Racist Tea Party People? Nope. Just Americans!

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by Moeceefus

I bet she could give you a blow you'd never forget.

[face_mischief]

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

I guess viewpoints depends. Perhaps you had an "interesting" youth? Not trying to say your age as I don't know but many people who were into the movements of the 60s went right due to how they viewed their younger selves. Tho I tend to notice their right is a bit right of center not extreme right.

Perhaps you saw your face as someone who wanted nukes to be outlawed. Military to do whatever.. Maybe even a socialist aspect (As some were back then) Maybe that is why you see dems and liberals as such. Tho it has tended to move to the right a bit. Especially with my viewpoint of Tecnological Progressive which is only a bit left of center and advocates a "Left" approach to gov involvement in technology research and use.

If that was the case perhaps then your shift wasnt as extreme in my opinion. I advocated violence against an entire region and advocated removing rights from homosexuals (Back then I think its safe to say I was a homophobe) My shift was extreme in comparison in my opinion. It had to be. My viewpoints got this country in a mess with the wars.

Nah, dude. I was born in 1982, into a very conservative family. Your shift was no more extreme than mine, as I also felt the same way, then went left, then back right again. My youth probably wasn't any more interesting than yours. I just got older, saw a bit of the world, and this is where I've landed. I'm just another tea party people being people.

I think we're more alike than you might suppose, but let me explain. You describe yourself as a "technological progressive". I can't say I blame you. I was that way for most of my life. Still am, as a matter of fact. I really think that technology will solve all of mankind's problems. You could even call me a technophile, despite my bass-ackwards redneck ways.

The only place we differ in this respect is in how that technology is to be obtained in the most efficient means possible. You prefer government investment, which is the most direct means, and I say that government has never been efficient at doing anything, and that we should rely upon the market to dictate technlogical development.

Both arguments have their points; Government investment is direct. We know what the money is going for, and an agency is established to oversee and undertake development in that field. Given enough time and money, it will produce the desired result. Usually.

Private investment is indirect, and you may well not see what you want for a good time, but the market directs investment and innovation to where it is wanted most, by virtue of the fact that it simply cannot do otherwise. If it did, it would cease to exist because it is not profitable. You may not get fusion power or armies of UAVs through the private market, but you will get whatever is the most cost-efficient at the time. Usually.

What I think places the private system above the government system is that the private system must perform while the government system might perform, eventually. Most of the time, government systems produce substandard results, not because the intentions are misguided, but because the way in which they are pursued is very inefficient. Just consider how much progress we have made in space exploration, or power production, or just about anything you'd care to imagine, as compared to what computers and phones and electronic finance and other minimally-regulated industries have achieved in the same timespan. Then go stand in line at the DMV and see what you think. Personally, I'd rather have the miraculous inventions that the market produces on a regular basis. I just wish that businesses and entrepeneurs and speculators had more to invest, and more freedom with which to invest.

More than anything, I would like you to consider the possibility that government may not know what is best, and where it does know what is best it often screws everything up. Por ejemplo, you may remember the thread you had where we discussed alternative energy sources. I think it was caled "A Real Energy Future" or something like that. In that thread, I was championing nuclear power as a source of cheap energy. Since then, nuclear power has been embraced and construction is now underway (and in most cases, under consideration) for many new nuclear plants. You'd think I'd be happy, but I'm not. I was totally wrong about nukes. They're a great source of power, and very efficient, true enough, but the sheer amount of red tape surrounding them still makes them unprofitable, so they must get government subsidies. I am no longer of the opinion that nukes are great. Natural gas and coal are the most economically-feasible power sources today, and probably ten years from now. It seems little has changed.

Now, I'm not saying that I have totally given up on nuclear power, or even other alternative enegry sources. Far from it. But what I have realized is that the problem lies more with the policymakers than with the policy itself. Generations of energy policy and legislation are distorting the natural price mechanisms of the market. People no longer buy what is best suited to their own needs, they buy what is best suited to their own needs as amended by price controls and energy policy as defined by the same government that has yet to implement a satisfactory energy policy.

I can appreciate your idealism, ZS, but give a thought as to what kind of machine you are going to have to build in order to realize your ideas. Someone is going to have the power to implement those decisions and it is not likely going to be someone like you. I know this because I know you're not the kind of cutthroat bastard who usually succeeds in the world of politics. Most likely, it will be someone with an altogether different agenda. Fix the disease before you start prescribing cures for the symptomns.

This is just my opinion, but I'd like you to think about it a little.

[Zachstar]

A very well made post. And about the closest anyone in any forum has gotten to understanding what a tech progressive is.

The reason I believe tech can solve mankinds issues is because based on what I call "political reality" it is about the only way to have our cake and eat it to. By cake I mean over 10 billion people in the next 25-50 years. And eat it to which is have them fed and protected.

I have learned many times how corrupt and contemptuous of the lower classes both parties are. Bills get loaded with pork. Promises get half answered and the party expects the base to "agree" It is a damn fine mess indeed.

The reason I continue to beg for more tho is because I just dont see the private industry responding correctly to the situation. Oil and coal companies have a potential GOLD MINE on their hands if they could be the first to discover 30 percent or greater efficiency cheap thin film solar. Markets for solar power have only recently been explored and to say game changer is an underestamation. If both it and storage could be solved projects and business could exist in far more areas making untold numbers of new jobs and wealth for states and nations.

But they don't as their efforts are pathetic at best. And only then just to appease the greenies that think that planing a tree allows them to drive an SUV for another 6 months. The solar market nearly whithered and died during the crisis. If the railroad would have bogged down the same way it would have been a decade before the boom that made our nation the super economy it is today. It was the gov support that really made it happen.

In order to make the big things happen gov must be involved. The only surefire way to promise a fission plants worth of solar power and the tech to make it cost far less to maintain can only be assured through law. Attempts otherwise have failed. And sadly when they are both small and big at the same time the president gets to screw over Americans and unions by giving a company in spain the promise so they can spend half a decade to make a plant to power only 40 thousand homes.

Forgive me for the rant. Tho I am left my party isnt safe from my criticism tho it has done more than republicans. That isnt saying much when summer air conditioning costs financially cripple many families when a realistic solar and inverter plan could give western states the ability to reduce those heavy costs on families and FAR more important reduce grid use which is old and expensive to maintain.

We need big, bold, apollo style tech projects. Private had its chance and it failed. Now let the gov give business to many small and innovative companies to bring their advanced technology to the factories and put Americans back to work.

[SteamWake]

Wow.. just wow.. exactly whom is raising the racial tensions around here??

Originally Posted by ABC News

The NAACP wants to "create a climate where they can say that those on the right are in fact racist and those on the left are their saviors," he added. "This is very much what the liberal agenda is about."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/naacp...ry?id=11144640

[Fincuan]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Wow.. just wow.. exactly whom is raising the racial tensions around here??

The Tea Party activist whose quote that is?

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Fincuan

The Tea Party activist whose quote that is?

He was just pointing something out not speaking in a public forum.

Originally Posted by Michelle Obama

When stubborn inequalities still persist -- in education and health, in income and wealth, I think those founders would urge us to increase our intensity, and to increase our discipline and our focus and keep fighting for a better future for our children and our grandchildren," Michelle Obama said to the NAACP.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...intensity.html

[GoldenRivet]

I refer to African Americans as "Colored" sometimes


As long as the NAACP does it... so will I.


this whole race issue is retarded. some folks just cant move on.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

I refer to African Americans as "Colored" sometimes


As long as the NAACP does it... so will I.


this whole race issue is retarded. some folks just cant move on.

But you're 'colored' too. The color just happens to be pink.

[SteamWake]

The 'Tea Party' reacts to NAACP's plan to take up a resolution branding the conservative movement as 'racisist'.

These two paragraphs pretty much sums it up.

When you look at the crime and poverty and family breakdown of the African-American community ... you see a half-century of failure by the NAACP," he wrote. "None of those persistent problems was caused by the Tea Party movement, yet the principles of the Tea Party are exactly what's needed to wind down the multi-generational destruction in the African-American community.

"The NAACP was once a vital weapon in the war against segregation and oppression. All that's left is a bigoted and malicious shell that does far more harm than good for people who need a break," he wrote.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...bigoted-naacp/

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

But you're 'colored' too. The color just happens to be pink.

I've wondered about this myself. Why can't I get financial aid and all the NAACP perks just like a black man can? After all, white is a color as well.

For real, I've been turned down by an employer before because of my race. The HR person told me to my face that they liked my background and would love to hire me but they couldn't because of my race. They needed another black person to meet their hiring quota! Now ain't that some BS!!!

I even tested this before with an online job application. I didn't really need a job at the time because I was already working but I wanted to test the system out just to see how it worked. So I filed under myself as usual just to see if I would be excepted for the position. Even listed all my years in law enforcement and military with all the awards and decorations I had earned. Even filed for the 10-point veteran preference that I get from being considered "disabled" by the VA. I listed just tons of experience for the job plus my two degrees in Criminal Justice and IT/Networking & Security Management.

Then I applied again, as a black woman, with no experience at all. No military, no education beyond my GED, 2 prior drug related convictions and a prior conviction for larceny, filed for bankruptcy 2 times, on welfare, and I even misspelled most words on the application just to look even more foolish.

Guess who got the job? The black woman!

It's not about "best qualified" like we've all been told by the EEO! Nope. It's all about RACE and GENDER! Just look at Sonia Sotomayor that Obama appointed last year to the US Supreme Court. Was she the most qualified person to put on the US Supreme Court? Not by a long shot, but she was a Latino woman and Obama knew she was a racist, as well as a sexist, against white men! This was obvious from her public comment during her time as a lower level judge...

Originally Posted by Sonia Sotomayor

a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases," Sotomayor said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

And before any moron says, "That's not a racist comment", just think for a minute! If a white male had said anything close to this while referring to Latino women, he would be labeled a racist, not to mentioned, disbarred from practicing law....period.

Just the fact that she specifically said, "White male" is a sign she was racially targeting them. Why didn't she say "Black male" or "Asian male" or any other ethnic group? Simple. She's a racist/sexist against "white males".

[Moeceefus]

It used to just be about ridiculous taxes. I have no idea what the hell happened to it.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Moeceefus

It used to just be about ridiculous taxes. I have no idea what the hell happened to it.

By 'it' I assume you are referring to the tea party they have always been an remain about smaller goverment control of spending and less intrusion by the goverment. Nothing to do with race.

What you are witnessing are desperate attempts by certain factions and their willing accomplisis in the media to try to paint them as racisist bigoted homophobes as they always have. Its really the only card they have left to play.

Originally Posted by SteamWake

By 'it' I assume you are referring to the tea party they have always been an remain about smaller goverment control of spending and less intrusion by the goverment. Nothing to do with race.

What you are witnessing are desperate attempts by certain factions and their willing accomplisis in the media to try to paint them as racisist bigoted homophobes as they always have. Its really the only card they have left to play.

Exactly!

The worst thing that can happen to anybody, especially political parties, in the US is to be labeled "racist" or "sexist". It's almost a guaranteed way to discredit their entire voice, opinion, and cause.

[ETR3(SS)]

Note before reading following story; I have no sources to cite and do not recall where I heard this from, it could be an urban legend.


I'm reminded of an incident involving a South African who immigrated to the US legally. When he filled for a grant or scholarship from the NAACP he was turned down on account of his race. Turns out he was a white South African. Something in the requirements for the grant stated the person had to be of African descent, which he clearly was. In the end it went before the courts and the court ruled in favor of our young South African.

Moral of the story? Racism isn't limited to white people only; to believe otherwise makes you a fool. Want to end racism in America? Be accountable for your own actions instead of pointing the finger.