I don't think I have read quite so much, so often, as I have recently vs. the past on the accusations of racism flying around the liberal press - and virtually all of it directed at conservatives.   You almost get the sense that Rosa Parks had refused to vacate her seat on that bus just a few weeks ago, rather than a generation before. 

I have vague memories growing up not far away from Newark, NJ in the '60's when that city burst into flame and mayhem.  Economic disaster filled the smokey, bloody void after, and the city still has not fully recovered from it despite recent gains.  For me, as a kid, the conflict in Newark was on TV, and in pictures in the local papers, but still seemed far away.  In reality, it was very close.

I remember quite well the day someone came round to our house in our classic all white suburban NJ neighborhood taking some sort of survey on whether we would object if a black family moved into the area.  My father answered no he had no problem with blacks moving in, and the next day our family station wagon was vandalized.  No one thought it mere coincidence, not even me at the time, a kid.  We all got the message:  'wrong answer, pal'.

Those were the days when racism was real.  Today, racism as a term has be denuded of it's original meaning, and is merely being used as a weapon of sorts to shut down debate, galvanize the weak-minded to stop their limited critical thinking ability, and most importantly distract people away from issues that leftist liberals are incapable of explaining truthfully without losing all credibility.

Does racism occur today?  True racism - the racism of the early/mid 20th century.  The odds are that real white against black racism is still around, but far less so than black leadership or the leftist liberal press would have you believe.  As a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant male, I can tell you that I have not witnessed personally an act of bona fide racism in 15 years at least.   And I didn't vote against Obama  because he was black, I voted against him because I saw through the smoke and mirrors, and fully understood that Obama was a radicalized leftist.  I remain troubled that so many didn't see the obvious.

And here we are in the modern day.  The Tea Party arises, and it's recognized by the left as a threat to their hold on power.  The basic message of the Tea Party activists resonates with a lot of people - Government is getting so big it's becoming a threat to us all.   Government spending of borrowed money is recklessly irresponsible and must be halted or see it ruin the nation.  Taxes are too high, and what congress does with the money it collects is also irresponsible.

So, what to do with a activist group sounding the alarm over the state of the Union, getting too much attention, and sending a message resonating with an alarming number of people?  Paint them as kooks and racists, that's what.  The only problem here is that for this counter-attack by the leftist press to be effective, the Tea Party and other loud conservative voices need to be provably racist.  And so far, the leftist press has been unable to make the charges stick.   But the campaign to label the Tea Party as racist has been somewhat successful - because rather than debate the important issues at hand - the almost exponential growth in Government, reckless fiscal policy, quasi-seizure of whole swaths of industry by the Obama government, taxation, wealth redistribution and so on, these conservative voices have been forced to defend themselves from these false and inflammatory accusations instead.  

One problem with the use of racism in this way - if you can't prove it, eventually you lose all credibility.  And so far, the leftist liberal press hasn't produced a lick of proof that the Tea Party is a racist movement.  And that's because it isn't.

Only a Stupid Nation believes what the press says simply because they say it.  And never in my adult life have I ever witnessed such open, naked leftist press bias on such a sustained basis.