Huff Post: Tea Parties Are Racist

[Matt Collins]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leonard-zeskind/what-not-to-do-about-the_b_462829.html




.

[revolutionisnow]

Right, because LA RAZA, AIPAC, and the NAACP are all ok, but if whites organize they are clearly racists. Meanwhile back in the real world.........

YouTube - THE AUDACITY OF HATE - Obama & Pastor Wright's Racist Church (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcXFxbx1Y4M)

YouTube - Is Sotomayor a Racist? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dbDEsMrGU0&)

YouTube - ABC7- CAIR-Chicago Comments on Rahm Emanuel's Apology (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7pkxUuvaUE)

[CapitalistRadical]

If they call you a racist, you must be racist. Why else would they call you racist?

[hugolp]

If they call you a racist, you must be racist. Why else would they call you racist?

Hufftington Post are a bunch of racists.

[JeNNiF00F00]

I wish someone would correct the douche that commented on that article saying that "we need to take back the democracy". WTF.

[Bruno]

huffpo is racist

[BlackTerrel]

I'm sure by their very nature the tea parties attract some of the lunatic fringe. The best way to deal with that is call them out and don't let them lump everyone else in with them


Right, because LA RAZA, AIPAC, and the NAACP are all ok, but if whites organize they are clearly racists. Meanwhile back in the real world.........

You ever think why the NAACP was founded? Would you like to go back to the laws that existed in 1905 when the NAACP was formed?

[SamuraisWisdom]

I'm sure by their very nature the tea parties attract some of the lunatic fringe. The best way to deal with that is call them out and don't let them lump everyone else in with them



You ever think why the NAACP was founded? Would you like to go back to the laws that existed in 1905 when the NAACP was formed?

Careful, using sense and logic usually get you in trouble around here.

[The Patriot]

I'm sure by their very nature the tea parties attract some of the lunatic fringe. The best way to deal with that is call them out and don't let them lump everyone else in with them



You ever think why the NAACP was founded? Would you like to go back to the laws that existed in 1905 when the NAACP was formed?

Do you think a business owner has the right to decide who comes onto his property? Or hire who he wishes? Or pay what he wishes?

The NAACP has been a net negative on liberty in this country.

[BlackTerrel]

Do you think a business owner has the right to decide who comes onto his property? Or hire who he wishes? Or pay what he wishes?

The NAACP has been a net negative on liberty in this country.

You really think we had more liberty in 1905 than we do today? Well maybe some people did...

Anyway that's not really the point. The tea parties aren't inherently racist, though I'm sure it attracts some of them just by its nature. Just thought it was dump to bring up the NAACP or Rev. Wright when we're talking about the tea parties.

[The Patriot]

You really think we had more liberty in 1905 than we do today? Well maybe some people did...

Anyway that's not really the point. The tea parties aren't inherently racist, though I'm sure it attracts some of them just by its nature. Just thought it was dump to bring up the NAACP or Rev. Wright when we're talking about the tea parties.

Yes, no Federal Reserve, no IRS, no Drug War, no Patriot Act, no affirmative action, no gun control, no minimum wage, no hate crime laws etc. Yes, we had many more liberties then than we do today.

[Von_Mises]

Do you think a business owner has the right to decide who comes onto his property? Or hire who he wishes? Or pay what he wishes?

The NAACP has been a net negative on liberty in this country.

Just as Unions when the were first founded, intentions were better.

Undeniably, the current state of the NAACP is a devolved, irrelevant disaster.

With regard to the tea party, they aren't as racist as they are misguided neocons; therefore, your typical conservative insults will just invariably carry over (and then a one-person-sound clip about how Obama is a Nazi or a satanist exacerbates the situation).

Huffington is kicking a dog here, but it's not like you couldn't see this happening.


Yes, no Federal Reserve, no IRS, no Drug War, no Patriot Act, no affirmative action, no gun control, no minimum wage, no hate crime laws etc. Yes, we had many more liberties then than we do today.

Considering the rights of women and minorities were infringed, I would be inclined to disagree with you.

I see your point, however.

[New2Libertarianism]

huffpost = ****** idiots

[ChaosControl]

Liberals automatically call anything that isn't liberal "racist"
Basically it is their version of the conservatives "socialist".

[Brett]

Liberals automatically call anything that isn't liberal "racist"
Basically it is their version of the conservatives "socialist".

and conservatives' anti-Semite.

[revolutionisnow]

Yes, no Federal Reserve, no IRS, no Drug War, no Patriot Act, no affirmative action, no gun control, no minimum wage, no hate crime laws etc. Yes, we had many more liberties then than we do today.

A good portion of these alphabet agencies and rights groups came all about the same time and were put into place by and funded by the same group of people. The NAACP didn't have a black leader of the organization for 60+ years.

[BlackTerrel]

Yes, no Federal Reserve, no IRS, no Drug War, no Patriot Act, no affirmative action, no gun control, no minimum wage, no hate crime laws etc. Yes, we had many more liberties then than we do today.

No affirmative action but I couldn't drink from the same water fountain as you. Or marry someone of another race.

If you're comparing that to affirmative action then you are not only out of touch - but the exact reason people call the tea parties (or Ron Paul supporters) racist.

[BlackTerrel]

A good portion of these alphabet agencies and rights groups came all about the same time and were put into place by and funded by the same group of people. The NAACP didn't have a black leader of the organization for 60+ years.

Where do you think Ron Paul would stand on the early years of the NAACP?


In its early years, the NAACP concentrated on using the courts to overturn the Jim Crow statutes that legalized racial segregation. In 1913, the NAACP organized opposition to President Woodrow Wilson's introduction of racial segregation into federal government policy, offices, and hiring.

By 1914, the group had 6,000 members and 50 branches. It was influential in winning the right of African Americans to serve as officers in World War I....

....The NAACP devoted much of its energy during the interwar years to fighting the lynching of blacks throughout the United States by working for legislation, lobbying and educating the public. The organization sent its field secretary Walter F. White to Phillips County, Arkansas, in October 1919, to investigate the Elaine Race Riot. More than 200 black tenant farmers were killed by roving white vigilantes and federal troops after a deputy sheriff's attack on a union meeting of sharecroppers left one white man dead. White published his report on the riot in the Chicago Daily News.[15] The NAACP organized the appeals for twelve black men sentenced to death a month later based on the fact that testimony used in their convictions was obtained by beatings and electric shocks....

...The NAACP also spent more than a decade seeking federal legislation against lynching, but Southern white Democrats voted as a block against it or used the filibuster in the Senate to block passage. Because of disfranchisement, there were no black representatives from the South in Congress and the region had essentially a one-party system of Democrats. The NAACP regularly displayed a black flag stating "A Man Was Lynched Yesterday" from the window of its offices in New York to mark each lynching.

In alliance with the American Federation of Labor, the NAACP led the successful fight to prevent the nomination of John Johnston Parker to the Supreme Court, based on his support for denying the vote to blacks and his anti-labor rulings. It organized support for the Scottsboro Boys. The NAACP lost most of the internecine battles with the Communist Party and International Labor Defense over the control of those cases and the strategy to be pursued in that case.

The organization also brought litigation to challenge the "white primary" system in the South. Southern states had created white-only primaries as another way of barring blacks from the political process. Since southern states were one-party states, the primaries were the only competitive contests. In 1944 in Smith v. Allwright, the Supreme Court ruled against the white primary. Although states had to retract legislation related to the white primaries, the legislatures soon came up with new methods to limit the franchise for blacks.

Beatings, electric shock, disenfranchised voters. Talk about abuse of government. I'm pretty sure I know where most Ron Paul supporters would stand on this - regardless of race.

You can say you don't think they are necessary today. But anyone who doesn't think there was a need for the NAACP 100 years ago is either dumb or racist.

[Matt Collins]

Where do you think Ron Paul would stand on the early years of the NAACP?

Beatings, electric shock, disenfranchised voters. Talk about abuse of government. I'm pretty sure I know where most Ron Paul supporters would stand on this - regardless of race.

You can say you don't think they are necessary today. But anyone who doesn't think there was a need for the NAACP 100 years ago is either dumb or racist.
YouTube - Free At Last (Ron Paul, Martin Luther King) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWClI8zsH4)

[The Patriot]

Where do you think Ron Paul would stand on the early years of the NAACP?



Beatings, electric shock, disenfranchised voters. Talk about abuse of government. I'm pretty sure I know where most Ron Paul supporters would stand on this - regardless of race.

You can say you don't think they are necessary today. But anyone who doesn't think there was a need for the NAACP 100 years ago is either dumb or racist.

Ron Paul is against the Civil Rights Act, however, I imagine he would have been against lynchings and white only primaries(which violate the 14th Amendment). I don't think Paul would be against a literacy test(or at the very least he wouldn't believe it is the authority of the Feds to stop a state form setting up a voting standard as long as it was equally applied). I doubt you would see Ron Paul pushing for a "pro-labor" Justice to the Supreme Court. The NAACP has taken far more than it has given anything positive in the way of liberty.

[The Patriot]

No affirmative action but I couldn't drink from the same water fountain as you. Or marry someone of another race.

If you're comparing that to affirmative action then you are not only out of touch - but the exact reason people call the tea parties (or Ron Paul supporters) racist.

But I can't serve who I want or hire who I want(say I was a federal contractor or subcontractor). I am forced against my will to associate with those who I might not want to associate myself with and hire unqualified people to fulfill federal quotas leading to a more inefficient business model. Also, State Universities practice reverse discrimination. I know for a fact black kids who had lower grades and got into certain public universities over me to fulfill quotas. I didn't want to go to those schools, but it is a the principle of the thing. We are not a merit based society, but a quota based one. You just replaced one tyranny for another and used the federal government to impose your version of morality on me.

As for water fountains, I don't think the Federal Government has the right to get involved in state issues like water fountains unless not everyone is equally provided with one. I personally don't think they should be segregated, but the Feds have no such Constitutional Authority to enforce such laws.

I don't think the Government should be involved in marriage, period.

[BlackTerrel]

YouTube - Free At Last (Ron Paul, Martin Luther King) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWClI8zsH4)

Awesome video. Thanks for posting.

[revolutionisnow]

Where do you think Ron Paul would stand on the early years of the NAACP?



Beatings, electric shock, disenfranchised voters. Talk about abuse of government. I'm pretty sure I know where most Ron Paul supporters would stand on this - regardless of race.

You can say you don't think they are necessary today. But anyone who doesn't think there was a need for the NAACP 100 years ago is either dumb or racist.

This discussion is about TODAY, not 100 years ago. As far as the lynchings, the grand total according to the Alabama's Tuskegee Institute from 1882 - 1968 is 4,749. Judging by the current FBI and police crime statistics, one could use the basis of your argument and say that the US is currently in dire need for a NAAWP.

YouTube - Pat Buchanan slams Race Hustler and Black community problems (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlLD91qI6xg)

[The Patriot]

I haven't ever heard Ron Paul supporters be called racist except by Wolf Blitzer, some posters on huff post and some posters on free republic. Racism being equated with Ron Paul doesn't cross the minds of most people I meet and talk to about the man. In fact, I have had several minorities who have been receptive to his message(asians and latinos), and they never complain about "racism".

[BlackTerrel]

But I can't serve who I want or hire who I want(say I was a federal contractor or subcontractor). I am forced against my will to associate with those who I might not want to associate myself with and hire unqualified people to fulfill federal quotas leading to a more inefficient business model. Also, State Universities practice reverse discrimination. I know for a fact black kids who had lower grades and got into certain public universities over me to fulfill quotas. I didn't want to go to those schools, but it is a the principle of the thing. We are not a merit based society, but a quota based one. You just replaced one tyranny for another and used the federal government to impose your version of morality on me.

These things are so far apart they can't be compared. It's all relative

Look I have a friend from Romania. When she was little she used to have to stand in line for eight hours for a small bottle of milk and some bread and sometimes after eight hours of standing in the cold she'd get to the front of the line and there was none left and her family wouldn't eat that day. She was 11.

When she hears Americans complain about the economy she laughs. Yes these are tough times but compared to communist Romania we live like kings.

It's the same thing here. I can't relate but you talk to my grandfather about the time he was 6 years old and accidentally used the "white bathroom" because he had to pee really bad and a cop beat the crap out of him. He was 6! I can't even fathom these stories. And I could tell you another 100 just as bad.

You can't compare that to you not getting into a University (which is probably majority white people anyway).

These are two wildly different things. Clearly there are more civil liberties today than there were in 1905 - at least for many many Americans. It's not perfect - there are tons we have to improve. But spare me the victimhood.

My friend from Romania helps me be grounded. Nobody in this country has it that bad regardless of race.

[BlackTerrel]

This discussion is about TODAY, not 100 years ago.

You were the one that talked about the founding.


A good portion of these alphabet agencies and rights groups came all about the same time and were put into place by and funded by the same group of people. The NAACP didn't have a black leader of the organization for 60+ years.


As far as the lynchings, the grand total according to the Alabama's Tuskegee Institute from 1882 - 1968 is 4,749.

Let's say I accept the Alabama's Tuskegee Institute stats as 100% accurate. So what?


Judging by the current FBI and police crime statistics, one could use the basis of your argument and say that the US is currently in dire need for a NAAWP.

I guess "one" could. But it would be a pretty dumb argument. According to Wiki the NAAWP was founded in the 50's and went defunct, then revived in the 80's by your boy David Duke but quickly went defunct again because no one wanted to join.

[The Patriot]

These things are so far apart they can't be compared. It's all relative

Look I have a friend from Romania. When she was little she used to have to stand in line for eight hours for a small bottle of milk and some bread and sometimes after eight hours of standing in the cold she'd get to the front of the line and there was none left and her family wouldn't eat that day. She was 11.

When she hears Americans complain about the economy she laughs. Yes these are tough times but compared to communist Romania we live like kings.

It's the same thing here. I can't relate but you talk to my grandfather about the time he was 6 years old and accidentally used the "white bathroom" because he had to pee really bad and a cop beat the crap out of him. He was 6! I can't even fathom these stories. And I could tell you another 100 just as bad.

You can't compare that to you not getting into a University (which is probably majority white people anyway).

These are two wildly different things. Clearly there are more civil liberties today than there were in 1905 - at least for many many Americans. It's not perfect - there are tons we have to improve. But spare me the victimhood.

My friend from Romania helps me be grounded. Nobody in this country has it that bad regardless of race.

Look, honestly, you can appeal to emotion, but it just doesn't coincide with the facts that we are well on our way to a police state today, and we were far freer back in 1905. Today, I can't smoke a joint, a can't smoke a plant because the Federal Government says so, they can't monitor my cell phone without a warrant, I can't own an automatic weapon in California, and I have to give my income to the Federal Government against my own will. What happened to your grandfather really sucks and shouldn't have happened, but we have moved further away from liberty since 1905. Believe me, if I were alive back then I would have been pushing for voting rights for your grandfather and fighting all white primaries and would have been against police brutality like I am today, I believe in civil liberties for all people, not just white people.

[catdd]

Well, it's a lie to begin with; the Tea Party isn't racist even though there are some racists involved in it. What can you do?
The republican and democrat parties are full of racists and yet they point fingers at the TP.
By today's standards, racists are not the worst thing we have to worry about - Neocons pose a much greater problem.

[BlackTerrel]

Look, honestly, you can appeal to emotion, but it just doesn't coincide with the facts that we are well on our way to a police state today, and we were far freer back in 1905. Today, I can't smoke a joint, a can't smoke a plant because the Federal Government says so, they can't monitor my cell phone without a warrant, I can't own an automatic weapon in California, and I have to give my income to the Federal Government against my own will. What happened to your grandfather really sucks and shouldn't have happened, but we have moved further away from liberty since 1905. Believe me, if I were alive back then I would have been pushing for voting rights for your grandfather and fighting all white primaries and would have been against police brutality like I am today, I believe in civil liberties for all people, not just white people.

I think we're pretty much in agreement. I'm with you bro.