The 'Racist' Tea Parties vs. the Black Panthers


As noted by Jesse Walker, former Reasonoid Dave Weigel, guest blogging over at Andrew Sullivan's place, is certainly right that conservatives are overplaying this New Black Panther Party (NBPP) non-story, with hopes that foot soldiers in the Beck Army will cast ballots against the ghost of Huey Newton and Fred Hampton in the midterms. It's a shopworn (and often effective) tactic. When I lived in Sweden, the deeply anti-American tabloid Aftonbladet would run front page, 30 point type stories on Fred Phelps's "church," failing to point out that Westboro Baptists' congregants were almost all family members and could fit into the back of a Cooper Mini.

But my comrades on the left, those denouncing the absurd NBPP story as a "new Southern Strategy," those expressing outrage that conservative blogs and media would exploit the lunatic fringe for electoral gain (what has D.C. become??), might have noticed an uptick in stories on supposed Tea Party racism. Surely the persistence of such stories couldn't be motivated by politics? Indeed, this morning's Express, the freebie published by the Washington Post and distributed throughout D.C., splashed the Tea Partiers-are-racist accusation on its front page. As those who have read my periodic columns on the movement know, I'm something of a skeptic of Tea Partyism; too many lazy conflations of socialism, communism, tsarism, and Nazism, for starters. But I have defended them against the charge of racism in the past—there are clearly racists present at some of these rallies, but no evidence that it is endemic or anything but an embarrassing minority—and the way MSNBC (Weigel's current employer) treats the Tea Party racists is not unlikehow Meghan Kelley treats the NBPP. And as Jesse Walker observed, nor is it unlike how the media treated the so-called "Hutaree Militia."

But let's end on an unfunny note. Here is lunkheaded "spoken word artist" and DEA stooge Henry Rollins, writing at Vanity Fair, on the "racist" Tea Partiers and the NBPP:

You racists need to stop hiding. Come on out! Be who you are. At least have the guts to stand up for your convictions, like a man standing in front of a voting location yelling that he hates crackers. Who the hell knows what was bugging that guy? Why, I just love crackers—graham, saltine—I'm gonna get me a whole big bunch of crackers out of a box, or whatever, and I'm gonna squash 'em on my face and let 'em run off my chin!

Why Vanity Fair, home to some very fine writers, allows this level of retardation on its website is beyond me. But you can read the rest of this laugh riot here.

NEXT: ...and this is your brain on local news.

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. If anyone at Vanity Fair who made the decision to allow Rollins to write for them has ever heard his spoken word shit, they should be fired immediately and executed by a New Yorker firing squad.

    1. they should be fired immediately and executed by a New Yorker firing squad.

      I’m guessing people at the New Yorker don’t own guns.

      1. Maybe Rollin is addressing Ron Paul. He’s one racist who should come out of the closet

        1. Don’t worry, scrote. There are plenty of ‘tards out there living really kick-ass lives. My first wife was ‘tarded. She’s a pilot now.

          1. Max can’t use the word “racist” in its proper context, so his argument – like ALL of his arguments – is bullshit.

            1. Max likes to be amused, but he doesn’t have a very high-functioning intellect; having found that he isn’t quite big enough to ride the adult rides, he just satisfies his need by pissing off those who can.

              I have a feeling he is a sockpuppet, though, because he gives up somewhat easily. True stupidity is belligerently persistent.

  2. You racists need to stop hiding.

    Um. He can’t see them, but he know they exist. The Dwarkins fans should have a field day with this.

    1. Translation: I know there are racists among you, you fucking Teabaggers. It’s not fair that you hide so well that, no matter how many cameras we take to your events, we can’t capture a single overt sign of racism anywhere. Quit being so damn sneaky and confirm our biases already.

  3. former Reasonoid Dave Weigel, guest blogging over at Andrew Sullivan’s place, is certainly right that conservatives are overplaying this New Black Panther Party (NBPP) non-story,

    What the fuck?

    Did you not read Weigel when he was working here at reason?

    He did the same fucking thing with the Birthers that Fox is now doing with the Black Panthers.

    Weigel is a pure hack and i don’t give a crap how nice of a guy he is or that he is your friend. He is still a hack.

    1. The Birthers were far closer to the levers of power in the GOP than the NBPP is to the Dem leadership.

      1. [citation needed]

        You do realize who Eric Holder is …

        1. Eric Holder is in the NBPP? Speaking of citation needed…

        2. Eh, no, apparently he doesn’t. Y’know, Tulpa, information on Eric Holder isn’t exactly that difficult to find. You’ve got no excuse for not knowing how high up in this commie traitor regime he is.

          1. I know what office Holder holds, jackass. I’m just not aware of him being involved with the NBPP, a charge for which an informed individual like you should have no trouble providing a reliable source.

            1. He was “involved” up to his eyebrows in getting the case against them dropped after they had already been convicted.

              So STFU, shithead.

              1. They weren’t convicted of shit. The case that was dropped was a civil suit.

                And there are plenty of videos of bin Laden being thankful for Bush’s reaction to 9/11, so does that mean that Bush was collaborating with al-Qaeda? You may have more in common with Rachel Maddow than you think.

                1. They were convicted. You’re saying they were not, so you’re full of shit, just like Weigel. Just like Weigel, you’re digging yourself in deeper engaging in another irrelevant comparison to distract us from how out of step with reality your whole argument is.

                  Anyone else can see that a terrorist being “grateful” [citation needed] that one of his worst enemies put a bounty on his head and attacked his host country is nothing like a criminal being grateful to the head of the crooked DOJ that helped him get away with the crimes for which he’d already been convicted. Nice try though, shithead.

                  1. Technically, they received a “default judgement” for failing to show up at a hearing.

                    Thats not a ‘court conviction’. The case was never even pursued. So there was no trial. There was a hearing where nothing was heard. No evidence presented, no defendants appearing. If you think that amounts to “conviction”, you have a pretty thin understanding of the law.

              2. I’m not a big fan of all the namecalling, but Holder DID drop the case.

                1. You’ve got no excuse for not knowing how high up in this commie traitor regime he is.

                  Man, back in my day, you had to work hard to be a commie traitor. Get out my pool of fire!

      2. Citation?

        1. Uh, the GOP vice presidential nominee from 2008? Is that close enough for you?

          “Would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?” she was asked (around 9 minutes into the video above).

          “I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue, because I think that members of the electorate still want answers,” she replied.

          “Do you think it’s a fair question to be looking at?” Humphries persisted.

          “I think it’s a fair question, just like I think past association and past voting records — all of that is fair game,” Palin said. “The McCain-Palin campaign didn’t do a good enough job in that area.”

          And then there’s Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh. Not directly in power, of course, but certainly more prominent than any Dem who’s spoken kindly of the NBPP.

          1. That’s like citing something Rachael Maddow says about 9/11 as official DNC doctrine. You really don’t know much of anything about anything, do you, Tulpa?

            1. Never said anything about it being official RNC policy, just that they were a lot closer (which they are). Maddow hasn’t been nominated for anything by the Democratic party last I knew.

              1. Neither have Lou Dobbs or Rush Limbaugh, last time I checked. To your disgrace, though, Al Franken’s pretty “close to the levers of power” thanks to shitheads like you who think election fraud and corrupt justice departments aren’t important.

                1. It’s not hard to google “dobbs birth certificate”.

                  After being attacked by groups ranging from the Southern Poverty Law Center to Media Matters for relentlessly calling on Barack Obama to prove his eligibility for the office of the presidency, CNN’s Lou Dobbs wasn’t backing off on either his syndicated radio or his television program today.

                  Once again, he renewed his calls for Obama to produce his long-form birth certificate that would settle doubts about where he was born and offered that the president’s actions could actually be “illegal.”

                  1. Are you claiming Lou Dobbs is a Republican?

                    If so, you are wrong about that.

              2. Remember when Hillary in 2002 went to the Senate floor and uttered these typical politician weasel words:

                “I am simply here today on the floor of this hallowed chamber to seek answers to the questions being asked by my constituents,” Hillary explained. “Questions raised by one of our newspapers in New York with the headline ‘Bush Knew.’

                Just seeking answers, of course. Everyone likes a good investigation.

                It’s the standard bullshit, practiced by both parties. Doesn’t make them true believers, doesn’t make it less bullshit.

                1. So? Howard Dean, head of the DNC, said the most interesting theory he’d heard was that George Bush knew about 9/11 ahead of time. And Trutherism is about 100x as crazy as Birtherism.

          2. Are you claiming Limbaugh is a birther?

            If so, you are wrong about that.

            1. He continued, “Barack Obama has yet to have to prove that he’s a citizen. All he has to do is show a birth certificate. He has yet to have to prove he’s a citizen. I have to show them 14 different ways where the h— I am every day of the year for three years.”

              Later in the show, Limbaugh showed a video of a woman criticizing Rep. Mike Castle for ignoring the birth certificate issue during a Delaware town meeting. She presented her own birth certificate, signed by a doctor, and asked why Obama hasn’t been compelled to do the same.

              1. Standard weasely not actually saying that he believes this, just wondering why Obama won’t put more evidence out there. (Even though no evidence would ever satisfy people on issues like this; even if Andrew Sullivan delivered Trig Palin himself he’d still doubt.)

                1. The point is, no serious presidential candidate of a major party has ever been expected to produce documentation proving natural-born status. Let alone producing a gorram long-form birth certificate that Dobbs in the quote above is demanding. My question is, why would they want Obama to be the first? I think I know the answer, but I’ll leave it to the gentle reader to decide for him or herself.

                  This is especially ironic given that John McCain was certainly not born in the United States — he was born in Panama (or so he claims) — yet Rush, Lou, and Sarah have not demanded to see his papers, which need to prove a great deal more than just the location of birth.

                  1. My question is, why would they want Obama to be the first?

                    Maybe because he is the first whose father was African, i.e. not American, by birth? Maybe because he spent some of his youth in Malaysia? What do you think is the reason, because we are all just RAACCISSSTS?

                    I think he was born in Hawaii, but what would it hurt for him to produce a birth certificate?

                    Does he have a passport? You must produce a birth certificate to get one, so if he does have a PP then that would be pretty good proof that he has a valid birth certificate.

                    1. My father was not American by birth

                    2. Neither was mine

                    3. You get the idea

                    4. No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

                    5. Neither were you. 🙂

                    6. Above comment meant for George Washington. Could Also apply to John and Tom.

                    7. …what would it hurt for him to produce a birth certificate?

                      HE HAS PRODUCED A BIRTH CERTIFICATE YOU FUCKING NIMROD! You fucktards just don’t like it because it shows him to be a citizen, so you’re demanding another. If the “long form” ever gets released, you asssuckers will start demanding the the “longer long form”.

                  2. Actually, John McCain willingly showed his original birth certificate (long & short form) to reporters and members of Congress in 2008, well before the election.

                    1. People do tend to forget that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone – outside of the 50 states – and had similar questions asked about his own constitutional eligibility, which mostly were just glossed over in the end without any sort of actual judicial ruling.

                    2. “People do tend to forget that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone – outside of the 50 states”

                      canal zone was under the control of the US military, and (Like all US military installations) was considered US Soil. anyone born on a US military installation is considered a natural born citizen, and allowed to choose their home state – as though they had actually been born there.

                      my dad served 23 yrs in the army (82nd airborne) and this is what happened with my sister when she was born in Heidelberg Germany.

                      I’m sure your aware that Germany is not a part of the US, but since my dad was a soldier (and was stationed there at Campbell) he was asked to choose a home state. to this day, there is no question that she is a US citizen.

                      the same is true for mccaine. he was born to two Americans that were stationed in the canal zone. they were there because his father was serving his country, and thats where he was stationed. similarly, anyone born to US service personal in the canal zone at that time would also be treated as though they were born in one of the 50 states.

                      but don’t take my word for it – seriously, i’m just an anonymous “someone” on the net. feel free to ask someone who’s serving now (preferably someone who’s had a kid while stationed overseas).

                    3. Wait, he had two birth certificates? One of them must be fake!

              2. This is your idea of “proof” that Limbaugh is a birther?


                He talked about the issue on his show just as he talks about all sorts of issues.

                The birthers are the ones who are running around demanding that Obama be forced to prove his birth status.

                1. Much as I think Rush is a douche extraordinaire, I have to go with the above.

                  I’m convinced that he doesn’t actually believe 1/2 of what he spews daily. He’s a rhetorician, and a good one (if look at the use of rhetoric in a vacuum), not an insane nutbag (though he is a fucktard).

          3. Sure, but that kind of statement is equivalent to some making nice with Truthers stuff that elected Democrats have said. It’s the weasely “we should have a more open investigation to clear the air; it’s not that I believe this stuff but you must understand that without being fully upfront and presenting all available evidence to the American people these ideas will spread.”

            Cynthia McKenney actually said that she thought that Bush knew, but a lot of other people fell into the William Clay (D-MO) weasel category of saying “”I’m curious as to whether it will reveal what Congresswoman McKinney has stated. I’m interested. I’m interested in an investigation.”

            The not-really-endorse-but-not-really-reject-hey-I-just-want-a-full-investigation-so-we-can-satisfy-everyone weasel words happen frequently on both sides, and with things other than birthers and truthers, too.

            (There’s also the actually nominated LaRouchie in TX, but that’s not mainstream in the Democrats.)

            1. Yes, and I would say that Trutherism does contaminate the Democratic party to a significant degree. But the topic here is NBPP support vs. Birtherism.

              1. On that I agree with you. Birtherism is much more similar to Trutherism.

                NBPP support is more similar to, say, support for those wacky folks at Bob Jones University, or maybe support for actual racist groups.

                (Though, as Esquire noted, most white supremacists they found preferred Obama to “race traitor and friend of the Jews” McCain, and a black supremacist supported McCain over equally traitorous Obama. Nutballs, eh.)

              2. No, the topic here is DOJ racism and corruption involving the NBPP. You’re trying to distract us with Birtherism because you know you’ve lost the argument and made a fool of yourself.

                1. No, the topic here is DOJ racism and corruption involving the NBPP.

                  You’re reading a different article.

            2. I have to object to the whole widely accepted notion that Birtherism is really that crazy. All it contends is that maybe, 40-odd years ago, a mother might have tried to give her newborn son a better deal in life by fudging his birth records — and it was fuelled by reports from his own family. Are Birthers wrong? Almost certainly. But it’s not in the same league as, for instance, Trutherism.

              It’s closer to, say, those recently aired theories that Alvin Greene was a GOP plant. And I remember when the John Edwards affair was just some crazy thing that every respectable publication ignored. And people forget that until Monica produced the POTUS DNA, she was an emotionally disturbed stalker egged on by a “vast, right-wing conspiracy” as our current Secy of State put it.

              1. And I would be remiss not to one can apparently write for the venerable Atlantic and still openly promote the batshit crazy notion Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy.

              2. I’d be willing to admit that the fact that many elites– and me myself– don’t really care if the President, any President, is a natural born citizen. Imagining that it would bring down a Presidency is sort of like imagining that Hillary couldn’t be confirmed as Secretary of State because of the Emoluments Clause.

                And from that it follows that a suspicion that even if it were true, it would be covered up, is sort of reasonable, if you’re the kind of person who would REALLY CARE about the President being born in the country and you already distrust all those other people precisely because they wouldn’t care. Except that it’s actually really hard to cover up things.

                1. Good point John — it’s irrelevant anyway. I think it’s within the powers of the House to just pass a resolution saying BHO is a citizen.

                  Birtherism is dumb, and wrong. But it’s not so crazy that people should have to defend themselves from notions of being crypto-Birthers.

                  1. BTW John — your earlier comment was Instalanched.


                  2. I’ll pick a nit a say that whether the House could declare him a “citizen” is irrelevant. The Constitution says *natural born* and his birth location is his birth location, regardless of what Congress may declare.

                    1. According to my plain text reading of the constitution, “natural born” simply excludes children born to IVF. The Framers were aware of the possibility of ‘aritificial birth’ and were worried that a cyborg militia would attempt to naturalize a mandarin president.

                    2. WTB,

                      My understanding is that it doesn’t matter, because the House decides who is and isn’t a natural born citizen. They can just declare that he is.

                2. So, let’s have Arnold Schwarznegger run in the next presidential election?

                  The problem with “elites” deciding that portions of the constitution are anachronistic is that it leads us down a path of lawlessness. What’s next, “2A is from another time…”, oh, wait?

                  1. Meh, I don’t think being born a citizen means being born in the US anyway.

                    I really wish the birther claims were true, because it would be an interesting constitutional issue; there are a lot of interesting permutations on how to settle it.

          4. We *know* Obama was born here, because the Clintons didn’t use it as a campaign wedge.

      3. And the plan was coming together until that meddling Weigle figured it out.

        But we got him and we’ll get you Tulpa


      4. I read all kind of crazy tin foil hat shit. The top two places to go for birther news are MSNBC and wherever the fuck weegl is. Even within the crazy ass right wing blogosphere, birthers are considered pretty low on the totem pole. Even truthers tell them: “dude chill out on that crap, you are making us look bad”

        1. World Net Daily is a pretty mainstream conservative website that is still stuck on the birther issue.

          1. Ok. Maybe world net daily, and rush, and hannity ARE still all over it. I wouldnt know.

          2. WND is practically tabloid.

            if you are really interested in legit conservative opinion, try out hot air (

      5. More bullshit. Like racist Tea Partiers, Birthers largely do not exist. They are a few wackos unaffiliated with any major party, and at their worst aren’t the outright racist haters the NBP are.

        I could have saved Moynihan a lot of time writing this column. Tea Party isn’t racist. Democrats are desperate. NBP is racist and violent. This story is legit. The end.

  4. […]Westboro Baptists’ congregants were almost all family members[…]

    Well… yeah.

    1. And civil rights attorneys.

  5. Why Vanity Fair, home to some very fine writers, allows this level of retardation on its website is beyond me. But you can read the rest of this laugh riot here.

    Because the “Web” is a place where hip, urban youth eschew convention and write edgy, controversial stuff.

    1. When was Henry Rollins ever hip? He’s been edgy, but only in a desperate attempt to be hip, which his god awful band failed to become.

  6. As a Huey Newton fan, the NBPP pisses me off?for name-in-vain/tool-of-the-man reasons. I’ve been told repeatedly that conservative commentators are sharing my pissed-ness?for whatever reason?but I haven’t seen it. They’re pissed at the DOJ for throwing an already-decided case in a transparent racial-political play, and at that one specific NBPP guy for sounding like Black Mel Gibson without the pro-quality line-reads.

    Got a link? To someone who isn’t just being “right” about other people elsewhere? To a set of raging-at-the-fake-Panthers things that numerically justify being called an “overplay?”

    I’m sure someone‘s going insane, because that’s what people (especially Weigel) do, but gimme five. If the story justifies daily reiteration, in the absence of new information, there must be hundreds to choose from.

    Let’s see.

    1. C’mon. There’s more than one racist fucktard in the NBPP, just as there are more than one racists in the tea bunch.

      But I’d say offhand, per capita, there are more cracker-hating racists in the NBPP than white-boy racists in the tea gang. Neither, of course, have any good reason to hate, but that’s what racists do… hate irrationally.

      1. I would guess that every member of NBPP is a racist, all ten of them.

        1. I was being kind. I’ll also be kind and say the number of actual racists* in the NAACP is relatively low.

          *actual racist = not “because a liberal used the word racist to describe one of their enemies”.

          1. Being kind doesn’t justify lying. Based on their behavior in recent years, the NAACP is entirely racist.

        2. Living in Newark, I’ve seen a NBPP member around. Sometimes he leads protests made up of a bunch of old red diaper babies and 5%s shuffling around downtown, ranting about something or other.

          He’s an Amtrak baggage guy in his daily life.

  7. The New Black Panther Party is just being honest including black in the name. They certainly aren’t being racist by centering their organization specifically around a race.

    If only the Tea Party movement (or whatever) would come out and change its name to the White Tea Party, then we could stop calling them- well, obviously we would still call them racists because we disagree with their message and need it dismissed without honest debate, but we might slip in a little something positive into the discussion about them being honest.

    1. They should change to the Green Tea Party. The GOP needs some antioxidants.

      1. With a name like that, the party would surely get a Nader bump in its popularity.

      2. Not to burst your bubble, but that’s Tom Friedman’s horrible idea.

        1. Still beats the Brown Baggers, the Coffee Party, the Cocoa Party, and One Nation

          …though not by much. Better to stick with what works and tell the racist hypocrites like Tulpa there to go suck their own nuts.

          1. ….like Tulpa there to go suck their own nuts.
            Wow…now there’s some powerfully erudite discourse, Hijo. Get out much?

            1. I LOOM LARGE

  8. Rollins has always been retarded. I will never understand why anyone ever liked him. He is just a typical leftist tool. The only difference is other leftist tools in the entertainment industry have talent.

    1. He’s more physically fit than a normal punk idiot, and he can project intensity. I’m pretty sure that’s it.

      1. Rollins admits that Iggy Pop can kick his ass.

    2. He’s more physically fit than a normal punk idiot, and he can project intensity. I’m pretty sure that’s it.

    3. Dude, Damaged was an awesome album.

    4. And he couldn’t hold a candle to Dez in Black Flag, either.

  9. I have a feeling racists will stop ‘hiding’ when McCarthy stops looking for them.

  10. All these parties fighting each other…and tonight we have the TV Party against the Tea Party…where will it end.

  11. Another day, another defense of Weigel against us ratfuckers, mounted out of class solidarity against the proles.

    1. Anyone have the “who voted for Obama” list to see if Weigel’s defenders have anything else in common?

      1. Right here. It’s depressing how many of these idiots voted for the Zero.

    2. This is exactly why I’m less and less inclined to glance past Reason these days… I always knew that Libertarianism was an academic heresy and would have some of the downfalls that attend the academy, but only recently – and in light of how many writers here voted for Obama and their reasons for doing so – is it becoming clear just how strong class solidarity is vs. stated principles.

  12. She’s black, everything I need, everything I have She’s black, everything I need, everything I have She’s black, my love is true, so true to you She’s black, everything I love, she’s everything I have She’s black. Everything I see. Take me back. She’s black. She’s black, I’ve been had, everything I hate She’s black, it’s out of my hands, everything I hate She’s black, my love is true, my love so true to you Now she’s black every night and day, and I love you She’s black. Everything I see. Take me back. She’s black. Now she’s black, your baby’s been had Now she’s black, your boy’s been had, Black! Now she’s black, your silly boy’s been used up Now your baby’s all used up, little boy black I’m black, let me in! I’m black Black, dying at your door, take me back! Black! Let me rot at your feet, let me in! Black! Black! Black! She’s black. Everything I see. Take me back. She’s black. She’s black. Everything I see. Take me back. She’s black.

    Henry Rollins

  13. I will apoligize now for ever thinking Henry Rollins was cool 10 years ago… I’m sorry (hangs head in shame)

    1. Any cool Henry might have had (always debatable) was certainly used up well before the 90’s hit…but by 2000, my god, he was as washed up as Jello Biafra by 2000.

      1. Yeah, he was cool was about 20 years ago (although still the worst BF singer, imo.)

        I still remember seeing them perform at an abandoned church in DC.

        Man, there wasn’t an ounce of PC on the entire stage.

        1. I saw Black Flag at the Sancho Brothers wrestling hall in El Paso in 1984. Both Rhythm Pigs and Saccharine Trust blew them away…but they were certainly full of energy.

      2. I think the beavis and butthead appearance was his peak.

    2. I don’t think he was ever cool, but he’s kind of funny/amusing in his own way.

  14. So, taking the time to read Mr. Rollins, I am surprised to find that his point seems to have been taken out of context in this post. It ain’t much of a point, fur sure, but…

  15. I’m convinced the NBBP story was an advance attack against the eighteenth Tea Party is racist thrust by the Democrats.

  16. This post misses the entire point of the focus on the NBPP. The case of voter intimidation that was dropped by Eric Holder. There have been no credible news accounts that have challenged the facts in the case. Had a Bush allowed voter intimidation by the KKK, this would have been front page news.

    Also, Wiegal is a hack, and my opinion of Reason has dropped knowing he was employed here.

    1. Yeah, well, if Moynihan and Walker had any brains, they’d at least be properly ashamed enough to stop citing him as a source once he was outed as just another left-wing hack, but they don’t.

      1. Walker claims to be a leftist. I think it just means a sophisticated person who knows Sarah Palin is dumb.

        1. That’s a big word for you, Max. is your friend, no?

        2. Walker claims to be a leftist.

          A while back, I told Max that I don’t think left and right are very useful categories. How he gets from there to “claims to be a leftist” is an exercise best left for the reader.

          1. I use “left” to refer exclusively to socialist or social-democratic on economic policy.

            “Liberal” I use in reference to issues like gay marriage, abortion, and immigration.

    2. The facts of the case: the police couldn’t find a voter who was intimidated. That’s kind of a necessary ingredient to a voter intimidation prosecution.

      Plus, if the NBPP planned to intimidate voters into voting for Obama, a heavily black polling district is a pretty piss-poor choice of location. That’s like the Inquisition looking to forcibly convert the residents of a Franciscan monastery to Catholicism.

      1. The facts are that the DOJ had a civil case against the NBPP in the bag and then dropped it at the direction of Obama’s political appointees.


        1. Oh jeez, Spakovsky. I saw the end of that URL and din’t click on it. I’ve met him; he’s a humorless bastard.

          I’m not making any claims/comments on what he has to say, but seriously, he’s not some one you’d want to hang out with.

          Talk about Prussian atavism.

      2. The facts of the case: they convicted them you shithead! They convicted them and then dropped the case under Eric Holder. All your bullshit about “they couldn’t find an intimidated voter” doesn’t change the fact that they were convicted of intimidation. They got away with a crime they were convicted of committing. That’s because they were caught on tape doing this shit. Only a shitheads like you–and Weigel–could still be defending these bastards after the trial.

        I bet you really think that kiddy fiddler Polanski ought to go free too, don’t you, shithead?

        1. They did not convict them, as the case that actually made it to court was a civil one. And they were caught on tape standing near the polling place, not actually doing anything to anyone. Weak tea, my friend.

          1. A civil conviction is still a conviction. They were caught on tape brandishing their nightsticks and yelling racist bullshit. Your shit’s not sticking, DOJ catamite.

            1. Civil trials do not have convictions. Defendants are either found liable or not liable. The word “conviction” means “guilty of a crime”, which would necessitate a criminal trial.

            1. Sigh.

              Put guys in white hoods brandishing nightsticks and yelling about killing “nigger babies” outside any voting booth and do you think Eric “nation of cowards” Holder is still dropping the case?

              1. No, he wouldn’t drop that case… because only whites can be racist. Sheesh.

              2. Well, they weren’t caught on tape yelling about killing white babies at the polling place, were they? That was a separate incident.

                I’m not disagreeing with your main point – there would have been no dropping the case if guys in white hoods had been outside a polling booth. Simply standing there in the hoods would have been enough, but apparently the same is not true if the hoods are substituted with night sticks.

          2. Why do you insist on minimizing their actions? They had weapons, used racist language, and expressed support for racist violence. If you don’t think these specifics are a big deal, why are you omitting them from your discussion?

            Are you insane? Or are you just a disgusting partisan hack?

            1. At this point, anyone who’s not insane is just not paying attention.

              1. Beyond the equality/fairness issues, this is a non-starter. I don’t care who does what and where; holding a stick and yelling stuff? Not a big deal. And if it’s not a big deal, then the prosecution of people who essentially did nothing is wrong on its own merits, no matter how unfair.

                Egalitarianism is misplaced. Prosecuting these guys is wrong, no matter how many other groups might be prosecuted. And two wrongs don’t make a right. Screwing people equally is still screwing people.

      3. The facts of the case: the police couldn’t find a voter who was intimidated. That’s kind of a necessary ingredient to a voter intimidation prosecution.

        Is it? What does the applicable federal statute say? So far, I have seen lots of people express opinions as to whether what these guys did is or is not voter intimidation, but I have yet to see anyone quote or even cite the applicable federal law. And, y’know, it’s kinda, y’know, relevant, being that the statute will define the crime and all. Y’know, like, it will, like, set forth the actual elements of the crime.

        It is quite possible that nobody needed to actually “feel intimidated” for him to have engaged in “voter intimidation.” Depends on the wording of the statute.

        Just because the police couldn’t find a voter who would come forward and press the charge doesn’t mean there wasn’t anyone who was intimidated. A lot of people would be scared shitless about the possibility of testifying against that little racist fuck – especially after hearing his rant about how he wants to kill crackers.

        1. Wait, are you saying that people who were intimidated by hostile racists might not speak up because they were… what’s the word? INTIMIDATED?

          1. Ah, so the lack of evidence is itself evidence. You’ve graduated to the next level of conspiracy theorizing.

            1. The evidence is that DOJ won the case. Unless you think there’s some sort of conspiracy to convince us it happened when it didn’t.

              1. They were set to win by default judgement since the NBPP didn’t respond to the complaint, not due to any evidence.

                1. And then it was dropped. Which, as you apparently haven’t noticed, is the point.

                  1. Oh he noticed.

                    He just keeps trying to evade the point.

                    1. I like the idea of the DoJ dropping cases. Let’s keep them on that road.

      4. Plus, if the NBPP planned to intimidate voters into voting for Obama, a heavily black polling district is a pretty piss-poor choice of location.

        They didn’t want to force people to vote for Obama; they wanted to keep away anyone who was going to vote for anyone other than Obama.

      5. hey, there’s an idea… filthy Fraticelli heretic hippies…

        1. …the idea being:

          That’s like the Inquisition looking to forcibly convert the residents of a Franciscan monastery to Catholicism.

          …infernal comment system…

      6. They don’t need to find a specific intimidated voter. You will still get a ticket if you park next to a fire hydrant, even if there was never a fire while your car was there.

  17. I wonder who it was who used to sing “White Minority”?

  18. David Weigel

    1. Who are you voting for in November? I’ve got the luxury of a guilt-free, zero-impact vote in the District of Columbia, which I would cast for Bob Barr if he was on the ballot. Since he’s not, I’m voting for Barack Obama, the only remaining candidate whom I trust not to run the country (further) into the ground with stupid and erratic decisions,…

    1. If you really want to start feeling all conspiratorial, try a search to see how much mention the very real beatings of Kenneth Gladney (which also involved the actual hurling of racist epithets) and Nathan Tabor (by a radical left-wing black) ever got from the article writers on here. It’s enough to make you wonder who else on here is a closet JournoLister who doesn’t want to admit how violent and racist all the Democrats’ bosom buddies really are.

      1. Dang man, Tabor got knocked the fuck out by a pensioner. He threw the first punch and missed, oh well.

        1. Bullshit. We’ve got the beating on video, it clearly shows that Nathan Tabor never threw a punch, and you’re a lying sack of shit. Now go fuck yourself, leftard.

    2. Fortunately for Weigel he was not on the ballot. Fibber.

    3. good god, that’s some ripe-ass crow being shoved into his snotty brat mouth

  19. According to CATO, the Tea Party is Whiter that the general public, but not as White as the Sierra Club. Hmmmm. I guess that is why my local environmentalists protest everytime someone tries to build affordable housing in my county.

    1. *Cato. Your point: that’s a great counter-example to use when debating liberals. I bet PETA is even more white.

      1. What about furries? Are they considered the colour of their underlying skin or the colour of their fur?

  20. While I agree that the constant charges of racism are just a pathetic attempt to shut up dissenters, the NBPP story isn’t a NBPP story. It’s a DOJ story.

  21. @bestpriceforsales equus 3100 First off the unit won’t go into the menu mode no matter what I do. The procedure seem simple enough. Just won’t go! Secondly the video on the attached CD plays with sound, but no video. Bummer!!!

  22. not this again

  23. I should clarify, since it looks like we have some newbies flitting about here…I’m not a fan of the Democrats. They’re associated at the highest levels with reprehensible groups such as SEIU, AFL/CIO, NEA, Planned Parenthood, etc, whose truly destructive influence many conservatives seem tired of opposing so they turn to a ridiculous target like the NBPP. But there’s no evidence the NBPP has any sway whatsoever.

    1. Nobody tired of whacking those bastards. It’s just that a couple of shitheads keep trying to distract us from the DOJ’s scandal by saying “Oh, why are you wingnuts so freaked about the pathetic and insignificant NBPP getting away with a crime?”

      That’s a strawman you’re attacking. We’re pissed off about the DOJ dropping a case they’d already won solely because the defendants were black, which tells us there’s blatantly racist corruption in the DOJ reaching all the way up to Eric Holder and the supposedly “post-racial” lying two-faced piece of shit who appointed him.

      There’s also the fact that writers at this magazine who should know better are quoting a disgraced writer of theirs as if he’d never been disgraced, hoping his bullshit will smell as much like a rose to us as it does to them. Better get your noses checked, suckers. You might also have to run a scan to see whether you’ve still got any of that JournoList cancer on your body politic.

      1. Exactly how was Weigel disgraced? It was revealed that, while he was writing about conservatives, he really, really doesn’t like conservatives. That doesn’t make him any more disgraced than the Reason writers who make plain their distaste for Obama time and time again but yet still write about him!

        1. Exactly how was Weigel disgraced?

          it’s a real puzzler. then he went and offered his resignation and The Post accepted it. strange indeed.

      2. And that’s not all the DOJ is doing.

        One Obama’s political appointees explicitly stated that they were not interested in enforcing the voter verification provisions of the motor voter law.

  24. One of the many, many reasons that Sons of Anarchy is a great show: They ended the second season by having Rollins’ character executed in a public toilet. WHOOPS SPOILERS

  25. too many lazy conflations of socialism, communism, tsarism, and Nazism, for starters.

    Oh for fuck’s sake, Michael, most people barely know Marx from Hayek, let alone National Socialism from the Soviet variety. I don’t know why you’re bringing tsars into this, though.

    Why Vanity Fair, home to some very fine writers, allows this level of retardation on its website is beyond me.

    Because anti-white racism is socially acceptable due to decades of lefty social engineering. White Pride is an offensive epithet in polite society, while notions of “black power” and La Raza are generally accepted, where not lauded. This proceeds naturally from the statist assumption that any ethnic group underachieving must need some government action on their behalf, which might even have been true 50 years ago.

    These days, identity politics is just fucking dumb, but it’s a critical political tool for Dems (which is why you have the hilariously ironic spectacle of the explicitly racist NAACP accusing the Tea Party of racism) so don’t expect our racial Balkanization to end anytime soon.

    1. Huh?

      Rollins point was that groups who claim purity are kidding themselves as there are racists and there is racism on all sides. I don’t see how you can read his silly rant without noticing that he is calling out racism generally…not specifically “white racists.”

  26. Tea party racism:…..-coloreds/

    1. I tried to read this, but I couldn’t stop laughing after the author said Hitler mustaches on Obama were racist.

      Anyways, if the NAACP isn’t racist, maybe they should change their name to something like “National Association for the Advancement of All People” becausing promoting only colored races is explicitly racist.

      1. So you missed the ‘letter to Lincoln’, then, which was the whole point of the link?

        Because it’s disingenuous, not to mention childish and frankly damaging to serious-minded critique of liberalism to pretend that the Tea Parties are 1) not racist and 2) not mindless angry anti-intellectual shouting.

        They’re a bad stink, and anyone who gets too close to them will end up smelling that way, too.

        1. Mark Williams is a vile idiot who the liberals drag out when they want to show off how racist the tea party is. He is not a “tea party leader” just because he is head of a group with the words in it (Tea Party Express). The Tea Party movement doesn’t have leaders, and they’ve been distancing themselves from that raving nut ever since he called Obama an “Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug and racist-in-chief.”

        2. So I missed the fact that this is one isolated guy, then, which proves I’m stupidly trying to smear a whole movement via guilt by association?

          Because it’s disingenuous, not to mention childish and frankly damaging to hypocritical self-righteous critique of a diverse and growing conservative movement to pretend that all the Tea Parties are 1) racist and 2) mindless angry anti-intellectual shouting on the basis of some dude on the internet.

          I stink of asshattery like a dead skunk, and anyone who argues as retardedly as I do will end up smelling the same way.

          1. Yo, spoofing without changing the name ain’t cool.

            1. But still excellent spoofery nonetheless.

          2. Huh, that’s clever. Only not really. Did I just graduate from Reason? Because I’ve been posting here for years and years, but I’ve never felt the urge to walk away and give it up as a lost cause.

            Seriously, are you *defending* the tea partiers? The idiots who don’t know the difference between tsarist Russia and communist Russia, who think Glen Beck speaks the Holy Word of God, and who think that a picture of Obama with a bone in his nose is an acceptable criticism of the president?

            These are not libertarian allies. They’re *theocrats*, they’re *racists*, they’re *ignorant* of basic civics, and they’re the worst anti-intellectual dead-enders in the nation. I’d rather a truckload of honest-to-god unreformed Soviet Communists than these inbred douchebags.

            And you know what? It’s not one isolated guy. I read Free Republic. It’s pretty fucking far from one isolated guy. It’s every single commenter there. It’s the heart and soul of this movement, right out in the open where we can see how festering and vile and awful it is. I have relatives who are tea partiers, relatives who are fairly senior organizers of tea party events. I’m not speaking from ignorance, here: racism and willful anti-intellectualism are standard, not unusual outliers.

            I guess the fact that they mouth the words to libertarian anthems is sufficient to convince gullible, desperate libertarians that these asswipes are on the side of ‘freedom’. It gets libertarian concepts out in front of the media, I suppose. But that’s a two-way street, because it turns ‘libertarian’ into a swear word, a pejorative associated with the lowest common denominator of the fringe right.

            That’s not a place I want my ideas to live, and those aren’t ideological allies with whom I’m comfortable making common cause.

            1. lol – freep equals Tea Party… prove it, or grow up and understand your “beliefs” don’t make evidence.

        3. They’re a bad stink

          That observation is on par with, “They are dodo heads.” Isildur, you seem to have the debate skills of a 5 year old, so I’ll save myself the bother of reading any other comments written by you.

        4. So you missed the ‘letter to Lincoln’, then, which was the whole point of the link?

          Yes. This is what happens when writing is too bad to wade through.

    2. In other news: Think Progress busted for lying and distorting evidence!

      1. Ohnoes! I think I will shit my pants now.

  27. The racist BS for the NBPP is bullshit. Not prosecuting them after winning the case is institutional bullshit.

    Who cares about the news cycle. Anyone with a brain knows it’s 99% bullshit and those that don’t know better deserve what they get for not expanding their information set.

    1. P.S.

      Fuck Henry Rollins and Black Flag. I will stick with the real punks thank you. Not the wannabe tattooed bitches that act like tough guys. I’m not racist, but I’ll glad provide him with who I am. Imagine the street cred for a beating a mentally retarded ex pop start.

    2. P.S.S

      I just watched Stossel. Jesus christ on a popsicle stick MeMe Roth looks even dumber than Nick made her look debating Katherine. I didn’t think it was possible, but there she was flipping her hair saying stupid shit as plain as day.

      1. Oh shit. MeMe rears her ugly head again? Where are my pearls? I need to clutch them.

        1. Come on guys, MeMe just needs what all stuck up dumbass bitches want: DVDA.

  28. COMMENT OF THE DAY: “The New Black Panther Party plays the same role for the right that basically everyone that Dave Weigel covered when at the Post played for the left.”

    Plus, a dash of common sense: “For most people the story is about whether the DOJ has a race based policy not about the NBP. Weigel is trying to make the story about Fox instead of the DOJ.”

    Must be the new JournoList narrative. But the big news is that the story is now big enough that they have to try to explain it away, or change the subject, instead of just ignoring it. That means we’ve reached Phase Two.

  29. Tulpa, don’t get to worked up over these bitches.

    Hijo de puta, thinks it actually matters that voter intimidation actually happens.

    The way I look at it the fighting between the two parties is a good thing. Let them bash each other’s brains in.

    Every polling place, on every election; a fucking blood bath…

    Eat it Mr. Puta.

    1. The cycle of violence continues!

        1. Sorry, had to.

          Is it a contradiction to inflict freedom on people?

          1. I was just joking, dude. I want no part of this whole TEAM RED TEAM BLUE TEAM MORON discussion.

            1. Oh, I know your general position on things.

              The minus one was a reference(joke) to a certain psychologically challenged poster that peppers threads with approving/disapproving +1/-1s.

              The “inflict freedom on people” was a serious query, though.

              1. The minus one was a reference(joke) to a certain psychologically challenged poster that peppers threads with approving/disapproving +1/-1s.

                Ah, I see. I just ignore the thing.

            2. We all know which of those three teams you’re on.

              1. Don’t be a bitchface, Tulpster.

                C’mon man, settle down and we’ll solve integrals if it calms you down.

                1. There you go, jumping to conclusions. How do you know I wasn’t complementing poor Epi.

                  1. Tulpa, one day I am going to show up at your office with some mind bending chemicals, and we are going to make the mathematical breakthroughs that are outside of confined-law-abiding thought.

                    Then I will have you arrested for being the racist murderer you are.

                    1. that you are.

              2. We all know which of those three teams you’re on.

                Exactly, Tulpa. None of them.

            3. Hey. Fuck you buddy.

  30. I must thank the Tea Party for electing Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown since he voted for the Financial Reform Bill and help the President of the United States with another legislative victory, thank you Tea Party.

    The problem is this. Tea Party candidates will win a number of these congressional races because local districts are often safely partisan in nature. They can make their wild, unfounded claims, crazy accusations, etc., and win. That means not only are we likely to see an increase in Republican seats in both houses, we’re likely to see more antics, more insanity, more stupidity. At the same time they’re going to do everything they can to derail Obama’s policies which will likely mean high unemployment, a moribund economy, and more compromises on policy positions that make no one happy.

    That could literally mean that if the Republicans put up a legitimate candidate in 2012, they could win. Such a result is bad enough, but the likely response for the Democrats is to move further to the “middle” to placate voters. As we’ve seen over the last decade, the “middle” in American politics is basically on the verge of being an 80s Republican. Increasingly that means we’ll have a political landscape of a conservative party and ratfuck insane parties. The former, given it’s track record, slowly moving to the right, the latter, given it’s track record, loudly screaming “socialism, communism, fascism!!!”

    If we continue on this course, privatization will be socialism.

    1. capitol l: Cyrus, do you like tapes or cds more?

      Cyrus: Well cds of course, as they are much more con…

      capitol l: well ceedeeze nuts in yer mouth biatch.

        1. I must give props, as this was from the episode of Crank Yankers with Snoop Dogg.

          1. I simply thought it funny because it immediately transported me back to 10th grade when a fellow student asked our English teacher if she liked CDs, to which she responded “Certificate of Deposit?”

            Then the entire class busted out laughing along with a couple of “ceedeez!” while she was wondering if we were on drugs.

  31. I came across this today:…..ntent.html

    “the case was downgraded to a civil case 11 days before Obama was inaugurated, 26 days before Eric Holder became attorney general, and about nine months before Thomas Perez was confirmed as head of the Civil Rights Division.”

    So the case itself had already been downgraded to a civil matter when Obama entered office. This doesn’t clear them, from all responsibility in the matter, but the blame could probably be spread around a little bit more. In any case, I really don’t give a shit.

    1. that’s very pertinent information. i appreciate it, even if you don’t.

    2. The downgrade from criminal to civil was apparently due to evidence issues — the sort of standard judgment call that’s entirely appropriate for the DOJ to make. Dropping a case they’d already won, however, is bizarre and highly suspicious.

    3. Getting injunctions against voting shenaniganizers is the purpose of the Civil Rights Division. Their choice of the fastest, surest path matters less than the 71 I shot with 12 beers at Pinehurst #2 in ’02.

  32. “You racists need to stop hiding. Come on out! Be who you are. At least have the guts to stand up for your convictions, like a man standing in front of a voting location yelling that he hates crackers. Who the hell knows what was bugging that guy? Why, I just love crackers?graham, saltine?I’m gonna get me a whole big bunch of crackers out of a box, or whatever, and I’m gonna squash ’em on my face and let ’em run off my chin!”

    Well if one takes a quick look at leftist comments across the interwebs (particularly the Huff On Post and YouTube) they’ll notice that leftists have finally dropped their ridiculous “anti-Zionist” pretence and are now saying openly and honestly: blame “The Jews”. Didn’t mention that in Vanity Fair though (lack of space I’m guessing).

  33. Another fucking article about Weigel? How many times a day does his shitty little name get dropped by the namby pamby lefties masquerading as free thinkers at Reason? Just a matter of time before his wussy ass is spewing crap on the Reason dime again.

  34. Repost:

    I’ve seen the tape, and anyone who calls it voter intimidation is a pussy and a racist.

    Basically, the argument that it’s intimidation consists of the claim: “Well, they’re black. And they’re men. And they’re wearing funny outfits that I fear because I’m a suburban pussy white fuckwad. Therefore they’re engaged in voter intimidation! By dint of being black males near a polling place! Because black males are scary when you’re a fucking pussy like me!”

    Nice going, dicklords.

    No, I am not trolling.

    1. I live in Chicago, where we have strict rules about how close the three big union guys in T-shirts with signs can stand to the polling place, and what they can say as you go to vote. Things usually run peacefully, and there’s little intimidation type activity. But you can sure see how it could happen. So yeah, I kind of think it’s important that our polling places not have guys with baseball bats standing outside them, thanks. It’s kind of what makes us us, and not Kazakhstan or Liberia.

    2. The NBPP folks were holding weapons, calling voters “crackers”, and shouting about killing “crackers” and “cracker babies”. That is definitely voter intimidation.

      1. That was a different incident. Fox keeps showing them standing outside the polling place with batons, and then shows the one guy standing in a street at what appears to be a street fair, shouting about killing whites and white babies.

    3. You have really lost your mind on this. You honestly think that guys standing around with clubs near a polling booth is not “intimidation”? if that is not intimidation what is? Further, I would tell them to fuck off and walk by them. But I am nuts. I don’t think my level of physical courage should be the standard for everyone. Would you call a 100 lbs 70 year old woman a “pussy” for finding this intimidating.

      You are not trolling Fluffy. You are just being stupid.

      1. I tend to take a very dim view of claims of “intimidation” that don’t involve direct intimidation.

        They’re too often employed by people who are taking soccer dives to make a political point.

        When, as predictably happens every election, Democrats claim that because a cop was directing traffic entering a polling place, black voters were “intimidated” I always call bullshit on that. And many, many, MANY more black people have actually been mistreated by cops than white people have been mistreated by Black Panthers. Being “intimidated” by the mere existence of police is about 1000x more reasonable than being “intimidated” by Black Panthers, and it’s still not reasonable enough for me.

        I also don’t care if someone was called a traitor to his race. As far as I am concerned, if someone stands in front of a polling place shouting that anyone who votes for Obama is a traitor to the Constitution, that’s perfectly kosher. If a bunch of NRA guys want to open carry as part of a demonstration at a polling place on a day where some citizen initiative involving guns is on the ballot, that’s also perfectly kosher.

        1. “If a bunch of NRA guys want to open carry as part of a demonstration at a polling place on a day where some citizen initiative involving guns is on the ballot, that’s also perfectly kosher.”

          That is nice. But you know as well as I do that is not the standard. If the NRA did that, Holder would make a federal case out of it. He only didn’t here because in his mind there are different rules for blacks and whites. And that is wrong.

        2. Probably a dead thread, but if you read this:
          I’m gonna make a prediction. Either you’re not white, you’re batman, or you’ve simply lived waaaay longer than your survival skills warrant. I usually find you quite convincing, but in this case you’re fucking nuts. If you are white and have a family, for their sake, don’t ever go waking through a large group of black men with the cries of “kill crackers” coming from somewhere in the middle.

          1. John, that goes for you too.

    4. and telling the black, republican poll watcher he was a “traitor to his race”?

  35. Funny how this hyping of the DOJ failure shows how partisan anyone noting it is, yet Weigel’s constant hyping of every negative aspect of the right doesn’t show any such thing. It’s almost like there’s a double standard or something.

  36. Are the NBPP a serious threat to the Republic?

    Of course not.

    Is an explicitly rac(ial)ist DOJ a threat to the Republic.

    I kind of think so, yes.

    Is blubbering on about the NBPP partisan hackitude?


    Does that fact that some people are blubbering on about the NBPP have any relevance whatsoever to the mounting evidence of rac(ial)ism at DOJ?


    Are people trying to distract from the DOJ scandal by saying “Hey, look over there – partisan hackery!” helping, hurting, or just indulgin on their very own partisan hackery?

    No, yes, and yes.

    1. iirc,
      The Bush DOJ did not find this incident worth much notice. Based on the facts I have seen, the decision was based on the fact that this was a minor incident, not a race-based decision…it was a “why waste tax payer dollars on these fools” decision.

      Other similar cases involving white people HAVE been dropped in recent history (Minuteman with a gun intimidating hispanic voter, for instance).

      I just don’t see this revealing an important trend in the DOJ.

      Maybe I am missing something, but I do think this is a much ado about nothing case.

      1. they had already won a default judgement. So there was no need to drop the case or waste anymore tax payer money

      2. “Other similar cases involving white people HAVE been dropped in recent history (Minuteman with a gun intimidating hispanic voter, for instance).”

        What case was that? Can you please provide a link to the story?

        And the big deal is not so much one guy in Philadelphia. The big deal is that Holder has said that as a matter of policy DOJ will not pursue voter intimidation cases where the people being intimidated are whites. That is pretty shocking.

        1. “Holder has said that as a matter of policy…”

          Likewise, I would need a link to that quote regarding that policy. Where is he on record saying that?

          As for “default win”, well sure…but that leads to other expenditures related to sentences, serving warrants, etc…resources go towards continuing to pursue this case. DOJ decided the case didn’t warrant the resources, as far as I can tell.

        2. November 8, 2006, Austin American-Statesman

          In Arizona, Roy Warden, an anti-immigration activist with the Minutemen, and a handful of supporters staked out a Tucson precinct and questioned Hispanic voters at the polls to determine whether they spoke English.

          Armed with a 9mm Glock automatic strapped to his side, Warden said he planned to photograph Hispanic voters entering polls in an effort to identify illegal immigrants and felons. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund reported the incident to the FBI.

          Not pursued by DOJ.

          1. Was he shouting “kill spics”?

    2. “the mounting evidence of rac(ial)ism at DOJ?”

      Speaking of which, here some more evidence:

      ” Christian Adams, a former career Justice Department lawyer who resigned recently to protest political interference in cases he worked on, made some news yesterday in testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

      “As expected, he claimed that Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an Obama appointee, overruled a unanimous recommendation by six career Justice attorneys for continued prosecution of members of the New Black Panther Party on charges of voter intimidation in an incident I detailed here yesterday. But Mr. Adams leveled an even more explosive charge beyond the Panther case. He testified that last year Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes made a jaw-dropping announcement to attorneys in Justice’s Voting Rights section. She said she would not support any enforcement of a key section of the federal ‘Motor Voter’ law — Section 8, which requires states to periodically purge their voter rolls of dead people, felons, illegal voters and those who have moved out of state.

      “According to Mr. Adams, Justice lawyers were told by Ms. Fernandes: ‘We’re not interested in those kind of cases. What do they have to do with helping increase minority access and turnout? We want to increase access to the ballot, not limit it.”

  37. A (black) republican poll watcher claimed he was intimidated and among other things, called a “traitor to his race.”

    This seems to be lost in every media report.

    It would seem to me that anyone who cares about the voting process being honest, would not approve of the people who are there to witness the voting process not be subjected to such abusive, intimidating language.

    Whether or not Fox News is making too big a deal about the NBP, is neither here nor there. It shouldn’t matter whether the guy doing the intimidation is part of a organization that is of legitimate concern or not. Shit, it doesnt matter if he is even part of an organization.

    This isn’t about Fox News. Its about whether or not the DOJ dropped a case it had already won(because the defendants didnt even care enough to show up to court) for political and/or racial reasons.

  38. All racists are people, therefor, all people are racists.

  39. And PS, Weigel claims the NAACP “decided not to press the issue”.

    Is he a full fledged Democratic Party hack now? Or is he incapable of understanding anything?

    They are putting the motion to its board in October, you know that month just before the November elections? They’re saving the issue for when it will have greater impact on their goals: getting more Democrats elected.

    But Dave’s conclusion is that the NAACP is backing down, and it’s the Tea Partiers who are unreasonable. Just another day at the office for Dave, digging up a new way to disparage the right without actually having to take a position.

  40. The big story isn’t about the NBPP ? it’s about a justice department that decides cases based upon race as opposed to the law.

    Lady Justice wears a blindfold for a reason.

    Of course there are always nutters and I certainly don’t believe that the NBPP is representative of the left, but a justice department with race based enforcement is a big deal. Period.

  41. Another “Reason” idiot who dismisses this Black Panther Party stuff. It’s not a scheme to gain votes, it’s genuine outrage.

  42. A little late, but… *siiiigh*

    This story exists for one reason only: to keep up the FOX News/Rush Limbaugh narrative about how Obama is just the president of black people and wants to oppress white people.

    The fact that this story is completely trumped up is irrelevant. The people it’s meant to reach don’t care about whether things are true, just whether they feed their racial fear.

    Can we get out of the 1960s?

  43. Moynihan beclowns himself by comparing the NAARLCP’s condemnation of the Tea Party as racist to Megyn Kelly’s flared-nostril coverage of some racist black nutjobs in Philly. The comparison to the breathless media coverage of the “Hutaree militia” is much closer to the mark. Except of course that the racist Black Panther types are in the street in Philly, with a megaphone, calling for the killing of whites and “their white babies”.

    Michael should attempt to clarify his analogy by imagining in a future column just what Eric Holder’s DOJ would do if some Stormfront members held a rally in the street in Kansas City and called for the killing of blacks and their black babies.

    As an exercise in fantasy, it would be fun to try and project that. After all, if the clownish Hutaree guys were worthy of a multi-state, Federal law enforcement roundup and prosecution, what level of assault would this inspire? I am picturing Apache helicopters and drones with Hellfire missiles…

  44. Yawn … Anyone who espouses a viewpoint that disagrees with the current liberal/progressive ideology is deemed to be racist/phobic/etc.

    What was once an effective tactic has become tired, lazy and ineffective.

  45. Shouldn’t that be the “African-American Panther Party”

    NB: The “Tea Party” isn’t a political “party”, though there is the “Boston Tea Party” which is a political party.

    Therefore, there is no organization known as the “Tea Party” … it represents a movement, like the “Civil Rights Movement” only the “Tea Party Movement” represents ALL citizens and their civil rights.

  46. Henry Rollins is a short little man.

    We’re gonna have a tea party tonight (All right)

    We’re gonna have a tea party all right (Tonight)

  47. This is just a smear campaign, but let?s assume its true that although there is nothing racist in the Tea Party platform they are closet racists with a hidden agenda.
    They are being accused of being racist by openly racist organizations: the NAACP, black caucus members and the general race grievance industry.
    I find it so insane that I wonder if it?s me who?s insane, and if there is a pill or an electroshock treatment that could make me see the light.

  48. Its ovious that the NAACP is looking for others to blame as to why OBAMA polls are falling and their membership is also falling

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.