Page 5 of 29 FirstFirst 1234567891015 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 567
  1. #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The Forum Section is titled "Off Topic". It's a container for all topics off-topic to PreCentral topics.

    Kinda self explanatory.
    Plus, it's kinda fun.
    If you like my Themes, please donate! Thanks!

    http://wiseguyandbeyond.blogspot.com

    http://wiseguyandbeyond.blogspot.com
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    WOW!!! This statement is extremely telling. Can't anyone else see the problem here? What does this line of reasoning say about the liberal view of minorities? Anyone?
    The problem is the Teabaggers don't remove these types from their ranks. I watched Chris Matthews give a Teabagger group leader numerous opportunities to discount the racist poster carriers in a video of a Teabagger demonstration and the guy just tap danced around it.

    (and "Teabagger" has come into the regular lexicon due to the members wearing teabags on their hats. Also, I don't see how the other meaning would be negative as it's technically an alpha position)
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaer57 View Post
    I was expecting to see people mocking his disease. All it was people mocking his politics, which is nothing abnormal. Both sides clearly mock each other's politics; to say anything otherwise is exercising tunnel vision or just lying.

    I mean, this topic is titled "Teabaggers mock man with Parkinson's Disease". Who's mocking who now?
    Well, this isn't the first thread started with the express purpose of smearing a group for the actions of a few, so should anyone be surprised?

    KAM
  4. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #84  
    Quote Originally Posted by biggyfred View Post
    The question of whether our constitutional constraits afford the ability to require a service be purchased is a wholly different question, yet also is essentially settled case law. We require all citizens to purchase the service of protection and safety, vis a vis police, fire, military, food and drug inspection, transportation maintenance, etc. It seems on the surface to be different, but commercially speaking, really isn't.
    Actually it is very different. One side is the use of tax money for general services. The other demands that (for no other reason than being a citizen) that people buy a specific service-product.

    KAM
  5. #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by sublimobile View Post
    Wow...just.....wow.

    He purposely sat in front of republicans to get a rise out of them? thats like me saying I pruposely put my face in front of your hand and you punched me...I guess thats my own fault.
    Ummm, yeah! Did you not see him sitting directly in front of the crowd of Republicans away from the Democrat protesters? theog even said he needed more info, just as I did. We don't know what he was saying to the crowd. They weren't making fun of his disability.

    Look, I'm not condoning what they said or did, I'm just saying that it looks as though he was trying to get a rise out of them. Guess what? It worked!

    Quote Originally Posted by sublimobile View Post
    "Trying to link Sea Shepard with liberals is such a stretch its a joke. I cannot respect another thing you say, because that is simply the dumbest thing i have ever heard. not trying to be rude. I am being totally serious. that is incredibly dumb. just...wow"
    Hmm, lets see
    Captain Paul Watson
    Former Member of Greenpeace Check
    Left Greenpeace to form a new organization thats more pro active Check
    Member of ELF Check
    Member of the Sierra club Check

    Hmm Paul Watson Quotes

    Paul Watson (Sea Shepherd Conservation Society President)

    "We need to radically and intelligently reduce human population to fewer than one billion."

    **At this time there are over 6.5 billion people on Earth, and the world's population is steadily going up..........So, in order to fulfill this lunatic's desires at least 5.5 billion human-beings need to be killed!!

    For those of you who are mathmatically challenged, that's a lot of people; 85% of humanity.....Oh, it needs to be done "intelligently" as well.**
    Liberal Jackass Quote of the Day: Paul Watson (Sea Shepherd Conservation Society President)

    This was made in reference to the "Carbon Footprint" that Humans are leaving on the environment.

    Yep, sure sounds like he's a Republican!!! Ha ha ha

    Incredibly dumb? Yes
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Of course, everyone is not some ideologue. However, with their history and method of protest (N.azi, Obama as an African witchdoctor-posters, etc.) and their allowing the frankly racist speeches at their convention, it's very difficult to see Teabaggers as some magnanimous group.

    Certainly there are people in the Tea Party who don't feel this way--but I have yet to see even ONE person distance themselves from those nasty tactics.
    First--this is not some unified group. It is a bunch of small groups, so treating them as one entity is off-base.

    By your logic, everyone is required to refute the actions of anyone that YOU choose to associate them with? That is an utterly ridiculous demand.

    This 'guilty-by-association unless you specifically disown everyone that someone else links you to' "reasoning" is nonsense, and extremely dishonest.

    I know this has become a popular line of attack here, but the dishonesty of this is getting beyond reasonable.

    Let's be honest here shall we--the OPer and you and others don't like the political views of the Tea Party people, and this is just another attempt to smear ALL of them, because of the actions of a few.

    Ironically, this is the exact sort of dishonest crap that Hate Mongers try and pull, you who preaches so loudly about the party of hate. This smearing of a whole group of innocent people, who have done NOTHING wrong, by hanging the actions of an individual (or number of individuals) on them is SHEER hate.

    All you are doing is demonstrating that it is ok to hate, smear, belittle, attack, etc someone if you disagree with them, while having the audacity to call others hateful.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 03/18/2010 at 01:15 PM.
  7. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The problem is the Teabaggers don't remove these types from their ranks. I watched Chris Matthews give a Teabagger group leader numerous opportunities to discount the racist poster carriers in a video of a Teabagger demonstration and the guy just tap danced around it.

    (and "Teabagger" has come into the regular lexicon due to the members wearing teabags on their hats. Also, I don't see how the other meaning would be negative as it's technically an alpha position)
    Remove them from their ranks? This isn't some military organization where you can drum someone out. Its a collection of individuals, who have the freedom to say and do what they want (legally)--even if they are class A Jerks.

    This is just another in a series of attempts to smear a broad group of people for the actions of a few. It doesn't get more dishonest than that.

    KAM
  8. #88  
    Biggyfred, that was an awesome response. I don't think there is enough ritalin in my house for me to concentrate on how to re-quote, re-comment, or respond. (as I finished reading in I lauched outloud at remembering the point-counterpoint response from Dan Akroyd...)

    But I salute your articulate work. Let me just say that they analogy between Bush sidestepping the Constitution and what congress is doing is simpler than that. The point is both sides fall in to the trap of "the end justifies the means". I wasn't comparing the two issues they were addressing, just that we are a nation of laws and therefore "the end justifies the means" isn't a valid position. That, and I was also pointing out that if it were valid, it would have to be valid for both sides. What's good for the goose...

    I also appreciate your discussion about food stamps, etc. Those programs mean well, but they tend to get out of control - that's why Clinton worked to "reform welfare."

    I also think it isn't the case that "we as a society" decided to do that stuff. Congress wasn't any more responsive to voters then. And, even if we DID decide as a society, that is quite different then declaring it to be a inalienable right.

    Finally, the premise of my entire argument is that charity, like most other things, should not be the responsibility of govt, but rather of neighbors and fellow citizens. To use your terms, "we as a society" decided to start the Salvation Army, United Way, Red Cross, etc. And let's not forget the zillions of local charities that feed the hungry, operate toys-for-tots programs, etc.

    When the govt takes a dollar from you, very little of it actually gets to the person they are trying to help. When I send a dollar to the local food back, almost all of it benefits the person needing help. It's not only our civic duty, it's just a more efficient way to spend money helping each other.

    If that weren't true, then the trillions we've spent so far would have solved the problem. The people saying that healthcare is in crisis are essentially saying "look how much worse things are..." and then suggesting we do more of the same stuff that has "made it worse."

    Or, they could look at industries that produce a miraculous thing like a Palm Pre Plus (PPP) that can do soooooo much for relatively little cost, and perhaps come to the conclusion that competition was a major factor in making it all possible. Of course you need oversight to prevent monopoly, and to stop the next Bernie Madoff, etc. But the general point is this: Let the people help each other, and let the government stay out of things whenever possible. If you really study history, you will see that formula works, and the opposite always brings unintended (and severe) consequences.

    That's why I refuse to get in to the left/right rhetoric or the emotional pleas "for the children" that we are pounded with. It's not a matter of right/wrong, hate/compassion, left/right. It's a matter of results and fixing things that break. Let's actually solve the problem, and learn enough from history to avoid making the same mistakes. You know what they say about "learning from history"...

    ...and the popular "definition" of insanity is to "keep on doing the same thing, and expect the results to change"

    A wise man once said "if you keep doing what you did, you will keep getting what you got".

    So let's not keep thinking that a new govt program or agency will solve a problem, when it hasn't ever done that before.

    Heck, if you could find a way to tax Americans without the need for the IRS, that savings alone would fund all the health insurance needed for anyone that needs it. In the words of Steve Jobs (or his ad agency)... Think Different.
  9. #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The problem is the Teabaggers don't remove these types from their ranks. I watched Chris Matthews give a Teabagger group leader numerous opportunities to discount the racist poster carriers in a video of a Teabagger demonstration and the guy just tap danced around it.

    (and "Teabagger" has come into the regular lexicon due to the members wearing teabags on their hats. Also, I don't see how the other meaning would be negative as it's technically an alpha position)
    LOL, come on! You know what teabaggers really refers to! You are just using it to your advantage to make fun of a certain set of people.

    Anyone that has ever wrestled in HS and College knows what "tea bagging" really is.... I would elaborate further, but it would likely (and probably should be) be censored. It is nothing more than an insult and you know it. It would be like me calling gays "tea baggers". I'm sure if someone called a gay a teabagger, people in here would be calling that person a racist homophobe.

    Come on... GET REAL!

    Besides, many people have already realized that the "Original" Tea Party movement has been hijacked by the neocons led by Faux News. That's why Ron Paul and his supporters have stepped away and are calling the movement the "Campaign for Liberty".

    Stop the spin
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  10. #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by notaphonegeek View Post
    LOL, come on! You know what teabaggers really refers to! You are just using it to your advantage to make fun of a certain set of people.

    Anyone that has ever wrestled in HS and College knows what "tea bagging" really is.... I would elaborate further, but it would likely (and probably should be) be censored. It is nothing more than an insult and you know it. It would be like me calling gays "tea baggers". I'm sure if someone called a gay a teabagger, people in here would be calling that person a racist homophobe.

    Come on... GET REAL!
    You didn't read what I posted. I referred to the sexual connotation as the "other meaning" and pointed out that it technically isn't insulting as a "teabagger" is an alpha position as opposed to "teabaggee".
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaer57 View Post
    I was expecting to see people mocking his disease. All it was people mocking his politics, which is nothing abnormal. Both sides clearly mock each other's politics; to say anything otherwise is exercising tunnel vision or just lying.

    I mean, this topic is titled "Teabaggers mock man with Parkinson's Disease". Who's mocking who now?
    By the way, the term "teabagger" is a mocking. Anyone that doesn't know what "teabagging" is can consult the urban dictionary, lose their lunch, and then return to this forum.

    It's just one more way to label people, and that isn't any more helpful that calling people "tree huggers", or whatever.

    And based on recent behavior by the tea-party extremists, I can tell you this. If I REALLY WAS a teabagger, I would be offended at you associating me with
    them. Just as I would be by the way's people used various racial terms to label unrelated behavior.

    Here is an example from way back when, but is safe enough to not have anyone start calling me a bigot...

    Once upon a time you would here someone say "that's mighty white of you" when they meant "that's very nice" or "thank you". Obviously there were many negative and horrible examples where racial or other slurs were use to imply bad things about someone. Hopefully you get the point.

    Genuine teabaggers should not have their term co-opted. And we shouldn't be calling names. But, that's just what I consider to be good manners.
  12. #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Remove them from their ranks? This isn't some military organization where you can drum someone out. Its a collection of individuals, who have the freedom to say and do what they want (legally)--even if they are class A Jerks.

    This is just another in a series of attempts to smear a broad group of people for the actions of a few. It doesn't get more dishonest than that.

    KAM
    No, it's the truth. At their own little convention they certainly do control the space and they did not ask people to leave that represent that type of fringe.

    And even CPAC with that speech by Tancredo. Come on! They should have totally discounted that whack-a-mole speech.
  13. #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    You didn't read what I posted. I referred to the sexual connotation as the "other meaning" and pointed out that it technically isn't insulting as a "teabagger" is an alpha position as opposed to "teabaggee".
    It is insulting (and mocking) because it is being used in a pejorative way, and implies that one person is disgusting because the other person is disgusting.

    Ok, I have to editorialize here that both behaviors are actually disgusting to my sensibilities, but that is for another time.

    The point is that taking the label for one group and using it in a negative manner to label another group is inappropriate. You can think of MANY racial or ethical slurs that would instantly having you scream "hate" and otherwise asking for someones resignation... It's the same thing...

    IMHO
  14. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #94  
    Hello Everyone,

    Let's do a little comparison here.

    What are the typical tactics of Hate Mongers?

    They stereotype people--making them into a caricature. Check

    They fabricate negative claims about the group, Check

    They ridicule that stereotype (ignoring that people are individuals). Check

    They come up with derogatory names. Check

    They use a horrific example that someone in that group did and apply it to everyone in that group. Check.

    It seems to me that some people here (not all), are more than happy to use the same tactics that Hate-mongers the world over utilize to attack people they have decided they dislike.

    What's next? How about you accuse "Teabaggers" of coming to rape your liberal women.

    Really--how low will you people go?

    KAM
  15. #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Hello Everyone,

    Let's do a little comparison here.

    What are the typical tactics of Hate Mongers?

    They stereotype people--making them into a caricature. Check

    They fabricate negative claims about the group, Check

    They ridicule that stereotype (ignoring that people are individuals). Check

    They come up with derogatory names. Check

    They use a horrific example that someone in that group did and apply it to everyone in that group. Check.

    It seems to me that some people here (not all), are more than happy to use the same tactics that Hate-mongers the world over utilize to attack people they have decided they dislike.

    What's next? How about you accuse "Teabaggers" of coming to rape your liberal women.

    Really--how low will you people go?

    KAM
  16. #96  
    +1 for KAM. Both sides should hold themselves to the standards they hold their opponents to.
  17. #97  
    Heres another example of "Democrat Nutjobs" in action

    Pro Abortionist attacks Pro Life person


    So you see, this is an actual physical assault. We can pull up videos like this all day long on both sides, but where does that get us???

    Or how about the Gay pride parades with grown people marching down the street with "strap ons" and "**** less chaps"???? In front of children. Is that a case of Democrat nut jobs????

    I can do this all day, and counter every right wing nutjob with a left wing nut job.
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  18. kalimotxo's Avatar
    Posts
    7 Posts
    Global Posts
    12 Global Posts
    #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by notaphonegeek View Post
    Or how about the Gay pride parades with grown people marching down the street with "strap ons" and "**** less chaps"???? In front of children. Is that a case of Democrat nut jobs????
    I've been to a LOT of gay pride parades and I've never once seen anyone with a strapon. I think you're fantasizing.
  19. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #99  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    No, it's the truth. At their own little convention they certainly do control the space and they did not ask people to leave that represent that type of fringe.

    And even CPAC with that speech by Tancredo. Come on! They should have totally discounted that whack-a-mole speech.
    No, you're wrong. Being NEAR someone that does something wrong does not make you guilty of it. This is blatant guilt-by-association you are attempting here.

    No one should rightfully be made to be subjected to someone's smears for something they didn't do, or directly advocate/support.

    This whole line of attack is based on the false premise that someone has to Preemptively defend themselves by actively disassociating themselves with someone they might not even know or be aware of.

    KAM
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    It is insulting (and mocking) because it is being used in a pejorative way, and implies that one person is disgusting because the other person is disgusting.

    Ok, I have to editorialize here that both behaviors are actually disgusting to my sensibilities, but that is for another time.

    The point is that taking the label for one group and using it in a negative manner to label another group is inappropriate. You can think of MANY racial or ethical slurs that would instantly having you scream "hate" and otherwise asking for someones resignation... It's the same thing...

    IMHO
    Actually I never heard the term "teabagger" before the tea protesters. Of course I had heard the term "teabagging" uttered by adolescent-like males who giggle at phrases like "dirty sanchez" but never heard the phrase teabagger used until a bunch of conservative protesters started wearing them.
Page 5 of 29 FirstFirst 1234567891015 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions