Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:09 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:34 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
The son of Don Black, a former long-term member of the American Nazi Party, Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, convicted felon (of the ill-fated "Bayou of Pigs" invasion) and founder of the internet's first major hate website, is trying to take a position in the Republican Party.

Apparrently, some members of the neo-Nazi/supremacist/separatist movement believe that the way to get their agenda enacted is through the Republican Party (instead of through a third party). (Quote from Black as recorded in an interview with an Italian reporter: "Non è più tempo per cercare di creare un terzo partito destinato alla marginalità, dobbiamo presentarci ad ogni elezione primaria dentro il partito repubblicano così da imporre i nostri temi nel dibattito, dobbiamo lavorare per creare un nostro gruppo di interesse, per restaurare le tradizioni e i veri valori bianchi". This translates as: "There is no more time to try to create a third party for the marginalized, we must enter every primary election within the Republican Party to impose our issues in the debate, we must work to create our special interest group, to restore tradition and true white values http://www.repubblica.it/2008/10/sezioni/esteri/verso-elezioni-usa-5/nuovo-kkk/nuovo-kkk.html).

Quite disturbing. I can't help but wonder who the folks were in Palm Beach who voted for him.


Palm Beach Republican Party faces lawsuit from Ex-Klan wizard's son
http://www.examiner.com/x-36109-Palm-Beach-County-Elections-2010-Examiner~y2010m2d25-Palm-Beach-Republican-Party-faces-lawsuit-from-ExKlan-wizards-son

Quote:
Derek Black, the son of a former Ku Klux Klan wizard, was elected by 60 percent of his district to the Republican Executive Committee, and has sued the Palm Beach GOP to seat him, who is refusing to because Black, allegedly, did not sign a loyalty oath, reports the Palm Beach Post.

The Palm Beach GOP claims they posted the deadlines for taking such oaths, a charge that Black denies, saying changes to the dates were never publicized. By virtue of this lawsuit, Black is asserting that it is because of his parentage, a charge that he claims is absurd because of differences in his philosophy from that of his father.

Black has said he is not a white supremacist but rather "a white person who is concerned about discrimination against white people." reported The Post.

Facts that the PBC GOP, and the public at large, seem to be interested in are that Black's father, Don Black, is a close associate with David Duke. Black has engineered radio broadcasts for his father titled "White Pride World Wide", and had also spoke at a 2008 conference promoting "the rights and heritage of European Americans."

Black, in the debate for his seat, has focused his attacks on the PBC GOP's rules, rather than what may be perceived as the problem with his candidacy, and subsequent election.

Black has asked the judge in this case to seat him on the grounds that he was popularly elected, and that the deadline change was not publicized by the Palm Beach Republican Party, thus resulting in what, it seems, he considers a negligible part of the process of being elected, a loyalty oath.

Some would argue that running for public office, to serve your community is a loyalty oath in and of itself, and Black seems to be of this opinion himself.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:49 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:41 pm
Posts: 2474
Location: Western Virginia
Likes: 368
Liked: 133
Ugh.

_________________
"Never, Never, NEVER GIVE UP" Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:37 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
Many supremacists and seperatists like to mask their ideology in the more innocous-sounding talk about "pride" and "rights." But many of them are not only hard core racists, are vehemently anti-semetic but also advocate the use of mass violence - if not now than at some point in the future. I view people like this as terrorists in the exact same light as those who are adherants of extremist Islamic ideology. And just as Islamic extremism is not just a foreign threat but a domestic threat (esp. in prisons and in impoverished areas), Nazi philosophy is also a threat, both foreign and domestic. In both cases, the extremists try to capitalize on conditions of suffering (such as the economy) or of various resentments and blame another group (such as the USA itself, Jewish people, Israel, or minorities in general) for all the problems, making the argument that violence and hatred is a justified response - even a defense. It's the same basic philosophy in place between white separatists, black separatists, and adherants of radical Islam - just substitute the variables for who is to blame ("zionists", "the white man", "infidels") for all the world's problems. Apart from who they choose to hate, they're all remarkably similar.

And at least to some level, this particular group of separatists would like to take advantage of the disatisfaction that everyone has with party politics and political ineptitude to further their agenda. They also have been trying to infiltrate the Tea Party movement (http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/White_Supremacists_Tea_Parties_Follow_Up.htm).

(The racist web site mentioned in the article is the one that is run by the GOP committee candidate's dad).

On the positive side, I think it speaks well of many at the Tea Party rallies that the neo-Nazis had such a hard time getting the attendees to pay any attention to their nonsense.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 5:18 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:48 am
Posts: 970
Likes: 8
Liked: 19
The Dems have had their KKK moments as well.

Sen Robert Byrd joined the Ku Klux Klan in 1942. His local chapter unanimously elected him Exalted Cyclops.

Byrd wrote to segregationist Mississippi Senator Theodore Bilbo:
“I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”

The ex-Klansman later filibustered the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act -- supported by a majority of those "mean-spirited" Republicans -- for more than 14 hours. He also opposed the nominations of the Supreme Court's two black justices, liberal Thurgood Marshall and conservative Clarence Thomas. In fact, the ex-Klansman had the gall to accuse Justice Thomas of "injecting racism" into the Senate hearings. Meanwhile, author Graham Smith recently discovered another letter Sen. Byrd wrote after he quit the KKK, this time attacking desegregation of the armed forces.


Byrd has since disavowed the klan, since that it has become politically expedient to do so. I still wonder: Why was he fighting against Civil Rights as late as 1964??

Warning: Article has the dreadded N-word.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin030801.asp

_________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism." ~ Ronald Reagan


You say "Conspiracy Theorist"?? Call me Agenda Analyst.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 6:13 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
More about the attempted infiltration of the TEA Party movement by racist separatist organizations, some of whom openly advocate violence.

This seems like a balanced and fair article. I love the last sentence, so I bolded it. Everybody needs to stand together and kick the extremist subelement to the curb and let them know that their ideology is not welcome.

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=5754
Quote:
On the one hand, we have liberals and detractors claiming that the TEA Party Movement is racist. On the other, we have those who dig on the TEA Party vibe saying that that’s ridiculous, and that the TEA Party is about fiscal accountability for our government, and nothing more. Keep in mind that this TEA Party Movement is full of Democrats, Libertarians, Independents, and Conservatives.

This is an issue that has been tossed back and forth like a water balloon filled with nothing but rhetoric. It is an apparently unbridgeable gap. Maybe this article will help both parties see that both of them are correct. Well, in a fashion, that is.

Consider the possibility that White Supremacist groups are purposely trying to infiltrate the TEA Party. Even The Democratic Underground, back in 2009, reported about this issue.


Some people and organizations with more than a tax reform agenda are hoping to exploit the tax protestors’ anger and win them over to their causes. At the white supremacist website, Stormfront, for example, people have posted comments urging their fellow racists to attend tea parties and try to recruit new members to their cause.

“Don’t go there (Tea Parties) with flags and uniforms, and don’t try to preach the truth,” advised one Stormfront writer. “Go in civil, meet people with whom we might do things later, and try to get into the organising (sic) circles.” Another writer said in response that white supremacists shouldn’t “fail to push to envelope” but cautioned them to “dress inconspicuously.”

Meanwhile, the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) is urging its members to attend tea parties. The CCC is the successor to the White Citizens Councils that opposed desegregation in the South in the 1950s and 1960s. It is a white supremacist group that opposes non-white immigration and affirmative action, while supporting the display of the Confederate battle flag.


The Southern Poverty Law Center also had some insight, prompting the same sentiment as the DU.

Now, to anyone with any common-sense and ability to read English, allow me to opine freely here, and say that liberals were correct in that there probably were racial signs at TEA Party rallies, and the TEA Party sympathizers were right in that the TEA Party’s vision is not about racism or any other such notion. That is not to say that the TEA Party Movement is racist, no no no, but there were probably those White Supremacist elements there trying to incite and foment hatred.

Knowing now that White Supremacists have purposed it to infiltrate the TEA Party and sully its image, I hope both sides of this debate can stop for a moment and focus on the real enemy. Like I said, Democrats are part of this TEA Party Movement. It’s not all about Conservatives. Democrats and Conservatives should join together to fight against this despicable infiltration of a noble and valid movement.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:26 am 
Offline
MODERATOR
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 6634
Location: South Beloit, IL
Likes: 479
Liked: 152
I hope we have enough people like Gov. Huckabee to stand up and speak up! KKK lost their home with the Dems. I don't want them taking over the GOP!

_________________
Psalms 144:1 "Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:37 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
GrannyT wrote:
I hope we have enough people like Gov. Huckabee to stand up and speak up! KKK lost their home with the Dems. I don't want them taking over the GOP!


The Governor is the ideal person to take the leadership of the Republican Party and, as he has done before, show those folks that they have no common ground with real conservatives.

I strongly disagree with the President on a number of important issues. But I just don't understand people who hate him - or the idea of hating people with whom we disagree in general. I regularly pray for his safety and the safety of his family. I disagree with a number of important policies of our government. But, as a person who loves America, I pray for the safety of our country from all threats, foreign and domestic. It's one thing to have strong feelings that things are not going in the right direction and to speak out strongly against it the way Huckabee does. It's another to hate and tolerate violence and subversion or to wish ill of people. That's dangerous. I hope everyone feels the same way.

This is pretty scary stuff and these are very scary people. Here is an article describing some more about this element.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/08/obama-secret-service-bodyguards

Quote:
The Southern Poverty Law Center began life in 1971 as a tiny law firm specialising in civil rights cases. It took on the might of the Ku Klux Klan, and was duly rewarded by having its offices razed and its senior lawyers targeted for assassination. But it kept on going and grew to be one of the most respected monitoring groups of rightwing extremism in America today.

Recently it brought out a report called Terror From the Right, which identifies, in chronological order, the serious home-grown plots, conspiracies and racist rampages that have been cooked up in America since the Oklahoma City bomb in 1995. The list runs to 10 pages of closely printed type and itemises 75 domestic terrorism events, from plans to bomb government buildings to attempts to kill judges and politicians.

Each of the incidents aimed to change the political face of America through violence, courtesy of groups with such titles as Aryan People's Republic, The New Order and The Hated. But in the summer of 2008 the chronology takes on a sharp change of tack. Entries, which had been running at one or two per year, start coming faster. And instead of a variety of different targets, one name crops up time and time again: Barack Obama.

The first such entry is for 8 June 2008. Six people, linked to a militia group in rural Pennsylvania, are arrested with stockpiles of assault rifles and homemade bombs. One of the six allegedly tells the authorities that he intended to shoot black people from a rooftop and predicts civil war should Obama, who five days previously had cleared the Democratic nomination for president, be elected to the White House.

Next entry: 24 August 2008. The day before the opening of the Democratic convention in Denver at which Obama was nominated, three white supremacists are arrested in possession of high-powered rifles and camouflage clothing. They are talking about assassinating Obama.

24 October 2008: Less than two weeks before the election, two white supremacists are arrested in Tennessee over a bizarre plan to kill more than 100 black people, including Obama.

21 January 2009: The day after Obama's inauguration, a white man is arrested in Massachusetts, having allegedly killed two black immigrants and injured a third. He says he was "fighting for a dying race".

10 June 2009: James von Brunn, aged 88, walks into the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington and shoots dead a security guard. Von Brunn, who died last month in jail awaiting trial, left a note that read: "Obama was created by Jews."

In the 13 months that Barack Obama has been the occupant of the Oval Office he has been the subject of an extraordinary outpouring of emotion from the American electorate. At the start it was largely adulatory, though more recently the adoration has been drowned out by a cacophony of criticism from tea party activists, birthers, global-warming deniers and viewers of Fox News. At the same time, largely hidden from view, there has been a layer of antagonism towards Obama that lies well beyond the boundaries of reasonable political debate.

That has been a fact of life for Obama and his family since long before they took the keys to the White House. On 2 May 2007, fully 18 months before election day, he was assigned a secret service detail – much earlier than any other presidential candidate in American history. The precise reasons for the move have never been disclosed, but there was certainly a mood in the air sufficiently palpable to disconcert Michelle Obama. A senior US official in the State Department has told the Guardian that before he decided to run for the presidency, Obama had actively to win Michelle over to the idea by assuaging her fears about the potential of an attack on him, her and/or their two daughters.

Michelle would have been aware of the backstory here: that Colin Powell had declined to run for the 1996 Republican nomination partly because his wife Alma feared his assassination at the hands of white supremacists. Over the course of the long presidential race, Michelle spoke openly about her anxieties and how she had determined to overcome them, telling 60 Minutes that she had decided to fling herself into the race because "I am tired of being afraid".

According to John Heilemann and Mark Halperin's new account of the 2008 election, Game Change, she eventually felt relaxed enough to crack sardonic jokes about the subject. "I've already gone out and increased our life insurance on [Barack]," she quipped. "You just can't be too careful!" But as the Southern Poverty Law Center survey shows, the issue of safety and the 44th president remains anything but a laughing matter. "Virtually every domestic terrorist event we have identified since June 2008 – when it became obvious that Obama was going to win – has been directly related to him," says the author of the report, Mark Potok.

Apart from the Obamas themselves, the burden of such a threat falls primarily on the shoulders of the US secret service, and as Joseph Petro, head of global security for Citigroup, puts it, the challenges facing the service today are unlike any period that has gone before. On top of all the usual risks associated with guarding the world's most powerful politician, there is now the added, explosive ingredient of his race. "As the first black president he creates a whole other set of issues for the secret service to deal with," he says.

Petro can claim to be something of an expert in this area: he spent 23 years as a special agent in the service, four of them, from 1982 to 1986, as the man who stood beside Ronald Reagan. He knows what it's like to be the last line of protection, how it feels to be in a milling crowd in which you are surrounded by thousands of potential assailants, what it is to live with the constant knowledge that any mistake – a split second taking your eye off the ball – could be fatal.

Petro has a formula for measuring the potential dangers for any particular incumbent of the White House. You take the general atmosphere of the times in which they are in office and combine it with the specific personality that the president brings to the job. In both regards, he says, Obama presents a huge task.

"In Obama, we have a president with a very unique personality who likes to be out with the people. Put that together with the political atmosphere of these times that is highly partisan and vitriolic, then include race, and we've got a big challenge. There's no margin for error."

Petro's point about the role the president's personality plays in his own safety is ably illustrated by the single most disastrous failure in the secret service's history – the event that every incoming trainee agent spends hours and hours studying until it is drilled into his or her bone marrow. Judged by modern security standards, the shooting of John F Kennedy in Dallas on 22 November 1963 should for several reasons never have happened. The parade route Kennedy took was publicised in advance – a cardinal sin by the rule book of today. Lee Harvey Oswald had a relatively easy line of fire from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, which would these days have been thoroughly swept and sealed off. But it was the orders given by Kennedy himself that did for him – the president asked for the bullet-proof glass bubble to be taken off his limousine and for agents not to ride on the back of the car, thus leaving himself utterly exposed.

In the last analysis, as Kennedy proved at his own cost, a president can only be as safe as he allows himself to be. Agents can advise the commander-in-chief what is best for his security, but they cannot give him orders. "The secret service would want to take the president to Camp David straight after the inauguration and keep him there out of any contact with the public for the next four years. But they know that's not possible," Petro says.

During his presidential campaign, Obama would regularly mingle among crowds of astonishing size. But since his inauguration he has clearly responded to the guidance of his protecting agents, detaching himself considerably from direct public engagement. To some extent, that is only normal – he is no longer running in an election. But for a president who promised to break down barriers between politicians and people, it is noticeable how sparingly he is seen in public these days, and how the events he does appear at are almost invariably staged indoors.

Over the years, the secret service has developed a range of technological devices for improving security. Petro recalls asking Reagan on several occasions to wear a bulletproof vest. (Reagan would grumble and groan but usually comply.) Over the last decade, such innovations have come thick and fast. A whole new array of gadgetry has been added to the service's armoury, from face-recognition technology to a new generation of armoured vehicles. Obama rides in a Cadillac with military grade eight-inch thick doors; on election night in November 2008 he gave his victory speech to a crowd of almost a quarter of a million people from behind bullet-proof glass walls designed to foil sniper attacks.

But gadgetry is only as effective as the people who use it. In the last analysis, the human factor remains supreme, as was illustrated last November when two reality show hopefuls gatecrashed a White House function, penetrating the inner core of the building and shaking Obama's hand. As it happened, they had no malice towards the president. But in the mindset of the mortified secret service that didn't matter; they could have done.

Which on some level is the nature of the beast: being president of the United States is a high-risk enterprise, as Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley and John Kennedy all found out the hard way. Danger can come at a president from any number of directions. It can come from the lone deranged gunman. It can come too, theoretically, from international terrorism of the Islamist variety. But al-Qaida experts point out that the closest the group has come to a direct attack on the president was 9/11 itself. "From al-Qaida's view, to assassinate the president would be very desirable," says Yehudit Barsky, a terrorism specialist at the American Jewish Committee. "But it would be difficult for them to go after him not because they don't want to but because their capacity is so impaired."

Which is why in the overall assessment of risk to Obama, so much attention is settling on rightwing extremist groups who are already operating inside America, are armed and ideologically motivated, and in some cases potentially capable of desperate acts. This brings us back to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been tracking the activity of potentially violent militia groups since the last great wave in the 1990s when the so-called Patriot movement ballooned in proportion to rising rightwing anger towards Bill Clinton and fears of impending gun control. That wave of opprobrium culminated in the Oklahoma bombing in which 168 died and 680 more were injured.

The centre's latest report, released last week, records an astonishing mushrooming in extremist anti-government Patriot groups who see the Obama administration as a plot to impose "one-world government" on liberty-loving Americans. The numbers leapt from 149 groups in 2008 to 512 groups in 2009, of which 127 were classed as paramilitary groups.

"We know there has been a spike in activity across a broad range of things, particularly with regard to the notion that this government is illegitimate," says Brian Levin, a criminologist who heads the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University. Levin says the phenomenon is evident in rural areas around the Appalachian mountains and Great Lakes and into the west and Pacific north-west, where new armed militia groups are spontaneously emerging; and he has no doubt about why this is happening right now: "We've always had people who hate the president, we've always had conspiracies, but the fact that we have a black president at a time of economic tumult makes these conspiracies much more volatile among a far wider group of people."

Chip Berlet, an analyst of rightwing extremism at the Massachusetts-based group Political Research Associates, estimates that there have been nine murders by individuals who have white supremacist, xenophobic or antisemitic leanings since the inauguration of Obama. Berlet sees similarities in the current foment to the militia agitation of the 1990s. "Anger is spilling over from people who believe Obama is coming to remove their liberties, seize their guns, enslave the white American nation. What's new is that they can now recruit and communicate online, and that makes it very much more dangerous for the president."

Montana is one of the rural states where resurgent extreme rightwing activity can be detected. Travis McAdam has been tracking such activity for the last two decades on behalf of the Montana Human Rights Network, so has a unique vantage point for what is going on today. "The hatred that's there is very real. It's more than a gut-level hatred of having an African-American as president, it's also ideological – these people see black people as sub-human. Groups are popping up that have a new message and are using Obama to recruit new members."

White supremacist forums that provide closed talking shops for members only have been abuzz with anti-Obama rhetoric since the presidential election. In one such talkboard, monitored by a watchdog group, a correspondent writes: "if we want to see the overthrow or the cleansing of society then we should support Obama being where he is! I believe in the coming war. With this Nig as President he will just speed up the process. He's a catylist! Is'nt this what we want?" Another says: "Our backs are really against the wall now. We need progressive activism and we need to be solution orientated. For a Whiter future for our children." A third says: "I never thought I'd ever see the day when a monkey ran my country & I'm 34. I weep for our children."

For McAdam, the crucial question is how to sort this body of vitriol into its constituent parts – to separate out those individuals and groups who may be offensive and repulsive in their choice of words but are essentially harmless, from those that have the potential to be truly violent. He likes to think of it as a funnel, at the top of which are many people drawn to radical right groups for all sorts of reasons – gun rights, taxation, Obama-as-alien, or whatever. Most never go further than that level, but some do. "As they dig into the subject, going down into the funnel, they start to lose connection with the social networks around them that keep them tied to normality. Down, down they go, and eventually out the other end of the funnel emerges the Oklahoma bomber, Timothy McVeigh, who says, 'Our country is under attack, I must do something about it.'"

It's the thought that some may be emerging from the end of the funnel at this politically charged moment, McAdam says, that bothers him so, and makes him think that "violence against President Obama is a real concern".

McVeigh, executed in June 2001, is a name that crops up frequently among the extremism monitors. It comes up again when Mark Potok gives his last word on the threat to Barack Obama. The white supremacists and anti-government militia who are out to get the president should not be underestimated, he says. "These groups aren't al-Qaida. Most of them look vastly more bumbling than effective." But then he adds: "It only takes one to get through. Timothy McVeigh taught us that."

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:39 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
NOTE: This is what true conservatives don't want coming out of the anger over the Health Care debate and from the Tea Party movement. This sort of nonsense is partially how we got to this point at which the Democrats controlled all branches of government.

Shame on the idiot scumbags who were doing these types of things. Not only do they infuriate me personally and hurt all Americans in general, but they also do a great disservice to those who want their valid criticisms of policy to be heard.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35965961/ns/politics-capitol_hill/

Ugly build-up to House health care vote
Demonstrators hurl N-word, spit at black members of Congress


Quote:
WASHINGTON - House Democrats heard it all Saturday — words of inspiration from President Barack Obama and raucous chants of protests from demonstrators. And at times it was flat-out ugly, including some racial epithets aimed at black members of Congress.

Most of the day's important work leading up to Sunday's historic vote on health care was being done behind closed doors. Democratic leaders cajoled, bargained and did what they needed to nail down the votes they will need to finally push Obama's health care overhaul bill through the House.

But much else about the day was noisy, emotional and right out in the open. After more than a year debating the capstone of Obama's domestic agenda and just hours to go before the showdown vote, there was little holding back.

The tone was set outside the Capitol. Clogging the sidewalks and streets of Capitol Hill were at least hundreds — no official estimate was yet available — of loud, furious protesters, many of them tea party opponents of the health care overhaul.

Rallies outside the Capitol are typically orderly, with speeches and well-behaved crowds. Saturday's was different, with anger-fueled demonstrators surrounding members of Congress who walked by, yelling at them.

"Kill the bill," the largely middle-aged crowd shouted, surging toward lawmakers who crossed the street between their office buildings and the Capitol.

'N-word' 15 times
The motorcade that carried Obama to Capitol Hill to whip up support for the bill drove past crowds waving signs that read "Stop the spending" and "Get your hands out of my pocketbook and health care." Many booed and thrust their thumbs down as Obama rode by.

As police held demonstrators back to clear areas for lawmakers outside the Capitol Obama's speech, some protesters jeered and chanted at the officers, "You work for us."

Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., told a reporter that as he left the Cannon House Office Building with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the civil rights era, some among the crowd chanted "the N-word, the N-word, 15 times." Both Carson and Lewis are black, and Lewis spokeswoman Brenda Jones also said that it occurred.

"It was like going into the time machine with John Lewis," said Carson, a large former police officer who said he wasn't frightened but worried about the 70-year-old Lewis, who is twice his age. "He said it reminded him of another time."

Kristie Greco, spokeswoman for Democratic Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said a protester spit on Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., who is black and said police escorted the lawmakers into the Capitol. Cleaver's office said he would decline to press charges, but Sgt. Kimberly Schneider of the U.S. Capitol Police said in an e-mail later: "We did not make any arrests today."

Clyburn, who led fellow black students in integrating South Carolina's public facilities a half century ago, called the behavior "absolutely shocking."

"I heard people saying things today that I have not heard since March 15, 1960, when I was marching to try to get off the back of the bus," Clyburn told reporters.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who is gay, said protesters shouted "abusive things" to him as he walked from the Longworth building to the Rayburn building. "It's a mob mentality that doesn't work politically," he said.

Step toward communism?
Inside House office buildings, protesters made their views known by visiting lawmakers' offices and chanting at legislators walking by.

Among the demonstrators was Delane Stewart, 65, of Cookeville, Tenn., who had come with her husband, Jesse.

"You know what's coming next if this happens?" she said, referring to the health bill's passage. "They're going to come after gun control."

Retired businessman Randy Simpson, 67, of Seneca, S.C., also said the health bill was just a first step.

"My concerns are about the health care bill, and the direction it takes us is toward communism, quite frankly," he said.

At a daylong meeting of the House Rules Committee, members of both parties squeezed into a tiny hearing room traded accusations in a session that was often a shouting match.

"You all in the minority know what the American people think," Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., said loudly and mockingly at Republicans repeatedly saying the public overwhelmingly opposes Obama's health care bill.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, said a tricky voting procedure Democrats had been contemplating "corrupts and prostitutes the system" and would "unleash a cultural war in this country."

Obama's Capitol Hill visit was the day's emotional peak for House Democrats as he sought to energize them to finally approve the legislation.

He conceded that it could be tough for some to vote for the bill, but predicted it would end up being politically smart because once it becomes law people will realize they like its provisions like curbs on insurance companies.

"It is in your hands," the president said in what Clyburn later called the best speech he'd ever heard Obama make. "It is time to pass health care reform for America, and I am confident that you are going to do it tomorrow."

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:59 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:03 am
Posts: 4844
Likes: 1174
Liked: 782
Quote:
For McAdam, the crucial question is how to sort this body of vitriol into its constituent parts – to separate out those individuals and groups who may be offensive and repulsive in their choice of words but are essentially harmless, from those that have the potential to be truly violent. He likes to think of it as a funnel, at the top of which are many people drawn to radical right groups for all sorts of reasons – gun rights, taxation, Obama-as-alien, or whatever. Most never go further than that level, but some do. "As they dig into the subject, going down into the funnel, they start to lose connection with the social networks around them that keep them tied to normality. Down, down they go, and eventually out the other end of the funnel emerges the Oklahoma bomber, Timothy McVeigh, who says, 'Our country is under attack, I must do something about it.'"

It's the thought that some may be emerging from the end of the funnel at this politically charged moment, McAdam says, that bothers him so, and makes him think that "violence against President Obama is a real concern".

McVeigh, executed in June 2001, is a name that crops up frequently among the extremism monitors. It comes up again when Mark Potok gives his last word on the threat to Barack Obama. The white supremacists and anti-government militia who are out to get the president should not be underestimated, he says. "These groups aren't al-Qaida. Most of them look vastly more bumbling than effective." But then he adds: "It only takes one to get through. Timothy McVeigh taught us that."


As a Kansan, I have often wondered about Timothy McVeigh. Was he a white supremacist? I have always pictured him as anti-American with ties to al-Qaida. His final statements before execution said something like, "I am not doing this for Osama Bin Laden." That was the first time I had ever heard that name, and it made me wonder who Bin Laden was and what the connection was. It had to be something important for him to mention in his last statement on earth.

I am sure most people joining the Tea Party movement are concerned, respectable, but frustrated people. But I, too, saw a more radical element the one time I went to a protest in Wichita. They were pretty scary and unsettling as they attacked Sam Brownback. Unfortunately, a few bad apples can spoil the good. Or at least their reputation and effectiveness.

Watching the Washington Rally I again was wishing and wondering to my husband, "Where are the blacks?" I saw only a few, but did not see the White Supremacists as such.

Somehow, stronger leadership is needed for the Tea Party to keep out the extreme elements.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 9:47 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:37 pm
Posts: 552
Likes: 462
Liked: 84
TVV, without being too specific, I will say that I know exactly what you are saying. I have just resigned as a core member of a local tea party because some of the things of which you speak were sneaking into the group.

Also, can you believe there is a candidate who is running for Governor of Georgia who refuses to say the pledge to the US flag? He also is a member of a group called the "League of The South." Are you familiar with this group, and do you have any information about this group? I'm not saying that the tea party movement is all about racism, and I don't think this was the intent of the movement, but if we do not take a stand against these things, I fear they will do a lot of harm to what started out as a patriotic passion and love for country.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 10:11 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
mxnwilson wrote:
TVV, without being too specific, I will say that I know exactly what you are saying. I have just resigned as a core member of a local tea party because some of the things of which you speak were sneaking into the group.

Also, can you believe there is a candidate who is running for Governor of Georgia who refuses to say the pledge to the US flag? He also is a member of a group called the "League of The South." Are you familiar with this group, and do you have any information about this group? I'm not saying that the tea party movement is all about racism, and I don't think this was the intent of the movement, but if we do not take a stand against these things, I fear they will do a lot of harm to what started out as a patriotic passion and love for country.


I have read about the League of the South. On the one hand, some from the group have claimed that the group is not racist, and on the other hand, both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League consider the group to be a "neo-Confederate" hate group and mention them in the same context as groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Council of Conservative Citizens.

Here is an excerpt from heir entry on the group from the Southern Poverty Law Center: (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/league-of-the-south):

Quote:

League of the South.
Leadership:
Michael Hill
Ideology: Neo-Confederate
Groups: League of the South
Mike Hill represents the intellectual but racist faction of the neo-Confederate movement. Ironically a professor for years at a historically black college, Hill established the League of the South in 1994 as an institution devoted to reviving Southern heritage and pushing for secession.

.
Associated Profiles
Michael Hill
Related Articles:
'Heritage' for Sale
Little Men
The Ideologues
C-4 and the Confederacy
The Abbeville Horror
League of the South Loses Members and Momentum
Written Works:
The Free Magnolia
Founded: 1994
Location: Killen, Ala.
Ideology: Neo-Confederate
The League of the South is a neo-Confederate group that advocates for a second Southern secession and a society dominated by “European Americans.” The league believes the “godly” nation it wants to form should be run by an “Anglo-Celtic” (read: white) elite that would establish a Christian theocratic state and politically dominate blacks and other minorities. Originally founded by a group that included many Southern university professors, the group lost its Ph.D.s as it became more explicitly racist. The league denounces the federal government and northern and coastal states as part of “the Empire,” a materialist and anti-religious society.

In Its Own Words
“Somebody needs to say a good word for slavery. Where in the world are the Negroes better off today than in America?”
— Jack Kershaw, League of the South board member, 1998

“[T]he Southern League supports a return to a political and social system based on kith and kin rather than an impersonal state wedded to the idea of the universal rights of man. At its core is a European population.”
— Michael Hill, essay on League of the South website, 2000

“If the scenario of the South (and the rest of America) being overrun by hordes of non-white immigrants does not appeal to you, then how is this disaster to be averted? By the people who oppose it rising up against their traitorous elite masters and their misanthropic rule. But to do this we must first rid ourselves of the fear of being called ‘racists’ and the other meaningless epithets they use against us. What is really meant by the [anti-racist] advocates when they peg us as ‘racists’ is that we adhere to ethnocentrism, which is a natural affection for one’s own kind. This is both healthy and Biblical. I am not ashamed to say that I prefer my own kind and my own culture. Others can have theirs; I have mine. No group can survive for long if its members do not prefer their own over others.”
— Mike Hill, Web essay


You can read the entry in its entiry. There is a reference later on to Hill making a comment days after the 9/11 attacks, saying that the attacks were “the natural fruits of a regime committed to multiculturalism and diversity.” Horrible.

The ADL has an entry for the League, mentioning them on the same page as the Klan, the American Nazi Party, and a Holocaust denier.
http://www.adl.org/learn/Events_2001/events_archive_by_year.asp?XStateArc=SC&Year=2009

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 10:41 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
justgrace wrote:
As a Kansan, I have often wondered about Timothy McVeigh. Was he a white supremacist? I have always pictured him as anti-American with ties to al-Qaida. His final statements before execution said something like, "I am not doing this for Osama Bin Laden." That was the first time I had ever heard that name, and it made me wonder who Bin Laden was and what the connection was. It had to be something important for him to mention in his last statement on earth.


McVeigh had indirect involvement with white supremacist organizations. Meaning, he had associates who were associated with wn organizations. But he was personally more of the anti-government type than the racist type.

Which comes back to the danger of extremists - in general. Think of these three names: Timothy McVeigh, John Muhammad and Nidal Hasan. These three terrorists, all of whom served in the U.S. Army, came from three different forms of extremism, all of which led to the same result. McVeigh was an anti-government/white seperatist extremist who killed 168 innocent people in the Oklahoma City bombing; Muhammad was an Islamic/black separatist extremist who killed dozens of people in the D.C. Sniper attacks; Hasan murdered 13 people, many of them U.S. soldiers, in the Fort Hood shooting. Three different types of extremists with three different violent ideologies. Same result.


Quote:
I am sure most people joining the Tea Party movement are concerned, respectable, but frustrated people. But I, too, saw a more radical element the one time I went to a protest in Wichita. They were pretty scary and unsettling as they attacked Sam Brownback. Unfortunately, a few bad apples can spoil the good. Or at least their reputation and effectiveness.


Intense, ferocious anger does not do much to get people to hear a person's point of view. Shouting "YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO US, YOU @$%!@ IDIOT COMMUNIST!!!!!" doesn't do that much good. Because by the time you've gotten half way through the shout, you've guaranteed that people aren't listening to you anymore - including people who may have agreed with you if you, like Mike Huckabee, used principled reason and consideration in making your points. No one likes to be yelled at. Actually, the more people seem to be raging out of control, the more people tend to view them as being mentally unstable.

Quote:
Watching the Washington Rally I again was wishing and wondering to my husband, "Where are the blacks?" I saw only a few, but did not see the White Supremacists as such.

Somehow, stronger leadership is needed for the Tea Party to keep out the extreme elements.


I was in the barber shop today and talk turned to the health care bill. My barber said "who cares what those Tea Partiers say. They're just a bunch of racists." And of course, someone else in the shop then mentioned that they had seen a TV clip of some people spitting on a black legislator and using the N-word against John Lewis and other black legislators. I said that that stuff came from a fringe part of the group and that not everyone was like that, but, my words can't compete with those images of an angry, impolite and sometimes verbally abusive crowd made up almost entirely of whites who seem to be angry on a very personal level and haven't been represented by a enough people who calmly explain their point of view with courtesy, as Huckabee does.

This same group of barber shop folks, in some previous conversaions, have expressed support for the death penalty ("they need to treat murderers like they do in Texas. They don't play down in Texas."), disdain for vulgarity in modern music and support for pro-life sentiments. And there isn't exactly a love affair with the Democratic Party. This is in one of the richest counties in the United States, in which many people earn nice salaries and are deeply concerned about the amount of taxes that they pay. Not exacly completely lacking common ground with conservatives. But because "Republican" and "conservative" are dirty words to them, just as "Tea Party" is becoming one, because they equate these things with hostility to blacks, they never get to the point at which they realize that there is common ground.

The real irony is that if the conservative movement had long tried to be more inclusive, there would be no possibility that the Dems would control the whole government. The biggest threat to Dem policy isn't a bunch of angry, hot and passionately disdainful protesters. The biggest threat to the Democrats is the prospect of conservatives coming to be seen as a group that includes not just whites but black, hispanic and latino conservatives as well. That would do more to change the government than any Tea Party rally as that would rob the Democrats of the coalition formula that they've depended on for the past fifty years.

But the more that the Tea Party movement is invaded by extremists and the more the group is seen to be a bunch of racists, the more frustrated good conservatives will become as elections will continue to go against them.

The key is to bring people together under a set of rational and polite answers to irrational policies. People still don't get that, just as they didn't get that bashing Obama endlessly was not the way to beat him back in 2008. Just as that backfired, blowing gaskets will backfire now. Now is the time for Huckabee-style leadership.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:25 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:48 am
Posts: 970
Likes: 8
Liked: 19
If you are a committed Christian, carrying your Bible to home group bible studies, go out witnessing to others and are
non - apologetically anti-abortion, believe me, the Southern Poverty Law Center is not your friend. Neither are they your friend if you speak of or (High Terrorist Alert!!) actually carry a copy of the Constitution with you.
Do the research. It's been declassified, they actually had a hand in Elohim City, the supposed haven where militant white supremacists were trained.
Most of the really stupid and loudest supremacists are clearly Co-Intel-Pro.
A lot of so the called terror plots, like the now declassified case of the so-called Florida pizza guys, were actually genned up by FBI operatives who were supposed to only be infiltrating the groups, but when these losers turn out to be just a group of "not the brightest bulbs on the tree", they offer the incentive and the needed resources to make them a more credible threat, then arrest them, and sing the glories of another terrorist plot foiled..
Infiltrate, assess the threat, if necessary neutralize it, don't incite or enable as has been the case too often. If any of these were real threats, any good security force would not put them out for public consumption.
In cases where they choose to publicize, it is clearly a sign that such were never a threat.
I only say this because a lot of time burned on cases like this ties up resources from pursuing real threats. And..
We are clearly not caring about security when visas/passports are still granted from nations that support terrorists. All travel from such places needs to stop yesterday. And for God's sake, Close the Border.
However, Globalists will have no part of that, so it will never happen.

_________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism." ~ Ronald Reagan


You say "Conspiracy Theorist"?? Call me Agenda Analyst.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:46 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:37 pm
Posts: 552
Likes: 462
Liked: 84
Thanks, TVV, this information is not that surprising now that I have encountered this very disappointing experience. I also read somewhere that this group has labeled Abraham Lincoln as a war criminal. Very sad indeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:37 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:03 am
Posts: 4844
Likes: 1174
Liked: 782
TheValuesVoter wrote:
justgrace wrote:
As a Kansan, I have often wondered about Timothy McVeigh. Was he a white supremacist? I have always pictured him as anti-American with ties to al-Qaida. His final statements before execution said something like, "I am not doing this for Osama Bin Laden." That was the first time I had ever heard that name, and it made me wonder who Bin Laden was and what the connection was. It had to be something important for him to mention in his last statement on earth.


McVeigh had indirect involvement with white supremacist organizations. Meaning, he had associates who were associated with wn organizations. But he was personally more of the anti-government type than the racist type.

Which comes back to the danger of extremists - in general. Think of these three names: Timothy McVeigh, John Muhammad and Nidal Hasan. These three terrorists, all of whom served in the U.S. Army, came from three different forms of extremism, all of which led to the same result. McVeigh was an anti-government/white seperatist extremist who killed 168 innocent people in the Oklahoma City bombing; Muhammad was an Islamic/black separatist extremist who killed dozens of people in the D.C. Sniper attacks; Hasan murdered 13 people, many of them U.S. soldiers, in the Fort Hood shooting. Three different types of extremists with three different violent ideologies. Same result.


Quote:
I am sure most people joining the Tea Party movement are concerned, respectable, but frustrated people. But I, too, saw a more radical element the one time I went to a protest in Wichita. They were pretty scary and unsettling as they attacked Sam Brownback. Unfortunately, a few bad apples can spoil the good. Or at least their reputation and effectiveness.


Intense, ferocious anger does not do much to get people to hear a person's point of view. Shouting "YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO US, YOU @$%!@ IDIOT COMMUNIST!!!!!" doesn't do that much good. Because by the time you've gotten half way through the shout, you've guaranteed that people aren't listening to you anymore - including people who may have agreed with you if you, like Mike Huckabee, used principled reason and consideration in making your points. No one likes to be yelled at. Actually, the more people seem to be raging out of control, the more people tend to view them as being mentally unstable.

Quote:
Watching the Washington Rally I again was wishing and wondering to my husband, "Where are the blacks?" I saw only a few, but did not see the White Supremacists as such.

Somehow, stronger leadership is needed for the Tea Party to keep out the extreme elements.


I was in the barber shop today and talk turned to the health care bill. My barber said "who cares what those Tea Partiers say. They're just a bunch of racists." And of course, someone else in the shop then mentioned that they had seen a TV clip of some people spitting on a black legislator and using the N-word against John Lewis and other black legislators. I said that that stuff came from a fringe part of the group and that not everyone was like that, but, my words can't compete with those images of an angry, impolite and sometimes verbally abusive crowd made up almost entirely of whites who seem to be angry on a very personal level and haven't been represented by a enough people who calmly explain their point of view with courtesy, as Huckabee does.

This same group of barber shop folks, in some previous conversaions, have expressed support for the death penalty ("they need to treat murderers like they do in Texas. They don't play down in Texas."), disdain for vulgarity in modern music and support for pro-life sentiments. And there isn't exactly a love affair with the Democratic Party. This is in one of the richest counties in the United States, in which many people earn nice salaries and are deeply concerned about the amount of taxes that they pay. Not exactly completely lacking common ground with conservatives. But because "Republican" and "conservative" are dirty words to them, just as "Tea Party" is becoming one, because they equate these things with hostility to blacks, they never get to the point at which they realize that there is common ground.

The real irony is that if the conservative movement had long tried to be more inclusive, there would be no possibility that the Dems would control the whole government. The biggest threat to Dem policy isn't a bunch of angry, hot and passionately disdainful protesters. The biggest threat to the Democrats is the prospect of conservatives coming to be seen as a group that includes not just whites but black, hispanic and latino conservatives as well. That would do more to change the government than any Tea Party rally as that would rob the Democrats of the coalition formula that they've depended on for the past fifty years.

But the more that the Tea Party movement is invaded by extremists and the more the group is seen to be a bunch of racists, the more frustrated good conservatives will become as elections will continue to go against them.

The key is to bring people together under a set of rational and polite answers to irrational policies. People still don't get that, just as they didn't get that bashing Obama endlessly was not the way to beat him back in 2008. Just as that backfired, blowing gaskets will backfire now. Now is the time for Huckabee-style leadership.

Thank you very much, TVV, for your thoughtful reply. You continue to research and teach.

Please tell your barber shop group that there is at least one lady from Kansas who is earnestly hoping, praying, and working for the day when the Republican Party will be able to break down any barriers of race.-- Someday when we can join hands and work together for the conservative principles that will help benefit our families and nation. --Someday when slurs of any kind, whether they be against black or Latino or Jew will not be tolerated.

I long to work together with any black conservatives I can find, and I will keep mentioning this need to my fellow Republicans. The ones I know and associate with are the best of people, not RINOs, not fanatics, (who we have worked to defeat). Hypocrisy and lack of commitment to principle for any sort of self-promotion and bribe-taking cannot be a part of politics on the right. We must distinguish ourselves with a new commitment to morals and equality for all people. Our work is cut out for us.

BTW, I heard one Congressman say that the demonstrators who were so angry with him were steelworkers. So I don't know if we should immediately associate everyone who showed up in the halls of Congress as only Tea Partiers.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:50 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
Melopa, I don't automatically believe everything that the SPLC (or anyone else, for that matter) says. Case in point, my former Bishop was mentioned on their web site as a nice guy but someone whom they were "watching" because of his involvement in political efforts to fight same-sex marriage. So, I obviously don't take everything that they say as Gospel, unchallenged - and I don't do that for anyone else, either. But they, along with the ADL, do excellent research on extremist hate groups, especially the far fringes of them. My approach to evaluating information from the SPLC is to try to independently verify it and to pay particular attention to the direct statements of people associated with the groups that are mentioned. Often times, the groups referenced as hate groups are actually hate groups. Not always, but often.

I live in one of the most ethnically diverse and racially harmonious areas of the U.S., which also happens to be one of the highest ranked places to live. But I saw that the SPLC had listed a neo-Nazi hate group as operating about ten minutes from where I live. I didn't believe it. So I investigated. Sure enough, they really are there. A small group of idiots who regularly rant against blacks but are stupid enough to choose to live in a state that is almost one-third African American ("duh ... I hate cattle and guns ... duh .. I know ... I'll move to TEXAS! Duh, yup, yes'sir'eee"). They even tried to get on the local school board.

The SPLC's information needs to be validated, just like anyone else's. But they have done a lot of work on keeping a pulse on extremists of all flavors. The ADL does an even better job of tracking them.

My motto is to be like the Bereans. Validate information to see whether or not it's true.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:25 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
Reposting this in light of the recent debate.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:40 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:45 pm
Posts: 1792
Location: Pennsylvania
Likes: 208
Liked: 275
I just have to quibble with one thing you posted here, TVV, and that being the MSNBC article you posted earlier in this thread. I think it's been pretty well disproven that anyone used the "N" word during the post healthcare signing "walk" the Dems did. It seems more likely that the Dems were trying to incite some type of name calling by the protestors and when it didn't happen, they made up the stuff they claimed was said by those protestors.

It always safe to disregard any story written by MSNBC. :)

_________________
Most people believe what they see, the Left see's what it believes.....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:16 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
It could be that it didn't happen. Hopefully it didn't. I guess it's possible it did. Who knows. But what concerns me more is the much better documented attempts by some in the neo-Nazi movement to infiltrate Tea Party events. To the credit of many attendees, their propaganda fell on many deaf ears in many rallies. On the other hand, some nazis reported success in finding a few folks who had an interest in keeping in touch with them.

Which brings me to the following thought. I disagree with any statement that the Tea Party movement as a whole is "racist." But based on what I heard, that's not what the NAACP actually said about the movement.

I also disagree with the vehement denials that there is any possibility that there are individuals within the Tea Party who are racist. It's a big movement with little central organization and a wide diversity of individuals in it. How could anyone guarantee that the organization does not allow racists to attach themselves to it?

Of course, the NAACP is also a big organization although its membership is a tiny fraction of the African American population (500,000 members versus 39 million black Americans). People have responded to the racism allegations by calling the NAACP racist, which i also disagree with, although there are certainly a few racists within it also. But all the name-calling gets us nowhere.

This should be a serious conversation and the Tea Party should look at this not as an opportunity for argument (like that idiotic "parody" letter which offends me) but as an opportunity for expansion. Contrary to what we see in politics, most blacks in this country are conservative or moderate. Only about a third tend to consider themselves libeeral - which is strikingly similar to the stats for white Americans. I hope that instead of knee jerk denials, people take this as an opportunity to understand each other. There is much more common ground than people think.

The parody letter was absolutely disgusting and offensive to me as a black conservative and does not help advance this goal.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:56 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:12 pm
Posts: 4153
Likes: 307
Liked: 525
This is what I was referring to by the satirical letter:

Quote:
"Dear Mr. Lincoln," the blog post read, "We [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People 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 [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People and we demand that it stop!"


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/16/satirical-letter-meant-to-spark-discussion-tea-party-leader-says/?fbid=36fTdMth4aI

Nice. I often disagree with the NAACP on a wide range of issues. But I don't think it's so proposterous to suggest that the Tea Party as a whole could do more to discourage racists from attaching themselves to the movement. Does that mean that I don't think for myself, that I want welfare and handouts? How incredibly stupid, disgusting and insulting. And if after this response, blacks are less likely to like the Tea Party does that add further confirmation that we're all a bunch of liberals? Or isn't it possible that idiocity like this might have a little something to do with it?

On one hand, we have people who unnecessarily offend people with pretty insensitive stuff and then give blank stares as if to say "what's wrong with you people getting offended so quickly?" And on the other hand, we have the racial ambulance chasers like Jesse Jackson who seem to find racism in everything. We need to put all of this stuff aside and get Americans of all hues to stop being foolish so that we can get to the common ground and get common sense people of every background together as Americans.

_________________
The Values Voter
http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY