The Shirley Sharrod Affair
- Thread starter domtoni
- Start date
No, the word does not make him a racist. Did you read the sign? It wasn't a racist sign, it was a very, very, poor choice of a word. He wasn't saying bad things about blacks, he was equating taxpayers to slaves/n-----. But you're not going to see this are you? Got that N word between your teeth and you're going to run with it. It was stupid, it was unfortunate, but don't label the entire group.
Jim, How about deciding to label democrats/liberals? Let's say that they are all tax evaders. We have Rangel, Kerry, Geitner, etc. There are plenty more I would wager. These guys aren't just some unfortunate guy off the street, these are leaders, prominent people. So by this, taking your lead, I can say that all democrats/liberals are tax evading pieces of garbage. OK sounds good to me.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Al,
Lets go over your train of posts on this subject..................
When I first posted the picture of Mr Robertson (in reaction to your "were in the hell do you get the idea (and the proof) that the tea party is racist). You said "do we know who this is, were was the picture taken and who supplied it" You felt it could be a fake!
Then when it tuned out not to be a fake and was taken at a political rally you said that when the people at the event saw the sign "they asked him to leave" and you called him a "butthead" and "abnormal".
Later when it turned out he was the "founder of the modern Tea Party movement" you said it was'nt a racist sign, just a "poor choise of words"
So Al, tell us, is he a "butthead/abnormal person" or just someone who used a poor choise of words?
Lets go over your train of posts on this subject..................
When I first posted the picture of Mr Robertson (in reaction to your "were in the hell do you get the idea (and the proof) that the tea party is racist). You said "do we know who this is, were was the picture taken and who supplied it" You felt it could be a fake!
Then when it tuned out not to be a fake and was taken at a political rally you said that when the people at the event saw the sign "they asked him to leave" and you called him a "butthead" and "abnormal".
Later when it turned out he was the "founder of the modern Tea Party movement" you said it was'nt a racist sign, just a "poor choise of words"
So Al, tell us, is he a "butthead/abnormal person" or just someone who used a poor choise of words?
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Posted by Al,
I absoulutly condem anyone who lies, cheats, evades taxes or uses their political position for illegal personal gain.
Now if Rangel, Kerry, Geitner, etc, stood up and proclamed their cheating and liberals apploded and supported them then I would absolutly condem them.
Al, be sure and let us know if that happens.
Pat
Supporter
Jim, you are factually inaccurate. I earlier quoted sources as to the origins of the Tea Party Movement. Mr. Robinson was not part of it. If you dispute that, take it up with the New York Times. You characterize the entire Tea Party Movement based on a picture of a poster (whose meaning is not clear). That’s stereotyping and is as ethically wrong as the stereotypes that have been applied to minorities through the years.
I don't condemn anyone; I don't have that much clout. I just share the thoughts and feelings I have. Mr. Breitbart is free to call himself whatever he wants, just as you are. It doesn't make the coarseness of the language any less offensive. But he's not hurling the offensive language at others as you are.
The Obama administration, at best, is inept, at worst emerging fascism. To cover approaching the next election cycle, the left is again poised to smear and discredit the opposition with name-calling. The card being played is assigning opponents with the tag of "racist". For example, according to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.
In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Reverend Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”
Looks like you're attempting just that to the Tea Party Movement. I guess the sexual slurs weren't enough...
It was reported today in the Houston Chronicle that Shirley Sharrod will definitely file civil suit against Breitbart.
Power to her and best wishes. I hope that a huge award will send a message to those who use the media to promote false, manipulated information that the practice will not be tolerated, regardless of political persuasion.
Doug
Power to her and best wishes. I hope that a huge award will send a message to those who use the media to promote false, manipulated information that the practice will not be tolerated, regardless of political persuasion.
Doug
Jim,
Again with the "Hitler" stuff. I thought you were past that. Guess not.
And to claim to be "not current on slang" but to use it anyway...puhleeeez.
Can someone please tell me how to put Jim on "ignore"?
Thanks, Ron
Again with the "Hitler" stuff. I thought you were past that. Guess not.
And to claim to be "not current on slang" but to use it anyway...puhleeeez.
Can someone please tell me how to put Jim on "ignore"?
Thanks, Ron
C'mon, Ron.
Why would you want to ignore him, unless your mind is made up beyond even considering a differing opinion?
Tolerance of a different view is not a character defect, man. I recently took one of our members off "ignore".....found that some of the discussions on here were much less entertaining without him.
My mom said "No man is totally useless, they can always serve as a bad example". I guess I enjoyed the "bad example" that was the person I "ignored" more than I realized......glad he's back. No, I can't agree with his opinion, but I can certainly derive something from his input.
I find Jim's compassion and passion in his beliefs delightful.......he and the other few of us who are not on the political radical right here on this forum are significantly outnumbered and yet he continues to endure the endless personal attacks when he exposes the fallacies fostered by the political right (as in Breitbart). You could learn to appreciate Jim's posts, too......IF you can see beyond those self-imposed blinders ("there are none so blind as those who will not see").
To paraphrase Master Po of "Kung Fu"......"tolerance, grasshopper, tolerance!"
Cheers!
Doug
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Ron, I was answering the above post and quite frankly I though I did a nice job of it.
I could care less if do not belive what I know about modern slang or not.
Your more upset about a name that Mr Breitbart is proud to be called than that the founder of the modern tea party calls people n******.
What a classy guy!
Did you know the founder of the modern Tea Party was a racist?
Arn't you the one who lied about being a poor black child?
Please put me on ignore!
Last edited:
Pat
Supporter
Comrade Jim, TeaParty.org is a website. It's not the Tea Party movement. I would refer you back to my New York Times source as to The Tea Party Movement’s founding, which you’ve apparently ignored.
But for illustrative purposes, let's accept your logic. Go to Home peoplesworld, (You can get to it through the Communist Party USA website - Home cpusa). Peoples World describes itself as known for its partisan coverage to the working class, racially and nationally oppressed peoples, women, youth, seniors, international solidarity, Marxism and socialism. They enjoy a special relationship with the Communist Party USA From the battles of the unemployed and the campaigns to organize the CIO, through the civil rights and peace movements of the 1960s and '70s to the struggles that have given us the "new" labor movement, to the people's upsurge that elected our first African American president, and now the growing movement for a progressive, people's agenda – (they’ve) been there to support struggles for political independence (which take many forms) both within and outside of the Democratic Party. (From their website)
These fellows are Communists that support Obama and the Democratic Party. So I guess that by your convoluted (website = Tea Party = racists) logic therfore all other members of the civil rights and peace movements, unions (CIO), Obama supporters and Democrats are Communists as well. Hmmm… maybe that isn’t so far fetched
All this is (like your anti-conservative rhetoric) simply nonsense. It’s as logical as saying some guy that founded a website that has a picture with a racial epithet represents thousands of individuals that consider themselves mobilized by the unprecedented govermental growth, fiscal irresponsibility, threats to civil liberties and cram down of unpopular legislation to align with Tea Party ideals.
Let’s face it; the race bating is nothing more than a counterattack to obscure the profound failures of the Obama Administration. And to argue it, regardless as to how absurd this has become, successfully masks the debacle that is Washington today. Maybe it’s time to stop being distracted.
Veek, I think we're all in agreement that the Obama administration has a few failures......nobody here seems to be distracted to the extent that those issues haven't been noticed.
What I find assinine is that the outrage is not focused on Breitbart's shameful manipulation of the video in the first place. He seems so desperate to "out" the racial biases of the NAACP (it is, after all, the National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People--kind of hard to miss that, isn't it?) that he has actually committed what I believe to be libel with his misdeeds.....regardless of what you think of the Bee-OH administration, surely you can recognize that, no?
On the other hand, is it possible the radical right's rhetoric has you so distracted that you cannot (or, WILL not) see that anyone aligned with the conservative agenda might be capable of committing such a despicable act :shocked: ?
I'm just asking, here........
Doug
BTW,
In order to have a constructive conversation, there has to be a free, informed and honest dialogue.
Participants in a conversation lacking those characteristics are just wasting their time. In this particular case, the endless ad hominem attacks and positioning of "straw men" (among other logical fallacies) renders conversations with certain people fruitless.
In order to have a constructive conversation, there has to be a free, informed and honest dialogue.
Participants in a conversation lacking those characteristics are just wasting their time. In this particular case, the endless ad hominem attacks and positioning of "straw men" (among other logical fallacies) renders conversations with certain people fruitless.
Similar threads
