Perhaps we could check the hatemongering at the door for honest dissent? by Rimfrel
(libertarian)
Thursday, April 1, 2010
It boggles me that the Tea Partiers are being cast as racist hatemongers. The other night, "The O'Reilly Factor" had Alan Colmes on the "Barack and a Hard Place" segment. Colmes alleged that the Tea Party has racism as a motivating factor at its core. O"Reilly asked for proof, and Colmes admitted that people won't say they are racist. But he seemed to feel perfectly comfortable alleging racism all the same.
I'd like to see some proof, personally. I am involved with a Tea Party group and I admit I don't like President Obama personally nor the policies he is encouraging Congress to implement in legislation. I don't like Pelosi or Reid, either, so why would I be considered a racist for not liking Obama? During Bush's tenure, were black people who didn't like him considered racists?
I can't see how the race of the President can be alleged to be the main determinant of one's decision to dissent from his politics. This isn't high school, where school spirit was driven by the school colors, with implied disdain (not hate) for those who wore other colors. Politics is far more important than that. People getting handouts from the government don't sign up based on the race of the President. Surely if racism is driven by that consideration, no one would sign up for benefits that are implicitly received from someone they hate? Wouldn't this be the case, even though it is not the President who is handing out the money (misplaced joy over "Obama money" notwithstanding)?
My personal experience of the Tea Party, and my observations of the Tea Partiers who have made the news, is that they are generally concerned that the government is not going to be able to keep its promises for much longer. They are concerned about increased spending with no apparent plans to actually pay off the national debt. They wonder why the deficit cannot be cut to zero immediately, through balancing the budget. They wonder if there will a chance for prosperity for their children and their grandchildren.
After the passage of the health care legislation, they wonder when Congress quit caring what they think. They wonder if Congress realizes it is cooperating in making itself irrelevant, through ceding more power to the Executive and Judicial branches. They wonder how to peacefully make a difference between now and November.
Most of these Tea Partiers are nice normal people who didn't (until recently) know what "teabagging" is, and are not grateful for that particular new word in their vocabulary. Not that their speech doesn't get a little salty at times, especially when talking about those spendthrifts in Washington DC, but that was not a mainstream word. Sure, any large group of people is going to have a Gaussian distribution of personality types. They don't all own guns, and some probably belong to PETA (I used to). They mostly don't care whether Obama was born here or not, unless there is proof he was not, but they assume he was. They tend to believe Obama and his administration lean left, more than the Obama campaign led them to believe. Surprisingly, perhaps, some of them voted for Obama.
I didn't vote for Obama, but I wasn't thrilled with McCain, either. I voted against Obama using McCain as my proxy. God bless McCain, he served our nation bravely, but he has the charisma of a raw potato and his politics weren't far enough right for me. I kept thinking it would be nice to have Condi Rice and Thomas Sowell run, but they wouldn't have been perfect either. They would have understood foreign affairs and the economy, though, and that would have helped alot.
I think there is ample reason to believe the Tea Partiers are not hatemongering toward Obama because he is black. They would like him to be a great President, but leading the country into bankruptcy isn't the way to do that.
It isn't racism, it's honest dissent.
Perhaps we Tea Partiers need to take the moral high ground and stop hatemongering toward people on the Left. If we stop it, maybe the non-zealots (every movement has the people who aren't all that gung ho) will talk to us instead of yelling at us. Maybe we could have a real discussion about how they plan to pay for the entitlement agenda in the face of increasing population. Wouldn't we like for everyone to get necessary health care? Good healthy food to eat, warm clothes and a clean spacious house with flowers planted in the yard? If they have a way to pay, let's talk.
And if they keep attacking us when we don't attack them, the independent voters will notice that. Guess who they'll think the crazies are?
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 9
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Rimfrel only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Rimfrel is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Let's remember the more updated and accurate definition of racist:
RACIST: 1. Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive term for a white person. 2: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities, if promoted by white people. 3: a belief that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, if promoted by white people.
There is nothing in the original post that suggest racism to me. There was certainly a tiny minority of the Tea Party crowd outside the Congress that showed racist behavior. What else can you say about someone yelling Nigger at John Lewis, a Member of the House of Representatives and a leader of the Civil Rights movement? This is no doubt a tiny fringe of the Tea Party movement, but such overt racism is to be confronted, not excused.
