Libs try to infiltrate tea party to feed liberal media

[The T]

Still in school.

Throwing himself on the ground and demanding I debate HIS WAY or else!!!!!!!!

Like I said, I don't have to provide the language. Just the results, which I already have, and this is just the beginning.

He hasn't read it or is a denier. I'd like to know which.

I think it's pretty obvious he is still in school. That's why I tried to take the time to explain to him where he's wrong. (sigh).

But he is beginning to remind me of my 20 year old when she was 9 years old. Home from school for three days with a bad sore throat. The first day she goes back to school the temperature dips and we have a heavy snow. She comes home from school expecting to go play out in the snow.

Of course I said NO! But you try reasoning with a nine year old, as to why she can't play in the snow, after being home three days from school.

Trying to explain to this guy, these actions by these businesses are a direct result of Obamacare and NOT a hypothetical--Just about as hopless and exasperating.

They both aren't interested in reason, just having their way. (sigh)

Of course all they're interested in is their way or the highway...Damn the details or the reprocussions. (Even if it affects them too...the PARTY is of more import, -this- is quite evident).

 

[edthecynic]

Excuse me but I already proved these photos are NOT of the tea party. If one is a lie, then the rest are suspect.

Discredited, fail!

Get over it.

In logic, for that to be true then the contrapositive must also be true, so if one is genuine then the rest might be valid.

Obviously your claim does not hold up because at least one is genuine and one is fake.

‘N-Word’ Sign Dogs Would-Be Tea Party Leader The Washington Independent

Dale Robertson, a Tea Party activist who operates TeaParty.org, is getting stung for an old photo — taken at the Feb. 27, 2009 Tea Party in Houston

Update: Josh Parker of the Houston Tea Party Society tells me that Robertson was booted out of the event for this sign.

BS, I gave URLS to back up my photos. When you don't give urls, it's because you know the source is suspect.

I call BS!

And when you lie about the link not being there when it has been right above the photo all along, it's because you know the source is unimpeachable!!!

 

[The T]

In logic, for that to be true then the contrapositive must also be true, so if one is genuine then the rest might be valid.

Obviously your claim does not hold up because at least one is genuine and one is fake.

‘N-Word’ Sign Dogs Would-Be Tea Party Leader The Washington Independent

Dale Robertson, a Tea Party activist who operates TeaParty.org, is getting stung for an old photo — taken at the Feb. 27, 2009 Tea Party in Houston

Update: Josh Parker of the Houston Tea Party Society tells me that Robertson was booted out of the event for this sign.

BS, I gave URLS to back up my photos. When you don't give urls, it's because you know the source is suspect.

I call BS!

And when you lie about the link not being there when it has been right above the photo all along, it's because you know the source is unimpeachable!!!

Just like you passing off photoshopped images as genuine.

*YOU* are a FRAUD.

 

[Qball]

FOXNews.com - Tea Party Opponents Hope to Infiltrate Party, Dismantle It

You asshats are actually starting to believe your own fearmongering. AWESOME!

Keep clapping as you read this site, Crash the Tea Party.

Yeah, the idea that idiot liberals want to troll a protest rally to make them seem "crazier" is so farfetched. Except it's not.

 

[oreo]

FOXNews.com - Tea Party Opponents Hope to Infiltrate Party, Dismantle It

I went to my tea party in C. Spgs.CO today. We had a little over 2000 tea partiers there -and our very minut--tea party crashers--came from the high school across the street--which consisted of about 5 very young teenagers that really had no idea what they were doing--LOL. They left a little embarrassed.

Anyway--the teapartycrasher.org--is an utter failure. In fact--I just tried to get back to their web-site and they have already closed it down.

That's kind of funny. I wouldn't have been too hard on the kids. They are naive and I'm sure they were led into it by their brain washing teachers.

Poor kids!

No one was hard on them--but they didn't know that a 1000 camera's were onto them. One carrying an obscene sign gladly posed for the camera's and that picture was sent onto the principle of the high school. Needless to say--it's not going to be a good weekend for them--

 

[JakeStarkey]

This whole thing so reminds of the sixties when the far whinge was so sure things weren't going to change. The same yelling, crying, and whining, but nothing will change back for them now.

Most are old, white, well off, very unhappy with the socio-political direction of American culture the last forty years. But, so what? They will cry, then die of old age, then be forgotten.

 

[edthecynic]

Excuse me but I already proved these photos are NOT of the tea party. If one is a lie, then the rest are suspect.

Discredited, fail!

Get over it.

In logic, for that to be true then the contrapositive must also be true, so if one is genuine then the rest might be valid.

Obviously your claim does not hold up because at least one is genuine and one is fake.

‘N-Word’ Sign Dogs Would-Be Tea Party Leader The Washington Independent

Dale Robertson, a Tea Party activist who operates TeaParty.org, is getting stung for an old photo — taken at the Feb. 27, 2009 Tea Party in Houston

Update: Josh Parker of the Houston Tea Party Society tells me that Robertson was booted out of the event for this sign.

BS, I gave URLS to back up my photos. When you don't give urls, it's because you know the source is suspect.

I call BS!

And when you lie about the link not being there when it has been right above the photo all along, it's because you know the source is unimpeachable!!!

Just like you passing off photoshopped images as genuine.

*YOU* are a FRAUD.

You can't face the truth.

If the photograph was photoshopped, why did Josh Parker of the Houston Tea Party Society say Robertson was kicked out of the Houston event for the sign????????????

It must have said something even worse before it was "photoshopped" for him to have been kicked out.

Further proof that when CON$ are caught lying they just keep on lying.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Yep.

 

[teapartysamurai]

In logic, for that to be true then the contrapositive must also be true, so if one is genuine then the rest might be valid.

Obviously your claim does not hold up because at least one is genuine and one is fake.

‘N-Word’ Sign Dogs Would-Be Tea Party Leader The Washington Independent

Dale Robertson, a Tea Party activist who operates TeaParty.org, is getting stung for an old photo — taken at the Feb. 27, 2009 Tea Party in Houston

Update: Josh Parker of the Houston Tea Party Society tells me that Robertson was booted out of the event for this sign.

BS, I gave URLS to back up my photos. When you don't give urls, it's because you know the source is suspect.

I call BS!

And when you lie about the link not being there when it has been right above the photo all along, it's because you know the source is unimpeachable!!!

Well finally we have a link! It is about freaking time!

That's all I asked for people. If I missed this before, I apologize. But why wasn't this pointed out to me before? I kept asking for it and instead you guys just kept pulling a Dan Rather saying *I* had to provide the link. It's about time!

But I don't know what that proves.

If the man was booted out of the event for having the sign all that proves is that the tea party is NOT racist.

If it was racist, they would have welcomed him with open arms for having that sign.

Instead they booted him out. So, I honestly don't know what that sign proves other than one person with bad judgement.

It would be like me bringing a Swastika to a Martin Luther King Rally and getting kicked out. Does that prove the MLK rally is racist? NO! Far from it. They said, take your sign elsewhere that's not what we are about.

So, how does them asking him to leave because of his sign prove the tea party racist? Makes absolutely no sense.

But I'm sure it makes sense to liberals snatching desperately at any straw trying to smear the tea party.

Besides, he's not who started the Tea Party. Rick Santelli did:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZB4taSEoA[/ame]

O Forgotten Hero: How CNBC’s Rick Santelli Started the Tea Party Revolution

Rick Santelli delivered his now famous “Shout Heard ‘Round the World”—his impromptu suggestion that America needs a Boston Tea Party redux—on February 19, 2009. As a full-fledged CNBC geek, I happened to be watching “Squawk Box” that morning, my alternative to “The View.” (Not to take anything away from Babs and her bevy, but when it comes to looks and smarts, nobody can top CNBC morning money-honeys Melissa Francis and Trish Regan.)

This was an electrifying moment for cable television—but especially for the mostly genteel and always arcane CNBC. Even to a drama junkie like me, Santelli’s rant was instantly recognizable as pure, unadulterated, off-the-charts emotion. I mean, this was CNBC, dude! These guys get worked up about the LIBOR rates and global decoupling. But Tea Parties?
Here was a rare unscripted moment, a spontaneous economic cri de coeur. It didn’t hurt Santelli, whose straight-shooter affability is very infectious, that he had an army of like-minded traders behind him, with the modern-day equivalent of pitchforks—their BlackBerrys and iPhones—in hand ready to cheer on their modern day Paul Revere or Samuel Adams.

O Forgotten Hero: How CNBC’s Rick Santelli Started the Tea Party Revolution - Big Journalism

 

[edthecynic]

BS, I gave URLS to back up my photos. When you don't give urls, it's because you know the source is suspect.

I call BS!

And when you lie about the link not being there when it has been right above the photo all along, it's because you know the source is unimpeachable!!!

Well finally we have a link! It is about freaking time!

That's all I asked for people. If I missed this before, I apologize. But why wasn't this pointed out to me before? I kept asking for it and instead you guys just kept pulling a Dan Rather saying *I* had to provide the link. It's about time!

But I don't know what that proves.

If the man was booted out of the event for having the sign all that proves is that the tea party is NOT racist.

If it was racist, they would have welcomed him with open arms for having that sign.

Instead they booted him out. So, I honestly don't know what that sign proves other than one person with bad judgement.

It would be like me bringing a Swastika to a Martin Luther King Rally and getting kicked out. Does that prove the MLK rally is racist? NO! Far from it. They said, take your sign elsewhere that's not what we are about.

So, how does them asking him to leave because of his sign prove the tea party racist? Makes absolutely no sense.[/URL]

First of all the link WAS there all along and people were laughing at your dumb act pretending it wasn't there.

And the fact that he got the boot proves several things. First that the photo was real. Second CON$ know they are lying when they claim he was a plant. Third CON$ know they are lying when they say the signs are photoshopped. And lastly CON$ will lie to cover up the facts after they are caught. Robertson, after the photo was published, did his own photoshop job on the photo to try to accuse Libs of photoshopping the photo. Of course, he was just obeying his programming as shown in the first quote in my sig.

Tea Partier's Site Shows Photoshopped Image Of Racist Sign | TPMMuckraker

Tea Partier's Site Shows Photoshopped Image Of Racist Sign

When you're a Tea Party activist and you've been caught holding a racist sign that refers to taxpayers as the "n" word, maybe it's better to just leave the whole subject alone.

Dale Robertson seems to disagree. Over the weekend, the Houston-based Tea Party leader posted a picture of himself at a rally last year that you can see opposite.

Notice something strange about the words on that sign Robertson is holding? That's because it's a (very poorly) photoshopped image.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hey Ed, Teabagger Selling Lies is doing a pretty good job of demonstrating that when cons are caught in a lie, they just pile more on.

She just keeps going. Hey.....Teabagger Selling Lies.......what's your damage, you got GOP OCD or something?

 

[teapartysamurai]

And when you lie about the link not being there when it has been right above the photo all along, it's because you know the source is unimpeachable!!!

Well finally we have a link! It is about freaking time!

That's all I asked for people. If I missed this before, I apologize. But why wasn't this pointed out to me before? I kept asking for it and instead you guys just kept pulling a Dan Rather saying *I* had to provide the link. It's about time!

But I don't know what that proves.

If the man was booted out of the event for having the sign all that proves is that the tea party is NOT racist.

If it was racist, they would have welcomed him with open arms for having that sign.

Instead they booted him out. So, I honestly don't know what that sign proves other than one person with bad judgement.

It would be like me bringing a Swastika to a Martin Luther King Rally and getting kicked out. Does that prove the MLK rally is racist? NO! Far from it. They said, take your sign elsewhere that's not what we are about.

So, how does them asking him to leave because of his sign prove the tea party racist? Makes absolutely no sense.[/url]

First of all the link WAS there all along and people were laughing at your dumb act pretending it wasn't there.

And the fact that he got the boot proves several things. First that the photo was real. Second CON$ know they are lying when they claim he was a plant. Third CON$ know they are lying when they say the signs are photoshopped. And lastly CON$ will lie to cover up the facts after they are caught. Robertson, after the photo was published, did his own photoshop job on the photo to try to accuse Libs of photoshopping the photo. Of course, he was just obeying his programming as shown in the first quote in my sig.

Tea Partier's Site Shows Photoshopped Image Of Racist Sign | TPMMuckraker

Tea Partier's Site Shows Photoshopped Image Of Racist Sign

When you're a Tea Party activist and you've been caught holding a racist sign that refers to taxpayers as the "n" word, maybe it's better to just leave the whole subject alone.

Dale Robertson seems to disagree. Over the weekend, the Houston-based Tea Party leader posted a picture of himself at a rally last year that you can see opposite.

Notice something strange about the words on that sign Robertson is holding? That's because it's a (very poorly) photoshopped image.

No, it proves he was asked to leave.

You can desperately spin all you want, but it's no different than these guys:

Some LaRouchite cult members showed up with Obama-Hitler signs. Will the Left now be accused of bigotry, intolerance and hate crimes because someone who showed up at their rally put a Hitler mustache on the President? Signs point to "No."
San Francisco "Anti-War" Rally: The New Communist/Truth/Jihad Alliance

This was quite an interesting discussion, as a hyper-self-confident LaRouchite tried to explain to an Obama fan why the president needs to be impeached. I had a feeling that, at conversation's end, not many minds had been changed.

San Francisco "Anti-War" Rally: The New Communist/Truth/Jihad Alliance

They showed up at an leftwing antiwar rally. Does that make the left all racists? Or the rally racist?

And BTW, as far as my information goes, THEY WERE NOT ASKED TO LEAVE, as compared to what happened at the tea party.

Sorry but you can't spin your way out of this.

But keep on trying

 

[Truthmatters]

They were only kicked out because they thought they were liberals trying to make them look bad.

In the past they just let them carry any racist signs like Obama with a bone through his nose.

BTW the tea part events are the results of ONE GROUP!

 

[teapartysamurai]

They were only kicked out because they thought they were liberals trying to make them look bad.

In the past they just let them carry any racist signs like Obama with a bone through his nose.

BTW the tea part events are the results of ONE GROUP!

Sorry but evidence from this very thread (and given to us thanks to liberals) proves that's wrong.

The guy carrying the sign that said the N word on it, was told to leave, by the TEA Party.

Nice try but you need to read the thread and keep up.

 

[ABikerSailor]

They were only kicked out because they thought they were liberals trying to make them look bad.

In the past they just let them carry any racist signs like Obama with a bone through his nose.

BTW the tea part events are the results of ONE GROUP!

Sorry but evidence from this very thread (and given to us thanks to liberals) proves that's wrong.

The guy carrying the sign that said the N word on it, was told to leave, by the TEA Party.

Nice try but you need to read the thread and keep up.

Thus sayeth the Teabagger Selling Lies with GOP OCD.

 

[edthecynic]

Well finally we have a link! It is about freaking time!

That's all I asked for people. If I missed this before, I apologize. But why wasn't this pointed out to me before? I kept asking for it and instead you guys just kept pulling a Dan Rather saying *I* had to provide the link. It's about time!

But I don't know what that proves.

If the man was booted out of the event for having the sign all that proves is that the tea party is NOT racist.

If it was racist, they would have welcomed him with open arms for having that sign.

Instead they booted him out. So, I honestly don't know what that sign proves other than one person with bad judgement.

It would be like me bringing a Swastika to a Martin Luther King Rally and getting kicked out. Does that prove the MLK rally is racist? NO! Far from it. They said, take your sign elsewhere that's not what we are about.

So, how does them asking him to leave because of his sign prove the tea party racist? Makes absolutely no sense.[/url]

First of all the link WAS there all along and people were laughing at your dumb act pretending it wasn't there.

And the fact that he got the boot proves several things. First that the photo was real. Second CON$ know they are lying when they claim he was a plant. Third CON$ know they are lying when they say the signs are photoshopped. And lastly CON$ will lie to cover up the facts after they are caught. Robertson, after the photo was published, did his own photoshop job on the photo to try to accuse Libs of photoshopping the photo. Of course, he was just obeying his programming as shown in the first quote in my sig.

Tea Partier's Site Shows Photoshopped Image Of Racist Sign | TPMMuckraker

Tea Partier's Site Shows Photoshopped Image Of Racist Sign

When you're a Tea Party activist and you've been caught holding a racist sign that refers to taxpayers as the "n" word, maybe it's better to just leave the whole subject alone.

Dale Robertson seems to disagree. Over the weekend, the Houston-based Tea Party leader posted a picture of himself at a rally last year that you can see opposite.

Notice something strange about the words on that sign Robertson is holding? That's because it's a (very poorly) photoshopped image.

No, it proves he was asked to leave.

You can desperately spin all you want, but it's no different than these guys:

Some LaRouchite cult members showed up with Obama-Hitler signs. Will the Left now be accused of bigotry, intolerance and hate crimes because someone who showed up at their rally put a Hitler mustache on the President? Signs point to "No."
San Francisco "Anti-War" Rally: The New Communist/Truth/Jihad Alliance

This was quite an interesting discussion, as a hyper-self-confident LaRouchite tried to explain to an Obama fan why the president needs to be impeached. I had a feeling that, at conversation's end, not many minds had been changed.

San Francisco "Anti-War" Rally: The New Communist/Truth/Jihad Alliance

They showed up at an leftwing antiwar rally. Does that make the left all racists? Or the rally racist?

And BTW, as far as my information goes, THEY WERE NOT ASKED TO LEAVE, as compared to what happened at the tea party.

Sorry but you can't spin your way out of this.

But keep on trying

You are misinformed, as usual.

Like It or Not, LaRouche Cultists Are Aligning With Conservatives on Health Care The Washington Independent

Like It or Not, LaRouche Cultists Are Aligning With Conservatives on Health Care

The LaRouche cultists oppose Obama’s plan because they think he’s trying to euthanize old people and the infirm. They oppose it for one of the reasons that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) oppose it, and they’re providing a lot of the “research” for this smear. Instead of grappling with this or rebutting the smear, McCormack smears Democrats, who have repeatedly purged these conspiracy theorists from their party.

 

[rightwinger]

My sources tell me that Sarah Palin is a poorly disguised infiltrator from the left

You betcha!

 

[drsmith1072]

Nice try but I don't don't have to prove anything. You are still desperately clinging to the Dan Rather ploy and it won't serve you anymore than it helped Rather.

(and Obama says the "bitter clingers" are on the right)


I don't have to provide evidence for photos someone else posted.

I already proved one was suspect thus making them all suspect.

The onus is on the person who posted them.

I'm sorry you are so devoid in logic that you cannot understand this, but you cannot prove a negative.

You are only displaying your clear lack of understanding in this regard.

Actually YOU made the claim that because one is fake they all are fake and that is a LIE. Unless you can prove that all are fake then YOU LIED. In recent post you have backtracked and tried to claim that they are merely suspect but in your original argument you claimed that they were fake and the author was a lair.

YOU made the claim that they were all fake becuase one was and can't back up your own claim that onus is on YOU.
You could be honest and admit that you were WRONG but I don't believe that you have the integrity to be so honest.

Oh and i will post this again and again until you respond to it.

As for the onus being on the person who posted it, you were the one that posted that the guy with the swastika sign was a plant and yet you have failed to prove that claim and continue to avoid doing so despite being called out for your avoidance several times. Do you have the proof or not??

So will you respond or are you going to continue to be dishonest and avoid it?

Look you aren't out of school are you? It's becoming more and more obvious by your inability to understand how logic and evidence works.

No matter how you to try to force me on the defensive it isn't going to work.

I'm not the one that posted the photos. Have you ever been in a court of law? The Defense attorney doesn't have to "prove beyond a shadow of a doubt" his client's innocence. All he need to is prove the Prosecuting's attorney's evidence against his client is suspect or lacking.

I'm already done that.

The onus is on the one providing the evidence to prove BEYOND THE SHADOW OF A DOUBT.

Because you can't prove a negative.

That's why our court system is based on innocent until proved guilty.

Now let's take this case. This poster, posts a bunch of photos and accuses the Tea Party of being racists, etc, based the evidence of his photos.

*I* like a defense attorney point out the evidence against my "client" the tea party, is suspect because of a defect in the evidence (in that one of the photos is fake, not from a tea party, being from 2003, and there is no evidence or url provided to prove the validity of the rest.)

The onus is on the prosecutor, the person who posted the photos, to prove otherwise, by providing evidence for the validity of these photos.

He hasn't done that, nor I doubt will he, because it's pretty obvious, the photos are not legit.

If they were, he would have simply provided evidence of their source, as I did with the photos I produced for left wing protests.

Now those simple facts of logic and how evidence works aren't going to change because you keep having an internet tantrum.

Sorry, but the onus is on the person who posted the photos. Get over it. It's not going to change just because you keep throwing yourself on the floor, throwing a tantrum and demanding to have your way.

Aww poor samurai can't engage in an hoenst debate so he has to stoop to attacking me as he tries so desperately to demonize and discredit me with baseless personal attacks.

The sad thing is that you once again try to DISHONESTLY spin to CYA. I am NOT asking you to prove that the photos are real or fake. the FACT is that YOU made the FALSE claim that since one is fake that all are fake and that is an ASSUMPTION that you haven't proven and keep trying to avoid. One has has NO bearing on the others and it was dishonest for YOU to make that argument. The fac that you continue to try to dishonestly claim that I am asking you to prove that they are fake further exposes your dishonesty.

The funny thing is that you counter your own claim when you try to bring in "innocent until proven guilty because based on that principle the photos are presumed real until proven fake.

Although it is hilarious that you now admit that our system is based on innocent until proven guilty when earlier that didn't matter to you when you admitted that wiretapping innocent people was "wonderful" becuase they were proven innocent after the fact.

So why is it that you can't focus on what I actually said instead of the false argument that you continually and dishonestly try to attribute to me? I am not asking you to prove that they are fake I am merely pointing out how YOU claimed that since one was fake that all were fake. That is not true and is not an honest way to debate.

Why is it so hard for you to keep up?

 

[drsmith1072]

By all the urls I posted that you obviously didn't bother to read, because your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused by the facts?

It's pretty obvious who is lying.

I read them and supplied you with excerpts that counter your spin.

So, yeah it's pretty obvious that YOU are lying. LOL

Well you know I won the debate when that's all the left has left.

"you're lying!!!!!!"

At least they didn't pull out the race card.

Isn't that basically what you have been trying to do to me and others??? How many times have you called people liars in this thread?? Oh well, it must means that you know you lost the debate or else you wouldn't have called people liars.

LOL once again your own logic counters your spin and shoots down your argument. LOL

You FALSELY accuse me of not reading them AFTER I supplied excerpts from your own articles to counter your spin. So I point out the fact that you have been and are being dishonest and the best you ahve to offer is to claim you wan becuase i returned to you what you have been dishing out.

 

[drsmith1072]

No you didn't:



AT and ampT Plans $1 Billion Charge for Health Care - NYTimes.com

They are required by law to report this. It's gong to cost them money or they will have to change benefits in new contract negotiations with the unions.

That means no matter how you slice it, it's going to cost money. Either in lost jobs or HIGHER HEALTHCARE COSTS for their employees.

That's NOT a hypothetical.

And it's just starting. Wait until we get to 2014.

In case you missed it there is a HUGE difference between "it WOULD take" and it did take.

one has happened the other hasn't. Do you know which is which?? Doesn't seem that you do.

Again the article in question seems to be talking about things that haven't happened yet and it's hilarious that you went to the one article that i didn't cut an ecxcerpt from last time. I guess you realized how I shredded them and decided to avoid admitting that by avoiding the articles. LOL

those costs are going to translate into lost jobs for this economy

that's a hypocthetical cut form your own thread. You lied therefore all of your post are suspect and lies, you lose AGAIN. LOL

You don't understand how businesses have to take these charges or report them.

Like I said, pretty obvious, you are still in school.

I understand. You will be out there one day and have to work at one of these companies, then you will start to get it.

Nice avoidance, that and your basless personal attack shows that you know that you have lost the debate.

Any debate that focuses in the future tense on an event that hasn't yet happened is debating a hypothetical which you claim that you don't do. However, based on your posts you do in fact debate hypotheticals. So my guess is that you only claimed that you don't debate hypotheticals to avoid a debate that you know that you were going to lose.