Of Tea Party folks and Racial Slurs...

[quote name='xxDOYLExx']LOL


I don't know, I believe that when any group in america makes asses of themselves they hurt their cause. This is why I don't understand the hysteria over the tea party. Let them hang themselves.[/QUOTE]

It is kind of annoying how much attention they get.

I remember one of their protests had like 600 people and got more attention than other rallies with tens of thousands of members.

They are basically getting rewarded for being loud, obnoxious and ignorant, because our media is so fucked up.
 
[quote name='Msut77']It is kind of annoying how much attention they get.

I remember one of their protests had like 600 people and got more attention than other rallies with tens of thousands of members.

They are basically getting rewarded for being loud, obnoxious and ignorant, because our media is so fucked up.[/QUOTE]

They actually got no attention for the first 6 months. Once the health care bill came up and the mainstream media saw that they should cover this "controversy" they started showing the demonstrations of thousands of people.

The only people who are being loud obnoxious and ignorant are the people who are airing false news reports of them being racist, not to mention the people going to "infiltrate" rallies with racist signs. No none of that is obnoxious, loud, or ignorant.

That actually brings up a good question, if you have a sign that is racist but you don't actually believe the sign, but you are holding it does that make you racist?

GASP! Anyone who disagrees with the tea party is now racist because a few crazies decided to hold up fake signs! Racist bastard
 
Yes Knoell, there is no 'bagger out there who is "concerned" about Obama's birth certificate that isn't some liberal plant.

Meanwhile the 'baggers who went to town hall meetings shouting nonsense and doing everything but crapping on the floor in order to disrupt them weren't loud or obnoxious at all.
 
I am surprised we haven't had a mediocre rap artist rap about Obama's birth certificate yet, like the songs we got about Bush bringing dem towahs down.
 
Holy shit! Haahahaa! sut you made my effin day.

That beat sounds like one that came pre-programed on my Roland....

edit: spaz look him up on youtube.
 
[quote name='depascal22']So a common English word was never used by anyone in America until 1875? Do you really think that's possible? You don't think anyone used it to describe a slave even once?[/QUOTE]

I think it happened. But, again, "skinny ******". Are you saying that was never used - even once - to describe a person of color? Does that make "skinny" a racist word?

[quote name='Knoell']That actually brings up a good question, if you have a sign that is racist but you don't actually believe the sign, but you are holding it does that make you racist?[/QUOTE]

No, it makes them an idiot.

It's like the "All black people, leave the store now" kid. If he was racist, he could have used the other word instead of "black" - all he wanted was the attention.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I think it happened. But, again, "skinny ******". Are you saying that was never used - even once - to describe a person of color? Does that make "skinny" a racist word?



No, it makes them an idiot.

It's like the "All black people, leave the store now" kid. If he was racist, he could have used the other word instead of "black" - all he wanted was the attention.[/QUOTE]

I agree, especially on the skinny part. You notice that none of them comment on that part though? Kind of like the spitting video...You would think they would like to debate to find out the truth, but it seems they only want to believe what they want.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I think it happened. But, again, "skinny ******". Are you saying that was never used - even once - to describe a person of color? Does that make "skinny" a racist word?[/QUOTE]

but skinny/uppity don't have the same etymological roots. but i think i only believe what i want to believe.
 
Maybe he's just a fan of the color and I'm reading into it that white means race?

Like he buys the boxes of 64 crayolas and hoards the white ones.

Why do I gotta make "white pride" and the use of "spic[k]s" and the implied shooting thereof into a racial thing?
 
[quote name='Knoell']I would ask what you thought of the other videos, and quotes, but you guys have moved on from them. I guess they didn't suit your needs.[/QUOTE]

:rofl: Irony. You're a fucking joke.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100413/ap_on_re_us/us_n_word_feud

That video?

Oopsie.

Spin away, homeskillet.

EDIT: Meanwhile, back at the ranch, this appears to be Andrew Breitbart's third big-time strike in terms of how the truth of a situation plays out against video evidence he claimed was certifiable. When are you going to grow up mentally and discover that he's not a reliable source of information?[/QUOTE]
I read the first paragraph, and then stopped reading because the article is ridiculous. Noone here said anyone is lying about the racial terms. What we have said is that there are a few idiots in every crowd. It does not make the entire crowd racist.

God damn how can you not understand this yet?

I decided to give it a second chance, went back to read a bit more.
"The dispute pits the lawmakers — one of them, Lewis, is a leader and survivor of 1960s civil rights battles — against conservatives determined to counter claims of racism within the predominantly white and middle-aged tea party movement. The criticism has proven a distraction to a nascent movement pushing a unified message of fiscal conservatism and limited government."

Wow if this isn't a set up to fuel racial tension I do not know what is...

wake up the media is playing you man...

also when did I ever say he was a reliable source of information? I am fairly certain you all keep bringing him up...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Kirin Lemon']:rofl: Irony. You're a fucking joke.[/QUOTE]
What is irony is that you are behaving just like them, because you disagree (or because you saw a "ignore knoell" thread, posted in it and jumped on the bandwagon...either way, at least call me racist or something
 
racist_tea_party.jpg


[quote name='Knoell'] Wow if this isn't a set up to fuel racial tension I do not know what is...[/QUOTE]

Wow, I totally agree with your statement Knoell.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Would you dare dispute that the tea party is NOT predominantly white, middle-age, and conservative?[/QUOTE]

So you are now actually arguing that the quote was put in to fuel racial tensions, and make the article more interesting?

The author said that the situation is pitting blacks vs whites!

My god what is wrong with you? instead of fueling the tension, why not condemn the actions of those few individuals, and get back to the real god damn issues...
 
[quote name='Knoell']those few individuals[/QUOTE]

this is the source of our disagreement, and your daily deflection at the next breaking "few individual" to be exposed as a racist only shows how you're ideologically curling up in the fetal position and lashing out at anyone, instead of recognizing that flagrant, seething racist idiocy is the foundation of the tea party.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Where did I say that all tea partiers are racist? Quotesplz[/QUOTE]

IRHari, gotta go to work now, but myke definately does, I am not sure you ever said it, and I will look for some tomorrow, but if you do not think the majority of tea partiers are racist then what does all this coverage mean?

It is sad but racism exists in our culture, against everyone in every group. The ironic part is that racism is actually diverse.

The fact is that everyone is avoiding talking about the out of control spending by focusing on the racism because I guess its more interesting to some people.
 
[quote name='Knoell']IRHari, gotta go to work now, but myke definately does, I am not sure you ever said it, and I will look for some tomorrow, but if you do not think the majority of tea partiers are racist then what does all this coverage mean?[/QUOTE]

I'll still wait for those quotes, but if you can't find any, you owe me an apology and it would be appropriate to call you a fucking hack.
 
Wait so cons and the baggers are accusing liberals of using false flag tactics?

How do we know the link they keep linking to isn't some double dog false flag operation?

Wait...
 
[quote name='Msut77']Wait so cons and the baggers are accusing liberals of using false flag tactics?

How do we know the link they keep linking to isn't some double dog false flag operation?

Wait...[/QUOTE]

Is my Skrewdriver t-shirt ironic or indicative?
 
I don't see what the problem was with crashtheparty.org. Their objective is non-violent dissolution of the Tea Party. How is that a bad thing?
 
Protests rarely ever seem reasonable to me. I didn't watched the entire video, but was there anyone shouting $$$$$$ or $$$$er?

edit- Use your imagination.
 
The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45.
Click to expand...

Old rich white males. Got it.

As for idiocy, well, yes. The entire Tea Party is idiocy because it's a smattering of people rallying around vague ideas (Freedom! Liberty! Small government! The free market!) that have not even attempted to elaborate on a platform of policy suggestions, yet demand to be taken seriously.

Let me take this opportunity to say that the "liberal MSM" has *never* given this much time or credence to the Green Party.

Anyway, these folks may be more comparatively educated, but so long as the Tea Party itself demands to be taken seriously while proffering ideas that are as profound as cheerleading bits, they are idiots.

Show me one Tea Party policy proposal. Not something you want, or you think identifies with the Tea Party - something tangible and actionable, something that could be made into a piece of legislation - that they've put on the table as a way to accomplish something.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Old rich white males. Got it.

As for idiocy, well, yes. The entire Tea Party is idiocy because it's a smattering of people rallying around vague ideas (Freedom! Liberty! Small government! The free market!) that have not even attempted to elaborate on a platform of policy suggestions, yet demand to be taken seriously.

Let me take this opportunity to say that the "liberal MSM" has *never* given this much time or credence to the Green Party.

Anyway, these folks may be more comparatively educated, but so long as the Tea Party itself demands to be taken seriously while proffering ideas that are as profound as cheerleading bits, they are idiots.[/quote]

There is nothing wrong with rallying around vague ideas. That is what Obama's entire presidential campaign was about. And he didn't even follow through with his vague ideas.

I think we could use logic here to determine that if you follow the principals of conservatism of the tea party, you are more likely to be wealthy when you are older. That does not sound idiotic to me.

Show me one Tea Party policy proposal. Not something you want, or you think identifies with the Tea Party - something tangible and actionable, something that could be made into a piece of legislation - that they've put on the table as a way to accomplish something.
Click to expand...

Obviously since the movement just recently started and they are thus too new to be elected to any position, this demand is nonsensical.
 
^ Poor deflection. Doug Hoffman ran for office and failed just last year. What were his ideas?

Also, Obama and McCain had thoroughly fleshed out platform stances and policy proposals when they ran for office. What you're trying to say (Obama's campaign was about vague ideas) is only true if you only read the marketing of a campaign and don't do your civic duty by reading up on the candidates' ideas. When a candidate has hundreds of pages of policy proposals available, then you have zero credence to say it was "vague ideas" that he ran on.
 
A good percentage of the Tea Party supports a Constitutional Convention for the purpose of creating an amendment to the Constitution that would require the Federal Government to submit a balanced budget (i.e.: No Deficit Spending) each year.

Does this meet your criteria, Myke?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']A good percentage of the Tea Party supports a Constitutional Convention for the purpose of creating an amendment to the Constitution that would require the Federal Government to submit a balanced budget (i.e.: No Deficit Spending) each year.

Does this meet your criteria, Myke?[/QUOTE]


Really? is that on the Baggers website? I never see signs like that, nor hear them chant anything.

I agree with the idea, but it's hard to take them serious when they don't have any platform. It's really not that hard.
 
Balanced budget isn't really a platform it's a slogan with almost zero basis in reality. A half blind butcher can count on one hand how many years we have had one, it also has the downside of tying ones hand in times of fiscal crisis.

That is assuming of course the 'baggers aren't exempting the funding for the wars which is the deficit hawk version of yelling "no homo".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe No Deficit Spending that doesn't make it bigger? Hard to just ignore what's already that many in the hole.

Wars just cost too much, and spending our troops and money on influence just doesn't cut it.
 
Balancing the budget is definitely a fevered dream. You have to approach it from many angles, there is no silver bullet. Here is how I would do it.

1) Roll back the Reagan tax cuts
2) Reduce our military to 5% of current capacity and close virtually all foreign bases
3) Remove the social security tax cap
4) End oil and corn subsidies/tax breaks
5) Sales tax on stock trades (which will eliminate high-frequency trading, a scam which currently accounts for 3/4 of all trading volume)
6) Tax capital gains at the same rate as personal income instead of as little as less than half.
7) A number of measures/investments that increase tax revenues by building the strength of the domestic economy
-7a) Trade tariffs to protect domestic industry
-7b) Free or nearly free public education through ph.d
-7c) Single payer health care system
 
just saw this on digg.

image6396386.gif


image6396389.gif


image6396384_370x278.gif


image6396387.gif


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20002529-503544.html?tag=stack

sorry if any of this was already posted.

not surprising really. but the "gun in household" question bugged me. its like they threw it in there to paint the tea party movement as "obama gunna take r gunz" people. i know plenty of people with guns in their household that are left and right. some hunt, some are enthusiasts, some have them for protection (live in the boonies).
 
Yeah ... The thing about that is I don't want to be part of some organization that views Sarah Palin favorable by a wide margin.

I'm unsure how people can be unsure of Ron Paul.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Let's pretend we had a balanced budget amendment. Currently, we have a $1.171 Trillion deficit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget

Where would you like to cut and where would you like to raise taxes if "you, the Supreme Leader," can't balance the budget?[/QUOTE]

They can be so glib about it because they don't know much of anything about the budget.

To paraphrase xycury an actual policy goal would be to bring the deficit down (although progressive taxation is against their ideological DNA), but eliminating it is a dream.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top