Of Tea Party folks and Racial Slurs...

UncleBob

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
http://www.syracuse.com/have-you-heard/index.ssf/2010/04/black_conservatives_who_back_t.html

They’ve been called Oreos, traitors and Uncle Toms, and are used to having to defend their values. Now black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white tea party movement — and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation’s first black president.

I guess I can now paint the entire liberal movement as a bunch of racists since a few of them have used racist terms. That's how it works, right?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']
I guess I can now paint the entire liberal movement as a bunch of racists since a few of them have used racist terms. That's how it works, right?[/QUOTE]

well bob

Barack Obama is a “light-skinned African-American with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”........o wait Harry Reid said that.


racist_democrat_poster.jpg
 
The tea party has been hijacked, it is no longer a party of the people. Now it is being used as a political weapon or an agenda shadow, cointelpro.
 
Yeah the Democratic party and the Republican party of 100 years ago are NOT the same ones they are today.

Oh and I would agree with Reid 100%. Have you seen videos of Obama speaking in black churches as opposed to campaign rallies in PA? Yeah.
 
Obama isn't Black. He acts like a White man most of the time, and he talks like one most of the time too.
 
Hey guys! I got yer false equivalency right here!

I got this thing, and it's exactly like this other thing and I'ma try to convince you of that:
thunder-2L.jpg
 
Still trying to post that Dr. Thunder pic? Shameful, Mr. Vermin, just shameful.

Besides, Obama is a clone of a Rockefeller. I posted that link last week or so.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I love how you took a 100+ year old advertisement to make a point about current liberals.[/QUOTE]

I figured you would get the joke depascal
 
[quote name='SpazX']Who said all of the tea party is racist?[/QUOTE]

While no one (that I know of) has came directly out and said it, quotes like this really drive that idea home...
[quote name='mykevermin']this is not "an isolated incident" anymore than the racism from the Tea Party is.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='mykevermin']Hey guys! I got yer false equivalency right here!

I got this thing, and it's exactly like this other thing and I'ma try to convince you of that:
thunder-2L.jpg
[/QUOTE]

cool deflection bro.
 
There is a racist element to the tea party, they aren't all racist, but they're not all not-racist. It's clear that Obama's race is a driving point for a not-insignificant number of them.

Talk about it like grown ups?
 
Cross posting from the stay class thread:

Gov. Robert F. McDonnell, reviving a controversy that had been dormant for eight years, has declared that April will be Confederate History Month in Virginia, a move that angered civil rights leaders Tuesday but that political observers said would strengthen his position with his conservative base.
The two previous Democratic governors had refused to issue the mostly symbolic proclamation honoring the soldiers who fought for the South in the Civil War. McDonnell (R) revived a practice started by Republican governor George Allen in 1997. McDonnell left out anti-slavery language that Allen's successor, James S. Gilmore III (R), had included in his proclamation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040604416.html

This is something that can't be pooh-pooh'd away as the rantings of a lone nut. Doesn't get much more institutional then that.
 
[quote name='SpazX'] It's clear that Obama's race is a driving point for a not-insignificant number of them.
[/QUOTE]

How is that clear? Did I miss something obvious somewhere or do you have evidence?

I excitedly clicked on this thread thinking that maybe, finally, we had hard video evidence of racism or racist remarks in the tea party gatherings. So far we are soaking up the MSM airwaves with random claims of such without evidence - which I guess shouldn't be surprising.

Dozens, if not hundreds, of video cameras and cell phone cameras can't exaggerate, but people do.
 
[quote name='SpazX']There is a racist element to the tea party, they aren't all racist, but they're not all not-racist. It's clear that Obama's race is a driving point for a not-insignificant number of them.

Talk about it like grown ups?[/QUOTE]

I love it. Have you ever been to a tea party rally? Or are you trusting the media that bases its profitability on INTERESTING news stories. Peaceful rallies aren't enough to catch peoples eyes, but throw in racism and you got some viewers. Stop drinking the koolaid
 
I would be incredibly embarrassed to be associated with a group which worships Sarah Palin. That alone is enough to make me want to go nowhere near those people, never mind that i don't agree with them.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I would be incredibly embarrassed to be associated with a group which worships Sarah Palin. That alone is enough to make me want to go nowhere near those people, never mind that i don't agree with them.[/QUOTE]

I'd be ashamed to be associated with a group that worships any individual.
 
The problem is, when Obama does stuff like personally ordering the assassination of an American citizen, liberals call him out on it.

I don't think there were a huge number of conservatives who were NOT toeing the Bush line. GOP runs a much tighter ship.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I'd be ashamed to be associated with a group that worships any individual.[/QUOTE]

Aren't you a Christian?

Knoell, I'd counter with a question for you. Have YOU every been to a tea party rally? Why do you go to such lengths to defend the group?
 
[quote name='depascal22']Aren't you a Christian?

Knoell, I'd counter with a question for you. Have YOU every been to a tea party rally? Why do you go to such lengths to defend the group?[/QUOTE]

They have not been to my area, but I have spoken to people who have, and I am going to Washington, D.C. very soon.

I defend the group because they are honest Americans fighting the federal governments socialization of the country. Americans are finally waking up to this threat of social justice, and income redistribution, and you people dare deflate the movement by calling them racist?

Wake up, They are standing up for you to keep more of your money, not just theirs.
when will the government draw the line? Don't they take enough from us already?
 
[quote name='Knoell']waking up to this threat of social justice[/QUOTE]

When Obama said "the audacity of hope" he wasn't kidding. Go ahead and look up audacity on the online dictionary. We'll wait.
 
[quote name='camoor']When Obama said "the audacity of hope" he wasn't kidding. Go ahead and look up audacity on the online dictionary. We'll wait.[/QUOTE]

Come on, guy. You can't expect Knoell to go to dictionary.com and type in audacity.

Hell, you can't even expect him to read the rest of this post.

au·dac·i·ty

 /ɔˈdæs
thinsp.png
ɪ
thinsp.png
ti/ Show Spelled[aw-das-i-tee] Show IPA
–noun,plural-ties. 1.boldness or daring, esp. with confident or arrogant disregard for personal safety, conventional thought, or other restrictions.

2.effrontery or insolence; shameless boldness: His questioner's audacity shocked the lecturer.

3.Usually, audacities. audacious acts or statements.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Aren't you a Christian?[/QUOTE]

No, sir.

But, if I were a God-fearing person, I probably wouldn't classify such an almighty, all powerful, all knowing being as an "individual". ;)
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Come on, guy. You can't expect Knoell to go to dictionary.com and type in audacity.

Hell, you can't even expect him to read the rest of this post.[/quote]

Tell him to look up Socialization while he is at it, it is an actual word so he gets points for that but:
sminigo1.jpg
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Threat of social justice? Since when is justice of any kind a threat?[/QUOTE]

I am not sure if you are being facetious, but social justice is not just a phrase, but a well known theology. Just because it has the word 'justice' in it, doesn't automatically make it virtuous. Communism can be argued is a far more "just" method of government too.

From the first two paragraphs in wikipedia (I recommend reading all of it) :
Social justice is the application of the concept of justice on a social scale. The term appeared before the 1800s,[1] including in the Federalist Papers and Edward Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire‎. The idea was elaborated by the moral theologian John A. Ryan, who initiated the concept of a living wage. Father Coughlin also used the term in his publications in the 1930s and the 1940s. The concept was further expanded upon by John Rawls beginning in the 1960s. It is a part of Catholic social teaching and is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Party upheld by green parties worldwide. Some tenets of social justice have been adopted by those on the left of the political spectrum.

Social justice is also a concept that some use to describe the movement towards a socially just world. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity and equality of outcome than may currently exist in some societies.

I can see why people would be against that. It's also easy to see how a philosophy centered on Social Justice could quickly lead to many of the government tendencies and loss of liberties that most libertarians hate.

Many people involved in the social justice movement in the US during the early part of the last century were hailed as heroes in Nazi Germany and/or were so anti-capitalist they were associated with communism.

On the other hand, I respect those that believe in social justice-like philosophies as a valid and 'safe' approach to society. It just happens to be a point of view I don't agree with or want.
 
There is a remarkable irony at the fact that the party who fears and condemns social justice is the party who thinks Christ is on their side.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']There is a remarkable irony at the fact that the party who fears and condemns social justice is the party who thinks Christ is on their side.[/QUOTE]

Are you arguing that Christ ever publicly advocated any form of government or government policy? As far as I'm aware, he only ever discussed the individual.

If you think Jesus was a communist, present your evidence, sir.
 
maybe I wasn't looking in the right spots before, but it seems that Jesus/Christianity have been coming up in our discussions a lot lately
 
^ yep. probably. means the end times are comin'.

[quote name='thrustbucket']If you think Jesus was a communist, present your evidence, sir.[/QUOTE]

social justice ≠ communism.

capitalism as an economic form is more clearly condemned in the bible than homosexuality, by the way.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']^ yep. probably. means the end times are comin'.



social justice ≠ communism.

capitalism as an economic form is more clearly condemned in the bible than homosexuality, by the way.[/QUOTE]
I won't say capitalism is championed in the Bible, but where are you finding it more clearly condemned than homosexuality? I think the Bible is pretty cut and dry on that issue.
 
I'll get around to that later - busy busy this morning.

But the OT does condemn taking a profit from selling what you produce. Societies followed that religiously (haw haw) for centuries. It wasn't until the Calvinists and Pietists emerged that you saw Christian societies develop capitalistic tendencies. More or less the basic premise of Max Weber's "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism."

As for condemning homosexuality, I've always found the "abomination" claim to be hogwash, since Leviticus also proclaims menstruation an abomination. A natural biological condition experienced by women is put on parity with a sexual orientation. So if homosexuality is out (i.e. a damnable offense), then by virtue of that conclusion, being a woman is a damnable offense. We can't pick and choose which abominations are abominations.
 
Profits-is this it?
Leviticus 25:37-You must not lend him money at interest or sell him food at a profit."
That's about the closest I can come to finding profit outlawed in the OT.

Menstruation-Can't find where it's called an abomination. Could you cite it when you get some time?
 
Mylor, Myke mentioned a book a million years ago called "The Year of Living Biblically" it is a really amazing and quick read.
 
msut-by Dobson? I think the cover is a picture of the author with a big gnarly black and gray beard? If that's it, it's near the top of my list of books to get

Looked it up, I'm thinking of Year of Living Like Jesus by Ed Dobson(not the Focus on the Family guy).
http://www.amazon.com/Year-Living-like-Jesus-Discovering/dp/0310247772/ref=pd_sim_b_5

Year of Living Biblically by A.J. Jacobs
http://www.amazon.com/Year-Living-Biblically-Literally-Possible/dp/0743291476

I'm checking it out on Amazon now, thanks
 
leviticus 15:19-30

Hmm. I was certain the word "abomination" was used, but, hey, I own up when I'm wrong.

We could parse over the differences between "unclean" and "abomination" for quite some time and never really hit any agreement at all.
 
I think the whole Jesus/Social Justice discussion is far more interesting than the OT..... Anyone care if we hijack?

I don't have a lot of time either, I'm stealing time at work - but I would just like to say that I think Jesus, as far as government goes, would have believed in theocracy. A theocratic government implementing it's own version of social justice does actually make some sense - as long as everyone was a willing participant.

It is very difficult for me, however, to believe that Jesus would have been an advocate of both completely removing God and religion from government, and at the same time use government as the tool of social justice.
 
I'm not sure that leviticus treats menstruation the same as homosexuality, but it's not really that relevant since anybody using leviticus to justify something is just being a douche.
 
Unclean means they are not able to enter the Tabernacle at that time, but it's only a temporary thing. After certain periods of time(another har har?) they were considered clean again.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I am not sure if you are being facetious, but social justice is not just a phrase, but a well known theology. Just because it has the word 'justice' in it, doesn't automatically make it virtuous. Communism can be argued is a far more "just" method of government too.

From the first two paragraphs in wikipedia (I recommend reading all of it) :


I can see why people would be against that. It's also easy to see how a philosophy centered on Social Justice could quickly lead to many of the government tendencies and loss of liberties that most libertarians hate.

Many people involved in the social justice movement in the US during the early part of the last century were hailed as heroes in Nazi Germany and/or were so anti-capitalist they were associated with communism.

On the other hand, I respect those that believe in social justice-like philosophies as a valid and 'safe' approach to society. It just happens to be a point of view I don't agree with or want.[/QUOTE]

Not to go back to the whole social justice thing, but I am still waiting for JolietJake to respond to this post you made directly confronting what he said.

It seems the people on this forum pick and choose what posts and what part of posts they can pick apart piece by piece instead of debating what they actually said.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Did Jeebus kick the shit out of a moneychangers' table?

What do you think his thoughts on toxic debt would be?[/QUOTE]

He kicked the table over because they were profiting off of the temple. This says nothing besides capitalism should not exist within the church.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I'm not sure that leviticus treats menstruation the same as homosexuality, but it's not really that relevant since anybody using leviticus to justify something is just being a douche.[/QUOTE]

Note to self: Read Leviticus and apply in every situation.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Not to go back to the whole social justice thing, but I am still waiting for JolietJake to respond to this post you made directly confronting what he said.

It seems the people on this forum pick and choose what posts and what part of posts they can pick apart piece by piece instead of debating what they actually said.[/QUOTE]

 
bread's done
Back
Top