Why Tea Party Chairman Mark Williams Got Kicked Out

tea partyTea Party Chairman, Mark Williams, was kicked out of his post over the weekend, after he posted a racist blog in response to calling on the Tea Party to purge its ranks of racists. Without going into what Williams said, understand he broke the number one rule of organizations where racists are harbored: “Thou Shalt Not Publicly Speak Our Truths.” The NAACP (and everybody else) would’ve only been able to speculate the ideology of the group had certain acts not occurred.

Listening to provocative speakers (Sarah Palin, Rand Paul) does not a racist organization make. Promulgation of false truths that make up the philosophy of the group and cause the group to act in a certain way (exclude, attack, discriminate) does a racist organization make. When Tea Party members spat on John Lewis prior to the health care vote, shouted the N-word at other black Congress Members and verbally assaulted gay Congressman, Barney Frank, and the crowd refused to give the person up (say who did it), the movement validated the claim that it was harboring racists.

The NAACP called them out at their national convention last week. I know I’ve been hard on the NAACP the past few weeks, but this is the advocacy the NAACP is supposed to be doing. Monitoring racial temperament, responding to legal assault on our constitutional rights and shining their huge spotlight on racial hypocrisy is the NAACP’s job. This chasing talking greeting cards and advocating for recreational marijuana stuff is a bunch of bullsh*t.

The NAACP put their finger on the pulse of the next racial movement in America, hiding in the Tea Party movement. And it is just below the surface. My mom used to say, if you want to know who’s guilty, throw a rock at a bush and watch who jumps out, whether the rock hits ’em or not. The guilty party will scream the loudest, or run the fastest. The NAACP threw the rock, Williams jumped and screamed hard, saying there were no racists in the Tea Party, then wrote racist diatribe that got him booted. It’s the same in any company, government, or social environment. You think what you want to. You can act in unison on your ideology in private setting and in unspoken terms. But once you make it public, that’s a no-no. Racism is not over. But overt racism isn’t readily accepted, just yet.

The Tea Party Express, the counter-populous movement to Obama “Change” populism, is on the verge of taking over the Republican Party as the party seeks to reconstitute its base and its ideology. Their mock dissatisfaction over the state of the country is the baseline of a reconstituted ideology they know the Republican Party needs to listen to. The subtext of their existence, however, is to contain and marginalize President Barack Obama, which is consistent with the Republican Party’s objective of marginalizing the Democratic Party over the next two election cycles.

The biggest core of the Tea Party membership are Southerners, Mid-Westerners, and poor whites who didn’t vote for Barack Obama, and are still shocked that the rest of the country overcame their racial insensibilities to elect a black President. There is no other justification for their persistent objection to anything the President does. But the Tea Party movement was adamant about their cause being about the issues. It’s what racists have claimed for 235 years, that American society is about rights (mainly theirs, everybody else’s can be stepped on) and not about race. It’s why racists wore hoods and sheets in public, and why their powerful societies that controlled political and economic affairs were always secret.

The less you know about what they think, the less you can respond to how they think, even though the social, political and economic outcomes will tell you what they think. No one ever publicly embraced what Strom Thurmond said in 1948 during the “States Rights” Party formation that allowed Harry Truman to win the election. Dixiecrats momentarily left the party because Truman desegregated the military. But when Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott said “We would have avoided all these problems had we voted for Thurmond” in 2002, he had to give up his seat. Verbalizing such thoughts was no longer popular. No one ever publicly embraced what Bull Connor did in Birmingham in 1963, but when President Lyndon Johnson ended segregation by signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Dixiecrats permanently left the Democratic Party, switching to the Republican Party in 1968.

Even when the Democrats elected the first Southern President in over 100 years, eight years later (Jimmy Carter in 1976), those with a “peculiar” ideology waeren’t with him. And the code words flew with Ronald Reagan’s announcement for President in Philadelphia, Mississippi, three years later. The anti-taxation, individual rights, no race quota, family values conversation, froth with racial inferences, took the country back for two decades. Obama populism caught this segment of the population off guard. It didn’t catch the Republicans off guard.

They knew they had run the party in the ground with an antiquated ideology, and the country in the ground with it. They were looking for a way to recover and the Tea Party is the branch of the tree lowest hanging. Not one of the Republican Party frontrunners has repudiated any comments coming from the Tea Party. Most have appeared at one event or another. Most are tracking the growth of the Tea Party base, despite the antics tied to their message. But vocalizing racism and putting racists up front will temper the movement and re-empower Democrats. That’s the last thing the Tea Party and the Republicans wants.

Don’t look for Tea Party activists to try to run racists hiding in their ranks out of the movement. For they can no more disavow the racists in their own Party than they could disavow their white grandfathers that raised them but said things that made them “uncomfortable.” They’ll just have to learn to keep their unspoken truths to themselves.

Anthony Asadullah Samad

Anthony Asadullah Samad, Ph.D., is a national columnist, managing director of the Urban Issues Forum and author of the upcoming book, REAL EYEZ: Race, Reality and Politics in 21 Century Politics. He can be reached at www.AnthonySamad.com.


  1. concerned in portland says

    Racism is alive in the US, but everyone should be careful placing the lable on someone. It has been documented on video, that Tea Party attendees do not support racism. People have asked people to leave when displaying Natzi symbils.

    Sara Palin married a bi-cultural person and her children are part Eskimo Indian. It’s not that she and many others, disapprove of President Obama because he is partically black. People reject his efforts to sign laws taking control of publicly held companies, like GM and Chrysler.

    As far as Barney Frank, he was shouted down at town hall meetings, because he was misrepresenting the proposed Health Care bill, which has become law.

    This country has been built on a citizen’s right to disagree with our leaders. Our leaders should be exposed when they make false statements like President Obama promising that the federal government would not pay for abortions. There are three states currently funding abortions under the new Health Care Bill.

    So, I would reccommend that you check your facts prior to publishing inacurate information.

    • majii says

      The Hyde Amendment, which was passed in the 1970s, prohibits the spending of any federal monies on abortion. All of the members of Congress know this, but some of them decided to feign ignorance of this amendment as a reason to oppose HCR. This only highlights the extent to which they were willing to lie to their party members in order to defeat the bill, and to make it seem as if President Obama was doing something illegal. The Affordable Care Act does NOT pay for abortions, but it allows for women to purchase a separate policy to pay for them, so the assertion that the new health care act is paying for abortions in 3 states is incorrect, wrong, a lie, not true, etc. In fact, President Obama issued an order this week expressly forbidding the ACA to cover abortions. As citizens living in a democracy, we must have access to accurate information in order to act in our own best interests. Many pundits have their own agenda when they lie to their viewers/listeners, therefore we must seek the truth about government policies on our own.

      One should also have adequate knowledge of how the U.S. government works before pushing falsehoods. It is impossible for the president to sign any bill into law without the consent of Congress. The president did not “takeover” publicly held companies. Basically, the companies made an agreement with the government, with the consent of Congress, to turn over a share of their stock in exchange for the government lending them the money they needed. It was not a forced deal, no company was coerced into participating in the deal. We, the American people, own the stock because we are the government.

      A democratic republic is based on the concept of people holding the ultimate power over the government, and this power is exercised at the voting booth. President Obama is not profiting from the stock that was exchanged, and he couldn’t do it even if he wanted to. The Constitution grants him limited powers and grants limited ( and different) powers to the legislative and judicial branches of government. One may not like having members of an opposing political party in power, but it is no reason to make false claims.

      A refresher course in U.S. government is recommended for those Americans who do not understand that the government under President Obama is operating exactly as established in the Constitution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *