Rep. Andre Carson said that the Tea Party is “protecting its millionaire and oil company friends while gutting critical services that they know protect the livelihood of African-Americans, as well as Latinos and other disadvantaged minorities.”
“This is the effort that we’re seeing of Jim Crow,” Carson said. “Some of these folks in Congress right now would love to see us as second-class citizens.”
“Some of them in Congress right now of this Tea Party movement would love to see you and me … hanging on a tree.”
Folks who likely never cared much for Rep. Carson in the first place are, pretty much on cue, hitting the ceiling, clutching their pearls, getting the vapors, and heading for the fainting couches.
Rep. Carson is alluding to the days of Jim Crow when, like it or not, lynching was a problem. Now, let’s start here: do Tea Partiers want to lynch black people? There might be a couple, but that’s probably about it.
So why might the allusion occur to Rep. Carson? Because he has an irrational need to tell lies about the Tea Party? I doubt it. I think it starts here: “We need to take our country back.”
Yet the speech that opened the Nashville event yesterday, an address greeted with whoops and cheers from the mainly white audience, reflects a movement that also appears to have a less attractive side to it.
Tom Tancredo, a former Republican congressman who ran for president in 2008 on an anti-illegal immigration platform, said of the voters who elected Mr Obama: “They could not even spell the word ‘vote’ or say it in English and they put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House — Barack Hussein Obama!”
Decrying America’s multiculturalism, Mr Tancredo said that Republicans and Democrats had voted for a black man because they felt they had to. To a standing ovation, he shouted: “We really do have a culture to pass on to our children: it’s based on Judaeo-Christian values.”
“This is our country,” he declared. “Let’s take it back!” He added, to applause: “Cultures are not the same. Some are better. Ours is best!” The crowd, some wearing recently purchased T-shirts saying “Keep the change — I’ll keep my FREEDOM my GUNS and my MONEY”, loved it.
This is not isolated craziness from Tom Tancredo. “We need to take our country back” has been a drum beat. The question “back from whom” is rarely asked. But, President Obama is a committed socialist in the same universe where Tea Partiers are lynching black people. Somehow the socialism accusation doesn’t prompt the blood boiling pearl clutching that these Jim Crow allegations from Rep. Carson have.
Now, what must this “take the country back” business sound like to the part of the American population from whom the Tea Party wants to take the country back? What does “back” mean to them in historical terms? In some cases it’s lynching; in a lot of cases it’s a deprivation of civil rights.
But, when Matt Tully’s editors tell him to drop everything and go report on Rep. Carson’s “hanging from trees” comments; I’ll bet they’re not looking for a nuanced discussion. They’re looking for a story on how Rep. Carson has hurt the feelings of folks like Sen. Banks who is outraged and offended and, consequently, demanding an apology.
Perhaps it’s because I’m on the other side of the fence on (just to take an example — not seeking to describe the universe of topics where political rhetoric gets overheated) reproductive rights, but I don’t see this kind of push for political food-fight coverage every time a pro-life lawmaker refers to “baby killing.” In part, I think that’s because the Left doesn’t do outrage and taking offense nearly as effectively.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, all of this unpleasantness has left me quite unsettled.
i was amused by the immediate calls (from the usual suspects) for rep carson to resign.
also, the reason why these people aren’t upset about accusations that obama is a socialist is because they’re the ones making those accusations: http://twitter.com/#!/Jim_Banks/status/1783901669
Nice piece. The right is expert at saying all sorts of inflammatory things, and then getting the vapors when someone calls them out on it. Or, say, declaring that “class warfare” is being waged when someone from the left has the temerity to say that maybe it’s not good for the country for 1 percent of the population to have 50 percent of the money.
What does “back” mean to them in historical terms? In some cases it’s lynching; in a lot of cases it’s a deprivation of civil rights.
Bull. Evidence? Forget lynching, give me even ONE case where “it’s a deprivation of civil rights.” You can’t even give me one example.
You forget that Carson MADE UP a story about Tea Partiers calling him the N word. Dumbass was on video, MULTIPLE video streams. It wasn’t true.
As for the lack of outrage of being called a “baby killer” vs. a racist, are you serious? There is no comparison. There is absolutely nothing worse in this country than being called a racist. Nothing.
Carson is scum. He is unintelligent, uneducated, and uninformed, exactly the same as the people who keep electing him. That you defend him in any way degrades you. That you refuse to see it is just sad.
Who is Tancredo anyway? He’s not relevant to anything. Fringe candidate, at best.
Tancredo is so fringe and irrelevant that I know his name–yet I probably can’t name 75% of the other members of the House of Representatives even though I do pay attention to such things. Oh, and he’s on TV all the damn time. So he must speak for somebody.
Just sayin’, we never heard this loud a drumbeat of “take our country back” until a black guy got elected president.
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-09-29/news/white-america-has-lost-its-mind/
More on why some white people are freaking out — minorities are a majority, or soon will be, in many metro areas:
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/0831_census_race_frey.aspx
“William Frey: Growing Hispanic populations are driving demographic shifts in major American cities, and changes in Asian and African-American populations mean greater diversity among young people – creating a cultural generation gap.”
Just sayin’, we never heard this loud a drumbeat of “take our country back” until a black guy got elected president.
Could have something to do with him being a socialist more than him being black.
Seriously, where does the “take back” stuff come from? The health care bill. That’s where the Tea Party came from, too.
“Carson is scum. He is unintelligent, uneducated, and uninformed, exactly the same as the people who keep electing him.”
Boy, that sort of language sure sounds reminiscent of the times that Carson was alluding to.
Might as well say “THOSE PEOPLE are stupid savages who are lucky to have as much as we’ve given them” and get it over with.
Tancredo is so fringe and irrelevant that I know his name–yet I probably can’t name 75% of the other members of the House of Representatives even though I do pay attention to such things. Oh, and he’s on TV all the damn time. So he must speak for somebody.
I’ve never seen Tancredo. I’ve never heard Tancredo. I don’t know what TV shows you’re watching, but you need to change the channel.
BTW, I’m on National Review Online every day, so if Tancredo was the Godfather of the right that you make him out to be, I would certainly be well versed in his work. But I am not.
exhoosier,
I remember FAR more militia groups talking about “taking this country back” under Clinton than I’ve seen under Obama. I was even approached about becoming a member while visiting a small grocery store in a little Southern Indiana town.
I also remember seeing many more “Impeach Clinton” stickers back in that day, before Lewinsky, than I’ve see anti-Obama stickers.
I know it is all anecdotal, but from my point of view the far right has been less hostile to Obama than they were to Clinton.
Might as well say “THOSE PEOPLE are stupid savages who are lucky to have as much as we’ve given them” and get it over with.
I was waiting for this type of reply. I don’t live in Indy, but I do live in Northwest Indiana, and have the honor of being in the same county as Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago. I know straight ticket Democrat voters, the kind of people that vote overwhelmingly for people like Carol Ann Seaton, a Gary Democrat running for Lake County Assessor who had licenses in two states (most likely for welfare fraud) among other issues.
There was one reason and only one reason to vote for Carol Ann Seaton: the color of her skin. Straight ticket Democrat voters didn’t know who she was, what her record was, and what the likely outcome of her election would be (incompetence and corruption, which was her record in the Calumet Township Assessors office).
So… yeah. Voters need to be held responsible for the choices that they make. The record in Carson’s district is that they make extremely poor choices, and the reason is that those voters are uneducated, uninformed, and unintelligent. It has nothing to do with race.
Jason — I remember covering the militia groups as a small-town reporter south of Indianapolis during that time, talking to people who had declared themselves independent of the United States, or used some obscure document from 1811 to explain why they didn’t need to get a license plate. So I would agree that those folks were certainly out and about. But I think the difference now is that the militia types were the weirdos in the 1990s. They are, subtly, much more accepted under the Tea Party banner, so in a way those previously kooky have now been accepted into a mainstream movement. After all, racists vote, too! :)
If I were Rep. Carson’s adviser, I wouldn’t recommend these comments. But, I am really hesitant to join in any chorus criticizing it because there appears to me to be a large imbalance in how these things play out as between Left and Right.
The Right refers to the baby-killing, Islamic, socialist, fascist, Kenyan, death panel creating, latte-sipping, elitist, welfare-taking, statist, godless, humanist, liberal, limousine driving, arugula-eating, criminal coddling, tax-and-spend, gun grabbing, Jesus-denying, deficit-exploding, America hating, troop spitting, flag desecrating members of the Left and it’s just kind of boys being boys. The Left says something intemperate, and it’s time for a National Discussion about whether the monster should resign or just grovel for forgiveness.
You want to see what I mean when I say that these voters are uneducated, uninformed, and unintelligent, here are the Lake County election results for 2010. Click on any of the Gary districts (G1, G2, etc.) and see the results. Seaton won on average 100 to 1.
ACORN also did a number on Gary in 2008. Gary has 60,000 registered voters, but their Census population is only 80,000. Hammond only has 40,000 registered voters for the same population. There is massive voter fraud going on in Gary.
The Left says something intemperate, and it’s time for a National Discussion about whether the monster should resign or just grovel for forgiveness.
What the heck are you talking about? This is the first I’ve heard of it.
The world does not revolve around Indianapolis, believe it or not.
You know, Doug, by your standard (“I know that a FEW want to lynch, and MANY want to roll back civil rights”), leftists are EXACTLY those things.
I’m sure a few are baby killers. I’m sure a few are Kenyans. etc. etc. So what the heck is your problem?
I’m still waiting for ONE example of someone who wants to roll back civil rights, BTW.
rep carson certainly did not lie about being called the N-word — the right-wing “analysis” that supposedly proves otherwise was riddled with factual and logical errors. but for some, it’s more comforting to believe that three black congressmen (not just carson, but reps lewis and cleaver) are “scum” than to accept the possibility that some of their fellow conservatives may have racist tendencies.
still, this is an instructive example of how conservatives react to incendiary right-wing behavior: pretend it didn’t happen and attack the messenger for suggesting it did.
Ah, I see the reason for at least some confusion. My paragraph was not well written:
The “them” I was trying to describe was not the Tea Partiers – it was a pronoun intending to reference “the part of the American population from whom the Tea Party wants to take the party back.”
So, whether or not Tea Partiers actually want to roll back civil rights, that’s what “back” probably means in historical terms to other parts of the population.
as for attempts to roll back civil rights, how do you pick just one?
how about the movement to eliminate birthright citizenship?
Nice one, Doug. It is not often that someone sees confusion in the replies to their commentary and goes back to their own original comment to examine it for clarity. Bravo.
Funny, I can’t find where in the 1965 Civil Rights Act where birthright citizenship is mentioned.
Oh, and stAllio, I’d like some help finding the video showing Tea Partiers calling Carson the N word. Preferably from multiple angles.
At heart, I’m a tremendously lazy person, Buzz. Doing it that way saved a lot of time and energy.
“I’m still waiting for ONE example of someone who wants to roll back civil rights, BTW.”
Rand Paul.
Then he realized that you’re not supposed to say those things out in public and he groveled all over himself to backtrack.
“There was one reason and only one reason to vote for Carol Ann Seaton: the color of her skin.”
Because, you know, in the history of elections, there has NEVER been a white person who has voted for a white person only because of the color of his or her skin.
Because, you know, in the history of elections, there has NEVER been a white person who has voted for a white person only because of the color of his or her skin.
Because two wrongs make a right.
So when these voters vote for soon to be felons because they share a skin color, don’t come back and call me a racist for saying that they’re uneducated, uninformed, and unintelligent.
exhoosier: that is some terrible reasoning. Your comment above amounts to “they did it first.” That is abysmally poor reasoning.
Doug: the Congressman’s comments prove him to be a bigot and uninterested in substantial policy discussion. All we need to do is recognize that fact, elect him out of office at the earliest opportunity (as happenned with Tancredo), and hope the next representative from this gerrymandered district is more interested in civil discourse and less interested in demonizing a significant portion of America. No fainting required.
Paul C.: The point of my comment was that not two wrongs make a right. The point is that Buzzcut claims voters only voted for a certain candidate because of skin color, as though somehow black people have a monopoly on this behavior.
Also, the unfortunate thing about the “hanging from trees” remark is that it IS obscuring the substantial policy discussion he brought up: that the Tea Party is there to feather the beds of its millionaire donors, and screw everyone else. There are plenty of stories out today about how House Republican freshmen are giving all sorts of goodies to their donors, and certainly you’ve read about how allegedly anti-tax Tea Partiers are only more than happy to not renew a payroll tax exemption, thus adding to the tax burden of the poorest of Americans, while fighting tooth and nail to keep the Bush tax cuts in place.
As for “civil discourse” — please. Bring Allan West his fainting couch for wanting to leave the Congressional Black Caucus over this considering, his infamous email to Debbie Wasserman Schulz calling her “vile” and telling her to “shut the heck up.”
Doug,
You’re not towing the traditional liberal line; the objectivity is refreshing.
The point is that Buzzcut claims voters only voted for a certain candidate because of skin color, as though somehow black people have a monopoly on this behavior.
Want to make a bet?
Find me a white area of Lake County that voted for Carol Ann Seaton’s opponent at the 100:1 ratio that she got in Gary.
You have a lot of theories about folks that don’t meet reality. I think that you need to put your money where your mouth is. How about $50?
From my extensive research, she never did much worse than 4:1 in white areas.
There may be, in Doug’s words, “a few” whites that vote for a candidate because they’re white, but it is nothing like what you are seeing in Gary, and I would assume in most of Carson’s district as well.
exhoosier: (1st) I didn’t say “two wrongs don’t make a right.” That was Buzzcut. I said, “they did it first.” It appears from your clarification post that the proper summary of your comments is “they do it too.” So I guess I was close.
What you stated in your clarification post is at least close to civil discourse, unlike the comments of Carson, which provide the rebuttable presumption that Carson is unfit for the office he serves.
As for Allen West, you are just trying to muddy the waters and create another “Republicans do it too” argument. While I think West’s comments to Schultz were a bit stronger than needed too, they do not come anywhere close to the offensiveness of Carson’s comments.
BTW Doug: consider this another exhibit of what I stated in your last gay marriage thread (my post was deleted). In that post, I stated that Democrats typically villify Republican and Tea Party folks as being prejudiced against groups, such as women, racial minorities, and homosexuals. Here, if you disagree with Congressman’s Carson’s desire for “change” then you must be a racist that wants to kill african-americans. Consider this just another example of the phenomenon I mentioned.
The thing I find interesting here, being a libertarian and thus not right or left, is that both right and left seem to think that a) Their side doesn’t make this kind of gaffe, b) When their side does, they justify or excuse it, c) When the other side does it they are shocked, Shocked, I tell you! or outraged, or both, and d) go on to explain how the media treats the other side better.
Well, when dehumanizing the other side so regularly, so completely, eventually it always comes back at your side- whichever side that is. Also, the price to be paid for being so vigilant in enforcing political correctness.
“As for the lack of outrage of being called a “baby killer” vs. a racist, are you serious? There is no comparison. There is absolutely nothing worse in this country than being called a racist. Nothing.”
Child molest much? Are you feeling a little rapey? In many circles, becaue a liberal is worse than a racist.
Mike, what you describe is the law of asymmetric insight. Believe it or not, libertarians are subject to it as well.
I don’t think Carson should resign, but man would I love to whup his ass in the next election. Sadly, gerrymandering means that the lest likely Indiana Congressmen to lose are Carson and Visclosky.
Child molest much? Are you feeling a little rapey? In many circles, becaue a liberal is worse than a racist.
In the world that is your mind, yes. In the real world, not so much. Being a racist is the worst possible thing that you could be called.
There aren’t many things worse than calling someone a racist. That being said, I actually agree that child molester is worse than racist. I also note that you don’t see many politicians calling a certain group of people child molesters. Bottom line, saying a group of people “hate” any other group of people is lower than just about anything else you can say.
Andre Carson is one of best if not the best congressman.
being called a pedophile is clearly worse than being called a racist, as is being called a terrorist (or “terrorist sympathizer”, both of which are routinely used against liberals).
Gay conservative here. Democrats advocate the killing of millions of little black babies every year. And it’s been decades since I’ve seen a lynching.
As Ronald Reagan said, “Liberals aren’t bad people. They just have bad ideas.”
And Andrew Carson is just as ignorant as his mother was.
Nice column from Matt Tully on Carson’s remarks. It’s thoughtful, at least; though, it probably feeds into the “both sides do it and are equally bad” equivalency — Matt himself isn’t necessarily guilty of this, but it’s an easy meta-narrative that gets used a lot.
So which congressman wants to see black people lynched? I can buy the case that their MAY be a tea party member that feels that way, but that is largely unprovable since it is such a general accusation. However, he accused a sitting congressperson of being a racist that wants to see black people lynched. The accused group can’t be that large – who is it Rep. Carson?