|
Post by texaswoodie on Apr 14, 2010 19:59:06 GMT -5
The Tea Party does not nor does it want a candidate. We spend our time and money getting people elected that share our views. taxdayteaparty.com/teapartypatriots.ning.com/And here is the Libs trying to crash the party. crashtheparty.org Two questions. If the Tea Party is not relevant as the Libs say, why go to all this bother? If the Tea Party people are racist morons as the Libs say, they wouldn't have to do this would they? Curt Hmmm, seems like crashtheparty has been crashed. ;D
|
|
|
Post by texaswoodie on Apr 15, 2010 19:07:45 GMT -5
|
|
WyckedWyre
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since April 2007
Posts: 1,391
|
Post by WyckedWyre on Apr 15, 2010 20:10:59 GMT -5
Who are They?
::)S
|
|
|
Post by texaswoodie on Apr 15, 2010 20:23:46 GMT -5
Click on the links Susan. Curt
|
|
free4rms
freely admits to licking rocks
My little pet walrus
Member since January 2007
Posts: 839
|
Post by free4rms on Apr 16, 2010 7:33:52 GMT -5
Thanks for the links, Curt.
I read both of them in their entirety. I found the NY Times article interesting, and here are a few of my favorite quotes about the tea baggers:
<< A plurality do not think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president
Well, that's about the only thing they got right. But just think, if she did become President, she could quit half way through her term, making it *four* jobs in a row where she quit half way through.
<<and 25 percent think that the administration favors blacks over whites — compared with 11 percent of the general public.
Hmmm, more racist that the general public, I see.
<<Ninety-two percent believe Mr. Obama is moving the country toward socialism, an opinion shared by more than half of the general public.
Educated or not, 92% don't know the definition of socialism. Of course, as a spin-off from the Republican party, they are required to use the word "socialism" as often as possible to keep scaring and confusing the American public.
Here's a quote from one ignorant that illustrates the point:
“I just feel he’s getting away from what America is,” said Kathy Mayhugh, 67, a retired medical transcriber in Jacksonville. “He’s a *socialist*. And to tell you the truth, I think he’s a Muslim and trying to head us in that direction, I don’t care what he says. He’s been in office over a year and can’t find a church to go to. That doesn’t say much for him.”
I"ll bet the tea baggers have lots of intelligent folks like this in their ranks.
<<They do not want a third party and say they usually or almost always *vote Republican*. The percentage holding a favorable opinion of former President George W. Bush, at 57 percent, almost exactly matches the percentage in the general public that holds an unfavorable view of him.
I guess this shows how out of touch they are with mainstream America. And *of course* they vote Republican. That's why the oppose everything Obama is doing... pretty obvious.
<<And nearly three-quarters of those who favor smaller government said they would prefer it even if it meant spending on domestic programs would be cut. But in follow-up interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.”
Yeah, cut spending on domestic programs, but only if I still "get mine". What a bunch of hypocrites.
Here's a quote from one member that about sums it up:
<<“That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.” Translation: Hmmm, I don't know what I'm talking about. It's just that I want my cake and eat it, too.
Now on to the Faux news article:
Oh Lordy, not another Contract on Americal! The last one under Gingrich was a gross failure and now they want ANOTHER one?
All of their party planks are just ideas. Nowhere do they get down to specifics or specific examples of how these ideas should be enacted. For example:
(4) End runaway government spending by imposing a statutory cap limiting growth in federal spending
Ok, *where* are you going to make the cuts or stop the funding? Defense? The nation's infrastructure (collapsing highway bridges, etc.) ? Anyone can call for limiting growth on federal spending, but without some clear cut examples of how to do it, that is about as vague as saying you believe in reducing crime.
(3) Demand a balanced budget
See number 4 above.
1) Require each bill to identify its constitutional authorization
Oh yeah, can you imagine the potential for bogging down legislation with this one? In many cases, nothing would get done. The courts are quite capable of dealing with constitutional issues in cases of new legislation. Why put the cart before the horse?
Then the article goes on to say that the typical right-wing extremist celebrities attended the "huge" gathering of 4-5,000.
As for the suggestion about the only reliable news source in America (Faux news), I can only say
BWAAAA-HAAAA-HAAAAA-HAAAAA! If you really want to know how "fair and balanced" their news is (Lord, I gag and choke every time I read that), see if you have the guts to take this test: For a month, read the lead-in article (usually with a large photo on the upper left of the page), the main articles listed to the right of the large photo, and then the list of articles in the opinion section. Now, here's the part where you have to be totally honest: Rate them all in terms of which ones are critical of Obama or his administration in any way, critical of any Republicans or any part of their platform in any way, or neutral articles. If you are totally honest in the evaluation, you will see after one month that their extreme bias is against Obama/his administration. The opinion section is probably the worst, with a much greater percentage of conservative/anti-obama editorialists. Don't believe me? Take the test.
|
|
|
Post by texaswoodie on Apr 16, 2010 7:45:56 GMT -5
Of course they are biased, but not nearly as biased as the heads up the butt media in general. What a bunch of ass holes!
If you think we are a bunch of loons, so be it. I support your right to believe and say that to the death. But you better get used to it, because a bunch of "loons" are going to be in charge after Nov. and will be in full charge after 2012.
Curt
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Apr 16, 2010 16:24:09 GMT -5
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 16, 2010 17:02:34 GMT -5
Well, I have to respond... First off, this is not meant as a personal affront to anyone here, but no one is going to inspire thoughtful discussion by the use of the term teabagger. It is a vulgar and disrespectful distortion of the very nature of the tea party movement. For those who do not know, google "teabagger definition". The original Boston tea party was inspired by a rate of taxation far less than the one we have now. These people are expressing their 1st amendment right to speak their mind. That is one of the most cherished rights of a free society. I am amazed at the way the far left is trying to paint them as racists, homophobes, dangerous militants and about every other pejorative they can think of. When the left was calling for Bush's head on a platter, demonstrating with signs filled with hate speech, that was more than okay. It was even said to be a admirable thing, one's civic duty as it were. Why was no one ever arrested for threatening President Bush at protests, when they displayed signs in public that called for his death? Want some examples? Check out this video from George W. Bush's Inauguration. Did anyone show this hatred at Obama's Inauguration? How about these signs, do you see the tea party folks displaying this sort of degenerate behavior? (Though as we know, the left has been caught coordinating attempts to place people into the rallies to do this) And as for those shrill voices saying that the tea party people are despicable for expressing their disagreement with this administration, please see what Hillary had to say on the subject not so long ago. The reason the left is attacking the tea party in such a vicious and unfair manner is because they fear them. They know they can't win the argument that our country is being transformed in a way that may spell the end of that which caused us to be the greatest, freest country ever known. So, they are using tactics straight from Saul Alinsky’s book Rules for Radicals. ( "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.") westernfrontamerica.com/2009/08/04/know-your-enemy-saul-alinskys-rules-for-radicals/www.americanthinker.com/2009/04/obama_alinsky_and_scapegoats.html
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 16, 2010 17:06:34 GMT -5
*L* Yep funny spelling on those signs but then half the folks in America can't spell worth a dang or write a sentence with correct grammar, including a lot of PHDs I know, and me, and I'm quite well educated *L*. I would guess half of congress can't write or spell worth a dang. It's obvious most can't read what they vote on. However, lack of spelling skill in a country with lowest common denominator type education is not very surprising nor does it mean the folks with the misspelled signs don't have valid points or ideas. Add to that the obvious infiltration of the tea party groups by subversive folks like those at Crashtheparty.com, and such misspelled signs, may or may not even be being carried by teapartiers. The crash the party dude incidentally has been suspended from his teaching job. Don't know for sure why but maybe being a dishonest subversive dick is against school rules *L*. OH yeah, I agree with grayfingers too I seem to recall Bush being hung in effigy at numerous lefty protests and a liberal art store in the town of Ojai where I used to live featured a giant painting of Bush with his head full of spikes and holes leaking oil. That was very charming and not hateful at all, right. Lefties are much more aggressive about that kind of crap than the tea party folks ever are. The media just doesn't cover their crappy behavior. Hypocrisy is rampant on the left..Mel
|
|
|
Post by texaswoodie on Apr 16, 2010 21:24:12 GMT -5
Yup, I saw tons of that on TV and personally witnessed "Kill Bush" signs. Never saw a Teapartyer with one of those about Obama. And think what you will but the left is scared out of their minds. If they were not, they would be ignoring the Tea Party.
Did you guys see the speech when Bummer in all his arrogance said we should be thanking him? Ha! We'll thank him in Nov.
Curt
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Apr 16, 2010 23:58:32 GMT -5
Sorry, Grayfingers, but the teabagger nom de plume is self-inflicted.
If you’re out to “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems” (Feb ’09) or “Tea Bag the White House” (Apr ’09) – what else you gonna get tagged?
Those “Proud to be a Teabagger” buttons didn’t just grow on a tree.
|
|
free4rms
freely admits to licking rocks
My little pet walrus
Member since January 2007
Posts: 839
|
Post by free4rms on Apr 17, 2010 8:18:24 GMT -5
Yep, I have to agree with parfive on the use of teabagger. I doubt one person in a thousand had ever heard of the google definition term for teabagger. I had never heard of it. And since some of the group use the term for themselves, it clearly indicates that the term has a new meaning.
<<Don't know for sure why but maybe being a dishonest subversive dick is against school rules *L*
In your wildest dreams. He was suspended (but still receiving his pay check) while the school looks into whether "he used school time and computers" to organize his crash party.
Your post was well written, Greyfingers. I don't agree with most of it, but it was well argued. One thing I would like to point out though, when talking about the (left) "using (ridicule)tactics straight from Saul Alinsky’s book Rules for Radicals"... isn't this what the tea party is doing with their "socialist" signs and when they attack him for his religious beliefs?
<They know they can't win the argument that our country is being transformed in a way that may spell the end of that which caused us to be the greatest, freest country ever known.
Man is that ever open to debate. Sorry, that boogeyman just doesn't scare me.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 17, 2010 8:27:53 GMT -5
*LOL* Good golly! All this teabagger talk and me having led a rather sheltered life working science labs and around farmers and ranchers, married to my college sweetheart 40+ years, and admittedly not sexually progressive, I just had to look it up to see exactly what teabagging is. Again, holy smokes!!!! If that ain't the gayest practical joke I've ever heard of I don't know what is!!!! I know this isn't politically correct but my first comment would be, since close to 80% of gay guys vote democrat, I reckon I know which party contains the real teabaggers *L* My second comment would be, anyone who doesn't stomp a mudhole and deliver a major beatdown to the person doing that to them must have something wrong with them. Jeez that's friggin gross!!.....Mel
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 17, 2010 9:32:10 GMT -5
Rich, I am pleased that the origin of the "Rise of an Epithet" is the point you chose to counter. You are correct. However, though the phrase did initially appear on a sign at one of the early rallies, it is debatable whether they intended to refer to a gay sexual practice most feel is akin to a swastika-bedecked bar mitzvah celebration. The idea was to send tea bags to Washington as a symbolic protest. One would assume the party of political correctness might hold higher standards. My point is that those who rail against devise and intolerant speech were quite quick to use this as a means to denigrate people they dislike because they do not agree with them. The use of this term to ridicule people one disagrees with is a personal choice that defines the quality of the character of those who use it. Name calling is a poor substitute for mature discussion.
And, the media sure knew what the term meant. "The liberal media, to use a convenient tag, went after the protesters with glee. Take Anderson Cooper, the acclaimed anchorman for CNN. He was interviewing David Gergen, the political pundit. And Gergen was saying that, after two very bad elections, conservatives and Republicans were “searching for their voice.” Cooper responded, “It’s hard to talk when you’re teabagging.” He said this with a smirk."
"MSNBC had an outright field day. Rachel Maddow and a guest of hers, Ana Marie Cox, made teabag jokes to each other for minutes on end: having great, chortling fun at the conservatives’ expense. And here is the performance of another host, David Shuster:
“For most Americans, Wednesday, April 15, will be Tax Day, but . . . it’s going to be Teabagging Day for the right wing, and they’re going nuts for it. Thousands of them whipped out the festivities early this past weekend, and while the parties are officially toothless, the teabaggers are full-throated about their goals. They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending.”
Shuster went on to say that Fox News personalities were “looking forward to an up-close-and-personal taste of teabagging.” Etc., etc., etc. All the while, MSNBC was picturing Republican figures, and the following words were on the screen: “TEABAG MOUTHPIECES.”
Vance, I agree that both sides could do without the more radical messages on signs, but I do believe calling socialist-leaning agendas by what they are is not the sort of ridicule I am referring to. I am talking about charges of "racist","Dangerous Militants" and the other terms that are not within the realm of discussion of policy. And as far as I am aware, Obama has declared himself to be a Christian, and I do feel it is wrong to call him anything else without proof.
|
|
|
Post by texaswoodie on Apr 17, 2010 9:43:54 GMT -5
It's small wonder that Fox has better ratings than MSNBC and CNN combined.
Curt
|
|
WyckedWyre
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since April 2007
Posts: 1,391
|
Post by WyckedWyre on Apr 17, 2010 19:59:40 GMT -5
Click on the links Susan. Curt Dude, I was being facetious. :nono: S
|
|