Tea Party Federation Kicks Out Group Over Racist Writing

Call me when one of the tea parties lynches anybody.

 

i'm not the one who made the asinine comparison.

 

first of all, don't make ASSumptions. Go back to the Imus thread, I personally couldn't have cared less.

secon, as rm95 pointed out, new black panther <> Imus

 

Comparing apples and oranges is common in this forum. My point is that racism begets racism. Do you want this concept perpetuated? I certainly don't, but I believe organizations like the NAACP and the KKK do because hate generates their money.

 

Either you are just obtuse or purposefully obfuscating; either way, you really do not "get it" do you?

You are undermining your shaky credibility and grasp of general political issues in this thread beyond the norm.

The only thing missing now is for your defense of the KKK from the slanderous comparison to the NAACP.

 

Then refute my comparisons with actual argument rather than a quarrelsome sulk. It's you who doesn't "get it" if you don't see they are obverse sides of the same coin. One is perceived as "good" and the other as "evil" -- black or white if you will pardon this appropriately inappropriate pun.

 

Perhaps thumbs is only considering where the two organizations are in very recent history. Looking at the KKK platform, it doesn't seem all that different from what one might hear listening to right-wing commentators on Fox News or the radio:

http://www.kkk.bz/program.htm

Would Glenn Beck / Rush Limbaugh / Ann Coulter disagree with any of that?

 

The original thought stream linked the tea parties to the KKK.

 

As I stated earlier, the histories are different, with the NAACP having a useful, vital voice that inspired laws that ban racism. No one can rationally defend the inception and spread of the KKK. However, again as I pointed out, today is a different world, but the NAACP has not adapted its methodology. Whomever challenges them or a policy they advocate is automatically branded a racist. Check the rhetoric of Ben Jealous or Jesse Jackson.

 

do you agree with that?

 

Actually they represent all minorities - not just blacks. And you can see some of their activities by visiting their website. Although I still think they focus way too much on the superficial type of racism instead of uplifting people out of poverty.

 

Linking the two is outrageous. Klan and Neo-Nazis love to show up, but they are routinely asked to leave as soon as they arrive at tea party gatherings. I would be curious to see whether the New Black Panthers or other extremists are asked to leave as soon as they arrive at an NAACP gathering.

 

I don't see how the NAACP getting all bent out of shape over the Imus comment did any good. Particularly because I don't think Imus said was racist (it was sexist though). I mean, he was calling the other team, again with African American women - beautiful. Anyway, not to rehash things but if you go to their website they tell you what they spend their time doing. And it seems to me they are very vague on the empowerment stuff but have a lot of time focused on the public perception front.

I think if they dropped the PR angle more that would be nice....but you know, I won't criticize them too hard, because like most organizations, they need a lot of money to just exist and Imus probably does more to raise money for them than anything else. Maybe that's cynical of me, but I am a cynical type of person.

 

As a minority member, I haven't seen that. However, given that you are correct, wouldn't you agree that it would follow that they need a serious name change from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? How about the National Association for the Advancement of Disadvantaged People?

 

Your views provide an interesting, if not baffling, window into the mindset of the average tea bagger.

More eye-opening than you realize.

The sad part is that you think you sound reasonable.

Good day.

 

howbout National Basketball Developmental League of Under-Developed Players?

teabaggers...

 

I don't think so. Colored people includes everyone from Asian to Hispanic and they do have members of those races. And they are a proud and historical organization, I don't think they need to change their name since their mission is to eliminate race-based discrimination.

The best way to do that in my opinion is to empower minorities who are disadvantaged. But I do understand why they are sensitive to race and feel uncomfortable about groups like the Tea Party.

Let's be honest, there's still immense tension between whites and blacks in this country - immense. And to some degree, the NAACP has become part of that to whites. But to blacks, many of them feel it's a voice and some of their only political representation on the national level. Just because Obama is president doesn't mean blacks no longer need the NAACP.

Does it need to evolve - absolutely. But again, to some degree, they are beholden to their donors.

 

You're argument that racism is over, and there is no need for groups to combat it, is nonsensical to put it nicely. People, including myself have disagreed with Obama's policies plenty and weren't called racists for it.

A more accurate statement would be, people who argue against things they believe to be Obama's policies but aren't actually his policies, or argue against Obama for things he is far less guilty of than previous administrations are called racists.

The fact that a climate exists where racism can be brought about says much. Whether everything that is called racism is actually racism isn't that important. It can't be truly discovered unless we can see in the hearts of men. But their is a reason why an environment exists where people feel so discriminated against. They have experiences in their daily lives that lead them to those feelings. To examine that and wipe that out is worthwhile.

Why are you and others scared of black people doing things to help out predominantly black communities. Due to hundreds of years of deficits in those types of actions, it certainly seems worthwhile. But anytime a group specifically targets black communities in positive efforts to elevate those communities, some people feel very threatened and go crying about racism.

The NAACP pushes the elevation of black communities which helps not only the black community but all communities. Some of their claims are misguided, but why throw the baby out with the bathwater?

To claim they are in anyway comparable to the KKK demonstrates ignorance of the NAACP, the KKK or both. One is a positive group set on helping. The other is a negative group set on dividing, putting down, belittling. One uses violence, and the other does not.

As wrong as I think you are, much of the time, I believe you're smarter than to think the KKK and NAACP are two sides of a coin.