Reply With Quote
The Tea Party is not racist. That the Tea Party has benefited greatly from the fact that Obama is black is obvious.This "Tea Party = Racist" message is really gaining traction with Americans.
This "Tea Party = Racist" message is really gaining traction with Americans.
The Tea Party is not racist. That the Tea Party has benefited greatly from the fact that Obama is black is obvious.This "Tea Party = Racist" message is really gaining traction with Americans.
If Hillary had won and done the same ty job, they'd be railing against her too. I guess you guys would then have to change your message to the Tea Party hates women.
Why does the Tea Party hate Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barbara Boxer (just to name a few)?
The Tea Party wouldn't have formed had Hillary been president just the way it didn't form when good ole boy Bush was president. Low and behold, months into the black mans presidency the Tea Party forms and is dominated by white males.
Just a coincidence, right?
They hate Pelosi because they are too stupid to realize that she is the greatest speaker of the house this country has ever seen.
They hate Reid because even though his state is the epicenter for home foreclosure and unemployment they are too stupid to realize it was Bush's fault.
They hate Boxer because they are too stupid to realize that a liberal from California can't reasonably be expected to leave any type of legacy after 20+ years of service.
I thought you were smarter than this.
Great post.
I don't think hating on Pelosi, Reid and Boxer is exclusive to the Tea Party members. Plenty of mainstream GOP *and* Democrats are on the same boat.
Manny should read this
Tea Party Started Brewing Under Bush
The tea started brewing under Bush. It’s important that Democrats and Republicans alike understand this. Democrats know that they are about to suffer a rebuke of historic proportions, but it’s important they understand the reason and not imagine themselves the victims of racism or irrationality. And it’s important for Republicans to understand that their legacy of government growth and deficit spending is also suffering rebuke. The Republicans will recapture the House (if they do) not because Americans love the GOP but because the Democrats doubled down on the Republicans’ big-government tendencies.
Raise your hand if you’ve heard this before: “If the Tea Party activists were really upset about spending, where were they when Bush was running up the deficits?” The alleged inconsistency -- that conservatives were perfectly content with big government under Bush but are outraged now -- is a key component of the liberal argument that the Tea Party is actually driven by more nefarious motives. Since the conservatives who comprise the Tea Party movement raised no objection when Bush was expanding government, the argument runs, they must actually be angered by something else. They reject not spending but Democratic spending, not a big-government President but a black big-government President.
This explanation for the motives underlying the Tea Party did not take long to form. Rick Santelli’s fateful rant against government mortgage bailouts on CNBC took place in February of 2009, and the loudest mouths in American liberalism swiftly divined what everyone was really upset about. Keith Olbermann declared in April that the Tea Party “is now petered out” and departing the American scene (Nostradamus he is not), and explained that the protestors do not care about “spending, deficits, or taxes” but simply “hate the President of the United States.”
The enlightened Janeane Garofalo, who saw still further into the withered hearts of the Tea Party rabble, worried about the violence that would surely erupt from such an ignorant and bigoted bunch. “Let’s be very honest about what this is about,” she said. “It’s not about bashing Democrats, it’s not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don’t know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up.” Tea Party activists are “nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks” who “hate that a black guy is in the White House.”
This interpretation of the Tea Party movement, although few would put it as crudely as Olbermann and Garofalo, has become one of the primary obstacles to liberal understanding of the movement. Recent examples abound. Bill Maher claimed last month that “teabaggers” hate “when you call them racist,” and “the other thing they hate is black people.” He fleshed out the fuller argument on Bill O’Reilly: we know that Tea Party concern over spending and the size of government is merely a cover for racism because “nobody was angry about the deficit under President Bush.” Another line of argument claims that the Tea Party’s summons of “take our country back” secretly means to take the country back from the dark-skinned interloper in the White House. Versions of this argument have recently been made by Washington Post columnists Jonathan Capeheart and Richard Cohen, the Huffington Post, and the political genius Jon Hamm (who only plays an actor on television). Or as Cynthia Tucker, Andrew Sullivan, and Newsweek explain, Tea Partiers really wish to take our country back in time to a Rockwellian 1950s when whites were comfortably in the majority and straight white Christian males dominated the American scene.
Rest of article at
http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Add...nder-Bush.html
So I'm supposed to ignore that the demographics of the Tea Party are by far dominated by middle aged white males and the fact that during 8 years of Bush doing these things (TARP was the latest bailout in a long list of bailouts) all they could ing do was "brew"? There was plenty of anger at Bush during his presidency from all throughout the spectrum yet these assholes couldn't get off their ass to do a damn thing other than "brew"?
Yet, the moment Obama wins they're ing out in full force.
Thats one of a coincidence. Nevermind what Darrin posted in the NPR thread about the conditioning that has been found in our society regarding how black males are viewed I'm just supposed to forget about all of that and chalk it up to they'd just had enough and Obama's skin color had nothing to do with it.
Yeah, I'm sorry but I recognize how much race still plays a part in our society and that there is a long way to go before we're post racial so I'm not going to chalk it up to one of a coincidence.
Its funny to see that author hold up polls to show that they're not racist. How many people are going to answer a poll on affirming they are racist?
I'll tell you what. If they were actually motivated by what they say the majority of them would not be former McCain/Palin - or current in the latter's case - supporters and Ron Paul would have made a whole of a lot more noise.
Where I'm from 2+2 = 4 no matter how much you want to make it = 5.
Same , different team.
Why are liberals so obsessed with race?
we just like to pinpoint those that can't evolve.
No one likes Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, etc except for members of Congress, I have no ing clue how they can be leaders in that body of . But you say Obama did a bad job which is the reason the Tea Party Express is so aggressive, but there's no way around the fact that the Tea Party Express started screaming bloody murder immediately after Obama was elected. Either people just had a severe visceral reaction to him because he's black or they are just naturally paranoid. There's nothing else to say about it.
And what's so hard for people to understand about the Tea Party (Anti-Fed, Anti-Patriot Act, Anti-Bull Wars) starting under Bush but being "incoporated" (keyword, INC.) into the GOP for midterm election base known as the Tea Party Express? All it is now is the Al Qaeda of American politics, spreading fear and proping up "franchise" candidates that would support Sarah Palin or someone of her choosing in the 2012 elections.
Many came out against Obama, in a not insignificant part, because of his campaign promises...specifically the complete subjugation of contemporary healthcare. That being said, your observation regarding the "INC" factor is likely spot on.
Did you or did you not post that studies have shown we view black people in a negative light and it was due to conditioning?
With irony firmly in hand, I would suggest that Juan William's writings on race relations would be a good read about now.
I'll have to check them out
the tea party started after TARP and the stimulus.
Fiscal conservatives abandoned Bush long before that. Religious conservatives were the main reason he got re-elected.
Or did you forget about all the "spending like a drunken sailor" references in the GOP primary? (that was before Obama won the nomination)
He needs to be the star in a new movie with the tag line "I see racists," rather than dead people.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
