H.P.: Your request is being processed... Tea Party Federation Expels Mark Williams Over 'Offensive' Response To NAACP's Racism Charge

[Nickclone]

The National Tea Party Federation has expelled conservative commentator and Tea Party Express spokesman Mark Williams over a fictional letter Williams wrote on his blog last week from "Colored People" to Abraham Lincoln.

"We, in the last 24 hours, have expelled Tea Party Express and Mark Williams from the National Tea Party Federation because of the letter that he wrote," federation spokesman David Webb said Sunday on CBS's "Face The Nation."

Williams wrote the blog post, which has since been taken down, in response to a resolution adopted by the NAACP accusing Tea Party leaders of tolerating racism within the movement.

"Dear Mr. Lincoln," began Williams' letter. "We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!"

Webb called the blog post "clearly offensive."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/18/tea-party-expels-mark-william s_n_650445.html

So the NAACP claims the tea baggers are racist...so the tea baggers reply with a racist, fake letter to Lincoln? What a bunch of unorganized dolts...

[ACW]

I think it was just satire that epic failed.

Good on the Tea Partiers for not taking any chances though.

[ljs]

..so the tea baggers reply ...

nope nope nope...ONE person replied with a stupid ass letter and they kicked him out.

but nice try on lumping everyone who associates with "Tea Party" with one person.- fail.

[Ax]

The assault on the Tea Party has only just begun.

Misdirection of the electorate.

[Nickclone]

I think it was just satire that epic failed.

Good on the Tea Partiers for not taking any chances though.

Even if this were his attempt at satire, there is truth in jest and his past is laced with bigotry. This guy has protested a mosque near ground zero in New York, said Muslims worship a "monkey God" and called Obama an Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug. This guy is definitely a bigot.

[Prosperity]

I think it was just satire that epic failed.

Good on the Tea Partiers for not taking any chances though.

yeah I get what he is trying to say, and there is a bit of truth in that, but wow, what horrible execution

though I wouldn't be surprised if he's a racist' I don't think this shows that he is

[Teller]

I didn't read the entire letter, but the quote of it in the article is beyond tasteless. I agree that it was an attempt at satire gone wrong, but I think it's a wise move to jettison this fool and try to move forward.

[Nickclone]

nope nope nope...ONE person replied with a stupid ass letter and they kicked him out.

but nice try on lumping everyone who associates with "Tea Party" with one person.- fail.

You mean that one man, the spokesman? The man that speaks for them and their organization?

[Teller]

You mean that one man, the spokesman? The man that speaks for them and their organization?

The organization kicked him out.

What conclusion do you draw from that about the Tea Parties?

[Nickclone]

The organization kicked him out.

What conclusion do you draw from that about the Tea Parties?

He was an outspoken racist when they brought him in, they didn't necessarily fire him for what he wrote. If he had written that a couple of weeks ago it probably would've just been deleted and never spoken of again. However, he wrote this in response of the NAACP's request to oust racists (himself) and he definitely lashed out in a form of tasteless self defense.

Now, if they continue to do stuff like filtering out bigots (even if their views on legislation stay the same) good for them, but they still have a long way to go.

[Teller]

He was an outspoken racist when they brought him in, they didn't necessarily fire him for what he wrote. If he had written that a couple of weeks ago it probably would've just been deleted and never spoken of again. However, he wrote this in response of the NAACP's request to oust racists (himself) and he definitely lashed out in a form of tasteless self defense.

Now, if they continue to do stuff like filtering out bigots (even if their views on legislation stay the same) good for them, but they still have a long way to go.

Do they? Maybe they do. Maybe they don't. I honestly don't know what the numbers are in terms of actual racists in the Tea Parties. But I don't see them only advocating for the rights and privileges of one race; unlike the NAACP, of course.

The irony is amazing.

[Nickclone]

Do they? Maybe they do. Maybe they don't. I honestly don't know what the numbers are in terms of actual racists in the Tea Parties. But I don't see them only advocating for the rights and privileges of one race; Unlike the NAACP, of course.

The irony is amazing.

Ah, I can see your racist ideals or your lack of understanding starting to poke through. The NAACP is for the advancement of black people, but not at the expense of oppressing others to reach their goals, like the tea party. When the NAACP supports legislation allowing for the police to harass anyone who looks white because they might be an illegal alien...I'll give you credit for that one.

[Teller]

Ah, I can see your racist ideals or your lack of understanding starting to poke through. The NAACP is for the advancement of black people, but not at the expense of oppressing others to reach their goals, like the tea party. When the NAACP supports legislation allowing for the police to harass anyone who looks white because they might be an illegal alien...I'll give you credit for that one.

Ah yes. I'm for all people, so I'm a racist. Neeeeeever seen this argument before.

Show me one example of the Tea Parties officially endorsing "oppressing others to reach their goals."

[Seabee1973]

Ah, I can see your racist ideals or your lack of understanding starting to poke through. The NAACP is for the advancement of black people, but not at the expense of oppressing others to reach their goals, like the tea party. When the NAACP supports legislation allowing for the police to harass anyone who looks white because they might be an illegal alien...I'll give you credit for that one.

Till we get over color barriers and such there will always be racism. I am firm believer in treating everybody equal we all born human beings and we will all die human beings no need to add special groups to make it racist.

[rincewind]

Ah, I can see your racist ideals or your lack of understanding starting to poke through. The NAACP is for the advancement of black people, but not at the expense of oppressing others to reach their goals, like the tea party. When the NAACP supports legislation allowing for the police to harass anyone who looks white because they might be an illegal alien...I'll give you credit for that one.

Wow. I almost replied to h_h about his post, but decided I should stay out of this one (needless to say I would have argued VERY much against his point). I would not, however, have dropped the racist card so quickly or thoughtlessly. So were you just basically waiting around for someone to take a hardcore opposition stand to taunt them with being a racist? That move automatically puts the person not only on an unfair defensive, but in an attack position that, surely in your eyes, will only make them seem more 'racist'.

Bad form.

[Teller]

Wow. I almost replied to h_h about his post, but decided I should stay out of this one (needless to say I would have argued VERY much against his point).

And I fully expect -- and respect -- the opposing position. I've had enough of these debates to understand the argument on the other side, and it is one that (though as I said, I disagree with) I do understand and respect.

FWIW, if there was a NAAWP, I wouldn't support that either; even though I believe things like affirmative action are unnecessary and counterproductive.

[Seabee1973]

if anyone wants to see the full context of it pm me and ill send it you

[rincewind]

And I fully expect -- and respect -- the opposing position. I've had enough of these debates to understand the argument on the other side, and it is one that (though as I said, I disagree with) I do understand and respect.

FWIW, if there was a NAAWP, I wouldn't support that either; even though I believe things like affirmative action are unnecessary and counterproductive.

My not responding really wasn't much to do with you. More one of those, 'why am I getting into this type of debate on an internet football message board?' I try to just observe this type of threads these days. Don't really see the point of being an active participant anymore.

You know I love you though, hog.

[Nickclone]

Ah yes. I'm for all people, so I'm a racist. Neeeeeever seen this argument before.

Show me one example of the Tea Parties officially endorsing "oppressing others to reach their goals."

I'm not going to argue semantics with you on your own personal feelings towards race, I'd rather stay on the topic at hand.

The tea party supports SB1070, the Arizona illegal immigration bill, they support big business over the little people, even BP over all of the fisherman's lively hood they destroyed. They don't think gays have the right to get married, they say they support the working man and unemployed, but officially stand against any legislation to help the people they claim to support.

They don't just try to oppress people of different race, but of different ideals and class.

[Teller]

My not responding really wasn't much to do with you. More one of those, 'why am I getting into this type of debate on an internet football message board?' I try to just observe this type of threads these days. Don't really see the point of being an active participant anymore.

You know I love you though, hog.

Well, I've already dropped two "R" bombs (respect) on you today, so I won't use a third here, but you know I do.

I would do well to follow your lead in this area. But you also no me better than that.

[thebluefood]

Ah, I can see your racist ideals or your lack of understanding starting to poke through. The NAACP is for the advancement of black people, but not at the expense of oppressing others to reach their goals, like the tea party. When the NAACP supports legislation allowing for the police to harass anyone who looks white because they might be an illegal alien...I'll give you credit for that one.

I'm black and I don't believe the NAACP represents my interests or desires. As a matter of fact, I usually side with the Tea Party's ideals than the NAACP.

[Seabee1973]

I'm not going to argue semantics with you on your own personal feelings towards race, I'd rather stay on the topic at hand.

The tea party supports SB1070, the Arizona illegal immigration bill, they support big business over the little people, even BP over all of the fisherman's lively hood they destroyed. They don't think gays have the right to get married, they say they support the working man and unemployed, but officially stand against any legislation to help the people they claim to support.

They don't just try to oppress people of different race, but of different ideals and class.

Reach for straws much? e the only thing thats the truth in there is the AZ thing and everyone should be against illegal imagration

[Teller]

I'm not going to argue semantics with you on your own personal feelings towards race, I'd rather stay on the topic at hand.

The tea party supports SB1070, the Arizona illegal immigration bill, they support big business over the little people, even BP over all of the fisherman's lively hood they destroyed. They don't think gays have the right to get married, they say they support the working man and unemployed, but officially stand against any legislation to help the people they claim to support.

They don't just try to oppress people of different race, but of different ideals and class.

Oh, so it's NOT oppressing other races. That's what I thought. And as far as class goes, I KNOW the Tea Parties are not homogeneous. My dad is a union electrician (one of those working men you talked about) and he supports the tea parties. And I think many very wealthy Americans are against income redistribution as well. I just don't see your argument holding water. And even you have backed off your initial post about advancing whites at the expense of other races.

Am I still a racist when even you can't support your statement when asked to get specific?

And I'm sorry, my friend, but voicing opposing ideals is quite possibly the GREATEST thing about this country. If you're opposed to that, I'm truly sorry to hear it.

And if you STILL want to play this game, post the language of the Arizona law that actually passed, and explain to me how it's discriminatory.

Fish. Barrell. BANG!!!!!

[Nickclone]

Wow. I almost replied to h_h about his post, but decided I should stay out of this one (needless to say I would have argued VERY much against his point). I would not, however, have dropped the racist card so quickly or thoughtlessly. So were you just basically waiting around for someone to take a hardcore opposition stand to taunt them with being a racist? That move automatically puts the person not only on an unfair defensive, but in an attack position that, surely in your eyes, will only make them seem more 'racist'.

Bad form.

How is that dropping the race card, he said the mention of the NAACP was ironic in context to the topic at hand, he even said "But I don't see them only advocating for the rights and privileges of one race; unlike the NAACP, of course.". How else would one take that? Perhaps it was a case of misunderstanding, but I think it's wrong to compare the two organizations and say they're the same.

[rincewind]

How is that dropping the race card, he said the mention of the NAACP was ironic in context to the topic at hand, he even said "But I don't see them only advocating for the rights and privileges of one race; unlike the NAACP, of course.". How else would one take that? Perhaps it was a case of misunderstanding, but I think it's wrong to compare the two organizations and say they're the same.

First - you didn't drop the race card, you suggested he was a racist. Big difference, IMO.

Second - you brought up the NAACP, not him. Disagreeing with the NAACP doesn't, by any stretch of the imagination, make you racist... even if you're white.