Stay classy, Tea Party

135

Comments

  • sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,202member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jimmac View Post


    So says SDW here at the sand box!







    That was a completely unprovoked and inappropriate personal attack for which you have been reported.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    A propos the violence and lack of all perspective of these dickheads in the Tea Party, after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the SF Chronicle commented on John Wilkes Booth:







    They should grow the f*** up.



    Perhaps you could clarify...you're comparing the Tea Party to those who wanted Lincoln dead?
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Perhaps you could clarify...you're comparing the Tea Party to those who wanted Lincoln dead?



    Oh, re-read the quote from the SF Chronicle and use your brain.







    It's about language and violent rhetoric. You're not stupid.
  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Oh, re-read the quote from the SF Chronicle and use your brain.







    It's about language and violent rhetoric. You're not stupid.



    "If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun." - President Barack Obama
  • sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,202member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Oh, re-read the quote from the SF Chronicle and use your brain.







    It's about language and violent rhetoric. You're not stupid.



    After the Giffords shooting, liberals jumped on this "violent rhetoric" theme and ran with it. Calling the Tea Party racist and stupid wasn't working, so they decided to give this one a whirl. Dems decided to take a few exampled of wackadoos and make them the poster children of the movement. "Progressive" organizations even sent out "protestors" to join the group...quite literally a false flag organization.



    Now of course, the new "non-violent" standards don't apply and have never applied to progressives. They can continue to use rhetoric that is actually violent, such as hoping that Rush Limaugh's kidney's fail, or stating that they think someone should put a bullet between Dick Cheney's eyes.



    Come on, Mumbo...you haven't noticed? Any group with whom democrats, leftists and progressives disagree is racist, stupid, ignorant, sexest, bigoted, and even evil. This is why we have the new head of the DNC running around saying the GOP is "anti-women." Further she stated:



    Quote:

    "The pushback and the guttural reaction from women against the Republican's agenda out of the gate, the war on women that the Republicans have been waging since they took over the House, I think is going to not only restore but possibly helps us exceed the president's margin of victory in the next election," added the popular Florida congresswoman.



    from here: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/was...gop-anti-women



    Wait, I thought we were done with violent rhetoric? \



    Let me tell you about the real opposition to the Tea Party. It's liberals/progressives/leftists and socialists who actually believed they could change the fabric of America. They are in nuclear meltdown over the fact that much of the populace...the core of the country...has finally figured out what "remaking America" actually means. Everyday Americans in the lower, middle and upper-middle class have figured it out. And they are not happy with the direction their country is going. Sure, they argue about taxes and healthcare and wars and scandals and what have you...but they don't want our free enterprise system to be drastically altered. They don't wan to be told they can't drive their kids to soccer practice or have a BBQ because it's killing the environment. They don't want NASA to have "Muslim outreach" as one of its missions. They don't want the government spending double what it takes in. They don't want the government owning auto companies, banks, etc. They've woken up.



    Once folks who think like you do realized there was actual resistance to their thinking, they decided it needed to be eliminated. Cue the -isms and slander against everyday people that disagree with policies. Welcome to America.
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Here's that quote from the SF Chronicle editorial on John Wilkes Booth following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln again.



    Quote:

    Booth has simply carried out what ... secession politicians and journalists have been expressing in words ... who have denounced the President as a 'tyrant', a 'despot', a 'usurper', hinted at, and virtually recommended.



  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Here's that quote from the SF Chronicle editorial on John Wilkes Booth following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln again.



    A used a word.



    B used the same word.



    Thus b = a.



    Is that really your attempt at a logical argument?
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Sure, they argue about taxes and healthcare and wars and scandals and what have you...but they don't want our free enterprise system to be drastically altered. They don't wan to be told they can't drive their kids to soccer practice or have a BBQ because it's killing the environment. They don't want NASA to have "Muslim outreach" as one of its missions. They don't want the government spending double what it takes in. They don't want the government owning auto companies, banks, etc. They've woken up.

    .



    When I read this sort of thing, about your moderate centrist President and his economic policies to the right of France of Germany, I can't help but wonder when right wing America became such a bunch of hysterical pants-wetting ideologues.



    You can chill out. Your government's to the right of France and Germany and to the left of Britain. For god's sake, chill the fuck out.
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post




    I am intentionally misunderstanding something because Team Stupid is losing an argument on the internet.



    I see. Well, I'll have to talk to you through the fearsomely difficult point that I am making, then.



    People act on violent rhetoric. Like when there was a campaign to brand Abraham Lincoln a tyrant. They couldn't disagree with him; they called him a tyrant. And someone assassinated him. Before jumping on the stage and declaring 'death to tyrants'.



    You see? Really very simple.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    So let's start censoring free speech and brand anyone found to be expressing opposition to the Dear Leader in any form or fashion an enemy of the state. After all, it's "for our own good".



    Actually, it's already happening:



    Park Ranger Orders Visitor to Leave National Military Park, Citing Objection to Ron Paul Decals on Car
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    So let's start censoring free speech and brand anyone found to be expressing opposition to the Dear Leader in any form or fashion an enemy of the state. After all, it's "for our own good".



    Actually, it's already happening:



    Park Ranger Orders Visitor to Leave National Military Park, Citing Objection to Ron Paul Decals on Car



    EXACTLY. That kind of thing—comparing Barack Obama to the tyrannical leader of North Korea and claiming there's a system of state censorship in operation, when in reality one park ranger was a bit of a dickhead over a bumper sticker that didn't even mention the president?



    Why don't you just chill out and voice your objections like an adult instead of wetting your pants about tyranny that doesn't actually exist?
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    EXACTLY. That kind of thing?comparing Barack Obama to the tyrannical leader of North Korea and claiming there's a system of state censorship in operation, when in reality one park ranger was a bit of a dickhead.



    Why don't you just chill out and voice your objections like an adult instead of wetting your pants about tyranny that doesn't actually exist?



    One park ranger is an idiot, but the entire Tea Party Movement wants to assassinate Barack Obama.



    How can you not see the inconsistency in your thinking?
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    One park ranger is an idiot, but the entire Tea Party Movement wants to assassinate Barack Obama.



    How can you not see the inconsistency in your thinking?



    Sigh.



    While you're looking for the place where I said that the entire Tea Party movement actually wants to assassinate Barack Obama, why not have a bath and unwind, telling yourself 'Barack Obama isn't a tyrant and I really can breathe out now, because he's not really like the leader of North Korea.'



    Here's that quote from the SF Chronicle again, by the way, about John Wilkes Booth.



    Quote:

    Booth has simply carried out what ... secession politicians and journalists have been expressing in words ... who have denounced the President as a 'tyrant', a 'despot', a 'usurper', hinted at, and virtually recommended.



  • jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    After the Giffords shooting, liberals jumped on this "violent rhetoric" theme and ran with it. Calling the Tea Party racist and stupid wasn't working, so they decided to give this one a whirl. Dems decided to take a few exampled of wackadoos and make them the poster children of the movement. "Progressive" organizations even sent out "protestors" to join the group...quite literally a false flag organization.



    Now of course, the new "non-violent" standards don't apply and have never applied to progressives. They can continue to use rhetoric that is actually violent, such as hoping that Rush Limaugh's kidney's fail, or stating that they think someone should put a bullet between Dick Cheney's eyes.



    Come on, Mumbo...you haven't noticed? Any group with whom democrats, leftists and progressives disagree is racist, stupid, ignorant, sexest, bigoted, and even evil. This is why we have the new head of the DNC running around saying the GOP is "anti-women." Further she stated:





    from here: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/was...gop-anti-women



    Wait, I thought we were done with violent rhetoric? \



    Let me tell you about the real opposition to the Tea Party. It's liberals/progressives/leftists and socialists who actually believed they could change the fabric of America. They are in nuclear meltdown over the fact that much of the populace...the core of the country...has finally figured out what "remaking America" actually means. Everyday Americans in the lower, middle and upper-middle class have figured it out. And they are not happy with the direction their country is going. Sure, they argue about taxes and healthcare and wars and scandals and what have you...but they don't want our free enterprise system to be drastically altered. They don't wan to be told they can't drive their kids to soccer practice or have a BBQ because it's killing the environment. They don't want NASA to have "Muslim outreach" as one of its missions. They don't want the government spending double what it takes in. They don't want the government owning auto companies, banks, etc. They've woken up.



    Once folks who think like you do realized there was actual resistance to their thinking, they decided it needed to be eliminated. Cue the -isms and slander against everyday people that disagree with policies. Welcome to America.





    Quote:

    After the Giffords shooting, liberals jumped on this "violent rhetoric" theme and ran with it.



    Which is of course totally different from the way conservatives operate huh?



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=107127



    Oh God!



    Morning Mumbo!
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Sigh.



    While you're looking for the place where I said that the entire Tea Party movement actually wants to assassinate Barack Obama, why not have a bath and unwind, telling yourself 'Barack Obama isn't a tyrant and I really can breathe out now, because he's not really like the leader of North Korea.'



    One park ranger screwed up, and you're perfectly willing to hold him responsible for his actions.



    A crazed lunatic with no confirmed political affiliation or motive injures and kills people at a political rally in Tucson and you blame the so-called "violent rhetoric" of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party for his actions.



    It's a shameless attempt to demonize a political figure or group of people you disagree with.
  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    I see. Well, I'll have to talk to you through the fearsomely difficult point that I am making, then.



    People act on violent rhetoric. Like when there was a campaign to brand Abraham Lincoln a tyrant. They couldn't disagree with him; they called him a tyrant. And someone assassinated him. Before jumping on the stage and declaring 'death to tyrants'.



    You see? Really very simple.



    People don't act on violent rhetoric. Violent people use violent rhetoric before and after committing violent acts. Non-violent people use violent rhetoric as analogies so they do not have to commit any such acts.



    People who equate the two are stupid and illogical. They are also profoundly scary and authoritarian. Finally since they cannot distinguish between actions and speech, they are worrisome since they are most likely to commit actual violent acts against others for speech since in their mind the two are the same.



    In the meantime we have the classy Ed Schulz calling a talk show host a SLUT.
  • jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    People don't act on violent rhetoric. Violent people use violent rhetoric before and after committing violent acts. Non-violent people use violent rhetoric as analogies so they do not have to commit any such acts.



    People who equate the two are stupid and illogical. They are also profoundly scary and authoritarian. Finally since they cannot distinguish between actions and speech, they are worrisome since they are most likely to commit actual violent acts against others for speech since in their mind the two are the same.



    In the meantime we have the classy Ed Schulz calling a talk show host a SLUT.




    And some people egg their shall we say less focused followers into to doing violent acts by putting targets on a map of people.



    http://www.torontomike.com/2011/01/p..._us_rep_g.html







    Or how about this post from you in your rising tide etc. thread :
    Quote:

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tonton

    One thing that needs to be considered is that Bishop was from Alabama, where any white person supporting Obama would seem like an extreme off-putting nutjob to most family and friends.



    And your reply :



    Really and you think the whole shooting her brother, sending bombs and finally going on a shooting spree didn't trigger the nutjob vibes.



    It was just all those around her and their political views that actually put her (apparently incorrectly) in that group.




  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    People don't act on violent rhetoric. Violent people use violent rhetoric before and after committing violent acts. Non-violent people use violent rhetoric as analogies so they do not have to commit any such acts.



    People who equate the two are stupid and illogical. They are also profoundly scary and authoritarian. Finally since they cannot distinguish between actions and speech, they are worrisome since they are most likely to commit actual violent acts against others for speech since in their mind the two are the same.



    Yes, of course, trumptman, words have no power to persuade anyone to action, and the context of public rhetoric in which John Wilkes Booth assassinated Abraham Lincoln and the nationalistic speeches of Radovan Karadic, or Rwandan public radio, are entirely irrelevant to the violence that followed.



    Quote:

    Booth has simply carried out what ... secession politicians and journalists have been expressing in words ... who have denounced the President as a 'tyrant', a 'despot', a 'usurper', hinted at, and virtually recommended.



    What a desperate, useless argument you've made, trumptman.
  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jimmac View Post


    And some people egg their shall we say less focused followers into to doing violent acts by putting targets on a map of people.



    http://www.torontomike.com/2011/01/p..._us_rep_g.html







    It's pretty clear that Jared Lee Loughner wasn't a follower of Palin. He was a hard leftist upset that Gifford's was acting like a centrist.



    But let's run with your crazy logic. Clearly you're trying to cover for Barack Obama who incited Loughner into shooting people. I mean he said to bring a gun to any disagreement. Loughner disagreed and remedied that disagreement in the manner Barack Obama prescribed.



    I mean how can you not follow my reasoning when Barack Obama is a Patriot Act extending, torture camp operating, bombing the whole middle east through endless wars, won't even seek the sanction of Congress kind of President?
  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Yes, of course, trumptman, words have no power to persuade anyone to action, and the context of public rhetoric in which John Wilkes Booth assassinated Abraham Lincoln and the nationalistic speeches of Radovan Karadic, or Rwandan public radio, are entirely irrelevant to the violence that followed.







    What a desperate, useless argument you've made, trumptman.



    From a person as irrational as yourself MJ, that's a compliment.
  • mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    From a person as irrational as yourself MJ, that's a compliment.



    That's the worst comeback I've ever read.
Sign In or Register to comment.