According to leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), the Tea Party objectives are antithetical to black interests. In fact, the Tea Party's very nature makes it a racist organization. Wow, Ms Waters, those are pretty loaded and serious pronouncements.
This is interesting in many regards, not the least of which is the racial aspect. What about that? The problem for the Tea Party is that our message appeals to some fairly radical people including anarchists, for example, who also want government out of their hair. Rallies where the Tea Party declares a need for smaller government, less spending, less debt will inevitably attract those folks because they like the message. For some like Ms. Waters, that means the Tea Party espouses their beliefs even though we don't and even though we quiet them or run them off when they bring their unacceptable rhetoric to our gatherings.
Yes, we want President Obama out of office but it's because we disagree with his policies, not because we have anything against his skin color. A claim of racism would have some validity if he were not doing what we're standing against. If he were reducing federal spending, reducing the debt, reducing federal regulation, and reducing the scope and size of the federal government and we still opposed his administration, one could rationally argue there's some racism behind it. But he's doing the exact opposite of those things we stand for on on principle and he's doing it aggressively. Our goals for the federal government are polar opposites of what President Obama has been doing for 2 1/2 years. OF COURSE we'd oppose ANYONE who has taken this country down this path. That he's black is irrelevant to us. Are you listening Ms. Waters?
We're also opposed to much of what President Bush and congressional Republicans did fiscally/economically. They also grew government in an unacceptable way and helped spend our country to the brink of economic catastrophe. What happened on their watch was also very bad for our country. We're just as opposed in principle to what Bush and congressional Republicans did as what Obama has been doing. And we proved our non-racist agenda by replacing many 'establishment' Republicans in the last election. We want to clean house in our own party, consistent with our message of smaller government. We're consistent in our message regardless of race Ms. Waters! Pay attention!
If you want to check out the reaction of this Tea Party member to Obama's election, check out my January 20, 2009 blog tagged Celebrate America! (http://dennisolds.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2009-05-02T00%3A07%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=50 ... near the bottom of that page) If you can still honestly say I'm racist after reading that Ms. Waters then you're even more of a loon than I thought.
In spite of my high regard and total respect for the man at his inauguration and in spite of my honest difference of opinion based only on policy you think I "should go to hell" because of your unfounded, uncivil and unfair biases against me. If this is what passes for civil discourse from Democrats, Ms Waters, you are the ones who need to reexamine your attitudes, prejudices, dishonesty, incivility, and words.
It's true our energy level is higher against President Obama than against Bush Jr but it is only because Obama's government growth policies are like Bush's on steroids! Obama's policies are far worse than Bush's. Our strong opposition to them has everything to do with policy and nothing to do with race.
So, why do you say it's about race Ms. Waters? Maybe it's because you need it to be about race in order to muster support for President Obama and against the Tea Party. Doesn't matter whether your message is true as long as it motivates the progressive base against the Tea Party now that we're proving to be effective. Let us know when you're ready to discuss our differences like an adult and honest person based on policies and not made up partisan nonsense.
It also appears that for many blacks, the Tea Party's desire to reduce spending, which necessarily must includes reducing entitlement and welfare spending, means by definition we don't want to support the needy poor in our country. Also not true. There's no way the Tea Party wants to abandon people with real needs.
What we recognize is that a real fix is needed for this problem and one of the biggest areas needing attention is education reform that keeps minority children in school and gets them educated to at least a high school level. Then there won't be a need for so much welfare because they'll be elevating themselves out of poverty in a way that's not only beneficial to them (they'll have a real future!) but is also an outcome that's good for our country in myriad ways.
Also, there's incredible waste and fraud in the welfare system. Ask any honest recipient what they know about people ripping off the system and you'll understand how bad it is. None of this goal to reduce dependence on welfare is directed at blacks in a racist way. In fact, we want black Americans to be able to take full advantage of the economic opportunities in this country. But we believe they CANNOT get that through welfare; only through increasing their education in this increasingly technological world. We need to make societal and cultural changes that get people out of poverty permanently and education is absolutely key to that. Is it racist to want black Americans to be able to accomplish that in the completely rational way of getting a better education?
Who's really the hateful person in this picture Ms. Waters? One who tells all Tea Party members to "go straight to hell" for daring to oppose "the one we have been waiting for" and for wanting a smaller government or the significant percentage of Americans who vigorously strive to improve economic conditions in this country for all Americans, especially the poor?
No comments:
Post a Comment