Democratic Dirty Tricks - Massachusetts Edition - Page 5

Got it so you are still playing with words again. I have the post where you said forget exclusively, and here you are pressing the case with it again. That is patently dishonest.

Are anal sex or cunnilingus "exclusively" homosexual practices? Since homosexuality isn't about WHAT one does, but rather, WHO one does it with, trying to argue about WHAT one does is again, just purely dishonest.

Sad and desperate on your part. Did you do as I asked and go reference the John Waters clip from the movie Pecker that he used to try to introduce the term or just claim correctness via spamming repetition again?

Can you name for me an action that is EXCLUSIVELY homosexual? Can you name for me an act that two homosexual males can engage that a heterosexual couple cannot and thus it becomes exclusive?

Got it spamming versus addressing, you are simply trolling. You are now on ignore.

No teabagging and from 1998.

Thank goodness only insane people would associate a bunch of male dances in a gay strip club with homosexuality in any fashion.

I provide the ten year old clip and you provide definitions that can be voted on by anyone. You do understand how self-selected polls aren't at all accurate. Let me post my self-selected poll from Free Republic on what the definition of teabagger is and also on how Obama is doing. It much be right when self-selected instead of random.

If I posted my definition and then spammed a couple conservatives forums to go vote on it, would it be your tried and true go to definition two days from now?

I don't think so. But really, you've self enacted Godwin's law just to show the lack of discussion you are interested in having.

Watch lefties lose a couple elections and they just go insane. Olbermann has APOLOGIZED. Not to who he needs to of course because he will apologize to Stewart for being over the top, but not to Michelle Malken for calling her a bag of meat nor Scott Brown for tossing every -ist and -ism imaginable at him in hopes of jarring something lose in his winning election bid.

This thread reads like a nice microcosm of the national scene. The Republicans are out there winning elections and the Democrats are wondering why everyone is a Nazi, Redneck, Teabagger for not being as "smart" and "right" as they are in their supposed thinking.

Go yell at some more people and call them Nazis. Forgo deeping thinking for "screwjobs" and "greedy fuckwads."

With such reasoning, he who throws the biggest temper tantrum wins.

They didn't use it. They used tea party. The wonderful "newscasters" like Anderson Cooper, and Rachel Maddow decided to use it as a term of ridicule. It was right there in the Wikipedia link with only FIVE citation points.

But wait BR, can you prove I EXCLUSIVELY get my panties in a bunch?


Actually by your very own link, no it couldn't.

Koppelman speculates that Jenkins was more likely than ReTeaParty.com to have been aware of the double entendre; he summarizes, "for the most part conservatives haven't actually been using the words in such a way as to lend themselves to double entendre. With one or two exceptions, almost all of it has actually been coming from the left."[

Are you claiming the exception proves the rule? If I find one or two members of a lefist organization who don't understand a double entendre or who have questionable grammar, can I forgo courtesy and also if I am a journalist, any ethical standards and just call people names for as long as I want?


I provided a link to the ten year old John Waters movie that attempted to mainstream the term. I'm not just repeating nonsense or just making crap up. Within MJ's link I noted the journalists who used it and it had five citations. Within your own link it notes the exception and how derogatory lefist journalists and political pundits are using a total of two known instances to tarnish and treat badly an entire protest movement.

Speaking of reasonableness, let me ask you BR, if this were the 60's and several political pundits or newscasters were calling anyone marching "n*gg*r lovers" would you consider it appropriate and professional?

Let's go hit that wonderful UrbanDictionary.com you love so much and see what it notes.

Hmmm...notes it isnt just EXCLUSIVE to white people in that top rated definition. Lots of people voted for it too so really, that makes to totally right for Olbermann and Maddow to use on people.

It meets the BR and MJ criteria. The most people voted on it. I'm sure two people can be found who used the term whether it be appropriately or inappropriately to describe aspects of the civil rights movement. It isn't exclusive to one group.

Perhaps now you can see why all those strawmen are just bad reasoning put up to ignore good reasoning and good points of discussion.

And yes, you are right strawmen points really are "fucking retarded" to discuss instead of addressing the actual relevant points. The relevant point was that Olbermann was issuing a long hateful monologue for no rational reason. Stewart called him out on it. His funny summation was, that he had given up thought and was just calling people names. He pointed out that even the attempts to justify it were ridiculously weak and often hypocritical (irony is a synonym for hypocritical btw.) Olbermann agreed and apologized.

So when all the critics and principals involved in the action have agreed with me and even taken appropriate action related to it, it is indeed "fucking retarded" to repeat that one is correct and credible ad-nauseum when those being defended have already given up the fight and ceded the point. It is "fucking retarded" for you and MJ to be defending Olbermann when Olbermann has already said his words were wrong.

I'm not against gay marriage. I'm against judicial decrees. When given the opportunity to vote on Prop 8, I voted no. When the legislature passed gay marriage and Ar-NALD wouldn't sign it, I said he was wrong.

The posts are here in the forums. You can search for them. I'm just for language having meaning. When women wanted to vote, we change the laws. We didn't have a judge say man = woman or black = white. We amended the constitution to fix those points.

Also it wasn't used by the movement first. A movement isn't a movement of one or two. The exception never proves the rule. Movements are allowed to define what they want to be called and news organizations have respected it. Can you cite for me any other instance where news organizations called a protest movement something other than what it wanted to be called? Can you find me any other instance where two members determined what news organizations would call a protest group contrary to what that group desired?

You can't because these are pure ad-homs. There is no reasoning behind them besides hate. Your own link supports that point.

CNN Political Contributer, "I can't even believe that was allowed on the air"


Isn't it sad to think there are people defending Olbermann in this instance?

Turns out the dirty tricks down just happen in Mass.

Remember who spent the summer declaring critics to not be real, but rather "astroturf?"

Who's astroturfing now?


If the right even attempts to organize or protest it is worthy of major news reporting not to cover it, but to discredit it. Here we see lots of Democratic Astroturfing and as usual the liberal media complex won't investigate it. Hell, they are too busy assisting it by calling anyone who thinks or investigates it not a real news channel or a racist, sexist, -st and -ism du jour.

When will people wake up?

Yes but what you fail to remember is that paying attention to the needs of the working man is sexist because it isn't spending money on women. It's greedy because it has a carbon footprint and a possible return. He doesn't need health care because he is the oppressor even though lifespan shows that a white man won't outlive a black woman and a white woman outlives everyone. The working man doesn't need an education either even though he is barely 40% of undergrads.

The sexism and racism of the Democratic Party makes it impossible for them to address the needs of the middle class man.