TEA Parties Racist?

[Perchoutofwater]

I will not answer to tea partiers being racist or not racist, but I will answer to this 'study' 'debunking' myth about racist tea partiers.

You go out to count how many racist signs a rally has, and that is your basis for judging how racist a group of people is?

I'm pretty sure this study did not use the scientific method....

I will also note that there has been a great deal of welcome self policing by the tea party groups now that they have achieved real political clout and viability to push out the extremists of their group, be it people like Beck imploring them not to wear goofy outfits and brand racist signs, to certain tea party groups explicitly banning birthers.

 

6 percent of signs being 'controversial' is not a lot for a ploitical rally from any side of the aisle. So I am indeed surprised by the tepid signs from the tea party, but to use that as a basis for judging what is in a person's heart is really stupid.

 

I would agree with what you wrote above for the most part. I'm sure you would also agree that the left, both those here on this board, and the MSM painting a group as racist based on a few signs is even more laughable than this study is. This is primarily a counter to that.

[SEC=UGA]

when I was in grad school if a grad student proposed some sort of nonsense our professors would DESTROY it with glee

 

I did some quick research into the "study"'s author and it appears that she is pretty fair right wing (supported Ron Paul, went to a CATO institute, etc.). In her defense, she is pretty hot.

 

PHD candidate... She... Hot... Vagina...

 

What is she getting her PHD in Poli Sci, Anthropology, Sociology, Comparative Lit, English, Education... She's probably a retard. Or, as I said, a PHD candidate...

[Ursa Majoris]

You're too kind.

I am indeed.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

She's a PHD candidate, that's how...

 

You have repeated that line twice now, I am not sure how you are saying it.

Is it

1)" ....but she has a PHD". As if that justified any activity as stupid as it might be (not that the act of doing what she did is stupid, it's calling it a study to debunk racism and to reach that conclusion due to lack of offensive posters that is)

2) "what can you expect from a PhD condidate (old roll eyes)" like the desire in America to deride anything that has a whiff of education (read elitism)

 

BTW wiegie. Where are the pocs?

 

ETA guess you already answered the question SEC.

Edited October 19, 2010 by Dr. Sacrebleu

[wiegie]

PHD candidate... She... Hot... Vagina...

 

What is she getting her PHD in Poli Sci, Anthropology, Sociology, Comparative Lit, English, Education... She's probably a retard. Or, as I said, a PHD candidate...

Poli Sci

[SEC=UGA]

You have repeated that line twice now, I am not sure how you are saying it.

Is it

1)" ....but she has a PHD". As if that justified any activity as stupid as it might be (not that the act of doing what she did is stupid, it's calling it a study to debunk racism and to reach that conclusion due to lack of offensive posters that is)

2) "what can you expect from a PhD condidate (old roll eyes)" like the desire in America to deride anything that has a whiff of education (read elitism)

 

BTW wiegie. Where are the pocs?

 

Having gone through MANY years of college, I roll my eyes with regard to the clout that is given to MANY PHD candidates (and many undergrads for that matter.) I distinctly remember, as an under grad, my senior year, taking two graduate level classes, one from the history department, a class in Japanese history, and one from the English department, a British Literature class, in which I walked out of there with the highest grades. Prior to the final in the Jap. His. class, it was my last final of my undergrad career, I was sitting in the parking lot with a case of beer, having a few before the exam. I heard a knock on my window, it was my professor.

 

Prof - "Todd, what you doing"

Me - (Oh, sh!t expression) Not much, just getting ready for the exam

Prof - Are you prepared?

Me - Yes, it's my last exam

Prof - Well, don't worry about taking it. Your paper was extraordinary, I don't need to see any more work from you. Congratulations, have a good one.

 

I've had a number of friends receive their PHDs in a liberal arts field or education, these are not PHD worthy people.

 

While in grad school, I was continuously running in to undergrads and graduate students that were, shall we say, less than qualified to receive their diplomas. I would even argue that it was marginal whether I should have received my MBA and I graduated with a 3.9. I generally don't feel that degrees necessarily indicate that a person has an above average intellect unless they can prove otherwise. As you have concisely pointed out, this girl drew a conclusion by taking a sample of one meeting of a group and simply looked at the placards that the attendees were carrying, this in my mind is a VERY shallow study and to draw conclusions from it are erroneous.

 

On the other hand, I agree with the conclusions of the study.

 

ETA: to clarify... A PHD awarded 20+ years ago has merit... today, uh, not so much.

Edited October 19, 2010 by SEC=UGA

[SEC=UGA]

Poli Sci

 

That is what I thought and only solidifies my preconceived notions.

 

Though, it is quite intriguing to see a doctoral student in Poli Sci with a conservative bent... Good luck to her, I only hope she can get into academia and at least temper the liberal theology espoused by the rest of her comrades in the department.

[wiegie]

I've had a number of friends receive their PHDs in a liberal arts field or education, these are not PHD worthy people.

concerning the liberal arts fields, I would think it depends on the field and the university

 

However, with respect to doctorates in education, those are almost always a complete joke. (And I would be willing to say the same about many of the doctorates given out by business schools too.)

[wiegie]

Though, it is quite intriguing to see a doctoral student in Poli Sci with a conservative bent... Good luck to her, I only hope she can get into academia and at least temper the liberal theology espoused by the rest of her comrades in the department.

Given the shoddiness of the paper being discussed here, I don't want her anywhere near academia (and neither should you).

[westvirginia]

Good post until this last part. I for one certainly don't wring my hands over ANY Republican, least of all an establishment one. Like I said, the Tea Party folks are, IMO, ill-informed and extremely simplistic but establishment Republicans are slimy weasels.

 

Simplistic based on what? There's this one left-wing simpleton I know who continually argues that nominal tax rates are more important than effective tax rates.

 

Agreed on the establishment repubs, though.

[SEC=UGA]

concerning the liberal arts fields, I would think it depends on the field and the university

 

However, with respect to doctorates in education, those are almost always a complete joke. (And I would be willing to say the same about many of the doctorates given out by business schools too.)

 

True.

 

I still believe the average "quality" of the degree is greatly diminished from where it was a few years ago, however.

[SEC=UGA]

Given the shoddiness of the paper being discussed here, I don't want her anywhere near academia (and neither should you).

 

Another aspect of this that is interesting to me, I have an undergrad in poli sci, is that she should realize how flimsy her evidence is, if not from any other perspective than just a statistical one.

 

In order to obtain my degree in Poli Sci I had to take 3 stats classes and a scope and methods class (basically the application of all the stats you learned with regard to polling, how to create polls, etc...) She should have known that the conclusions she made can carry NO weight what so ever.

 

I do agree, I probably don't want her in academia... hopefully she will become mayor of Sacramento and then one day propel herself into the Republican Party limelight as a potential presidential candidate. I know you say it can't happen, but with enough publicity and grass roots support, I think any idiot can get into that competition.

[Azazello1313]

You go out to count how many racist signs a rally has, and that is your basis for judging how racist a group of people is?

 

well that's what the anti-tea-party media has been doing all along. "ZMOG, a racist sign!! the tea party is racist!" and in any case, obviously you can't judge what's in individual peoples' hearts, but the charge is that these rallies are hotbeds of racism, and studying what is actually said and expressed at these rallies is relevant to that.

 

I guess you can presume that everybody is pretending to be there because they are concerned about the size and scope of government, but the real reason is that they hate black people. goes back to what I posted earlier...

 

...the Theory of the Missing Motive. Since the education establishment has failed to convey a thorough and unprejudiced perspective on differing political points of view, even highly educated liberals possess a cartoonish, easily-dismissed image of American conservative thought. Liberals cannot believe that Tea Partiers are actually motivated by the passions and the reasons that Tea Partiers claim motivate them, because liberals in general are alienated from those passions and insufficiently educated in those reasons.

 

It is essentially a failure of imagination. Liberals cannot imagine themselves into a way of thinking in which conservatives do what they do and believe what they believe for good reasons. And since they cannot believe that conservatives are motivated by rational beliefs and admirable motives, they must appeal to darker, more primitive impulses to explain their behavior. The racist motive presents itself as a natural and convenient explanation.

[Ursa Majoris]

Simplistic based on what? There's this one left-wing simpleton I know who continually argues that nominal tax rates are more important than effective tax rates.

So if nominal rates are unimportant, why is it that those rates under Clinton vs Bush are always the first thing mentioned by the right?

[bpwallace49]

I would agree with what you wrote above for the most part. I'm sure you would also agree that the left, both those here on this board, and the MSM painting a group as racist based on a few signs is even more laughable than this study is. This is primarily a counter to that.

 

Perch there is a big difference between plugging your ears and chanting "there are no racists at all in the TEA party" and pointing out that the presence of wackos/racists dilutes the message of the TEA party.

 

You adamantly refuse to believe that there is anyone in the TEA party that is racist, or could be racist, and even if they DO exist, there are sleeper agents placed there by Obama. That is vastly different than acknowledging there are there, they represent a fringe minority, and that they do not accurately portray the majority of the TEA party movement.

[gbpfan1231]

Perch there is a big difference between plugging your ears and chanting "there are no racists at all in the TEA party" and pointing out that the presence of wackos/racists dilutes the message of the TEA party.

 

You adamantly refuse to believe that there is anyone in the TEA party that is racist, or could be racist, and even if they DO exist, there are sleeper agents placed there by Obama. That is vastly different than acknowledging there are there, they represent a fringe minority, and that they do not accurately portray the majority of the TEA party movement.

Oh my god - of course there are racist people in the tea party - I would bet a lot of money there is a racist or two at your place of employment right now.

 

The main stream media is trying to portray the whole party as racists - of course every group of people will have a bad apple but I think Perch and others are mainly saying that it is a small portion of the people and the party in general is not racist.

 

Just look at the african american population that still has 90% approval for Obama - why do you think that that portion of the public is the ONLY portion that has the approval rating that high? Do YOU think it is racial? Of course it is - ALL LEFTIES AND LIBERALS MUST BE RACIST!!!! Lets all revolt!!

[bpwallace49]

Oh my god - of course there are racist people in the tea party - I would bet a lot of money there is a racist or two at your place of employment right now.

 

The main stream media is trying to portray the whole party as racists - of course every group of people will have a bad apple but I think Perch and others are mainly saying that it is a small portion of the people and the party in general is not racist.

 

Just look at the african american population that still has 90% approval for Obama - why do you think that that portion of the public is the ONLY portion that has the approval rating that high? Do YOU think it is racial? Of course it is - ALL LEFTIES AND LIBERALS MUST BE RACIST!!!! Lets all revolt!!

 

[driveby]

Believe it or not the NAACP thinks so.

[gbpfan1231]

Don't get it? Why the laughing? You don't think there is race on both sides of the aisle? Of course there is - I would go as far as saying there is/was more race driving the Obama election than there is with the tea party.

[detlef]

My issue with the Tea Party has nothing to do with any alleged racism. As others have said, there are certainly no shortage of them in the movement but it doesn't seem to actually be endorsed by the party. Which could be said for plenty of other political movements.

 

My issue, and something that does seem to be widely embraced is the undying devotion to what they think the Constitution says but actually doesn't. Christine O'Donnell's latest gaff being a prime example. Listen, you all can come up with whatever you think is right to run our country. Just don't pretend that it's in the constitution if it's not. And please don't pretend you're an expert on the subject if you are anything but. O'Donnell flaunting her post-graduate "degree" in constitutional theory when it comes from a 7 day seminar lead by a right wing think tank with a really fancy name. Cracker please.

Edited October 20, 2010 by detlef