July 17, 2010

Racists

NAACP accepted the likes of Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and Jesse Jackson. They remain silent about the nut cases from the New Black Panther party who recently called for the killing of “cracker” babies. They ignored attacks by SEIU thugs against a black man even though it was caught on tape. But the NAACP did manage to pass a resolution against the Tea Party.

All good people condemn racists and racist acts, whether it is Al Sharpton and the Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case, the new black panthers or wherever it is found in the tea party of anywhere else. But SEIU or the tea party are not racist organizations because some members of their organizations act in racist ways, if indeed many even have.

In the case of the tea party, there has been a challenge out there for months for anybody to produce footage of tea party activists using the n-word. So far, nobody has come forward. Beyond that, 77% of tea party members are white, which is slightly lower than the 78.9% recorded by the Census Bureau among the general American population.

Racism is a serious accusation, but the very fact that it is so serious shows the immense progress we have made. It is powerful precisely because the vast majority of Americans find it so odious. We have come so far in the last generation that one of the worst things you can be called is a racist. Within living memory, George Wallace stood outside the University of Alabama and defended segregation. I doubt his supporters would have been put off by the word. A couple generations before that "scientific racism" was acceptable in the most progressive circles and President Woodrow Wilson ordered the segregation of the Civil Service during my grandparents lifetimes.

But as with any powerful taboo, deploying accusations of racism can come to be used cynically, aggressively or instrumentally. It can be used to silence dissent or stigmatize opposition. It can lose much of its meaning when it is used stupidly, as with Jesse Jackson's comparison of Lebron James to a runaway slave. It also comes to be seen as the property of particular people or groups. This is a common problem with articles of faith or taboos. This is what the NAACP is trying to do. NAACP President Benjamin Jealous used racism as a political weapon against the tea party. Probably to his surprise, it is not working. We have indeed come too far to allow the misuse of the concept.

Why is Jealous doing this? Some people have said it is just partisan political. He wants to raise concerns and hatred in order to drive up interest & fear among Democratic leaning black voters to mitigate the expected Democratic debacle in the November elections. I don’t believe that the NAACP has become a mere adjunct to the Democratic Party. But I also don't believe that Jealous really thinks the tea party is filled with racists. More likely, he just wants the attention. Unfortunately in our media saturated age, you get attention by saying outrageous things. The NAACP is an old organization showing its age and many people just don’t pay attention anymore. Now they are news again. We can understand the NAACP's desire to be relevant again, but it is unwise to cheapen such a real grievance in the service of grabbing attention.

Posted by Christine & John at July 17, 2010 03:38 PM
Comments
Comment #303752

The NAACP is catching alot of feedback for this proclaimation they made. I think it was a move as dumb as the Hallmark card fiasco.

When I read your link to Jesse Jackson and his reference, I finally realized it was basketball being talked about. This Lebron guy was brought up at a family cookout the other week and I didn’t know who or what was being talked about. Finally, I know. He’s a basketball player that transfered to another team. Big deal.

I thought Obama was suppose to be the President that got us past the race issue. It seems to me that racists are using his presidency to instigate rather than mediate.

Yes, I’m refering to the NAACP. Many black people are condemning the NAACP for it’s stance against the Tea Party movement. Just look at the BigGovernment.com webpage to see many people speaking out against the stance the NAACP has taken.

Talk about spit balls shooting people in the foot! Geesh!
The NAACP is using water balloons to flatten themselves and the Idea that Obama brought this country past the race issue.

Perhaps it’s necessary they do this to themselves. None of us could do it to them.


Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 05:26 PM
Comment #303755

Christine & John,

President Woodrow Wilson ordered the segregation of the Civil Service during my grandparents lifetimes.

This is something Glenn Beck said. You must be careful when you refer to information Glenn Beck provides. Democratics don’t like the information Glenn Beck provides. It’s devisive and wrong and it’s lies and misinformation and half-truths. Democratics don’t listen to lies and misinformation and half-truths. Democratics will say you are wrong.

Shhh! Be vewwy, vewwy carefull.


Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 06:12 PM
Comment #303757
Why is Jealous doing this? Some people have said it is just partisan political. He wants to raise concerns and hatred in order to drive up interest & fear among ignorant Democratic leaning voters …

Oh! Did I do that?
I hate it when that happens.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 07:01 PM
Comment #303758
1. uninstructed, untutored, untaught. Ignorant, illiterate, unlettered, uneducated mean lacking in knowledge or in training. Ignorant may mean knowing little or nothing, or it may mean uninformed about a particular subject: An ignorant person can be dangerous. I confess I’m ignorant of mathematics. Illiterate originally meant lacking a knowledge of literature or similar learning, but is most often applied now to one unable to read or write: necessary training for illiterate soldiers. Unlettered emphasizes the idea of being without knowledge of literature: unlettered though highly trained in science. Uneducated refers especially to lack of schooling or to lack of access to a body of knowledge equivalent to that learned in schools: uneducated but highly intelligent. 2. unenlightened.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/IGNORANT Posted by: PFCLarue at July 17, 2010 07:22 PM
Comment #303761

Hmmm, tempest in a teapot.

What is the membership of the new black panthers? How does that compare to people who think blacks are an inferior race? Is being called a racist really worse than being called a nigger?

Proportion and perspective are important tools for understanding what to get excited about.

Did someone say something bad about a millionaire NBA monopoly player? Really? Poor guy. My heart bleeds for him. No, really.

Posted by: gergle at July 17, 2010 07:40 PM
Comment #303762

C&J, why shouldn’t the NAACP have the right to choose what organizations/individuals they disagree with? They cab either prove their case or lose face for their actions. At the very least it will cause the TeaBaggers to watch their mouths in order to prove their innocence. As the election approaches it would be a good thing to focus on the important issues that face the country instead of the callous remarks the teabaggers have earned such a bad reputation for.

Weary, I’m not a dem but I would include myself in the statement “Democratics don’t listen to lies and misinformation and half-truths.” I would suggest the standard of not listening to lies misinformation and half truths for you as well as for repubs/conservatives in general. It makes things much easier when facts and truths are used don’t you think?

It’s not that I don’t like the “information” Beck provides it’s more of a I don’t like the misinformation he provides. I also agree with you that some of the “information Beck provides is “devisive and wrong and it’s lies and misinformation and half-truths.” That’s why I choose not to watch or listen to him for any length of time.

Posted by: j2t2 at July 17, 2010 07:44 PM
Comment #303763

I remember some arguing there was nothing racist about the Arizona law, nothing about it would engender any problems what so ever.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/7112931.html

No problemo…..

Funny how these headlines just keep popping up. Must be the bias in the MSM, or maybe it’s just neo Nazi’s. I know, let’s focus on Geraldo Rivera and really old headlines. Problem solved.

Posted by: gergle at July 17, 2010 07:59 PM
Comment #303765

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/7112931.html

So far, he says his patrols have only found a few border crossers who were given water and handed over to the Border Patrol. Once, they also found a decaying body in a wash, and alerted authorities.

Minutemen walking thru their back yard came upon some heat-exausted people. They gave them some water and pointed them in the direction of the local official. There was nothing they could do for the decaying body, other than alert the authorities.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 08:36 PM
Comment #303766
“We’re not going to sit around and wait for the government anymore,” Ready said. “This is what our founding fathers did.”

gergle, why are you apathetic to this type of behavour? He is correct! What he advocates is exactly what our founding fathers did!

Get a grip. The first step in solving a problem is to identify the parts, not ignore and chastize them.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 08:42 PM
Comment #303767
Various groups patrol the desert on foot, horseback and in airplanes and report suspicious activity to the Border Patrol, and generally, they have not caused problems for law enforcement.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/7112931.html

I should ask:
gergle, what’s your point?

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 08:46 PM
Comment #303768

WW

I didn’t get it from Glen Beck. Follow the link and find the references. Besides, just because GB says it doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Gergle

I think being called a racist is worse these days because it carries consequences. If someone calls you the n-word, you get to be the aggrieved party.

j2t2 & Gergle

NAACP can disagree with anybody it wants. But by misusing the racist label, it cheapens it. In this case, I think they just went too far. Now reasonable people are just thinking they have become another nutty organization.

I think the NAACP should watch their mouths. Of course the Panthers are just nuts, but we do have the duty to mention that they are nuts if it comes up, just as Gergle feel it important to mention nuts working in Arizona.

Actually, the NAACP is doing us a favor. They are cheapening the racist label and soon it will fall out of favor.

Posted by: C&J at July 17, 2010 08:54 PM
Comment #303770

Three racist black persons calling themselves what they are not, Black Panthers, getting fame and notariety from making outlandish statements sure to get press attention, sounds to me like 3 young black persons following the GOP and Tea Party game plan for getting publicity for November’s elections.

Appears to be a pretty shrewd couple of guys. This should be good for both some press and money. Works for Bachmann and Angle, Palin and Beck. Why should white racists get all the press and money?

In today’s America, anything outrageous is worth something.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 17, 2010 09:13 PM
Comment #303771

C&J, I heard it from Glenn Beck. Therefore, I am comfirming your assertion:

President Woodrow Wilson ordered the segregation of the Civil Service during my grandparents lifetimes.
Follow the link and find the references.
Posted by Christine & John at July 17, 2010 03:38 PM

I believe you! What? What did I say? I’m not arguing with you!
Dagnabit!
I love Watchblog, but no matter what, I’m always on the defense. Are you contradicting me for the sake of an arguement?

just because GB says it doesn’t mean it isn’t true.


WTF! C&J! C get a grip on J and figure this out. Don’t put words in my mouth just to disagree with me.

Go frak yourself, Remer. I expected better from you.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 09:25 PM
Comment #303773

Weary,

In Texas, the minuteman organization was found to be rife with racists and several were found guilty of assault, not to mention the organization leaders that absconded with donations.

You clearly have no problem with neo nazi’s carrying guns on the border. We’ll just add that to your political leanings. Good luck with that.

Posted by: gergle at July 17, 2010 09:27 PM
Comment #303774
Weary, I’m not a dem but I would include myself in the statement “Democratics don’t listen to lies and misinformation and half-truths.” I would suggest the standard of not listening to lies misinformation and half truths for you as well as for repubs/conservatives in general. It makes things much easier when facts and truths are used don’t you think?

It’s not that I don’t like the “information” Beck provides it’s more of a I don’t like the misinformation he provides. I also agree with you that some of the “information Beck provides is “devisive and wrong and it’s lies and misinformation and half-truths.” That’s why I choose not to watch or listen to him for any length of time.


Posted by: j2t2 at July 17, 2010 07:44 PM


I feel sorry for you j2t2. All I can do is refer you to this link:

http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/007138.html#303758

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 09:38 PM
Comment #303775

gergle,
You are associating minutemen with “with neo nazi’s carrying guns on the border.”

“the minuteman organization was found to be rife with racists and several were found guilty of assault”

Links, gergle, you people on this blog are really big on links that prove what you say. Where are they, gergle? Where are the links to the proof “the minuteman organization was found to be rife with racists”

Hmmm? as stewie griffith would say.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 09:51 PM
Comment #303776

tic

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 10:17 PM
Comment #303777

tock

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 17, 2010 10:19 PM
Comment #303779

David

I have not heard Bachmann and Angle, Palin or Beck make any overtly racist remarks. Being against the parody that organizations like NAACP have become is not racist.

Posted by: C&J at July 17, 2010 10:28 PM
Comment #303782

How about Margaret Sanger the founder of Planned Parenthood. Her purpose was to destroy black babies by aborting them. How much more of a racist can one be? Yet today PP still kills more black babies than any other group.

Posted by: tom humes at July 17, 2010 11:10 PM
Comment #303786

Weary,

The neo nazi link is in my first post in this column.

You commented on it. I guess the neo nazi thing in the headline didn’t faze you.

http://coloradoindependent.com/31469/tancredo-linked-to-minuteman-group-accused-of-arizona-double-murder

http://www.alipac.net/bored/index.php?topic=189.0

http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/immigration_extremists.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_4

How many links do you want?

I haven’t found the link for the Texas founder being described as a racist by several members who quit and found him to be spending donated money on his and his wife’s personal perks, but I remember the story quite well.

Posted by: gergle at July 18, 2010 12:36 AM
Comment #303787

gergle

It would not be surprising that there is a nativist streak in some people who want to protect the borders. We don’t require every organization to be perfect in all its members, especially when they are loosely organized.

I mentioned the racism of Sharpton, Jackson or Farrakhan against any of these guys, and the New Black Panthers are as openly racist as you can get. I never said racism was gone. It is just that it is much mitigated and considered odious by the majority of the population.

The NAACP was just out of line with their attack on the tea party and I am gratified by the reaction to it. It is like the old story of the “Emperor’s New Clothes.” It is finally okay to call shenanigans on egregiously bogus calls of racism. We no longer have to pretend to believe what the NAACP says.

BTW - if you have actual links of tea party leaders using the n-word, I suggest you claim that prize. If it is as common as the NAACP suggests, surely somebody in this age of ubiquitous mobile phones with video capacity has captured it.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2010 01:49 AM
Comment #303792

“I feel sorry for you j2t2. All I can do is refer you to this link:”

Weary if that is all you can do then perhaps it is I that should feel sorry for you.

Posted by: j2t2 at July 18, 2010 08:41 AM
Comment #303793

C&J,

So your test for racism is video documentation of saying the word nigger? That’s an odd definition.

Lee Atwater said this once:

You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

This was his response to a question about the Republican “Southern strategy”.

Being subtle doesn’t fool anyone with a brain.

Posted by: gergle at July 18, 2010 09:45 AM
Comment #303794

I wonder why rally’s attract these guys:

http://washingtonindependent.com/73036/n-word-sign-dogs-would-be-tea-party-leader

Posted by: gergle at July 18, 2010 09:49 AM
Comment #303795

Frankly, I think they are both right. The Peabaggies and the ‘N’ word defenders are both racist groups…and, that probably makes me a racist too?

Posted by: Marysdude at July 18, 2010 10:15 AM
Comment #303796

C&J-
I know you are admirably quick to jump to the defense of any Republican talking point out there, but please, for your own sake, don’t jump to the defense of this one.

Quoth Mark Williams, head of the Tea Party Express:

Dear Mr. Lincoln We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!

In fact we held a big meeting and took a vote in Kansas City this week. We voted to condemn a political revival of that old abolitionist spirit called the ‘tea party movement’.

The tea party position to “end the bailouts” for example is just silly. Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn’t that what we want all Coloreds to strive for? What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us coloreds! Of course, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is the only responsible party that should be granted the right to disperse the funds.

And the ridiculous idea of “reduce[ing] the size and intrusiveness of government.” What kind of massa would ever not want to control my life? As Coloreds we must have somebody care for us otherwise we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions!

The racist tea parties also demand that the government “stop the out of control spending.” Again, they directly target coloreds. That means we Coloreds would have to compete for jobs like everybody else and that is just not right.

Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government “stop raising our taxes.” That is outrageous! How will we coloreds ever get a wide screen TV in every room if non-coloreds get to keep what they earn? Totally racist! The tea party expects coloreds to be productive members of society?

Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house. Please repeal the 13th and 14th Amendments and let us get back to where we belong.

Sincerely

Precious Ben Jealous, Tom’s Nephew NAACP Head Colored Person

Also, I don’t think you would call Rush Limbaugh as a fringe figure, but he has been race baiting for years. Remember that nice little incident where he accused Obama of being responsible for a state of affairs where a white kid got beaten up by black kids?

The Real problem isn’t that Republicans are all racists, it’s that for certain political reasons, the party has looked the other way and sometimes actively rationalized the comments of those who are. It’s also campaigned on certain issues in a way that was meant to appeal to racial tensions.

Democrats have their prejudices to be sure, but it’s not something we so actively encourage or need to actively encourage.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 18, 2010 10:28 AM
Comment #303798

SD
Get your head where it belongs. Dems are equal to the task of being racist just as any other group.

Posted by: tom humes at July 18, 2010 10:48 AM
Comment #303800

gergle

It is a matter of proof. Some people say the tea party guys used the N-word. The people involved in the tea party deny it. So then we have the evidence of four tv cameras that didn’t see it. We have thousands of individual video that doesn’t see it. I don’t think the distinguished congressmen were lying when they said they heard the N-word, but the evidence indicates that they were mistaken or that if it did happen among the hundreds of thousands of participants, it was so uncommon as to be vanishingly small.

On the other hand, we have clear video evidence of the racial hatred by the Black Panthers. We have Jesse Jackson, still a significant leader, saying truly stupid things about slavery and we have the NAACP trying to become relevant by using race as an offensive weapon. This is not subtle. It is just wrong.

But I am less unhappy with the NAACP action than I might be. It looks like these guys have finally pushed too far and now we can get to the serious business of moving forward.

Marysdude

By the hyper definition some people use for racism, everybody in the world is indeed a racist. It is concept like original sin and just as much an article of faith.

In the practical and more real sense, if you treat someone differently ONLY because of his/her race, you are acting in a racist way. If not, you are not.

If you dislike Obama because of his race, but would favor big government expansion if he was white, then you are acting racist. If you would oppose those policies if it were a white guy, you are not a racist.

On the other hand, if you support Obama more because he is black, you are being a racist.

It is a simple definition. All that stuff those clowns think up about unconscious racism is silly, except to the extent that it affects behaviors in the ways mentioned above.

And nobody his a right to judge what you believe in your deepest heart. Only what you do is subject to criticism because what you do shows who you are.

Stephen

Please see above. There are plenty of racists in both parties and even in the NAACP. We all condemn racism. You should call for Democrats to police their ranks.

I don’t care for the satire you quote above. But we have seen similar satire in other places.

Talk show hosts say lots of stupid and hateful things. One difference is that Republicans didn’t elect one of them to the Senate,as Dems did with Al Franken.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2010 11:08 AM
Comment #303801

BTW

I remember the silly claims of racist past. I recall in college when some people used to say “disco sucks”. It did. But there were people who said this was a racist slogan, on the dubious assumption that blacks liked disco more than whites did.

We have to get to the real definition of racism, which is that you treat someone differently ONLY because of race. So if you have two job candidates for a job and you choose one ONLY because of race, then that is racist. If you decide to rent your house to a person only because of race, that is racist.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2010 11:17 AM
Comment #303810

tom humes-
I did not say Democrats couldn’t be racist. There are obviously some racists, and obviously some among races other than white.

But anybody who implies that the modern white person really has to worry about racism the way minorities in this country do has an uphill climb for their claim. Simply put, you don’t face the same obstacles, the same resentments and fears that a white person does, if you are a minority.

I don’t think the institutional racism of the past is quite dead. I think you can’t run a society the way it was run for hundreds of years, and not expect certain ongoing consequences, merely as a matter of common sense.

I think we are way better than we were four decades ago, make no mistake. And I do think minorities shouldn’t be racist towards us. It solves nothing. But do I think I can just order people not to be racist? No, I don’t. If you want to minimize racism from minorities, racism from the majority must be attended to.

Republicans, all too often, have exploited the buried elements of xenophobia, rather than tried to resolve them. (No, I won’t argue that Democrats are innocent of it, but I won’t accept the notion that the sin on both sides is equal, merely because it exists in both camps.)

People are not all on the surface. There have been scientific studies that demonstrate that fear and distrust of those who do not look or speak like us (particularly the latter, other studies have found) is stubborn, and begins young. And why not? We imprint our sense of normality from those we see around us.

Any minority will have this kind of problem, this kind of trouble. That’s true whether it’s a white person in Japan, or a black person in Iowa. Even the minorities themselves feel somewhat inferior, just because of what they see around them.

We’re not dealing with a simple problem that can be willed away. Human beings evolved under conditions were most individuals would rarely see a person from a different land, much less a different continent. Racism has been an issue that transportation, communication, and immigration have all conspired to make a major issue in our lives, and it will not go away. In fact, as the Jews experienced between the relative tolerance of the late 1800s, and the Genocidal hatred of the 1930s and 1940s in central Europe, prejudices can wax and wane in a society.

Certainly, Arabs and Muslims have encountered the same situations as they deal with the consequences of 9/11.

I don’t think we’ll do ourselves much good pretending like the problem’s been solved, because problems can unsolve themselves, especially when a majority has power. Rand Paul suggested that elements of the Civil Rights Act dealing with private businesses were unconstitutional. What if a whole bunch of Republicans started to agree with them, and they got the majority? They might, like him, see it as a repudiation of government overreach, but social behavior has a way of filling whatever container it’s given, like a water in a bottle.

My head’s in the right place. I’m not betting on human nature alone to contain human frailties. I believe it’s sometimes good to take advantage of where people naturally want to go, but sometimes you have to confront the expression of a human flaw to prevent that expression.

C&J-
In my experience, human thinking is rarely nice and neat, and people can justify irrational directions of behavior with rational thought. Look at the debate on immigration. prejudice against those who don’t look or speak like us conflates with economic concerns, conflates crime concerns with them.

This is about how we deal with people on different issues, a matter of our social relationships. Since nearly everything we do socially touches on some other issues, your hermetically sealed notions of what racism we should confront are inherently impractical. This is all about how we deal with other people. Even if it is not a thing that should always be given overwhelming weight, it is a thing that a diverse society like ours must weigh across the board in its social interactions. That’s the only real remedy to what is a chronic issue in ours society.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 18, 2010 03:08 PM
Comment #303813

Stephen

I understand that it is very hard to separate race from behaviors, habits etc. But I believe race is much less important because of how welcoming the U.S. has been to immigrants. I know people complain about the treatment of Muslim in the U.S., but Muslims have higher average income than do native born Americans. The same goes for Indian-Americans and many Asian-Americans. If race alone were the factor, this could not happen. Hispanic-American are often more physically similar to European immigrants than are Indians or Chinese. It is even true that many immigrant black groups have higher incomes on average than native born white Americans as a whole.

If race was the big issue, none of this could be possible.

I think it is perfectly fair to object to or favor behaviors, no matter what the race of the people involved. I am very practical when it comes to this. If the person can and will do things I think are good, I like to have him around. If he is doing things I don’t like, I prefer to avoid him if I can. And if it is neutral, so am I. I don’t give or subtract points based on race. I don’t like white rappers any more than I do black ones. I get to make the choice about rap, as others get to make the choice about my habits.

But if I say I dislike something like rap, I run the risk of being seen as racially insensitive. However, if I say I don’t like the screeching in a Wagner opera, it is always just a matter of taste. Actually both are just a matter of taste.

Re “solving” the race problem, we have solved it to a great extent. Do you really think that a black MBA, with good grades from a good university will have more trouble finding a job than a white guy with exactly the same qualifications? What about a doctor, lawyer, teacher etc? Social scientists have to construct ever more questionably complex measures to find unconscious racism.

If it is that hard to find, maybe it is not that important. Maybe it is like those elusive n-words at the tea party rally. Some people claim to be able to hear them, but there is no evidence for it.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2010 03:40 PM
Comment #303815

C&J wrote: “I have not heard Bachmann and Angle, Palin or Beck make any overtly racist remarks.”

C&J, modern racism has learned to avoid being overt. I am surprised by your comment that this obvious fact of modern life appears to have escaped you. Do you truly not recognize the lessons of David Earnest Duke in the rhetoric of your party’s supporters?

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 18, 2010 03:44 PM
Comment #303818

David

As I have repeated many times, I think that broadly defined racism is pretty much ubiquitous. I gave links and examples in the original post. But you are right that only nut cases like the New Black Panthers are overtly racist. What does that tell you?

It tells me that most people think racism is odious. But we cannot keep defining it in more and more occult fashion. Eventually we have to recongize that it is not the force it was.

Races are mixing socially and in business. Increasingly people are marrying outside their racial group. When even families become racially mixed, how much can we claim that it is still such a powerful force for separation?

It reminds me of the story about Metternich and Talleyrand (please excuse my esoterica). They were rivals and both were artful and sneaky guys who always looked for ulterior motives. When Talleyrand died, Metternich is supposed to have said, “I wonder what he means by that.” This is how the race debate is getting. More and more esoteric and theoretical. The idea seems to be that we assume racism and then look for - or create - evidence to back it up.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2010 04:04 PM
Comment #303819

C&J,

“Do you really think that a black MBA, with good grades from a good university will have more trouble finding a job than a white guy with exactly the same qualifications? What about a doctor, lawyer, teacher etc? Social scientists have to construct ever more questionably complex measures to find unconscious racism.”

It is truly easy to see that a few folks of the “black” persuasion have succeeded in life and make the statement that racism has been conquered.
As a percentage, just how does this compare to white folks in the same tier of jobs?

I am quite sure that society as a whole has moved forward, but that said, much more needs to be accomplished before we, as a society can claim that racism is truly dead.

Re: The Arizona law.
As a point of reference there is a law, right now, waiting for the signature of Governor Paterson of New York. This law would cancel the effort to assemble a database of names, addresses, SS numbers, etc of people that are “stopped and frisked” in New York State.
Much has been made of the “lawful contact” portion of the Arizona Law. In New York, the police have admitted that nearly 3 million people have been “stopped and frisked” since 2004, 90% of which were not charged with any crime, and a goodly portion of these folks were people of color.

Arizona’s projected population for 2010 is about 6.2 million.

Now while we may all claim that the Arizona law isn’t racist, surely it is aimed at only one nationality.

Now we may want to talk about what “lawful contact” means, but let’s do the math first.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2010 04:15 PM
Comment #303822

C&J-
Actually, the studies have pretty much said that Black people, all things being equal, don’t get the same job as often.

I’m not a fan of reactionary racial politics. I like the way that Obama dealt with race in his Philadelphia speech on the matter: with maturity, with a recognition that these things neither go away so easily, but aren’t as bad as they once were.

My part was once the party of institutional racism, a party whose popularity was built with some on rather backwards notions of civil rights. I am glad to see my party has changed. It’s a point of pride. But as I’ve stated before, I believe that such matters will always be something of a problem.

I believe it, though, to be a treatable problem, a problem we can handle with conscious efforts to see others as we see ourselves, and by maintaining the laws that prevent institutional racism from reviving and creating structural inequalities that perpetuate racial antipathies in the fabric of reality.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 18, 2010 05:23 PM
Comment #303841

Rocky Marks

Surely your remark is questionable at best. Some country has to have the majority of illegal aliens. Hispanics and Latinos are mixed by most people, but those nations are the nearest to the border. What would expect? There are other nationalities from the middle east and asia that are a big concern.

BTW- There was a car bombing in Mexico just like the ones in Iraq. Wonder who taught them?

Posted by: tom humes at July 18, 2010 08:26 PM
Comment #303843

“There are other nationalities from the middle east and asia that are a big concern.”

Really?

And where would that be?

“BTW- There was a car bombing in Mexico just like the ones in Iraq. Wonder who taught them?”

Perhaps Mexico, where the violence has been ongoing for decades, was the teacher.

But you didn’t think of that, did you?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2010 09:30 PM
Comment #303844

Stephen

I have seen many of those studies. But I also know that many organizations that have strict pay scales, such as government offices, have trouble recruiting well-qualified black candidates because they have relatively better options elsewhere. I black MBA with good grades and high scores is actively recruited by big firms.

I probably told you the story of my “Hispanic” daughter. She was born in Latin America, so I checked the box saying that she was “Hispanic” with origins in Latin America. We tried to get her into the gifted program when we moved to a new school district and we were denied. But a couple of weeks later, we got a letter telling us that they had discovered our daughter had special talent and we should consider applying for the gifted program. Our daughter’s talents didn’t change. But when they thought she was in a different category, her treatment did. Maybe we should call that racist.

Rocky

I don’t think racism has been conquered nor do I think it ever will be. All human societies are distrustful of those identified as outsiders. Of course the definitions of racism vary.

Hispanics are not a race. The category includes the Spanish speaking descendants of African slaves as well as those of Germans who a century ago chose to emigrate to Mexico or Argentina instead of the U.S. or Canada. The problem with illegal aliens is the illegal part. I don’t doubt that many people also object to the cultural influences from Mexico or Central America. That is a valid concern. It is not racist to want your community to be or stay a certain way and maybe you don’t want it to become more like Mexico, Norway, China or anyplace else in particular.

We should be careful not to mix the concept of race with cultural, linguistic or aesthetic preferences. I want people who come to live in my country to respect our laws and customs. I also personally don’t want to learn Spanish and I figure that those who come to live in my country should learn my language. It is a reasonable request that most people should be able to handle.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2010 09:33 PM
Comment #303847

C&J

“Hispanics are not a race. The category includes the Spanish speaking descendants of African slaves as well as those of Germans who a century ago chose to emigrate to Mexico or Argentina instead of the U.S. or Canada.”

Please re-read my comment;

“Now while we may all claim that the Arizona law isn’t racist, surely it is aimed at only one nationality.”

My point is that lots of people have “legal contact” with the police, even if it is only to be rousted. The events taking place surrounding the New York law I mentioned merely re-inforce that.

In the past, I have been accused of calling the police racist, and yet I did no such thing. The members of law enforcement are humans, they are not robots. They are subject to the same foibles as the rest of us, and someone would have to be pretty naive to believe otherwise

You started a thread recently, talking about Governor Brewers video. I suggested that the Governor had the power to stop the “drug smuggling”.
It is within the Governors job description as stated in the Arizona Constitution, that Brewer has the responsibility to enforce the laws of Arizona, and at any time she can order the Arizona DPS to deal with the trafficking of drugs. That is her job, and as of yet I don’t see her doing it.

As I write this the flow of illegals is slowing somewhat, and some of those that are already here are leaving. There are no jobs for the illegals to take.

This law, and all of the furor surrounding it is pure election year hair-on-fire politics.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2010 11:15 PM
Comment #303850

Rocky

I assume then that the “one nationality” you are talking about are Mexicans. Mexicans are also not a race.

I don’t care very much about the Arizona law. It just doesn’t make sense to me that it would be employed in a racist manner to any large extent. Beyond that, an American citizen or a legal alien would not be significantly inconvenienced even in the worst case scenarios.

If I get stopped for speeding, I assume the cop has a right to see my license and registration, and I also assume in our computer age that he can valid same electronically. If the procedure indicates that those are not valid, the cop should arrest me. What is the alternative? And if I am an illegal alien, it doesn’t make sense to just ignore that I have broken this law too.

America is very easy on such things, as you know. Laws are much stricter most other places, including in most European democracies. It might be a good idea for us to enforce our existing laws a little more enthusiastically.

re illegal aliens leaving Arizona because of the law - I am not sure that most people would consider that a problem. It might raise wages a little and encourage the use of labor saving machines in the longer run, but those are adaptions we could make. We should indeed develop some sort of guest worker program, but that is a new subject.

Posted by: C&J at July 19, 2010 12:02 AM
Comment #303851

Rocky Marks

DPS and several county law enforcement agencies make daily arrests in the northern part of the state for drugs be transported illegally. These stops are for hundreds and sometimes thousands of pounds of a variety of drugs. I think the correct phrase law enforcement of drug trafficing.

C&J
Thanks for explaning one more time about traffic stops. People think that the AZ law changes how traffic stops are made. Anywhere in the country when a person gets stopped they get asked for DL, Auto Registration, and Proof of Insurance. If these papers do not agree with what is in the computer then they are detained and charged accordingly. If at the time it is determined they are in the country illegally that just adds to the charges. It is rather routine police activity. That is according to law enforcement friends of mine. The second week of August I will be doing a ride along with a local police officer. I hope we find an IA just so I can personally document how the law works first person.

Posted by: tom humes at July 19, 2010 12:20 AM
Comment #303853

C&J,

Perhaps you have ignored the information I provided on the “stop and frisk” law in New York. Then again, perhaps you just don’t care.

This is not just about traffic stops. This is not just about probable cause, or reasonable suspicion. This about lawful contact, and lawful contact is an extremely subjective term.

BTW, I never said that Mexicans were a race. There are however, more indigenous (Yaqui, Mayan, etc) people in Mexico than there are those that are of mixed (European)heritage. There are 62 recognized languages in Mexico other than Spanish. The Spanish Mexicans speak is also different than that which is spoken in the rest of Latin America.

Tom,

“I hope we find an IA just so I can personally document how the law works first person.”

I am quite sure you’re just all abuzz with anticipation.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 19, 2010 12:52 AM
Comment #303859

http://coloradoindependent.com/31469/tancredo-linked-to-minuteman-group-accused-of-arizona-double-murder

MAD, a splinter group Forde led that was an offshoot of the more widely known Minuteman Civil Defense Corps.

Differentiate on MAD
Published: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 9:44 PM MST

In the interest of fairness I believe that given the horrors of the Arivaca murders perpetrated by the Minutemen American Defense (MAD) that henceforth whenever you publish a letter using the name “Minuteman or Minutemen” in it that you differentiate what group the letter writer is talking about. Otherwise, don’t publish it.

The anonymous “Louise” found it useful to use the name “Minutemen” in a broad brush attack on all Minutemen, referring to them as a “vigilante group” that takes the law into their hands. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We are an “observe and report” group that reports illegals to the proper authorities (i.e. Border Patrol), which is what every citizen should do. We notify the Border Patrol and the Sheriff whenever we go on patrol and work closely with them when we are on patrol.

We are the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (MCDC), not the Minutemen American Defense (MAD). MAD has never been a part of MCDC.

Sherman Frey, Green Valley


http://www.gvnews.com/articles/2009/06/23/letters/02letterfrey.txt

Activist acquitted in fight with Rancho Penasquitos day laborers

John Matthew Monti, 36, was cleared on all charges, including three battery counts, three hate-crime counts, and one count of filing a false police report. The jury deliberated more than a day before reaching its verdict.

Monti is a member of an anti-illegal immigration group, Save Our State, and has ties to Jeff Schwilk, the leader of the Oceanside-based San Diego Minutemen. Both organizations have protested at day-labor hiring sites.

After the verdict, Monti said the charges he faced were to shut him up after he filed a complaint with the San Diego County grand jury in March, alleging that the San Diego Police Department failed to adequately respond to an incident of prostitution and human trafficking in migrant camps near McGonigle Canyon. Monti has long railed against sex trafficking in the camps, and the smuggling of young girls forced into prostitution.
http://www.newsnet14.com/2007/09/28/activist-acquitted-in-fight-with-rancho-penasquitos-day-laborers/

This link you provided doesn’t even mention the Minutemen organization.
http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/immigration_extremists.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_4


Hey gergle, do you want to try again? Maybe this time you could actually try to back up your claims instead of throwing trash against the wall hoping ignorant people will believe it.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 19, 2010 09:10 AM
Comment #303862

C&J,

I’m glad that you cleared up racism for all of the people here at Watchblog.
Here I am thinking that a poster of the president depicted as a whitch doctor caricature, complete with bone in nose was offensive toward African Americans. Now I know it’s just me devaluing the charge of racism due to me being oversensitive.
Can you believe that I, in my politically correct dilusional state thought the monkey references were racist?
What the hell is my problem? “Go back to Kenya” sign with little stuffed monkey is sorta cute now that you cleared up what racism is for us minorities.

I’m also glad you lumped an idiotic statement from Jessie Jackson in your post so that I and the other overly sensative minorities can be dismissed for agreeing with the NAACP that there are racist elements in the Tea Party that should be denounced by the non racist members.

Well at least that’s what I thought before you shed the light on what racism really is.

I guess racist statements made by one of the tea party leaders that got him removed from the party weren’t racist either.
Not any more thanks to your enlightening us people of color on what racism really is.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 19, 2010 11:41 AM
Comment #303864

C&J,

Thanks to you I now know that the statement below is “satire” not racist filth.

“Dear Mr. Lincoln,” began Williams’ letter. “We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!”

What was the NAACP thinking?

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 19, 2010 12:10 PM
Comment #303877

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_xCeItxbQY&feature=player_embedded

Can we call this racism? Or will we explain it away with excuses?

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 19, 2010 03:34 PM
Comment #303896

These “reverse” racism charges are getting old. What actions have any of these so called Black Panthers taken other than looking thuggish and talking like idiots? Are they members of the NAACP? If not, why should this group be responsible for denouncing them. The Tea Party movement, on the other hand, allows bigots to hold up signs and spew filth with no consequence. They wink and nod and say “we don’t support those people.” But they do nothing to stop them. If these two wannabe tough guys showed up at an NAACP convention and talked like that and their officials said nothing then you may have a point. Call them bigots, call them prejudiced, whatever but racism is different as I see it. It implies some sort of power to actually do something to the people they are prejudiced against. Like turning dogs, fire hoses, and bullets against a people because of their skin color and desire to be treated just like everyone else. That’s racism. It is violent, ugly, un-American and comes from people so scared of their own shadows that they feel it is their right to do that to another human being. Those two men at the polling place can be rightly called bigots or prejudiced but racists … no.

The right uses this term pretty loosely and disingenuously. They call Barack Obama racist - for what? Has he turned dogs loose on a bunch of WASPs drinking martinis at the country club? Has he ordered the bombing of white churches? Has he denied white people the right to vote? NO. He hasn’t. Have these things happened to black people in my lifetime. Yes. It sickens me that people take so lightly the real violence of racism. If it is bubbling under the surface of any movement it certainly is not in a resurgence of the Black Panther Party - two guys at a polling place doesn’t constitute a resurgence. It is these Tea Party rallies where people allow signs with racist slogans, pictures of the president dressed up like a witch doctor, guns … hmmm … which one seems more likely?

When Obama turns the national guard loose on a Tea Party rally and uses dogs, tear gas, and bullets to break up a peaceful gathering then you may rightly use the term racist. When you lose your right to vote because you are intimidated by thugs at your polling place (I still haven’t heard of anyone in this Black Panther incident say they were intimidated) then you may use this term. When the local sheriff looks the other way after little girls are killed in a white church bombing then you may use this term. White people in this country have not experienced racism. They may have been treated unfairly but when compared to what real racism is it is just childish whining.

Posted by: tcsned at July 19, 2010 07:45 PM
Comment #303899

Andre

Those things are indeed potentially racist. I have not seen too many of these posters, however. I also remember Bush portrayed as a monkey, Hitler, and as various sorts of animals and daemons. There is always a fridge element and just because the target is a member of a minority doesn’t mean it is racist.

The term is way overused.

I am glad I could clear up your misunderstandings. Remember, it is only racist if you treat the person differently because of race. It is okay to ridicule or disagree if that is how you would treat everyone. Being rude is not the same as being racist.

BTW – I like that “people of color” thing you use. It really doesn’t make much sense. I get pretty dark during summers, so I am a seasonal person of color. It is funny how the strategic use of the preposition so complexly makes it all PC. It is so fulsome and Victorian. But who are the “people of color” & “people of white.” I mean, in your opinion who is included in this people of color group? Does it include people from India or China? How about the Middle East? If you include these groups, you might want to talk to those guys who make up the affirmative action programs, since they are not included in most targets. But if you did include them as “people of color” it would eliminate that troublesome testing gap on standardized tests.

Or do you just hold up some kind of color meter to figure it out? Of course, that wouldn’t work, would it? Groups like Hispanics are too diverse. I was recently in Barcelona, Spain and it seemed like most of the people of Barcelona looked a lot like the people of Germany.

Posted by: C&J at July 19, 2010 08:42 PM
Comment #303902

Weary,

I guess splitting hairs is in your mind an adequate defense.

I dunno murder is kinda serious where I come from. Splinters are things that stick in your ass when you slide down a piece of wood aren’t they?

Some links about the Texas racism and fraud. It interesting how google and others have buried these results. Someone with search engine saavy must be involved with the group. Since even with criteria asking for negative content, the pro minutemen links top the search list. Interesting PR campaign.

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/03/194699_comment.php

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1743626/posts

I don’t expect you to actually evaluate these links. It isn’t something you do. You simply blather about it ain’t true! Kinda hard to convince a blind bat.

Facts are facts, regardless how much you deny them.

Posted by: gergle at July 19, 2010 09:06 PM
Comment #303903

Willie

The woman on the tape was definitely a racist and a cowardly one at that. She badly misused her power as a Federal official and it is really shameful. She was fired today. The Obama Administration did the right thing. Now they should look into Holder.

The incident depicted was at an NAACP banquet. Presumably the NAACP will apologize and purge the racists from their organization.

Posted by: C&J at July 19, 2010 09:15 PM
Comment #303904

C&J,

“I mean, in your opinion who is included in this people of color group? Does it include people from India or China?”

In South Africa during Apartheid people from India, and Southeast Asia were considered colored.

Curiously though, people from Japan, and Taiwan were considered “honorary whites” because South Africa had diplomatic relations with those countries.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 19, 2010 09:20 PM
Comment #303910

Rocky

Indians tend NOT to be called people of color in the U.S. Apartheid was misguided and so is our obsession with race.

IMO - the rights establishment has become very dishonest. They understand that if they included Indian or other Asian immigrants in the minority targets, there would be no affirmative action programs left, since achievement gaps would disappear with the redefinition.

Posted by: C&J at July 19, 2010 09:57 PM
Comment #303912
It interesting how google and others have buried these results. Someone with search engine saavy must be involved with the group. I don’t expect you to actually evaluate these links. It isn’t something you do. You simply blather about it ain’t true! Kinda hard to convince a blind bat. Facts are facts, regardless how much you deny them.
Posted by: gergle at July 19, 2010 09:06 PM

gergle, I’m not going to format your quote,(dagnabit, I just did) or follow your links. I’ve already done that once and I have exposed your inaccuracies. You hope your links will convince others because they have convinced you. It will not be so. I have demonstrated the inacuracies of your claims.

In Texas, the minuteman organization was found to be rife with racists and several were found guilty of assault
Posted by: gergle at July 17, 2010 09:27 PM

EEURNT! Not true.
http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/007138.html#303859

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 19, 2010 10:57 PM
Comment #303915

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiaI63pBmLs&feature=player_embedded

Posted by: gergle at July 19, 2010 11:34 PM
Comment #303916

BTW, Weary,

Some of us read the newspaper everyday and do have memories that function. Some of us actually know a former member of the minutemen.

I’m sure the organization has made an effort to become more politically palatable than it’s beginnings, but it doesn’t change the profile of the people that belong to it.

I’m well aware you don’t read links or consider anything that doesn’t fit your agenda, especially when it counters a point you make. My goal isn’t quite so focused. It’s simply to bring some balance to a tilted and skewed argument.

Enjoy. I still am not sure how it is you think denying charges against the minutemen justifies a neo nazi in their ranks.

Posted by: gergle at July 19, 2010 11:44 PM
Comment #303922

Yea, It’s too bad you can’t convince me you know what you’re talking about.

Call me a racist.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 20, 2010 01:04 AM
Comment #303932

When failure is every where threatening in a society, the people will look for readily identifiable parties to blame and even punish for the impending failure. I speculate that this is what brought about the end of the Aztec civilization.

Racism is rising on all sides as the threat of a failed future grows larger with each trillion dollars of added debt to federal books, not to mention the failure of States and municipalities to provide essential services within their budgets. It is irrational, illogical, and entirely unfounded, except as a natural product of a species with powerful discriminating senses and even more powerful discriminating minds.

The single most important thing we can do to fight racism in America is to ensure the potential for a prosperous future. Not a prosperous present for those already prosperous; but a potential for broad based prosperity for all, from the janitors to the CEO’s. That is getting increasingly difficult to do with so very much of our nation’s wealth being concentrated into the hands of so few here at home, and in the hands of investors in foreign lands as a result of national debt and foreign borrowing.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 20, 2010 07:40 AM
Comment #303938

C&J - how is Eric Holder a racist? What has he done to oppress white people? Has he thrown them in jail on trumped up charges? Has he turned dogs loose on the Tea Party rallies? What actions has he taken that are racist?

Posted by: tcsned at July 20, 2010 08:49 AM
Comment #303939

He dropped the Black Panther case did he not tcsned. Ever since Obama got elected the “RACIST” remark has gotten more common, someone dosen’t like his policies he’s racist, someone dosen’t agree with him he must be racist.

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 10:15 AM
Comment #303942

C&J,

I wanted to point out to you that as a Hispanic American, who has experienced racism, I do not need a lesson on racism from you. You can knit pick my response all you want.
You posted an article about the tea party being unjustly labled racist by the NAACP.

1) The NAACP did not label the entire Tea Party racist. They asked that the racist elements be denounced.

2)You presume to have enough knowledge about racial relations to be able to level your condemnation at “people of color” for overusing the term racist? Are you serious?

3) You seem to hope that the only people who will read your post are as like minded as you and with the same lacking in understanding of cultural diversity,American history and life experience as you.

Please don’t try to tell me that looking at monkeys, witch doctors, go back to Kenya and the word nigger on the Tea Party posters is not racist. Some of the people who read your post are smarter than that, or at least have eyes.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 20, 2010 11:03 AM
Comment #303948

Andre There are ignorant people in the NAACP as well as the Tea Party. Both groups need to denounce those people who want to use the race game within their ranks.

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 11:47 AM
Comment #303950

MAG,

As we all know by now the NAACP denounced the woman who made the speech about the white farmer.

I want to see the Tea Party do the same.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 20, 2010 12:19 PM
Comment #303952

Weary Willie-
Try this on for size-

A Georgia woman who said she believes her husband is the white farmer referenced in the clip told CNN on Tuesday that Sherrod was helpful to her family and that the couple never felt she was being racist while trying to assist them in avoiding foreclosure.

“She treated us really good and got us all we could,” said Eloise Spooner of Iron City, Georgia. Spooner said she remembered that Sherrod helped find an attorney to help her husband, Roger.

She said she doesn’t believe Sherrod is being treated fairly.

Breitbart’s photo should be under the definition for the term “heavily edited”

MAG-
And no, it was not the Obama administration that dropped the criminal charges, it was the Bush Administration, and the Obama Administration didn’t drop their part of the case, they went ahead and got the injunction on the guy with the billy club.

So, in both cases here, Republicans have fundamental facts wrong in their stories. Not mere trivia items, but truly contradictory details to their conclusions. In one case, the supposed reverse racist’s victim believes she wasn’t discriminated against, and that the charge is bull****, and even calls into CNN to do so. In the other case, Republicans not only get wrong who dropped the case, but who actually finally took legal action.

What we’re getting here are false controversies that do true damage to people’s lives, that tar people’s reputations, that serve to put false shadows over the reputation of legitimate organizations.

We seem to have “shocking revelations” on the brain here, a tendency to value counterintuitive charges over well founded ones, simply because of their shock value.

Breitbart and his ilk are deceptive elitists, who believe that the truth is too good for the misled masses. They must be goaded and provoked with this kind of sensationalist bunk in order to push the public in their preferred direction. They are not trying to reason with the average person, only manipulate them, and you two, sadly, have little defense against con artists like them.

Is it any wonder that the Republican Party spun so wildly out of control, that conservatives didn’t exercise their means of holding their leaders accountable? With information like this so tunneled, and so few defenses between the supporters of the conservative movement, and their own media sources, how can we ever expect them to take responsiblity for their mistakes?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 12:55 PM
Comment #303953

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/breitbarts-editing.html

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 20, 2010 01:00 PM
Comment #303954

Hmm. Blockquotes didn’t work correctly. Quotation should end with “She said she doesn’t believe Sherrod is being treated fairly.”

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 01:02 PM
Comment #303956

I a a straight white male over 40. I have been called just about every name in the book. What do I care when words come from a mouth of ignorance? So what. I have more important duties spread before me. The only words that should hurt a person is the truth.

BTW-Holder told his honchos to not prosecute blacks against whites in voter issues. There are a number of words to describe that action. Arrogance. Racism. Dereliction of Duty. Stupidity. Hate Crime. Politics. There is room for your description in that list, just add it in. Do they fit. You determine that. I will leave it here with unfit for duty.

Posted by: tom humes at July 20, 2010 01:07 PM
Comment #303957

tom humes-
Do you mind providing us with quotes and a source for that?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 01:16 PM
Comment #303958

Tom,

“What do I care when words come from a mouth of ignorance? So what. I have more important duties spread before me. The only words that should hurt a person is the truth.”

It’s not the words it’s the hatred and disrespect behind them. It’s the message those words stand for.
It’s the foaming at the mouth hatred for a President that was voted into office by Americans of all color. It’s the sadness that hits me when I think of the things I thought changed for the better that have’nt changed at all. I hated being called a spic and a nigger in the late 60’s early 70’s because I was a child and couldn’t do anything about it. Now it’s not about the names, it’s about the doubt that’s slowly creeping back over the past year or so that the world is better now for my kids. I’m starting to doubt the validity of that.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 20, 2010 01:50 PM
Comment #303961

tom humes - what are you talking about? I’m sure you have some solid sources to back up such a wild accusation. What white voter are you talking about? I know of no complaints of voter intimidation. I don’t think that guy with the video camera was there to vote.

I agree that words in and of themselves don’t mean a whole lot. It’s actions that matter. For all these wild charges that Holder and Obama are racists there is nothing really to back them up. Most of these people pointing the racist finger at Obama should pay attention to the three fingers pointing back at them.

Posted by: tcsned at July 20, 2010 02:08 PM
Comment #303963

Andre I knew she was fired from her job at the dept of agrig. and they denounced her actions but I heard nothing from the NAACP. As far as the Tea Party, most I heard denounce racism and most are just wanting responsibility in government. And like I said most organizations have their share of idiots.
tcsned Maybe you ought to watch or read other News sources other then the liberal ones.

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 03:05 PM
Comment #303965

Has anyone here mentioned that a member of the Black Panther Movement cannot join the NAACP? Can a member of a White Supremacist group join the Tea Party?

Posted by: Marysdude at July 20, 2010 03:11 PM
Comment #303966

Marysdude-
I would say they already have. Many of Glenn Beck’s sources and supporters have ties to white Supremacist and Survivalist groups.

MAG-
The NAACP quickly did a codemnation of it based on the video Breitbart circulated, and she quickly resigned to avoid the furor. However, Breitbart heavily edited the video to exclude her explaining how she eventually overcame her prejudices and how she and the white farmers she was talking about became friends.

Oh, it gets worse: the woman helped save their farm, and now the farmer’s wife has called CNN to defend the poor woman.

Most people at this point would admit, absent some additional revelation, that Breitbart withheld crucial information from his viewers, and needlessly defamed the poor woman.

Most people. My question is, are Republicans going to be most people, or will this have to wait until somebody finally asks whether media figures on the right have any decency?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 03:27 PM
Comment #303967

Stephen, I read the News article, what about the left wing media Stephen, MSNBC has it’s share of strange figures. Do the media figures on the left have any decency?

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 03:39 PM
Comment #303970

MAG-
You could improve your arguments significantly if you pointed me to a similarly deceptive removal of context. You can ask whether media figures on the left have any sense of decency, but why? What terrible thing did we do?

You don’t just get to make accusations because they’re rhetorically or politically convenient. Proof. Evidence. Something more than empty words, please.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 04:09 PM
Comment #303971

Stephen,

I am sure that the right doesn’t care about the details of this incident, because if they did this lady would look less like a Black, probably liberal, racist woman.
An informed right would already know that this incident took place 24 years ago, and the NAACP (also uninformed) denounced her.
The right’s hair on fire bulls*&t agenda depends on an uninformed public, because that uninformed public is easier to manipulate through fear, and that’s all they have to work with.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 20, 2010 04:09 PM
Comment #303979

This may be a surprise to you Stephen but Beck and some others on Fox defended Sherrod. I usually don’t watch Beck instead I watch Matthews, but I got curious. Insead he slammed the WH for moving to fast and not getting her side or not getting the total content of the speach. The NAACP won’t release the tape because they want to review it. You see most people are jumping to conclusions over an incomplete recording, I have to admit I thought the worst but after Listening to Beck, I’m thinking differently and shifting it to something POLITICAL.
Stephen you guys slam Beck, Hannity and O’Riely but MSNBC has the like of Shultz, Olbermann and Maddow. The only ones that I can stomach on that network are Ratigan and Matthews.

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 06:16 PM
Comment #303986

MAG-
I heard he called her a Maoist, or something like that. High Praise?

As for the NAACP: “We were snookered.”

I’m a crotchety old rationalist at heart. I like reliable news sources. When people screw up reports, or read things into news items I don’t think the facts justify, I have a tendency to write them off. I think it’s a crass thing to be in such a hurry to confirm your own notion of things that you buy into questionable claims without reservation. I hit liberal newsters on it during the Healthcare Reform debate. I didn’t want more unnamed aide reports. I don’t like thin leads. I don’t like conspiracy theories, I don’t like people throwing around difficult to prove labels and crap like that.

Maddow I like better than Olbermann. Olbermann gets heavy-handed on things, where Maddow is much lighter in her touch. But even so, I usually don’t keep my television on for them. I devote enough time to politics online. I won’t turn them off that quickly if they’re on, but I don’t need to be preached to. I’m the choir.

But are their efforts equivalent to Breitbart’s? Show me where they are wrong, where they’ve lied, and you’ll be able to state that case. Partisanship and bias aren’t enough in this case, as Breitbart feverishly promoted this as some sort of answer to charges of racism towards the Tea Partisans from the Left. The question of credibility has arisen. The question is, do Republicans and conservatives at all care whether it’s right, so long as its harmful to the Democrats?

They should. Fighting the Democrats gets harder, even on the substance, when yours is the movement that cries wolf.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 07:27 PM
Comment #303988

Stephen, IMO this whole thing is because of the NAACP’s remarks about the Tea Party. Why didn’t the NAACP come to Sherrod’s defence right away? You heard wrong about the Maoist thing, I listened to Beck and he did nothing but defend the woman and slam the WH, Dept. of Agric. and the NAACP.in her defence. He is wating to hear the complete tape as I am. If what she says is true I think she should get her job back and appologies from the WH, Dept. of Agric., and the NAACP. Breitbart for what he did in posting an incomplete tape also ought to appologies big time to the woman. As far as Maddow, Olberman, and Shultz they’re to far left and partisan for me.

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 07:55 PM
Comment #303990

gergle, maybe it’s your search engine capabilities that are lacking.


At that meeting Barbara Coe resigned her position (giving her resignation from MMP, Inc. to Jim Gilchrist, its president) and Stewart and Courtney were fired. Judge Wilkinson ruled that the two defendants were legally terminated from the board of MMP on February 2, 2007 and “under no circumstances” are they board members after February 2, 2007. He issued a permanent injunction against their claiming that they are board members, officers, members or spokespersons for the Minuteman Project, calls for them to remove any websites making those false claims and finally orders them to return to MMP any property they have in their possession.[13]
The court ruling is devastating to their case.[11]The ruling affirms Jim Gilchrist’s position as head of Minuteman Project, Inc. and its successor organization Jim Gilchrist’s Minuteman Project, Inc.

Strike four, gergle! You’re out!

Stephen, having not seen the entire video I should reserve my judgement as to the woman’s position. However, the video portion presented was of the woman admitting her racist views, albiet 24 years ago.

I am looking forward to the entire video and I am also wondering why it was not brought forth immediately.

The question is, do Republicans and conservatives at all care whether it’s right, so long as its harmful to the Democrats?

This is a question that should be asked of Dan Rather.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 20, 2010 09:06 PM
Comment #303991

I see it now, Stephen. Thank you. BRB

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 20, 2010 09:11 PM
Comment #303992

MAG-
Breitbart acted of his own accord. The NAACP complained about the tolerance for racist elements within their ranks, and Mark William’s general behavior and recent Lincoln letter gave credibility to their charge that people like Breitbart were just itching to take away.

So what do they do? As journalists, they distribute an edited video without being sure they have the whole story. Were they not the ones running the site, I think it would be a firing offense. It was definitely a conscious choice on their part.

When you set whether somebody’s partisan one way or another as a gauge of their credibility, then you will inevitably fall into the trap of believing the worst of your enemies and the best of yourself when neither notion is warranted.

Olbermann and Maddow may interject a lot of opinion, but their style is to support a lot of that opinion with documented fact, and to withdraw such facts when they are discredited. They may not be unbiased, but the question is whether you can catch them doing something really reckless, source-wise.

I do believe she should be re-hired, and given an apology by everybody involved. But really, she is just one of many people who have had their reputations attacked without justification by a right wing that feels it necessary to win every argument through an ad hominem destruction of their credibility.

I’m sick of it. Maybe if folks on the right weren’t so busy arranging their rival’s destruction, they could avoid their own. It’s folks like Breitbart who made sure you cared more about destroying Democrats and liberals than protecting your own interests by keeping your leaders in line.

Democrats on my side put their interests above any kind of worship of the leaders. They’re not wanting another Clinton age, another period of just giving Republicans what they want. We want progress. We want things to improve. It’s not as simple as “destroy the Republicans and we win.”, there’s a strong component of pragmatism there. We’re willing to make deals to get what we want, but there are limits.

Republicans seem to want everything just how they like it, but from a position that they have to fight like Tasmanian Devils to achieve. There’s not really much good coming out of it, for them, in my opinion, because what it’s basically ending at is “Let’s go back to the Bush Policies.”

Republicans need to change. They need to recognize that some of their cherished beliefs were fragile illusions. That doesn’t mean that they were all wrong, or all bad-intentioned. They have a lot of good beliefs at heart, but the reckless pursuit of opposition to the Democrats has put them in a place of actually flip-flopping on what were once their policies. It’s also invested the movement with a kind of expedience that give rise to people like Breitbart.

You need serious people. Not necessarily folks who will agree most of the time with the Democrats, but people who aren’t politically invested in saying black everytime the Democrats say white. You need people with the flexibility necessary to govern properly, rather than folks who are forced to adhere to a political position, even at the cost of seeming or actually being incompetent along those policy lines.

In essense, Republicans need to be able to live and compete in the same world as the Democrats. I’d tell them drop the Liberal Media Schtick, because all it does is encourage an insular attitude that gets Republicans cut off from awareness of the problems most Americans see, in government and in their party.

Republicans need to get back in touch with those beyond their party. Otherwise, they cannot expand their political reach, and their influence and power will necessarily diminish.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 20, 2010 09:34 PM
Comment #303993

Marysdude

Nobody can join the tea party because it is just a movement, not an organization.

Andre

Being Hispanic may give you one perspective on the race issue. It is probably not one held by all Hispanics, nor is there any reason to believe it is correct or better than one held by people of other ethnic groups.

And yes, I think we overuse the term racist and often use it incorrectly. It is time we stopped fearing the term and allowing it to be used as a trump card and started talking about what it really means.

BTW – do “people of color” include Americans of Indian, Middle Eastern or Chinese descent.

Re those things you mention – I am not saying they would not be racist. I am arguing with your perception that they are widespread or even common. I have been to tea party rallies and seen not seen them. When you look at pictures of tea parties, you see vast numbers of people, but you don’t see those signs. Journalists can find some if they look hard. I think that those people should be castigated. But the tea party cannot kick them out because there is no real membership list. We don’t even know if the people holding those signs are tea party supporters. The left on many occasions has set its own people up as provocations.

So maybe I am indeed ignorant of your perception of American history, but I have probably seen much more of the world and of America and I just don’t see it from that narrow perspective of racial identity

Posted by: C&J at July 20, 2010 09:37 PM
Comment #303994

Having watched the entire speech I can say the lady is being treated unfairly. Her experiences would make a lesser person very bitter. Her statement; “Had we lived with hatred in our hearts we would probably be dead.” demonstrates her goodness.

Having watched her speak, I must say the administration “Acted Stupidly”.

They’re not wanting another Clinton age, another period of just giving Republicans what they want.

Finally! Thank you, Stephen, for finally recognizing the republican party’s accomplishment of the balanced budget and surplus Clinton has been taking credit for all these years.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 20, 2010 10:10 PM
Comment #303995

C&J,

Nobody can join the tea party because it is just a movement, not an organization….

…..and Dick Army and Fox News are just grass roots.


Weary,

Tell me, do you believe that as long as people get embarrassed and then fire the organizers that embarrass them, that nothing that went on in the past impacts the future? If so, you are exceedingly naive. BTW, You “struck out” long ago when you failed to explain why a neo nazi is a minuteman. Tick, tock. The game was called for delay of action and leaving the field…football doesn’t have strikes.

What you saw regarding the “racist” statement of the woman who resigned was a creation of Breitbart and Fox who averred for her resignation, loudly and clearly. When are they gonna fire Hannity? When are you going to scream about that?

Gooooooaaaal!!!!

Sadly, racism isn’t a game.

Posted by: gergle at July 20, 2010 10:30 PM
Comment #303996

Stephen All I’m saying is this woman should be vindicated and given her job back. As WW said this administration acted STUPIDLY. And Stephen you can stop with the democrat, republican rant because as I told you before I don’t care if the person has a D, R, or I after his name all I care about is his or her policies. Political party means NOTHING. What is needed is both sides getting off the race card issue.

Posted by: MAG at July 20, 2010 10:31 PM
Comment #303997

Playing the race card is dangerous, no matter who plays it.

We are too hypersensitive to race issues and should lighten up. A lot has happened since the 1960s.

The NAACP played the race card a bit dishonestly. This woman was later caught in the vortex, collateral damage. On most occasions the tape would have had no resonance, but because the NAACP had upped the ante, it did.

I suppose that now she feels ashamed of her earlier racism, she should not have lost her job. But in our hypersensitive racial climate, telling such a story is bound to get you in trouble

Substitution is the test of fairness. Imagine if a white official had said exactly the same things about her job and a black farmer.

Posted by: C&J at July 20, 2010 10:40 PM
Comment #303999
BTW, You “struck out” long ago when you failed to explain why a neo nazi is a minuteman.
Posted by: gergle at July 20, 2010 10:30 PM

You win, gergle. I struck out because the rules changed. I thought you said:

In Texas, the minuteman organization was found to be rife with racists and several were found guilty of assault
Posted by: gergle at July 17, 2010 09:27 PM


C&J, I don’t think she’s ashamed. I think she’s proud. Overcame adversity, that phrase comes to mind. I think she’s proud of the way her family took the high road.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 20, 2010 11:37 PM
Comment #304000

C&J,

“Nobody can join the Tea Party, because it’s a movement.”

Thanks for that tid-bit. So it’s okay for a ‘movement’ to host racists, but not okay for an organization to do so? If the organization disenfranchises racists from its membership, and the ‘movement’ doesn’t, it equates to what? That the ‘movement’ has no control over those who claim their name? It’s all just innocent fun? I’m sorry, but I don’t get it. If there is a leadership, there is control.

Posted by: Marysdude at July 20, 2010 11:39 PM
Comment #304001

MAG & Stephen,

Ruppert made it clear that Beck is an entertainer (to me not a very good one), and we all know that Maddow is a journalist (to me one of the best), so they are not really in direct competition.

Posted by: Marysdude at July 20, 2010 11:42 PM
Comment #304002

I think this thread should either change it’s course or end itself.

Perhaps we should discuss Shirley Sherrod’s disdain for lawyers!

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 20, 2010 11:47 PM
Comment #304003

Weary,

You anti-attorneyite!!!:)

(with a tip of the hat to Jerry Seinfeld)

Posted by: gergle at July 21, 2010 12:01 AM
Comment #304004

Weary,

I started out posting a story in the Chronicle about an avowed neo nazi in the minutemen. I then provided, as per your request, links to stories about past incidents of racism claims against the tea party.

If you need a list of all avowed racist minutemen signed in their own blood, I can’t provide that. I live in Texas, I know an ex-minuteman. I know the types that support them. The organization has made an attempt to clean up their image from it’s outset, but apparently has no issue with avowed neo nazis. That indicates to me there are still deep problems within the organization.

Texas fought a war with Mexico, despite avowing to be loyal to Spain. There was a horrific history of racism and genocide throughout that period committed by Texans and the Texas Rangers in particular. Sam Houston was horrified by the kill happy Texas volunteers. Texas is still a culture rich in racism.

You can dismiss it all you want. It doesn’t change reality.

Posted by: gergle at July 21, 2010 12:12 AM
Comment #304005

edit: against the minutemen.

Posted by: gergle at July 21, 2010 12:14 AM
Comment #304007

Comment #303773

Weary,
In Texas, the minuteman organization was found to be rife with racists and several were found guilty of assault, not to mention the organization leaders that absconded with donations.
You clearly have no problem with neo nazi’s carrying guns on the border. We’ll just add that to your political leanings. Good luck with that.

Posted by: gergle at July 17, 2010 09:27 PM

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 21, 2010 01:29 AM
Comment #304008

gergle, I have seen and heard it here in Texas too. Klan in robes assembled on the side of the I-35 Freeway just N. of San Antonio. A fight erupting in a billiards hall instigated by a white Texan telling a Mexican American Texan to speak English or get the hell out of America. Javier was a classmate of mine, helping me out as I was taking Spanish in College and needed the practice.

But, I have seen it just as bad in Saginaw and Flint Michigan amongst members of my own family, like an Uncle who blamed Blacks for taking white’s jobs, and dragging everyone down to their level. It is atrocious. I also remember being threatened and beaten up in Detroit for nothing more than being White in the wrong neighborhood. These incidents don’t rise to the level of commanding media attention - and I can think of no greater evidence than this, that we as a people still have serious racial and prejudice tensions and issues to grow through.

Vilsack, pre-judged this lady on the basis of a right wing blogger, costing her her job, without even so much as researching the efficacy of the right wing blogger’s material. Such prejudice leads to very harmful consequences, many have nothing to do with race at all. We have a long way to go in our education system to prepare a future where America has learned to avoid prejudice and pre-judging as a basis for hostile action toward others. Everyone surrounding this Black ladies firing, on the Right and Left, are guilty of prejudice, pre-judging, without having obtained the facts. This incident speaks not well of Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives. It smacks of McCarthyist tactics and knee jerk reactions.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 21, 2010 01:49 AM
Comment #304009
Everyone surrounding this Black ladies firing, on the Right and Left, are guilty of prejudice, pre-judging, without having obtained the facts. This incident speaks not well of Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives

I agree.

this post is guilty of instigating a race riot on line.

At least we can say we haven’t killed anyone discussing it.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 21, 2010 02:03 AM
Comment #304026

C&J-
There are organized National Tea Party Organizations. You can join them. Maybe it’s not as unified as the Republican Party, but it is joinable.

What you better watch out for is that the Tea Party might take over the party it was meant to save. Michele Bachmann, that example of balance and poise, started up a Tea Party Caucus within Congress. I’m interested to see just how that works out for the Republicans.

It’s not just going to be a movement forever. It’s going to define itself, and having sold the Tea Party as the GOP’s purification and redemption, it’s going to want to define itself by inviting people in, and kicking them back out. The new faux-populism might win gains in the next election, but how long can a political organization that doubles down on the worst Republican policies truly last?

As for the NAACP? It’s not the villain here, like the right was trying to make it, one way or the other. They didn’t play the race card. They said that the Tea Party was tolerating racist elements in their ranks, and that they should not do so. Lo an Behold, one Tea Partier’s letter drops jaws with its prejudice and offensiveness, and the Tea Party takes the NAACP’s advice, and his organization boots him. Left at that, it would have been a good start to doing the right thing.

But along comes this video. You guys pushed it. It was going to be on Glenn Beck. But now you’re going to make it out to be a problem of political correctness since the story blew up in your faces. The Republicans, the Tea Partiers, and other on the right seems to spin like gyroscopes nowadays, and the Democrats’ disadvantage seems to be that we don’t follow suit.

Weary Willie-
Yeah, would you be saying the same today if you hadn’t had the entire speech to look at? That’s what bugs me. I’m watching Morning Joe today, and I’m just wondering how many of these people, Joe included, would be making hay about this woman, if the debunking hadn’t come so quick from what you guys term compromised sources.

I mean, you presented that video to me yourself with these words:

Can we call this racism? Or will we explain it away with excuses?

And I didn’t even need to watch the video to know it was bunk. I just needed to see the lady’s name in the title, because I’d seen stories that debunked the controversy hours ago.

You folks on the Right? Not so lucky. Most of you went with your gut desire to bash back at the NAACP, to vilify another organization on the left, just as you vilified ACORN with another heavily edited video from the same people. The story should be that you folks were caught with your pants down.

When is this constant stream of BS coming from your side going to cost you folks some credibility? From Death Panels to this, and long before, the Republicans have had a very loose relationship to the truth. I think it’s time you folks finally accept your reckoning, and face the truth. Breitbart’s failure to do due diligence isn’t an isolated incident. It’s a regular occurence on the right. With nothing but ideology to filter the messages you get in, right wing audiences are increasingly poorly informed.

This wouldn’t be a problem if you folks had limited ambitions, but you see, you folks keep on trying to run the country with this abyssmal state of ignorance an incompetence. You’re so busy trying to filter out bias against you that you’re not perceiving that some of the negative perceptions and stories are true. And not facing those, you’re not taking care of your mistakes, nor are you facing difficult truths about where you stand.

A party can’t be run on pure ideas. It’s got to be integrated into reality, or else it drifts into a la-la land of confusion where it does good mostly by mere luck and accident.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 21, 2010 08:34 AM
Comment #304028

Weary,

I srand by that statement and my links back it up. Your supposed rebuttal simply tried to make the point that some of these people were subsequently drummed out of the minutemen organization. Well, duh.

Posted by: gergle at July 21, 2010 10:52 AM
Comment #304029

Dude, Maddow is a commintator NOT a journalist.

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 10:58 AM
Comment #304031

C&J,

“I am arguing with your perception that they are widespread or even common. I have been to tea party rallies and seen not seen them.”
Posted by C&J


“I and the other overly sensative minorities can be dismissed for agreeing with the NAACP that there are racist elements in the Tea Party that should be denounced by the non racist members.”

This is my first response to your article. Where’s the common or widespread you talk about?

” 1) The NAACP did not label the entire Tea Party racist. They asked that the racist elements be denounced.”

Once again where do I say widespread or common?

You keep telling me my position instead of listening to my position. That way you have an argument.


Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 21, 2010 12:09 PM
Comment #304032

Andre M. Hernandez-
Whats important here, as far as some on the Red Column are concerned is not what you said, but what they feel you said.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 21, 2010 12:35 PM
Comment #304033

Stephen Daugherty,

I thought it was just me.

One of the leaders of the Tea Party did the same thing when debating the leader of the NAACP the other day. He just kept repeating that racism is not widespread amongst Tea Partiers over and over and over.
Jealous just kept saying we know we’re not saying that over and over and over.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 21, 2010 12:43 PM
Comment #304034

The race card is being played far to much lately, no matter it being the NAACP or Tea Party. It’s being played with the Az. immigration law. It’s time people got with the real reason this country is in the shape it’s in and that being both Republicans and Democrats can’t seem to get it together. It’s time to stop with the finger pointing and get to working at what is in the best interrest of the people and NOT what some in congress thinks what is in the best interrest of the people.

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 12:47 PM
Comment #304035

MAG,

There is no “race card” being played here. The Tea Party has racists within it’s ranks. The NAACP called the Tea Party out. The Tea Party faked a video to try to discredit the NAACP.
It’s classless, divisive, truth bending GOP politics.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 21, 2010 01:37 PM
Comment #304036

Andre, The tape wasn’t fake it was edited. And it was a Right Wing Blogger who now has remorse about what he did not for the NAACP but for the women that they and others threw under the Bus before all the facts were brought to light. The tape did have parts to it where while Sherrod was speaking the people were clapping and laughing at the remarks and these were NAACP members. So don’t give me that BS that there isn’t racism in the NAACP it may be frowned upon but it does exist as in every group. Even the democrats and republicans have their share of rasist.

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 02:00 PM
Comment #304038

I don’t care who you are, or what you believe about Rachel Maddow, if you do not watch this clip, you will never understand the impact of dishonesty in American media politics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/21/rachel-maddow-white-house_n_654134.html

I just posted this in the left column, and now here. Please watch it.

Posted by: Marysdude at July 21, 2010 02:03 PM
Comment #304039

MAG,

Clapping along in recognition that they felt the same mixed feelings about helping those that had repressed them for so long and also clapping when she expressed that she learned it was about helping the poor and disadvantaged rather than racism is hardly a sign of racist attitudes. That’s a bizarre interpretation on your part, in my opinion. People often clap along with racist jokes by black and white comedians from both sides, in recognition of the stupidity and frailties of us all, not applauding racism.

Posted by: gergle at July 21, 2010 02:18 PM
Comment #304040

MAG,

“So don’t give me that BS that there isn’t racism in the NAACP.”

Please copy and paste where I stated there were no racists in the NAACP. Show me one instance where I discussed whether NAACP was racist. Please!

You are doing the same bait and switch nonsense C&J do. You feel you have a valid argument on a specific point so you pretend that myself and others are making that point to validate your argument.


1) NAACP requested Tea Party denounce the racist elements of their movement. FACT

2) Conservative, GOP, Tea Party supporter who confessed to being unhappy with perceived slight by NAACP edited, transformed video to dismiss NAACP as racist organization. FACT

3)Now all of the Conservative, GOP, Tea Party supporters feel bad(PLEEEAAAASSSE!!!!!!!)and are sitting around blaming the NAACP, The White House, USAG Dept. for believing the smell of smoke in the air due to the fire the Conservatives, GOP Tea Party set.

You people are hilarious, frightening and hilarious

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 21, 2010 02:22 PM
Comment #304041

Andre The Tea party is not an organized group like the NAACP. And all I am saying is that there are undesirable in every group. I don’t want to hear the blown out BS crap. I said that even the Democrats and Republicans have their share of racist in their ranks.

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 02:30 PM
Comment #304043

MAG,

“The Tea party is not an organized group like the NAACP.”

Why is it that when the Tea Party are bragging about the massive scope of their power and will to change this country you folks are like you Dems are going down. Look at the all powerful Tea Party.

When they start spitting on people, hold up monkey and nigger signs, get caught “editing” videos, you folks call yourselves a little rag-tag unorganized group of fellas just hanging out together who can’t control the folks next to you.

Hilarious, frightening and hilarious

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at July 21, 2010 02:49 PM
Comment #304044

Where is your proof of those allegations Andre, an offer of $100,000 dollars has been offered to anyone with proof to those allegations. The Tea party is a movement

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 03:04 PM
Comment #304046

The Tea Party is a bowel ‘movement’. :)

Posted by: Marysdude at July 21, 2010 03:58 PM
Comment #304047

MAG-
Conservatism is a movement, too, and has done a marvellous job of kicking out people when it feels like kicking them out. You folks just have to summon up the political will to stand up against the toleration of racism.

As for the race card being played here? I have misgivings about that term, because it can just as often be used as a means to create a chilling effect on legitimate claims of racism, as it can be used to create a chilling effect against racism.

The term, I think, is purposefully vague, with insinuations attached of deliberate, cynical political strategy, rather than a true grievance. It all abstracts things beyond the right and wrong of the event in question, and turns it into a hair-splitting debate on political etiquette.

As far as the reaction went with Obama and the NAACP, I think that really tells us about the differences in the mindset.

Sure, the Republicans and Right-Wingers who pushed this story are sorry now. But they were the ones driving the bus that she got thrown under, and she got thrown under that bus so quickly because Democrats and folks in the NAACP cared about whether they look like they’re being consistent and fair.

Meanwhile, the folks who jumped on this story who made it a big controversy in the first place are now criticizing the Obama Administration for that reaction. What’s more, it’s likely that these people who were shouting loudly about reverse racism, and what an outrage it was, who failed to do their due diligence, and intended to cause the considerable kind of political damage that these organizations were acting against won’t ever be held accountable, not if recent history is any indication.

How is it that Breitbart and others like him can continually mess things up like this and not be kicked to the curb? The real trouble is, Republicans and those on the Right nowadays depend far too much on what feels right, and not enough on actual examination of the evidence and the reporting.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 21, 2010 04:02 PM
Comment #304049

Stephen, Breightbart may have started the engine but your president and those in his administration drove the bus and why didn’t the NAACP come to the womans aid seeing how they had the unedited tape? They in fact threw her under the bus. IMO this is just a bad case of people jumping to conclusions before all the facts are presented. Stephen you are guilty of that fact. I can go back into the archives and bring up the Hadithia Story.

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 04:13 PM
Comment #304053

MAG-
I’m not going to hairsplit metaphors here.

The administration erred in reacting so quickly, that much is for sure. But let’s take a hypothetical here: what if the exonerating information hadn’t come so quickly?

Doubtlessly, your side would still be harping on it. The Obama administration overreacted, but it overreacted in defense against a conservative media that’s delighted in this kind of reckless defamation from day one.

If they erred, it’s in trusting a video posted by right-wingers, hyped by the conservative media, and before the left wing’s quick debunk, pushed by folks like yourself. Their mistake was doing what you wanted them to do when you guys fell down on the job concerning the facts.

The Obama Administration was wrong, but that doesn’t make you folks, or what you did right. The fact that Obama’s and the NAACP were wrong and mistaken too doesn’t exonerate the right. In fact, since your people were the originators of this accusation, the majority of the responsibility falls on you. Nobody would have called for this woman’s resignation, much less this quickly, if it weren’t for Breitbart and the right’s uncritical acceptance of the clip’s message, and deliberate decision to use it for political effect. Just as Mark William’s deserves the blame for publishing his racist satire, so does Breitbart and the rest of you deserve blame for being the active party in disparaging her reputation.

As for Haditha? What I argued is that there was plenty of evidence to show that an incident took place, and that innocent people were killed there. I did not accuse anybody in particular of being guilty.

Your people, though, took such stories and such admissions of probable fact to be a deliberate attempt to besmirch the reputations of the soldiers. You leave out facts like the false reports filed, the images taken on the camera. They told an inconsistent story, and that inconsistent story eventually lead to the infamy that plagued them.

I believe in a disciplined army where honesty and good conduct prevail. I also believe in paying attention to the psychological condition of the soldiers, and that coverups benefit enemies who profit from our failure to be forthright.

Your people said we were needlessly disparaging the soldiers, but to do so you disparaged investigators and others, who a year after the fact had to find witnesses and evidence for the crime in a war zone.

I support the soldiers, but that support acknowledges that simply apologizing for everything that gets done by their fellow soldiers isn’t a real defense for these people. They suffer for the ill-will such incidents and such secrecy creates. It’s not a matter of taking the terrorist’s word against the soldiers, but rather acknowledging what our own investigators said likely happened. It’s not a matter of throwing them under the bus, it’s a matter of admitting when it seems likely that they did so themselves by their conduct. Our policies concerning discipline in our armies should not resemble a mafia code of silence.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 21, 2010 06:31 PM
Comment #304061

Stephen, Why don’t you drop the BS. People erred jumped to the wrong conclusions on both sides. This kind of crap needs to stop.

Posted by: MAG at July 21, 2010 08:13 PM
Comment #304063

Andre & Stephen

Okay. The tea party members should denounce racists in their midst, as should members of the NAACP, as should Democrats/Republicans …

It is meaningless if we make such as statement, isn’t it. So you agree that racism is not widespread of common in the tea parties. Is that your position? Good. Then why should the NAACP even bring it up?

What the NAACP did was the classic dodge of accusing but then backpedaling. It is like asking the ACLU to purge all the pedophiles from its membership and then claiming that you never said it was a problem but in any organization it is bound to have some and shouldn’t we denounce them?

Marysdude

Please see above.

The tea parties do not host racists any more than general among all organizations, including the NAACP, ACLU, La Rasa and many others. Asking only the tea party to denounce them implies a special problem, which is not in evidence.

Posted by: C&J at July 21, 2010 08:19 PM
Comment #304074

>The tea parties do not host racists any more than general among all organizations, including the NAACP, ACLU, La Rasa and many others.

C&J,

Yes it does. And, not only hosts them, but panders to them. The Tea Party ‘movement’ milks the furor over there racist brethren for all the publicity and incitement it can get out of them. Rancor and divisiveness are the byproducts of such hosting and pandering. Even here on Watchblog, civility is being tested against a backdrop of Tea Party defense of the indefensible.

Posted by: Marysdude at July 21, 2010 11:06 PM
Comment #304107

Marysdude is right - the Tea Party owns the people who it has in its midst - whether they be the bigots or the other jackasses in their midst. To assign some sort of moral equivalency to the NAACP for not denouncing the Black Panther wannabes outside the polling place is nonsense. If those guys were speaking at an NAACP event then it would be another thing though as pointed out they would be denied membership in the NAACP. While the Tea Party is not a formal organization like the NAACP those that attend those rallies and do not toss those white supremacist idiots out there rears have some culpability for allowing that to happen in their midst. Does the NAACP have the responsibility to apologize for every black person in the country who does something stupid? Or just those who are their members? I don’t think anyone is looking to the Tea Party to apologize for every white bigot out there, just the ones at their rallies.

As to the Sherrod case. The Whitehouse acted hastily and stupidly by firing her based on anything coming from that disingenuous jackass Brietbart. They fired her before all the Faux News “reporters” ran with the story. This woman deserved better treatment first from Brietbart, then the Whitehouse, then Fox News. She overcame her race issues, founded in actually reality due to her father being murdered by the KKK. Unlike the pretend racism that these Tea Party folks think is being perpetrated by the Obama administration.

Posted by: tcsned at July 22, 2010 07:57 AM
Comment #304128

tcsned,

The right has filled the airwaves and other media with as much hate and discontent as is possible. Then jump on every chance to overshadow that by pointing fingers at and shouting about the few failures and weaknesses shown by some on the left. C&J are good examples, as they continuously attempt to equate a Whitehouse snafu with the incredible disingenuouness of the source of the problem for which the mistake was made. In their book, crime equals error…what a crock.

Posted by: Marysdude at July 22, 2010 11:39 AM
Comment #304202

MAG-
You say it’s both sides. No, that would have required that the Obama administration to have had its own separate view that was in error.

No, their error was taking your side agains Shirley Sherrod.

C&J-
The NAACP has significant safeguards in its organizations against this kind of controversy. The Tea Party does not. It counts on God knows what to discourage racism and bigotry in its ranks.

Also, can you tell me why you bother to persist in using the tu quoque argument? You’re essentially arguing that “you, too have a race problem.” No reference to severity or incident, just a generalized attempt to say “you’re a hypocrite for pointing out my flaws because you have them, too.”

Well, the Obama Administration and the NAACP moved quickly to sever ties with this woman after one such incident. Breitbart’s had multiple claims blow up in his face, including the infamous ACORN case, where, yes, the video was heavily edited there, too. And this wasn’t Mark William’s first display of bigotry.

I don’t hear your side saying “Breitbart, we know you not!”, and it took an appallingly racist letter to oust Mark Williams from his post, after he had said this:

“We are dealing with people who are professional race-baiters who make a very good living off this kind of thing. They make more money off of race than any slave trader, ever. It’s time groups like the NAACP went to the trash heap of history where they belong along with all the other vile, racist groups that emerged in our history.”

His bigotry went on for quite some time, in this major organization, before he finally shot himself in the foot with at twelve-gauge shotgun with that letter.

He had previously called President Carter a “creepy little faggot”, called President Obama “the former Barry Soetoro, Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug turned anointed.”, and called Palestinian’s “tree swinging savages.”

And folks in your party are just realizing he’s a bigot.

Your Conservative media is full of people like this. Why is it that the NAACP gets in trouble for suggesting that the Tea Party movement might be tolerating those of excessive bigotry in their ranks, and rather than look in the mirror, they go trolling for ammunition for a smear campaign?

I would argue that the right has become so intent on stamping out the left and its influence that they’ll overlook these things until it becomes a major drag for them. Meanwhile, Democrats bend over backwards to avoid the appearance of such things, and you folks draw an equivalence.

The Republicans are not all bigots, but they support a visible, vocal population of those bigots, many in high places in the conservative media, making what they say conventional wisdom among many who don’t have real bigotries at heart.

But of course, they don’t call it bigotry. They call it political incorrectness, and fiercely attack those who don’t let them spread this talk unchecked. They talk about how these are the truths the more politically correct are too hemmed in by their own rules to actually admit to.

While there is some value to loosening up and not being so easy to offend, and while we have to recognize language can’t be scrubbed of all potentially offensive messages, some people are abusing that common sense notion about language to justify messages that are offensively prejudicial in their content on those grounds.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 22, 2010 05:52 PM
Comment #304491

SD
You sure put a lot of words on a page to say nothing. I can get the same type of garbage from CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, Daily Kos, Huffington Post, MoveOn, etc. I really like Keith Olberman. He makes such a fool of himself with his suedo anger. Then Rachel Maddow, whose real last name could be Madcow, but she just loves to leave out those little items that change a story so much. Then I can change channels and get Wolf “in sheeps clothing” Blitzer. He should come to your house so you can teach him to shave. The lame street media is just that, they could do anything correct. Pity their stockholders. Huffington Post should have a more PC name like Puffington Post, other than that it just has too much hate to go there very often. MoveOn Soros is what they should rename that site. George needs to go back to France. Stephen Daugherty hasn’t anywhere to go unless he wants to volunteer that trip into the Gulf I said I would help him take. So with no place to go, SD decides to essay his way to fame. All those words and nothing to say.

Posted by: tom humes at July 26, 2010 12:05 AM
Comment #304607

From someone who blathers Tea Party/Republican talking points forever…

Posted by: Marysdude at July 27, 2010 09:04 AM
Post a comment