http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/06/now-playing-at-reasontv-is-the Now Playing at Reason.tv: Is the Tea Party Movement Racist? Michael C. Moynihan | May 6, 2010 Yesterday, The Washington Post reported that the Tea Party movement is "struggling to overcome accusations of racism," some of which has been perpetuated on The Washington Post's own opinion pages. Yesterday's New York Times, home to the most obsessively anti-Tea Party editorial page in America, was stunned to discover that "at least 32 African-Americans are running for Congress this year as Republicans, the biggest surge since Reconstruction, according to party officials." Previously, The Times reported that Tea Partiers are, on average, people with a high levels of education and higher than average incomes. So it would seem that they aren't, as some editorialists and pundits contend, simply a gang of subliterate militia men or, as actress Janeane Garofalo recently told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, a subsection of the white power movement. Wandering the recent Tax Day tea party in Washington DC with Reason.tv's Meredith Bragg, we saw some stupid signs—though none that could be considered offensive or racist. We talked to some people that claimed President Obama was both a Czarist and Bolshevik. We spoke to a former star of Saturday Night Live who has previously claimed that president might, in fact, be the anti-Christ. Or a communist. Or both. There were those who fretted that the United States were morphing into a Stalinist state. But mostly we spoke with protesters concerned that the Obama administration was spending recklessly; those interested in auditing the Federal Reserve; and various well-informed citizens seething about the General Motors bailout. So did we discover a Tea Party movement motivated by race, by the fact that we now have a black president? Did it seem as if their stated concerns about a government take over of health care and a ballooning national debt were simply a smokescreen, designed to concealing a racist agenda? Not exactly. Here is what we found: [video=youtube;Zf9BB6mrR3s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf9BB6mrR3s[/video]
When I see Fox News or MSNBC or whoever, spewing stuff like in the video above, it's time to change the channel.
Notice how this website is called sportstwo instead of sportstoo or sports2? the WO stands for Whites Only.
I'm referring to the polls that suggested that the income levels were above average. I.E., rich(er) people.
snips from two articles: On February 5-Super Tuesday- Obama did poorly in both New Jersey and Massachusetts, losing to Clinton by 10 and 15 points, respectively. The exit polls were in line with Obama's performance throughout the primary race: He did very well with blacks, wealthy voters, highly educated voters, and very young voters. He did poorly with working-class whites and older voters. In New Jersey, Obama was +20 among voters under the age of 29, but about -26 among voters over 50. and: Supporters of the Tea Party movement are wealthier and better educated than the average American, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll released Thursday. (same people)
That changes what I said...how? Rich people can't be racist? I'm not saying these people are (or aren't), but the idea that because they have money they aren't, is laughable.
The idea that people believe they are racist is a smear job. I think that's the point of the video. And Reason isn't democratic leaning, nor republican leaning.
Not setting up a strawman, just pointing out that the poll about the tea-party being wealthier or more educated meant that they couldn't be racist wasn't entirely true. Not saying they are, just that their education levels or wealth doesn't mean they mean they can't be or aren't.
If you're interested: http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/05/08/the-racist-tea-parties-debate/
Given that no one was making the point you were refuting, and that's pretty much what a strawman is, I don't see how you weren't setting up a strawman. Ed O.
