“What Me Racist?” Beck-a-Palooza Ralliers “Explain” Diversity and Race…

Definitely worth watching: White folks denying racial bias and trying to prove their racial liberality is always good for a laugh…


13 Responses to ““What Me Racist?” Beck-a-Palooza Ralliers “Explain” Diversity and Race…”

  1. LOL! If you have to ask . . .

    [Reply]

  2. The first interviewee is Richard Swier, director of the Florida Security Council, which is actually a Christian Zionist front orginization that attacks Islam in order to convert people to Christianity. (I know them personally.) So yeah, no prejudices there!

    http://www.floridasecuritycouncil.org/about.html

    [Reply]

  3. Just because a rally isn’t racially diverse doesn’t mean that the rally itself is perpuating racism. So by your logic, if I go to a Slayer Concert and I see one or two black people in the audience and there isn’t much racial diversity in the audience, then the Slayer concert is promoting white racism? Hey, I bet you will see more black people at a tea party rally(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1CLPhz0DHM&feature=fvw) then you will see white people at the annula million man march in Washington . Even though that movement not might comprise of black racists which I don’t beleive it is, it was certainly spearheaded by black racists and black seperatists. The tea party movement was formed by individualistic libertarian minded people.

    [Reply]

    Tim Reply:

    I think you miss the point Blaire. It’s not that the rally is racist because there are few black people there. The point is, when white folks try to prove they aren’t racist by posing with a black guy, it shows the absurd way in which most whites understand racism. It’s like saying, hey look, I am willing to hug a black guy, so I’m enlightened! The bottom line: what makes the rally racially dubious is the timing — coinciding with the 1963 March and claiming that, in the case of Beck, they are there to “reclaim the civil rights movement,” when the fact is, the right has not right to even try that. Conservatives played no role in the movement, and in fact, they were against it. No prominent conservatives were at the original march, indeed they condemned King regularly.

    And the Tea Party is not libertarian: they do not, by and large, believe what libertarians believe, about drug legalization, about ending foreign wars and U.S. militarism, about ending their own social security or Medicare (Just health care for other people), about open borders (which has long been the overwhelming libertarian position on immigration), etc. Libertarians also don’t run around talking about reclaiming the nation for God, or arguing that Muslims can’t build a cultural center where they want to…that is what the right wing does, liberty be damned.

    [Reply]

    Palaverer Reply:

    Thank you Tim! I am livid that these idiots are associated in the public’s mind with libertarianism. I’m now embarrassed to call myself one because it’s become confused with the worst kind of conservative republicanism thanks to the tea partiers. Whereas formerly the general public just didn’t know much about libertarianism, now they know plenty, but what they know is wrong.

    [Reply]

    Chris Moss Reply:

    Tim,

    Thanks for explaining the purpose of this article to Blaire. He is very confused about the situation. Blaire, more whites attend the million man march each year than black’s attend tea party rallies. But that’s irrelevant to the truth spoken about the tea party.

    [Reply]

  4. I wish that, just once, President Obama would go on the Daily Show and declare “Why, some of my best friends are white people.”

    [Reply]

  5. I’ll never forget the time when a Cleveland radio shock jock named Gary Dee was accused by an interviewer of using racial slurs. His reply was classic:

    “Racist? Racist! RACIST?! Why – I AM NO MORE RACIST THAN ANY OTHER RICH WHITE MAN!”

    Then he flashed a bad little boy grin. At least in those days some of the shock jocks had a sense of humor and a bit of self-awareness.

    [Reply]

  6. Blaire’s comparison fails on another, more basic level:

    1. Slayer has never been explicitly political, as far as I know. They’re a thrash-metal band. Beck, on the other hand, IS explicitly political, from the “9/12 Movement”, right on down to the recent rallies — NOT to mention the content of his show — rampant paranoia, misinformation, and race-baiting in the interest of “taking this country back” to some kind of “Leave it to Beaver” fantasy-land that never actually existed.

    2. As for the Tea-Party having been “founded by “individualistic Libertarian-minded people”: gotta call “bullshit” on that. The TeaBaggers are basically the wreckage of the McCain/Palin crowd, with a vanishingly-small mix of Ron Paul types thrown in.
    And Y’know what? Ron Paul is a total hypocrite, and the “rEVOLution” stank of it. Why? Well, his stance on abortion, for one thing: “Let the States decide” is most definitely NOT a Libertarian position, if for no other reason than (as Harry Browne, ANOTHER former Libertarian party presidential candidate, put it) “Banning things doesn’t work.”
    You’d think that a former Libertarian party candidate would have had the brains to understand that, IF Roe V. Wade were overturned so as to “let the States decide”, the predictable result would have been masses of (wealthy/middle class) women taking “vacations” to jurisdictions where the proceedure was legal, and poor women who couldn’t do that, resorting to having themselves butcherd via unsafe “back alley” procedures.
    (“Dr.” Paul would have been the obvious choice to understand that, as well, simply because he’s old enough to have actually experienced the pre-legalization period in history — AND is a trained OBGYN, to boot.)

    http://www.archive.org/details/when_abortion_was_illegal

    Watch the video, and attempt to debunk any of it, and THEN stop trying to pass the Teabaggers and their ilk off as any kind of “Libertarian-minded” ANYTHING.

    They’re not. They’re a mix of old-style paleoconservatives, Dominionist Christians, Post-9/11 warmongers, and plain old illiterates (at last, judging by their ever-so-frequently misspelled signs).

    [Reply]

  7. Hahahaha! The pictures just put it over the top for me. I feel sorry for that poor man having to stand around all those nutcases while he sold shirts, lol!

    I think the tea baggers and their stand on “racism” is…uh…feigned at best.

    [Reply]

  8. That one guy was right that Beck glosses over MLK’s radicalism and socialist beliefs. Only I’d call it political cowardice rather than “political correctness”.

    [Reply]

  9. …priceless!!!

    [Reply]

  10. Thanks, Tim. I had a discussion between some of these guys going on in my head. And then I blahgged it. Thanks for making me laugh/crymyselftosleep last night.

    http://readingpalin.blogspot.com/2010/09/standing-next-to-black-guy.html

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply