What's The Difference Between The Teabaggers and The Republican Base?

We've found out now that their dissatisfaction with the tax system is that poor people don't pay enough. That would make them conservative Republicans who've spilled the beans on conservative Republicanism.

No, apparently, they also have a list of "grievances" that contains a bunch of vague, flowery, terms like "protect the constitution (#1 with a bullet on their list).

Odd for a group that claims to be completely de-centralized and recognizes no formal leader to suddenly have a platform.

And I guess their plan for 'protecting' the Constitution is to magically conjure up a process where their 20% can dictate to the rest of us what the Constitution does and doesn't mean.

I mean, it's amazing, isn't it, that what the Constitution really means is what they and their faction just happen to themselves support!! How convenient!!
 
It's the left that promotes this term. The Tea Party movement does not use it.

Well, not anymore since they figured out that it has sexual connotations.

It has become the N-word equivalent to demean those who are involved in Tea Parties.

Pfft! Get a grip. Mocking people for their political beliefs isn't quite the same thing as mocking someone for their race.

No wonder you teabaggers are so unhinged with this massive martyr complex you have.
 
Who the hell is still reading the NYT anyway? Probably the same fruitcakes still finding Gary Trudea relevant.
 
Yep, they're a group that in many ways compares to the individuals we often encounter who deny being Republican, proclaim themselves Independents, and yet vote Republican 99.9% of the time.

An all too familiar phenomenum.

It's anecdotal, but I am from an area that has a pretty conservative set of Democrats (pro-life, but not sole issue voters on the matter, etc). I don't know of a single democrat who has joined the teaparty.

I think the consensus is that "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck".

I have to give credit to Armey and the people that stood up the teaparty movement though, they needed to do something to muddy the waters after Obama was elected with such a high degree of popularity among independents.

Now their attempts to run interference are becoming detrimental. The GOP still has no real platform and that's going to hurt them in 2010 if they don't fix it. Steele has just now realized it.

I think what we'll see, and are already seeing, is a greatly magnified version of the old run to the right in the primaries, run to the center in the general. McCain is exhibiting that in all its splendor.

Oh, and Palin fans? J D Hayworth has at least slightly closed the gap with McCain since Palin went down to campaign for McCain. Palin failin', once again. lol
 
And BTW... TUCK FULANE.

Go TIGERS!!!! Why the hell does Tulane still have an atheltic program? They couldn't beat Newman.
 
And I guess their plan for 'protecting' the Constitution is to magically conjure up a process where their 20% can dictate to the rest of us what the Constitution does and doesn't mean.

Exactly. Just like "activist judge" = "judge whose opinions I don't agree with". Hey, I am not a Scalia fan, but occasionally he makes a decision I like. I wouldn't deem him to be an "activist judge" simply because 99% of the time I disagree with his views, and I respect his position in determining the law of the land.

I mean, it's amazing, isn't it, that what the Constitution really means is what they and their faction just happen to themselves support!! How convenient!!

It's the usual cognitive dissonance that I pointed out on the other thread. If the constitution was a document that wasn't debatable, we wouldn't need the Supreme Court. In fact, we could basically put the country on autopilot.

Once you start splitting hairs, eventually no two people are going to agree on 100% of what the constitution says.

That's why "Protect the Constitution" is a useless plank. And that was #1.

Give me a break.
 
Let's put it this way, the first time I heard the term, was when Maddow used it about a year ago, the classless individual that she is.

Anyone who uses it is a classless buffoon, in my book.


It's the left that promotes this term. The Tea Party movement does not use it.

It has become the N-word equivalent to demean those who are involved in Tea Parties.

Anyone who thinks 'teabagger' is equivalent to ****** deserves to be demeaned.
 
Let's put it this way, the first time I heard the term, was when Maddow used it about a year ago, the classless individual that she is.

Anyone who uses it is a classless buffoon, in my book.


It's the left that promotes this term. The Tea Party movement does not use it.

It has become the N-word equivalent to demean those who are involved in Tea Parties.

Anyone who thinks 'teabagger' is equivalent to ****** deserves to be demeaned.

how enlightened of you. :lol:
 
The simple fact that the teaparty movement has you let-wing loons so unhinged means their on to something. You goofs can't efectively counter their anti-big governement and anti-multi-trillion $$ annual deficits platform so you resort to the tired old left-wing tactics... the race card, the homophobe card, the lies, etc.

I for one, love watching it.
 
Last edited:
And I guess their plan for 'protecting' the Constitution is to magically conjure up a process where their 20% can dictate to the rest of us what the Constitution does and doesn't mean.

Exactly. Just like "activist judge" = "judge whose opinions I don't agree with". Hey, I am not a Scalia fan, but occasionally he makes a decision I like. I wouldn't deem him to be an "activist judge" simply because 99% of the time I disagree with his views, and I respect his position in determining the law of the land.

I mean, it's amazing, isn't it, that what the Constitution really means is what they and their faction just happen to themselves support!! How convenient!!

It's the usual cognitive dissonance that I pointed out on the other thread. If the constitution was a document that wasn't debatable, we wouldn't need the Supreme Court. In fact, we could basically put the country on autopilot.

Once you start splitting hairs, eventually no two people are going to agree on 100% of what the constitution says.

That's why "Protect the Constitution" is a useless plank. And that was #1.

Give me a break.

True.

By the time a case gets to the Supreme Court, in all likelihood there is no 'right' or 'wrong' answer. That's why you see all those 5 -4 or 4-5 decisions along political lines.
 
Let's put it this way, the first time I heard the term, was when Maddow used it about a year ago, the classless individual that she is.

Anyone who uses it is a classless buffoon, in my book.


It's the left that promotes this term. The Tea Party movement does not use it.

It has become the N-word equivalent to demean those who are involved in Tea Parties.

Anyone who thinks 'teabagger' is equivalent to ****** deserves to be demeaned.


Anyone who continues to use a vulgar expletive against a group of people who are peacefully exercising their constitutional rights deserves to be called on it.

You are what you are: a mean spirited bigot (with an extreme fixation on male genitalia).
 
The simple fact that the teaparty movement has you let-wing loons so unhinged means their on to something. You goofs can't efectively counter their anti-big governement and anti-multi-trillion $$ annual deficits so you resort to the tired old left-wing tactics... the race card, the homophobe card, the lies, etc.

I for one, love watching it.

We're unhinged? We're not the people running around in the street with teabags hanging off our hats, crying to the heavens that the sky is falling.

I guess the fact that President Obama has the teabaggers so unhinged means HE"S onto something.

oops.:lol:
 
Anyone who continues to use a vulgar expletive against a group of people who are peacefully exercising their constitutional rights deserves to be called out.

"Call-out" away. I don't give fuck. If you think your irrelevant insults ("shiteater"? Really? Was that the best you guys could do?) is going to stop me from using the term teabagger (a totally relevant insult since the teabaggers came up with it), you are mistaken.

You are what you are: a mean spirited bigot (with an extreme fixation on male genitalia).

Mocking someone's political beliefs is not being a "bigot", but since you don't know the difference, I can see why you are so confused.
 
It's the left that promotes this term. The Tea Party movement does not use it.

It has become the N-word equivalent to demean those who are involved in Tea Parties.

Anyone who thinks 'teabagger' is equivalent to ****** deserves to be demeaned.


Anyone who continues to use a vulgar expletive against a group of people who are peacefully exercising their constitutional rights deserves to be called on it.

You are what you are: a mean spirited bigot (with an extreme fixation on male genitalia).

Well, I'm glad I held off awarding my Ironic Post of the Week award till the last minute...
 
The simple fact that the teaparty movement has you let-wing loons so unhinged means their on to something. You goofs can't efectively counter their anti-big governement and anti-multi-trillion $$ annual deficits so you resort to the tired old left-wing tactics... the race card, the homophobe card, the lies, etc.

I for one, love watching it.

We're unhinged? We're not the people running around in the street with teabags hanging off our hats, crying to the heavens that the sky is falling.

I guess the fact that President Obama has the teabaggers so unhinged means HE"S onto something.

oops.:lol:

We also don't go into convulsions when someone dares to insult our political beliefs.

Hey, I guess being a liberal (or not a neo-con) in the 9-11 years and having every idotic term in the book thrown at us gave us thicker skin.
 

Forum List

Back
Top