At least Dr King's niece has a brain and has not fallen in with people like Sharpton.

Damn and the other week it was scared because Palin was its biggest threat:rotfl2:
Isn't it amazing that you can come up with individuals who are widely regarded as a joke and a liablity and claim that they are threats to the opposition when their biggest threat they pose is to those they endorse.

Well Palin is a threat in addition to Beck and Fox News, thus why they are so reviled by the Left.Widely seen as a joke? hmm going to disagree with that.I'm not a fan of Palin but not blinded by my dislike for her and can see how popular she is.Not a fan of Beck but he is prob the most influential commentator out there currently.Think about it, his reports on Van Jones, Antia Dunn have forced their resignations from the Obama Regime, name a commentator who has done that recently? exactly. The Left is scared because they know they are going to lose big in November and prob in 2012 so they do what the left knows how to do, try to distract from the real debate with accusing some of being racist or trying to whine about Glenn Beck/Fox etc because things are not great for Left media right now, ratings/viewer problems and their golden boy is in trouble. Voters are ready to throw the bums out and it's making the Lefties heads spin exorcist style:)

Despite the idiocy of the rally. I have to hand it to the Beckster. Whitestock went far better than I expected. 87 thousand. It is obvious pubs are out in force this year and he did something VERY smart by banning signs. The lack of signs took away some of the power the racists had.

Do you get it Tea Party. If frakking moron Glen Beck can control racism in his rallies why cant you? I am waiting for an answer!

The "whitestock" comment, well....

http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/x...t_Green_sm.gif


LOL

So what specifically happened and was said to make you believe this was racist?

Or are you suggesting that it was racist merely because of the skin color of the vast majority of attendents?

Because it seems to me you are doing the latter, which by itself is racist. In fact, it seems as though you are probably far more racist than most at Beck's rally. And no, being of the same ethnicity does not preclude you from being a racist - it just makes you even more ignorant than the rest.

There was very few of color in that rally. You honestly believe anyone of color would be even remotely conformable IN the crowd after the events at the Mosque rally where a non Muslim was nearly pounded on?

Whitestock was a funny name I heard earlier today.

And don't try the ole projection tactic. Racism in Tea party rallies is well documented.

But if you want a more recent reminder of some of the people in these rallies.

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets...x_shirtguy.jpg

I lol'd. Especially at the Haiti part.:haha:

Mauitania? Where's that.....

or did he mean Mauritania...

Sure he's right, slave owning isn't just restricted to white people.

Beck might not be a representative of the GOP but he does represent them. I can't really comment as I haven't really seen any of his stuff. I do however agree that politics and religion don't mix.

As for Palin being a threat, you serious? She is ignorant. Beck from the stuff I have seen can string a sentence together.

Racism, from all sides, in all sorts of groups is well-documented.

Odd how the one group you condemn for it happens to be one which opposes your political ideology...

Now, are you simply a mindless automaton ideologue or are you going to explain how the things the Tea Party actually publically stand for are racist?

PS: Aren't there also well-documented cases of liberals organizing to crash Tea Party rallies by posing as racists and other types of scum in an attempt to demonize the movement? Or did you miss that memo too?

PPS: At least I don't think you're racist anymore ... ignorant is a better term.

unfortunately I think he is, he thinks people like Beck and Palin are something more than just a joke:doh:

1 t-shirt in 300,000+ people? How about a statistical analysis, instead. We'd need a decent number of random pictures (the news will of course try and use as many as they can find), then do a count of what % are racist. Though I am a little at a loss how an anti-slavery shirt is racist.

Stating something as a known fact that is entirely unsubstantiated often doesn't make it true.

I'm unwilling to make a statement one way or another about racism in such groups without pretty convincing statistics. I know I saw none driving down the street by a tea party thing here in town (it was right in front of my dentist's office, and I had to drive by about a mile of it after my appointment).

BTW, apply the same scrutiny to other rallies, say "million man march," or anti-war rallies.

No kidding. Reverse it and see what happens.

Nah you know how difficult it was to get that agent provocateur in place for that picture? Two tea party people saw him get out of the DNC van and had to be eliminated...

Dont expect alot of coverage on this event let alone 'random pictures' it is in the mainstream medias best interest to just let this pass with very little coverage.

No instead they will focus on the numbers and makeup of the crowd. The message is un-important and whipping up racisim paramount.

Now maybe It's just me but doesent the woman in the background of that picture appear to be of one of those 'other' races? The one with the cammo hat.

Isn't it funny how it's always "the mainstream media" that gets bashed by these types? Fox is the most watched new channel. Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al. have large radio audiences. Investors Business Daily, Drudge Report, and a bunch of other right conservative rags are huge. Krauthammer, Malkin, Coulter and the rest have columns in most every newspaper. The right wing media noise machine is huge.

Haven't they become "the mainstream media"?

Fox has the highest CABLE ratings. They don't touch the broadcast news in terms of viewers. The most eyeballs see the "mainstream" press, no question.

I like how a conservative editorial slant makes them "rags." Any conservative take on things is "the noise machine." Got it, as opposed to the "signal" which is whatever liberals are pushing.

Newspapers have editorial slants. It is public, they endorse candidates. You can look at said endorsements, and know with certainty where their slant is. News magazines and TV news pretend to be unbiased. They claim they are not biased, that is. Meanwhile, real journalists (newspapers) at least don't have that pretension.

Bottom line is that all studies of journalists at large shows a substantial bias in their political affiliations.

Rush, etc? Those are OPINION shows. They wear their bias on their sleeves. They don't claim to be NEWS. They don't claim to be unbiased, or somehow beholden to a transcendent code of ethics.

You appear to "have religion" regarding news—signal vs the noise of any opinion you disagree with. Myself, I take each story one at a time. I try to understand the bias of the reporting, and filter accordingly (that would go for fox, too, if I ever watched it). But enjoy whatever echo-chambers you read/see.

Both sides have rags and noise machines. Daily Kos is a liberal rag. Olbermann is a liberal noise machine. Don't misunderstand me. It's all a circus show.

Now you're making things up. I said nothing of the sort in that post. Don't do that.

Besides, it isn't news if it's an opinion. So your comment is not valid.

Gotcha. Fair enough. But you said "rags" and "noise machine" only in the context of opinions you disagree with. Had you mentioned "left" analogs, I'd not have responded that way.

Drudge doesn't really write much of anything, it's a page of links to news outlets. He's one of the bigger referrers to the NYT, The Guardian, WashPost, LA Times, etc. Yeah, he editorializes by which links, but it's not remotely the same as the editorial slant of a newspaper, newsmagazine, or TV news. They actually change the wording to suit them.

For TV, fox is IT. The ONLY news with any sort of conservative slant. They also have nonsense shows like Hannity, but in looking at NEWS slant, you can only look at the news shows (evening news, etc), not opinion shows—which are at least labeled as such.

Left TV? All the rest.

Newspapers? WSJ is right (not very, though), as in the WashTimes. The latter is not a major player.

News Magazines? None are conservative at all.

Columnists? Again, they are explicitly opinion.

I think the reason Rush, et al do so well is that there is a vacuum, and they fill it. Someone with a left slant can turn on the radio and listen to NPR, or any TV news other than Fox and hear an echo-chamber.