The AJC's Cynthia Tucker is getting a lot of flak for daring to suggest that it was inappropriate of the NAACP to call the Tea Party movement racist. She makes the observation that not all Tea Partiers are racist:

Still, [the resolution] leaves the impression that the NAACP believes all tea partiers are racist -- a stereotype that the NAACP should abhor.

Second, the resolution further arouses well-justified suspicions that the NAACP is nothing more than an arm of the Democratic Party. NAACP President Benjamin Jealous has said the anti-tea party resolution will, among other things, motivate his members to vote in the mid-term elections. That suggests the organization's chief concern is supporting Democrats in the fall. (Does the IRS know?) It is perfectly appropriate for the NAACP to rally around specific political issues, such as comprehensive immigration reform.

However, according to NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, "The NAACP along with it allies and partners will show America that a solid majority of this nation is ready, willing and able to fight back to ensure that all the change we voted for is made a reality for all of our children." That sounds suspiciously like a vote for Democrats, period.

Third, it's awfully hypocritical for the NAACP to call for the tea partiers to purge their ranks of racists, as Jealous did. It's a rare day, indeed, that the NAACP purges its ranks, no matter how inappropriately some of its members behave.

And, fourth, this resolution just draws attention to the tea partiers -- who represent, at most, about 20 percent of the electorate -- and gives the demagogues something to rally around. Already, tea partiers and their supporters are having a field day with the resolution, calling NAACPers reverse racists and insisting they withdraw the statement.

Naturally, she is being excoriated for it. This comment (from "libhomo") is a classic:

The pervasive racism in the teabagger movement is a well documented fact. You should have done more research before making this ill informed and irrational critique on the NAACP.

Please show me this documented racism. Have you won the $100,000 for Breitbart for providing a video of these 'racial epithets' hurled at black members of Congress?

I strongly disagree with you Ms. Tucker,
Not only as a child of the south but a current resident of the south, it is easy to get caught in glazing over of racial epitaphs because most racists have changed tactics (i.e. instead of lynch mobs...some form POLITICAL PARTIES hmmmm). Your article indicates that you are out of touch on that. The NAACP has been a bit out of touch in recent years...but the organization got it right this time.

And to argue your point a little further...racists in the south didn't care about churches much either (16th Street Baptist Church, Birmingham Ala, 1963... 4 little black girls killed...ring a bell?).

Do your research...PERIOD!!!

The same commenter later left a link to an article about a billboard emanating from a group which calls itself the "North Iowa Tea Party." Obama is portrayed along with Hitler and Lenin, and the group took the sign down.

It's a paranoid and over-the-top comparison, IMO, and one which tends to trivialize the victims of Nazism and Communism. But precisely how is it "racist" to compare Obama (who is black) to Hitler or Lenin? I would submit that if such comparisons are racist, then George W. Bush was the victim of more racism than any American president in history.

What's the rule? That it's normal political hyperbole to compare white politicians to Hitler, but racist if the politicians are black? Such logic worries me, because if it is allowed to go unchallenged, by extension it would mean it's OK to criticize white politicians but racist to criticize black politicians. As Tucker herself notes, "the very word "racist" has lost all meaning."

So I kept scrolling for the "evidence" that proves the Tea Party movement is racist, and other than the usual recitations of unproven allegations, it simply wasn't to be found. However, one commenter offered a fascinating explanation as to why. The Tea Partiers carefully conceal it:

There is a huge racist element in the tea party. They have learned how to hide it well so there are no valid accusations against them. Most people who have any friends or family members that are in the tea party know how they speak behind closed doors. My father in law is a good example of this. He says the most vile things when he is in the company of his family but out in public he would never have the guts to expose how he really feels about things concerning race. Anyone who claims that there aren't many people like this in the tea party is either delusional or lying.

While anonymously citing a single in-law proves nothing, the commenter might have made a point there, except I don't think the reluctance to discuss one's feelings in public is limited to conservatives. Nor is it limited to race. Plenty of wealthy white liberals send their kids to all-white schools, but they're never asked to explain why or expose their feelings, simply because they're on the left. Plenty of white liberals would hate to have a gay son, and plenty are not genuinely comfortable around homosexuals. But they have an easy way to conceal this bias: obtain official "NON-BIGOTED" certification by loudly supporting gay marriage, and condemning those who don't as bigots! (By definition, such liberals cannot be called homophobic.)

Commenter "steve schuster" not only asserts the Tea Partiers are racist, but he conflates libertarianism with racism by mischaracterizing the views of Rand Paul (who many have noted is not a libertarian), following which he venomously spews forth what can only be called eliminationist rhetoric -- at libertarians!

Condemning the Tea Baggers, was appropriate. They are racist. It was a smart move. And it will set the stage for blacks to unite against Tea Party candidates in the coming election.

Tea baggers are reactionaries. If given the chance they will set the country back 30 years. Libertarians like Rand Paul, who said he was against civil rights legislation interfering with the private sector are dangerous to the social and economic well being of the USA.

Their libertarian, pro free market, at any price, economic ideas, caused the financial crisis, and will cause many more, if they get power. Swat them down before they get the chance to procreate.

Dear Steve @ 11:09, we tea partiers defend the liberty of the leftists to teabag each other.

Regarding identitarianism generally, commenter "Scout" remarks the obvious:

Ms. Tucker:

I guess you know the NAACP is now going to brand you as an "Aunt Flossie" (or whatever female term they use for "Uncle Tom") for not following along like a good African-American should !

If we're having a "national conversation about race," I think it sucks. I hate even writing about it.

God bless Cynthia Tucker for not shutting up.