Teabaggers’ Delicate Feelings
Apparently teabaggers are up in arms because of a 2-month-old quote by president Obama where he used the term “teabaggers.” Jake Tapper gives us the quote in question:
Three days after he decried the lack of civility in American politics, President Obama is quoted in a new book about his presidency referring to the Tea Party movement using a derogatory term with sexual connotations.
In Jonathan Alter’s “The Promise: President Obama, Year One,” President Obama is quoted in an November 30, 2009, interview saying that the unanimous vote of House Republicans vote against the stimulus bills “set the tenor for the whole year … That helped to create the tea-baggers and empowered that whole wing of the Republican Party to where it now controls the agenda for the Republicans.”
John Cole explains again, for 1,345,679th time that teabagger is a term that they came up with themselves. They even sold buttons about how proud they are to be teabaggers. But yes, liberals and others use the term mockingly to describe them. Hey, they’re the ones that called themselves after a sexual act.
This outrage is getting rather old though. In case you don’t remember, teabaggers are the ones who carried around signs equating Obama to Hitler. They are the ones who call Obama a socialist, a tyrant, a fascist and usurper. They are the ones who go around making billboards that say “Where is the Birth Certificate?” For years before that even Republican leaders don’t even use the term “Democratic Party” instead use the ungrammatical “Democrat Party.” Republicans even circulated a petition in their own party to rename the Democratic Party to the “Democrat Socialist Party.”
So really, pardon my lack of civility if I use the term teabagger to mock you. This the atmosphere you created. If it offends you, good, you deserve it. Once you discover that you have value for political correctness (calling people by the term they prefer to call themselves) then perhaps we can have a conversation about who’s respectful and who’s childish.
Tags: Manufactured Outrage, Teabaggers
“In case you don’t remember, teabaggers are the ones who carried around signs equating Obama to Hitler.”
Right. Because that never happened to any other president before.
At least in the prior instance, JustMe, the comparison was apt.
New polling on the teabaggers:
Most people aren’t paying attention to the TP. People who are paying attention are much more likely to hate it rather than love it.
Because Teabaggers are racists, and mainstream America isn’t.
More say they like it less, rather than more, as they hear more about it.
That’s going to be a problem for Republicans in November.
I saw bumper sticker on my way into work this morning sayin “Remember Remember the Second of November.” Ah, a teabagger! Unfortunately for him he was surrounded (not purposefully) by four cars all with Obama stickers. I laughed.
As predicted rage, outrage and the interest of old people is easy to start and hard to maintain.
So when a GOP leader refers to Barack Obama by a crude name such as is suggested here, you will have no problem with it, right? And you will consider it acceptable for the media to use that term to refer to Obama by that epithet with a wink and a grin, right?
GOP leaders already refer to Obama by rude and disrespectful names. The point of the post is that the teabaggers demand you call them by their preferred name while calling others names. They’re freaking hypocrite crybabies.
UI we’ve been over this before, the term “teabagger” didn’t originate with the tea party movement. But please feel free to link everyone to the Rachel Maddow clip that doesn’t prove your point, or to the two articles you’ve posted before that don’t prove your point.
“They’re freaking hypocrite crybabies.”
Not that there’s anything wrong with that…
Yep, it did.
Miz… it did. The Teabaggers named themselves teabaggers.
Further proof:
http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/17643
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-03-11/news/0903100736_1_tea-bags-tea-party-protest
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/4/9/204940/8378
http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/001140/
Accept it Miz.
You can’t really appreciate what a fuckwad Rhymes with Right is by merely reading his comments here. For a full-fledged wahmbulance call on this issue — “boo-hoo-hoo, I’m being called names!” — check out his sniveling web site.
DD, holding up a tea bag, sending tea bags to politicians, and refering to “tea bags” or even one person holding a sign that says “teabag them before they teabag you” is not the same as a movement naming themselves “teabaggers.”
I can’t believe we have to rehash this topic, can’t you just post the thread from the last time we went over this?
Got it. It’s OK for Tea Whatevers to call other people any names they want, but it’s a mortal insult to call them Tea Baggers.
Look, Mizundastood, there’s an easier way to make your case, to wit: Teabagging requires that at least one party have balls. Nobody in the Tea Party set has any. Therefore, they cannot be teabaggers. Q.E.D.
Geezer, FTR-like 99.99% of Americans, I’m not a supporter of the Tea Party movement. I do, however, support any American’s right to protest, dissent, or otherwise exercise their right to free speech, even speech I think sucks balls.
There’s certainly more than one sign calling themselves teabaggers. Yep, completely ignore the pic I posted or more pics at the link. Reality is what you make it, am I right?
Free speech includes the right to give insulting names to groups one disagrees with. Without that, the entire radio talk industry would evaporate. BTW, the Tea Party claims 18% who consider themselves members.
Look the issue here is whether or not demonizing your opponent is a good thing. Either it is or it isn’t. You cannot make one set of rules for you (i.e. I can compare Bush to Hitler because I think comparison is apt) and other for your opponents (i.e. you cannot call Obama a socialist because I do not think the comparison is apt.)
Everyone is doing the country a disservice with the vitriol. You want to argue about who’s right and wrong and why that’s fine but stick to substance. Everything else isn’t helping.
“Look the issue here is whether or not demonizing your opponent is a good thing. Either it is or it isn’t.”
Wrong. It could be a neutral thing — neither good nor bad, or both good and bad.
Some of us realize that, without any adjectives, it’s just a thing. It exists, therefore we must deal with it.
“Everyone is doing the country a disservice with the vitriol. You want to argue about who’s right and wrong and why that’s fine but stick to substance. Everything else isn’t helping.”
Helping what? I have no interest in debating anything with the conservative trolls who visit, because they are not persuadable. It’s a waste of effort. What do they care what a bunch of liberals call them? Surfing over here and trolling in the comments is a pretty good working definition of people going out of their way to find something to be offended about.
Everyone is doing the country a disservice with the vitriol. You want to argue about who’s right and wrong and why that’s fine but stick to substance. Everything else isn’t helping.
That’s the problem, JustMe, the Tea Partiers have no substance. All they have is anger, vitriol, and misinformation. That’s why they’re not a real political party. They’re just a collection of sore-loser conservatives who are unwilling to call themselves Republicans anymore. I would love to stick to substance and debate real policy points with them, but they don’t have any. The whole “movement” is nothing more than an incoherent bitchfest held together only by an overriding resentment and hatred of Obama, and liberals in general.
UI you said they came up with the term themselves. That, again, is not true. Holding up a tea bag is not labeling yourself a “teabagger” and one person holding a sign that says “teabag” is not labeling yourself, and certainly doesn’t label an entire movement, as “teabaggers”.
The idea that the Tea Party labeled themselves “teabaggers” simply is not true. Here’s the NRO link that you’ve posted several times in the past as proof that the movement labeled itself “teabaggers”:
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=Mjk1YmRjNzIxNmUwMTI0ZWYxZWU4OWU2MzFiOWJmNDE=
Again, one protester with a sign that says “teabag” is a far cry from a movement labeling itself “teabaggers”. Note how Norlinger correctly points out how that one sign set the media off on their “teabagger” tangent.
Once again, ignore the picture right here in the post because you don’t like it. Oh well. You can’t talk to a brick wall.
UI, that picture is from November of 2009, a full 7 months AFTER Keith Olbermann was using the term “teabaggers”.
That picture doesn’t prove at all that Tea Partiers came up with the term themselves.
A sign that reads “ballroom dancing tonight” = dancers
A sign that reads “Bike for the cure” = bikers
A sign that reads “Skating rocks” = skaters
And a sign that reads “tea bag them before they teabag you” = ???
pan again, one protester with one sign doesn’t equal the Tea Party movement labeling themselves “teabaggers”. And using the term “teabag” doesn’t equal labeling the movement “teabaggers”.
I know you refuse to believe it miss, but it was more than one protestor with one sign. It was the Free Republic boards that started it. There is also another pic in one of the links, from back in Feb./March 2009, something like “Teabagger for Jesus.”
You’re going to have to do your own research however. You won’t though. You’ll just believe that KO made up the word for them and then the teabaggers started handing out pins calling themselves that, because they take orders from Olbermann or something.
How tiresome to be re-litigating this bit of bullshit again.
A guy holding up a sign telling the world to “Teabag a Liberal before they Teabag You”, is specifically calling for his fellow travelers to teabag a liberal. You can’t construe that any other way. If you are asking your fellow travelers to teabag anybody — then you are identifying yourself specifically with people who do this thing — a teabagger.
Just pretending that this guy’s sign means something else is just plain ignorant — and, frankly, an argument you will have a much easier time with over at Delaware Politics, perhaps.
miz, not enough people watch Olberman for him to have started the trend of the teabagz.
cass and UI, you guys arent thinking like a teabag. IN order to understand the Teabag, one must put themselves in the reality of a mesh paper sack filled with dry darjeeling…. or probably sassafras in their case. (i prefer oolong or sencha)
Now close you eyes and imagine…
Obama was not born in America… Sarah Palin is the best possible president since Reagan….Glenn Beck is a wise sage who knows all about American History….. brown people can have their citizenship stripped away and 3….2….1…
A sign that says “I am a proud teabagger” means “no more government takeover” and a sign that reads “you are a teabagger” means a crude sex act. see how easy?
“Wrong. It could be a neutral thing — neither good nor bad, or both good and bad.”
Completely disagree. Fighting words are useful if you intend to provoke a fight not calm things down. However, you’ve missed the point I was trying to make. That is you need to apply the rules evenly to yourselves and your opponents if you want any sort of credibility.
“Some of us realize that, without any adjectives, it’s just a thing. It exists, therefore we must deal with it.”
Deal with it yes but demonization isn’t helpful and you know that.
“Helping what? I have no interest in debating anything with the conservative trolls who visit, because they are not persuadable. It’s a waste of effort. What do they care what a bunch of liberals call them? Surfing over here and trolling in the comments is a pretty good working definition of people going out of their way to find something to be offended about.”
Helping to calm things down. Am I the only one who isn’t happy with the endlessly shrill rhetoric? It’s one thing to call your opponent wrongheaded it’s entirely different to liken them mass murders and tyrants and decry them as evil. I disagree with DL on most issues but I come here so I don’t get stuck in an echo chamber of people who think like me. The problem is I can’t have any sort of reasoned discourse here b/c I’m immediately pegged as this or that and all conversation ends. If that’s not what this place is for, fine. I’ll move on. If it isn’t what is DL here for?
“That’s the problem, JustMe, the Tea Partiers have no substance. All they have is anger, vitriol, and misinformation. That’s why they’re not a real political party. They’re just a collection of sore-loser conservatives who are unwilling to call themselves Republicans anymore. I would love to stick to substance and debate real policy points with them, but they don’t have any. The whole “movement” is nothing more than an incoherent bitchfest held together only by an overriding resentment and hatred of Obama, and liberals in general.”
And I think you’re simplifying things. From my perspective they’re people who think they pay enough in taxes already and are concerned with the size and moreover scope of government. They want to reduce government meddling in their everyday affairs and stop the endless spending. Just my $.02