Rangel: Tea Party = White Crackers

[y4m]

Charlie Rangel: Tea Party Is ‘Same Group’ Of ‘White Crackers’ Who Fought Civil Rights


In an interview with the Daily Beast published Friday, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) suggested Tea Partiers are the "same group" who fought for segregation during the Civil Rights movement.

“It is the same group we faced in the South with those white crackers and the dogs and the police. They didn’t care about how they looked," Rangel said.

Because of this, Rangel said the Tea Party could be defeated using the same tactics employed against Jim Crow.

"It was just fierce indifference to human life that caused America to say enough is enough. ‘I don’t want to see it and I am not a part of it.’ What the hell! If you have to bomb little kids and send dogs out against human beings, give me a break,” said Rangel.

livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/charlie-rangel-tea-party-is-same-group-of

[IIOY]

He should be a huge TP supporter, given his aversion to paying taxes.

[Deleted]

He should apologize for using the term "Cracker" but otherwise I think he's right. The tea party people I know are some of the most racist too.

[summer]

First, I'll never understand why public figures think it's okay to use derogatory terms for groups. Politicians are *supposed* to be professionals.

I think the Tea Party definitely has some racist elements that it hasn't dealt with, at least not publicly. As we've been saying in some of our racial discussions lately, it's hard to know where a group in general stands when they address their public demons privately.

[IIOY]

Aug 3, 2013 6:51:22 GMT -5 summer said:

As we've been saying in some of our racial discussions lately, it's hard to know where a group in general stands when they address their public demons privately.

Love.

[caden]

Is someone from the DNC going to publicly deal with Rangel? The TP doesn't even have a central organization like that. It's mostly local groups, loosely connected. There are some national groups but they dont control local groups. Yes they should address public racism in a public response. But that will be difficult at the national level when one group thinks it has nothing to do with another. Or if the media highlights an offense but the response from the org is ignored as non-news because the org doing the correcting is very small and relatively insignificant. They can always use their own websites and they should. I just think a national response to a local leader (or lower, like just a member) is unlikely since the structure is not formally coordinated, but that seems to be what people are looking for.

[Velar Fricative]

Because the most successful way to publicly shame racists is by...calling them racist terms.

[Velar Fricative]

Aug 3, 2013 7:32:44 GMT -5 incogneato said:

Semi random thought of the day- Out of curiosity, if you were called a cracker in person, how offended would you be? (you= anyone reading this thread who wants to comment.) I mean, I know it's offensive but I, personally, don't feel like I'd have much of an emotional reaction if someone said it to me. I'd just be a little   .  I'm just wondering if my response is typical or not. Thoughts, anyone?

I wouldn't be offended, but it's still generally considered a derogatory term so Rangel shouldn't have used it.

[caden]

I'd probably laugh if someone called me a cracker to my face but it depends on the context I guess. My friends call each other that when they complain about WPPs. I forget that it has slave driver connotations though because for so long I thought cracker meant the color of a cracker. I'd be super pissed if someone called me a racist and compared me to a slave owner. But just an anti-white term? Don't care.

[annieblah]

Ditto IIOY. Rich from Rangel.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2013 7:32:44 GMT -5 incogneato said:

Semi random thought of the day- Out of curiosity, if you were called a cracker in person, how offended would you be? (you= anyone reading this thread who wants to comment.) I mean, I know it's offensive but I, personally, don't feel like I'd have much of an emotional reaction if someone said it to me. I'd just be a little   .  I'm just wondering if my response is typical or not. Thoughts, anyone?

It would make me think of that Louis CK bit "You cant even offend a white man - call me a cracker? Oh no! That takes me back to the days when I owned land. And people" lol.

Obviously a joke, but I have never thought you could compare cracker as a racial insult to anything really. The only way it would bother me would be if the person saying it was about to smash a wrench into my head.

[5thofjuly]

Being called a cracker would probably make me laugh. It's just not a phrase I've heard used against whites very often. It's not a good choice of words, to be sure, but I think it's much harder to be offended when you a member of the majority because your lived experience is often very different minority group members.

Call me the OTHER c-word, though, and it's on.

[annieblah]

Aug 3, 2013 8:37:23 GMT -5 nuggetbrain said:

I call my husband's best friend "crackerhead" when he's acting especially white.

how does one act especially white?

[iammalcolmx]

Aug 3, 2013 8:37:23 GMT -5 nuggetbrain said:

I call my husband's best friend "crackerhead" when he's acting especially white.

[caden]

Aug 3, 2013 12:13:20 GMT -5 annieblah said:

Aug 3, 2013 8:37:23 GMT -5 nuggetbrain said:

I call my husband's best friend "crackerhead" when he's acting especially white.

how does one act especially white?

"Honey, do you think my Nalgene bottle will be too heavy for my backpacking trip? Maybe I should take some cuipo water instead. OMG north face SIGG bottles are on sale."

[Deleted]

I find the word very offensive but its also very common in fl so I hear it as a slur a lot.

[iammalcolmx]

Aug 3, 2013 13:03:55 GMT -5 caden said:

Aug 3, 2013 12:13:20 GMT -5 annieblah said:

how does one act especially white?

"Honey, do you think my Nalgene bottle will be too heavy for my backpacking trip? Maybe I should take some cuipo water instead. OMG north face SIGG bottles are on sale."

Imma need a translation. H wouldn't be able to translate for me fwiw

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2013 7:25:07 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Because the most successful way to publicly shame racists is by...calling them racist terms.

Right?? If he really believes all TPers are racist, this is not the way to address/bring up the issue.

[NitaX]

Aug 3, 2013 7:34:55 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Aug 3, 2013 7:32:44 GMT -5 incogneato said:

Semi random thought of the day- Out of curiosity, if you were called a cracker in person, how offended would you be? (you= anyone reading this thread who wants to comment.) I mean, I know it's offensive but I, personally, don't feel like I'd have much of an emotional reaction if someone said it to me. I'd just be a little   .  I'm just wondering if my response is typical or not. Thoughts, anyone?

I wouldn't be offended, but it's still generally considered a derogatory term so Rangel shouldn't have used it.

Look, I don't use slurs. So, you aren't ever going to hear me call anyone anything of the sort. Rangel should really know better. And he shouldn't be saying this shit. It's inappropriate and he'd straight cut a bitch if they called him Boy or anything else. So, the rule of thumb is treat others how you want to be treated. This includes not partaking in dergogetory name calling.

[winnied]

Aug 3, 2013 10:09:58 GMT -5 @dontcallmeshirley1 said:

Aug 3, 2013 7:19:27 GMT -5 caden said:

Is someone from the DNC going to publicly deal with Rangel? The TP doesn't even have a central organization like that. It's mostly local groups, loosely connected. There are some national groups but they dont control local groups. Yes they should address public racism in a public response. But that will be difficult at the national level when one group thinks it has nothing to do with another. Or if the media highlights an offense but the response from the org is ignored as non-news because the org doing the correcting is very small and relatively insignificant. They can always use their own websites and they should. I just think a national response to a local leader (or lower, like just a member) is unlikely since the structure is not formally coordinated, but that seems to be what people are looking for.

I imagine, though, that if the Tea Party is looking to actually defend itself against allegations of institutional racism, then it needs to become an actual institution and shut that shit down, as they say. I've heard people identify as Tea Partiers and claim that race has nothing to do with their ideology. Honestly, that's a bunch of nonsense when many groups characterized by virulent racism adopt the label. 

And how do you propose they do that? Round up every person who has ever identified him/herself as having views similar to the "tea party" and then saying, now, we are not going to be racist, mmmk? The group would just proclaim that the "tea party" at large isn't racist and then we're good?

Just because people a few people who identify themselves as members of the tea party are racist doesn't make it racist. I think it's a huge, huge jump to say that even a significant number of TPers are racist. You hear about a few sensational idiots because...welp...it's sensational.

The tea party varies so much in issues even. Some groups focus only on some issues, some on others. By the nature of the TP it is disorganized. That has its pros and cons. 

[ttt]

Aug 4, 2013 15:29:44 GMT -5 winnied said:

Aug 3, 2013 10:09:58 GMT -5 @dontcallmeshirley1 said:

I imagine, though, that if the Tea Party is looking to actually defend itself against allegations of institutional racism, then it needs to become an actual institution and shut that shit down, as they say. I've heard people identify as Tea Partiers and claim that race has nothing to do with their ideology. Honestly, that's a bunch of nonsense when many groups characterized by virulent racism adopt the label. 

And how do you propose they do that? Round up every person who has ever identified him/herself as having views similar to the "tea party" and then saying, now, we are not going to be racist, mmmk? The group would just proclaim that the "tea party" at large isn't racist and then we're good?

Just because people a few people who identify themselves as members of the tea party are racist doesn't make it racist. I think it's a huge, huge jump to say that even a significant number of TPers are racist. You hear about a few sensational idiots because...welp...it's sensational.

The tea party varies so much in issues even. Some groups focus only on some issues, some on others. By the nature of the TP it is disorganized. That has its pros and cons. 

Maybe it's worth asking why so many racists are attracted to the Tea Party in the first place.

I don't think all TPiers are racist. But there seem to be an awful lot who feel comfortable, say, carrying racist signs at TP rallies.

And then, of course, there's

depts.washington.edu/uwiser/racepolitics.html

keranews.org/post/racial-comment-tea-party-leader-draws-ire-democrats

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/tea-party-express-mark-williams-naacps-use-of-colored-makes-it-racist.php

www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/16/tea-party-blames-unruly-cpac-racism-panel-on-african-american-woman-reporter/

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/inge-marler-tea-party-arkansas-leader-racist-joke_n_1597334.html


www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/18/gop-anti-immigration_n_3618392.html

[ttt]

Aug 4, 2013 18:32:02 GMT -5 @dontcallmeshirley1 said:

ttt beat me to it! Maybe I shouldn't be stuffing my face with cake. Which I am doing. Right now. Yum.

Don't ever say "maybe I shouldn't be stuffing my face with cake." Of course you should.

[annieblah]

Wouldn't a number of racists be more aligned with less government (since the government makes them interact)? Just a thought and, possibly, one reason.

[ttt]

Aug 4, 2013 19:48:45 GMT -5 annieblah said:

Wouldn't a number of racists be more aligned with less government (since the government makes them interact)? Just a thought and, possibly, one reason.

I'm not sure it's that so much as a whole array of attitudes:
-"black people get huge advantages and white people get screwed by affirmative action"
-"brown illegal immigrants are stealing all our jobs and the government doesn't do anything to stop them, it just gives them free healthcare and welfare"
-"it's all those black and hispanic people who are getting huge government benefits and free stuff from MY tax dollars when I work hard for my money"
-"the Muslims attacked our country and now they're trying to have mosques in OUR community and the government is all 'wah wah the first amendment' and just lets them do it"


I think the Tea Party is appealing to people who hold these attitudes because they believe that if the government would just get out of the way, white people could go back to being in charge of everything and their lives would be so much better, the way they were in the 50s, when everybody was happy and Christian and things were The Way They're Supposed To Be.

You see a lot of "take our country back" in the Tea Party and I think this is precisely what they mean by that. We (the white, Christian, straight people) want to take OUR country back (from the uppity freeloading black criminals, terrorist Muslims, and the hordes of invading job-stealing but also freeloading Mexicans/brown people who we're just gonna call Mexicans).

[summer]

I do think there is a problem with disorganization, so you don't really know who speaks for them as a party leader. But there have been many examples of a particular kind of racism running through the party. Like I said, maybe it gets addressed on the inside, and maybe it's hard to reign in because of disorganization, I don't know. I do think that the racists in the party have waited a long time to have a sort of public space to say what they've been thinking for awhile so they use their party affiliation to do so. I remember there was a board member in Arkansas awhile back who told this joke as part of her speech at a rally:

“A black kid asks his mom, ‘Mama, what’s a democracy?’

“‘Well, son, that be when white folks work every day so us po’ folks can get all our benefits.’

“‘But mama, don’t the white folk get mad about that?’

“‘They sho do, son. They sho do. And that’s called racism.’”

I mean, really, to say that out loud to a group of people, assuming they will be fine with it, even laugh and agree, says something about the people you are amongst. And you must yourself feel that there are more than a few.

[annieblah]

Aug 5, 2013 6:18:52 GMT -5 @dontcallmeshirley1 said:

Aug 4, 2013 20:32:32 GMT -5 ttt said:

I think the Tea Party is appealing to people who hold these attitudes because they believe that if the government would just get out of the way, white people could go back to being in charge of everything and their lives would be so much better, the way they were in the 50s, when everybody was happy and Christian and things were The Way They're Supposed To Be.

You see a lot of "take our country back" in the Tea Party and I think this is precisely what they mean by that. We (the white, Christian, straight people) want to take OUR country back (from the uppity freeloading black criminals, terrorist Muslims, and the hordes of invading job-stealing but also freeloading Mexicans/brown people who we're just gonna call Mexicans).

Can we archive this with sbp's personhood argument for future reference? 

I don't think it is really needed as many have said it here and, well, these are all opinions.  Nothing more.  At least with the personhood, it has some legalease in it.  JMO and not to say the thoughts aren't good, but the 2 posts quoted are the same, virtually, and since I posted one in 2 lines similar to the above, I can say mine was all just an opinion.