April 14, 2010
Tea bagger pride?
(Via Instapundit.)
Well done... but now this is the end of denouncing those terrible Tea Party antagonists who use the term. How dare they! Was that better than owning the term and flinging wet bags at stacks of legislation and distorted photographs of Nancy Pelosi? Go on the offensive and stop sniveling, presumably?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
186 comments:
I don't know if other parts of the country ever see this, but here in the Southwest recent Mexican immigrants used to hang large simulated bull testicles off the rear bumper of their pickup trucks.
Teabaggers should do the same with tea bags. Of course, that will get your car keyed by the fair-minded teabagees, which I don't understand since they chose the bottom.
Now I know what the people at Stonewall felt like.
This commercial probably cost less than a tenth of what the RNC's ad cost. It's funny, it's endearing, and it's real.
The RNC has lost its soul (I guess that's presuming it had one at some point).
The only reason not to have a third party is the pragmatic that the GOP and Tea Party would split votes... really, everyone wishes it were feasible to just delete the RNC and GOP from the next election cycle and run common sense sustainable government against entitlements. That's the debate we're having... Mccain and Steele get in the way of that.
I liked the add..
Good idea, bagoh. You beat me to it.
I had a similar idea for the rubber scrota. Hang them from the ends of long sticks and then dangle them over any party crashers or antagonistic journalists. I suggested it to my parents, who are attending a rally tomorrow, but they declined... probably because they are better human beings than I.
Using teabags themselves would be a lot less offensive, but just as effective. The last few seconds of that video were pretty shocking to me.
I'm at work without a flash player, so haven't seen the ad. But I'll comment more generally: I don't understand why "teabagger" is any less offensive than "slope", "spade", or "fag".
I just hope tea party organizers don't get too caught up on this.
In a strange way, I think is good to have these detractors.. it shows that the protestation is having some effect.. its feared.
It's gonna be a great year!
Big Fan (2009)
Very effective and this is coming from someone who most people here would regard as an intransigent liberal.
I like the ad. It says: They named us after a particular sex act for no reason other than to create connotations in people's minds.
Now We will own the term and push back at them with actual tea bags, not the other (figurative) meaning.
Kind of connects with the original Tea Party too.
Bravo!
Take the enemy's tactics and turn them to your advantage.
The Gospel According to Robert Rogers - Chapter 1, Verse 1.
PS Am I the only one who thinks the little old lady looks a lot like Michael Moore?
Well done... but now this is the end of denouncing those terrible Tea Party antagonists who use the term.
Nope. Same word, different meanings. You should know that.
Gosh, and here I had just gotten comfortable with my faux outrage over a slur. It was cut-and-paste ready.
What now? Folksy humor with a wink-and-nod grin?
Instead, can I straddle the fence, appearing nonplussed, but with a shit-eating grin?
Instead, can I straddle the fence, appearing nonplussed, but with a shit-eating grin?
Be careful straddling that fence Pogo-gotta watch out for the ol'teabags you know.
Damn--at last.
Embrace the ridicule. Make it your flag.
Shorter version: No Whining.
When I a student at UW-Madison there was a chem prof who wore a necklass made out of IUD's to make the point of just how much he supported Planned Parenthood.
Do you suppose it would be in bad taste to wear a pair of tea bags as necklass now?
I was never too worked up about it. It just means the opposition are ballsuckers. I have no problem with that.
That German lady wearing the wig is cute.
Imagine what the other side will do with that.
People who use the term tea bagger do it for a reason. That reason is they just don't like fags. It's a derogatory term, for an act that they consider dirty. A sexual act that will dehumanize another human being. It's like Titus playing with his shit.
"Well done... but now this is the end of denouncing those terrible Tea Party antagonists who use the term."
I think this is ridiculous.
I don't think it's the end of denouncing those who use the term 'queer' or 'n****r' just because homosexuals and blacks have famously coopted those terms.
People who use the term 'teabagger' unironically to refer to the tea party movement are disgusting or simply uninformed. We can apply different rules to the term based on whether you're trying to be disgusting or overcoming the hatred, in my opinion.
IIRC the term "yankee" used to be a derogatory term for rebellious colonials. We took the term and made it over into a positive. Unless you happen to be a Red Sox fan that is.
The Tea Party is at the tipping point, where we discover if there was a significant degree of preference falsification in the last election.
The widening support for the TP suggests the kind of dramatic and unexpected shift in power that Timur Kuran wrote about in Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference. Falsification
Effective.
Now, how about some specifics about what they'd like cut from the budget?
Ok, from now on, since Tea Partiers are embracing the term Tea Baggers, I'm calling them the Durty Sanchezes! . Or the Stinky Hitlers if they prefer! LOFL
Now, how about some specifics about what they'd like cut from the budget?
I'd like the future legality of my high deductable health insurance restored for starters.
It's the same thing that happened with "N*gger" if you are the right colour and "Grunt"-which was not a term of endearment for 11B's or 0311's-until they made it their own.
I'm calling them the Durty Sanchezes! . Or the Stinky Hitlers if they prefer! LOFL
Talk about smear tactics...sheesh Garage.
Smear tactics indeed. C'mon, it's just a joke.
"garage mahal said...
Ok, from now on, since Tea Partiers are embracing the term Tea Baggers, I'm calling them the Durty Sanchezes! . Or the Stinky Hitlers if they prefer! LOFL
"
Compare this to the democrat like Fred Phelps of Robert Byrd who proclaims he has the right to joke using the N-word or Queer because the targets of their hatred coopted the term to show they aren't ashamed of who they really are.
Sounds awfully familiar to me. No doubt, it will backfire yet again. The kind of simpleton who thinks it's OK (or funny) to scream the N word at someone because they heard it on BET is probably highly receptive to promises of free government benefits, though.
Garage really takes a lot of joy in his attitude. Ordinarily, it's better to ignore infantile hate slurs, but April 15th is a good time to focus on what the Tea Party deals with, proposes, and stands against.
I dunno. What is the reason to blend the two word phrases together? The Boston Tea party is a famous early Revolutionary tactic that actually worked. But the Tea Baggers are sexual pleasure performers that are not interested in any rebellion. We can remember the difference, can't we?
C'mon, it's just a joke.
See, I knew that garage, I forgot to append the smily thing to my comment. :)
Are you any good at playing euchre Garage? 'Cuz I'm starting to have my doubts...
"C'mon, it's just a joke."
Lots of democrats said this when they were burning crosses, too.
There's no doubt that Anderson Cooper and Keith Olbermann were trying to make Tea Party membership scary and intimidating for people who normally stay out of protests and politics. It's hate, and I don't see how it's clever humor.
In what way is the sex act of 'teabagging' relevant to sustainable government? Oh, that's right, Anderson Cooper said it's hard to talk when you're teabagging... he wants to shut you up the way the democrats shut up republicans with burning crosses, back in the day.
1 out of 4 voters is a Tea Partier. It's becoming a huge movement, and folks who disagree with them ought to remember they will probably be respected for a long time as a major aspect of American History.
You know, in the congressman Cleaver video you can see Cleaver go and ask a black officer to comeback with him, presumably to arrest someone.
Why not as soon as we see someone with a racist sign move away from him/her isolating him/her.. meanwhile have someone go and get a black officer to take a look.. try and peacefully shame the faux racist into leaving?
I know its probably hoping too much but there is really not much one can do in that situation.
Love euchre. We play smear with the guys I hang out with though. A Wisconsin/Upper Mich thing.
p.s. Not that kind of smear!
Uhhh, no. It didn't work.
You're all still a bunch of sexual ignoramuses.
Sexual ignoramuses of America, Unite!
The left's attempt to destroy the TP reminds me of this quote from Star Wars - "if you strike me down I shall become more powerful then you can possibly imagine". I still tremble thinking about that.
Ritmo - and you're a vulgar ogre. I hope you're proud about that.
The fact that you felt the need to react this way is telling enough.
Who's writing the narrative now, beetches!!!
Oh, and Pollo: ;-)
OT but 98 years ago tonight the RMS Titanic struck an iceberg and sank 2 hours and 40 mins later.
The previous post just gave me an idea.
Why not have a life size cutout of Obama and just keep the cutout in front of the guy, as close and as in front of his face as possible.
Prouder than I'd be of your sexual ignorance.
This is a rather funny circle of sorts. (No pun intended). Will embarrassed ignorance trump sexual knowledge?
Sounds like the conflict to define a decade.
Now, what was your stance on policy, again?
We play smear with the guys I hang out with though.
I remember playing something callled smear in middle school. What were the basic rules again?
Somehow, "sexual ignoramus" doesn't sting. Should it?
@garage:
Is smear the game you play where you try and throw things at the other guy to get him out? God I still remember getting hit in the nuts with a red rubber ring in gym class. I saw stars and had to walk around for 15 minutes or so.
As long as one's willing to raise the issue of vulgarity...
Sorry! Couldn't resist.
Somehow, "sexual ignoramus" doesn't sting. Should it?
Yes. It should, mesquito.
Or maybe given its consequences it might deaden your own sting!
ZING!
Ritmo believes that TheWon is writing the biggest narrative in history right now. He's mistaken. He'll get a rude sucker-punch this November.
Gawd how I wish I could just embed that into a comment...
Obama ba-rocks-a.
Actually, I think a kinder, gentler conservative implosion would be more dignified. But what do vulgarians like me know about dignity anyway?
Since I'm not a conservative (at least, not according to how Althousians strangely define the notion), I'm wary of absolute truths, including future prediction.
However, Obama is writing a more interesting narrative. The way you writhe with discomfort over your inability to define him and box him into simplified terms that suit no one's purposes but your own is quite fun to watch.
"Ritmo Brasileiro said...
Uhhh, no. It didn't work.
You're all still a bunch of sexual ignoramuses.
Sexual ignoramuses of America, Unite!"
Oh, we don't know all the terms in urban dictionary! I admit I have no idea what a 'dirty sanchez is', though it sounds like rubbing feces on someone's upper lip. There's something about that guy on the internet bragging about what a stud he is, for knowing all the urban dictionary sex terms, that screams 'virgin'.
Trust me, people who have healthy sex lives are not interested in that stupid crap. Figuratively or literally. You laugh at how the Tea Partiers don't know your trivia, but you're the obsessed loser, they are the hot ladies with happy lives.
There's a reason the left needs to infiltrate the Tea Party to 'prove' they are violent angry racists... it's because they are happy well adjusted cool people. Just showing them for what they are doesn't seem to work for you lefties.
Ritmo knows so much about sex that he lent the horse used in that Paladino e-mail.
"Now, how about some specifics about what they'd like cut from the budget?"
First 10% across the board. Those departments and agencies can find where to cut it and their constituents can scream about it. Then we can ask: "You need this money that we don't have for what?"
Until we start asking that question of all agencies of government, we will continue to have enormous waste. Pick any government agency. Does anyone really think there is not 10% waste that could easily be eliminated with a little courage from that loss center.
In my business, we had to cut expenses by over 60% in the last 18 months because many of our customers went bankrupt. We did it, we survived and now we are very profitable at a smaller size. Employees accepted, even asked for pay cuts and reductions in benefits they knew could not be afforded. We stopped spending on things we liked, but could live without and were not essential. We made our cost fit our income not the other way around.
For the public employees out there, income is what your customers voluntarily agree to pay you for your work. Not what you force them to pay by striking and refusing to do your job while preventing anyone else who would from doing it.
Private industry has a substantial different mindset than government and that's what needs to change.
I could find 10% savings in pay and benefits alone that would still leave government employees better compensated than the vast majority of private employees.
Public employees do not have to compete, therefore their compensation should be limited to the same as the equivalent private employees WHO PAY THEIR SALARIES.
You laugh at how the Tea Partiers don't know your trivia, but you're the obsessed loser, they are the hot ladies with happy lives.
Some pictorial evidence to that effect would be most welcome.
Not every she-rightie is ugly, or even stupid. Some are ok. But like any ideologue, the hard-core ones have a habit of ageing into some nasty shrews - at least, when they're not too busy letting "their man" define them. Again, just based on my limited experience of old she-righties.
If someone doesn't moderate by the time they get older, then they just become too sour to bother with.
"However, Obama is writing a more interesting narrative."
Is Bill Ayers ghostwriting this one?
Maybe you're right. Villains, treachery and disaster often make for more interesting narratives than pleasant stories about good guys doing well and being happy.
There's something about that guy on the internet bragging about what a stud he is, for knowing all the urban dictionary sex terms, that screams 'virgin'.
Who knows how I got to be such a stud, but I have a feeling it has to do with reasons other than my knowledge of general trivia and ability to check the latest slang before dubbing my movement.
Anyway, I hope my words don't "scream" too loudly this time. Some might believe you're mistaking observer for what is observed.
How are we sexual ignoramuses, Ritmo? We get it that calling us tea baggers is an attempted slur. Kind of ironic coming from the Left, that great champion of all things gay. If all things gay are so marvelous then what makes "tea bagger" a smirking smear? Isn't it just a marvelous practice of that marvelous lifestyle? Can't have it both ways? That's all the way the Left has it. But who cares. Punishment in November. Punishment like you won't believe, Mr. Superior Shit.
There's nothing pleasant, good or happy about simply ignoring displeasure, evil or pain. If there were, we'd all be Republicans.
Ritmo is telling people what to be ashamed of in their sexual lives. Typical nanny. Has to intrude and judge people for something that most folks are too busy to concern themselves with.
In reality, the sexual ignoramous is the one howling with delight that a mouse looks like a vagina (his blog has a lot of this kind of thing). He really thinks that people who don't practice dirty sanchezes are 'ignoring pleasure' because he really doesn't know very much about sex yet.
Hey, I was 13 once too, but at least I didn't tell the adults to be ashamed of not being a stud like my fantasy ego.
How are we sexual ignoramuses, Ritmo?
Do I even really have to answer this one?
We get it that calling us tea baggers is an attempted slur.
Typical to not understand the meaning of the word "slur". A taunt is not a slur. Especially when you're making fun of one's own ignorance.
Kind of ironic coming from the Left, that great champion of all things gay.
Ok. There. Yes. Right. Whatever.
But I already answered you.
If all things gay are so marvelous then what makes "tea bagger" a smirking smear?
Didn't I already answer this?
Isn't it just a marvelous practice of that marvelous lifestyle?
While others marvel at the ignorance of the hard-right, only the hard-right finds such a self-induced spectacle "marvelous".
Can't have it both ways?
Which ways?
That's all the way the Left has it.
More oversimplification.
But who cares.
Followed by equivocation.
Punishment in November.
And future prediction.
Punishment like you won't believe, Mr. Superior Shit.
And an insult. And a taunt.
What a predictable script. Yawn.
But like any ideologue, the hard-core ones have a habit of ageing [sic] into some nasty shrews ...
I see you've met Medea Benjamin, Nancy Pelosi, Cindy Sheehan, ...
Slow Joe, since you say I "really don't know very much about sex yet", can you get more specific about what I remain to learn or be taught?
Does it have to do with what you learned in the abstinence-only courses you took at age 13?
"What a predictable script. Yawn.
What's predictable is a leftist redefining a term. It's slur. You are simply taunting with a slur, sheese.
The rest of the defense falls apart from there.
"There's nothing pleasant, good or happy about simply ignoring displeasure, evil or pain."
Apparently not, as the good people here continue to respond to you.
Apparently not, as the good people here continue to respond to you.
People can be "good", and still be wrong.
Ritmo, or the loneliness of the long distance snarker.
Iconic. Direct action... vandalism... destruction of private property... the onerous task of showing necessary blatant disrespect for hateful authority.
Took balls.
Ritmo, You use a pretty disgusting sexual slur to describe college students, working people, seniors and all kinds of Americans (including some gay ones) that you don't even know and have never met and know little about. That's what you did. That's what you continue to do. Live with it. Stop trying to make excuses or redefine it. You own that wonderful legacy for posterity in world wide digital permanence. Congratulations!
"Slow Joe, since you say I "really don't know very much about sex yet", can you get more specific about what I remain to learn or be taught?"
Well, since we're getting vulgar, I might as well join in as I have qualifications that few others here have.
Have you ever sucked a man's balls, Ritmontana? No? Well I have! I've also had my balls sucked, by males, many times! I also support the general goals and sentiments of the "tea party" people! And I also love and frequently drink decoctions of the leaves of Camellia sinensis. So I know more about "tea bagging" of all sorts than you could possibly hope to know.
Unless you'd like to spend an evening with me, for a little "tea party" of our own. I sort of have a fetish for decocting with lefty guys.
What's predictable is a leftist redefining a term. It's slur. You are simply taunting with a slur, sheese.
What bullshit. They came up with their name, or at least unthinkingly accepted it. That's ignorance. That's neglecting to fact-check. But that's all just typical Republican behavior.
Except for when you point out the fact that the double-entendre had a sexual connotation, the irony reaches a whole new level - seeing as how one is dealing with The Party of Repression and Oversimplification.
And that makes it a whole lot funnier than when they fuck up their facts in different, and infinitely more serious ways.
The fact that they're trying to redefine it, and, I suppose "own" the term, makes it even funnier. The same way Republicans tried to re-write reality to cover over all of their fuck-ups during the Bush administration, they continue to do it now by thinking they can just concoct new slang terms all on their own.
Stalin erased people out of images that he thought could be altered to remove unpleasant truths (executed enemies). What's funny is you guys do the same thing - with sexual language.
Just accept your tarditude, laugh and move on. I know, it's not as "dignified" as the pompous Republicans prefer to see themselves. But y'all are a part of this over-sexualized celebrity culture that excess wrought. Live it. Own it. Sex it up.
And learn to see things in perspective, for fuck's sake!
looks like I hit a button there, Ritmo.
I'm sure, in your head, you might as well abstain entirely if you don't know what 'dirty sanchez' and 'rusty trombone' are.
You know a good place to meet a nice young lady is a Tea Party. Of course, you're not likely to get anywhere with a woman once you get near one, judging by your prepubescent views on sex.
Hey, this is all it is to you. Sex sex sex, insult insult insult, finding a picture that looks like a vagina and posting it on your blog, telling people to be ashamed their sex lives aren't what you think they should be.
But most people want to talk about the government's massive spending. It's worth noting just how horrible the Tea Party's enemies have behaved. A lot of them are just like you, full of rage because they are sexually repressed.
Get a life, dude. You can't vote yet anyway.
Well, now Palladian! You make it all sound so sweet and pleasant until you use the allusive term "decoct"!
>>"What bullshit. They came up with their name, or at least unthinkingly accepted it. That's ignorance. That's neglecting to fact-check."
Goddamn Ritmo, only you could fuck up your own argument in the first four sentences.
Joe, I feel strangely turned off by your telling me what "most people want to talk about", and following that with the words "government" and "spending". That sounds like an atrocious conversation in any social scenario.
Not that I have a problem addressing it. I just believe in getting the job done, that needs to be done - whether that be deficit reduction or whatever. Which is why I don't vote for people who run for positions in an entity they claim to detest (the government) on a platform of, you know, doing nothing.
If they ran on a pledge to start by cutting their own salary and access to influence, maybe then I'd believe they were sincere in their whole purported "cut everything all the time no matter what" ideology.
Who did I say should "be ashamed" by their sex lives? I said they should be ashamed that their promotion of sexual ignorance leads to, you know, saying ignorant things about sex.
As for my alleged repression, what exactly did you want me to do in order to prove otherwise?
Conversations with you are apparently very, well, odd things.
Ritmo, It's not the term that makes it a slur, it's how you use it.
Just like the "N-word" or "queer".
You use it just like a bigot and bigots are not born, they self-identify. Why not just get a T-shirt?
Like I said, burned into the internets for eternity.
The entire tax code done over from scratch. Flat tax for every one who earns even one dollar. No deductions for anything. A poor guy pays taxes and needs money to live? do it thru the welfare system, not the tax system. Every citizen should write a check every April 15th even if only for 25 cents.
Ritmo, I'm soooo sorry that I am not appealing to you, but you already went on and on about how you hate 'typical republicans' in a different thread.
You are not persuadable and I don't think anyone is going to take you seriously.
While you keep howling at sex ideas like an idiot, tens of millions of Americans want to talk about the government's unsustainable spending direction. you admit you do not care about this topic. It's too intellectual for you. It's boring. It's not about vaginas.
Got it. So you're trying to change the subject, when people criticize Obama. Like Anderson Cooper did when he started the Teabagger meme, based on the fact that some people were mailing bags of tea and in your bizarre mind, opening up the door to being slurred.
Well, 1 out of 4 voters is a Tea Partier. Millions of democrats are. Obama and the democrats will lose power if they cannot bring them back to their side. I find that subject to be interesting and I find government spending to be interesting. I find Tea Party protests to be a lot of fun with nice people.
I know, I know... you think we should be ashamed that we don't conform to your sexual demands. You're a swell guy. I bet you have a lot of girlfriends.
I remember playing something callled smear in middle school. What were the basic rules again?
I'll lead you here instead of typing it out. It's basically a Wisc redneck ice shack variation of sheepshead. Maybe we can even get Meade out in the shack and play smear? He'd fit right in with the people I hang with.
Althouse, I know that the big event, the most symbolic one, took place today, in Boston. However, there are many smaller events scheduled for tomorrow. Would you be interested in receiving e-mailed pix (& perhaps etc.) from smaller tea-party gatherings in more obscure places tomorrow, should there be people willing to provide them?
Ritmo, It's not the term that makes it a slur, it's how you use it.
Just like the "N-word" or "queer".
You use it just like a bigot and bigots are not born, they self-identify. Why not just get a T-shirt?
Like I said, burned into the internets for eternity.
Your faux-trage will leave a mark at least as indelible as my alleged "bigotry", all the moreso given that your faux-trage is something you'd like to believe is real, while in reality I am not a bigot.
Now, show me the group that purports to feeling aggrieved by the terms "teabagger" or "teabagging". Granted, we are talking about putting balls into a partner's mouth of vice versa, so that should potentially cover a very large number of (sexually active) people - at least if we include the entirety of their sex lives.
And yet, no one's come forward to claim that they were "slurred".
Lesson #1 for Cons to learn when it comes to the politics of grievance: Find someone who actually claims to feel aggrieved by the action in question. Better yet, make it sound plausibly sincere.
You guys don't really do aggrieved all that well. At least not if sincerity is your aim. Authoritarian thinking, ignoring the common good, and neglecting to put problems into their proper perspective will do that to you, you know.
And the rules of the game boil down to catching each other's partner telling his/her partner what he/she has in their hand.
You make it all sound so sweet and pleasant until you use the allusive term "decoct"!
Bobitt anxiety or just John Wayne enmity Ritmo?
"Flat tax for every one who earns even one dollar. No deductions for anything. A poor guy pays taxes and needs money to live? do it thru the welfare system, not the tax system"
I love this. There are many tax reforms that seem simple and obviously better than what we have. A flat tax can be 'progressive' and would be very simple.
A lot of people argue over which simple tax reform makes the most sense, but I'm cool with this or any of the basic, fair, and much less corrupt systems.
Of course, the libs are going to attempt to impose a VAT. They love complicated taxes that don't directly get paid by most dem voters. so easy to skim and wheel and deal.
Dirty Sanchez
And supposedly you aren't the racist garage.
"And yet, no one's come forward to claim that they were "slurred"."
Someone isn't paying attention!
What a loser.
Ritmo, I'm soooo sorry that I am not appealing to you, but you already went on and on about how you hate 'typical republicans' in a different thread.
You are not persuadable and I don't think anyone is going to take you seriously.
I don't know who you mean by "typical republicans", but I am persuadable by serious and humane people who take the idea of thinking seriously.
So that might include David Brooks, David Frum, Kathleen Parker and (sometimes) Andrew Sullivan. But whether or not their conservatism (as opposed to their "Republicanism") is typical to you, probably depends on how you define it.
I'm not persuadable by those whose aim is solely partisan. You've got that right. Most people with an ounce of sense aren't.
"Someone isn't paying attention!"
No. Someone isn't thinking.
Republicans who call themselves "Tea...(whatever, fill in the blank)" aren't the aggrieved group. People who have put their balls in someone's mouth (or vice versa) are.
Show me someone who has done such a thing and resents the application of the term to Republican agitators.
Ritmo
as my alleged "bigotry",
Remeber just the other night-when you repeatedly made fun of my name?
Well it happens to be of Native American origin-which I guess would never dawn on you because you have your prejudices but ya-
you're the "un-bigoted" one around here.
Ritmo, Your logic goes nowhere. You lose this bad, dude.
Being personally aggrieved is not needed to identify a bigot.
What makes a bigot is using a slur to harm, whether anyone cares is out of his hands. He means the harm just the same. If Barney Frank didn't hear someone call him a fag and you did, would you call that guy a bigot? You did, you still do, you will tomorrow, you are a bigot. The proof is here foreverrrrrrrrrrr.
Oh, and saying you're not a bigot was never good enough for you to accept from the Tea Party, but I do understand why you would expect better of them in return, they are your superiors in both civility and position.
Would you be interested in receiving e-mailed pix (& perhaps etc.) from smaller tea-party gatherings in more obscure places tomorrow, should there be people willing to provide them?
I'm going to the one in Oceanside tomorrow. My kid needs our good camera for a school project, but I'll have my iPhone in case there's anything worthwhile recording.
Well it happens to be of Native American origin-which I guess would never dawn on you because you have your prejudices but ya-
you're the "un-bigoted" one around here.
Oh, I know! I just make it the biggest point to promote hatred and intolerance of every aspect of what I don't know about Native Americans - especially as regards obscure details pertaining to Northern Canada.
In fact, I'm thinking of forming a group whereby hatred is unwittingly promoted by referring to things whose reference point had nothing to do with what the organization had in mind.
Yep. I think that's what bigotry's all about, come to think of it.
"I am persuadable by serious and humane people who take the idea of thinking seriously.
So that might include David Brooks, David Frum, Kathleen Parker and (sometimes) Andrew Sullivan"
Ha!
Jesus in a cummerbund, that's funny, Ritmo.
Being personally aggrieved is not needed to identify a bigot.
It's needed to identify what constitutes a slur in the first place.
What makes a bigot is using a slur to harm, whether anyone cares is out of his hands.
Who was harmed and how?
He means the harm just the same. If Barney Frank didn't hear someone call him a fag and you did, would you call that guy a bigot? You did, you still do, you will tomorrow, you are a bigot. The proof is here foreverrrrrrrrrrr.
It takes a real idiot to pretend that Dick Army (and BTW, would "military penis" be a more accurate name?) would be above mis-speaking in order to disseminate his slur, especially given a constituency that antagonized against the "gay agenda"?
But next thing you know you'll accuse me of "slurring" stupid people?
Oh, and saying you're not a bigot was never good enough for you to accept from the Tea Party,
Because their reasoning sucked. Such things are only self-evident to Republicans - (because they never believe they have to prove anything to anyone).
but I do understand why you would expect better of them in return, they are your superiors in both civility and position.
That's debateable. They certainly aren't intellectually superior, which is all that matters when one wants to make a point.
Gee,
No one has commented that the second and third bags landed in Pelosi's mouth.
Very cute!
Anybody going to a rally tomorrow? I am, if I can fight the traffic to get there.
Why don't you tell us which conservative (because Lord knows no other ideology ever informed your thinking) writers you like to read, Professor Pogo? And if you can help it, maybe name one or two who actually survived into the relevant time period (I think that's 2010). I'm interested in hearing their take on the events of the day as they exist and not about how the present is just the past in disguise.
But of course, as always, you're probably too pure for that sort of thing.
A poor guy pays taxes and needs money to live? do it thru the welfare system, not the tax system. Every citizen should write a check every April 15th even if only for 25 cents.
Exactly.
Flat tax for every one who earns even one dollar. No deductions for anything.
I would be willing for there to be a reasonable (low) exemption per person. I would also be willing to extend the flat tax (assuming that such a flat tax was set at pretty low level, *for everyone*) to every dollar--not just every dollar earned as wage, but also every dollar earned via investment in its various forms.
Everyone contributes from his or her efforts at wealth**-generation, whatever it is and however it is derived, period. Wage, rents, investment income, the whole shooting match. But at a pretty low rate--and, above all, a rate that has some stability, so that people can reasonably plan to take care of themselves and their families, and also to run their businesses in a responsible manner.
Under NO circumstances do people who do not pay taxes get a "refund" check from the IRS, as compensation for not paying taxes. That's what the welfare system is for, as, I think, Meade was referring to.
**By "wealth," in this context, I don't mean being wealthy or rich. I mean "wealth" in the sense of individual people and families seeking to increase, by personal effort, the money available to them under their personal control, both the getting of and the using of, by whatever means. It does NOT have to do with the number of dollars, per se.
The Tea Party crowd is a bit confused.
When talking about the Tea Party movement, the largest number of respondents said that the movement’s goal should be reducing the size of government, more than cutting the budget deficit or lowering taxes. 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 Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.”
The irony is that the group that represents the Tea Party has explicitly said they want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. Obviously a good portion of the Tea Party crowd doesn't really pay attention to what the party they follow wants to do.
"Because their reasoning sucked"
That's great coming from you tonight when you are so far underwater here, with no logic whatsoever.
"Who was harmed and how?"
It doesn't matter. If you shot a 9mm at me and missed, does that mean your not trying to kill me? If you prefer, sometimes you're only an attempted bigot.
You are throwing the slur, whether it hits or misses, bigots throw slurs, that's what they do, sometimes they miss. That does not change who they are.
Own it or stop it, your choice.
Incidently, I'm not offended myself, I'm a teabagger. But lots of slurred people just consider the source.
I can't talk to you anymore, someone might see us and that would make me look bad. Goodnight.
"I'm interested in hearing their take on the events of the day as they exist and not about how the present is just the past in disguise."
Which means you understand nothing at all about conservatism, which is in part a protest against the tyranny of unreflective neoterism.
And your request betrays your enslavement, for you miss the greatest conservative author, Edmund Burke.
Nevertheless, consider Theodore Dalrymple and John Derbyshire; both excellent reads if you require the author a pulse.
"Most people with an ounce of sense aren't."
good example of the "no true scotsman fallacy!"
if you require the author a pulse.
I do. Not every aspect of modern life came about for the sake of "novelty" or to spurn conservative ideologues.
And Burke would have chafed at your dismissal of mainstream liberal ideas, let alone your insistence that such things do not exist and were displaced by "socialism", communism and whatever other 20th century movements remain the only fixed points in your conception of politics.
"(because Lord knows no other ideology ever informed your thinking) "
Again you are wrong, for conservatism is the absence of an ideology.
Russell Kirk: "The American order of our day was not founded upon ideology." ..."order is a kind of organic growth, developing slowly over many centuries; it cannot be created by public proclamation."
Instead of ideology, the conservative is guided by the accumulated wisdom of the past and fights against attempts to discard that wisdom for the chimera of innovation.
There's a missing "however" before "I would be willing..." in my 9:42 p.m.--Althouse blog-time--which is Central time.
And yes, I do realize there would be some percentage of folks who don't pay even 25 cents in taxes so long as any exemption at all exists. Well, there's some percentage of people where that makes sense--it's just that we've gotten far, far afield from the ballpark where it *does*.
BagoH2O's assertion that Republicans are being called "teabaggers" because people who put their balls in someone's mouth are thought of in a negative way, is the biggest piece of garbage I've seen written on this site.
You should head their movement, Bag. Only someone that unserious could be taken seriously by tea baggers.
"And Burke would have chafed at your dismissal of mainstream liberal ideas"
Bullshit. Modern liberals are mere statists, egotistical authoritarians all.
"Not every aspect of modern life came about for the sake of "novelty" "
And again you are wrong. Conservatives recognize the need for change and growth.
Kirk again: "The thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society.""
The difference?
Conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence, pay attention to the principle of variety, are chastened by their principle of imperfectability and are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked. [Kirk again]
In contrast as author Thomas Sowell (still-alive!) notes:
"The grand delusion of contemporary liberals is that they have both the right and the ability to move their fellow creatures around like blocks of wood - and that the end results will be no different than if people had voluntarily chosen the same actions."
Pogo--seems to me conservatism goes back much further than Burke, although as you poing out he is the one most associated with conservatism at this point.
If you have not done so, you might want to read some of the political writings of the Cavalier writers such as Sidney, King James I, and James Harrington all had a conservative bias.
Again you are wrong, for conservatism is the absence of an ideology.
I used the term intentionally to reflect what ideologues have done under the guise of "conservatism".
Russell Kirk: "The American order of our day was not founded upon ideology." ..."order is a kind of organic growth, developing slowly over many centuries; it cannot be created by public proclamation."
And what of the role of disorder?
You can claim conservatism as the "anti-ideology". You can't prove that it is. Not if an arbitrary definition of "wisdom" replaces all attempts at reason and empiricism.
Instead of ideology, the conservative is guided by the accumulated wisdom of the past and fights against attempts to discard that wisdom for the chimera of innovation.
Keep replacing "reality" with the term "innovation".
"BagoH2O's assertion that Republicans are being called "teabaggers" because people who put their balls in someone's mouth are thought of in a negative way, is the biggest piece of garbage I've seen written on this site.
"
Wow, this guy is completely off the rails. Everyone knows BagoH20's claims are true, and even banal. Obviously the Tea Party is full of independents and democrats too, though.
What's so funny is the hysterical reaction. This obvious claim is the worst thing in the history of the world! And we should be ashamed of our sexual preferences! Bla bla bla. You guys on the left do not have to explain this kook. I realize every group has kooks.
But this idiot was motivated by the Olbermanns... they are galvanizing those democrats and independents, that Obama needs, to vote for the GOP. Just the vicious insults make it pretty hard for Tea Partiers to let the movement die down. That's why it's growing so quickly even after the Obamacare battle would otherwise fade.
There are plenty of terms out there that have sordid meanings only if you want them to. I remember watching SNL and seeing Drew Barrymore ad libbing and saying someone "shot their wad." Then she acted so embarrassed that she obviously had no idea that the term refers to muzzle loading muskets.
There's no reason the term tea bag has to mean anything sordid at all. Take on the name, use it to distinguish their movement from the sacrosanct memory of the original Boston Tea Party (which was in reality a bunch of ruffians controlled by Sam Adams, who was very much like a union thug of his day) but still retain a patina of that revered ideology.
The obscene meaning is only there is you agree that it should be there.
Your 10:05 post is too self-serving and selective to take seriously.
Pogp--another great tract on conservatism (if you can find it) is Hobbes last work: "a dialogue between a philosopher and a student of the common laws of England"
"The irony is that the group that represents the Tea Party has explicitly said they want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. Obviously a good portion of the Tea Party crowd doesn't really pay attention to what the party they follow wants to do."
This will be the model for attacks on the Tea Party going forward. Democrats will pretend to be the Tea Party or identify some crank pretending to be the Tea Party (often Ron Paul nutsos). They will then pretend that supporting the Tea Party movement is somehow also support for all kinds of extremely unpopular things.
But the actual protestors realize there is no organization... this is pure grass roots. They are all different people with different ideas. We come together to protest the ridiculous growth in spending, the intrusions, the unsustainability of this crumbling bloat.
Some want to end all entitlements. Some want to increase the retirement age and means test. Some want gay marriage and legalized pot, and some want the 10th Amendment to be honored once again. Some want a constitutional convention, and some want the democratic party to fight for its goals within a balanced budget. There is no king of the Tea Party to tell us what we should all uniformly believe. We're not pretending to be uniform.
But that kind of attack is the model. "why you didn't even know what the group in charge of the Tea Party said! They want to draft us all and turn us into soylent green! Vote for Obama!"
Pretty pathetic.
Ritmo hasn't read the authors he's trying to quote. Wikipedia and urban dictionary for Leisure Suit Larry over there.
"Your 10:05 post is too self-serving and selective to take seriously."
Ritmo bravely ran away.
"And what of the role of disorder?"
That's what the left brings to the table.
I thought pogo's thoughtful discussion was really nice, but Ritmo claims it can't be taken seriously.
He's quite the anti-intellectual. It's a turn off to bring up taxes, and everyone who enjoys their sex life on terms other than ritmo's is hereby condemned.
I guess pogo will be devastated to learn that his views can't be taken seriously. Ritmo can't stay out of your bedroom or even topics he admits he has no interest in. Because he's such a rockin' stud.
RogerJ,
Many thanks!
I look forward to the research.
Pogo--if you love the language of Milton and the KJV of the bible, you will enjoy these political tracts even more--the English Civil War is, IMO, the philosophical underpinning of our republic. I particulary recommend James Harrington's Oceana--but the writings of that period, to a piece, are spectacular and have the sound of a Handelian Oratorio
Which, of course, is why we just may be conservatives at heart.
Amazon = instant gratification!
And James I may have been a tea-bagger of the vulgar kind as well!
Palladian--welcome aboard! James the I was a bit eccentric, but who is not. BTW--cant help but think of the church of San Giorgio Maggiore when I see you post. Its a wonderful association. Venice remains my very favorite city.
Palladian
The benefits of being left the hell alone.
Here is another outrageous t-shirt at a Teabagger rally.
The things bear closer observation.
AlphaSockPuppet had better go to bed or I'll report him to his shop steward.
Yes, I admit it's funny that people who had their taxes cut will be protesting Obama on "tax day".
Teabaggers, meet your petard.
Scott, I've met smarter broccoli.
"Your 10:05 post is too self-serving and selective to take seriously."
Ritmo bravely ran away.
No, I let you (bravely) masturbate on your own terms. By yourself. Right before you went on about the "benefits of being left the hell alone"!
Your perceptions are unfortunately enslaved to the demands of an entirely theoretical outlook on life. Too bad it makes you thick to your own ironies.
That would be an insult if I respected hacks.
"Your perceptions are unfortunately enslaved to the demands of an entirely theoretical outlook"
Eschew obfuscation, Ritmo.
It ain't your sweet spot.
When The Great Masturbator (Pogo) is done with argument by assertion, I will address his ideas... assuming he has any of his own.
Amateur semioticists are as fun to watch as monkeys fucking.
What is the sexual thing you have ritmo--you know Pogo masturbates? If so how? dont you claim to be an empiricist? please cite your evidence
Eschew obfuscation, Ritmo.
Eschew confusion, Pogo.
It's not doing you any favors.
It's a metaphor for his idea of "dialogue".
The pin-up model is Burke.
"I will address his ideas ...assuming he has any of his own.
Don't fear Kirk, Ritmo; he writes quite clearly.
You have weak requirements for debate: living authors but you cannot cite them, for the ideas must be "your own", if such a creature exists.
Why are you afraid of the great authors?
I admit my debt to these great teachers.
Why reject them?
Tedio is a very penis-oriented man. It's a Brazilian thing no doubt; although thinking with the small, brainless head is a vice that is Tedio's alone.
Pogo's just not worth addressing on these matters. It's just too rich to listen to someone go on about accepting the need for growth, change, variety (do the Tea Partiers?) - while bleating on with Sowell as his sole guide to any philosophical take on modern times and modern politics.
It's disingenuous and self-serving. Again, if those words didn't come from someone who believes in committing proof by assertion as if it were a water faucet, that would be a different story. His caricature of anything to the right of John Birch with terms no more detailed than "Hitler" and "Stalin" make him not worth taking seriously.
The man who talks of the need for "growth", "change", and "variety" is obsessed with seeing Hitler and Stalin in any policy he disagrees with. Once he removes his head from out of his ass, where there is a constant reel of 1950s America playing, then he may be worth engaging. Until then, let him argue political philosophy with someone who still believes we're in the 18th century.
"The pin-up model is Burke."
Actually, you're a slave to your genitals. It informs your every thought.
It's your north star.
The glory of older age is the recognition that sex has its place, but it is not the pinnacle of human achievement, nor the aim of all waking life.
Don't fear Kirk, Ritmo; he writes quite clearly.
Growth, variety, change. You sacrifice them all for "clarity".
Show us your use for these things you claim to agree are necessary. Or else admit that they are just talking points to pretend you can inoculate yourself from the same sort of fringe accusations that you levy at any one to the left of John Birch.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
"Pogo's just not worth addressing on these matters. "
Unable to respond to the thoughts posted, Ritmo bobs and weaves, throws a few insults, tosses in a phrase about argumentation (without actually arguing), and generally evades the discussion.
In terms you might better understand, you have been teabagged.
Ritmo bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Ritmo turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Ritmo!"
Ritmo--the beauty about political philosophy is that it is timeless--whether it involved Plato arguing for a Spartan model, or Tacitus talking about the failures of the empire or a host of others including Hobbes and Locke during the English Civil War, these philosophers are positing ideas that are timeless. They raise the same issues that we face today. It seems to me to be a good thing to be aware of them and understand them--If you choose to rject them as outdated, your choice.
The glory of older age is the recognition that sex has its place, but it is not the pinnacle of human achievement, nor the aim of all waking life.
Sure enough, most lifeforms have to focus on eating before fucking. But I've taken care of that, as well as the right-wing proxy for nourishment: wealth and their excuse for it - i.e. gluttony. Well, not so much the gluttony.
I also enjoy intellectual conversations and light banter with people who don't transform those things into forms of masturbation in their own right.
Maybe if your intercourse were more frequent or interesting and your discourse more, well, you know.
It's called proof by assertion, Professor Pent-Up Penis Energy! Learn it.
And then you will learn how to have a rational conversation without having to force a framework on it so clear that it's mythological.
I don't reject the philosophies, Roger, nor the themes within them that are repeated over and over again. I reject the implication that Pogo understands how they apply to any given historical era. Well, especially the one we're living in.
I Crave Your Mouth, Your Voice, Your Hair
Don't go far off, not even for a day, because--
because--I don't know how to say it: a day is long
and I will be waiting for you, as in an empty station
when the trains are parked off somewhere else, asleep.
Don't leave me, even for an hour, because
then the little drops of anguish will all run together,
the smoke that roams looking for a home will drift
into me, choking my lost heart.
Oh, may your silhouette never dissolve on the beach;
may your eyelids never flutter into the empty distance.
Don't leave me for a second, my dearest,
because in that moment you'll have gone so far
I'll wander mazily over all the earth, asking,
Will you come back? Will you leave me here, dying?
--Pablo Neruda
"I also enjoy intellectual conversations and light banter..."
I think you mean 'monologues'.
Professor of Pointlessness Pogo, now turning to poetry, rejects the notion that turning one's back on a masturbating fool is an instinct more akin to self-respect than self-preservation.
Well Ritmo, I would disagree--the themes that Tacitus discussed (not a philosopher, granted) are analogous to present situations. If that be conservatism--to look at past experience and apply it to the present situation--I think those themes are important.
You may not agree, but thats OK
Yet:
On the Ning Nang Nong
n the Ning Nang Nong
Where the Cows go Bong!
and the monkeys all say BOO!
There's a Nong Nang Ning
Where the trees go Ping!
And the tea pots jibber jabber joo.
On the Nong Ning Nang
All the mice go Clang
And you just can't catch 'em when they do!
So its Ning Nang Nong
Cows go Bong!
Nong Nang Ning
Trees go ping
Nong Ning Nang
The mice go Clang
What a noisy place to belong
is the Ning Nang Ning Nang Nong!!
--Spike Lee
"Pogo, now turning to poetry,
That's anothe author.
But insult away; it's your way.
"You may not agree, but thats OK"
Finally. At long last, someone who doesn't feel threatened by the idea that perceptions vary.
See? Cause I would go further and say, not only that, those variations might even be crucial.
Pogo doesn't understand this.
Unlike him, I will keep my criticism of conservatism brief, free of hyperbole, and to the point.
The problem, as I see it, is a need for clarity that is at odds with a need to accept the ambiguity that variations in perception will inevitably bring.
Does Pogo understand this? I take it at least a few in the long line of conservative philosophers post-Burke (or even perhaps, including Burke) would.
That's really the only acknowledgment I'm looking for when I'm doing battle with you guys. It's really what all the fuss is about.
I would ask you ritmo--I assume you have read Hobbes' Leviathan written when the sage of Malsbury was younger, what would you make of his final work, a dialogue between a philospher and a student of the common laws? quite significant, IMO, about how one's mind changes over time. Its a rather common theme, and Plato, for example, comes full circle after the Republic. There is a theme there that is instructive.
The teabaggers used the icon proudly until a few people snickered and dirtied it up.
I might have had a little respect for the baggers had they fought the mudslinging. Instead they let it stick to them, and even wallowed in it like a bunch of pigs.
Oink oink. The mean people called us teabaggers in a sexual context. Waaah! Don't call us teabaggers! Waaaah. Crybabies who could not even stand up for themselves when a few asses flamed them.
Yeah they're all about common sense.
Ick.
"Let's get that straight, Pogo. You are just not very good at taking a real challenge. "
Meaning: Ritmo abandons all hope of countering the great ideas of civilization.
Such insight is indeed the first step to real transformation, Ritmo.
keep at it.
as far as perceptions go, Plato's allegory of the cave deals with whole notion of perceptions--so your point about perceptions, is of course, valid, but actions still follow from those perceptions, and those actions have consequences.
"a need for clarity that is at odds with a need to accept the ambiguity that variations in perception will inevitably bring.
Does Pogo understand this?
That's really the only acknowledgment I'm looking for..."
Hey! We agree on something!
Roger, thanks for referencing Plato - whose allegory I'm more familiar with than I am of every piece by Hobbes not intrinsic to Leviathan. But I'm as much a fan of the consummate empiricist Aristotle.
When we move from addressing ideas to addressing the consequences of actions, I'm just not seeing as much empiricism when it comes to policy debates as I would like. I think this is because an appeal to mythology and nationalism (nationalism, after all, incorporates a heavy dose of mythology into it) seems to trump empirical consideration when it comes to those debates. And I find it disillusioning and dispiriting and a misappropriation of American ideals. The founders were not opposed to reason or empiricism.
Ritmo: Pogo's not responsible for my comments, nor for the fact that--generally speaking--you skim, rather than read, comments and the contents therein.
wv: doome
"those actions have consequences."
Hence the need for accumulated wisdom, prudence, and tradition as guides.
And the issue for poltics is defining, and acting on those perceptions--varying perceptions aside, the oltical authorities act on the perceptions as they see them--and therein is the conflict between ruler and ruled.
Hey! We agree on something!
Sometimes it takes an outside party to mediate or negotiate an obvious solution to disagreements that are inherently soluble. Thanks goes to Roger for deftly facilitating a rearrangement of the terms of debate.
"those actions have consequences."
Hence the need for accumulated wisdom, prudence, and tradition as guides.
As well as empiricism. As well as reason.
The problem with tradition comes when it acts in place of mythology - a no less human need, and undoubtedly recognized by conservatives as such.
Ritmo--most people have not read much of Hobbes beyond leviathan, so you can be forgiven--the point of Hobbes final work is that he abandons his radicalism in the leviathan and come around the importance of traditionalism as emobided in the English common law tradition. Much like Plato, whose radical Republic is replaced by the need for the importance of laws in his later dialogues. These two philosophers specifically emobdy Mr Churchills aphorism about liberalism and conservatism.
Ritmo: Pogo's not responsible for my comments, nor for the fact that--generally speaking--you skim, rather than read, comments and the contents therein.
If more of them were deeper and more original, then I would skim less and read them with the sense of attention that such comments would deserve. I'm talking about content. We know how much Althouse values style. I'm not knocking the style and a sense for it. I already know y'all have that.
As far as ownership of comments goes, I do not see where I misattributed one of his comments to you, or vice versa. If I did, then sorry. But I'm not sure where that would have happened.
ands lets assume that I typed everything correctly in the foregoing post.
Interesting thread and I apreciate the participation of all
And my final thought before going to bed--Ritmo raises an excellent point about mythology (myth) as a foundation of conservatism--a point worth further discussion at swome later time--the works of Joseph Campbell are always helpful here.
Joseph Cambell is insanely valuable. We should all be knowledgeable of his works.
Thanks to you to, Rog. (and, - aww, what the heck - Pogo). Glad it ended up well. 'Night all.
"Tea bagger pride?"
YES! When a movement, in its infancy, suggested that people send tea bags to Washington DC and their legislators in lieu of joining them in person, I've wondered why they ever objected to the phrase "tea bagger"?
Yeah, yeah I know all about that OTHER meaning, but frankly, "tea bagger" just seems to capture something special about a very large group out there that supports the movement...except...well, they don't move so much. BUT, they can send a tea bag on to make their point. It's not money. It's not a vote, but it's the next best thing to it.
Republican wrote:
"Crybabies who could not even stand up for themselves when a few asses flamed them."
I totally agree. Although my politics trend to the Right, most Conservatives need to grow a set of tea bags and start hitting back twice as hard. (Rhetorically, of course.)
Ritmo got his ass kicked up one side and down the other on this thread. History really does repeat itself!
reader_iam said...
Everyone contributes from his or her efforts at wealth**-generation, whatever it is and however it is derived, period. Wage, rents, investment income, the whole shooting match. But at a pretty low rate--and, above all, a rate that has some stability, so that people can reasonably plan to take care of themselves and their families, and also to run their businesses in a responsible manner.
Under NO circumstances do people who do not pay taxes get a "refund" check from the IRS, as compensation for not paying taxes. That's what the welfare system is for, as, I think, Meade was referring to.
Just now noticed this. Yes, reader, that is what I was referring to. You said it better than I. Thanks.
Spike Milligan ≠ Spike Lee.
Reaction formation is a term used where an insult is transformed to a non-insult. Much like n*gg*r is used within the african-american community (and ONLY within the african-american community) or f*g is used within the gay community. I've also heard women use b*tch in a non-perjorative sense.
Basically, insiders can use the term as a non-insult, not outsiders.
As far as the ad goes, thought it made a very crude reference at the end to Pelosi.
Well, I'd like to thank bagoh20 for actually answering my question about what, exactly, should be cut from the budget.
I'd like to believe that it would be politically possible to cut 10 percent from defense and entitlement spending. Maybe an outside movement could push such an agenda successfully, as there's no way I can believe that either the Democrats of Republicans could do this.
<< most Conservatives need to grow a set of tea bags and start hitting back twice as hard. (Rhetorically, of course.)>>
Hell. The ones I'm familiar with, touted as being The Leaders of THE One True Biggest Teaparty--(the people Glenn Reynolds promotes every chance he gets!)--are some of the biggest crybabies around.
They spend a lot of their time bickering with and about other conservatives. They admit to monitoring conservative forums and blogs, Twitter, Facebook, et al, looking for dissent from Republicans (or as they say, "RINOs") (Insert irony namecalling alert here)
This is how their "grassroots" inexperience shines through most, because they aren't professional in any sense of the word.
Even with the continous publicity and support of Reynolds, Breitbart, Roger Simon, and Althouse to a degree--they still come across like fringe lunatics.
Ick redux.
I'm going to out on a limb here and guess "republican" is a democrat and more than a bit of a coward.
The strange myth democrats have used for their slurs is repeated over and over.
"They are whiners!" "They are puppets of these powerful people!" "I'm pretending they used it first and that makes it ok to slur them with strange sex jargon!"
OK, so-called "Republican". You're really doing the left a huge favor. You know, I'm pretty sure most of the bloggers and evil conservatives you're calling whiners have no interest in freaking you out so much (OK, Althouse seems to try to do that to folks sometimes), and they certainly don't complain as much as you.
Can anyone point out to me a speech where Sarah Palin defended private-sector, capitalism? Because I think she's just playing ya'll rubes for $$$.
btw, Republican is an obvious moby. Try harder next time.
Peter Hoh--on a thread below there was considerable discussion of how federal non-entitlement expenses could be cut. It was in a response to our friend Monty who never checked back in to see the answers to his question. In effect, drastic reductions in Korean and Nato forward stationed troops, eliminations of most regulatory agencies, elimination of HUD, DOE (by Madison Man), DHS, and Transportation. Privitazation of social security--anyway, scroll down and check it out.
Slow Joe, giving a Typical Teabagger response:
Anyone who criticizes us Teabaggers are Democrats !
We aren't crybabies!
Waaaaah.
Typical Republican response:
Anyone who says John McCain isn't conservative, is a Democrat.
Anyone who believes RINOs are the downfall of democracy, is a Democrat.
Anyone who says he is a conservative, not a Republican, is a Democrat.
Anyone who believes they are above criticism is a Democrat.
Etc. blahblah.
Post a Comment