PDA

View Full Version : A Choice Tea Party Morsel


finnbow
02-05-2010, 05:53 PM
The latest juicy morsel from the Tea Party group grope is provided courtesy of the distinguished wingnut Tom Tancredo. Subtle fellow, he.

"People who could not even spell the word 'vote' or say it in English put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House," Tancredo claimed. "His name is Barack Hussein Obama."

If he was hoping to be understood by his audience, I hope he was speaking in tongues.:p

Fast_Eddie
02-05-2010, 05:59 PM
That's Tancredo- the Democrats best friend. I've talked about this before here. Tom started off saying we should put the illegals in busses and send them back to Mexico.

Strike one: they're not all from Mexico, Tom.

Now he says things like this. While it's difficult to understand, my guess is he's saying Hispanic voters put Obama in the White House. He's right. And he's going out of his way to offend them.

Strike two: Illegals can't vote, Tom. Those people are American citizens.

It's that transition from "illegals" to "hispanics" that has killed the Republicans with this growing group.

djv8ga
02-05-2010, 06:20 PM
Strike one: they're not all from Mexico, Tom.

Strike two: Illegals can't vote, Tom. Those people are American citizens.



Strike one: Yeah, Why can't he see all the Canadians marching in the streets of Phoenix.

Strike two: That's why we have Acorn.

Fast_Eddie
02-05-2010, 06:40 PM
Strike one: Yeah, Why can't he see all the Canadians marching in the streets of Phoenix.

Strike two: That's why we have Acorn.

Hey man, you can agree with him all you want. Facts is facts. There are a lot of hispanic voters out here in the west. More every year. Making fun of people who don't speak English probably isn't a great way to earn their votes. But that's not my problem.

And the point, by the way, was that there are a fair number of countries south of the U.S. with Spanish speaking people. I wasn't talking about Canadians. But like I said, keep up the hate speech. Please- make it a Republican part platform plank. "We hate anyone who doesn't speak English". See how that works out.

Boreas
02-05-2010, 07:03 PM
Now he says things like this. While it's difficult to understand, my guess is he's saying Hispanic voters put Obama in the White House. He's right. And he's going out of his way to offend them.

We do well to remember the history of literacy tests in the US. Up until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, when they were outlawed, literacy tests were part and parcel of the Jim Crow Laws in most southern states.

Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, literacy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors. Literacy tests were designed to disenfranchise large numbers of African American voters in the South.

Tancredo's arguments in favor of them should be viewed in the light of our history. Literacy tests have always been and will always be used to disenfranchise segments of our society whether it be African Americans, naturalized Americans or any other category of Americans not considered reliable when it comes to voting for the interests of entrenched power.

John

noonereal
02-05-2010, 07:31 PM
We do well to remember the history of literacy tests in the US. Up until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, when they were outlawed, literacy tests were part and parcel of the Jim Crow Laws in most southern states.

Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, literacy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors. Literacy tests were designed to disenfranchise large numbers of African American voters in the South.

Tancredo's arguments in favor of them should be viewed in the light of our history. Literacy tests have always been and will always be used to disenfranchise segments of our society whether it be African Americans, naturalized Americans or any other category of Americans not considered reliable when it comes to voting for the interests of entrenched power.

John

never though of that

good post, as usual

Fast_Eddie
02-05-2010, 07:44 PM
We do well to remember the history of literacy tests in the US. Up until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, when they were outlawed, literacy tests were part and parcel of the Jim Crow Laws in most southern states.

Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, literacy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors. Literacy tests were designed to disenfranchise large numbers of African American voters in the South.

Tancredo's arguments in favor of them should be viewed in the light of our history. Literacy tests have always been and will always be used to disenfranchise segments of our society whether it be African Americans, naturalized Americans or any other category of Americans not considered reliable when it comes to voting for the interests of entrenched power.

John

Yeah, then only "Real Americas" will be able to vote, if you know what I mean, wink wink.

jwrags
02-05-2010, 08:48 PM
Um, Boreas---is this what you really wanted to say?

. Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, literacy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors.

I would agree with your second sentence in that paragraph.

Where did you get your numbers from?

Best
John

Boreas
02-05-2010, 08:56 PM
Um, Boreas---is this what you really wanted to say?

. Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, literacy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors.

No, I meant "Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, illiteracy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors." ;)

Thanks for catching that.

Where did you get your numbers from?

I got the figure here:

http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/disenfranchise1.htm

John

jwrags
02-05-2010, 09:11 PM
John:

I read your link. I was unable to find "Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure,......"

I did read about illiteracy rates in 1890 being 4 to 5 times greater.

Best
John

HatchetJack
02-05-2010, 09:27 PM
Welcome jwrags, dont worry he will find it somewhere. These guys are sharks
at hunt, find, copy and paste left wing propaganda.

Boreas
02-05-2010, 09:28 PM
John:

I read your link. I was unable to find "Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure,......"

I did read about illiteracy rates in 1890 being 4 to 5 times greater.

Best
John

How else would you account for it? Before, and right up until, the Civil Rights Act there were separate and inferior school systems for blacks in the South. This isn't a matter of opinion or debate. It's an acknowledged fact. The year 1890 was cited because that was the year that "explicit" literacy tests were imposed in the South.

John

Fast_Eddie
02-05-2010, 09:48 PM
John:

I read your link. I was unable to find "Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure,......"

I did read about illiteracy rates in 1890 being 4 to 5 times greater.

Best
John

Sorry, may I ask a couple of questions?

1. Are you suggesting that the segregated schools for Blacks were just as good, or superior to the schools for whites?

2. I have to assume that in bringing this up you have some point. The only point I can logically assume is that you favor a return to segregated schools? Or are you just arguing to hear your own voice?

Just trying to clarify your position. It seems odd to me to argue about school segregation in 2010. I didn't realize there was still a question about the proper course forward here. Guess I was wrong.

Take care,

Ed

jwrags
02-05-2010, 09:58 PM
John:

No need to get all hot headed.

No, I meant "Because of the separate and grossly inferior schools systems black students were forced to endure, illiteracy rates for southern blacks were 4 or 5 times greater than for their white neighbors."


In reading the article I find a date of 1890 for illiteracy rates of 4 or 5 times greater for blacks. Are you prepared to say this was also true in 1960? If so, where is that information.

Grossly inferior I guess depends on when and where and what defines grossly. Yes they were separate. I agree completely literacy tests were designed completely to disenfranchise black voters.

I only ask these questions because I've lived it since moving here in 1962. You speak with authority and I'm just wondering where your info comes from.

No need to take offense, none intended.

jwrags
02-05-2010, 10:11 PM
Ed:

Please take a few minutes to read the article John linked to for me. Then read my question again. You may have the same question I had. Maybe not.

You're reading things that were not stated or asked about.

The article is a good read and there are other parts to it that are also good reads.

I ain't trying to get anyone upset, I thought I asked pretty simple questions. Sorry if I have offended, you can rest assured it will not happen again.

Best John

Boreas
02-05-2010, 10:27 PM
John:

No need to get all hot headed.

What makes you think I am?

In reading the article I find a date of 1890 for illiteracy rates of 4 or 5 times greater for blacks. Are you prepared to say this was also true in 1960? If so, where is that information.

If you mean prepared to say the disparity was identical, no. I wouldn't make that claim without supporting data. It might have been better or it might have been worse but the disparity in the quality of education was real and marked all through the 100 years between the end of the Civil War and the passage of the Civil Rights Act. As I said, there really isn't any debate on that point.

Grossly inferior I guess depends on when and where and what defines grossly. Yes they were separate. I agree completely literacy tests were designed completely to disenfranchise black voters.

You agree that they were separate but do you believe they were, as the saying goes, "separate but equal"? If so, what do you base that on?

I only ask these questions because I've lived it since moving here in 1962. You speak with authority and I'm just wondering where your info comes from.

I don't know how authoritative I am but this isn't "ancient history" for me. I was 20 years old when Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, a young adult living in Jim Crow Maryland and Virginia and spending time in South Carolina. In general, what I know is a product of my own contemporary experience.

No need to take offense, none intended.

I really don't know why you think I took offense.

I would like to hear anything you have to say in disagreement. It's fine to question me regarding my post but your questions seem to be coming from a fairly skeptical perspective. If you have any information that contradicts what I said I'd like to hear it.

John

Fast_Eddie
02-05-2010, 10:55 PM
I ain't trying to get anyone upset, I thought I asked pretty simple questions. Sorry if I have offended, you can rest assured it will not happen again.

n00b.

No point being here if you'll never get anyone upset. But, for the record, I'm not.

I understand what you were doing. I was just pointing out that you were asking for proof or documentation of statements that really don't require a lot. Don't we all agree that the segregated black schools were inferior? And don't we all agree that segregated education isn't a good thing? I wasn't actually suggesting that you believed either of those things, just pointing out that you were arguing over points that there is little need to argue over.

I mean, I'm sure there are people who want to see a return to segregated schooling, but I doubt that any of them are on this web site. There's plenty of stuff for us to talk about and debate. No point waisting time on this. You said so yourself, the literacy tests were designed to disenfranchise black voters. So why argue about supporting documentation for a premise that we all agree is true?

Look, I do it to. We see someone we don't agree with and start picking at fringe things that have nothing to do with the actual issue at hand. I'm just trying to move past it and seeing if I can bring anyone else along with me. That's what the people running the parties and the talk shows want us to do. Stop thinking about actual issues and start fighting about trivial crap. They can leverage that crap into votes. Then they can do as they see fit knowing that we won't do a damn thing about it. They're tools of manipulation.

Sorry, I'm done now. I think early to bed for me tonight.

Take care,

Ed

BlueStreak
02-06-2010, 01:19 AM
Let them keep going. Dig, dig, dig.................:D

Dave

merrylander
02-06-2010, 06:57 AM
But like I said, keep up the hate speech. Please- make it a Republican part platform plank. "We hate anyone who doesn't speak English". See how that works out.

They need to be careful with statements like that since it covers about 95% of the population.:D

"The Americans and the British, two friendly peoples separated by a common language." W. S. Churchill