Allen West slammed smug liberal for claiming Tea Party is racist

[R.D.]

]"The Tea Party grew out of a fear of a changing America"[/B]

Kelly said that was a veiled reference to "people of color" and fear of minorities.

West then proceeds to go on his stump speech about People calling the Tea Party racist.....

When it seemed the point was about how big money is actually what grew the Tea Party.

No it didn't.
Tea Party grew at the start of President Bush and the bailout of Banks in 2008.
It continued to grow under President Obama.
The voters are sick and tired of an out of control Government that won't abide by the Constitution.
Big money latched on to the Tea Party and there are only 3 or 4 of them that are funded by big money.
The vast majority of them are the people (the voters themselves).
Stop listening to the political spin talk, because it's not true at all about what the Tea Party is about.
Both Parties, especially the incumbents are scared to death of them, because they know that they will lose their power if they ever get enough representation.

That is false. The so-called tea party's started raising its ugly head the minute the black guy became president. That's when the loons started ranting about "taking back the government". That amused me given that power changed hands in a lawful election. Actually make that TWO lawful elections. And the sore losers are STILL ranting that they aren't getting their way..

Not at all.

In fact it was already years old and CNBC's Rick Santelli -not FOX or the boggy men Koch brothers- is widely credited with launching the grassroots movement. While standing on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange on February 19, 2009, he unleashed what can only be called a rant against the Obama Administration's proposal to help homeowners facing foreclosure refinance their mortgages.

"Do we really want to subsidize the losers' mortgages?" he asked. "This is America! How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor's mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can't pay their bills?" He went on to suggest that he would organize a Chicago Tea Party in July, where capitalists would dump "some derivative securities into Lake Michigan." The video of his tirade became a YouTube hit, and thus the movement was born. Within weeks, Tea Party protests were sprouting up all over the country. The Tea Party name, a clear reference to the American colonists' dumping of tea into Boston Harbor to protest taxes imposed by King George, stands as an acronym as well: Taxed Enough Already. link

 

[peach174]

]"The Tea Party grew out of a fear of a changing America"[/B]

Kelly said that was a veiled reference to "people of color" and fear of minorities.

West then proceeds to go on his stump speech about People calling the Tea Party racist.....

When it seemed the point was about how big money is actually what grew the Tea Party.

No it didn't.
Tea Party grew at the start of President Bush and the bailout of Banks in 2008.
It continued to grow under President Obama.
The voters are sick and tired of an out of control Government that won't abide by the Constitution.
Big money latched on to the Tea Party and there are only 3 or 4 of them that are funded by big money.
The vast majority of them are the people (the voters themselves).
Stop listening to the political spin talk, because it's not true at all about what the Tea Party is about.
Both Parties, especially the incumbents are scared to death of them, because they know that they will lose their power if they ever get enough representation.

That is false. The so-called tea party's started raising its ugly head the minute the black guy became president. That's when the loons started ranting about "taking back the government". That amused me given that power changed hands in a lawful election. Actually make that TWO lawful elections. And the sore losers are STILL ranting that they aren't getting their way..

So the signs that said Tea Party 2007 in the video is what exactly?

 

[Plasmaball]

It really started in 2007 and grew in 2008. Then is really took off in 2009.
Tea Party Started In 2007 - Ron Paul Is The Godfather - YouTube

it really didnt start in 07. It was way before that. It took off around then though

It started in 1988 when Bush Sr. broke his campaign promise and raised taxes.
Then they were for Ross Perot. They did not really name themselves until 2007 as the Tea Party movement.

no they did name themselves the tea party back then as well. they where just small groups scattered around. But the real origin is hard to pin down. the reality is you dont know what are you talking about, because now you are giving two different stories.

 

[Pogo]

No it didn't.
Tea Party grew at the start of President Bush and the bailout of Banks in 2008.
It continued to grow under President Obama.
The voters are sick and tired of an out of control Government that won't abide by the Constitution.
Big money latched on to the Tea Party and there are only 3 or 4 of them that are funded by big money.
The vast majority of them are the people (the voters themselves).
Stop listening to the political spin talk, because it's not true at all about what the Tea Party is about.
Both Parties, especially the incumbents are scared to death of them, because they know that they will lose their power if they ever get enough representation.

That is false. The so-called tea party's started raising its ugly head the minute the black guy became president. That's when the loons started ranting about "taking back the government". That amused me given that power changed hands in a lawful election. Actually make that TWO lawful elections. And the sore losers are STILL ranting that they aren't getting their way..

So the signs that said Tea Party 2007 in the video is what exactly?

We just did this. They referred to "corporate welfare", homeland security, torture, "neo cons", the PATRIOT act and the like. Those would be anti-Republican issues, not pro-Republican. Once the Kochs and Armeys took over, none of those issues were on signs. Because the Kochs and Armeys are for those issues, not against them.

I can't believe I have to spell this out...

Two different entities using the same historical theme doesn't give them something in common beyond the name.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Tea Party, minus all racism, minus all implied racism, minus all alleged racism,

is an extremist rightwing political movement.

That alone makes it unacceptable. Any racism you might add to that is just icing on a very nasty cake.

 

[Pogo]

No it didn't.
Tea Party grew at the start of President Bush and the bailout of Banks in 2008.
It continued to grow under President Obama.
The voters are sick and tired of an out of control Government that won't abide by the Constitution.
Big money latched on to the Tea Party and there are only 3 or 4 of them that are funded by big money.
The vast majority of them are the people (the voters themselves).
Stop listening to the political spin talk, because it's not true at all about what the Tea Party is about.
Both Parties, especially the incumbents are scared to death of them, because they know that they will lose their power if they ever get enough representation.

That is false. The so-called tea party's started raising its ugly head the minute the black guy became president. That's when the loons started ranting about "taking back the government". That amused me given that power changed hands in a lawful election. Actually make that TWO lawful elections. And the sore losers are STILL ranting that they aren't getting their way..

Not at all.

In fact it was already years old and CNBC's Rick Santelli -not FOX or the boggy men Koch brothers- is widely credited with launching the grassroots movement. While standing on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange on February 19, 2009, he unleashed what can only be called a rant against the Obama Administration's proposal to help homeowners facing foreclosure refinance their mortgages.

"Do we really want to subsidize the losers' mortgages?" he asked. "This is America! How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor's mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can't pay their bills?" He went on to suggest that he would organize a Chicago Tea Party in July, where capitalists would dump "some derivative securities into Lake Michigan." The video of his tirade became a YouTube hit, and thus the movement was born. Within weeks, Tea Party protests were sprouting up all over the country. The Tea Party name, a clear reference to the American colonists' dumping of tea into Boston Harbor to protest taxes imposed by King George, stands as an acronym as well: Taxed Enough Already. link

Thank you. I knew it was sometime in February. O'bama by the way was inaugurated 11 days before February '09. I did the math.

[/QUOTE]

Thank you again. Another example of another action invoking the same theme, obviously an unrelated action but again, since the original (Boston) Tea Party was an action of defiance against tyrannical authority, it gets invoked frequently as a rallying cry.

Which makes it all the more ironic that the Koch-Armey version would co-opt the populist theme, since they are the PTB and anything but populist.

 

[blackhawk]

Here is something to ponder the left has stated over and over that if your critical of President Obama especially those on the right it's because of racism not because of his policies or political ideology so here is the question if your on the left and your critical of someone like Allen West, Tim Scott, or Dr Ben Carson is that racism as well?

 

[Pogo]

Here is something to ponder the left has stated over and over that if your critical of President Obama especially those on the right it's because of racism not because of his policies or political ideology so here is the question if your on the left and your critical of someone like Allen West, Tim Scott, or Dr Ben Carson is that racism as well?

"The left" has stated nothing. "The right" has stated nothing. "The center" has stated nothing. Entire sides of political philosophy do not speak or issue manifestos. Your premise is absurd.

Read your own sigline.

 

[blackhawk]

Here is something to ponder the left has stated over and over that if your critical of President Obama especially those on the right it's because of racism not because of his policies or political ideology so here is the question if your on the left and your critical of someone like Allen West, Tim Scott, or Dr Ben Carson is that racism as well?

"The left" has stated nothing. "The right" has stated nothing. Entire sides of political philosophy do not speak or issue manifestos. Your premise is absurd.

No it's not there have been statements and accusations from people on the left that the reason for the opposition to Obama on the right is because of his race if you wish to deny it fine that's your right it doesn't change it though.

 

[Pogo]

Here is something to ponder the left has stated over and over that if your critical of President Obama especially those on the right it's because of racism not because of his policies or political ideology so here is the question if your on the left and your critical of someone like Allen West, Tim Scott, or Dr Ben Carson is that racism as well?

"The left" has stated nothing. "The right" has stated nothing. Entire sides of political philosophy do not speak or issue manifestos. Your premise is absurd.

No it's not there have been statements and accusations from people on the left that the reason for the opposition to Obama on the right is because of his race if you wish to deny it fine that's your right it doesn't change it though.

Doesn't change the fact that you just laid a blanket generalization fallacy, no.

 

[blackhawk]

"The left" has stated nothing. "The right" has stated nothing. Entire sides of political philosophy do not speak or issue manifestos. Your premise is absurd.

No it's not there have been statements and accusations from people on the left that the reason for the opposition to Obama on the right is because of his race if you wish to deny it fine that's your right it doesn't change it though.

Doesn't change the fact that you just laid a blanket generalization fallacy, no.

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The Tea Party, minus all racism, minus all implied racism, minus all alleged racism,

is an extremist rightwing political movement.

That alone makes it unacceptable. Any racism you might add to that is just icing on a very nasty cake.

You are a complete fucking moron.

There is no racism at all but you insinuate there is because we don't like your policies and you have no defense for them. Therefore you have nothing to claim but if the guy doing this stupid shit wasn't black we would all be happily going along. You have no cake because this extremism you are so worried about is limited government just like the Constitution calls for. Has nothing to do with anything other than policy, but you can't figure that out.

 

[The T]

Here is something to ponder the left has stated over and over that if your critical of President Obama especially those on the right it's because of racism not because of his policies or political ideology so here is the question if your on the left and your critical of someone like Allen West, Tim Scott, or Dr Ben Carson is that racism as well?

YES it is and they can't have Conservative NEGROES off their plantation, hence: Uncle Toms...FORGET they're human...they're grouped cattle like everyone they have to lump into a group. The HUMAN element they NEVER consider. And that's their problem.

 

[Pogo]

No it's not there have been statements and accusations from people on the left that the reason for the opposition to Obama on the right is because of his race if you wish to deny it fine that's your right it doesn't change it though.

Doesn't change the fact that you just laid a blanket generalization fallacy, no.

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

Blanket generalizations are by definition untrue. Do you not understand that?

 

[The T]

Doesn't change the fact that you just laid a blanket generalization fallacy, no.

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

Blanket generalizations are by definition untrue. Do you not understand that?

Is that why YOU practice it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Tea Party, minus all racism, minus all implied racism, minus all alleged racism,

is an extremist rightwing political movement.

That alone makes it unacceptable. Any racism you might add to that is just icing on a very nasty cake.

You are a complete fucking moron.

There is no racism at all but you insinuate there is because we don't like your policies and you have no defense for them. Therefore you have nothing to claim but if the guy doing this stupid shit wasn't black we would all be happily going along. You have no cake because this extremism you are so worried about is limited government just like the Constitution calls for. Has nothing to do with anything other than policy, but you can't figure that out.

You douche, I said take racism off the table completely and you're still left with a Tea Party composed of and led by rightwing assholes.

Is that clear enough for you, Noddy?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Doesn't change the fact that you just laid a blanket generalization fallacy, no.

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

Blanket generalizations are by definition untrue. Do you not understand that?

You're under the blanket. stop whining.

 

[Pogo]

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

Blanket generalizations are by definition untrue. Do you not understand that?

Is that why YOU practice it?

And where would this be?

 

[Pogo]

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

Blanket generalizations are by definition untrue. Do you not understand that?

You're under the blanket. stop whining.

I swear ta god, how do some of you find the power button on your computer?

"Blanket statement" doesn't mean there's an actual blanket like you find on a bed. It's a metaphor.

 

[The T]

No it's not there have been statements and accusations from people on the left that the reason for the opposition to Obama on the right is because of his race if you wish to deny it fine that's your right it doesn't change it though.

Doesn't change the fact that you just laid a blanket generalization fallacy, no.

Since nothing I stated was untrue it does.

The leftists here will never admit it. They live and wallow in their lies.