The most interesting thing about the “racism” argument when it comes to the Tea Party is this. By definition, racism is the hatred of someone because of the “color of their skin”. Nothing more and nothing less. Therefore, how can a person who associates themselves with the Tea Party be a racist if he or she supports Herman Cain and the Tea Party folks are, according to the MSM, racist. BY DEFINITION it is impossible. I have yet to hear this question proposed to the Harry Belafonte’s or the Tavis Smiley’s. You can’t have both.
>>Therefore, how can a person who associates themselves with the Tea Party be a racist if he or she supports Herman Cain and the Tea Party folks are, according to the MSM, racist. BY DEFINITION it is impossible.<<
Ah, but you’ve overlooked their classic rebuttal. Any black person favored by a white Republican or the Tea Party is also, by definition, an Uncle Tom. He’s sold out to the white race, and should no longer be considered black. He’s become a pseudo-slave who knows his place.
It’ll be a little hard for the Left to come to grips with the fact that we figure Herman Cain’s “place” is the White House, I suppose, but that’s the sort of mind-tangle created with the logic the Left uses.
I am no Webster, but I would define racism as thinking one race (or your race) is superior to another race, or that one race is inferior to other races.
The TEA Party is in no way racist, IMO.
I am no Webster, but I would define racism as thinking one race (or your race) is superior to another race, or that one race is inferior to other races.
The TEA Party is in no way racist, IMO.