Are "educated" Tea Partiers racist?

The article makes good points, but of course nobody here will even read it to make judgment. Despite the fact that it is merely stating the facts determined from a poll, not a personal opinion.

What's to debate?

No matter what any one says opposing the racist, ignorant, homophobe myth, it persists. Those questions were so awful, I can't believe a worthy survey was taken. If you look at the people doing it, their purpose was to find discrimination against minorities. Wow, they did.


Since 'educated' was put into parenthesis, I guess that means you don't believe they are despite reports to the contrary.


If you did not vote for Obama, you're racist.
If you did not want to spend a trillion on health care, you're racist.
If you worry about an attack because we have a bowing butt-licking President, you're racist.
If you actually think people should take care of themselves and get a helping hand, not a handout, you're racist.
If you protest against bailouts, you're racist.

If you protest in Arizona, throwing rocks at police, that's OK, you're not racist, you're a liberal and the MSM ignores it.

So to answer the question, no.

Did you notice the 66% who never heard of it?
http://www.newsweek.com//frame...%2Fracepolitics.html

So

When the statement that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites," 73 percent of the movement's supporters agreed, while only 33 percent of people who disapproved of the Tea Party agreed. Asked if blacks should work their way up "without special favors," as the Irish, Italians, and other groups did, 88 percent of supporters agreed, compared to 56 percent of opponents."

and

Tea Party supporters were more likely to believe that "the Obama administration favors blacks over whites" and that "too much has been made of the problems facing black people."

Is now considered rascist? It maybe some what PC, but not racist.

Survey's are usually in the "eye of the beholder"...

Racism and the Tea Party Movement

But what about the racial stereotyping items? The lead investigator, political science professor Christopher Parker, graciously provided me with the fuller data—which strongly contradict the notion of the Tea Parties as a unique hotbed of racism.

Thus, while only 35 percent of strong Tea Party supporters rated blacks as hardworking, only 49 percent described whites as such. While the gap is evident, these responses are close to those for all whites (blacks are rated as "hardworking" by 40 percent, whites by 52 percent). While whites who are strongly anti-Tea Party seem free of bias on this item—blacks and whites are rated as "hardworking" by 55 percent and 56 percent, respectively—this is not true for intelligence and trustworthiness. Whites in every group are less likely to rate blacks than whites as "intelligent" by similar margins: 14 points for Tea Party supporters (45 percent vs. 59 percent), 13 points for all whites (49 percent vs. 62 percent), 10 points for Tea Party opponents (59 percent vs. 69 percent). On "trustworthy," the gap is smaller in the pro-Tea Party group (41 percent vs. 49 percent) than in the anti-Tea Party group (57 percent vs. 72 percent). One could write headlines about the "racial paranoia" of white liberals who consider blacks less trustworthy than whites!

The endurance of racial stereotypes in this day and age is disturbing; but Tea Party supporters differ little in this regard from mainstream Americans. (It is also worth noting that, as in many other surveys, Asian-Americans in the UW poll are rated much more positively than whites.)

Compared to middle-of-the-road whites, Tea Party supporters show far more agreement with the statement that blacks should work their way up "without special favors" the way other minorities such as Italians and Jews did, or that blacks would be as well off as whites if they worked harder. The standard left-of-center view, shared by the UW researchers, is that such attitudes represent a subtler form of racism, or "racial resentment." In some cases, that is surely true. Yet these sentiments may also reflect a genuinely race-neutral belief in self-reliance and self-help—or the view, shared by many black commentators, that the black community's problems are partly rooted in damaging behavioral and cultural patterns.

quote:

Since 'educated' was put into parenthesis, I guess that means you don't believe they are despite reports to the contrary.

You're correct. I don't think you can be educated and racist.

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Since 'educated' was put into parenthesis, I guess that means you don't believe they are despite reports to the contrary.

You're correct. I don't think you can be educated and racist.

Tell that to Hitler and Malcolm X...I guess that depends on what you mean by "educated"...

You asked for a fair shake in the OP:

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:
I realize it's useless to say this, but try not to attack me personally.

And then basically personally attack any tea party supporter as uneducated:

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Since 'educated' was put into parenthesis, I guess that means you don't believe they are despite reports to the contrary.

You're correct. I don't think you can be educated and racist.

Priceless!

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Nation:
You asked for a fair shake in the OP:

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:
I realize it's useless to say this, but try not to attack me personally.

And then basically personally attack any tea party supporter as uneducated:

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Since 'educated' was put into parenthesis, I guess that means you don't believe they are despite reports to the contrary.

You're correct. I don't think you can be educated and racist.

Priceless!

I didn't attack. The article speaks for itself.

I know you righties like to challenge the outcome of polls - unless they're in your favor.

Try again.

One would do well to read the mission statement of the group that performed the study. If future grants are related to racism, sexism, and other 'isms, I am sure they can deliver the goods and find the offending 'isms.

quote:

The University of Washington's Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race and Sexuality, is an interdisciplinary research center dedicated to bringing the tools of contemporary social science inquiry to the careful examination of issues of social, economic, and political exclusion and disadvantage of marginalized minority populations in the United States, and their potential solutions.

http://www.newsweek.com//frame...%2Fracepolitics.html

quote:

Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
One would do well to read the mission statement of the group that performed the study. If future grants are related to racism, sexism, and other 'isms, I am sure they can deliver the goods and find the offending 'isms.

quote:

The University of Washington's Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race and Sexuality, is an interdisciplinary research center dedicated to bringing the tools of contemporary social science inquiry to the careful examination of issues of social, economic, and political exclusion and disadvantage of marginalized minority populations in the United States, and their potential solutions.

http://www.newsweek.com//frame...%2Fracepolitics.html

So are you saying they fudged the study? Or the participants were somehow coerced to answer a certain way? Did the people conducting the study pull the lever on behalf of the participants?

Yes, look at the methodology.

This leads to the question of why I chose the states that are in the survey. Because Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, and Ohio were battleground states going into the 2008 election cycle, Matt Barreto suggested that we should examine racial and political dynamics in those states. California, the seventh state, was chosen because we thought it wise to include a state in which the election was never in doubt. Thus, it provides a basis for comparison.

A final note on the methodology: The survey is drawn from a probability sample of 1006 cases, stratified by state. On average, it took 45 minutes to complete the survey; the survey had a 51% cooperation rate (COOP4). The study, conducted by the Center for Survey Research at the University of Washington, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent, and was in the field February 8-March 15, 2010.


3. Some readers were puzzled that you reported data for those who either strongly approve or strongly disapprove of the tea party movement. Could you say what share of respondents fall into that category and how each differs from the remaining subset of white respondents who neither strongly approve nor disapprove?

I understand why some readers are curious about support for the tea party among whites who are not on either end of the distribution. Here's what I have: Based upon 354 valid cases for this item (30% say they never heard of the tea party or have no opinion), 19% (N = 66) strongly disapprove of the tea party; 17% (N = 59) somewhat disapprove of it; 32% (N = 112) somewhat approve of the tea party; and 33% (N = 117) strongly approve of it. (Of course, when those that have never heard of the tea party (30%; N= 157) are included, increasing the number of observations to 511, the cell sizes change: 13% strongly disapprove; 12% somewhat disapprove of it; 22% somewhat approve; and 23% strongly approve of it.)

Polls are too easy to fudge one way or the other. One can ask a question and limit the responses such that one winds up answering a "Do you still beat your wife" question with a answer that one would not give if a more complete list of responses were allowed. With the advent of Caller ID on phones, I doubt that one gets a broad spectrum of responders. I don't pick up the phone when I don't know who is calling and I suspect that a goodly number of educated people don't either.

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:
I know you righties like to challenge the outcome of polls - unless they're in your favor.

Try again.

I prefer the term "Non-Lefty"..so please address me as such...I know you "lefties" hate to be PC...

Check out the link to the article in my previous post that examines in more depth the very same survey newsweek cites...it more or less comes to the conclusion that this "racist" stuff is what it is...hype.

It finds that the tea party supporters racial views are pretty much in line with average Americans.

Not to mention that only 511 responses were given and all responders were white.
Some cross-section.

Oh, and buttercup, I'll take that $20!

From the Daily Kossack!!! I am in shock.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...eople-cant-be-racist

Educated people can’t be racist?
by futurebird


There is some buzz on this site an others about the poll result published in the NY Times that says that tea party members are more well-off and more educated than average Americans. Some folks have been surprised by this data, others suspect it is false due to poor polling methods or bad self-reporting of education level. I, however, think it's spot on-- at least, it matched my impression of the tea party members from the beginning.


I have no idea why so many liberals have it in their heads the teabaggers are simply "rednecks" or "white trash" (to use two more problematic labels.)The idea that educated people can’t be racist is one of the great lies we have in this country. It is very comfortable to point a finger at a poor uneducated racist– less easy to realize that you may have gone to college with some of these folks. (I know I did–)

I don't think that education does much to make people less racist. Some of the most virulent racists are highly educated and operate in universities. Take John Derbyshire for example. He was on the rec-list not long ago for sprouting racial theories that are right out of the 19th century. But he imagines himself and intellectual no doubt. He's even written a book about prime numbers. (As a grad student in pure mathematics I submit it is not a very good book, it's pithy, and it is not worth buying at all.)

Edited, link didn't work.

quote:

SEZ Buttercup:
I realize it's useless to say this, but try not to attack me personally. Try something new, like debating what's in the article. I bet $20 I'm attacked personally within five posts.

Don't shoot the messenger, folks; I'm just posting the link.

I love the last paragraph (interview with Tom Fitzhugh). Funny.

It has become obvious by your posts, that you do not come here to "debate". You throw outright "insulting garbage" at anything you consider conservative, or "right wing".
Then, expect everything in your opinionated posts to be taken as the "gospel".
You are, however, a good source of laughs and
"double facepalms".
Keep posting, give the other Trolls a break...

50 percent drop out rate, I'm telling you, and people in jail, and women having children by five, six different men. Under what excuse, I want somebody to love me, and as soon as you have it, you forget to parent. Grandmother, mother, and great grandmother in the same room, raising children, and the child knows nothing about love or respect of any one of the three of them .All this child knows is “gimme, gimme, gimme.” These people want to buy the friendship of a child....and the child couldn't care less. Those of us sitting out here who have gone on to some college or whatever we've done, we still fear our parents . And these people are not parenting. They're buying things for the kid. $500 sneakers, for what? They won't buy or spend $250 on Hooked on Phonics.


Love this man--but he DOES seem racist

Some Tea Partiers are racist and some are not.

Some Tea Partiers are smart and some are not.

And some Tea Partiers and other right wing knee-jerk bozos are just astonishingly, appallingly STUPID, as shown by the link below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...vernme_b_252326.html

Sample: "At a town hall meeting held by Rep. Robert Inglis (R-SC):

"Someone reportedly told Inglis, "Keep your government hands off my Medicare."
"I had to politely explain that, 'Actually, sir, your health care is being provided by the government,'" Inglis told the Post. "But he wasn't having any of it."

quote:

Originally posted by btchpls50m:
Yes, look at the methodology.

This leads to the question of why I chose the states that are in the survey. Because Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, and Ohio were battleground states going into the 2008 election cycle, Matt Barreto suggested that we should examine racial and political dynamics in those states. California, the seventh state, was chosen because we thought it wise to include a state in which the election was never in doubt. Thus, it provides a basis for comparison.

A final note on the methodology: The survey is drawn from a probability sample of 1006 cases, stratified by state. On average, it took 45 minutes to complete the survey; the survey had a 51% cooperation rate (COOP4). The study, conducted by the Center for Survey Research at the University of Washington, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent, and was in the field February 8-March 15, 2010.


3. Some readers were puzzled that you reported data for those who either strongly approve or strongly disapprove of the tea party movement. Could you say what share of respondents fall into that category and how each differs from the remaining subset of white respondents who neither strongly approve nor disapprove?

I understand why some readers are curious about support for the tea party among whites who are not on either end of the distribution. Here's what I have: Based upon 354 valid cases for this item (30% say they never heard of the tea party or have no opinion), 19% (N = 66) strongly disapprove of the tea party; 17% (N = 59) somewhat disapprove of it; 32% (N = 112) somewhat approve of the tea party; and 33% (N = 117) strongly approve of it. (Of course, when those that have never heard of the tea party (30%; N= 157) are included, increasing the number of observations to 511, the cell sizes change: 13% strongly disapprove; 12% somewhat disapprove of it; 22% somewhat approve; and 23% strongly approve of it.)

So, I suppose that poll that concluded the Tea Party people have higher than average education levels couldn't have been fudged? The group who did that study couldn't have possibly manipulated the results, right?

Works both ways.

quote:

Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
Polls are too easy to fudge one way or the other. One can ask a question and limit the responses such that one winds up answering a "Do you still beat your wife" question with a answer that one would not give if a more complete list of responses were allowed. With the advent of Caller ID on phones, I doubt that one gets a broad spectrum of responders. I don't pick up the phone when I don't know who is calling and I suspect that a goodly number of educated people don't either.

I repeat:

So, I suppose that poll that concluded the Tea Party people have higher than average education levels couldn't have been fudged? The group who did that study couldn't have possibly manipulated the results, right?

Works both ways.

quote:

Originally posted by CageTheElephant:

quote:

SEZ Buttercup:
I realize it's useless to say this, but try not to attack me personally. Try something new, like debating what's in the article. I bet $20 I'm attacked personally within five posts.

Don't shoot the messenger, folks; I'm just posting the link.

I love the last paragraph (interview with Tom Fitzhugh). Funny.

It has become obvious by your posts, that you do not come here to "debate". You throw outright "insulting garbage" at anything you consider conservative, or "right wing".
Then, expect everything in your opinionated posts to be taken as the "gospel".
You are, however, a good source of laughs and
"double facepalms".
Keep posting, give the other Trolls a break...

Having any luck on that toilet, Elephant, evacuating some of the **** that usually comes out of your mouth?

As usual, you have nothing interesting or intelligent to add to the conversation. Keep sitting, read a magazine and wait.

quote:

Originally posted by Reflecting One of the voices i:
50 percent drop out rate, I'm telling you, and people in jail, and women having children by five, six different men. Under what excuse, I want somebody to love me, and as soon as you have it, you forget to parent. Grandmother, mother, and great grandmother in the same room, raising children, and the child knows nothing about love or respect of any one of the three of them .All this child knows is “gimme, gimme, gimme.” These people want to buy the friendship of a child....and the child couldn't care less. Those of us sitting out here who have gone on to some college or whatever we've done, we still fear our parents . And these people are not parenting. They're buying things for the kid. $500 sneakers, for what? They won't buy or spend $250 on Hooked on Phonics.


Love this man--but he DOES seem racist

Hahahaha! Case in point. "These people" - classic.

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Originally posted by Reflecting One of the voices i:
50 percent drop out rate, I'm telling you, and people in jail, and women having children by five, six different men. Under what excuse, I want somebody to love me, and as soon as you have it, you forget to parent. Grandmother, mother, and great grandmother in the same room, raising children, and the child knows nothing about love or respect of any one of the three of them .All this child knows is “gimme, gimme, gimme.” These people want to buy the friendship of a child....and the child couldn't care less. Those of us sitting out here who have gone on to some college or whatever we've done, we still fear our parents . And these people are not parenting. They're buying things for the kid. $500 sneakers, for what? They won't buy or spend $250 on Hooked on Phonics.


Love this man--but he DOES seem racist

Hahahaha! Case in point. "These people" - classic.

The quote was from Bill Cosby....a black man

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Since 'educated' was put into parenthesis, I guess that means you don't believe they are despite reports to the contrary.

You're correct. I don't think you can be educated and racist.

Unfortunately, the author of the Turner Diaries, one of the worst racist works in print, was a physicist.

quote:

Originally posted by Reflecting One of the voices i:

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Originally posted by Reflecting One of the voices i:
50 percent drop out rate, I'm telling you, and people in jail, and women having children by five, six different men. Under what excuse, I want somebody to love me, and as soon as you have it, you forget to parent. Grandmother, mother, and great grandmother in the same room, raising children, and the child knows nothing about love or respect of any one of the three of them .All this child knows is “gimme, gimme, gimme.” These people want to buy the friendship of a child....and the child couldn't care less. Those of us sitting out here who have gone on to some college or whatever we've done, we still fear our parents . And these people are not parenting. They're buying things for the kid. $500 sneakers, for what? They won't buy or spend $250 on Hooked on Phonics.


Love this man--but he DOES seem racist

Hahahaha! Case in point. "These people" - classic.

The quote was from Bill Cosby....a black man

Yes, I read the link. I'm aware of Mr. Cosby's controversial and condescending opinions, so are many black people.

You posted the link and pointed out that passage didn't you? You did say that the post seemed racist. Am I misunderstanding which side your on on this issue? If so, I stand corrected; otherwise, it's condescending to black people.

As to the Newsweek article, it was quoting from anecdotal evidence, hardly a method of proving anything. The signs quoted read like those used by left wingers acting as agents provocateur. Trying to discredit the movement.

As for the fudging via the questions asked, consider the graphic with this legend: Blacks would be as well off as Whites if they just worked harder.
The question that the outcome was based upon was " Irish, Italians, Jewish, and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without special favors. " and one could only agree or disagree with the statement. Someone who thinks that Blacks are equal in ability to the other minorities might agree with that statement. Nowhere in that loaded question is the thought that Blacks are lazy.

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Originally posted by Reflecting One of the voices i:

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:

quote:

Originally posted by Reflecting One of the voices i:
50 percent drop out rate, I'm telling you, and people in jail, and women having children by five, six different men. Under what excuse, I want somebody to love me, and as soon as you have it, you forget to parent. Grandmother, mother, and great grandmother in the same room, raising children, and the child knows nothing about love or respect of any one of the three of them .All this child knows is “gimme, gimme, gimme.” These people want to buy the friendship of a child....and the child couldn't care less. Those of us sitting out here who have gone on to some college or whatever we've done, we still fear our parents . And these people are not parenting. They're buying things for the kid. $500 sneakers, for what? They won't buy or spend $250 on Hooked on Phonics.


Love this man--but he DOES seem racist

Hahahaha! Case in point. "These people" - classic.

The quote was from Bill Cosby....a black man

Yes, I read the link. I'm aware of Mr. Cosby's controversial and condescending opinions, so are many black people.

You posted the link and pointed out that passage didn't you? You did say that the post seemed racist. Am I misunderstanding which side your on on this issue? If so, I stand corrected; otherwise, it's condescending to black people.

To expound on my post:

I've been very good friends with two black women for about ten years and we've talked frankly about racism and misconceptions about black people many times.

I'm not going to make the mistake of generalizing, because I can only speak for my friends and the many conversations we've had. But these kinds of statements - especially coming from Mr. Cosby - are very hurtful and frustrating to them. They're both successful, well-educated women with advanced degrees. I know both of their families and every member of those families are productive, active, tax-paying members of society.

We've even specifically discussed Mr. Cosby's attitude toward and comments about black people. Can a black man be racist towards his own race? I didn't think so, but my friends say yes. Is Mr. Cosby a Tea-Partier? I don't think so, but I don't know for sure.

The bottom line is what I meant by "case in point" is the excerpt was racist and it reflects what many scared white people think.

Interesting Article by Dennis Prager

Opponents of the popular expression of conservative opposition to big government -- the tea-party movement -- regularly note that tea partiers are overwhelmingly white. This is intended to disqualify the tea parties from serious moral consideration.

But there are two other facts that are far more troubling:

The first is the observation itself. The fact that the Left believes that the preponderance of whites among tea partiers invalidates the tea-party movement tells us much more about the Left than it does about the tea partiers.

It confirms that the Left really does see the world through the prism of race, gender, and class, rather than through the moral prism of right and wrong.

One of the more dangerous features of the Left has been its replacement of moral categories of right and wrong and good and evil with three other categories: black and white (race), male and female (gender), and rich and poor (class).

Therefore the Left pays attention to the skin color -- and gender (not just “whites” but “white males”) -- of the tea partiers rather than to their ideas.

One would hope that all people would assess ideas by their moral rightness or wrongness, not by the race, gender, or class of those who hold them. But in the world of the Left, people are taught not to assess ideas but to identify the race, class, and gender of those who espouse those ideas. This helps explain the widespread use of ad hominem attacks by the Left: Rather than argue against their opponents’ ideas, the Left usually dismisses those making an argument with which it disagrees as “racist,” “intolerant,” “bigoted,” “sexist,” ”homophobic,” “xenophobic,” and/or “homophobic.”

You’re against race-based affirmative action? No need to argue the issue -- you’re a racist. You’re a tea partier against ever expanding government? No need to argue the issue -- you’re a racist.

As a leftist rule of thumb -- once again rendering intellectual debate unnecessary and impossible -- white is wrong and bad and non-white is right and good; male is wrong and bad and female is right and good; and the rich are wrong and bad and the poor right and good. For the record, there is one additional division on the Left -- strong and weak -- to which the same rule applies: The strong are wrong and bad and the weak are right and good. That is a major reason for leftist support of the Palestinians against the Israelis, for example.



This is why, to cite another example, men are dismissed when they oppose abortion. The idea is far less significant than the sex of the advocate. As for women who oppose abortion on demand, they are either not authentically female or simply traitors to their sex. Just as the Left depicts blacks who oppose race-based affirmative action as not authentic blacks or as traitors to their race.

In this morally inverted world, the virtual absence of blacks and minorities from tea-party rallies cannot possibly reflect anything negative on the blacks and minorities’ absence, only on the white tea partiers’ presence.

And that’s the second troubling fact about the obsession over the color of the tea-party rallies. In a more rational and morally clearer world -- where people judge ideas by their legitimacy rather than by the race of those who held them -- people would be as likely to ask why blacks and ethnic minorities are virtually absent at tea parties as they would ask why whites predominate. They would want to know if this racial imbalance said anything about black and minority views, rather than assume that this imbalance necessarily reflected only on the whites attending those rallies.

If they were to ask such un-PC questions, they might draw rather different conclusions than the Left does. They would know that the near-absence of blacks and Hispanics no more implied racism on the part of tea partiers than the near-absence of blacks and Hispanics in the New York Philharmonic implies racism on the art of that orchestra.

They might even conclude -- Heaven forbid -- that it does not reflect well on the political outlook of blacks and Hispanics that they so overwhelmingly identify with ever-larger government. Leftist big-government policies have been disastrous for black America just as they were in the countries that most Hispanics emigrated from. But like the gambling addict who keeps gambling the more he loses, those addicted to government entitlements seem eager to increase the size of the government even as their situation worsens.

If one eschews the “racism” explanation and asks real questions, one might also conclude that America generally, and conservatives especially, have failed to communicate America’s distinct values -- E Pluribus Unum, In God We Trust, and Liberty (which includes small government) -- to blacks and Hispanics.

Unfortunately, however, no real exploration of a good number of important issues in American life is possible unless the Left stops focusing on the race, gender, and class of those who hold differing positions. And that will not happen. For when the Left stops attacking people and starts arguing positions, we will see what the Left most fears: blacks and Hispanics at tea parties.

-- Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.

quote:

Originally posted by CageTheElephant:

quote:
SEZ Buttercup:
I realize it's useless to say this, but try not to attack me personally. Try something new, like debating what's in the article. I bet $20 I'm attacked personally within five posts.

Don't shoot the messenger, folks; I'm just posting the link.

I love the last paragraph (interview with Tom Fitzhugh). Funny.



It has become obvious by your posts, that you do not come here to "debate". You throw outright "insulting garbage" at anything you consider conservative, or "right wing".
Then, expect everything in your opinionated posts to be taken as the "gospel".
You are, however, a good source of laughs and
"double facepalms".
Keep posting, give the other Trolls a break...

SEZ Buttercup:

Having any luck on that toilet, Elephant, evacuating some of the **** that usually comes out of your mouth?

As usual, you have nothing interesting or intelligent to add to the conversation. Keep sitting, read a magazine and wait.

So, we can look forward to intelligent, enlightening material from you in the future?
Or...more of the same ignorant, foot-in-mouth, "HuffPo" referenced blatherings?

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:
...I'm not going to make the mistake of generalizing...

Hmmm...really?

quote:

...The bottom line is what I meant by "case in point" is the excerpt was racist and it reflects what many scared white people think...

Typical...good job of not generalizing...

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Norris:
Interesting Article by Dennis Prager

...It confirms that the Left really does see the world through the prism of race, gender, and class, rather than through the moral prism of right and wrong.

One of the more dangerous features of the Left has been its replacement of moral categories of right and wrong and good and evil with three other categories: black and white (race), male and female (gender), and rich and poor (class).

Therefore the Left pays attention to the skin color -- and gender (not just “whites” but “white males”) -- of the tea partiers rather than to their ideas.

This is the entire crux of the problem...supposed "open" minded people who can never "open" their mind to the fact that some people actually disagree with them on principle...not because they are racist, bigoted or homophobic.

http://article.nationalreview....istory/thomas-sowell

Oh no...hold on...racism at a Tea Party.

Watch all the way through at your own risk...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...ture=player_embedded

quote:

Originally posted by beternU:
Some Tea Partiers are racist and some are not.

Some Tea Partiers are smart and some are not.

And some Tea Partiers and other right wing knee-jerk bozos are just astonishingly, appallingly STUPID, as shown by the link below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...vernme_b_252326.html

Sample: "At a town hall meeting held by Rep. Robert Inglis (R-SC):

"Someone reportedly told Inglis, "Keep your government hands off my Medicare."
"I had to politely explain that, 'Actually, sir, your health care is being provided by the government,'" Inglis told the Post. "But he wasn't having any of it."

Some liberal progressives are racist and some are not.

Some liberal progressives are smart and some are not.

And some liberal progressives are just astonishingly and appallingly stupid.

Would you disagree with that better?

quote:

Originally posted by beternU:
Sample: "At a town hall meeting held by Rep. Robert Inglis (R-SC):

"Someone reportedly told Inglis, "Keep your government hands off my Medicare."
"I had to politely explain that, 'Actually, sir, your health care is being provided by the government,'" Inglis told the Post. "But he wasn't having any of it."

I wonder why I was forced to pay all those taxes all those years. The government doesn't provide anything. Anything they give to anyone, whether it's Medicare, SS, Earned Income Credit, or the myriad of other promises they make to get votes, they must first take from someone else. As for Medicare, they're just fulfilling promises they made when they took your money. If they take the money but don't keep the promises, SS and Medicare are just a tax collection machine.

Hooked on the federal government, just like they wanted. When FDR was trying to pass SS, he said no one would ever pay more than 3% in tax. They couldn't keep that promise either.

Typical America hating liberal trash. Anyone that disagrees with your "boy" is a racist.

quote:

Originally posted by midknightrider:
I wonder why I was forced to pay all those taxes all those years. The government doesn't provide anything. Anything they give to anyone, whether it's Medicare, SS, Earned Income Credit, or the myriad of other promises they make to get votes, they must first take from someone else. As for Medicare, they're just fulfilling promises they made when they took your money. If they take the money but don't keep the promises, SS and Medicare are just a tax collection machine.

Hooked on the federal government, just like they wanted. When FDR was trying to pass SS, he said no one would ever pay more than 3% in tax. They couldn't keep that promise either.

"As for Medicare, they're just fulfilling promises they made when they took your money."

And "they" are not really providing the care...the government, just like everything else, has to "take" the service from doctors, hospitals, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Buttercup:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/236996

I realize it's useless to say this, but try not to attack me personally. Try something new, like debating what's in the article. I bet $20 I'm attacked personally within five posts.

Don't shoot the messenger, folks; I'm just posting the link.

I love the last paragraph (interview with Tom Fitzhugh). Funny.

I don't know who the bet was with, but you lost.

When it comes to Medicare the Feds are just another middleman. They do exactly the same thing BC/BS does. You give them some money and they pay your healthcare bills. The major difference is, you're forced to give them your money so they don't have to ask for your business, and they don't have to make a profit, they don't even have to break even. You pay for their services whether you use them or not. Like SS, it's just an insurance policy.