An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
White America?
Tyrone notwithstanding, like Stephen Colbert, I don’t see race.
37 Responses to “White America?”
Wow, look at all of those old fat people. No wonder they are concerned about health care…there is a millions dollars worth of heart conditions in that picture alone.
If those people would march 4x a week, we'd cut health care costs in half.
The pics are interesting, but I don't understand your reference, “Like Stephen Colbert….” Can you explain?
Joe:
I also don't know what you mean by the post.
I watched most of the photos and videos and I did see an African American (Washington DC) motorcycle policeman. T. S. showed a picture with a black young man. I am sure there must have been a few more African Americans in the crowds.
Pacatrue, from Wikipedia:
My reference was to say it is so obvious as to be undeniable that there are statistically next to no African-Americans at the rally. I've paged through hundreds of photos. I saw the motorcycle cop, and a woman standing outside a federal building. I've updated my post to acknowledge the one Tyrone found. But if you have to go looking, that sort of proves the point now, doesn't it?
The one black guy was probably paid to be there…or maybe liked the novelty of being like Jeremy Pevin at the BET Awards.
Thanks for explaining, Joe.
Dorian
Got you. Thanks, Joe.
Please notice towards the back the official flag (as opposed to the battle flag) of the Confederate States of America. I just want to know one thing … how many of those people there who support waving the flag of a defunct foreign nation cried foul when Mexican flags were waved at pro-immigration rallies?
Considering that 95% of black voters voted for Obama, is it surprising that not many blacks would be in a crowd protesting his policies? Now, I could be wrong, but I'd guess that the number of people who voted for Obama in that crowd is very small, white or black. If you take out the pool of Obama voters that does not leave many blacks.
Does anyone point to the lack of whites at a NAACP rally?
It is a correct observation that there are few black people there, but I'm not sure what point it proves. That republicans are mostly white? We already knew that. If you're point is that people who oppose Obama are racially motivated, your evidence could also be used to support that black people who support him are also racially motivated. I'd actually be willing to bet that more black supporters of Barack Obama are racially motivated than are his white opponents, who are mostly motivated by ideology IMO. According to my sister who works at a D.C. charter school where something like 95% of the students are black, if you don't like Obama, you're considered next to Satan on the evil scale. I'm not black, so anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there is immense pressure within the black community to support Barack Obama because they see him as one of them. There's nothing wrong with that, I completely understand the sentiment. I just don't think your picture is particularly revealing of anything.
Hey, I'm 65, probably close to the average of these “Tea Partiers” (pace Sam Addams). Like me, they got theirs. The difference is that they want to make sure they got it all. Screw the X,Y and whatever generations that might not get any.
Oh, Leonidas (may Sparta not turn over in her grave), I'm willing to bet that you will see a lot more white people at an NAACP rally than you will see black people at a “Tea Party”. Confederate Flag mean anything to you?
So my point was that it is ironic that a bunch of people that are marching against government intervention in their health care decisions are too irresponsible to take care of their own health.
I'm white, I've been to NAACP rallies, I have not been even close to the sole white present. Your point?
Also, most of them look as though they are already using govt. sponsored (Medicare) health care.
That one sign, “W.T.F. Barry stop looting.” Nothing racial there, at all.
Actually, Leo, there are usually far more whites at rallies having to do with African American issues than there were African Americans at the Tea Party march. Of course, that's not saying much, is it?
But… BUT… You're not a racist!.. You're a patriot!
ROTFL…
I wouldn't expect to see many African-Americans here. But the point of the picture of this Tea Party is that it is the talk radio and TV of white America which is stirring up white Americans to be against the multi-racial, multi-ethnic Democratic coalition.
These people aren't for America. These people are for **only** themselves without willing to recognize and negotiate with anyone who they consider different and/or un-American.
Oh I don't doubt it either. As for the Confederate flag, yes it does mean something to me, it represents Southern heritage and opposition to federal control over sovereign States. It represents the men who fought and died to preserve the Constitution as it was written. Having stated that, I am appalled by the racist uses the flag has often been put to, and I condemn such at every opportunity, but just because this symbol has been co-opted by some southern racist does not destroy what it represents to those of us who are not racist.
He is definately looting the taxpayer, I think you jump to an assumption without proof again Kathy, your kinda prone to it it seems.
Thats a rather silly comment SteveK
Seems to me these people are for being able to spend the money they earn as they see fit, not as Big Brother in government sees fit. Nothing more, nothing less.
Never said otherwise, But I've seen some NAACP protests and I'd estimate 50- 100 blacks per every white I saw in the crowds. Still more than blacks at a teaparty protest, but then again 95% of whiles (who represent a much larger share of the population) do not support the causes the NAACP protests.
Oh, I get it now, this is a post about something called Colbert.
What's a Colbert?
I agree there probably weren't many black people there, but what is the conclusion you're trying to extrapolate from that?
Considering that “Constitution as it was written” included that part about 3/5's of a person, doesn't that mean that one of “the racist uses the flag has been put to” was indeed the war itself? Personally, I've never bought the whole state's rights argument for the war, in that the main right they were protecting was to hold slaves.
Wow. The mythical “Angry American,” “Ugly American,” or “Large-vehicle-driving overweight hatred-stereotyped AMerican” gets to be, what else, hated by nihilistic little leftist US-haters in degenerate PC conformity, along with convention-fulfilling pathological hatred of the Confederacy and the South by extension (except that blacks and others who vote Democratic are “acceptable” Southerners, of course), and other excuses for hatred of the intelligent opposition to the increasingly misbehaving Dems.
How much worse is it going to be, how much lower are the low-lifes going to go, if the public option fails?
Even though professional extremist liars like Wise can be invited on CNN to say we are institutionally racist and opposition to ObamaCare is, naturally, racist, and others can be badgered repeatedly by the likes of Don Lemon to say that the protests are racist, intelligent people know better than that.
We've also been treated to regurgitated lies about “temper tantrums” about the protests (while the true children are those who demand their government entitlement and lunatic legislation, NOW!) and all that's missing is repetition of the “angry white males” and “extremists” lies post-1994 — the silly scapegoating of talk radio (other than far-left talk radio, that is truly hate-filled right now along with being the site of true temper tantrums and health-care desperation) has already been in effect.
* * *
“it is the talk radio and TV of white America which is stirring up white Americans to be against the multi-racial, multi-ethnic Democratic coalition.”
Untrue. It is about an increasing fraction of the public this year expressing rising opposition to the excesses and destructive behavior and legislative efforts of the liberal Democrats in Washington.
” As for the Confederate flag, yes it does mean something to me, it represents Southern heritage and opposition to federal control over sovereign States.”
Really, Leonidas??? Really???? Holy cow, a flag that was used for all of, what? A few years? …this flag represents “heritage”? Even the British flag was flown in the area for longer than the Confederate Flag. How many Southern black people get all nostagic for those good ol' heritage days? It's used as a tool of intimidation, and you know it. “Heritage”, he says. Please, don't insult the intelligence of the other people on this thread.
The confederate flag has nothing to do with states rights except as a tool of politicians to rile up their constituents against a federal government they are not in control of. While the Southern politicians were in power, they had no problem using federal power to ram federal power down the throats of northern states. The fugitive slave act was a prime example, forcing northern citizens to become the police force of the southern slave institution. The treachery of the south was totally race based. They wanted to keep whites in power, and african americans underfoot and enslaved. That was it, look at the papers when lincoln was elected, they were all afraid he would free the slaves, yes it was the use of federal power to do so, but as i pointed out, they had no problem with it when they were in power. (btw, lincoln never intended to use federal power to free slaves)
Now we see the same thing with the republican party today. Just a few years ago, many progressives and moderates questioned the trampling of rights by the republicans, going beyond the limits of the constitution and often ignoring it. We were told by them to put up, shut up, or move to another country. Our opposition supporting the constitution and opposing how they were violating it was labeled unpatriotic. Now they turn around and say they are all for states rights, and don't want the federal government messing with the rights of the people. With the evidence from the previous few years, I call bull. When they come forward with actual policy arguments that are constructive, i'll listen and disagree, but i will respect them for it. They deserve no respect for bringing forth the states rights argument, because they only hide behind it when it is convenient for them.
Bringing out the confederate flag is also racial, i don't care what they say about how it symbolizes freedom from federal oppression, the flags themselves are a symbol of oppression. Today just as during the 1860s, the motivation was predominantly racial. These people are still fighting the civil war. They lost. By the way, even before that our nation decided the federal government had to be stronger than the states and its laws universal across the nation, that is why we ditched the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution was created.
The picture is a good one and makes the point well: not many African Americans oppose Obama.
Yes, i'm being sarcastic. My point is that how you view this picture depends entirely on your point of view. If you think the protesters are all crazy, you are likely to notice that they are all white people who presumably have some sort of racial bias against the president, since there is obviously no other reason to oppose him. On the other hand, if you believe the protesters have good reason to be upset, you are likely to notice the lack of minorities, and wonder where they are. My view is somewhere in between.
I'll ignore the confederate flag for now since the number of confederate flags in this picture is likely less than the number of African Americans.
“Wow, look at all of those old fat people”
Since I am neither old nor fat (although I'm probably fatter than many of the people pictured), I assume that you will value my opinion as I respond to your comment:
“old”: Seems like it. They do seem a bit on the older side, compared to the median American. What’s your point? I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, so can you please explain how I should view your comment as anything less than agism?
“fat”: I'm not one to worry greatly that health care reform is an attempt to start some sort of social health engineering, but with comments like this, is it any wonder why some are worried? You are probably right that some of the people pictured don't know much about staying lean and fit, but that doesn't mean they haven't learned a thing or two (in their many decades, as you point out) about how government and politics work.
“Also, most of them look as though they are already using govt. sponsored (Medicare) health care.
”
How many times must we point out the flaws in this argument?
1. Someone being on Medicare does not imply that they must necessarily approve of Medicare as a government program.
2. Even if they do support it currently, that does not imply that they must necessarily support it if it were a new program. (ie. they hadn’t already sunk a lot of their own money into it, involuntarily)
3. Even if they would support it even if it were a new program, that does not imply that they must necessarily support expanding government involvement in health care even further.
4. Even if they do support the further expansion of government involvement in health care, that does not imply that they must necessarily support the reform that is currently being proposed.
Which of these points do you wish to dispute? You would actually need to dispute all of them in order for your argument to be anything more than a talking point designed to marginalize a large segment of the population. But I'd be satisfied for now if you could show how any one of those points is wrong.
Somehow I suspect that sarcasm is not in your vocabulary. Did you not see the little emoticon which you even copied?
Enough said.
I'm sorry, it wasn't clear to me to your emoticon meant “actually the point I'm making here is so indefensible it's funny.” If that's what you meant, I apologize, but that point has been made several times on this site in seriousness so the meaning of your emoticon was not obvious.
I'm not sure if most of the people on this thread live in all-white areas. For those of us who do have a little or a lot of diversity around us, it is striking when we see large groups of people and none of them are people of color — particularly if those large groups are in an area like DC. It's not weird or wrong (or racist) to notice that, although one does sometimes need to be careful about what one garners from it. For example, I'm an engineer, and I used to go into each class and count the other women in the room — generally about 10% once engineering split off from math and science. This could come from the fact that women aren't socialized as young people to really be interested in things like engines and machines, or it could indicate sexism on the part of admissions, or it could just be that girls suck at math. The point: regardless of what the real reason was (I would say it was 100% the first reason listed), having such a small number of women in the program meant that women weren't taken as seriously, and were often subject to hostility; this of course went to perpetuate the problem. Anyway, from this picture, probably the wrong way to go: “I'd actually be willing to bet that a much higher percentage of black supporters of Barack Obama are racially motivated than are his white opponents, who are mostly motivated by ideology IMO.” (@DLL83) So this quote wants to give the benefit of the doubt to the white protestors but of course not to the black people who chose not to show up — typical. Kind of the equivalent of “girls can't do math”.
Colbert's “I don't see race” theme is really pretty genius as a piece of satire of white right-wingers. The implication, of course, is that due to his whiteness and his ability to “not see race”, he has put himself in a nuetral or dispassionate position to judge race. That right-wing people (and, to be fair, a good number of white fauxgressives) think that they are nuetral arbiters of what does and what does not constitute racism is the joke.
There is only one standard to determine racism. Is a person treated differently for good or ill due to their race. Quotas and affirmative action are racism, discrimination and exclusion are racism, etc. Often difference in culture can be confused with or intermingled with racism, and it becomes difficult to distinguish, but the tow are not the same. For example, just because I view myself as a non racist, doesn't mean I can't speak out against “gangsta culture”, I feel the same way I do about some rap lyrics advocating violence in the same way I feel negetive towards Johnny Cash when he sings :I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die”.