Friday, July 16, 2010

Tea Party Racism??? Really?

Ben Jealous of the NAACP has all but frothed at the mouth condemning the Tea Party for alleged racism, citing fictional signs and equally fictional events for which there is no evidence. Al Sharpton has, in an apparently co-ordinated attack, risen up and accused the Tea Party of rasicm, citing their alleged vaunting of the doctrine of state's rights.

Sharpton says TEA Party folks want to turn the clock back when states could have policies that denied services to blacks based on their race and so forth.

Mr. Sharpton's historical memory does not go back very far. If he bothered to look a little further back he would find state's rights was used most by northern states and they used it mostly to refuse conforming to the fugitive slave law; every power, it seems, is like a sword and cuts both ways.

One asks if Mr. Sharpton would be so much against state's rights when slavery was Constitutional?

But the fact is Sharpton's criticism based on state's right is a red herring. It is something Sharpton invented out of whole cloth as a means of attacking the TEA party.

Any unbiased observer will conclude that the TEA party is not, in substance, about state's rights. TEA party people come from every state in the Union. If the TEA party were about state's rights one would have to ask which state and what issue?

Clearly, the TEA party is not about state's rights. If anything many states are in as much trouble with TEA party folks as the Feds. The TEA party is about a direct issue between We the People of the several states with the abusive taxation policies of the Federal Government.

It is absurd to say that the TEA party is about race as well. Look at the facts:

TEA party groups have supported candidates of all kinds of ethnic back grounds. TEA party folks support Marc Rubio, a cuban-american, over white Governor Christy in the Florida senate race, Indian-American Nikki Haley over three white opponents and Tim Scott, a black, over Strom Thurmond's son! TEA Party groups have also invited speakers of all races. Alan Keys has spoken at many rallies, as had Michelle Malkin, Star Parker and scores of others, and all have been greeted with great enthusiasm.

Clearly, the TEA party is conforming to Dr. Martin Luther King's exhortation to look on someone's character and not their color. It is the NAACP that is betraying the very core principle of one of its most famous members and leaders, for they are obsessed with race and color and nothing else and promoting a socialist, big government agenda. If they were about character they would give the TEA party their highest encomium while excoriating the embarrassment of the racist New Black Panthers. But such is not the case.

Rather than shun minorities, TEA parties are delighted to see individuals from all races join them in the fight to reduce government, keep more of the fruit of our labors, promote fiscal sanity in Washington and reclaim our Constitutional freedoms. If you can find race in that agenda then you are a sick person indeed and in need of help.

Even the recent highway sign in Iowa placing Barack Obama in the midst of two earlier tyrants, Adolph Hitler and Nicolai Lenin has nothing to do with race. Hitler and Lenin were white, for God's sake! It has to do with the nature of political though and methodology. And in regard to methodology and the goal of an all powerful unitary state Barack Obama most definitely has a place among these men.

The TEA party's name states its concern: TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY! The TEA party is about reigning back government and reclaiming individual liberty, and the fact that TEA party groups completely unhesitatingly support those of like mind, regardless of race, puts the lie to the false claims of race hustler Al Sharpton and the increasingly irrelevant NAACP––a group that has lost its way and has become a mere instrument of partisan politics.

These accusations of racism are completely false and they mark another instance of playing the race card as an act of desperation when liberals are losing the argument of substance. And like the boy who repeatedly cried wolf, what they are saying is losing effectiveness and traction each time they say it.

No comments:

Post a Comment