Is The Tea Party Racist?


At The Daily Beast, Tunku Varadarajan weighs in on the NAACP's denunciation of the Tea Party movement as racist:

If black Americans are suffering due to our current economic woes, Obama's own policies are hardly helping them. The NAACP can't bitch about "the Man" anymore because the Man is Obama. And so instead it turns its racially monolithic vituperation on the Tea Party, which has never been in power, and has had no impact on the economic condition of black Americans—except to advocate policies (smaller government, lower taxes, radically reduced deficits, etc.) that would likely improve the standard of living of all Americans (blacks included). In fact, the Tea Party is a greater friend of black Americans, one might say, than the administration, and is much more representative of America than the NAACP. (There are many more black members of the Tea Party—however you define that movement—than there are, by definition, non-black members of the NAACP.)

More here.

Back in May, Reason.tv went searching for racism at a Tea Party event. Approx 2 minutes.

NEXT: Pro-Wrestling and the Connecticut Senate Race

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Not this again.

    1. Sounds like a scam to me.

      1. Yeah, this is like asking if Ron Paul is a racist. It takes more than a few racist rants to make a racist. Has any Negro been lynched lately? I don’t think so. Maybe a lot of rich white folks don’t like black folks gettin health care on their dime, but that don’t make them racist. And them Jews and spicks and Sigma Nus, all they ever do is breed. Just give us our country back from that Muslim that they somehow elected. That’s all we want. What’s racist about that?

        1. I don’t know why, but this latest spew scares me more than anything from Max coming before.

          You really are an ignorant, stupid little fuck, aren’t you.

          1. Must be that lefty “humor” we’ve been hearing about lately. Gosh, it’s funny.

          2. OOOOO I’m very very spooky.

        2. Ummmm…what’s a Sigma Nu?

          1. i’m a sigma nu

            1. That doesn’t help me pierce the veil of my own ignorance.

        3. The Boy Who Cried Wolf

          There once was a shepherd boy who was bored as he sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. To amuse himself he took a great breath and sang out, “Wolf! Wolf! The Wolf is chasing the sheep!”

          The villagers came running up the hill to help the boy drive the wolf away. But when they arrived at the top of the hill, they found no wolf. The boy laughed at the sight of their angry faces.

          “Don’t cry ‘wolf’, shepherd boy,” said the villagers, “when there’s no wolf!” They went grumbling back down the hill.

          Later, the boy sang out again, “Wolf! Wolf! The wolf is chasing the sheep!” To his naughty delight, he watched the villagers run up the hill to help him drive the wolf away.

          When the villagers saw no wolf they sternly said, “Save your frightened song for when there is really something wrong! Don’t cry ‘wolf’ when there is NO wolf!”

          But the boy just grinned and watched them go grumbling down the hill once more.

          Later, he saw a REAL wolf prowling about his flock. Alarmed, he leaped to his feet and sang out as loudly as he could, “Wolf! Wolf!”

          But the villagers thought he was trying to fool them again, and so they didn’t come.

          At sunset, everyone wondered why the shepherd boy hadn’t returned to the village with their sheep. They went up the hill to find the boy. They found him weeping.

          “There really was a wolf here! The flock has scattered! I cried out, “Wolf!” Why didn’t you come?”

          An old man tried to comfort the boy as they walked back to the village.

          “We’ll help you look for the lost sheep in the morning,” he said, putting his arm around the youth, “Nobody believes a liar. . .even when he is telling the truth!”

        4. There were Sigma Nus at my school. There’s nothing wrong with hating them.

  2. Racist … and fucking obscene!

    1. Learn to spell, NAALCP and you are the racist.

    2. Surprise! Blacks are still tribalists.

    3. NA-WHO?

    4. NAACP = CUNTS

  3. NAACP Chairman Todd Jealous looks like a cracker.

    1. Here I am with my mother and grandmother. Black enough for you now?

      And that’s Benjamin Todd!

      1. Yeah but what about the non slave side of the family?

        1. They don’t like to talk about the rapist pedophile side of the family for obvious reasons.

          1. Slave owners were not pedophiles. And a lot of the sex was consensual. Neither side in old South wanted to admit getting busy with the other. So, everyone just ignored all those curiously light skinned black people.

            1. Can anything actually resembling a sane definition of “consent” actually happen when one party owns the other?

            2. You cannot consent to sex with someone who owns you. When someone owns you, you don’t consent to anything, you just have the ability vary the degrees of resistance up to death you make before acquiescing.

              1. I stand behind no one in my condemnation of the old south and slavery. But race relations even in the antebellum south were not that simple. And the slaves, while oppressed, were not children. They were people just like you and me. And their relationship with the whites who “owned them” was often much more complex than just one side raping the other.

                1. Still not consensual, John. Just like taxes aren’t voluntary. Some might give their money joyously, but it is still collected under threat of force.

                  1. I see what John is saying, but I gotta go with SugarFree here.

                    It’s a question of whether a slave can ever meaningfully legally consent, in a situation where by definition their consent has been rendered irrelevant.

                    Put another way, they say that Sally Hemmings loved Thomas Jefferson like a mistress. But if she went nuts one day and decided to kill him, and I walked in while it was going on, and she said to me, “I’m killing my rapist!” I’d pretty much have to say, “Where do we hide the body?”

                    1. Put another way, they say that Sally Hemmings loved Thomas Jefferson like a mistress. But if she went nuts one day and decided to kill him, and I walked in while it was going on, and she said to me, “I’m killing my rapist!” I’d pretty much have to say, “Where do we hide the body?”

                      And if I were a jury member I’d say that you’re a murder accomplice and let you be hanged.

                    2. and I’d vote to acquit.

          2. Get off my handle assclown!!

      2. The kids on Jersey Shore are darker than those folks.

        1. Ummm…. no. NOT black enough for me. Looks like a wop that used “Just For Men” and is now trying to pass himself off as an original member of the Temptations or somethin’… ain’t cuttin’ it… makes Bryant Gumbel look like Malcolm X.

      3. Dude, that’s ME.

        I was with the writer and director of “Couples Retreat” and we were all about to accept our Razzies.

        Leave me out of this shit.

      4. Mi amigo! Did not know you were Mexicans man.

  4. Anyone who has attended these things — and I have attended about six — cannot honestly believe they are racist. This is spin and spin only. However, I do recognize a hostility to immigration and immigrants (only illegals, of course, ahem) among the Tea Party set which certainly has some measure of prejudice at its root. But that is the closest you’ll get.

    1. How is being equally against illegal Russians and illegal Jordanians a measure of prejudice?

      1. Because most people agitated about illegal immigrants aren’t agitated about illegal Russians or illegal Irishmen or illegal Swedes.

        If five illegal immigrant Irish girls moved in next door to your average Minuteman he’d say, “Ooo! Cute girls!”

        If five legal Mexicans move in, he’ll steal their mail to check their social security numbers. “Those damn illegals! Using all our services!”

        It’s true.

        Yadda yadda yadda, No Fluffy You’re All Wrong, How Dare You Accuse Us Of That. Oh well.

        1. It is a question of degree. If there eleven million illegal Irish in this country, they wouldn’t find those girls so cute. Indeed, back in the days when illegal Irish really were a significant portion of the population outside of Boston and New York, people hated their guts.

          No, Fluffy not everything is about hating brown people despite what they taught you in school.

          1. Dude, if there were 11 million illegal Irish girls in this country, I would start agitating for the legalization of polygamy.

            And if the Minutemen had any sense they’d be right there beside me.

            1. I never found the Irish chicks to be that hot when I was over there. Now if you want to let 11 million illegal Czech or Brazilian chicks, you got my vote.

              1. Two arms, two legs, two eyes. What more do you need? (Well besides the naughty bits)

            2. LOOK!! If the illegal Mexican girls ARE CUTE and PUT OUT then I am all for it! Jeez… you make out like we can’t see the upside of this!

              1. Many Mexican women are gorgeous. They also will put out. The problem is they are Catholic and very marriage minded. And they have large close families. There is saying in the southwest, “you think you are marrying the bean but you are really marrying the enchilada.” Not that there is anything wrong with large families. But marrying into one and spending every weekend going to Cousin Maria’s first communion or Uncle Ramon’s 60th birthday party gets old quick.

                1. Enchiladas don’t contain beans.

                  1. It is whole burrito. My mistake.

                2. I found that to be true when dating a Mormon woman. Nearly every week it was someones birthday and man, did that get old. Worse, they would stop watching the Superbowl when it was time for dinner. Who the hell does that?

                  1. That is just un American. My wife is from a big Italian Irish family in Boston. It is the same deal. I refuse to live anywhere near Boston for that reason.

                3. Haw-haw!

                  Yeah, they’re crazy-Catholic.

            3. “Dude, if there were 11 million illegal Irish girls in this country, I would start agitating for the legalization of polygamy”

              And I’d do everything in my power to help you.

              1. What I learned from this conversation is that John prefers brunettes, preferably with a darker skin tone. Fluffly likes pasty white redheads.

                1. I do like brunettes. Not that there is anything wrong with redheads, other than the fact that they are usually dangerously crazy.

                  1. MMMMMmmmmmm pasty white redheads.

                    Yes please.

                    1. Yeah it is all fun and games fluffy until you wake one night and she has run your car through your bedroom wall.

                    2. Mmmmmmm all fun and games…

                  2. they are usually always dangerously crazy.

                    It’s part of the appeal.

          2. It’s about in groups and out groups. The Irish were not considered “white” back in the day, neither were Italians. But they’ve been integrated into American culture. Mexicans etc are currently in the same position, but give it another generation and they’ll be as white as the rest of us.

            1. Agree. They already have to differentiate “White Non-hispanic” from “White Hispanic” on all the forms.

              Is Jennifer Lopez “non-white”? How about Salma Hayek?

              Antonio Banderas? Not white?

              Seriously … Hispanic … as in half-spanish, as in Spain, as in Western European, Catholic country, much like Ireland, France, and Italy.

          3. Funny, cause when the Irish immigrated there was no “illegal” to be had. You just showed up. “You got TB?” nope. “You a crook?” nope. “You bring marryin age chicks?” yup. “you wanna serve in the military right now?” do I have a choice? “Nope”

          4. People used to dispise the Irish. My mother warned me about them(atholic).

            And Germans too in the 18th ct.

          5. We hate us.

    2. A large majority of black people in this country oppose immigration to. So where does that leave the NAACP?

      1. In the pit of their own hypocrisy, where they’ve been for a few decades now?

      2. Citation needed.

        1. In contrast to the leadership of many ethnic advocacy groups, most members of minority groups think immigration is too high.

          * Hispanics: 56 percent said it is too high; 7 percent said too low; 14 percent just right.

          * Asian-Americans: 57 percent said immigration is too high; 5 percent said too low; 18 percent just right.

          * African-Americans: 68 percent said it is too high; 4 percent said too low; 14 percent just right.

          Most members of minority groups do not feel that illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration as many ethnic advocacy groups argue; instead, members feel it’s due to a lack of enforcement.

          * Hispanics: Just 20 percent said illegal immigration was caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 61 percent said inadequate enforcement.

          * Asian-Americans: 19 percent said not enough legal immigration; 69 percent said inadequate enforcement.

          * African-Americans: 16 percent said not enough legal immigration; 70 percent said inadequate enforcement.


          There you go. It is actually hard to find. The media doesn’t like to admit blacks oppose immigration.

          1. I got mine!

          2. a local state rep near where i live as a republican won both the majority black precincts in his district in the 2006 election by going door to door on two issues… illegal immigration and gay marriage.

            1. Black people are Democrats. They are not liberals.

              1. Black people are Democrats. They are not liberals.

                Or at least, not very progressive.

                (Recall that Amendment 2 in Florida was passed with 62% of the vote.)

          3. It’s true, blacks oppose immigration. I sympathize with the feeling even though I’m pro-immigration. Problem is that immigrants take the low-rung jobs that might otherwise be taken by blacks, crowding blacks out of entry level manual labor and service jobs.

            And I’m willing to admit it have a racial component. White managers may be more comfortable hiring hispanics than blacks.

            1. There is a racial component but it is not that. The component is that many hispanics won’t work with blacks. So once you have an hispanic crew, you couldn’t hire a black guy if you wanted to without losing the rest of your crew.

  5. The comments to that article are a scream. Essentially the entire conversation is some variation of one post of someone saying “I don’t think the tea party is racist” and then ten liberals screaming “that is racist you racist!!”

    1. Is that racist?

      1. Denying racism is racism.

        1. But not racism, racism.

          1. Damn, Girl. My butthole hurts after that one. It feels like rape, rape.

            1. Pizza, pizza.

    2. You’re just saying that cause you’re racist.

  6. the NAACP is going back to an old playbook

    Just “The Playbook?” will suffice.

  7. We’ve come a long way since the 60’s. What will they denounce next, cholesterol?

    1. They might catch up to that one in a few years, maybe smoking too.

    2. You’ll have to pry that fried chicken from my greasy dead fingers!

      And you misspelled Beyonc

  8. What is this Daily Beast thing? Reason only links to Varadarajan’s articles posted there, but the comments on that site seem to appear straight from the Huffington Post/Daily Kos.

    1. It is some woman named Tina Brown’s site. I don’t know who she is or why I should know who she is. But she is this sort of semi hot blond, British cougar who seems to be of some importance among people who give a shit about such things. She runs a site that seems to be similar to HuffPo.

      1. Tina Brown was the editor of Vanity Fair and other Cond? Nast magazine(s).

        The things I learned reading Spy back in the 1990’s…

        1. A great mag!

          1. Spy, that is….

  9. I reaslize this sounds paranoid, so pardon me if I sound wacky.

    The NAACP is part of the left machine. The Tea Party people are energizing the Right. The media tried to paint these people as wackos and freaks, but thanks to CNN managed to make them just look more normal. The WhiteHouse can’t seem to stop them. Therefore the left is using their rhetorical H-bomb (or more accurately the R-bomb) in an attempt to paint the Tea Party people as racists and thus easily marginalized. All they need to do is get some Race hustling group like Rainbow-PUSH or theNAACP to call them Racists and then the media can use this as a line of distraction questions anytime the TP starts to win an argument.

    This Racism allegation needs to be fought aggressively by all people concerned about the future of the country.

    1. True. I’m not sure why this would be a surprise to anyone. The NAACP is no more interested in the advancement of Blacks then the NEA is interested in the advancement of education or NOW is interested in the advancement of women. They’re all just arms of the DNC and they do whatever they’re told to do. The Tea Party is seen as a real threat to the DNC in November. They’re trying to get out in front by spinning the tea party as racists. That way anyone the Tea Party endorses will be guilty by association. It’s not going to fool everyone, but this race baiting has worked pretty well over the years for them. The NAACP, along with Black leaders like Jackson and Sharpton, and the DNC lapdogs in the MSM have played this race card so well that the DNC consistently gets 90%+ of the Black vote, and has for years. No other demographic vote is owned so completely by a party. If a strategy works, why would they change it?

      1. The ownership is so complete that congressional districts are often drawn based on nothing other than race.

      2. The NAACP is interested in what they have always been interested in which is helping the “talented tenth” get goodies from the government. Of course this was (and still is) the “high yellow” folks largely. And the talented tenth argument is really a trickle-down argument at heart. Kind of amusing. Of course they realize this is not correct nowadays and have changed the talk but as far as effects on society, we still have the results of their own color-based strategy to deal with.

        1. The National Association for the Advancement of Coddled People

    2. Needs to be aggressively fought?

      Maybe. I dunno.

      Maybe it should just be laughed at as the transparent garbage that it is.

      1. Nope, fought and fought mean, hard and dirty. Careers in journalism need to end if this is referenced regarding an individual tea party person (without due cause).

        This becomes the meme that the Left uses to destroy the Tea Party. No one will support them for fear of being painted a racist. You can lose friends, jobs, personal stature all for a false claim like that.

        The NAACP is a joke, but the damage some Leftist reporter can do with that allegation is not. These pinheads need to know that their careers are on the line if they try to burn some random Tea party person just to get out of a losing debate position or to make them look bad for long enough for the dems to catch up in an election.

  10. “The Tea Party” is not racist, but I have seen pics of and blog comments from certain individuals who attempt to associate themselves with the Tea Party and who make racist statements.

    To those with insufficiently developed critical thinking skills and cognitive ability, one guy showing up at a publicly advertised open event and holding a sign with a racist slogan on it equates to the entity that organized the event being racist.

    1. To those with insufficiently developed critical thinking skills and cognitive ability


  11. Entertaining this question yet again is beneath Reason. Yesterday’s race fest was one of America’s worst days. The NAACP is trying as hard as it can to make sure there are more racists to keep them in business.

  12. Please. The NAACP is the New Black Panther Party for people too old to wear camouflage.

    1. At least that black panther dude screaming about how he hates white people is funny.

      1. Hooked On Ebonics.

    2. Funny, but inaccurate. The Black Panthers want to kill rich white people, the NAACP is owned by them.

      1. Maybe the old ones did, but this is the New Black Panther Party. Their goal is to use the street cred of the older organization to funnel outrage wherever the further leftist in the room deems appropriate.

        Just like the NAACP.

    3. Is not the New Black Panther Party racist? After all, they only want to kill white people and white babies.

      1. The NBPP isn’t as violent as the old. Their desire to kill white babies is more an appeal to the leftist and black communities to support them.

        As for racism generally, I suspect they hate blacks who disagree with their politics much more than they hate whites who do.

        Their rhetoric is racist. My observations concern their function and purpose.

  13. Racism is not illegal.

    Discrimination is illegal.

    1. No one is illegal!

      1. Rosanne Barr should be.

        1. what about rosie o’donnell?

      2. But your thoughts, and even your feelings are, if they are Racist!

  14. Just so long as everyone can agree that “Tunku Varadarajan” is one awesome fucking name…

    1. Tunku. Tunku very much!

  15. Sadly, we are destined to be in the hundreds of comments within the hour on this thread.

    But on a good note, I don’t think this racism thing will fly. The Internet is too big a place to hide the truth anymore.

  16. Enslaving Blacks : racism
    Concentration camps for Japanese descended Americans : racism
    Strange enthusiasms for Sarah Palin’s thoughtcraft : racism? Really?

    1. Concentration camps? Show me the ovens and the gas chambers.

      1. The Brits are often given credit for creating the modern “concentration camp” in the Boer War. No ovens or gas chambers there, just lots of people living inside a barbed wire enclosure.

      2. Ovens and gas chambers are not requirements for Concentration camps.

        The term originated to denote camps set up by the British to detain civilian Boer prisoners, mostly the family members of men suspected of fighting in the Afrikaaner insurgency.

        1. There’s something really funny going on with the time stamps. It too a while for me to write that post, but I find it hard to believe it was ove seventeen minutes.

  17. “The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” says Rob Shapiro, another former Clinton official and a supporter of Mr Obama. “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

    oh shit

  18. Is it racist to point out that the % of ‘colored persons’ whose votes are owned by the democrat party = the % of ‘colored persons’ owned by the democrats in 1860 (shortly before the democrat party fought a war to keep owning the ‘colored persons’)?

  19. So they honestly believe that the Tea Partiers would be totally on board with these moronic policies if Hillary was promulgating them?

    They are either disingenous, or very, very stupid.

    1. Oh that’s because they’re sexist too.

    2. “They are either disingenous, or very, very stupid.”

      I vote both.

      1. +1

    3. Thanks, BP, that’s the tack I will take in answering the (inevitable) letter to the editor castigating the Tea Party for racism.

      1. You’re more than welcome, creech. I only wish I could be cogent more often.

  20. It’s so freaking obvious that this thing about the TEA party being racist is simply the democratic party’s fear and hate based campaign strategy for the midterm election.

    They desperately need to try and motivate their base to come out in order to avoid a historic beatdown in Novemember. God knows they sure as hell can’t run on their accomplishments, because most of the country absolutely despises most of what they have done in the last year and a half.

    1. Yep, it’s as simple as that. Shame on the msm for playing along.

    2. That is exactly it. The got a lot of votes in 2008 from dumb white people who wanted to be “part of history” and black people who don’t normally vote who wanted to vote for a black president. All those votes are not going to be there in November. I said right after the 08 election that 2010 was going to be ugly for them if they were not careful. Their numbers were artificially inflated in 2008. They still would be okay if they hadn’t completely fucked everything up and spent two years giving 60% of the public the finger. But they didn’t and now they got problems. Their only hope to avoid a shocking historical beat down is to scare everyone into thinking it is vote Democrat or put the KKK in office. I don’t think it is going to work.

      1. Also keep in mind that Obama is actually losing Jewish voters. He got most of them in ’08 too.

  21. I think of Joe Boyle running around after the 08 election claiming that it was 1932 looking for his pony on Christmas morning.

    In reality it was more like 1928. The financial collapse came too late. The Democrats would have been better off not winning in 2008. They then could have blamed the entire financial collapse and the recession on the Republicans and won big in 2010 and 2012. At that point, it would have been too late for the Republicans to blame anything on them. As it is, they came in just in time to own the economy and the deficit and both wars. Instead of a new FDR, they got Barrack W. Hoover.

    1. But no theme song to All in the Family.

  22. TDB delivers on the comments as usual.

    1. TDB delivers on the comments as usual.

      I gave up on participating over there a long time ago. It’s like the anti-Reason – at least (most) of the libs who troll here will argue with you.

  23. When all you have is a hammer…

  24. Anyone else remember how leading up to the 08 election, Obama’s supporters told everyone that his winning would be a transcendent event in race relations? If we just voted for Obama, all our race problems would begin to heal. Gee, it doesn’t seem to be working out that way. Of course some of said that as soon as he won every criticism of him would be read to be a sign of racism. And we were told that that would never happen.

    1. You had to vote for him and agree with him. If you just vote for him and disagree with him you area racist. If you didn’t vote for him but now agree with him you are a racist. If you didn’t vote for him and don’t agree with him you are an evil racist bastard.

      1. That could be Jeff Foxworthy’s new act; “You might be a racist”.

        1. If you hold down a paying job that is not related to politics or the government, you might be a racist

        2. If you live anywhere between the Hudson River and the San Frendando Valley and there is not a major university or state capitol in your town, you might be a racist.

        3. If you are not a paid subscriber of the New York Times you might be a racist.

        The jokes pretty much write themselves.

        1. Not all white people are racists, but if you’re a racist, you’re probably white.

          1. Yeah, just ask Chris Rock. “Crackerty ass cracker!”

      2. It is not enough to obey Big Brother; you must love him as well.

        1. I don’t love him. My big brother is an ass.

    2. Out of all the lies that were foisted on America in the last election, this was one of the worst. Obama, Holder, and the gang are not, never have been, and never will be uniters. They are as deliberately divisive and polarizing as anyone we’ve seen in the executive branch.

      I can understand why many decent Americans who don’t pay much attention to detail hoped that this wouldn’t be the case, but it’s sad that even some Reason writers who should have known better fell for this hokum. There was plenty of hard evidence to show what total bunk all the “post-racial presidency” stuff was months before the election, for those who didn’t suspend their disbelief.

      1. Bu- Bu- Bu- But

        I couldn’t have voted against the black guy. I had no choice. I couldn’t have handled the guilt.

        1. And what’s nice is that now their guilt is absolved. They did it. They voted for him.

          And now they’ll throw his (party’s) ass out and won’t be particularly happy about having the racist badge thrown back at them.

          Many are still going to be dumb and stupid, but many won’t be fooled again, I bet.

      2. Did you hear what Obama said about the Israelis? He said the reason they are suspicious of him “is because my middle name is Hussein”. Does this idiot not know that one of Israel’s best friends in the Middle East is King Hussein of Jordan? Is there anything this bastard won’t blame on racism and claim his sorry ass as a victim?

        He’s not the post-racial president. He’s the most-racial president.

        1. He really didn’t say that did he? Seriously, if he is that stupid we are in a lot of trouble.

        2. Did you hear what Obama said about the Israelis? He said the reason they are suspicious of him “is because my middle name is Hussein”. Does this idiot not know that one of Israel’s best friends in the Middle East is King Hussein of Jordan? Is there anything this bastard won’t blame on racism and claim his sorry ass as a victim?

          Do you have a cite for that?

          1. Here it is in Haaretz, which is Israel’s equivalent of the New York Times and the Washington Post.

          2. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-50…..03544.html

            He said it alright.

            1. Duh…

              Though he did say it.

  25. Is The Tea Party Racist?

    Who cares?

  26. How many non-black people sit on the 60 plus member board of the NAACP?

    I wonder if their make up properly represents the racial diversity of America. Or hell if it even represents the racial diversity of the colored people in America.

    1. Saying “colored” is racist.

      I have a nice tan sometimes.

  27. “policies (smaller government, lower taxes, radically reduced deficits, etc.) that would likely improve the standard of living of all Americans (blacks included). ”

    Citation needed.

      1. Sorry, Austrians don’t believe in empirical verification of claims.

        1. Touche.

          1. He asked for citation, not an empirical verification. Slight difference in the two.

            1. Agreed… but it was still a rather witty response considering.

              Which is why MNG is often more bearable than the rest of the trolls.

          2. And stop toucheing me.

    1. so it is your opinion that black people would be better off with big deficits, a devalued currency, high taxes and a big government? Interesting how everyone else does worse under those conditions. What is so special about black people?

      1. Black poverty rate pre-Great Society=50%+
        Post Great Society=below 25%

        1. That statement is so full of potential holes it isn’t even funny.

          For starters:
          How was poverty quantified over the time frame?

          You are assuming there was a single variable or that the most significant variable was political.

        2. We have had this discussion before. And you refuse to face facts. The overall poverty rate was dropping clear through the 40s and 50s before the great society. There is no evidence that the great society did anything to increase the trend.

          And of course something else happened in the 1960s along with the great society. The civil rights movement. Once black people got access so some measure of equal opportunity they improved their own lot in life. They didn’t need guilty liberals like you to do it. The fact that you look at black achievement and immediately think of the Great Society and not civil rights and self improvement shows what a closet racist you really are.

          1. “The overall poverty rate was dropping clear through the 40s and 50s before the great society.”

            Citation needed.

            1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…..meline.gif

              The Great Society did not kick in until 1966. The poverty rate in 1959 was 26% and by 1965 the year before the Great Society, it was 15%. It fell on its own by 1/2 in six years. Do some research and you will find that it was over 40% just after World War II. And what is it today? 13.2%. A whopping 2% drop since 1965

              I have pistol whipped you with this statistic at least three times now. Yet, you are apparently so stupid or bull headed, you wipe the fact out of your mind and pretend it doesn’t exist. You are like some fundie who claims man lived with the Dinosaurs. No matter how many times I show you the fossil, you still can’t get it through your thick fucking skull.

              1. https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/people.html

                Check out tablee 2, the reduction you point to is smaller than your figures.

                And check out the figure for blacks, not even close to 1/2 drop for them in that period.

                Of course your claim it was civil rights is dealt a blow by your own figures unless you want to claim that Jim Crow took some major hit in the early 1960s. It didn’t.

                1. First, you don’t respond to my point which is that poverty was dropping on its own before the Great Society. The Great Society was aimed at whites as well as blacks. Second, black poverty did drop in the 1950s and early 1960s. Why? Primarily because millions of black people moved out of the South to the industrial north and go jobs. It is called the great migration. You might have read about it in the history books if you had ever bothered to read any. Industrial growth in the North and black migration out of the Jim Crow South to opportunity in the North is what dropped the black poverty rate.

                  Why does the fact that black people helped themselves bother you so much?

                  1. The Great Society was aimed at reducing poverty and blacks were afflicted at much higher rates than whites. And it seemed to work.

                    I’m always happy to hear about black people or anyone helping themselves. I just realize that sometimes people need barriers removed and help for that to happen.

                  2. “The overall poverty rate was dropping clear through the 40s and 50s before the great society”

                    These were big government periods btw.

                2. You realize that the data on you link doesn’t support your assertion, right? Those numbers, and the handy graph on this pdf (page 4 of the packet, 10 of the pdf) shows a significant drop from at least 1959 until about 1969 and then a leveling off until about 1994 when the rate began to fall again. There is no Big Government causality you can prove from these numbers.

        3. I’d bet a whole dollar that the Civil Rights Act accounts for at least 95% of that improvement.

          But… hey… generations of an entire race being dependent upon government hand-outs at the cost of a few hundred billion dollars over decades is surely worth that remaining 5%.

          1. “I’d bet a whole dollar that the Civil Rights Act accounts for at least 95% of that improvement.”

            The Act libertarians oppose?

            1. yeah, didn’t a popular libertarian candidate denounce the civil rights act?

              and that guy was favored by the tea party. so, the tea party denounces the civil rights act!

              tea party is thinly veiled racism, probably sexist and homophobic too. but they just want to focus on fiscal issues. uhuh, sure.

            2. yeah, didn’t a popular libertarian candidate denounce the civil rights act?

              and that guy was favored by the tea party. so, the tea party denounces the civil rights act!

              tea party is thinly veiled racism, probably sexist and homophobic too. but they just want to focus on fiscal issues. uhuh, sure.

              1. The objection to the Civil Rights Act to which you refer was driven by a property rights argument, which makes it ultimately economic.

                The distinction between economic liberty as a value in and of itself and economic liberty as a utilitarian value that leads to better outcomes is ultimately irrelevant.

            3. Actually the act can easily be opposed by the method alone. Which is where the majority of the beef lies, at least with those that I know that oppose the act. The problem isn’t the result or the goal, it is the method. The same with women’s suffrage. The goal and the results could be achieved without legislation and making the process more complicated.

        4. Citation needed.

      2. “Interesting how everyone else does worse under those conditions.”

        Citation needed.

        1. Well you respond to my other citation, we can deal with this one. I don’t think that you are smart enough to process more than one chart at a time. You really are having some kind of a break down over Obama aren’t you?

          1. John
            We’ve had THIS discussion before. I opposed Obama and predicted exactly the kind of problems we have from him now on H&R way before he was the nominee…

            1. Yet you have turned from a reasonable liberal to a batshit crazy troll after his election. If not Obama, then what is responsible for this?

              1. Funny it seems to me Obama’s election turned folks like yourself batshit crazy…

                1. I get it, you’re calling John a racist.

      3. Robert Mugabe’s sheep didn’t seem to do very well under the conditions you describe, John. Of course, it might be different for Americans because, well, we’re Americans.

  28. “If black Americans are suffering due to our current economic woes, Obama’s own policies are hardly helping them.”

    Citation needed.

    1. See Hayek.

      part deux

    2. Asking for citation is pretty fucking retarded. If you don’t know the two sides of the argument and the sources from which they are derived you are a boob (and not a good one).

      Of course this is either a sockpuppet or a pathetic, and juvenile, attempt to form an argument.

      Or it’s a really shitty troll.

    3. Actually, none needed

    4. See Detroit.

    5. 010100010101010101001111010001000010

      1. that’s racist, you know only autistics and computers can read binary


        2. There are 10 types of people in this world.

          Those who can read binary, and those who can’t.

      2. I think my translator is broken, it spit out:


    6. Nobody needs to provide you with a citation on anything, MNG.

      Every non-liberal alive on the planet is automactically and infinitely more authoritative than you about every aspect of existence in the universe.

  29. If you have to have press conferences to say that you’re not gay, you’re gay.

    If you have to have press conferences to say that you’re not racist, you’re racist.

    To me, anyway…

  30. Once again, I have to assume “Vote for me, you racist” is not going to be a very fetching slogan for the Dems.

  31. If black folk can self-identify as n*****s, then the Tea Party should reclame the word racist and change it’s name to the Racist Party.

    1. we are so many years from that working effectively

    2. Notice the Old English spelling of “reclaim”. Sadly, long out of favour.

  32. By the way, in case anyone needed even more evidence of just how increasingly irrelevant the NAACP has become since achieving equal rights for African-America, they’re now trying to have Michael Jackson’s former “Neverland” estate turned into a state park.

    1. He’s one of “theirs,” remember?

  33. If the Tea Partiers were smart (and Sciencey!), they’d point out that Social Security is biased against blacks, and minorities in general.

    Minorities tend to enter the work force younger, and die younger as well.

    But let’s not forget: GW Bush once spoke at Bob Jones University!!!!

  34. The NAACP are racist collectivists. Sometimes they do good things, like endorse the CA marijuana legalization initiative, but they are viewing the tea party as a collective, instead of a decentralized movement of individuals. Their are racits in the NAACP, there are racists in all movements, but that doesn’t make the mainstream of the movement racist.

    1. *There (not their, too stoned)

  35. Good points all. Except…

    There are an awful lot of people who belong to the Tea Party because it is the ‘Anti-Obama’ party. And a significant number of those people have racist sentiments and apply those to Obama in particular.

    What bothers me about the Tea Party isn’t what it says it stands for. It is what the people who belong to it whom I have talked to say it stands for. And, frankly, a lot of their rhetoric sounds pretty racist to me.

    Moreover, these are the people recruiting new members. Sometimes it feels to me like the Tea Party is undergoing the same kind of internal takeover that turned the Republican party into an arm of the Christian Right.

    1. Agree 100%.

  36. What I find funny in all this is that while Tea Partiers have been bending over backward insisting they’re not racist, they’ve appropriated civil rights language and have started calling every black or latino person they can find a racist. (Obama, Justice Sotomayor, any number of civil rights leaders have all been called racist over and over again.) It’s all very cute.

  37. This article mis-represents what NAACP is saying. The NAACP is NOT saying that the Tea Party Movement is Racist. They are saying that the Tea Party is not doing enough to separate themselves from the racist in the Party that come out and hold Racist signs and make racist statements.

    1. Bullshit. The NAACP is trying to tar the entire Tea Party as racist both to keep non-liberals from supporting it and motive its own base. It is doing so in a way calculated to help its surrogates (you) pretend it isn’t in the hopes of preserving as much of its reputation as possible.

      1. You should read their statement carefully. They are NOT AGAINST the Tea Party per se. They are against the fact that some members (not all, and i’ll go as far as saying not most) are racist and hold up racist signs and make off-colour remarks.

        1. You should wake up. They are against the Tea Party per se, and it has nothing to do with race.

  38. You can’t control membership in a decentralized movement. The worst speech is still protected speech, they have just as much of a right to protest. They seem to have done a lot to distance themselves from the racists and make it known they are not wanted and not the mainstream. The Rand Paul faction of the tea party aren’t neocons and they are not racists. I don’t consider myself part of that movement but I do agree with some of the things they say.

  39. What’s the official Tea Party position on the Ground Zero mosque?

  40. It’s not about RACE it’s about ANARCHY stupid.
    Ever since the Tea Party held their first meeting it was clear that this group of of ANTI U.S. GOVERNMENT jerks was advocating that Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Karl Rove and the so-called American Patriots were walking on water!!!!!
    What they were really saying is for President Obama and his administration to FAIL just as Flush Rush has been broadcasting since day one of President Obama term.
    Don’t let yourself be fooled by these nuts because they’re headed for ANARCHISM FIRST CLASS.
    Anyone voting in their favor is UNAMERICAN…….

    1. WOO HOO! Slap my ass and call me a teabagger then!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.