CNN's Roland Martin to Tea Party Haters: 'Shut Up'

When last we heard from CNN political analyst Roland Martin, he was giving heartfelt advice to members of the conservative commentary regarding suspicions surrounding the accusations of racial epithets that were allegedly heard by three members of the Congressional Black Caucus. His advice last week:

I think it’s dumb on the Tea Party’s part to be focusing on this. I mean, if you are trying to create an actual movement, this is the last thing you want to continue talking about. You want to be talking about policy. You want to getting folks involved. You don’t want to be constantly reminding people of the possibility that the “n” word was used because all you’re simply doing is having a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Mr. Martin seems to be following his own advice.

Today at CNN.com, Mr. Martin has an opinion piece about the Tea Party protests. And although he carefully dances around the question of the inherent racism that Frank Rich, Janeane Garofalo and Keith Olbermann (among others) habitually see at these events, he makes no mention of the “N-Word” episode:

Do I object to idiots holding up clearly racist signs, as well as the stupidity of images of President Obama as Hitler? Of course. That ignorance detracts from whatever commentary they are trying to make on the status of the nation.

This glancing reference is a statement that just about every American can embrace, especially with the memory of so many “Bush as Hiltler” signs are still seared in the memory of those who supported the Iraq War and the Bush Administration’s policies.

But, what is most stunning about Mr. Martin’s essay is not the exclusion of any mention of the supposed racial epithets form the March 20 protest in Washington DC, but the overall tone of enthusiastic support for the movement as well as a healthy bit of chastisement for those attempting to characterize the Tea Parties as something they are not:

First, let’s deal with the Tea Party haters. Please, shut up.

How can any liberal, progressive, moderate or conservative be mad about a group of Americans taking to the streets to protest the actions of the country? What they are engaged in is constitutional. The freedom to assemble, march, walk, scream and yell is right there in the document we all abide by.

For those who oppose the Tea Party, you have every right to gather with those who agree with you and take to the streets. If they oppose the policies of President Obama, and you support them, demonstrate your support for his agenda. Don’t whine about someone else making noise. Men and women, stand up and be heard.

Folks, this isn’t a radical transformation of the nation shaping up. It’s the latest effort by citizens primarily in one party or professing one ideology to rise up and allow their voices to be heard.

And that’s a good thing.

Read the whole thing as Mr. Martin certainly had some issue-based criticism of the movement, but forgive us if we do a bit of an end-zone dance here. When Roland Martin steps up and gives this kind of support for the Tea Parties and makes no mention of the most volatile talking point from the past month’s coverage of these protests, it sure feels like we’ve made our case and we’ve succeeded in changing the narrative.

Paradigm shift, anybody?

Now maybe we can engage in a discussion of the issues instead of phantom insults and hysteria.