I've read many tea party members and supporters decrying and denying allegations of racist thoughts or intentions in their rather vitriolic opposition to both the Democratic party and the Obama administration. They are wondering where these opinion might arise from, in other words, how we got here.
Lets review.
Republican and conservative leaders and corporate interests created and deployed the strategy of attempting to intimidate members of congress by shouting in town hall meetings. This has the effect of increasing media attention and simultaneously stifling debate and the exchange of ideas. It also gives the seriously unhinged a venue and an outlet for their fears, which by the way were implanted by the same parties who now exploit them. This was the watershed moment for the end of civility.
Out of that impulse and bolstered by long-established overt racism in certain areas of the country and the visual distaste of seeing a person of color address a joint session of congress as President of the United States, Joe Wilson shouted out his now infamous invective.
We all watched as Republican after Republican dismissed or otherwise stepped on the toes of Rush Limbaugh, one of the most bellicose and intolerant voices alive in conservative thought today, only to crawl back, kneel and figuratively "kiss his ring" (another word comes to mind...but I digress). This indicates to any objective observer that it is Limbaugh and Fox News who are leading the Republican party, setting the agenda and talking points, not the other way around.
It is Republicans who have called a bill passed by the majority of both houses of Congress, by members of Congress each elected by a majority in their districts, "an unconscionable abuse of power," "a violation of the presidential oath," and "the end of representative government." Speaking in such terms is both patently false and irresponsible. It does have the affect of demonizing the duly elected government of the United States and convincing those people whose grasp of civics and government is less than stellar, that the Democratic leadership and the administration are doing something nefarious, which also is not true.
It has been Republicans who have spoken of secession while campaigning for office in their home states. It was a Republican who chose a (patently unqualified in my opinion) Vice-Presidential candidate whose husband belonged to a secessionist movement in Alaska. It has been Republicans who have lately chosen to ignore the long-standing rules of decorum in the Congress by bringing their town hall meeting strategy into the chambers.
It was Fox News (Republicans) who promoted and sometimes funded Tea Party gatherings. It was Republicans that were invited to speak at these events and allowed to spew their particular brand of racial hatred and intolerance to those people assembled there. It was at tea parties and other right-wing events where guns were very much in evidence, another attempt to threaten and intimidate the public and ramp up fears against the government.
It has been Republicans (and often, the Republican leadership) who have accused their political opponents of being communists, Marxist, fascists, socialists, and totalitarians. It was right-wing militia and extremist groups the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) warned the country about in the first part of this year. It was a right-wing militia with the goal of murdering police officers in a bid to start a war against the "anti-Christ," a label such groups and tea party supporters are fond of applying to President Obama and the Pope.
Several militia groups have the stated goal of starting a "race war" in the United States and have tied such a war to "the rapture" or the "second coming of Christ." Glenn Beck, yet another mouthpiece for conservative Republicans has called the President of the United States a "racist (which likely hasn't been true since Ronald Reagan left the office) who seems to hate white people." Who was that dog whistle moment for?
The governor and attorney general of Virginia removed civil rights protection for gays and lesbians in the state. Newt Gingrich opined that the Democrats will regret their decision to push for comprehensive health care reform, saying "They (Democrats) will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years with the enactment of civil rights legislation in the 1960s." Who was that statement meant for? Day's later he was backing up from that statement as fast as his little legs could carry him, but he got it out there.
Can you discern a pattern yet?
No Republicans are countering these statement of this behavior. Why? Because most of the moderates have been purged from the party. There are many very good reasons why so many see the Republicans and the Tea Party movement as racist, intolerant, and more akin to the right-wing death squads in El Salvador than to the party of Lincoln.
It is the same tendency and lack of responsibility that lead to the death by suicide of 15 year-old Phoebe Prince. These things are connected. If you can't see how, you have really got yourself a problem. This is the kind of behavior we are modeling for our young people. Neither is this racially suspect tilt to the Republican party a new phenomenon. Check out this article entitled "Message to America from the Racist Republican Regime" from 2003 by Jackson Thoreau.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/01/10_racist.html
As long as the people of the Tea Party stand beside racists and extremists while failing to repudiate their messages, it makes it virtually impossible to receive any other message or characterization. Don't then be surprised when you are labeled racist or extremist.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 52
Good stuff.
You may disagree with that statement, but it is not intrinsically a racist statement. It's just (in this case) one person's stated opinion. Nevertheless, someone inevitably responds to it with a statement like "Well you're just a racist $#@!"! And you want to talk about vitriol?
That is why I have a problem with how loosely that accusation flies around these days. People are using it as a political argument in lieu of actual thought or discussion, and in situations where it makes no sense whatsoever to even make the accusation.
I won't even get into how race centered liberal politics are. That's my other problem with using "racist!" as a political argument. People accuse the Teapublicans or whoever of being racists, but there's plenty of racism coming off both sides. That doesn't make statements like "You're a racist #$@!" valid political arguments, but again -- that is the pattern I picked up on and that is what I have a problem with.
I guess I just think that if someone is going to try and "argue" a political viewpoint, they ought to try making a statement that actually makes sense rather than toss more vitriol around. *shrug*
Democrats advocate for women and all minorities, not just whites.
Many of us who are white and Democrat agree that is how we need to be as a nation.
So you can also state that Democrats are feminist based.
Equal rights for all.
But correct me if I am wrong.
They were calling it "reverse discrimination" back in the Clinton years. Same thing as racism -- you're discriminating based on skin color, and in some cases sex as well.
Equal rights for all indeed.
The pattern that I discern more often is that the charge of racism comes from the right, not the left. In this case, it often seems to serve the purpose of a preemptive strike, an urge to label others before possibly facing being the recipient of such a charge.
Liberal politics seem race centered to you because they are often about social justice. In the context of our shared history, racial issues often loom large in such discussions, if not as the subject, than as an analogy for sexism, gender bias, or some other discrimination.
You can pretend it isn't a recurring theme if you like... I certainly wish it weren't, it astounds me greatly... or you can pretend I'm making it up... but the fact is that is what passes for political argument in some peoples' small minds.
People act like assuming someone else is a racist makes it automatically so. It doesn't, and I for one get sick of them acting that way.
I get the point about social justice. I just don't believe that the racial and ethnic discrimination inherent in some liberal politicians' pet projects is going to solve the problem of racism in society as a whole. It's just more racial discrimination.
Seems kinda hypocritical to me to embrace politics like that and then scream "racism!" when someone does nothing more vicious than disapprove of your favorite politician.
Republicans do an excellent job of lying that democrats focus on Demographics. Yes, we do, Here is why.
Take lenders who would red-line an entire area for loans, if that area included African Americans. Never mind that most, yes, most had jobs and good credit histories. Never mind that there was no history of defaults, just a prejudical idea that there would be defaults.
Now we come to one of the lies about the economic collapse.
These loans were so successfully that entire data bases were developed and loans were made to anyone. The Lie: The government made them make bad loans. Not so, those lenders were braking all lending rules.
The community Investment act said, lend to the buyers with good credit and good income who lived in or who were buying in those areas.
Do you believe the lie? That a few hundred million in loans to credit worthy minorities broke down the entire world's financial system?
Demographics,
Um yes and directed at Unions who would not allow minority members.
Saying hey you have to allow some minority members.
Excluding someone from the labor force than calling them lazy is a real dirty trick.
Redistricting for political elections.
Sure if you are racist and want to keep all the power you split up the minority vote as a way to exclude them.
So yes Democrats pushed for another kind of re-districting to allow minority to gain some power. Why were you afraid, they were a Minority?
Republicans focused on Demographics far more strongly, but their focus was intended to prevent any African-Americation entry into political office, colleges and universities, or good jobs.
You can see it as someone taking a job away from a white male, or you can see it as making all jobs subject to equal access and sadly it had to be forced by law.
Go back to 2007...a gatherer writes a post on how she is on food stamps and her parents are on medicaid. she is trying to get disability but is frustrated that she was denied.
Jump to 2008...same gatherer says we cant elected Obama cause he is "scary". I ask her to define scary...considering that the current pres Bush has the US in a war that has no apparent reason, he has ruined our economy, has sold out the people to big corporations and given the superwealthy another tax cut...so what can be scarier than that?
She of cource doesnt answer but another person comes onto the article and tells me that Obama is scary because he wants to give everyone free stuff like healthcare. I reply that if you pay taxes and receive a service from those taxes then by definition it isnt FREE....examples: libraries, roads, bridges. He then counters with: then Obama wants to give those like him other free stuff. I ask who is those and what does "other free stuff" consist of. To which I am told that I dont know what I am talking about and they are not going to waste any more time talking to me.
Now during this time I see several "Golden Negro" pings and comments from the self proclaimed non-racists like these 2 above.
Jump to 2009. I see this person and others(one actually manifested flu like psychosomatic symptoms upon learning of Obamas victory) saying that our COUNTRY IS RUINED. Obama hasnt even taken office yet but our country is doomed.
2010
The lies of Obama. If I had a dime for every time I saw this one...I would have enough to buy a happy meal.
One of Obamas LIES.
Prior to announcing his candadacy for POTUS in 2006 or 07 Obama was asked by some journalist if he would ever run for Pres and he told them no.
LIE...ON OBAMAS 3RD GRADE PAPER HE WAS SUPPOSED TO LIST WHAT HE WANTED TO BE AND HE SAID PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
Now I realize that people like Mr Logic think they are being clever disguising their racism with words like scary and elitist but the rest of us arent so dumb.
You call Republicans liars for claiming that Dems focus on racial demographics, then turn around and admit Dems focus on racial demographics. That means it isn't a lie. Are you even reading what you write here?
I don't see it as anyone taking jobs away from anyone else. I see it as certain people being barred from the job/service because of their skin color. I don't know why you say I can see it as "equal access", because that certainly does not constitute equal access. It's racism that is, as you say, forced by law.
And no, for the record, I don't believe everything the Republicans say any more than I do the Democrats. Neither party represents me any more.
I realize that would hamper your ability to pigeonhole me into one of your neat little stereotypes, but hey... just assuming the opposition says and thinks a certain way is what liberals do, isn't it?
On second thought, thanks Lori. You made my point for me.
That is talking "about" me, not "to" me. And it's exactly the sort of assumptive argument that I see repeatedly from the left, as when I was addressing the strange and unfounded accusations above.
Yes you are angry that laws were passed making EXCLUSION from education and the workplace based on race. You are using the arguments that racists use, while you insist that you have a good and reasonable reason to object to laws that prevented racism in employment and education and politics.
I think it is awful that this was necessary,(LAWS) to counter racism in employemnt and education. It was, It still is.
Racism seems to be winning again. And you and other working class whites don't know who the real enemy is.
Yes, I make typos and don't always catch them.
So my first sentence about Republicans and lies about Democrats and Demographics.
So here is how I meant to type that first line:
Republicans do an excellent job of lying(about the reason) that democrat focus on Demographics. Yes, we do, Here is why.
It did provide you with an excuse to avoid the topics I had in my comment.
You don't admit the discrimination that existed, and still exists.
I never denied that discrimination existed before, so why do you say I won't admit it? It's a matter of fact that discrimination existed before and still exists, but fighting it with more discrimination? I just have trouble seeing that as the solution. It doesn't seem logical to me. Of COURSE racism existed before and it still exists, but it exists on both sides, so why pretend that one group (Republicans) own the concept lock stock and barrel? And what on earth makes anyone think that passing such discrimination into law is going to make discrimination go away?
Speaking of preexisting discrimination, wasn't it the Democrats trying to bar blacks from voting in the Deep South?
Again, you assert that Rebupicans are lying about Democrats focusing on demographics while again admitting that they do indeed focus on them. I'll have to assume you mean then that Republicans are lying about the reasons for it.
All I'm saying is it doesn't make sense to instigate racist political policies in order to combat racism. That just makes you go from discriminating against one group to discriminating against another. You claim that these laws prevented racism, but it is clear they did no such thing or else it wouldn't even be such an issue anymore.
They had no trouble flipping Republican after the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
I didn't say Republicans invented racism. I said Nixon, Regan, Bush, Bush, all used race to get elected by working class whites.
No one can deny the all white Republican political conventions and the all white tea bag partier demonstrations. Nor the Republican support of the Tea bag partiers. Elected Republicans speak at their gatherings.
Now there is a HUGE panic. The whites are already outnumbered in
California, Florida, Texas. . . .what are you going to do, keep raging about anti-discrimination laws?
I have never seen a law that bans the hiring of whites.
Nor have you. Having quotas, which I hate as well, and which were only imposed on organizations existing on tax payer money,
Police
Fire,
Defense contractors
Trade Unions, (they do work on government projects)
FACT
Perhaps you can explain until there were strong anti-discrimination laws.
There were only white men in those organizatons.
To me, as a person, the color of a man's skin just isn't an issue and never has been. Other people focus on it and hate people for it. You can't keep them from doing it no matter how many laws you pass. It's a personal choice people make on an individual basis, not as a bloc of demographic samplings.
That's why I object to politics that focus on that, and why I object to "racism!" being tossed out there like it's a valid argument to someone's politicial views. It isn't.
What my post tries to point out is how reasonable people can come to the conclusions that the current configuration of the Republican party and a large segment of the people who identify with the tea party movement subscribe, either by active participation or tacit approval, to the views and values expressed by the leaders and speakers they have chosen.
When you put the Democratic and Republican parties side by side, the distinction is even more stark. Look at the national conventions. The lack of diversity in the Republican crowd is symptomatic. There is a reason for that visual, and the reason is that the Republican party has actively run against the interests of many people of color, even while trying to invite them into the party. From the Civil Rights and Voting Rights act to the Health Care Reform bill, the Republican party has been against efforts to extend the privileges their members have enjoyed to others, particularly to minorities.
This is one reason they are so reluctant to jettison RNC chairman Michael Steele. They desperately need that dark face on television and on podiums around the country to essentially give them cover. The sad truth is, even if 35% of Republicans were people of color, their policies (and recently their tactics as well) would still put them on the wrong side of history.
Your personal views really don't matter as to the validity of my post. I'm talking about how much of the country views the Republican party and the Tea Party movement. I certainly don't recall labeling either group as racist in my post, but rather tried to explain why people could be making such a charge.
Please note that for measure after measure and policy after policy, Republicans who were not only in favor of these policies and measures but actually proposed many of them were, after the historic election of the first black president, suddenly opposed to these same measures. The very first time Barack Obama came to Republican legislators, both figuratively and literally, they were told by their leadership to vote no and reject everything that he proposed. The entire country was able to see what was happening in real time. Do you think we couldn't understand what was happening or what the motivations for that action might well be?
Do you remember the video and interviews shot at the McCain/Palin political rallies? Do not now insult our intelligence by suggesting that people are pulling charges of racism out of thin air. Racism may not be a valid argument to someone's political views, but it is obviously a powerful motivator.
Stupid of them to try to deny it.
Teaparty is funded and supported by the same wealth (Koch one of the biggest supporters) that owns the Republican party.
The message is definitely racist. Your mone is going to be used to support poor African Americans.
The idiot tea bag partiers never stop to notice, the money also supports them and their own families.
When the Republicans are raging against "entitlement" programs the tea bag partiers think they mean welfare for African Americans and Illegal Immigrants, that is how the rhetoric is designed.
The world's largest "entitlement" program is Social Security/Medicare and that is the program the Republicans intend to kill.
You have actually bought into this nonsense? This is the PEOPLE standing up against big government, big debt and big taxes.
"Out of that impulse and bolstered by long-established overt racism in certain areas of the country and the visual distaste of seeing a person of color address a joint session of congress as President of the United States, Joe Wilson shouted out his now infamous invective."
How do you get to assign motives of racism for Wilson shouting out LIAR, especially when it was proved that he was lying, in that bill illegal alieans would have received Health Care, not that they don't already.
"This indicates to any objective observer that it is Limbaugh and Fox News who are leading the Republican party, setting the agenda and talking points, not the other way around."
Ah, the Lefts hatred of any voice that disagrees with their own. Free Speech for all that agree with the commies because the ends justifies the means. However, they are actually listening to the MAJORITY of Americans.
"It does have the affect of demonizing the duly elected government of the United States and convincing those people whose grasp of civics and government is less than stellar, that the Democratic leadership and the administration are doing something nefarious, which also is not true."
Not listening to the MAJORITY of Americans who did NOT want THIS bill and using a parliamentary trick, in a way it was never intended, ask Bird who wrote the law, is unbelievably arrogant. It was President Obama , then Senator who said you can not get your agenda through and a 51 vote and be able to govern. We will see if he was right.
"It was Fox News (Republicans) who promoted and sometimes funded Tea Party gatherings. It was Republicans that were invited to speak at these events and allowed to spew their particular brand of racial hatred and intolerance to those people assembled there. It was at tea parties and other right-wing events where guns were very much in evidence, another attempt to threaten and intimidate the public and ramp up fears against the government."
First I did not know Fox News had a party? The brining up of the talking point on the one event where someone carried a gun openly, where it was legal to do so, tips your hand you are not informed, this is just talking points. If you where informed, you would have know that was a Black American so I guess he was a racist and hates white people?
As to the Republicans speaking at some events, I watched them and know people that were there, there was nothing racial discussed. Unless you are one of thoss Left wing socialist/marxists that believe that anyone who wishes to go back to following the TRUE INTENT of the Constitution and do not believe in "social justice", that makes us racist? Yes, we do not believe in redistribution of wealth and neither did those who created the Constitution. Face it everything the Central Government does right now is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, except collecting income taxes thanks to the 16th amendment. Capitalism did not fail, we are not currently a capitalist nation. We have been a psuedo-socialist nation. The Judiciary has given the Government UNCONSTITUTIONAL powers that were NEVER intended by the people who wrote the Constitution.
This is a good site to understand the commerce clause. The abuse of this clause has given the central government almost unlimited power. every single bureaucracy, welfare, social security, medicare, foreign aid, disater relief to the states, public works, etc are all unconstitutional because they did not amend the constitution. The founding fathers that created the Constitution was clear as to how the constitution could be changed for future needs, it was not through the judiciary, it was through the amendment process; which requires 3/4ths of the states and 2/3rds of congress. This can be best displayed by James Madison's Veto of the Public works bill James Madison is rightly considered the father of The Constitution and no Jefferson did not write The Constitution he was busy in France as our Ambassador. Many people from each state of the Confederation debated for Months to come up with our Constitution, at the time our govt. was The Articles of Confederation.
I am tired of typing, can you see a pattern yet?
I know this author will not read the information presented or learn a dang thing, because he wants a country of "social justice" which is another name for communism and means we all get to suffer equally.
You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy.
You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed.
You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.
You didn't get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.
You didn't get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said illegal war.
You didn't get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq .
You didn't get mad when you saw the Abu Grahib photos.
You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people.
You didn't get mad when the national debt doubled under the previous President from $5.674 trillion to $10.024 trillion.
You didn't get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans and the President lied about it.
You didn't get mad when we didn't catch Bin Laden in Tora Bora.
You didn't get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed.
You didn't get mad when we let a major US city drown!
You didn't get mad when the deficit hit the trillion dollar mark.
You finally got mad when.. when... wait for it...............
When the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick.
Yes! Illegal wars, lies, corruption, torture, stealing your tax dollars to make the rich richer, are all ok with you, but helping other Americans... well that makes me mad!
Instead of objectively looking at the legitimate arguments on the other side, partisans (like you) think that proving your opponents hypocrites passes as a valid argument in support of Obamacare.
Your original post has some small grains of truth regarding the Republican party's hypocrisy. But on the whole, your post is just another collectivist exercise in rounding a group of people and labeling them - to satisfy your argument.
Socialist
Government take over
Big spending
The poor(read AfricanAmerican/Illegal Immigrant) will get free care.
I disagree with the reasoning, it is gross exaggeration.
And you did not voice any of them when Medicare Prescription Plan D was passed. The unfunded trillion dollar disaster of Dubya's Adm.
I, yes a Democrat, think you poor white people voting against this need to rethink the source of your income/food stamps/unemployment benefits/free lunch for your children at school/Medicaid to supplement your parents/ Medicare/special education teachers/for your children
All solicist government programs that benefit the gather.com conservataives, and now more of you will be able to have Medicaid, the free medical coverage.
"You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President. "
Again misinformed, the Supreme court sent it back to the Florida supreme court who made a bad ruling.The Constitution of Florida clearly said it MUST be certified by the date whats her name stopped the counting. So, Gore got extra time illegally and after the election debacle was finally over, the news agency counted it for months and Gore still would have lost.
"You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy. "
Your bias is evident, I was a critic of the Bush administration and Bush is not a Conservative, But they certainly had input, you ASSuME they made energy policy as you were not in the room. But, imagine energy companies having inpu0t on energy policy, maybe they should have consulted you? Also, those Energy Companies are the ones making solar panels.
"You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed. "
Well, more misinformation, she HAD been a covert agent, but she was not a covert agent at the time. This is why there were no such charges made only a charge of perjury, which always happens with a failed independent prosecutor investigation. That said if it was proven Chenney or Bush had anything to do with it I would still have been pissed.
Were you pissed when Clinton perjured himself and and was not prosecuted for it?
"You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed. "
yup, are you mad Obama is id doing exactly what Bush did and the Patriot act has not been repealed?
"
You didn't get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us. "
Which one? The one with the 17 U.N. Sanctions against it? You guys love the U.N., I want out.
"You didn't get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said illegal war."
Hmm, did you get mad at Obama's almost 900 billion dollar stimulus bill? I got mad at Bush's too. How about the 3.6 trillion budget? how abhout the Dems raising the debt ceiling to 14.8 trillion?
Are you mad at the lies about the new health care bill saving us money? Will you be mad if it turns out to cost us money?
"You didn't get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq .
You didn't get mad when you saw the Abu Grahib photos."
I did.
"You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people."
I do not consider it torture, we water board our military pilots and special forces are we torturing them?
"You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people."
Actually I was mad about it and your boy broke that record already! How do you like him now?
"You didn't get mad when we didn't catch Bin Laden in Tora Bora."
I was disappointed, but I could not get made or blame anyone as I was not present.
"You didn't get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed."
I was and I wrote letters, emails and made phone calls over it.
"You didn't get mad when we let a major US city drown!"
Actually it was the governor's fault for not allow them in right away, but disaster aid is unconstitutional.
I was mad about the buses sitting in a parking lot the mayor did not deploy.
I was mad that because we let those people live in the hell that is the welfare entitlement culture, they all just sat there and waited for someone to help them instead of evacuating, when told to do so THREE days ahead of time!
"You didn't get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans and the President lied about it."
It was not illegal and he was wire tapping to get info about oversees persons. Any information on that call pertaining to the U.S. citizen could never be used in the courts as they had no warrant for the U.S. Citizen.
"You didn't get mad when the deficit hit the trillion dollar mark."
You are repeating yourself, yes I did.
"When the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick."
They already could see a doctor, you can pay to see a doctor and if you are poor there are clinics and no one can be turned away from any hospital. This is why illegal aliens have shut down hundreds of hospitals in the southwest.
That said it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, if they amended the Constitution, I would not be mad only disappointed.
See, I told you he would not read up on the truth about all these social programs being unconstitutional. The truth is the left are too lazy to help anyone themselves so they relegate CHARITY to the government.
I hate both parties, but I despise Socialist commie bastards hiding behind benign words like liberal and progressive, tell the truth! You hate capitalism, you hate America, you hate the Constitution and mostly you hate the people who wrote it wrongly confusing them as racist as well.
The left never let's the facts get it the way of a good name calling!
I hope you enjoyed our little debate, but I am done with this ridiculous thread.
WOW are you super super dooper wrong !!!
Sounds just like a John Bircher
We get to assign motives of racism to Joe Wilson because he knew very well what was expected of him in a joint session addressed by the president and we know very well the historical context of racism in South Carolina. It's not a stretch.
We could debate your assertion that the listeners of Rush Limbaugh constitute a majority of Americans, but that is not the point. The point is that a majority of Americans voted to elect Barack Hussain Obama to the presidency of the United States.
I also understand the coded word "arrogant" used in this context. Your objection is noted. Use your vote and change the outcome next time.
If you don't realize that Roger Ales and Rupert Murdoch have a political agenda and affiliation, you have had your head buried in the sand for a very long time.
I am aware that it was a black man who openly carried his assault weapon to the meeting in question, indeed I have a photo of him. I don't know whether he was a racist or not. Nor do I know his views on white people. I received no indication one way or another. I do know that stupidity comes in all colors.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I did read your post. It is quite true that I want to live in a nation of social justice. Who wouldn't? But I think even you know that social justice is not communism, but rather a movement towards a socially just world. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality.
Excellent write!
...Unless you are one of thoss Left wing socialist/marxists that believe that anyone who wishes to go back to following the TRUE INTENT of the Constitution and do not believe in "social justice"...Face it everything the Central Government does right now is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, except collecting income taxes thanks to the 16th amendment.
Those who do not speak the truth about this do not give others who need to know a chance to understand the basis of the argument so they can better prepare for it.
Thank you.
j/k
You are intellectually incapable of engaging me in conversation.
Socialists!
Muslims!
Take away my freedoms!
Take away my guns!
Tax my grandchildren!
Born in Kenya!
No, teabaggers aren't paranoid!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Forgive me, but I have to comment on a few things I have read above:
"Take lenders who would red-line an entire area for loans, if that area included African Americans. Never mind that most, yes, most had jobs and good credit histories. Never mind that there was no history of defaults, just a prejudical idea that there would be defaults. "
Please provide a link to a reputable site showing statistics for a certain time period when stating someting as true. Other wise, it is just an opinion.
.
"The Lie: The government made them make bad loans. Not so, those lenders were braking all lending rules."
This quote requires the writer to read a bit of history. I am referring to the congressional budget committees actions starting in 1997 and going forward. One question I have for the writer is: have you ever heard of "no doc" loans? If the answer is truthfully "yes", then we can discuss further. If the answer in "no", then you are, how do I say this.....asserting an opinion as fact
major bank for 30 years.
No doc loans were not part of the
Community Investment Loans. If it is not so, you can provide your link.
Since you are posing as the expert, send a link to the hearings or regulation change that said banks HAD to make
0 doc loans.
Here is teh problem, The Community reinvest ment loans worked.
Bank of America and WElls Fargo both made them and they worked.
Wells Fargo and BAnk of America did not have the problems other lenders who made the illegal, yes illegal loans did fail.
The only reason B of A and Wells took Tarp Money.
1. Wells was told to buy WA MU
2. B of a Was told to buy Merryl Lynch.
Even so it was not just home loans that caused the problem
There was all that Derivitive trading and AIG's transactions on the institutions involved in the crooked loan sales.
Get over it a few hundred million in loans to people with good credit did not bring down the world's financial system.
Greed and crooked illegal lending and trading did.
the loss was $5 Trillion. . . .
I am not going to post all the links. Look it up yourself.
That was 1 1/2 years ago, I don't want to go back and find it all again.
It wouldn't change your mind. You do not want knowledge or facts or you would already know what really happened.
Plese believe me - I am not posing as an expert nor am I an expert in the world of mortgages and finance. I do however understand some of the aspects of the derivitive world and the AIG participation, as well as, credit score requirements to obtain a home loan. Speaking of the AIG deal - whoa! what a deal! Insuring success - what a concept!I also understand the realm of the subprime lending market as it was at the time. These loans, while not being illegal, were IMO terrible for the borower for obvious reasons.
This discussion could go on forever so I will stop and say that hopefully we are back in a world of sanity. I also wish people who made illegal loans were sitting in prison.
Thank you for your reply. Facts ae very important and are to be treasured. I am more than willing to listen and evaluate. The search for knowledge is eternal. Some times when you discuss an issure with someone, you learn something new and fresh.
Sorry