Here's Your Tea-Party.

1. 80

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   "A staffer for Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told reporters that Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) had been spat on by a protestor. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the civil rights movement, was called a 'ni--er.' And Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) was called a "faggot," as protestors shouted at him with deliberately lisp-y screams. Frank, approached in the halls after the president's speech, shrugged off the incident."--Sam Stein
   
   You san say that this is not representative of all tea-parties, but if so, then you'd better get a grip on them. Because all I can remember  from these protests are the signs with Obama as Ledger's Joker, or as a vodoo witch doctor with a bone through his nose.
   And Faggot?
   
   Please tell me how that is about healthcare reform?
   I think we all know what this is about.
   
   Better get a grip....Ron Paul--you need to take back your Libertarian Tea-Pary ideals. They have been hi-jacked.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      LegendaryHeroposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Bush has been called worse if I remember the last 8 years of insults correctly...
      
      
      
      Its not representative of all tea parties, there are thousands of them and a couple people do not speak for all of them, stop making unfair generalizations.
      
      What's the problem with the signs? Are we not allowed to have free speech? Liberal protests had some pretty terrible signs of Bush...
      
      
      
      This is about people being sick and tired of their government not listening to them, this so called health care reform is just the straw that broke the camel's back. But if you think you know what's it's really about, please enlighten me.
      
      Another thing...Ron Paul has nothing to do with the Tea Party.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Do you want to give us any examples of what Bush was called or whot those awful signs were..  I remeber that whenever Bush made public apperances - people with signs opposing Bush or the war - or anti-bush tshirts were taken to 'free speech zones' far away from the president and the cameras and released after the POTUS and cameras were gone. Such an abuse of fre speech rights does not happen under THIS administration.
         
         John Lewis declined to press charges against the teabagger who spit on him. SO you decide who has class.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Bush declined to shoot the guy who threw shoes at him.
            Now that's a heckuva lot classier.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               It was not his decision to make.

               replyreport
            2. 60

               Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Actually, I think the shoe-throw guy should be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. (Turns out it can only be awarded to American citizens.)

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Then why was it given to Obama?
                  
                  Oh yeah, sorry, that was the Nobel Prize.....I'm so confused when everything's being handed to him on a silver platter, when it isn't even proven that he was legally eligible to run for President.

                  replyreport
               2. 56

                  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  "Actually, I think the shoe-throw guy should be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor."
                  
                  
                  There it is again. Bemoaning the mere threat of violence from a few idiots on one side while celebrating actual violence when it is directed against the 'other' side.
                  
                  Shameless, rank hypocrisy.

                  replyreport
               3. 67

                  Arthur Fontesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  You applaud an attack on the president.
                  
                  You lack the integrity to post in these forums.
                  
                  
                  Is that not what you said about ATexan after he was banned and unable to respond to your attacks?
                  
                  
                  CWRD

                  replyreport
   2. 69

      nifty@50posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Every  movement conservative, Liberal or Libertarians have their share of fringe nut jobs. Organizations like Green Peace and Pita, that do many good works, Get a "'black eye" from their organizations harder core element! When a major media outlet like MSNBC  focuses the displays of a few "red necks" and tries to smear the entire Tea Party movement, I find it  misplaced but predictable. In light of the fact we're on the brink of the Health care vote I think it is very much a "wag the dog " scenario. Would it kill MSNBC to put one opposition voice ever on their show, I'd take a Democrat or Republican!

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I think you mean PETA, unless there is a new organization fighting for the rights of Meditteranean cuisine.
         
         As much as I am against the Tea party and what they stand for, I don't think these scumbags who yelled out are representative of the whole movement.

         replyreport
      2. 67

         Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         There is a great difference between the Tea Party nut jobs and liberal nutjobs. The liberal nutjobs take extreme positions on protecting endangered species, eating meat, wearing fur, environmental issues, and sometimes even get carried away with name calling Wall Street bankers and even Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Gonzales, et al. But they don't go around carrying "God Hates Fags" signs and calling black Democrat Congressmen niggers, accusing the President of being a socialist, a communist, a fascist, a Nazi, etc. There is a definite qualitative difference between liberal and right wing polemicists and nutjobs.

         replyreport
         1. 54

            creepyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            this liberal nut job would ever call bush a nazi
            
            http://www.rense.com/general67/amnaz.htm

            replyreport
         2. 54

            creepyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            no liberal would ever call bush a socialist
            
            http://nevadasagebrush.com/blog/2008/10 … tor-obama/

            replyreport
            1. 67

               Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Bush was a lazy, not-very-bright, draft dodging, comic book reading little guy who played the organ grinder's monkey to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who were put there to look after Georgie.

               replyreport
               1. 56

                  Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Trying to give us an example of the liberal haters?

                  replyreport
               2. 59

                  JOE BARNETTposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  ya hit the nail on the head!!!!

                  replyreport
         3. 56

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            "There is a great difference between the Tea Party nut jobs and liberal nutjobs. The liberals nutjobs take extreme positions on protecting endangered species, environmental issues, and sometimes even get carried away with name calling Wall Street bankers and even Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Gonzales, et al. But they don't go around carrying "God Hates Fags" signs and calling black Democrat Congressmen niggers, accusing the President of being a socialist, a communist, a fascist, a Nazi, etc. There is a definite qualitative difference between liberal and right wing polemicists and nutjobs."
            
            
            LOL! LOL! & LOL!
            
            You should know better:
            
            
            http://www.zombietime.com/sf_rallies_ju … 84_IMG.JPG
            
            http://www.zombietime.com/us_out_of_ira … G_2416.JPG
            
            http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/S … hitler.jpg
            
            They call black Republicans 'Uncle Tom' and 'Sambo' and 'Oreo' and accused the president of being a fascist and a nazi all the damn time. Please. It's the same thing in the other direction. Liberals have no purity to claim on that score.

            replyreport
2. 61

   saltposted 14 years ago

   your angst led me to read some more of your work, which I have read before, but it really motivated me today.. thankyou for your astute eye.
   
   sticks and stones can break my bones..... debate and freedom of speach may not be what we want them to be,... but its better than repressed anger expressed inappropriately !!! Communication is the skill, hearing the right message is the craftsmanship.

   replyreport
   1. 67

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Me, too!

      replyreport
3. 80

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   Thank you for the kind words salt. It is angst for sure...and years of being castigated for simply speaking out and questioning. Makes a person hard.
   I wish there could be debate without the vitriol...but that is a thing of the past.
   Thank you Republicans for that one. Spoken from personal experience!
   Although I will say I never liked watching Move On rallies either...too militant!
   It goes on in all sides...but it should NOT go on with public officials.

   replyreport
4. 0

   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

   There is no communication problem.
   This current Administration is a tyrannical piece of hogwash.
   When Barney Frank can flash his liberal crap in front of the nation, the people have a legal right to be just as nasty.
   I'm not saying they have a moral right, because two wrongs don't make a right.  But hey, Barney's just asking for opposition.  Why would he expect any less?

   replyreport
5. 67

   Ralph Deedsposted 14 years ago

   Too much Tea Party racism!
   
   Too much tea party racism
   As protesters call Dem leaders "nigger" and "faggot," it's time for Republicans to denounce them. So far, none have
   By Joan Walsh
   
   
   http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joan_ … newsletter

   replyreport
   1. 56

      Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      And when Michael Steele was pelted with oreos and Clarence Thomas called an 'Uncle Tom' and worse was that definitive of the democrat party?
      
      
      There are always going to be some idiots if you get a large enough group of people together.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         The 'large enough' group was a few hundred of the CORE teabaggers bussed in for the occasion. This IS the tea party movement - violence and intimidation and the denial of democracy.

         replyreport
         1. 56

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            There you go. I'll bet you don't think those who called Clarence Thomas an "Uncle Tom" or threw Oreo cookies at Michael Steele ARE the democrat party, right?
            
            
            Hypocrisy

            replyreport
6. 80

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   Yes-I'm waiting too for someone to call them out on it!
   It's not like they haven't SEEN it just like everybody else....
   And if they don't renounce it, then they give approval to it. As the old saying goes, silence=complicity.
   
   And ps: I LIKE barney Frank's "liberal crap". The  Republicans have been in power so long, they forget they are not the only game in town, and DO NOT speak for all Americans!

   replyreport
   1. 68

      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Funny, it sounds like the Dems are about to get the same lesson that they don't speak for all Americans.  Funny thing is, this piece of legislation is at least as divisive as the Fugitive Slave Law was.  For much the same reason.  American's don't like being compelled to do things, for some strange reason, especially when it comes to somebody violating their right to make decisions about their lives.  We're funny that way.
      
      Chris, are you ignorant or mentally challenged in some way.  Until 1994, the Dems held Congress for decades.  Now I might excuse your words because you might be young.  But 60+ years of the Dems in control of the legislature seems a bit more than 15 years of the Reps in control of Congress.

      replyreport
7. 67

   Arthur Fontesposted 14 years ago

   Reid can make racial comments and that is all sugar plums.
   
   Matthews makes racial slurs and it is all sugar and spice.
   
   Hypocrites

   replyreport
   1. 56

      Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      "Reid can make racial comments and that is all sugar plums.
      
      Matthews makes racial slurs and it is all sugar and spice.
      
      Hypocrites"
      
      
      Exactly

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Sab Oh - you can try to twist an inappropriate comment into a racial slut. But the congressman yesterday was SPAT UPON by a teabagger and called a 'nigger'. We are all grown up enough to see that word and recognize and detest the hatred behind it and wonder what it is that the Tea Party Patriot Movement represents
         
         But you want to apologize for these people.

         replyreport
         1. 56

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Who wants to apologize for those people? Pointing out the left's hypocrisy is no apology for those idiots.

            replyreport
         2. 56

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            " you can try to twist an inappropriate comment into a racial slut."
            
            LOL! There's a perfect example! Coming from one side it's a racial slur, but coming from the other it's "an inappropriate comment." Classic, shameless hypocrisy. How about stupid racist comments are stupid racist comments regardless of political affiliation?

            replyreport
8. 0

   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

   Right on, Sab Oh

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      How appropriate that you take on the role of cheerleader to a defender of racism.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I think they are the same person

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Who?  Sab Oh and me?
            
            hahaha
            
            No I'm not Sab Oh.
            
            How paranoid a suggestion!
            
            I for one have no other account nor screen name here on this site, and you should know by now that I say what I mean and mean what I say without hiding behind an another name.
            
            I'm pretty sure Sab Oh would either laugh at that too, or else take huge exception to that insinuation.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               You can never be too sure who you are speaking to here.

               replyreport
            2. 60

               Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               If I was Sab Oh, I would be insulted...

               replyreport
      2. 54

         creepyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         dont forget this tea baging racist and the many MANY more just like him
         
         http://www.lloydmarcus.com/

         replyreport
         1. 56

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            But, but...that can't be! The libs said so!

            replyreport
9. 89

   Will Apseposted 14 years ago

   I seem to remember Bush was accused of being none too bright and a warmonger. I don't think anyone took the opertunity to pour hatred on huge sections of humanity.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      No, they just used the opportunity to weasel their own people and agendas into our government.

      replyreport
      1. 89

         Will Apseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Who exactly are their "own" people?

         replyreport
         1. 67

            Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            For Brenda, "commy-preverts"! :-)

            replyreport
      2. 60

         Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         'weasel'????????   Obama and the democratic congress were ELECTED by a MAJORITY.. You had the chance to vote for your guy and he lost. Get over it. Or don't you believe in democracy?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I don't believe in the type of "democracy" where the majority reigns after the moral basis of the nation has been stripped away, no.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               "moral basis' = Christian Theocracy that Brenda envisions. What we have is a secular democracy which represents without bias people of any eligion or NO relgion equally. There is a separation between Church and State that Brenda wants to repeal..

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  No really.  I think there should be a "separation" between the PERCEIVED Church and State....mainly the Roman Catholic Church (from what I gather) is what's viewed as the staple or basis of "Christianity".....
                  
                  There should be NO separation between moral ground and State.  Yet that's what has happened and continues to happen, escalating with this current Administration.

                  replyreport
      3. 59

         Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Our people, our government.  The Republicans lost, remember?
         
         Get used to it, there's more where that came from.

         replyreport
   2. 56

      Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      So when individual conservative African Americans are the object of slurs it's just directed at those individuals. When a conservative woman is subject to endless, shameless, viscious misogyny it's not an attack on 50% of the world (as evidenced by the ear-splitting silence of women's advocacy groups) but just personal attacks on one person. When the person on the receiving end of hateful stupidity is a liberal they suddenly represent every person in the world who shares their pigmentation/orientation/reproductive organs.
      
      Typical liberal hypocrisy

      replyreport
      1. 89

         Will Apseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Is there any chance you could explain what you mean here?
         
         It seems pretty clear the insults were racist. Here is the story on Fox.
         
         http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03 … lawmakers/
         
         I'm not sure who the misogynists were that you mention.

         replyreport
         1. 56

            Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I didn't say the insults were not racist. Read my post again, more carefully.

            replyreport
   3. 0

      Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Bush W being a warmonger chickenhawk is true. People questioned his intelligence due to his speech and decision making. However, I do not remember people yelling racial slurs at him.

      replyreport
10. 0

    Kenrick Chatmanposted 14 years ago

    The Tea Party may be an outlet for the GOP and their supporters to clearly express (without filters) what is really on their minds.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       The GOP is playing with fire and may regret it.

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          An astute prediction. Those who survive may regret it.

          replyreport
          1. 56

             Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             That's interesting, coming on a day when the democrats in congress are dousing themselves in gasoline and playing with the 'on' button on a flame thrower...

             replyreport
             1. 59

                Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Like they did in '65?  It took the loonies 30 more years to briefly re-take congress after that supposedly suicidal vote.
                
                Good luck in 2040.  It'll take at least that long this time.

                replyreport
11. 0

    Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

    P.S.
    
    Very interesting that you'd be surprised that two people can think alike when it comes to certain issues.....

    replyreport
    1. 77

       Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I was actually joking...but some of your replies are similar to the type he gives. Not the content, just the style.

       replyreport
12. 0

    Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

    That's true of course!

    replyreport
13. 0

    Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

    Oh well.
    I have enough trouble keepin' up with my own conversations.  ha
    I'd be in a pickle trying to post under two different names.
    How do people do it?

    replyreport
14. 89

    Will Apseposted 14 years ago

    Sab Oh. Being an apologist for that kind of behavior is sad. I reckon the Republican Leadership will start distancing themselves from the Tea Party movement pretty quick. The undercurrent of violence is serious, including veiled threats to assassinate a President. It is a little more out of control with every meeting and you should recognize that.

    replyreport
    1. 56

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       " Being an apologist for that kind of behavior is sad."
       
       It sure would be. Who is doing that?

       replyreport
15. 80

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul cautioned in a recent interview that "neocon influence" is "infiltrating" the movement he is often credited for creating.
    
    Speaking to MSNBC host Rachel Maddow on Tuesday night, Paul first took up for the tea parties as a natural reaction of the people when they are unhappy with government. What they are not, he explained, are entirely adherent to his ideas. Paul suggested that the group only "sometimes" represents his views.
    
    "My message is somewhat different," he said. "The message gets somewhat diluted" with large movements of this nature.
    
    "Everybody likes to join what looks like a popular movement, then they want to come in and influence that movement," Paul continued.
    
    His core issues, such as creating transparency at the Federal Reserve, recalling overseas soldiers and ending the drug war, are "not what is generally heard from the Republican party," he said.
    
    
    I'LL say!!!
    Prisons-for-Profit are one of the most disgusting by-products of the drug war! (Babs Bush owns stock in it-as does Cheney and Rove. Surprised?)
    So you see-the Tea-Parties were originally Libertarian in ideals.
    Then, as someone mentioned, opportunistic Dick Armey gets involved, and BAM! Neo-Con take-over.
    They got Scott Brown elected too, you know...they came here and secretly worked for him, and money came pouring in from all over to get him elected....
    Not that I mind...so far, I like the guy!
    But they HAVE perverted the original intent of the movement. It's Palin/Gingrich/Armey...hardly bastions of Independent thought!

    replyreport
    1. 56

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Nobody "secretly" got Scott Brown elected in the most liberal state in the Union. People were so pissed that even in Massachusetts there was a mass movement away from typical political hacks like Koakely and toward someone who wasn't going to 'get along' with the arrogant, out-of-touch, overreaching crap being forced on us by obama and the rest of his gangsters.
       
       Brown got 0 money from outside the state until it became obvious people were not just going to rubber-stamp the democrat the way they usually do in Massachusetts. Koakely, on the other hand, couldn't be bothered to rub any elbows or shake any hands out in the cold because well, after all she was the democrat candidate. It was in the bag. She spent the campaign in D.C. collecting money and picking out the drapes.

       replyreport
16. 54

    creepyposted 14 years ago

    they also say obama isnt a socialist
    
    but

    replyreport
    1. 67

       Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Creep wouldn't know a socialist if one came up and bit him on the ass!

       replyreport
17. 80

    lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

    Not true! The Armey people came to Massachusetts in December of 08...and secretly campaigned for Brown. You see, they didn't want to be overt about it since their campaigning in upper New York state failed. Remember that one? They thought Palin could go up there and bully the tea-bagger into office, and it backfired.
    And most of Brown's campaign money came from out-of-state. Ask yourself why. It came from Armey's group. They are going all over trying to get baggers elected...and Brown played into it! He put on his web-site "Independent" for the Senate...even though he was a Republican...there was no mention of Republican anywhere on his web-site!
    Much like Lieberman, who claimed to be Independent so he could defeat the real Democrat....used it to get elected, and then turns back into the Republican that he really is!
    
    Believe me, I live here...and mostly it was such dislike for Coakley that lost it for her...even though it wasn't fair.
    Nobody, including myself, knew much about all the good she had done. She did a lot for abused women and kids, fought corruption and sued many of the companies responsible for deaths in the Big Dig.
    But Brown was dynamic and sold himself as a "man of the people" and it worked.
    Gotta give kudo's to him for voting with the Dems on the jobs bill, and for writing legislation for a cut in the payroll tax for workers. Which btw, John Kerry supported him all the way on.
    He, unlike other Righties, is not anti-Obama and anti-Dems at all cost. So far, he truly has proven to be Independent, and I respect that very much.
    And, he was treated with much more respect than the Repubs ever gave Obama. Harry Reid sent him the jobs bill right away and asked for his input...he was in meetings with them immediately. Unlike the Repubs, who snubbed every attempt at working together that Obama offered....except for a few cabinet posts...which he offered to Republicans!
    pshaw. These Repubs have No Class.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Sounds to me like you're influenced by his portrait in Cosmo or his little green leather shorts! :-)

       replyreport
    2. 56

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Don't try to pass that by me. Brown didn't get national support until well after the primaries, and not in a signifcant way until after the first debate where Koakely showed herself to be clueless and out of touch. And the support he earned was no secret. Koakely has been a disaster of an AG and ran one of the worst campaigns in history. People voted for Brown because he's a good guy, seemed to give a crap (as oppossed to Koakely) and pledged to be a vote against this stupid obamacare fiasco. It's gotten so bad that even Massachusetts turned out against this arrogant, corrupt administration's mad plans to turn the US into a European-style socialist state.

       replyreport
    3. 56

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       "he was treated with much more respect than the Repubs ever gave Obama."
       
       
       Really? Like when he was talking to Kerry who promptly ignored him and started sending text messages on the Senate floor?
       
       Classy

       replyreport
    4. 56

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       "She did a lot for abused women and kids, fought corruption and sued many of the companies responsible for deaths in the Big Dig."
       
       
       WRONG.

       replyreport