Are Tea Partiers Racist?

[Magnetic Poles]

A new study indicates a stronger tendency.


CLICK HERE for the story in Newsweek.

AND HERE for the NY Times.

From the Newsweek article:

Tea Party sympathizers are whiter, older, wealthier, and more well-educated than the average American. They're "just as likely to be employed, and more likely to describe their economic situation as very or fairly good," according to a summary of the poll.

If Tea Party supporters are doing relatively fine, what are they so riled up about? These studies suggest that, at least in part, it's race. The country that the Tea Partiers grew up in is irrevocably changing. Last month, new demographic data showed that minority births are on the verge of outpacing white births. By 2050, Hispanics are expected to account for more than a quarter of the American population. The Tea Partiers "feel a loss … like their status has been diminished," says David Bositis of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, which examines issues of race. "If you listen to [their] language, it's always about 'taking our country back.' But it's really not taking the country back as is. It's taking the country back"—as in time.
​

 

[Cutter]

Man, thanks for the enlightening information. I never knew being white, wealthy, and well educated automatically qualified someone as a racist. The liberal media relishes throwing out the racist charge in every instance when it comes to white people. I suppose whites are the only group that are capable of racism, therefore everytime whites associate with other whites they are engaging in racism. After a while this whole racism charge grows so old and tired.

 

[righteousdude2]

We All Know This As the Truth....

... mp is guilty of something far worse than racism... which I will address later in this post!

* But, first and foremost, if being opposed to most of Obama's policy and the health-care bill is racism: I'm guilty!

* If not liking Obama is racist: I'm REALLY guilty!

* If being against amnesty for those who broke our laws by crossing the border is racism: I'm guilty!

* If being a supporter of the Tea Party movement (not a member, yet) is racist: I'm guilty!

But, if mp gets off calling me, and other members of this board a "racist" for our opinions, than he is GUILTY of practicing RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY.

SEE THIS:

Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
Results: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices especially one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

A true bigot is one who lifts his opinions above another's opinions, and treats them with disdain, hatred, and intolerance. I'd say mp is guilty of treating all of his fellow conservative brothers and sisters-in-Christ with "hatred {prejudiced hostility or animosity}", "disdain {a feeling of contempt for someone or something regarded as unworthy or inferior}", and spiritual "intolerance {specifically, the inability to properly metabolize or absorb the substance of another's opinions, or, ideals}" each time he verbally attacks his fellow brothers and sisters-in-Christ by calling them names, belittling their opinions, applying character assassination to strengthen his point of attack, and downgrading their personal accomplishments by poking fun at them.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Shalom,

Pastor Paul :type:

 

[just-want-peace]

Will somebody please check the pasture gate; when this BULL gets out he has a gross habit of leaving his calling cards all over the place!

Seriously, MP you are bringing into question your reasoning skills if questions such as this truly have you wondering.

If Tea Party supporters are doing relatively fine, what are they so riled up about?

The answer, in simple terms, is that the way the gov't has been crumbling the cookie since Lincoln (maybe earlier), and this administration in particular, then in a very short time the ones that HAVE BEEN doing well, will no longer be! And whether you want to admit it or not, unless you for some reason become one of the "IN CROWD", however well you are doing now, will be -- was!

Course this is just one aspect of the "unrest", but then you already know that don't you??? Unless of course you are truly off in la-la land. :BangHead:

As for the racist crap --- why can you libs not respond to virtually any post sans this accusation, or make some complaint against "other than libs" with out hurling the same garbage?

If you really want to throw the opposition off guard, try responding to actual stated facts in lieu of taking another hike down the ole rabbit trail of RACE. (This trail IS worn down to bedrock, it's been used so much) Think y'all could ever manage that??

 

[Magnetic Poles]

But, if mp gets off calling me, and other members of this board a "racist" for our opinions, than he is GUILTY of practicing RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY.
:type:

More of your lies. I never said such. Apparently you cannot address the article, but would rather resort to your typical ad hominems. I expected no better from you, selfrighteousdude. I didn't call you or anyone else a racist...I posted a couple of articles for comment ON THE CONTENT OF THE ARTICLES. But you seem unable to get past your hatred to have any rational response. You are a sad case indeed.

 

[righteousdude2]

Ah, But Your Memory Fails You, Bub...

More of your lies. I never said such... selfrighteousdude - more bigotry on your behalf . I didn't call you or anyone else a racist (look below)...

04-11-2010, 04:27 PM
Magnetic Poles
9,000 Posts Club Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,245

"Yessirreebob, it's all them dang brown people bringing about the downfall of the USA. Oh yeah, them and Obama. Oh ... and Pelosi."
__________________

This is but one of your many attempts at referring to me as a racist. And there are other... but, I guess the other member was right: You are guilty of "Rabbit Trails" where ever you go!!!!:tear: Too bad, you can't do any better. :tear:

 

[Scarlett O.]

From the Newsweek article:

Tea Party sympathizers are whiter, older, wealthier, and more well-educated than the average American. They're "just as likely to be employed, and more likely to describe their economic situation as very or fairly good," according to a summary of the poll.

If Tea Party supporters are doing relatively fine, what are they so riled up about? These studies suggest that, at least in part, it's race. The country that the Tea Partiers grew up in is irrevocably changing. Last month, new demographic data showed that minority births are on the verge of outpacing white births. By 2050, Hispanics are expected to account for more than a quarter of the American population. The Tea Partiers "feel a loss … like their status has been diminished," says David Bositis of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, which examines issues of race. "If you listen to [their] language, it's always about 'taking our country back.' But it's really not taking the country back as is. It's taking the country back"—as in time.
​

MP, this article makes no sense to me.

I've read it several times and here is what I am getting from him (or her).

Tea Party members tend to be white.
White people tend to be wealthy.
Wealthy people tend to be educated.
Educated people tend to have good jobs.
White, wealthy, educated people with good jobs shouldn't complain against the government.

(take a big breath here because we are jumping to a completely UNRELATED fact)

Minorities are increasingly making up the population of the United States.

(TAKE ANOTHER BIG BREATH FOR ANOTHER BIG LEAP JUMPING BACK AGAIN TO CONNECT THE TWO UNCONNECTED FACTS)

Since white, wealthy, educated people with good jobs shouldn't have anything to complain about, they must be upset about the growth in minority representation in this country.

Ergo, they are all racists.

Ergo, the Tea Party which some of them belong to is a racist organization.

Ergo, since the organization is a racist one, the term "taking back our country" mean getting rid of all non-whites, including the President

and

that is why they complain about him.


It's like saying.....

I have an IRA account.
It's made of money.
It's in a bank.
It draws interest.
I don't like it that that I can only contribute $5,000 per year.

(unrelated topic next)

More people are unemployed than ever before. They are not making any money.

(big leap to connect the two unrelated topics)

My disdain for only being allowed to contribute $5,000 per year comes from a fear and disdain for people who have lost their jobs and have no money.

I am afraid that they are coming after my money.

Ergo, I must hate people with no money.

Ergo, I am a bigot and by association, anyone else with an IRA account is a bigot and we are not to be trusted nor taken seriously.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

MP, this article makes no sense to me.

I've read it several times and here is what I am getting from him (or her).

Tea Party members tend to be white.
White people tend to be wealthy.
Wealthy people tend to be educated.
Educated people tend to have good jobs.
White, wealthy, educated people with good jobs shouldn't complain against the government.

(take a big breath here because we are jumping to a completely UNRELATED fact)

Minorities are increasingly making up the population of the United States.

(TAKE ANOTHER BIG BREATH FOR ANOTHER BIG LEAP JUMPING BACK AGAIN TO CONNECT THE TWO UNCONNECTED FACTS)

Since white, wealthy, educated people with good jobs shouldn't have anything to complain about, they must be upset about the growth in minority representation in this country.

Ergo, they are all racists.

Ergo, the Tea Party which some of them belong to is a racist organization.

Ergo, since the organization is a racist one, the term "taking back our country" mean getting rid of all non-whites, including the President

and

that is why they complain about him.


It's like saying.....

I have an IRA account.
It's made of money.
It's in a bank.
It draws interest.
I don't like it that that I can only contribute $5,000 per year.

(unrelated topic next)

More people are unemployed than ever before. They are not making any money.

(big leap to connect the two unrelated topics)

My disdain for only being allowed to contribute $5,000 per year comes from a fear and disdain for people who have lost their jobs and have no money.

I am afraid that they are coming after my money.

Ergo, I must hate people with no money.

Ergo, I am a bigot and by association, anyone else with an IRA account is a bigot and we are not to be trust nor taken seriously.

I think you have missed the point. It is not that all teapartiers are racists...or that it is a racist group...but that they attract a larger than proportional percentage.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

__________________

This is but one of your many attempts at referring to me as a racist. And there are other... but, I guess the other member was right: You are guilty of "Rabbit Trails" where ever you go!!!!:tear: Too bad, you can't do any better. :tear:

Did we get too close to a nerve?

 

[Scarlett O.]

I think you have missed the point. It is not that all teapartiers are racists...or that it is a racist group...but that they attract a larger than proportional percentage.

Alright.

But again, what I am reading is that the author is asserting that largely proportional white means largely proportional racist.

And the author is making that assertion by connecting two unrelated variables.

White, wealthy, educated people have nothing to complain about.

Minority population is increasing.

If white, wealthy educated people ARE complaining, it must be about minority population.

I think the author of this article is spinning facts. And not even very eloquently.

I'm not a Tea Party kind of gal and don't really have a dog in that fight, but I can see where this author isn't using his or her journalistic skills truthfully.

 

[Robert Snow]

Did we get too close to a nerve?

Righteousdude compares Hispanics to "cockroaches" and then proclaims he is not a racist. :laugh:

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Righteousdude compares Hispanics to "cockroaches" and then proclaims he is not a racist. :laugh:

Yep. His self identification did the trick.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Righteousdude compares Hispanics to "cockroaches" and then proclaims he is not a racist. :laugh:

Calling people by the name of an insect is considered hate speech and is one of the aspects of the third step in justifying genocide. I have a friend in Prague who is working on his theological Ph.D. and his thesis is exploring events leading up to genocide. Calling a group of people 'cockroaches' is a very prejudicial expression, an expression of hate ... an expression that no Christian should ever make or feel toward others! There is nothing righteous when it comes to hate speech!

Eight steps to genocide ....

1. Classification: the division into us and them. This is extremely common in human society. While it is not a sign that genocide is on the way, genocide would be impossible without an us and a them.
2. Symbolization: words or symbols are applied to the them: the yellow star that Jews had to wear under Hitler, skin colour, classifications put on ID cards. Again, this is common and is not a sign of genocide, but genocide cannot proceed unless there is some sure way to tell people apart.
3. Dehumanization: the them become pariahs: they are seen as less than human, as animals or a kind of disease. The Tutsis in Rwanda were called cockroaches before they were killed by the thousands. Killing them was no longer murder – it was just ridding the country of something bad. Dehumanizing words, like “gook” and “nigger”, belong to this step. Unlike the first two steps, dehumanization is not common! It is the first sick step on the road to genocide.
4. Organization: To kill people in large numbers you need organization: leaders, followers, a chain of command, duties, meetings, guns, training, hate speeches. Sometimes it is the government that does this, but often it is a paramilitary group that seems to be acting on its own (but which the government is either secretly helping or at least turning a blind eye towards). The killing might start at this stage, but not on a huge scale. Examples: the SS in Nazi Germany, the Ku Klux Klan in America, the janjaweed in Darfur.
5. Polarization: The first people killed in any genocide are not the pariahs themselves but those in the mainstream who speak up for them. The voices in the middle are silenced through threats, arrests or even killings. Now the message of hate goes unchallenged.
6. Preparation: the pariahs are often separated from the rest of the country – into ghettos, camps, reservations or some undesirable part of the country. Their property is taken from them (they are not coming back!). This step leaves them defenceless.
7. Extermination: the mass killings, the genocide proper.
8. Denial: The leaders of the genocide downplay it or tell complete lies and say there never was a genocide. As long as they are in denial the killings can go on.
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/the-eight-stages-of-genocide/

 

[righteousdude2]

If This is True, What Does it Make the Following?

Judges 6:3-5 "... the Midianites, Amalekites and other eastern peoples invaded the country. They camped on the land and ruined the crops all the way to Gaza and did not spare a living thing for Israel, neither sheep nor cattle nor donkeys. They came up with their livestock and their tents like swarms of locusts. It was impossible to count the men and their camels; they invaded the land to ravage it."

Judges 7:12 "... Now the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the sons of the east were lying in the valley as numerous as locusts;"

Jer. 51:14 "... The (AC)LORD of hosts has sworn by Himself: 'Surely I will fill you with a population like (AD)locusts, and they will cry out with shouts of victory over you.'"

OOP'S, does that mean the Spirit of God is racist, too? He caused His Prophets to refer to the enemies of Israel as "locusts!"

Furthermore, let's apply Crabboy's litmus test to the Scripture, and see what it makes the writers out to be???

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Judges 6:3-5 "... the Midianites, Amalekites and other eastern peoples invaded the country. They camped on the land and ruined the crops all the way to Gaza and did not spare a living thing for Israel, neither sheep nor cattle nor donkeys. They came up with their livestock and their tents like swarms of locusts. It was impossible to count the men and their camels; they invaded the land to ravage it."

Judges 7:12 "... Now the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the sons of the east were lying in the valley as numerous as locusts;"

Jer. 51:14 "... The (AC)LORD of hosts has sworn by Himself: 'Surely I will fill you with a population like (AD)locusts, and they will cry out with shouts of victory over you.'"

OOP'S, does that mean the Spirit of God is racist, too? He caused His Prophets to refer to the enemies of Israel as "locusts!"

Furthermore, let's apply Crabboy's litmus test to the Scripture, and see what it makes the writers out to be???

The last time I saw twisting like that was an F-5 tornado in Oklahoma. :laugh:. Nothing like watching someone dangling on the end of their own rope.

 

[Robert Snow]

Judges 6:3-5 "... the Midianites, Amalekites and other eastern peoples invaded the country. They camped on the land and ruined the crops all the way to Gaza and did not spare a living thing for Israel, neither sheep nor cattle nor donkeys. They came up with their livestock and their tents like swarms of locusts. It was impossible to count the men and their camels; they invaded the land to ravage it."

Judges 7:12 "... Now the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the sons of the east were lying in the valley as numerous as locusts;"

Jer. 51:14 "... The (AC)LORD of hosts has sworn by Himself: 'Surely I will fill you with a population like (AD)locusts, and they will cry out with shouts of victory over you.'"

OOP'S, does that mean the Spirit of God is racist, too? He caused His Prophets to refer to the enemies of Israel as "locusts!"

Furthermore, let's apply Crabboy's litmus test to the Scripture, and see what it makes the writers out to be???

You're a pastor and you don't see the difference?

 

[rbell]

Oh, really now?

Great article about the MSM's outright dishonest treatment of the tea party rallies, supporters, etc.:

http://www.mrc.org/specialreports/2010/TeaParty/ExecSumm.aspx


No surprises here...but still:

• Given its demonstrated influence, network coverage of the Tea Party has been minuscule
• Such coverage is piddling compared to that lavished on protests serving liberal objectives. The Nation of Islam’s “Million Man March” in 1995, for example, was featured in 21 evening news stories on just the night of that march — more than the Tea Party received in all of 2009.
• Overall, 44 percent of network stories on the Tea Party (27 out of 61) suggested the movement reflected a fringe or dangerous quality.
• The MSM cast the Tea Party as a gang of angry white people. This, despite the facts...
  • Nearly one in six Tea Partiers are non-white, with education rates that are higher than the general population.
  • More info on demographics can be found HERE.

Also...

The postings of some on this thread would lead one to believe one thing......But here's some info from a guy who uses real statistics in his article:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/...o_respect.html

A USA Today/Gallup poll found that 79 percent of tea party supporters are white — compared with 75 percent of the general population — and 45 percent are women.

Tea partiers aren't all GOP stooges either. The same poll also revealed that 49 percent of tea party supporters are Republican, 43 percent are independent and 8 percent are Democrat. In other words, a majority of tea party members aren't Republican.

What do they want? Well, no one seems to have polled about cross burnings or racial purity tests. But a Winston Group poll found tea partiers united around two core issues: the economy/jobs and reducing the deficit.
In short, the profile of the tea party movement and the concerns of its members aren't that much different from the American people as a whole.

and...

None of this will come as a surprise to anyone who has actually taken the time to go to a tea party event and talk to tea party members rather than rely on willful misrepresentations of them as hillbillies and racists. But those misrepresentations — based (at best) on a handful of incidents (and many of those are spurious at best) at thousands of events involving millions of people — rather than reflecting reality reveal the panicked hope that the tea party will simply disappear...

Funny...MP, Snow, and Crabby never seem very disturbed by outright racist comments by folks like Sharpton, Maxine Waters, and some from MSNBC's loony left.

 

[windcatcher]

Classification: the division into us and them. This is extremely common in human society. While it is not a sign that genocide is on the way, genocide would be impossible without an us and a them.

Symbolization: words or symbols are applied to the them: the yellow star that Jews had to wear under Hitler, skin colour, classifications put on ID cards. Again, this is common and is not a sign of genocide, but genocide cannot proceed unless there is some sure way to tell people apart.

Dehumanization: the them become pariahs: they are seen as less than human, as animals or a kind of disease. The Tutsis in Rwanda were called cockroaches before they were killed by the thousands. Killing them was no longer murder – it was just ridding the country of something bad. Dehumanizing words, like “gook” and “nigger”, belong to this step. Unlike the first two steps, dehumanization is not common! It is the first sick step on the road to genocide.

Organization: To kill people in large numbers you need organization: leaders, followers, a chain of command, duties, meetings, guns, training, hate speeches. Sometimes it is the government that does this, but often it is a paramilitary group that seems to be acting on its own (but which the government is either secretly helping or at least turning a blind eye towards). The killing might start at this stage, but not on a huge scale. Examples: the SS in Nazi Germany, the Ku Klux Klan in America, the janjaweed in Darfur.

Polarization: The first people killed in any genocide are not the pariahs themselves but those in the mainstream who speak up for them. The voices in the middle are silenced through threats, arrests or even killings. Now the message of hate goes unchallenged.

Preparation: the pariahs are often separated from the rest of the country – into ghettos, camps, reservations or some undesirable part of the country. Their property is taken from them (they are not coming back!). This step leaves them defenceless.

Extermination: the mass killings, the genocide proper.
Denial: The leaders of the genocide downplay it or tell complete lies and say there never was a genocide. As long as they are in denial the killings can go on.

Interesting! From classification to pariahs to genocide: Looks like the TEA (which stands for Taxed Enough Already) Party is well on its way to being turned into a 'pariah'.

Everyone seems to be afraid of the TEA Party movement..... Wonder why it keeps receiving the false attacks of media and extreme opinion? I guess... like spaghetti....in a boiling pot...... the accusations keep rolling.... someone keeps tossing the spaghetti to the ceiling to see if something sticks.

 

[targus]

In that it is a well known fact that the radical left (well probably more accurate to just say the left) infiltrated the Tea Party to intentionally make them look bad...

Why are we to trust a poll of Tea Party members?

How do we know that the left did not also pretend to be Tea Party members in answering the poll.

You can't trust a liar.

The left has shown themselves to be liars in this regard.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Oh, really now?


Funny...MP, Snow, and Crabby never seem very disturbed by outright racist comments by folks like Sharpton, Maxine Waters, and some from MSNBC's loony left.

When one of these people or others post on the BB and call people racist names or dehumanizing names I will accuse them. Nice attempt to derail the thread.