Crash course: Your illustrated guide to the Tea Party saboteurs

If that's true then produce the Youtube video.

:lol::lol::lol:
If you had been on this messageboard longer you would have known I would never say there was a YouTube video if I couldn't produce it. Obviously I was hoping someone would still try to defend her and you came through earlier saying the sign was photoshopped. Thank you sucker.

As you can see he is right in front on the stage when the camera pans back at around the 17 minute mark and again at the 20 minute mark holding the sign in plain sight the whole time, next to the guy with the socialist sign that makes the O in Obama out of a hammer and sickle neither of whom were asked to leave the stage, and you see Malkin pose with him at the very end. He was a welcome guest on stage the whole time by every teabagger there.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7GZtKY5XR0&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - Right Wing Anti-Stimulus Rally in Colorado[/ame]

He's way over in the corner. The only reason the camera man knew he was there is he is helping him in this scheme.

Give me a break! :lol::lol::lol:
And Malkin is over in the same "corner" one person away from him. Which means when she finished her speech at the dais and walked to her place almost next to him, she walked DIRECTLY towards him with him holding the sign in plain sight, putting the lie to her denial and making a toady of you.
Thank you. :rofl:
 
What proof do you have that it was in fact a plant?? Oh you mean you DON'T have any proof you are merely relying on malkin's opinion as she is trying to defend herself for getting her picture taken with a guy holding a sign with swastika on it.
Thanks for the "it's all a liberal conspiracy" spin. LOL
The fact that she identified both of them as left wingers could be your first clue.

Oh dear....OH DEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

zachary_smith.jpg

She identified BOTH of them?? Really?? The excerpt from her own article that was provided doesn't show that.

I later learned from the character assassins at Progress Now, the Soros-backed outfit that just happened to be there and just happened to snap a close-up photo of the interaction, which was immediately disseminated to the local press and to the hitmen of Media Matters, that the man pulled out a sign at the last minute (which I didn’t see until later) sporting Obama’s name with a swastika on it. He held the sign away from me, but in direct view of the Progress Now cameraperson who used to work for CNN.

She didn't IDENTIFY them. In her own words, she CLAIMS that she learned later that the cameraman was from progress now but no where in what was provided does it say that the person in the taking the personal photo and holding the sign was identified. She ASSUMES that to be the case because she ASSUMES that the guy was a plant for the purpose of taking that photo. I have seen no evidence linking the two. Do you have any that does?

It seems to me that she is presenting her OPINION and not the FACTS.
Perhaps you should try to learn that there is a HUGE difference between OPINION and FACT before you try to ridicule anyone else. I am sure it will save you some embarassment in the future.
 
:lol::lol::lol:

This proves extremism by the tea party???????? GEE, I WONDER WHERE THEY GOT THE IDEA OF PUTTING THE PRESIDENT WITH A SWASTIKA???????

I think we have a case of IT'S ONLY OKAY WHEN LIBERALS DO IT! Funny I don't recall liberals objecting to having swastika's on Bush's picture.

HYPOCRITES! :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/118-1853_IMG.JPG[/IMG[IMGhttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/9-11_=_Reichstag_banner2.jpg[/IMG

[IMG]http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/118-1867_IMG.JPG[/IMG[IMGhttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/155-5568_IMG.JPG[/IMG[IMGhttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/120-2044_IMG.JPG[/IMG

[URL="http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/"]The zombietime Hall of Shame[/URL][/quote]

No, we have a case of it's only ok when teabaggers do it. Rightwingers who condone the teabagger misbehaviour never condoned it when it was perpetrated against Bush.

that, by definition, is hypocrisy.[/quote]

Oh GET THIS!!!!!!!!!

Liberals do it Ten fold and it's hypocrisy if there is ONE example of a swastika??????

I'm not even sure your photo is legit. It wouldn't be the first time liberals photoshopped Malkin. Anyone remember the Malkin in a bikini photoshop that Daily Kos (the morons) ran with?

I only have your word it is legit. I gave the SOURCE for my photos.

But I show you only the tip of the ice berg of liberals calling Bush a Nazi (and shall we recall when liberals did the same FOR OUR TROOPS like Durbin who called our troops "jack booted thugs" that were flushing Korans down the toilet (which turned out to be a complete lie AND WHO IS THE HYPOCRITE?

Nice try!

:lol::lol::lol::lol:[/QUOTE]

Are you retarded?? Seriously?? I have to ask because even malkin admits that the photo is REAL she just tries to spin and make excuses for it AFTER it got out.

Furthermore are you actually attacking liberals even as you are trying to defend righties for doing the same??
 
Michelle Malkin Crash course: Your illustrated guide to the Tea Party saboteurs

Liberals never could debate honestly. They know if they do, they lose. Their ideas just don't hold up against honest debate. So, they smear.

It's not about honesty or facts. It's about one thing with them, CONTROL.

Any challenge to that is going to be met with every scorched earth tatic they can spew.

The first trick of fighting liberalism is to know that.

I wish the "non partisan, can we all get along, I will reach across the aisle" RINOs would figure this out.

LOL So you talk about "honest debate" by engaging in a propaganda based attack?

malkin's article mentions a few less than honest tactics being proposed by a few people on the left and then the OP dishonestly tries to claim that these acts are representative of liberals as a whole.

So let's say I go back and bring up less than honest tactics from individual right wingers and groups such as the girl who cut up her own face and blamed obama supporters, joe the plumber and his fictitious rant, and then the tea partiers who travelled to another state the rally against a senator who does not represent them in an attempt to discredit and attack him.

So is it fair for me to say that these less than honest people on the right are representative of conservatives as whole and that ALL righties never could debate honestly??

Or is this argument just as baseless, dishonest and LAME as the one presented by the OP??

The OP itself is nothing more than an attack against liberals based on dishonest partisan opinion so it is apparent that the OP is not interested in an honest debate about anything.

The Girl who cut her face was a Ron Paul supporter. In short kook. Conservative websites no more supported her than liberals did.

Contrast that with the guy who was hanged with "Fed" written on his chest. Liberals RAN with that one, until it turned out to be a suicide.

So nice try on that one.

But for every single kook like that you can bring up, I can give you a PLETHORA of liberals who did worse.

And it's an attack when Malkin reports ON THE FACTS?

The FACTS are their are left wing sites springing up trying to infiltrate the tea party.

Who's spewing the propaganda? Or is it YOU just don't like we are blowing the whistle on these pukes?

:lol::lol::lol:

UH NO she wasn't a paul suppporter. She was MCCAIN VOLUNTEER when she claimed she was "attacked."


A McCain campaign volunteer who claimed she was robbed, pinned to the ground and had the letter 'B' scratched on her face by a Barack Obama supporter made the whole story up, police said. Young Republican who claimed Obama supporter carved letter 'B' on her face during robbery made the story up, police say | Mail Online
So once again you spin and the only thing you accomplish is make yourself look dishonest.

What does the "fed" hanging have to do with anything?? oh that's right, NOTHING. thanks for the diversion tactics but I would like to stay on topic and how according to your own spin that righties are just as dishonest as you are trying to claim liberals are. LOL It's funny how you coninue to spin and avoid an HONEST debate. LOL

You seem to be more than qualified at avoidance and diversion but when it comes to engaging in an honest debate, which is what you claim liberals can't do, you spin, you dodge, you try to change the subject, and you do everything you can think of to avoid an honest debate.

Furthermore, it has already been shown that it is less than honest for malkin to attribute the actions of a few to the whole so how was she talking about the facts when she dishonestly attempt to smear ALL liberals for the actions of a few? LOL

P.S. I already said that what those few are doing is dishonest and i don't support it. I don't know how i can spell it out for you any better.

BTW do you have a problem with foxnews and tea partiers "targetting" weak democrats in the next election?? I have to ask because malkin seems to be against it when liberals she chooses to focus on are doing it and she even mentions one in her article so I have to ask, does your distaste for these types of tactics apply fairly to both sides or are you just another among the many hypocritical republicans??
 
How convenient. It can't possibly be the more volatile and extremist members of the Tea Party movement - it's sabateurs!

Makes a good excuse for bad behavior I guess.

The funny thing is that from malkin's own article she pastes something from one of the "sabateurs" who admits...

"We will act on behalf of the Tea Party in ways which exaggerate their least appealing qualities (misspelled protest signs, wild claims in TV interviews, etc.) to further distance them from mainstream America and damage the public’s opinion of them."

so he admits that they will "EXAGGERATE" qualities that already exist in the tea party to "FURTHER" distance them from mainstream.

I am not defending this guy's tactic because it is wrong and they do well enough to accomplish that goal on their own but if these elements did not exist within the tea party his tactic of exaggerating them would be worthless??

Bwahahhaaaa!

Do you believe this! So the liberal "ADMITS" these qualities already exist in the tea party AND THAT IS EVIDENCE?

All that proves is these hate filled liberals already have their minds made up and won't be deterred by the facts.

That's about as factual and evidence based as when it was proved Rush Limbaugh didn't make all those racist states, those who printed them simply said, "well we know it's true about him anyway."

Oh yeah THAT'S EVIDENCE! :lol:

You are snatching at straws, but keep it up. It's hilarious to watch.

:lol::lol::lol:

You really are retarded aren't you?? My point is that the guy is stating what he wants to do and that IF they didn't already exist then he would ahve nothing to exaggerate. oh and unless you have proof that these "sabateurs" were doing this in the early stages of the tea party then how can you say with certainty that it isn't part of the movement??

I thought you were about an honest debate and yet once again you fail to accomplish that goal.
 
The first thing the Nazis did was take over the businesses and direct the owners they were going to have to what they dicated JUST LIKE OBAMA.

History is a bitch, you know?

:lol:

So can you prove that obama has "taken over" all businesses??

Which forms of industry has obama "taken over"?

Thanks for the spin and here I thought the OP was about "honest debate" and how liberals don't want one and yet it seems that here we have a righty who isn't interested in an "honest deabte." LOL

GM. Some of the banks. He is now seeking to take over the insurance industry and make it all single payer.

Hey Hitler didn't directly take over the industries either. He was smarter than the Soviets in that regard. He simply told them they had to do what he said, but they remained under the "ownership" of the industrialists.

Kind of like having a "pay czar" and telling businesses they can't have bonuses, and bringing CEO's up to Capital Hill to justify telling the truth about how much Obamacare will affect their bottom line.

I know how liberals define "honest debate." You don't saying anything honest about their leaders because that gets in the way of the agenda.

:lol::lol::lol:

So you made a claim that my questions have proven false but instead of having the HONESTY to admit you were wrong you spin a new tale.

Taking control of one aspect of an industry because they borrowed money from the federal government is not equivalent to taking over the entire industry.

How I define an honest debate is starting a debate based on the FACTS. Where as, based on the majority of your posts you don't even bother with the facts. Instead you just make claims you can't prove and then spend the rest of your time trying to change the subject in an attempt to avoid admitting that your previous arguments were flawed.
 
Last edited:
Malkin talked SPECIFICALLY about that picture in the linked article, the guy was a plant who hid the sign from her, but displayed it too a cameraman who was with him while he took the picture, from the linked article:

What proof do you have that it was in fact a plant?? Oh you mean you DON'T have any proof you are merely relying on malkin's opinion as she is trying to defend herself for getting her picture taken with a guy holding a sign with swastika on it.
Thanks for the "it's all a liberal conspiracy" spin. LOL

What proof do you have Malkin is lying.

You can see in the picture he is holding the sign away from her.

I KNEW there was something fishy.

So that is a NO, that you have no proof that the guy was in fact a plant? Thanks for the admission.

He is holding the pictuire to his own chest in full view and if you want to get technical about it, it is angled toward her and it appears possible that she can see the sign if she cared to look.
An OPINION was presented and you assumed that it is fact because it suited your needs to do so. What was that you said about honest debate??
 
A) No I'm not okay with them paying bonuses with taxpayer money. THAT'S WHY I WAS AGAINST TARP AND THE PHONY STIMULUS. DUH!

they are two different things. the taxpayer money had already bailed them out and then they tried to/did use it for bonuses. should this have been allowed or should obama have stopped it?




deflection?

B) Where is your evidence they are just writing crap? They are REQUIRED to report it.

actually I think its awesome that the companies were called up to testify. because its going to decisvely prove if obamacare raises taxes for business or not. both sides have to put up or shut up. if/when the companies prove that it does raise tehir cost then the democrats will have a lot of back peddling to do and the closer to november it is, the worse it is for them.

This is why I avoid answering you, because you don't come anywhere close to reality.

It's deflection to point out Obama voted for Tarp and pushed the Stimulus?

:lol::lol::lol:

That's all that needs to be said.

:lol::lol::lol:

What was your response earlier in this thread to someone who you claimed didn't respond to your post??

Let me translate that.

You can't refute it, so all you could do was make a snarky insult to try and save face.

It seems that your own standard applies to you. LOL
 
If that's true then produce the Youtube video.

:lol::lol::lol:
If you had been on this messageboard longer you would have known I would never say there was a YouTube video if I couldn't produce it. Obviously I was hoping someone would still try to defend her and you came through earlier saying the sign was photoshopped. Thank you sucker.

As you can see he is right in front on the stage when the camera pans back at around the 17 minute mark and again at the 20 minute mark holding the sign in plain sight the whole time, next to the guy with the socialist sign that makes the O in Obama out of a hammer and sickle neither of whom were asked to leave the stage, and you see Malkin pose with him at the very end. He was a welcome guest on stage the whole time by every teabagger there.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7GZtKY5XR0&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - Right Wing Anti-Stimulus Rally in Colorado[/ame]

He's way over in the corner. The only reason the camera man knew he was there is he is helping him in this scheme.

Give me a break! :lol::lol::lol:

Prove that he was "helping him with his scheme" IF you can. Oh wait you have already been asked to prove it and FAILED miserably.

Once more you avoid an honest debate. <sarcasm Alert> you must be a liberal, after everyone knows that liberals avoid an honest debate. LOL
 
If that's true then produce the Youtube video.

:lol::lol::lol:
If you had been on this messageboard longer you would have known I would never say there was a YouTube video if I couldn't produce it. Obviously I was hoping someone would still try to defend her and you came through earlier saying the sign was photoshopped. Thank you sucker.

As you can see he is right in front on the stage when the camera pans back at around the 17 minute mark and again at the 20 minute mark holding the sign in plain sight the whole time, next to the guy with the socialist sign that makes the O in Obama out of a hammer and sickle neither of whom were asked to leave the stage, and you see Malkin pose with him at the very end. He was a welcome guest on stage the whole time by every teabagger there.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7GZtKY5XR0&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Right Wing Anti-Stimulus Rally in Colorado[/ame]

You are seriously attempting to convince anyone with more than half a brain that this was not a set up?

Oh.

My.

God.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Little 'nazi sign', easily hidden and I notice he's the only one not chanting 'no more pork', and he has his little sign turned exactly right for the camera. And, the camera guy was filming the speakers the entire time..... until suddenly he pans out. Jeeeez, it wasn't even a professional camera person. Any real camera operator would have been panning the crowd and interspersing with the speakers. IF he was legitimate - because he would have been looking FOR the DAMNED SIGNS. He clearly knew exactly where that guy was, and waited for him to position himself then panned out.

Pathetic. What is really pathetic though is that anyone is dumb enough not to see it for what it clearly is.

Oh.

My.

God.

All of the posters on stage are aimed at the cameras, therefore based on your logic (using the term VERY loosely) they are ALL in on it. LOL

Actually if you have ever driven on a highway and came along an accident? most people are attracted to the accident and slow down to rubber neck. This camera man saw an "accident" and focused on it for a short while. I really don't see that as PROOF of any greater conspiracy but then I am not insane.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top