Yeah - the Southern Poverty Law Center is the bane of racists in our country. No wonder Jay Tea would try to vilify them. The Tea Party extremists, who feed off of racial hatred, dislke being called out for the racists they are - and there are a lot of Tea Party supporters here at Wizbang.

Have you noticed?

Democrats defend poor Americans and root out racial hate.

Republicans defend BP, racism and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

Sad fact, but true.

Another day, another insipid comment from the resident troll.

Dane, I am so ashamed. Please tell me where I'm in error.

I beg of you, correct my mistakes and help me see the light.

J.

I'm just glad to see that race pimping is a multi-cultural profession. All the white ppl at SPLC and MSNBC are making a killing off the institution the same as their peers JJ and Al "James Brown" Sharpton.

Let's face it race-baiting, and fighting for the "down-trodden" is an industry in and of itself, this is just undeniable proof. Gotta respect the ingenuity of em though....gotta love America.

Shocked, I am SHOCKED, that Dane would be the VERY first person to make a comment about the SPLC being a bastion of righteousness in a morally corrupt country like the United States.

After having watched the organization evolve over the last 40 years I think I can safely say they need to stick a fork in it and say "Mission Accomplished" and go home. But the bigots, and thats just what they are, cannot let it go. They have to have a boogieman to attack to justify their existence and obviously self inflated salaries.

Diane of my Existence wrote:

Democrats defend poor Americans and root out racial hate.

Which explains why the poverty level has risen 15% while Obama has been in office and 20% since the Democrats took over the Congress.

It also explains why the Justice Department dismissed the voter intimidation case against the Black Panthers.

How is it that Diane can always be one of the first commenters on a thread? No job maybe?

Thanks for helping to expose America's most profitable "non-profit."

The SPLC now has nearly $190 MILLION tax-free donor dollars on hand and the call for more donations goes out like clockwork every week.

You linked to my blog page exposing the all-White executives of the great "civil rights organization," here is a link to some notes I made about the SPLC's bogus "Hate Map," which is much along the lines of your observations.

http://wp.me/pCLYZ-K

I cite all my sources. All comments are welcome.

Richard Keefe

General argument is good--but there's one little detail you got wrong. The March of Dimes is no longer a benevolent organization. MOD was the leading funder of the research that developed the prenatal procedure of amniocentesis. Then the MOD became the leading promoter of the technique, and the leading promoter of the horrible use to which that technique is now put: namely, identify "defective" babies, then abort them.

This is why the "incidence" of Down syndrome has gone down by 90 percent. Just as many Down syndrome babies as ever are conceived--but, under pressure from doctors and from a culture heavily influenced by eugenic ideology--90 percent of women who find out their unborn baby has Down's choose to abort.

This same kind of pressure is being brought to bear on many different genetic conditions--cystic fibrosis, sickle-cell anemia, etc. MOD both developed and has pushed the "search-and-destroy" approach to babies with special needs.

Good little article about all this:
http://www.pregnantpause.org/people/modppf.htm

In addition, if you take a good look at local March of Dimes chapters, you will find that they're mostly just staffers with generous salaries spending all their time putting on glamorous fundraisers to raise more money for their own continued generous salaries.

I grant that some of MOD's work on preventing fetal alchohol syndrome is worthwhile and good, but the outfit as a whole is one big scam, and not only that, has done much actual harm by subtly propagandizing our culture into a progressively more eugenic mindset.

Check out the book, "Beyond Abortion: A Chronicle of Fetal Experimentation" by Suzanne Rini. http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Abortion-Chronicle-Fetal-Experimentation/dp/0895554879/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1284402039&sr=8-1

There is a pro-life alternative to the March of Dimes--for people who want to donate funds for research into genetic defects with a goal toward prevention and treatment, rather than killing the victims. It's The Michael Fund,
http://www.michaelfund.org/index.php?pr=Home_Page

If Bruce Henry or anyone else thinks the SPLC exists for ANY reason other than to line Morris Dees' pockets, they are IDIOTS.

The group wasn't even formed until the Klan was practically dead. Dees is like the little punk bully who comes along after the fight is over to kick dirt on the loser (as long a he's too weak to get up). Since the early days, they don't even file lawsuits anymore. Press releases, free media, and of course the meat and potatoes: fund-raising appeals to the stupid guilty white liberal donor base.

Morons . . .

JT, Dane simply cannot. His only task is to call names, label people he disagrees with and go on to juvenile behavior. He disappeared because you asked to be corrected. He cannot do that. ww

I fully expect SCSIWuzzy to come along any minute and scold Mr Gravitas Emeritus Addison for his incivility.

Alleged incivility. Doesn't bother me.

I'm not interested in defending the fact that SPLC has an all-white executive staff, or what they do today as opposed to what they did years ago. My point on that other thread was to debunk the notion that Mr Tea, Mr Drummond, and several regular commenters here are so fond of advancing. Namely, that liberals are moral and physical cowards because we're not brainless jingoistic Islamophobes. I pointed out that the Klan would dearly love to find Mr Dees, a "typical liberal," in a dark alley some night, but he goes right on fighting the Klan despite that risk.

Maybe not to YOUR satisfaction, Wizbangers, but he's done good work over the years. When you guys can say you've done as much good in the world during your careers as Mr Dees and Mr Potok have, I'll laud your efforts, too.

Bruce, I dismantled that argument on that thread you're running away from. I don't state absolutes, I note trends -- and your citing specific examples that run counter to that trend doesn't change it in the least.

But if just repeating that stupid point is all you're going to do in the future, then please find a briefer way of stating it. I'd recommend just typing "SSDD"* instead of dragging it over and over again.

J.

* "Same Shit, Different Day"

So the trend you're noting, Mr Tea, is the trend of liberals to be cowards, and conservatives NOT to be? Isn't that what your argument in both these threads has been? And in the specific case of the SPLC, liberals are not only cowards but frauds?

Right, you only note trends, and specific examples to the contrary prove nothing. Then how is it that examples that help to make your point DO count, Mr Tea?

We can get into the whole Republicans-are-chickenhawks/Kerry-didn't-deserve-a-medal quagmire if you want, Mr Tea, but it's hopeless. I'm just pointing out that the whole I'm-macho-you-ain't thing is, umm, false. It's based on nothing more than ideology, with no basis in fact.

I would state most liberals are cowards and garner their courage by group think or crowd methology. Liberals are told what to think and especially how to feel and the biggest feeling liberals play on their brethren in guilt.

Conservatives are individuals who act individually and if they come acrossed someone that thinks like they do, great, if they don't they don't care. I also believe conservative have something they would die for especially God and country. Liberals tend to hate what america stands for so why defend it. ww

One point I will give the SPLC, unlike the Obama admin, they recognize the New Black Panthers as a hate group.

Willie is Jim M's inarticulate little brother, here to explain "what libs believe."

Not incivility, but your lack of convictional fortitude, Bruce. Be who and what you are, but don't expect to have it both ways.

Oh, I took your advice on the other thread to heart, Mr Wuzzy. You won't see me apologising for snark again. The recipients will just have to "man up" and get over it if I go a little too far.

Any thoughts on Mr Tea's contention that examples which support his assertions are valid, while contrary examples are worthless?

Bruce, your arguments are worthless, because you do not recognize the nature of my thesis.

I was discussing overall trends. You were citing individual exceptions.

I talked about incidents and the general narrative. You rebutted with those who occasionally buck the narrative.

But they are the small exceptions.

Yes, Jon Stewart mocks both sides, and does a good job at it. But that doesn't change the fact that Reverend Jones' "threat" to burn Korans brought him the disapproving attention of the commander of armed forces in Afghanistan, the FBI, the Secretary of State, and the President of the United States. Meanwhile, the Ground Zero Mosque is defended by the President, and none of the aforementioned worthies had anything to say about the anti-American riots that featured burning Constitutions and Flags.

J.

iwogisdead asks how come Diane is every time one of the first to comment on a thread? No job maybe?

Her job may be to do just what he does. Probably one of the corruptly tax-payer remunerated otherwise deservedly unemployed doled by 0zero's "administration" for the purpose.

(Never was a Dane until a German porked a pig)

Bruce, if you can provide enough contrary data to show a different trend, you'd be refuting Jay's thesis.
As it is, this is like:
Jay: "Reptiles lay eggs, mammals don't; one of the many ways to tell them apart".
Bruce: "Platypus lays eggs!"
Jay: "Reptiles lay eggs, nearly every mammal doesn't"
Bruce: "My Rosy Boa has live young."
Jay: "Most every snake lays eggs, nearly every mammal doesn't"
Bruce: "Garter snakes don't"
Jay: "...."
Bruce: "Some rattlesnakes don't"
Jay: "Doesn't disprove the overall thesis"
Bruce: "Only if you ignore the facts I've presented"

Mr. Henry is confused on a few points. To wit: his contention that conservatives think "that liberals are moral and physical cowards because we're not brainless jingoistic Islamophobes."

This is missing the point - the point is that liberals are moral and physical cowards. The reason is inconsequential; it's like asking why water is wet.

Mr Henry also writes:

"I pointed out that the Klan would dearly love to find Mr Dees, a "typical liberal," in a dark alley some night, but he goes right on fighting the Klan despite that risk."

You mean, both Klan members? Perhaps Mr. Henry is unaware that the Klan is finished; a joke. While there is certainly an organization of that name, whatever power it had is broken. The "risk" here is personal, perhaps, given that some INDIVIDUAL Klan members might take it into their empty heads to attack Mr. Dees, but the organization is a paper tiger. Standing up to the Klan AS AN ORGANIZATION is about as brave as enlisting to fight the Confederacy - the battle's been won already.