Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 36 of 36
  1. #21  
    Cleaver spit on by Teabaggers

    Just in case you missed it, and just for those people who claimed it wasn't true because nobody actually recorded it, here is one of those nice thoughtful teabaggers spitting on a congressman. The fact that he's black is, I'm sure, strictly coincidental.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Cleaver spit on by Teabaggers

    Just in case you missed it, and just for those people who claimed it wasn't true because nobody actually recorded it, here is one of those nice thoughtful teabaggers spitting on a congressman. The fact that he's black is, I'm sure, strictly coincidental.
    I didn't click the link because I think it is the case where the guy has his hands up to his mouth (like a magaphone?) correct? I think it is impossible to say definively that he spit....but....I think it is at least something along the lines of "say it don't spray it". But even if the guy made a big loogie (sp?) and spit it on him, why would the connection be that all Republicans spit on black folks. I mean geez folks....why so quick to label all Republicans as racist folks who are just looking for reasons to spit on black people. I really don't think davidra feels Bush was on par with ******, I know he hated the majority of his policies, but just because some democrats like to make that connection does not mean that all democrats think like that. So why make the connection that all Republicans act like the fringe folks? I don't get it.

    A Republican friend of mine (okay, honestly, I really don't have many democrat friends, lol) was just telling me yesterday how a friend of hers (a democrat) accused her of being a racist because she was making negative comments regarding Obama's policies (key word, policies, not that he was black). What this person didn't realize, was all the charities that this woman (the one accused of being the racist) worked on that tended to help more blacks than whites. To the democrat, just the fact that she didn't support Obama made her a racist. This kind of stuff really just needs to be stopped on both sides.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Cleaver spit on by Teabaggers

    Just in case you missed it, and just for those people who claimed it wasn't true because nobody actually recorded it, here is one of those nice thoughtful teabaggers spitting on a congressman. The fact that he's black is, I'm sure, strictly coincidental.
    Looked more like a case of "say it, don't spray it" to me. Didn't look intentional at all.

    It's ironic that you're calling them out for hateful action, while at the same time calling them 'teabaggers'. That slur is abusive, disgusting, and immature. Try calling them by their name, the Tea Party.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    I didn't click the link because I think it is the case where the guy has his hands up to his mouth (like a magaphone?) correct? I think it is impossible to say definively that he spit....but....I think it is at least something along the lines of "say it don't spray it". But even if the guy made a big loogie (sp?) and spit it on him, why would the connection be that all Republicans spit on black folks. I mean geez folks....why so quick to label all Republicans as racist folks who are just looking for reasons to spit on black people. I really don't think davidra feels Bush was on par with ******, I know he hated the majority of his policies, but just because some democrats like to make that connection does not mean that all democrats think like that. So why make the connection that all Republicans act like the fringe folks? I don't get it.

    A Republican friend of mine (okay, honestly, I really don't have many democrat friends, lol) was just telling me yesterday how a friend of hers (a democrat) accused her of being a racist because she was making negative comments regarding Obama's policies (key word, policies, not that he was black). What this person didn't realize, was all the charities that this woman (the one accused of being the racist) worked on that tended to help more blacks than whites. To the democrat, just the fact that she didn't support Obama made her a racist. This kind of stuff really just needs to be stopped on both sides.
    I have never said these attitudes are representative of republicans. In fact, I am positive they are not. But I do think they are representative of the teabaggers (and yes, I use that descriptive term on purpose because they deserve it). I would be glad to see some data regarding attitudes of teabaggers that disproves what I say, instead of some yahoo who keeps saying that we are condemning all of these people because of the activities of some. Give me some reason to doubt that characterization and I will gladly change my mind. Until then, it's Tom Tancredo as the opening speaker at the first national Tea Party Convention that tells me otherwise.
  5. #25  
    I agree that criticizing policy does not make one a racist. We have however (as a society), become more sophisticated (coded) as to how we express racism. For example, in the man with Parkinsons video, the tea party guy says something along the lines of 'you aren't going to get any handouts on this side of town'. Many will deny this is racist but if you understand the history of segregation in the U.S., especially in urban areas, it is clearly referring to blacks and the welfare state. Micael, why do you criticize 'teabagger' as being abusive, disgusting and immature but remain mum on things that your own folks say?? Just call it on both sides, is all I'm saying...
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    I have never said these attitudes are representative of republicans. In fact, I am positive they are not. But I do think they are representative of the teabaggers (and yes, I use that descriptive term on purpose because they deserve it). I would be glad to see some data regarding attitudes of teabaggers that disproves what I say, instead of some yahoo who keeps saying that we are condemning all of these people because of the activities of some. Give me some reason to doubt that characterization and I will gladly change my mind. Until then, it's Tom Tancredo as the opening speaker at the first national Tea Party Convention that tells me otherwise.
    Would someone define who is in the group of "teabaggers"? I mean, I went to a "tea party" rally a little over a year ago (saw no direct spitting).....does that put me in that group? Is there some secret handshake? Was I supposed to get a white hood? Exactly when do/did I cross the line and become part of the teabagger group? If I am a teabagger, should I be spitting on black folks now? Very confusing.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  7. piaband's Avatar
    Posts
    275 Posts
    Global Posts
    570 Global Posts
    #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    I didn't click the link because I think it is the case where the guy has his hands up to his mouth (like a magaphone?) correct? I think it is impossible to say definively that he spit....but....I think it is at least something along the lines of "say it don't spray it". But even if the guy made a big loogie (sp?) and spit it on him, why would the connection be that all Republicans spit on black folks. I mean geez folks....why so quick to label all Republicans as racist folks who are just looking for reasons to spit on black people. I really don't think davidra feels Bush was on par with ******, I know he hated the majority of his policies, but just because some democrats like to make that connection does not mean that all democrats think like that. So why make the connection that all Republicans act like the fringe folks? I don't get it.

    A Republican friend of mine (okay, honestly, I really don't have many democrat friends, lol) was just telling me yesterday how a friend of hers (a democrat) accused her of being a racist because she was making negative comments regarding Obama's policies (key word, policies, not that he was black). What this person didn't realize, was all the charities that this woman (the one accused of being the racist) worked on that tended to help more blacks than whites. To the democrat, just the fact that she didn't support Obama made her a racist. This kind of stuff really just needs to be stopped on both sides.

    to your first point, the tea-party is currently the face of the republican party, along with sarah palin. If you want to reap their benefits (votes), you must now pay the price for their bad deeds. If I saw any true denounciation of these acts by republican leadership, I would be more willing to trust them. But mst of the time, they blame these things on democrats.


    To your second argument, who cares what some random person thinks of your friend?
  8. piaband's Avatar
    Posts
    275 Posts
    Global Posts
    570 Global Posts
    #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Looked more like a case of "say it, don't spray it" to me. Didn't look intentional at all.

    It's ironic that you're calling them out for hateful action, while at the same time calling them 'teabaggers'. That slur is abusive, disgusting, and immature. Try calling them by their name, the Tea Party.
    What about the ones calling the black congreemen the "n" word?

    I'm sure that didnt happen because its not on video too.

    Just seems like a lot of side-stepping to me.
  9. piaband's Avatar
    Posts
    275 Posts
    Global Posts
    570 Global Posts
    #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Would someone define who is in the group of "teabaggers"? I mean, I went to a "tea party" rally a little over a year ago (saw no direct spitting).....does that put me in that group? Is there some secret handshake? Was I supposed to get a white hood? Exactly when do/did I cross the line and become part of the teabagger group? If I am a teabagger, should I be spitting on black folks now? Very confusing.
    If you consider yourself a tea-partier, you can thank the other tea-partiers for giving you a bad name. Maybe more of you need to speak up to condemn this stuff, then it wont seem like you're all that way.

    Ever heard of the squeaky wheel gets greased? The racists are sqeaking pretty loud, so they're getting all the attention.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Oh, yeah...JUST a liberal tactic...

    Well, I guess the Conservative method is to just make-up data and defend it no matter how ridiculous the stance is.

    Examples? No climate change at all, no problem with the current healthcare system at all, evolution did not occur at all, etc, etc, etc...
    That's for another thread, but you brought it up:

    1. Government controls 48% of the healthcare dollars and has so for the last 40 years. The problem isn't healthcare, it's government. Why would we do more of something that hasn't worked, and expect different results? If Govt involvement in healthcare worked, why has it worsened to become a crisis?

    2. Global warming is easy:

    a. You have to explain how the earth had multiple ice ages and thawing periods, as well as tropical climate at the poles before man existed to cause such a thing, and yet this one is our fault.

    b. If the earth is 6billion years old (as most evolution believers think it is), there isn't sufficient data in a few hundred (or thousand) years to project a trend over millions of years. Davidre will chime in and help you with statistics, trends, and forecasting from a liberal perspective.

    c. if you had enough data that you COULD project a trend, you are now assuming that you KNOW what the optimum temperature for the earth is, and that it is colder than the current average. Really? Do you have data to prove that a few degrees cooler would be better? Or would that wipe out the rain forest? Or perhaps it would reduce the ability of some climates to support farming? How did you decide on what was best, and who it would help? Would a few degrees warmer be bad? On what basis?, or would it be better because it could extend the amount of land that could support farming or have some other positive impact on various ecosystems? How can you predict that? How do you know which is better?

    Note: I'm not taking a pro-pollution stance, I'm on a different point entirely. My point is that you quantitative data to show a trend, you don't have qualitative data to prove what temperature is "better", and you can't explain why various ice ages and warming cycles happened without man.

    The aftermath of mount saint helens totally changed how science looks at stuff, because layers and formations happened within weeks or months that would have been interpreted as having taken thousands or millions of years if they hadn't seen it in real time. Example, trees that had been knocked over in the blast stood upright in standing water (because of the heavy rootball) and multiple layers of silt formed around them in the same manner as layers of earth or rock in places where we assume that took millions of years to accumulate. Google that and see how many assumptions were disprove from that one event.

    I'll save evolution for another time, but that is also a logical argument and not a scientific one. Otherwise you'd be able to explain the vast complexity of your own eyes, feet, and brain and how they "evolved" when the interim stages would be a disadvantage. Example, what good is a scale that is "sort of" a feather" and "sort of a scale" so it doesn't do either job well? And how did males and females of any species happen to "evolve" in unison so that reproductive plumbing worked? Yada yada yada.

    That's for another time. But you see, you shifted the subject from "what is the actual problem" to "why didn't republicans fix it".

    You ignore facts like ice and thawing ages that didn't have man around to contribute,

    The only thing you didn't do is call names, and I'm sure you are thinking up some good names for me right now...

    And did you check out the "racist" site that I pulled the SIN acronym from? That's what I really wanted you to do. Go see what a racist, tea party, fair tax republican racist from Georgia is really like... You might be surprised, and you might learn something from him...
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by piaband View Post
    What about the ones calling the black congreemen the "n" word?

    I'm sure that didnt happen because its not on video too.

    Just seems like a lot of side-stepping to me.
    Refer back to the video that KAM posted and see what they were calling Bush. Is there a score card that ranks the "badness" of names that are called? Do we have a standard on degrees of hate speech badness or whacky behavior?

    Sounds like scoring artistic merit in figure skating....

    Go watch the video posted at the beginning of this thread.

    Then don't change the subject (ya, what about....), ignore the facts (you don't see the left behaving like animals...) and name calling (protesting obamacare makes people racist by association).

    See the previous posting on S.I.N. and the associated website for more on using those tactics when discussing issues...
    Last edited by Cantaffordit; 04/01/2010 at 03:29 PM.
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #32  
    Hello everyone,

    Some polling from Gallup regarding the Health care process and fallout from it.

    Blame Spread Around for Post-Healthcare Vandalism, Threats

    Interesting to note the "independent" responses.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #33  
    Hello Everyone,

    Just a point of clarification. This thread was started with the example of idiotic behavior of leftists not to make some accusation painting anyone who has liberal views as nut-jobs, but rather to highlight that people here have taken that exact stance in regards to Tea Partiers--attempting to smear them because of cases (and/or accusations) of a few kooks on that side of things.

    I trust that reasonable people will understand that we SHOULDN'T use broad-brush, guilt-by-association tactics, which have been demonstrated in this forum against innocent people (several threads doing exactly that), and if that persists, this thread will stand as a reminder to the hypocrisy of people who apply that "reasoning" to one side, but not the other.

    It's ridiculous dishonesty, but unfortunately it is apparently the go-to tactic right now.

    KAM
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    [...] Government controls 48% of the healthcare dollars and has so for the last 40 years. The problem isn't healthcare, it's government. Why would we do more of something that hasn't worked, and expect different results? If Govt involvement in healthcare worked, why has it worsened to become a crisis? [...]
    It's simple. It's because we haven't paid them enough in taxes and we haven't given them enough control. "Politicians say more taxes will solve everything. ...and the band played on."
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Hello everyone,

    Some polling from Gallup regarding the Health care process and fallout from it.

    Blame Spread Around for Post-Healthcare Vandalism, Threats

    Interesting to note the "independent" responses.

    KAM
    That poll is just whacky. The presumption that any of those things "were the reason" for violence and vandalism takes responsibility off the shoulders of the people that commit vandalism or behave like idiots.

    This is pretty close to the case a few years ago where eating twinkies and some junkfood that "made them" do something bad (commit murder)... and it the jury actually bought it!

    Twinkie defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    None of the reasons in that poll can be the "cause" of the actions and decisions of a carbon-based life form with a free will.

    I can't believe that someone spent money on polls like that. That's the same mentality that requires me to pay for healthcare and other subsidized govt services because they "can't".... I'm all for helping people that want to use the help to become independent, but not those that want to force me to own other people's problems.

    Those nasty congressmen (or talk show hosts) made me throw a fit like a little kid and call names and vandalize property. Sure, they MADE me do it. It wasn't anything I could help, they MADE me do it.....

    Geesh.
  16. #36  
    Whether left or right or centre, everyone has a point of view. Some a little more ummmm out there then the majority. I have seen several posts here, where supposedly non biased people have gone on rants, ( me included ). When you get 50 percent plus 1 to agree to agree, you have at best a majority. Yes i have heard, well that left 49 percent in disagreement. Well if we always went for 100 percent agreement on a given topic, you would never get anything done. Allow the reps and sens to do their jobs, if they believe thats what the people wanted when voting for them and Obama, thats what you have to allow. As I said in an earlier post, the only sure way, and thats up for grabs as well, is to hold a vote on everything. (argument again only 39 percent of the voting public voted so how is it a majority.) The other argument would be, well it wasnt the right question. this could go on for decades, and thats just to vote on what kind of toilet paper to use in the womens bathroom.

    so the only way around this whole thing, that i can see anyway, is to; 1) make it mandatory to vote. 2) vote on everything. 3) accept, with absolutely no qualms the concept of 50 plus 1 ( that means 50 percent of the people who actually voted plus 1 vote).

    This would give you your voice, this would end big govt, this would end a lot of things that many here see as what is wrong with your system.

    just a thought or two.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions