What is a tea-bagger?

[Nosmo King]

LOL, they were formed just to hate on the poor wittle Obama. That must be it.

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

Obama took office on January 20, 2009. By April 14, 2009, the teabaggers showed their faces. Any argument that the teabaggers were angry long before the first Black president is merely a fallacious one.

You just didn't have the time to protest as Bush raised the deficit? Or would it have been bad form to show up a fellow cracker?

 

[ItHappens]

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

Or perhaps just finally angry enough that big spenders have been replaced by BIGGER spenders.
And a little US History you probably didn't get in school, the KKK was founded by Southern Democrats.

Democrats schmeocrats! They were, and remain CONSERVATIVES! unless you were home 'sick' the day they discussed political philosophies versus party affiliation in school.

And what if I told you a political philosophy which kept one man dependent on another was just a different form of slavery. What would that make Democrats?

 

[MIPS]

You just didn't have the time to protest as Bush raised the deficit? Or would it have been bad form to show up a fellow cracker?

Yeah because it's just so productive to go out and organize protests against a lame duck President.

 

[Stephanie]

If the "oh so Intelligent" lefties thinks it's a good idea to call, ma and pa, grandma and grandpa middle Amercia, teabaggers. Then by golly they should continue.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

LOL, they were formed just to hate on the poor wittle Obama. That must be it.

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

Don't you know that anyone who opposes their Marxist agenda and their ringleader (Obama) is a Racist?

Racist? It has no meaning anymore. It is a catchall phrase used like a punch line to a sick joke.

 

[Stephanie]

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

Obama took office on January 20, 2009. By April 14, 2009, the teabaggers showed their faces. Any argument that the teabaggers were angry long before the first Black president is merely a fallacious one.

You just didn't have the time to protest as Bush raised the deficit? Or would it have been bad form to show up a fellow cracker?

LOL, still stuck on Bush I see.

 

[C-101]

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

Obama took office on January 20, 2009. By April 14, 2009, the teabaggers showed their faces. Any argument that the teabaggers were angry long before the first Black president is merely a fallacious one.

You just didn't have the time to protest as Bush raised the deficit? Or would it have been bad form to show up a fellow cracker?

If the Tea Party movement was fueled by racism they wouldn't, by your timeline, show up sometime in April to protest Obama. They would have been there from the day he was elected and even before he was elected during the campaign.

They didn't show up on MLK Jr. Day to protest Obama's race, but rather showed up on Tax Day to protest the egregious expansion of government.

Besides that, I really should not have to spell this out for you.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

Obama took office on January 20, 2009. By April 14, 2009, the teabaggers showed their faces. Any argument that the teabaggers were angry long before the first Black president is merely a fallacious one.

You just didn't have the time to protest as Bush raised the deficit? Or would it have been bad form to show up a fellow cracker?

LOL, still stuck on Bush I see.

See below....

 

[Bfgrn]

LOL, they were formed just to hate on the poor wittle Obama. That must be it.

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

It takes a TOTAL moron to misinterpret Tom Tancredo's opening salvo...

Former Representative Tom Tancredo, a Republican from Colorado, told about 600 convention goers in the Nashville ballroom that in the 2008 election President Barack Obama was elected because of "people who could not even spell the word 'vote' or say it in English.'"

Expressing his disappointment that America "put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House ... Barack Hussein Obama." Tancredo went on to suggest that a literacy test be implemented to prevent electoral outcomes in the future.

Suggesting a literacy test is nothing short of calling for a return to Jim Crow laws. Under Jim Crow laws literacy tests were used to prevent blacks from voting during segregation. They were banned by the Voting Rights Act in 1964.

 

[Nosmo King]

Or perhaps just finally angry enough that big spenders have been replaced by BIGGER spenders.
And a little US History you probably didn't get in school, the KKK was founded by Southern Democrats.

Democrats schmeocrats! They were, and remain CONSERVATIVES! unless you were home 'sick' the day they discussed political philosophies versus party affiliation in school.

And what if I told you a political philosophy which kept one man dependent on another was just a different form of slavery. What would that make Democrats?

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing you supported George W. Bush as president and further think Sarah Palin is the greatest political mind since Ronald Reagan. I'm making this assumption because I don't believe you have studied history, particularly political history, enough to realize Democrats have not always been Liberals and Republicans have not always been Conservatives.

With that, you still believe that Conservatism, politically speaking, is the right path for society.

The southern Democrats who formed the KKK along with Nathan Bedford Forrest, were Democrats because Lincoln was a Republican. That did not make those Southern Democrats Liberals by a long shot. Lincoln's fight to preserve the federal government and the union of the states did not make him a Conservative by a long shot. Is it getting clearer now?

 

[ItHappens]

WHITE HOUSE CAUGHT IN DEMOCRATS CROSS-FIRE

White House caught in Democrats' crossfire - Glenn Thrush and Jake Sherman and Lisa Lerer - POLITICO.com


Racist bastages!

 

[ItHappens]

Democrats schmeocrats! They were, and remain CONSERVATIVES! unless you were home 'sick' the day they discussed political philosophies versus party affiliation in school.

And what if I told you a political philosophy which kept one man dependent on another was just a different form of slavery. What would that make Democrats?

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing you supported George W. Bush as president and further think Sarah Palin is the greatest political mind since Ronald Reagan. I'm making this assumption because I don't believe you have studied history, particularly political history, enough to realize Democrats have not always been Liberals and Republicans have not always been Conservatives.

With that, you still believe that Conservatism, politically speaking, is the right path for society.

The southern Democrats who formed the KKK along with Nathan Bedford Forrest, were Democrats because Lincoln was a Republican. That did not make those Southern Democrats Liberals by a long shot. Lincoln's fight to preserve the federal government and the union of the states did not make him a Conservative by a long shot. Is it getting clearer now?

So you're against all the liberal entitlements which keep one person enslaved to another?

 

[Stephanie]

If they were sincere, they would have formed while Bush was in office. As it is, we never heard of a tea party movement until after the McCain concession speech.

Tea baggers are only missing a hood and a burning cross. Otherwise, an argument defending their long held hatreds and paranoias could be made.

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

It takes a TOTAL moron to misinterpret Tom Tancredo's opening salvo...

Former Representative Tom Tancredo, a Republican from Colorado, told about 600 convention goers in the Nashville ballroom that in the 2008 election President Barack Obama was elected because of "people who could not even spell the word 'vote' or say it in English.'"

Expressing his disappointment that America "put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House ... Barack Hussein Obama." Tancredo went on to suggest that a literacy test be implemented to prevent electoral outcomes in the future.

Suggesting a literacy test is nothing short of calling for a return to Jim Crow laws. Under Jim Crow laws literacy tests were used to prevent blacks from voting during segregation. They were banned by the Voting Rights Act in 1964.

Oh my gawd, Trancredo didn't say people should "take a literacy test" he said people should know Civics literacy before voting.. But don't let that stop you all from making shit up.

 

[Nosmo King]

And what if I told you a political philosophy which kept one man dependent on another was just a different form of slavery. What would that make Democrats?

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing you supported George W. Bush as president and further think Sarah Palin is the greatest political mind since Ronald Reagan. I'm making this assumption because I don't believe you have studied history, particularly political history, enough to realize Democrats have not always been Liberals and Republicans have not always been Conservatives.

With that, you still believe that Conservatism, politically speaking, is the right path for society.

The southern Democrats who formed the KKK along with Nathan Bedford Forrest, were Democrats because Lincoln was a Republican. That did not make those Southern Democrats Liberals by a long shot. Lincoln's fight to preserve the federal government and the union of the states did not make him a Conservative by a long shot. Is it getting clearer now?

So you're against all the liberal entitlements which keep one person enslaved to another?

comment edited out-against rules

What kind of question is that? One person enslaved to another?!? Take your ridiculous premise out of the mix and we'll talk. Frame your question with a predetermined answer and you will never learn anything! I suppose that's your problem right there! No intellectual curiosity.

 

[ItHappens]

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing you supported George W. Bush as president and further think Sarah Palin is the greatest political mind since Ronald Reagan. I'm making this assumption because I don't believe you have studied history, particularly political history, enough to realize Democrats have not always been Liberals and Republicans have not always been Conservatives.

With that, you still believe that Conservatism, politically speaking, is the right path for society.

The southern Democrats who formed the KKK along with Nathan Bedford Forrest, were Democrats because Lincoln was a Republican. That did not make those Southern Democrats Liberals by a long shot. Lincoln's fight to preserve the federal government and the union of the states did not make him a Conservative by a long shot. Is it getting clearer now?

So you're against all the liberal entitlements which keep one person enslaved to another?

Comment edited-against rules

What kind of question is that? One person enslaved to another?!? Take your ridiculous premise out of the mix and we'll talk. Frame your question with a predetermined answer and you will never learn anything! I suppose that's your problem right there! No intellectual curiosity.

A beaten man makes ridiculous statements like you just did and is not worthy of intelligent debate.

 

[Nosmo King]

It takes a special brand of liar (i.e, a typical modern American liberoidal) to make the patently false claim that the tea partyers are in any way "racist." There's not a scintilla of truth in it. So, of course, assbites like Nosmo Queen simply have to keep saying it. Some liberoidals are incapable of speaking at all unless they are deliberately lying.

The dishonest term "tea-bagger" by the way is just an asshole Olberpuke-way of trying to dismiss the opposition he can't refute with logic. Properly understood, tea-baggers tend to be liberoidal Democratics, like Bawney Fwank.

It takes a TOTAL moron to misinterpret Tom Tancredo's opening salvo...

Former Representative Tom Tancredo, a Republican from Colorado, told about 600 convention goers in the Nashville ballroom that in the 2008 election President Barack Obama was elected because of "people who could not even spell the word 'vote' or say it in English.'"

Expressing his disappointment that America "put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House ... Barack Hussein Obama." Tancredo went on to suggest that a literacy test be implemented to prevent electoral outcomes in the future.

Suggesting a literacy test is nothing short of calling for a return to Jim Crow laws. Under Jim Crow laws literacy tests were used to prevent blacks from voting during segregation. They were banned by the Voting Rights Act in 1964.

Oh my gawd, Trancredo didn't say people should "take a literacy test" he said people should know Civics literacy before voting.. But don't let that stop you all from making shit up.

That's still illegal! Show us where any kind of testing, literacy, civics, financial standing, marital, etc. is required for franchise. The only test is citizenship and age.

A political litmus test is something worthy of the Taliban, not a free American citizen.

 

[Nosmo King]

So you're against all the liberal entitlements which keep one person enslaved to another?

comment edited-against rules of the board.

What kind of question is that? One person enslaved to another?!? Take your ridiculous premise out of the mix and we'll talk. Frame your question with a predetermined answer and you will never learn anything! I suppose that's your problem right there! No intellectual curiosity.

A beaten man makes ridiculous statements like you just did and is not worthy of intelligent debate.

I'm not beaten, I'm just too smart to answer loaded questions! Especially when the loading comes from someone who really doesn't think they loaded the question. Try again.

 

[Intense]

1. teabagger 5412 up, 816 down
buy teabagger mugs, tshirts and magnetsmultiple meanings. 1) one who carries large bags of packaged tea for shipment. 2) a man that squats on top of a womens face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex, known as "teabagging" 3) one who has a job or talent that is low in social status 4) a person who is unaware that they have said or done something foolish, childlike, noobish, lame, or inconvenient. 5) also see "fagbag", "lamer", "noob"
Matt baseball, I can't believe he skipped our lan party to go to practice. Yeah, that kid is such a teabagger.

Urban Dictionary: teabagger

 

[Wry Catcher]

A Tea Party Pledge and all the talk about our founding father's vision of America is totally lost on this band of white trash.

In simple terms, they're right wing Republicans having a temper tantrum because they were sent packing by We, the people and they face the harsh reality of becoming a minority in the next half century.

In historical terms, they would be called tories, redcoats and lobsterbacks by our founding fathers. Their protests are sponsored by agents OF the modern day East India Companies.

Our founding father's CREATED a government. The tea-baggers and the 'government is the problem' wingnuts are protesting AGAINST the representation our founders fought for in favor of taxation (fees or payments) without representation BY today's East India Companies...United Health Group, WellPoint, Aetna, Humana, Cigna, Health Net, Coventry Health Care, Amerigroup, Universal American, Centene...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An important milestone in the history of corporations was passed in 1600, when Queen Elizabeth of England granted a charter to the East India Company. The new company enjoyed the relatively new privilege of limited liability: investors would be liable only for the amount they invested in the company, even if total debts exceeded total investments. Limiited liability attracted much greater investment, which was the goal as England strove to create the means to establish colonies and extract wealth from the New World.

Led by the Dutch and British East India companies, corporations gained significant power to shape world trade and transport, the governance of colonies, and even the creation of new laws to benefit their interests - one reason Thomas Hobbes likened them to parasitic worms in the bowels of the body politic in his 1651 political treatise Leviathan.

By 1776, however, one host population was ready to purge its system of parasites. A series of laws, including the Townshend Acts and the Tea Act of 1773-which essentially granted the East India Company a tax-free tea monopoly in the American colonies-helped incite the colonists to revolt against England and form a new republic in which the role of corporations was significantly constrained. In the newly minted United States, state legislatures imposed tight limits on corporations' purposes, the amount of capital they could procure, even how long they could exist. As corporate law expert Robert Hinkley observes, "These restrictions ensured that there was very little corporate abuse of the public interest in this country from the American Revolution to around the time of the Civil War."
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/575

It appears that somebody left one of the parrot's cage doors open...... don't you colorful fowl get tired of denigrating things you don't understand? especially given that the American Public isn't falling for this tired old tactic anymore and all that your continuous name calling accomplishes is turning more of the populace against your repugnant ideology.

You idiots were a lot more entertaining when you were bashing George W. Bush 24x7x365, at least then you had a point.

"...all that your continuous name calling accomplishes is turning more of the populace against your repugnant ideology.
"You idiots... "

 

[MIPS]

A Tea Party Pledge and all the talk about our founding father's vision of America is totally lost on this band of white trash.

In simple terms, they're right wing Republicans having a temper tantrum because they were sent packing by We, the people and they face the harsh reality of becoming a minority in the next half century.

In historical terms, they would be called tories, redcoats and lobsterbacks by our founding fathers. Their protests are sponsored by agents OF the modern day East India Companies.

Our founding father's CREATED a government. The tea-baggers and the 'government is the problem' wingnuts are protesting AGAINST the representation our founders fought for in favor of taxation (fees or payments) without representation BY today's East India Companies...United Health Group, WellPoint, Aetna, Humana, Cigna, Health Net, Coventry Health Care, Amerigroup, Universal American, Centene...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An important milestone in the history of corporations was passed in 1600, when Queen Elizabeth of England granted a charter to the East India Company. The new company enjoyed the relatively new privilege of limited liability: investors would be liable only for the amount they invested in the company, even if total debts exceeded total investments. Limiited liability attracted much greater investment, which was the goal as England strove to create the means to establish colonies and extract wealth from the New World.

Led by the Dutch and British East India companies, corporations gained significant power to shape world trade and transport, the governance of colonies, and even the creation of new laws to benefit their interests - one reason Thomas Hobbes likened them to parasitic worms in the bowels of the body politic in his 1651 political treatise Leviathan.

By 1776, however, one host population was ready to purge its system of parasites. A series of laws, including the Townshend Acts and the Tea Act of 1773-which essentially granted the East India Company a tax-free tea monopoly in the American colonies-helped incite the colonists to revolt against England and form a new republic in which the role of corporations was significantly constrained. In the newly minted United States, state legislatures imposed tight limits on corporations' purposes, the amount of capital they could procure, even how long they could exist. As corporate law expert Robert Hinkley observes, "These restrictions ensured that there was very little corporate abuse of the public interest in this country from the American Revolution to around the time of the Civil War."
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/575

It appears that somebody left one of the parrot's cage doors open...... don't you colorful fowl get tired of denigrating things you don't understand? especially given that the American Public isn't falling for this tired old tactic anymore and all that your continuous name calling accomplishes is turning more of the populace against your repugnant ideology.

You idiots were a lot more entertaining when you were bashing George W. Bush 24x7x365, at least then you had a point.

"...all that your continuous name calling accomplishes is turning more of the populace against your repugnant ideology.
"You idiots... "

Er....Idiots are as idiots do, for example idiots denigrate large swaths of the population that they know nothing about.

Get it now? or do you need a diagram and an instruction manual?