The Tea Party reminds me of the kid in the neighborhood that is a sore looser, when he gets his butt whipped by someone who he thinks is inferior he wants to try and pick a fight. He has to fight to save his status amoung the rest of the neighborhood kids instead of saying good game and wait for the next time to play.

 

In much that same way that those that feel (yes I use present tense because no matter how many times it has been disproven there are still many that feel Gore won the 2000 election) the GWB presidency was illigitimate and attacked everything he did. Where are the Cindy Sheehans and the Code Pinkers that were all over Bush? There may be an unprecedented amount of information going out about this president but there is also an unprecedented number of venues available to get information out that weren't there even 8 years ago.

Here is another potential issue with the Tea Party related to some of what has been discussed above - what is the racial make up of the Tea Party? From what I have seen, I would guess Tea Party members are at a minimum 90% Caucasian. When you compound that with these racial miscues like in Iowa, the Tea Party has a problem. In fact the Republican party has a problem in this area and they are compounding it with their strong immigration law attacks. As stated above African Americans are strongly Democrat and Latin Americans are being pushed in the same direction. By becoming hard line on immigration, the fastest growing segment of America is being pushed right into the arms of Democrats. The 95% African American vote Obama got is only half the story. There were also almost 3 million more African American voters in 2008 versus 2004 and you can bet those voters voted Obama. There also were over 1.5 million more Latin American voters in 2008 than 2004 and there is no doubt that number will continue to increase. Even more dramatic, there was a 46% swing by Latinos from Republican to Democrat in 2008. That number is even more meaningful IMO than the increase in African Americans. Meanwhile, white voter turnout was down a little over a million. In total including all minorities, minority turnout was up almost 7 million. Those are staggering numbers. So Obama got both a big turnout and a big percent of that voter turnout in these groups. The Republican party can name all the Mike Steele's and others they want to high posts but the party is dominated by Caucasians. The "whiteness" of the Tea Party and the Republican party is a "problem" they need to fix ASAP and being tough on immigration is not the way to fix it.

Here is another potential issue with the Tea Party related to some of what has been discussed above - what is the racial make up of the Tea Party? From what I have seen, I would guess Tea Party members are at a minimum 90% Caucasian. When you compound that with these racial miscues like in Iowa, the Tea Party has a problem. In fact the Republican party has a problem in this area and they are compounding it with their strong immigration law attacks. As stated above African Americans are strongly Democrat and Latin Americans are being pushed in the same direction. By becoming hard line on immigration, the fastest growing segment of America is being pushed right into the arms of Democrats. The 95% African American vote Obama got is only half the story. There were also almost 3 million more African American voters in 2008 versus 2004 and you can bet those voters voted Obama. There also were over 1.5 million more Latin American voters in 2008 than 2004 and there is no doubt that number will continue to increase. Even more dramatic, there was a 46% swing by Latinos from Republican to Democrat in 2008. That number is even more meaningful IMO than the increase in African Americans. Meanwhile, white voter turnout was down a little over a million. In total including all minorities, minority turnout was up almost 7 million. Those are staggering numbers. So Obama got both a big turnout and a big percent of that voter turnout in these groups. The Republican party can name all the Mike Steele's and others they want to high posts but the party is dominated by Caucasians. The "whiteness" of the Tea Party and the Republican party is a "problem" they need to fix ASAP and being tough on immigration is not the way to fix it.

 

I can't remember the exact date, 2020 or 2050 that American will be more "brown" than it is white - no matter how hard people want to fight that fact.

I can't remember the exact date, 2020 or 2050 that American will be more "brown" than it is white - no matter how hard people want to fight that fact.

What in the world is that supposed to mean?

I can't remember the exact date, 2020 or 2050 that American will be more "brown" than it is white - no matter how hard people want to fight that fact.

The Tea Party is not about race, Ace...

Here is another potential issue with the Tea Party related to some of what has been discussed above - what is the racial make up of the Tea Party? From what I have seen, I would guess Tea Party members are at a minimum 90% Caucasian. When you compound that with these racial miscues like in Iowa, the Tea Party has a problem. In fact the Republican party has a problem in this area and they are compounding it with their strong immigration law attacks. As stated above African Americans are strongly Democrat and Latin Americans are being pushed in the same direction. By becoming hard line on immigration, the fastest growing segment of America is being pushed right into the arms of Democrats. The 95% African American vote Obama got is only half the story. There were also almost 3 million more African American voters in 2008 versus 2004 and you can bet those voters voted Obama. There also were over 1.5 million more Latin American voters in 2008 than 2004 and there is no doubt that number will continue to increase. Even more dramatic, there was a 46% swing by Latinos from Republican to Democrat in 2008. That number is even more meaningful IMO than the increase in African Americans. Meanwhile, white voter turnout was down a little over a million. In total including all minorities, minority turnout was up almost 7 million. Those are staggering numbers. So Obama got both a big turnout and a big percent of that voter turnout in these groups. The Republican party can name all the Mike Steele's and others they want to high posts but the party is dominated by Caucasians. The "whiteness" of the Tea Party and the Republican party is a "problem" they need to fix ASAP and being tough on immigration is not the way to fix it.

The immigration stuff is the most misconstrued topic I can recall in some time. Illegal immigration is a problem, but speak out against it and you are a racist.

What in the world is that supposed to mean?

 

I am talking about the immigration debate, nothing to do with race. I believe even if you send the 12-30 million home the fact will not change.

 

Commando - The Tea Party is a very small group of people, at this point, and there are at least some in there that it is about race. (That is a horrible sentence, but I can't figure out how to change it.)

I am talking about the immigration debate, nothing to do with race. I believe even if you send the 12-30 million home the fact will not change.

 

Commando - The Tea Party is a very small group of people, at this point, and there are at least some in there that it is about race. (That is a horrible sentence, but I can't figure out how to change it.)

Thanks for clarifying.

 

Your second sentence is correct, but there is a faction of race motivated people in every single group in America. Democratic and Republican party to name two of them.

 

Quick funny side story when I hear NAACP. A few years back my Aunt ran in to Oscar Robertson at a charity event early in March. My Aunt is not a big sport's fan. She approached him and asked who he thought would win the NAACP basketball tournament. :lol:

Has there been a group of people like the "Tea Party" ever? In other words has there ever been a group of people spend so much time, energy, and money over the term of one President, attacking every thing he says or does?

 

 

Why does the "Tea Party" movement keep getting personalized? The concerns are about real policies and actions of the Federal government. Examples include a) expansion of the Federal government well beyond any constitutional authority, b) higher taxation, c) unsustainable public debt, d) radical redistribution of wealth via government programs, e) federal government funded bailouts of well connected financial institutions (started under Bush admin), f) takeover of private companies and private industries by the government.

 

These actions and policies have triggered the Tea Party movement. Its not personal. But people are truly concerned and in some cases truly angry at what is going on.

 

 

 

 

 

Moveon.org

Who's "fighting that fact"? Surely, you don't mean those opposed to illegal immigration.

So two years ago did the NAACP condemn New Black Panther Party for blatant (and video taped rather then just accused) racism. Does the fact that it happened two years ago excuse it?

 

Do the New Black Panthers claim to be part of the NAACP?

Do the New Black Panthers claim to be part of the NAACP?

 

Does the NAACP claim to represent the Black Panthers? Yes, as they claim to represent all colored people.

Does the NAACP claim to represent the Black Panthers? Yes, as they claim to represent all colored people.

 

Edit...not worth it.

Here is another potential issue with the Tea Party related to some of what has been discussed above - what is the racial make up of the Tea Party? From what I have seen, I would guess Tea Party members are at a minimum 90% Caucasian. When you compound that with these racial miscues like in Iowa, the Tea Party has a problem. In fact the Republican party has a problem in this area and they are compounding it with their strong immigration law attacks. As stated above African Americans are strongly Democrat and Latin Americans are being pushed in the same direction. By becoming hard line on immigration, the fastest growing segment of America is being pushed right into the arms of Democrats. The 95% African American vote Obama got is only half the story. There were also almost 3 million more African American voters in 2008 versus 2004 and you can bet those voters voted Obama. There also were over 1.5 million more Latin American voters in 2008 than 2004 and there is no doubt that number will continue to increase. Even more dramatic, there was a 46% swing by Latinos from Republican to Democrat in 2008. That number is even more meaningful IMO than the increase in African Americans. Meanwhile, white voter turnout was down a little over a million. In total including all minorities, minority turnout was up almost 7 million. Those are staggering numbers. So Obama got both a big turnout and a big percent of that voter turnout in these groups. The Republican party can name all the Mike Steele's and others they want to high posts but the party is dominated by Caucasians. The "whiteness" of the Tea Party and the Republican party is a "problem" they need to fix ASAP and being tough on immigration is not the way to fix it.

 

So then using this same logic the "Blackness" of the NAACP is a problem?

Do the New Black Panthers claim to be part of the NAACP?

 

The NAACP regularly condems racism. It certainly seems to me if just for the sake of consistancy they would so so here as well. After all isn't (or shouldn't) one of their goals be to eliminate ALL racism?