The KKK was declared illegal in 1871 by congress and signed into law by President Grant

[yodoobo]

While they still survive in miniature form, it was effective in de-powering this terrorist organization.


Why can't we repeat this for the teabaggers?

It's clear they operate on the same principles of racism, hate and terrorism just as the KKK. In addition to the hate and racism, they have added treason to their list of crimes.

I'm fearful that if we allow this racist organization to continue to grow, they could pose a real threat to our Democracy.

[EFerrari]

1. For a start, we should call them the kay-baggers.

[Chisox08]

29. No, the Tea Klux Klan has a better ring to it.

[Poll_Blind]

38. Oh I'm stealing that. That's awesome. n/t

PB

[goclark]

42. Or the TKK

Either way KK should be in there. :puke:

[virgogal]

2. No violence so far----at least that I know about.

[RKP5637]

3. Sometimes I'm concerned this is just the tip of the iceberg. With the hate media of

today, they just fan and fan the flames for profit. Back then they had printed material and word of mouth, now you can get it slammed at you 7x24. Not good for a healthy society IMO.

[Moderate Dem]

4. While I vehemently oppose tea parties,

They are not anywhere close to the KKK.

Doug

[yodoobo]

10. Not yet anyway.

[chrisa]

The teaparty movement is a fad movement.

It's starting to die already. It won't survive until the 2012 election.

[jdlh8894]

5. Illegal?? Link please. N/T

[yodoobo]

6. sure

http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Ku-Klux-Klan-Act

Michael Moore talked about it in one of his movies too.

[Ex Lurker]

7. as loony as the teabaggers are

they don't come close to what the 19th century Klan was. The Reconstruction-era KKK was an outright guerilla army and shadow government, continuing the civil war as an insurgency. It used all the insurgent tools, including intimidation, kidnapping and murder, and on occasion engaging the authorities in open combat. The teabaggers have a way to go before getting to that level.

It's a slippery slope you start down when you start proscribing groups you don't like, no matter how obnoxious.

[jody]

8. Don't forget that KKK members were Dems and they physically attacked Republican members. n/t

[yodoobo]

9. What are you trying to say?

First off the political winds have shifted a bit in 130 years.

Second, bad people are bad people no matter what party they belong too.

[jody]

11. You started the OP. Did you know that the first KKK was a Dem organization. If you wanted to make

another point you could have chosen the second KKK or even pointed out the present KKK.

Hate groups abound in many versions as the SPLC reports in it's list of 932 groups.

[yodoobo]

13. well i know that. just wondering what YOU were trying to say

If you don't want to explain that's cool, but its probably not a good idea to around replying to people then.

Yes there alot of hate groups there and they are still hate groups no matter stripes they -claim-

[jody]

16. I've explained so it's not my problem if you can't understand. If you don't want to deal with

replies then you might consider before you post an OP.

[yodoobo]

18. not really sure why your being so caustic

but I hope you find some peace.

[jody]

22. Caustic! You post an OP advocating congress pass a law to be signed by Obama declared illegal Tea

Party members?

If you don't see the infringement of your proposal on the unalienable/inalienable or pre-existing or fundamental right of freedom of speech that does not depend upon our Constitution for it's legitimacy, then you will have a very difficult time understanding those who oppose your idea.

[yodoobo]

27. There is no right to racism and hate

[jody]

30. Your April Fool's joke is a day late unless you believe that. You obviously "hate" Tea Party members

and that's your right and you have the right to express your hatred in all forms of speech.

That's the simple meaning of "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech".

If you want to understand how that fundamental right has been interpreted by SCOTUS, you should study Freedom of Expression Topics.

[yodoobo]

33. Guess you never heard of hate crime laws

And yes they have passed constitutional review.

Not really sure why you are going out of your way to defend the Tea Party Racist, but its a shame that you are doing it here.

[jody]

39. Please cite a "hate crime law" that makes it illegal to express hate in speech. n/t

[yodoobo]

41. we're not talking about speech

But I grow tired of listening to you defend this hate group.

Have a good evening.

[Forkboy]

46. No offense, but he's right.

He's not defending a hate group, he's defending YOUR right as well as theirs. The next time a Bush is in office (and there WILL be a next time), do you want YOUR speech restricted? Do you want to be told what ideas and concepts you can talk about?

Of course you don't.

I think so much of what the Teabaggers are saying is truly vile, but vile speech should be allowed. The idea is to counter their free speech with free speech of your own. We're in the right (so to speak). The Teabaggers are crazier than a box of frogs...let them show everyone that. For every person that sees them and agrees ten more see them and laugh. Let the 1st Amendment work...it's not always pretty, and it's not always safe. But it ALWAYS better than the alternative.

The ACLU defended the Nazi's right to speak....do you agree with that? The Nazi's didn't...until it was they that needed the protection. We're not nazi's, but don't you see how Bush, Inc, could have portrayed us that way? Bachmann and her ilk still do. Do you want THEM in power telling you what you can think and believe? Because if we pass laws to restrict free speech this is what we're inviting, with open arms. I'd rather take my chances with some speech that upsets me than restrict anyone's right to upset me in the first place.

[jody]

49. I've defended freedom of speech, yous and tea-baggers, and nothing more. Have a great evening. n/t

[paulsby]

45. hate crime laws don't outlaw hate

they merely add additional penalties when acts that are already crimes (such as vandalism or threats) are motivated by certain biases

[paulsby]

44. there most definitely is

there most definitely IS a right to hate

please show me the law that outlaws hate

also, fwiw the US is one of the few countries that does NOT outlaw hate speech ... because our first amendment MEANS something

hate , and the expression of same is FULLY protected constitutionally as it should be

get thee some learning

[chrisa]

12. Comparing the Teabaggers to the KKK is ridiculous.

Threat to our Democracy? They don't have any power.

And second, that would be a violation of the First Amendment.

[yodoobo]

14. their trajectory is the same.

and hate is not protected by the 1st amendment.

[chrisa]

19. They have the right to their opinions.

As long as they aren't breaking the law, why shouldn't people be allowed to protest, no matter how misinformed they may be? Making the teabaggers "illegal" wouldn't do anything other than start us down a road we don't want to go down.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. Actually, hate is protected by the 1st amendment.

So is love, humor, stupid, and illiterate.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. They are, in fact, the very same people.

They just don't wear the robes.

[jody]

20. That makes as much sense as saying all DUers are the same as die-hard Marxist just because a few of

that latter group are among the most vocal contributors to this forum.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. Maybe if DU were founded in and wholly supported by Marxist.

In the same way the whole teabag movement is saturated with racism.

Sorry, your false equivalence doesn't fly.

[jody]

23. LOL Have a pleasant evening. n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. I noticed this isn't the first time you've got to bat for white supremacists.

J.P. Rushton, for example.

[jody]

26. You naively misunderstand my belief that is so eloquently stated by Noam Chomsky "if we don't

believe in freedom of speech for those we despise, then we don't believe in it at all."

George Washington said “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. There's a difference between defending their speech and defending their character.

[jody]

48. I understand the difference. Every post I made in this thread defends speech, yours and Tea baggers,

and that's all.

[Forkboy]

31. And both fall under the protection of the 1st Amendment.

As someone who stands up for pro-rape video games you must surely know this.

[jody]

17. +1

:thumbsup:

[mod mom]

28. So is that why the GOP wants to replace Grant on the $50 w Raygun?

[yodoobo]

35. interesting observation.

[demodonkey]

32. Wow, for a group that was outlawed in 1871, the Klan sure has kept active...

... they were around and really going strong in the 1920's (burned crosses near my home in Western PA; my father saw this) and continue in various places to this day.

[yodoobo]

34. murder was outlawed long before 1871

yet it still happens.

Still laws against murder are considered a good idea in most circles.

[laughingliberal]

36. It might be important to look at the history of the Klan which led up to

declaring them a terrorist organiztion in 1871. Not defending the teabaggers but I think things might have to get a whole lot worse before that would happen.

[Jkid]

37. Did I just saw this thread on 4chan's /new/ ?

I did before it 404'ed.

[yodoobo]

43. I dunno

In fact I don't understand most of your post.

[TheKentuckian]

47. Uhmmm....It really didn't work at all. That wasn't even the Klan high water mark yet

They were running Indiana for a stretch in the early 20th.

LBJ took a lot of steam out of them finally but they still are around and have ebbed and flowed for the last 100 years. I suspect the teabaggers are the newest incarnation. They probably have finally rebranded after being hammered by even Reagan and poppy pretty good.

Tea parties are straight laissez faire Klan rallies, I don't care what Noam or Thom have to say. I hate to go here but I really think white people are naive in this area.

[metalbot]

50. How have they committed treason?

Treason is pretty narrowly defined in Federal law, and SCOTUS has narrowed that even further. I can go on TV and advocate violently overthrowing the US government, and it's NOT treason.

Unless you are referring to Hutaree, who were accused of sedition, but I don't see anything to indicate that they were Tea Party people.

[aikoaiko]

51. As I understand it, the Klan itself is not illegal.

Violent acts and conspiracies of violence are.

Verbal expressions of hate (but not including inciting violence and direct threats) are protected by constitution.