Tea Party Accusations of Racism Openly Challenged By Black Conservatives

In this case, "he" is a prominent leader of the organization in question. Here is proof.

"Black on Black" disgust, isn't racist, remember?

So says the "Left".

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/naacp-calls-black-man-uncle-tom

However, the NAACP has a name for those black individuals who support true American freedoms such as what the Tea Party supports. What am I talking about? In August of 09 Kenneth Gladney, a black man, was attacked by SEIU union thugs while he handed out yellow flags with “Don’t tread on me” printed on them outside the Russ Carnahan town hall, from which he sustained injuries to his knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face.

In May of this year the NAACP held a press conference so as to try and make the prosecutor drop charges against union thugs who attacked Mr. Gladney, sound familiar? NOT fight for Mr. Gladneys civil rights, but fight for the thugs that attacked Mr. Gladney. At this NAACP held press conference Mr. Gladney is called a "uncle Tom." Please note the NAACP placard directly under the speaker in the video.

This is the so-called "civil rights" organization wanting to today condemn the Tea Party as racist.

What does this do to the charges of racism leveled at the Tea Party?

Most of the people who will believe that there is no racism in the Tea Party because these black folks say so are people who are predisposed to want to believe (or pretend to believe) that. In other words...one more time...the choir:). As a practical matter, it won't have any effect at all.

Nope, logic has never affected entrenched belief.

Therefore, if you don't want to believe that the TEA party is not solely composed of racists and KKK members, then black conservatives who actually KNOW members of the TEA party because they ARE members of the TEA party will have no effect on entrenched leftist belief at all.

Sad, isn't it?

Therefore, if you don't want to believe that the TEA party is not solely composed of racists and KKK members

Who said the Tea Party is composed solely of racists and KKK leaders? Besides you, I mean? LOL.

Anyway...who are these black conservative "leaders" trying to convince? Other hard rightists? No, they don't have to be convinced. They're trying to convince moderate whites of racial good will, so to speak , that there is no racism in the Tea Party. Will they succeed in that? Of course not. So, as I said, it's essentially preaching to the choir, and at best, it'll give Tea Party people a reason to willfully delude themselves into believing that they've been successful at convincing (fooling) moderate whites.

Anyway...who are these black conservative "leaders" trying to convince?

Themselves. ;)

What liberals are claiming is that lack of central leadership and membership guidelines in its opening days has made the Tea Party an unfortunate haven for racists.

And a main accuser like the NAACP, which touts, blacks against them are "Uncle Tom's, aren't?

Singling out the teaparty is a Liberal thing, to get Liberals looking good.

steve

I would just take a guess that black racists would be in the democratic party. so then would the democratic party be a haven for racists also????

liberals just like to hear themselves speak i swear no content and dont look at what they are doing.

but I'll say it again: no one is claiming that all Tea Partiers are racists.

I can't COUNT the times I've read "those racist teabaggers" here on the Vine. Yes, there are a great many people who claim that the entire TEA Party is racist, there are also a great many people who claim that if you are a white Southerner you are a racist. Perhaps not you personally, but to say that "no one" is claiming that, is disingenuous.

Funny how the Democrat's haven't helped "Blacks", Hispanics" or any other group yet, due to the fact, "THAT'S THEIR CAMPAIGN PROMISE EVERY ELECTION YEAR"!!!!!!

Does any Liberal get it yet, or is it just the "Feel Good" mantra throughout the decades, that feeds their so called morality.

And a main accuser like the NAACP, which touts, blacks against them are "Uncle Tom's, aren't?

Irrelevant. If a confirmed murderer points out that murder is wrong, it doesn't matter what he's done. He is correct: murder is wrong. You can say the NAACP has racist elements as well, and you're right. That doesn't change the facts of what they said, so it's merely a diversion tactic.

Like I said, the Tea Party is not composed of racist elements, but has a greater statistical spike in racist elements than the population at large. This is a problem.

I would imagine if you performed a poll of the NAACP, or most other organizations outside of hate groups, you would find statistically similar numbers of racists within the group and outside the group. If, just for example, 10% of the black population hates white people, and 12% of the NAACP, that isn't a statistically significant difference.

Click the link I provided above to see the unfortunate statistics for yourself. The Tea Party has unusual spikes in racist thoughts that are statistically significant in their difference from the larger population. If you want to bury your head in the sand, vaguely point in another direction, and claim the lib'ruls are out to get you, that's your right. I just think it's going to bite you in the ass, because the Tea Party's flaws will eat it from the inside if you don't do something about them.

I can't COUNT the times I've read "those racist teabaggers" here on the Vine.

The statement "those racist teabaggers," while offensive, isn't necessarily an inclusionary statement to all members of the party. You are interpreting it that way. If someone says "those stupid Democrats," should I be offended? Are they saying all Democrats are stupid, or venting frustrations about some that they think are stupid? I would lean towards the latter, personally.

But yes, I can't literally say "no one," because I'm sure someone is. Still, I think people attributing racism to every single TPer is in the vast minority. Getting up-in-arms about isolated blowhards seems like a convenient way to avoid responsibility for the actual problem being pointed out by more fair-minded people. Racist elements have infiltrated the Tea Party. The Tea Party needs to exercise greater leadership to oust those elements and avoid perceptual problems. Deal with that reality, instead of going into histrionics and feeling personally accused.

Singling out the teaparty is a Liberal thing, to get Liberals looking good.

Oooh! The dastardly charge of making a political argument. I know that one always gets Rush Limbaugh's panties in a twist. Only the right wing is allowed to highlight the foibles of the opposition.

I get that you folks want unilateral disarmament. I think you don't get that we're not backing down. EVER.

Only the right wing is allowed to highlight the foibles of the opposition.

And when someone does highlight the foibles and failures of the Obama administration, what is the standard Liberal reply?

You must be a "raaaacist"!

I think you don't get that we're not backing down. EVER

Looks like black conservatives aren't backing down either. EVER.

So now what?

And when someone does highlight the foibles and failures of the Obama administration, what is the standard Liberal reply?

You must be a "raaaacist"!

If someone intelligently talks about Obama's economic policies, social views, war strategies, or simple gaffes, I don't mention race at all. Most liberals don't.

If you insist he's from Kenya, rose the ranks via affirmative action, or compare him to a monkey, yeah, I'll call a spade a spade and a racist a racist.

Again, I'm sure some ignorant blowhards have gone straight to the "racist" card when it wasn't appropriate, but I haven't seen enough to think it's the "standard liberal reply." Like I said regarding the other issue being discussed, you should deal with actual problems instead of letting a vast minority of people slewing insults distract you from the issues.

Getting up-in-arms about isolated blowhards seems like a convenient way to avoid responsibility for the actual problem being pointed out by more fair-minded people.

And you are saying that Liberals don't do that? Good heavens, let one idiot show up at a TEA party rally with an offensive sign, and there will be 10 articles on the Vine about how raaacist the TEA party is.

You can't have it both ways, you know. Either YOU condemn the idiots on your side of the debate who are screaming "all teabaggers are racist"...and condemn them publicly and loudly whenever you see them; or accept that no one person can be held accountable for the actions of every single member of their organization. The TEA party is composed of many and varied groups, and there is no "central leadership" with an actual political leader who can speak for all of them.

steve

its ideology.

its about him wanting to make slaves out of americans. I dont believe you have the moral authority to force me into paying for others.

the government should not be able to do anything that a normal citizen can do to its citizens.

therefore forced extortion is not right. I am on here quite a bit and not once have I seen anyone but trolls bring up his race...and who knows they could be left wing trolls just trying to start up trouble. its has been known to exist.

we dont believe in servitude...we believe in freedom. we want choice, we want responsibility for our own lives....we dont believe others should own us and decide what is best for us.

If i want to eat a triple bacon burger with 10 cigarettes afterwards with 5 shots of tequila then that is my life....its none of anyone elses damn business. and the argument about healthcare is a problem of socialism...its not a problem of freedom. With freedom you are not forced to pay for others choices.....see that is what is already coming...deciding how others live their lives via regulations and or increased taxes.

if you cant see that is wrong you are a hopeless cause.

peace.

And you are saying that Liberals don't do that?

Nope. Keep trying those diversion tactics, though, one of these days it's bound to work!

You can't have it both ways, you know. Either YOU condemn the idiots on your side of the debate who are screaming "all teabaggers are racist"...and condemn them publicly and loudly whenever you see them; or accept that no one person can be held accountable for the actions of every single member of their organization.

Let me take a wild, shot-in-the-dark guess here. You didn't click the link I provided. I'll summarize, since you seem very intent on not reading more information.

46% of Tea Party members agree with the statement "if blacks would only try harder, they would be just as well off as whites." To put it in shorthand, that means that 46%, nearly half of the Tea Party, agrees with a blatantly racist sentiment calling blacks lazy and irresponsible. This is as compared to 26% of the population at large. A 20% difference is statistically significant, so it is then reasonable to say that the Tea Party has a greater proportion of racist sentiment than the overall U.S. population. This is a problem worth addressing.

Now, if you can provide me some evidence that half of liberals are claiming all Tea Partiers are racist, you'll have a point. That would certainly be a significant problem that we should address. Instead, you're speaking anecdotally, about isolated cases where you've seen it. I've seen it too. I think it's a vast minority of the overall liberal population, and you haven't countered that in any meaningful way. Until you do, this is just another diversion tactic, and meaningless to the subject at hand.

So, let's get past all the diversions and distractions, and talk about what's important. Nearly half of Tea Partiers are racist. Deal with that problem and clean up your own house, rather than trying to point elsewhere and avoid responsibility.

Geez steve, you brought nothing to the table, on what I put forth.

Simple:

Why chastise the teaparty only, when the Liberals use the race based card, every election.

The Tea Party has unusual spikes in racist thoughts that are statistically significant in their difference from the larger population.

Really?

Did you figure in the Larouche crowd when you made that statement? You know, the one's that carry around the "Obama as Hitler" signs at every teaparty gathering.

http://thecollegepolitico.com/media-caught-in-bold-faced-lie-about-obamahitler-poster/

To maxy:

What has the Liberal fixed for any American. Notice I note Blacks and Hispanics Americans, compared to the Left, that labels them individually.

Any answer maxy?

steve has never had a good argument that I remember of just like he cant answer why he believes he has the moral authority to force others to live to his standards.

he cant do it because there is no argument...no liberal has an argument.

Why chastise the teaparty only, when the Liberals use the race based card, every election.

Irrelevant diversion. Is that seriously the only strategy you guys know? Can we not just have an honest discussion about a problem?

Did you figure in the Larouche crowd when you made that statement?

I provided a link to a study that proves the statement. Apparently you didn't read it.

Irrelevant diversion

Only for a Liberal!

Can we not just have an honest discussion about a problem?

The "Liberal" "I will save you" is a big problem. More than the teaparty that the Left finds a problem.

All the Democrat's do is tell you they will solve a problem, and they hold the purse strings, but just can't solve the problem, but it does cost us billions to not solve the problem.

You haggle over the teaparty, that isn't making law, and conveniently ignore those that make the laws.

Typical "LIberal".

Alright, greg, it's clear that you don't want to discuss racism in the Tea Party. That's fine, no one is forcing you to. But I'll ask you to kindly stop posting diversions in reply to me, because I'm attempting to have an actual on-topic conversation with people. Thanks.

Ignore reality, like you've been doing, is good, HOW?

Can you name one group or political party, that has NO problem children that show up?

The Democrat's always say, "we will fix it", AND DON'T.

Makes those Lefty politicians Pro's at deception and lies, compared to the "peoples party" (teaparty).

Singling out one group, as the end all, is pretty narrow minded, on a racist argument.

Can you name one group or political party, that has NO problem children that show up?

No I can't. And if you want to talk about that, write an article about it. This article is about racism in the Tea Party, and I'd like to talk with people about that. If you don't have any interest in discussing the topic, feel free to stop replying. Right now you're just starting to act childish, and I'm assuming Kane will be responsible enough to prune your off-topic replies when he returns.

feel free to stop replying. Right now you're just starting to act childish, and I'm assuming Kane will be responsible enough to prune your off-topic replies when he returns.

Talk about childish!

Well, someone will delete you! I guarantee it!

Geeez! What a weeinie!

You can't make an argument against one group, unless you are willing to lump in all groups, on a "RACIST" charge.

That word, thanks to "Liberals", is loosing meaning day after day.

Wonder how those that feel "Real" racism, feel about that.

Let me put it this way, greg. If someone posts an article about Obama's irresponsible spending, would you feel annoyed when liberals show up and write off-topic rants about Bush's spending? Despite my political preferences, I bristle when I see people veering off with distractions like that.

I expect a responsible author to prune the off-topic replies and keep the discussion on-track. This discussion is about Tea Party racism, and you're repeatedly trying to distract from that issue. If you want to discuss other issues, write your own article. This one is about racism and the Tea Party. Discuss it or don't, but stop trying to derail the conversation.

I wish it were true but all you have to do is visit any of the Tea Party attack seeds/articles here on the Vine to see that there are indeed some who flat out refuse to budge in their oft stated opinion that ALL of the Tea Party are racist.

Thank God, someone who actually wants to talk about the subject at hand.

I understand your frustration, Kane, but I still think what you're seeing is a vocal minority. Most liberals don't believe that "all" of the Tea Party is racist, even here on the Vine. Online forums tend to attract extremist rhetoric, so some of that can't be avoided. But if you give credence to the Newsvine nut-jobs and claim they speak for all liberals, how is that different from them claiming that the racists speak for all Tea Partiers?

The study I linked plainly shows that the Tea Party has a higher-than-average occurrence of racist views. It's certainly not all Tea Partiers, but it's enough of them to be a problem. The people claiming all Tea Partiers are racists are in the minority. They're certainly not worth your attention when the much larger, much more significant problem is the provable racism that's tainting the image of your political movement.

in washington state....thats not all of america.

and I do believe black americans are lazy...but I also believe that white americans are lazy...

its how the poll was conducted genius...how they ask the questions...come on use your head.

Let me put it this way, greg. If someone posts an article about Obama's irresponsible spending, would you feel annoyed when liberals show up and write off-topic rants about Bush's spending?

Happens constantly!

This discussion is about Tea Party racism, and you're repeatedly trying to distract from that issue.

Philosophy is really not your forte is it!

You can't discuss one group being "Racist" only, without bringing out the racism of the other groups, that say the one group is racist.

That's "Reality", which you seem to ignore, conveniently.

Stop whining!

in washington state....thats not all of america.

Reading is FUNdamental, james. You should really click on links before you comment about them.

"Led by Prof. Christopher Parker, the 2010 Multi-state Survey of Race & Politics"

Happens constantly!

I know, and I remarked that I don't like it when I see it. You dodged the point. Again.

biased poll did they ask the tea party if they thought whites were lazy???? dont think so

only the easily led would believe such a biased and racist poll such as this.

did they ask the question if the tea party thought whites were lazy????

No, but they didn't ask if blacks were lazy either -- not in those exact words. Instead, it asked if they agree with the statement, "if blacks would only try harder, they would be just as well off as whites." This eliminates your comparative problem, because the question's wording included both races to start with. From a starting point, it claims whites are successful, and blacks aren't because they aren't trying hard enough. The conclusion is that they think blacks are lazy or irresponsible.

This is the second time you've tried to criticize the poll, and fallen flat on your face because you commented without having read it. I'd recommend you give it a glance or two before you formulate your next reply.

You dodged the point. Again.

How is "Being to the point" dodging?

Like I said, THAT YOU KEEP DODGING (Mr. Philosopher), You can't discuss one group being "Racist" only, without bringing out the racism of the other groups, that say the one group is racist.

How is "Being to the point" dodging?

You claim that bringing up vaguely related topics is fair game. I brought up the fact that bringing up Bush when talking about Obama would be fair game under those rules. I remarked that I don't like seeing that, and I assume you don't either. You said it happens constantly, but dodged whether or not it qualifies as a fair rebuttal to criticisms of Obama. The fact that something happens, which I acknowledged from the beginning, does not make it correct. Under the criteria you've laid out, ranting about Bush when Obama is the topic is a perfectly fair rebuttal. If you disagree, you are a hypocrite for applying your silly rules inconsistently. I, meanwhile, have stated that it is an invalid rebuttal in both cases, and that I prefer to keep things on-topic.

And that's how you dodged the point. Hope that clears everything up for you.

Now, back on topic. The Tea Party has a statistically significant over-proportion of racists as compared to the rest of the population. This is a problem that should be addressed from within, because it's damaging the party's reputation and its effectiveness as a tool for social change. Let's try to talk about that for a little while.

The Tea Party has a statistically significant over-proportion of racists as compared to the rest of the population

Really?

County, City, State, Country, what population?

How many people are in the teaparty to evaluate that fact?

Who counted every teaparty member?

See the point, Steve.

It's all conjecture, with theory only, no facts.

What about the guy or gal, sitting at home, never to see a picket sign or protest park, that is calling themselves a teaparty member. Are they included? What about "Black's, Hispanics, Larouche protestor's, Protestant's, catholic's, Liberal's, progressive's, etc... that may be in the teaparty movement. Was that concidered or just a general consensus.

if that claims is going to be made, I would say, they need to get more specific, on who was the racist part and who wasn't.

I'll bet the government had the census worker's, secretly counting teaparty protest's.

It's all a Left ploy, to demonize the teaparty, ONLY!

It's a lame argument!

County, City, State, Country, what population?

Read the link.

Who counted every teaparty member?

Not necessary, and a pretty lame argument to be perfectly frank. Statistics never count every single member of any group, but with a large enough sample size you can extrapolate data that extends to more members. This poll surveyed about 1,000 people. That number is the standard sample size for most national polls, including pre-election surveys, which tend to accurately predict election results.

If you want to take a look at the study and bring up specific problems with its methodology, feel free. "They didn't ask every Tea Partier" isn't a valid criticism. At that point you're criticizing the notion of polling anyone, for anything, ever -- despite the fact that polls have shown to be accurate the vast majority of the time.

What about the guy or gal, sitting at home, never to see a picket sign or protest park, that is calling themselves a teaparty member. Are they included?

Seeing as they did a random sampling of people, yes.

What about "Black's, Hispanics, Larouche protestor's, Protestant's, catholic's, Liberal's, progressive's, etc... that may be in the teaparty movement. Was that concidered or just a general consensus.

Again: random sample means yes, that was considered as well.

I'm getting the sneaking suspicion that you don't really know how statistics work.

I'll bet the government had the census worker's, secretly counting teaparty protest's.

Oh yes, that's it. The government sent out a secret memo to tens of thousands of census workers, which never leaked for some reason, and then those census workers happened to be part of the random sampling of 1,000 Americans that were polled in the survey.

When I don't know about something, I choose not to debate about it. You're pretending to be an expert about something you're clearly clueless about. It's kind of embarrassing to watch, really.

Thanks for finally getting on-topic, though. I appreciate that.

Oh Steve:

Not necessary, and a pretty lame argument to be perfectly frank

Not neccassary?

Are you kidding, especially if your going to lump in one entire group!

Slap, Slap, shake Shake, Wake up Steve!!! Your Dreaming the Leftist's dream.

but with a large enough sample size

What, as in most poll's, 1,000 out of how many?

Again, Shake, Shake, Slap, Slap, Wake up!

When I don't know about something, I choose not to debate about it.

Please!

You're pretending to be an expert about something you're clearly clueless about. It's kind of embarrassing to watch, really.

Do you have a spy camara in my house?

Your the one pretending it's a perfect poll. Do you believe the poll's that show "Republicans could win the house and senate?

Actually it started in 2009 and was again denounced in a letter to the Congressional Black Caucus four months earlier than the NAACP resolution

I should've been more clear, Kane. I didn't mean to imply that the Tea Party did nothing before the NAACP's public statement. However, before they were made a spectacle, their responses were after-the-fact and weak. The problem persisted and they didn't take stronger steps to match the persistence of the racist elements. I think they should've taken a stronger stance, earlier. Even now I think their responses are a bit weak, but they're at least doing more than they were.

This was in spite of the fact that Black speakers had already appeared on Tea party stages at rallies around the country.

"I'm not racist. Look at my black best friend!"

Not neccassary?

Are you kidding, especially if your going to lump in one entire group!

What, as in most poll's, 1,000 out of how many?

I have to amend my prior statement:

I'm now completely certain that you don't understand how statistics work.

Do you believe the poll's that show "Republicans could win the house and senate?

That's not particularly relevant to the discussion, but yes, I do. Well, technically I believe they could win the House. I'm not sure that enough seats are in contention in the Senate for them to gain the majority. But generic ballot polling that shows them taking a slim majority in the House seems reasonable to me.

I'm now completely certain that you don't understand how statistics work.

And you choose to ignore reality and fall on number's, instead of "real People".

I think we know where you stand now.

Thank's for playing!

You go home with, "Statistical values".

Sad!

Steve...I did read your article, and also read the article on how the poll was conducted.

This was not a poll that covered the entire demographics of the TEA party, they chose 5 states that were "battlegound" states in the 2008 election, and the claims of racism were based on certain questions, such as:

"if blacks would only try harder, they would be just as well off as whites."

You can interpret that question in many ways, don't you think? It could be interpreted to mean that the person being questioned feels that skin color is no barrier to success if they answer yes. Let's assume that you answered yes. Does that mean that you feel that blacks don't try hard enough? Or does it mean that you feel that blacks have the same oppotunities as whites? On the other hand, let's assume you answered no. What does that mean? That blacks, no matter how hard they try, are unable to be successful? Or that blacks are lazy and not trying? No matter how you answer that question, it can be interpreted as racist...because the question itself is racially based.

Are you refuting the responses in #1.2 and #1.3? Let's see, as of this current moment as I type this, we have had three people on this seed that are espousing liberal points of view. Two of them claim that all TEA party members are racist. One of them (you) are not. Does that make for an effective poll that would say the majority of Liberals think all TEA party members are racist? Of course not. Neither does the survey you mentioned support the argument that they are.

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.)

It's based on questions answered by 511 people? And that you would consider a representative sampling of a nation?

And, you haven't answered the main question posed here. If the TEA party is so racist...why are these black conservatives defending it? Do you think that educated and intelligent black people who actually belong to and support the TEA party wouldn't have NOTICED if they were surrounded by racists? Do you truly believe that an organization that you think is 46% racist haven't noticed all the black people in their midst?

First off, thanks for reading. You have a lot more intellectual curiosity than our friend greg here.

This was not a poll that covered the entire demographics of the TEA party, they chose 5 states that were "battlegound" states in the 2008 election

But can you name a reason that those battleground states do not represent the Tea Party as a whole? Can you cite a relevant example of why Tea Partier opinions in those states would be significantly different from Tea Partier opinions in other states?

You can interpret that question in many ways, don't you think?

Not particularly. I think you're stretching a bit to come to that conclusion. The question's clear intent is that blacks are responsible for their own caste, by nature of their actions and not trying hard enough. You can twist out an alternate interpretation, but it's certainly not one that resembles common sense.

Not to mention that since you read the poll, you also saw other statistics regarding Muslims and Hispanics. Any one question might be put under scrutiny, but the poll showed a clear and consistent pattern of racism and mistrust towards non-whites.

Two of them claim that all TEA party members are racist. One of them (you) are not. Does that make for an effective poll that would say the majority of Liberals think all TEA party members are racist? Of course not. Neither does the survey you mentioned support the argument that they are.

So you're actually comparing three responses on the internet to a professionally conducted poll from a group of statisticians that took a sample size from over 1,000 respondents? Please, merle. When I saw that you had read the poll, I got optimistic about having a real discussion. Don't fall into the "polls are BS" red herrings that greg resorted to.

It's based on questions answered by 511 people? And that you would consider a representative sampling of a nation?

It's based on a representative sample of 1,000 people. If the survey-takers had excluded non-TP members, we would have no control group to compare the statistics to. Knowing that 46% of Tea Partiers think blacks are lazy is a meaningless number unless you can compare it to the rest of the population (26%).

Again, this is simply how statistics work. 1,000 people is a valid representation of America in opinion polling. Tea Partiers do not compose half of America, so 500 is more than enough for a valid representation of the group.

If the TEA party is so racist...why are these black conservatives defending it? Do you think that educated and intelligent black people who actually belong to and support the TEA party wouldn't have NOTICED if they were surrounded by racists? Do you truly believe that an organization that you think is 46% racist haven't noticed all the black people in their midst?

Blacks fought for the South in the Civil War, you know. I guess that means slavery was A-OK?

I don't think the presence of some token blacks automatically discounts racism within a group. I think that some black people excuse or ignore the racism, and others may not have noticed it. After all, racists rarely say racist things when in the presence of a person of another race. Most modern racists aren't the type to scream at a black person, they just think less of them and keep it to themselves. Claiming that the presence of black apologists means that racism doesn't exist just seems silly to me.

steve by asking them if they thought if blacks would be as good as whites if they tried harder...for one is still one sided. its common knowledge that their is a disparity in the incomes. there could be many causes to that.

welfare, food stamps. I know personally that I and many others believe that welfare is racist against blacks...that social security is racist against blacks, that the war on drugs is racist against blacks....all programs with good intentions....but the fact of the matter is whites are also victim to this. do I think people should stop being lazy and refuse help from the government....yes I do....do I think it affects blacks at a higher percentage than whites...yes I do....it was designed to do that genius.

the question and poll are still biased and racist and want to continue the racist entitlement agenda. they cannot see why people think that. They never asked the question if the tea party sees blacks as the victim of racism through government programs now did they?

all polls are biased genius.

your claim this one is not shows yours.

Wow Steve:

I don't think the presence of some token blacks automatically discounts racism within a group.

How many Black's constitute a "Token"?

I think that some black people excuse or ignore the racism,

Really! And you've actually met how many that ignore that comment?

Most racists aren't the type to scream at a black person, they just think less of them and keep it to themselves.

Really, again. If they keep it to themselves, how do you know they are racist's?

Claiming that the presence of black apologists

Racist?

Your a polster aren't you steve, or a closet, quiet racist?

Now Steve, I can see why your refusing to concede that the poll is skewed since you have assumed the position that it is a correct sampling of the demographics of the Tea Party.

I'm not necessarily denying that the poll is skewed, I'm saying that a skew would be insignificant to the point being made. Again, this goes back to explaining how statistics work.

The issue isn't so much about the number of Tea Partiers with racist views, as it is about how Tea Partiers are statistically more likely to hold racist views than the average American. Since you aren't arguing on poll phrasing like merle, I'll assume from a starting point that you agree the responses imply racism. If you want to take issue with that later, it's fine, but to address your point about skew I'm going to assume all things being equal.

So, say the questions were skewed and inflated. They would, by necessity of that assumption, be skewed and inflated proportionally. Let's say they alter the questions to reduce the skew. They would still be asking the same questions of both Tea Partiers and non-Tea-Partiers, meaning we'd see the numbers for both groups go down at roughly the same rate.

Let's take the question about black laziness for example. If you altered the question and the Tea Partiers were reduced to 30%, the rest of the population would be similarly reduced by about a third, to 13%. That still means that the Tea Partiers are twice as likely to hold racist views as the rest of the population.

No one seems to be denying that racist elements exist within the Tea Party. The apologists are only claiming that it isn't a pervasive problem significantly different from the rest of the population. This poll suggests otherwise, and reducing the skew wouldn't change that.

steve

of course there is racist elements in the tea party.....but to point out the faults of one party when the party you are in have the same faults....racism....that is called hypocrisy.

so thank you again I already knew that about the left. that is the point.

of course there is racist elements in the tea party.....but to point out the faults of one party when the party you are in have the same faults....racism....that is called hypocrisy.

Actually, hypocrisy would be criticizing the racist elements in one party while excusing it in another. Simply talking about one doesn't mean a person is obligated to talk about the other as well. The left has racists, I don't deny it or excuse it. That isn't the topic at hand at the moment, so I'm not addressing it. Staying on-topic is not hypocrisy.

Not particularly. I think you're stretching a bit to come to that conclusion. The question's clear intent is that blacks are responsible for their own caste, by nature of their actions and not trying hard enough.

Okay, then how would YOU answer that question? Yes, or No? Because I can interpret your answer as racist either way. If you answer yes, you think blacks are lazy, if you answer no, then you think they cannot acheive success equal to whites no matter how hard they try.

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).

Which means, that out of the 1,006 people surveyed, 51% responded. If you look at the numerical statistics above in my previous poll...511 people responded to the survey, and 157 of them claimed they had never heard of the TEA party.

Which means that this survey was taken from a grand total of 354 people. Of those 354 people, 117 people said they strongly approved of the TEA party. And from those 117 people come the "statistics" upon which this survey bases their claims of racism.

So you're actually comparing three responses on the internet to a professionally conducted poll from a group of statisticians that took a sample size from over 1,000 respondents?

I guess you skipped over the part where I said "Of course not."

I don't think the presence of some token blacks automatically discounts racism within a group.

How can you so devalue their intelligence and opinions by referring to them as "token blacks"? Did you even watch the video? Are you honestly incapable of believing that a black person might reject the Liberal doctrines? Do you truly and sincerely believe that any black person in the United States today is that gullible that they could be surrounded by racists and not realize it? Come on, Steve, you know better than that.

Blacks fought for the South in the Civil War, you know. I guess that means slavery was A-OK?

No, it simply means that some blacks were more comfortable supporting a lifestyle and home they knew and were familiar with and were resistant to change...not an uncommon attitude among the human race, black or white. What you are really saying is that they are "Uncle Toms". Sad, Steve, I was expecting better from you.

but when you are racist yourself and accusing the other of being racist????? kinda ruins your argument. and that is not a direct attack on you calling you racist....just so you know..its a generalization...if you would like I can explain it a bit more.

anyway...it makes you look well........ummmm i would rather not get banned.

but hey keep up the not so good argument steve.....you are doing a great job at not really proving anything and showing your bias and willful blindness.

but hey it works for you.

Which means that this survey was taken from a grand total of 354 people. Of those 354 people, 117 people said they strongly approved of the TEA party. And from those 117 people come the "statistics" upon which this survey bases their claims of racism.

And as I pointed out, you haven't offered a reason why we should expect these responses would be significantly different from a sample taken from a different state. The same goes for the sample size. More responses would make for a smaller margin of error, but as it stands the survey confesses to a 3% margin of error. At absolute worst-case scenario, for the "black laziness" question for example, that brings the TP racism down to 43%, and the rest of the population up to 29%. It's still a significant difference.

I guess you skipped over the part where I said "Of course not."

I didn't skip it, I pointed out how you're making a false equivalency fallacy. You're saying "these three people are an invalid sample size, so these 300 people must be an invalid sample size too, so conclusions from either are bunk." You're comparing them as if they're the same, then dismissing both.

How can you so devalue their intelligence and opinions by referring to them as "token blacks"? Did you even watch the video? Are you honestly incapable of believing that a black person might reject the Liberal doctrines? Do you truly and sincerely believe that any black person in the United States today is that gullible that they could be surrounded by racists and not realize it? Come on, Steve, you know better than that.

I'm not saying they aren't sincere, I'm saying their presence itself doesn't excuse or disprove racism. I thought I made that point pretty clear, but you went off on a tangent arguing with things I never said.

but when you are racist yourself and accusing the other of being racist?????

But that's where your argument falls apart. I, personally, am not racist. Therefore, I can talk about racists in both groups as much as I'd like. Right now I'm focusing on the Tea Partiers. If someone starts up an article about racism in the Democratic party, I can comment there too. In neither case would I be a hypocrite for it.

Depending on the pollsters predetermined opinion of the answer they expect to get, it can be interpreted either to say that blacks are held back by racism or by lack of trying (lazy). What is missing is the follow up question to the given answer: "Why do you feel this way?"

Again: if a skew exists, it exists proportionally. The argument you're making would only work if they asked for a reason why of the non-TPers, but not of the TPers. If they asked why, they would see the numbers deflate at roughly the same rate. That means that if they altered the questions to ask why, we'd see both numbers deflate, but the Tea Party would still show more racism proportional to the rest of the population. This is really just repeating a point I made previously, but it bears reiteration.

again I pointed out that social security was racist, as well as welfare and the drug war. these are institutionalized into our society..yet you want to blast on a party that really isnt a party and that there is no real evidence that the rate is much higher than that of democrats???

I do know that the tea party is still partly libertarians and I have not met one yet who was a racist. On my profile i posted an article on how ron paul discusses how the drug war is racist a week or two ago. I am for individual rights of get this you will be shocked....AMERICANS.....not my own special interests...not trying to force the other side to bend to my morals...i think people should be free to do what they want as long as they dont infringe upon the rights of others.

so being that the tea party is partly libertarian i would think that would more than offset any increase in racists that the republicans would bring.

you need to focus you attention on what is really causing the problems in our country...and that is our government as a whole...its not just one party.

peace to you steve.

Steve, you need to read your own poll...look at the questions and compare the responses...if you really think that 88% of TEA partiers agreeing with the statement

"Irish, Italians, Jewish and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without special favors."

, is indicative of racism...as opposed to 70% of all respondents agreeing with the same remark, then what you are saying is that 70% of the entire population of the United States is racist. And since 56% of people opposed to the TEA party agreed with the same remark...well, how much of a blanket indictment of racism in the TEA party is that, really?

Steve, you need to read your own poll...look at the questions and compare the responses...

I did, and I stand by my statement. Each of these questions points to a pattern of racism and mistrust of non-whites. Rather than address that on its own terms, you're culling one outlier question and isolating the general public response, while quietly ignoring the Tea Party response. My point has never been about the general response or the Tea Party response in themselves, but how they inform us in relation to each other.

The fact is that in every single question regarding race, including the one you just pointed to, the Tea Partiers showed responses that signified more mistrust or outright racism of non-whites. It's a pattern that runs throughout every question on the poll, towards every non-white race. The question you're pointing to has a slimmer margin, but the disparity remains. The reality is that the Tea Party has a greater degree of racism and mistrust than the general populous.

Think about what you're honestly arguing right now. The poll, which you've looked at the results of, shows a clear correlation between racism and Tea Party members. I'm not claiming all Tea Party members are racists, and you're not claiming that no Tea Party members are racists. I'm saying that an inordinate number of racists have infiltrated the Tea Party and as a result are tarnishing its image. Why are you even bothering to argue with that?

Steve you didn't answer my seemingly innocuous question.

Because it was based on a false premise, and I don't play silly word games with people who don't bother to read the research I provide. If you had checked the poll details like I repeatedly told you to, you would know that the answers were marked as agreement or disagreement, but respondents weren't limited to only using those exact words. They could give an answer as detailed or vague as they liked. If they felt they didn't come down on one specific side or the other, they could decline to answer altogether.

Is white a color?

In light, white is the combination of all colors. In pigment, it's the lack of any colors. That's the kind of answer you get when you talk to a graphic designer.

Funny how the Democrat's haven't helped "Blacks", Hispanics" or any other group yet, due to the fact, "THAT'S THEIR CAMPAIGN PROMISE EVERY ELECTION YEAR"!!!!!!

There's one of those contradictions in rightist rhetoric- they say the Democrats don't do anything for blacks, then in the next breath, accuse the Democrats of doing too much for blacks:). That begs the question...do rightists think Democrats should favor blacks? I mean, they're always complaining on our behalf (ahem) that the Dems aren't doing anything for us, right? On the other hand, they say Dems do too much for blacks, so do they want them to do nothing? Which is it? Is one, the other, or both? Or is it one or the other, depending on which one seems to work best for their own, self-serving, tribal purposes at any given time?

heh...heh

In light, white is the combination of all colors. In pigment, it's the lack of any colors. That's the kind of answer you get when you talk to a graphic designer.

Well, if you talk to an interior designer, they will answer with a question..."Which shade of white?" Trust me, I have spent hours upon hours debating shades of white with designers. Artic White is nothing like Alabaster White...if you are an interior designer.

Think about what you're honestly arguing right now. The poll, which you've looked at the results of, shows a clear correlation between racism and Tea Party members. I'm not claiming all Tea Party members are racists, and you're not claiming that no Tea Party members are racists. I'm saying that an inordinate number of racists have infiltrated the Tea Party and as a result are tarnishing its image. Why are you even bothering to argue with that?

Because your argument is based on such a small segment of the population that there is no way to gauge the accuracy of its results. Of the 70% (approx 358) of the people who agreed with the first statement (and I am using that one because it actually has the greatest differential percentage wise) approx 103 were TEA party supporters. The remaining 255 people who ALSO agreed with the statement were self identified as Middle of the Road, Total Skeptics (against the TEA Party), and Never Heard Of (the TEA Party). Approximately 115 of the Middle of the Road people questioned ALSO agreed with that statement. Are you saying that 67% of the MR'ers are racist?

You CANNOT extrapolate the results into the mainstream population by saying "Well, if we had asked more people they would ALL have responded the same way these people did based on their self identification as MR, TS, NHO or TP supporters. Because people are people, they will NOT all respond the same way simply because of political affiliation. With the small sample data you have presented, it only takes 10 people to alter the percentage point by 2%, and the sample data they have presented is taken from a geographically small portion of the country...are you truly saying poll results would not vary if taken in different areas of the country?

I am White, Southern, Female and Conservative (mostly). Based on your "poll" I would be dead set against gay marriage...but I'm not. I support the rights of gays to be married, let them hang along with the rest of us. Misery loves company.

Are you saying that 67% of the MR'ers are racist?

No, because I don't think you could extrapolate "racist" from one question. I'm talking about the poll showing a pattern of behavior. Throughout the questions, we see a clear indication that Tea Partiers are statistically more likely to have racist feelings than non-TPers. Again, you're concentrating on one half of the statistic, which I don't find terribly interesting or relevant. I don't really care if 1/4 of Americans think blacks are lazy, but I do find it interesting that inside the Tea Party that number is doubled. It's comparative analysis that makes this poll meaningful.

are you truly saying poll results would not vary if taken in different areas of the country?

I'm saying I don't see any reason to believe that. The poll author made sure to poll California as well, as a control group to the rest of his geographical chosen battleground states. If California had shown a significant difference to the rest of the respondents, it would certainly be worth noting. Since nothing of that sort was noted, I can only assume that the results were generally the same. You haven't given me any reason to doubt it, other than acting incredulous.

I am White, Southern, Female and Conservative (mostly). Based on your "poll" I would be dead set against gay marriage...but I'm not.

Here's the problem: you're personalizing statistics. This poll says nothing about what you, personally, would do. It says that other people like you responded in a certain way, and perhaps that someone like you is more likely to oppose gay marriage than a woman from Vermont. Those are undeniable facts, and they don't become less true just because you have gay friends.

By the way, I've been calling you merle this whole time. Would you prefer liz?

Oops.....so much for your poll results.

I'd say he's probably right, and tacit racism is a pervasive problem in white culture. It doesn't really contradict anything in this poll, however. Like liz (or merle), you're attacking one of the numbers in this poll, when the correlation is what makes it significant. Even if 80% of whites have tacit levels of racism, the poll clearly shows a pattern of more Tea Party members expressing overt racism.

Again, I'm not sure why you're fighting so hard against this. I'm not claiming the Tea Party is composed of racists. I just think that the Party had poor leadership in its foundation stages, and by throwing open the doors and inviting everyone with a chip on their shoulders, they unwittingly became a haven for undesirables. Now they're taking steps to remedy it, but the work isn't done yet.

Here's the problem: you're personalizing statistics. This poll says nothing about what you, personally, would do. It says that other people like you responded in a certain way, and perhaps that someone like you is more likely to oppose gay marriage than a woman from Vermont. Those are undeniable facts, and they don't become less true just because you have gay friends.

And your poll leaves out all personal identity whatsoever. There is no one on earth who is "like" me. I am an individual, and my opinions and beliefs and experiences and feelings are unique to me. Other people may share some of my beliefs, many people may share many of my opinions, some people may share my feelings...but no one on earth is just like me, with the exact same feelings and opinions and reasoning on all issues, because no one but me has lived my life. And that applies to every human on the planet. When you ignore that, when you decide that because a person feels one way about one thing, they therefore must feel a certain way about something else entirely...you degenerate into bigotry.

And you just disproved your own statement.

I asked:

are you truly saying poll results would not vary if taken in different areas of the country?

To which you responded:

I'm saying I don't see any reason to believe that.

But you then say:

perhaps that someone like you is more likely to oppose gay marriage than a woman from Vermont.

So which is it? Regional differences do or do not matter? So you are agreeing with me that if the poll had taken responses from people in Vermont, (why Vermont, BTW?) they would have had different results?

And, I'm not for allowing gay marriage simply because I have gay friends. I support gay marriage because to do otherwise is to support gender discrimination due to sexual orientation.

By the way, I've been calling you merle this whole time. Would you prefer liz?

Doesn't matter...Merle was the name of my beloved Catahoula Leopard Dog who was my best friend and fur child for 14 years. I lost him to old age seven years ago. Liz is short for Lizard, my female dog who is now 13. I have been Merleliz for so long some people still call me Merleliz, even though they have known me personally now for years and know my real name, LOL!

Steve Watts,

What are you doing man! You might as well use stats to argue with a five year old on why Santa can't possibly make to every house in the world in one night. You aren't going to convience that child any more than you will convince them.

Articles like this are meant to be enjoyed.

This is the opposition:

"Your linked study CAN'T possibly be right, its "skewed" because only 1000+ people were asked in ONLY five states! Well that right thar is just bunk.

But I tell you what, these random black guys that I found out back says that none of the tea partiers are racist! That PROVES with out a shadow of a doubt of what I've decided in my head already!"

That's what you are dealing with, classic false attribution error.

There's one of those contradictions in rightist rhetoric- they say the Democrats don't do anything for blacks, then in the next breath, accuse the Democrats of doing too much for blacks:).

Plants, you can't go putting those comments back to back like that you'll cause em to self destruct!

Yeah, I know CK...but common sense is all I have to work with. Partisan rhetoric and BS just don't appeal to me.

Ah, well...past my bedtime. Good night all and sweet dreams!

Oh, wait!! Your poll has 30 responses and 87% of those disagree that the TEA party is racist!

Case Solved...we have empirical DATA that PROVES the TEA party isn't racist!

: Statistically speaking of the three-ohiogal, plantsmantix, and steve watts-two of them are racist if all three are white and American

Let's say this again: Two of them are racist if all three of them are white and American.

And to confirm the logic, lets do the inverse: Two of them aren't racist if all three of them are not white and American.

Wow, CK! Whowudathunk you would have cleared two of us of being racist so damn easily!

And because your logic says nothing about the third. We can assume that the third individual has a 50/50 shot at being racist!

If I end up being the third person and you take a 50% chance and decide I'm racist, I assure you that I won't be running around all over NV trying to convince all my friends on the "internets" that I'm not.

I'll leave that sort of insecure behavior to the pros!

I would agree, that is why I use the term most in my statement. And, I do believe that most conservatives are not racist.

Borncorn #5, do you have any evidence to prove your opinion? If one were to listen to the media one would come to that conclusion. But, I wouldn't imagine that the media would expose liberals' or democrats' statements or acts of racism. They make silly excuses for them (liberals) when they happen to say something that, coming from the mouth of a conservative, would be labeled racist. It is a political tool used & abused by the liberals to win arguments, to stir up division, to gain power.