Lol. I am not here to prove anything, really. If you want to debate my points, you need to do your own legwork. Quote this, show that ain't going to fly. Obviously, I cannot possibly show ALL racist or inappropriate posters out there...I gave it a shot and if you know how to use Google you can find more explicit images, if you desire.

One of the top "tea party" officials already resigned over his online racist rant - it's still out there if you search.

Last but not least, Sarah Palin approves of the tea party. If it is not a red flag for you, I don't know what is.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Please educate a simple-minded person such as myself why

 

1) Sarah Palin approves of the tea party and therefore is a red flag

Also, since Robert Byrd was a democrat and also a former klan leader, should that be a red flag when considering voting for a democrat like Obama?  Also, Obama's (former?) pastor of 20 years, pastor Wright, since he supported Obama, isn't that a red flag?  I mean, I wasn't planning on ever using such an argument but since you like these childish games by mentioning Sarah Palin, I figured I could do the same and have you explain why I may be wrong to compare.

2)  Since you mentioned Sarah Palin, can you explain what exactly is wrong with her?  I mean, other than slogans, Saturday Night Live skit quotes, and typical left wing or environmental rants, can you explain to me why Sarah Palin is so horrible that that just her liking an organization makes said organization look bad?

 

I know you try to avoid responding to actual points, but you're the one who came back here so I figured you have an interest to debate.  Your "I'm not here to prove anything" statement makes me wonder why, then, you are here?  Should you try to address the above points please refrain from just posting links.  I will not click on these links.  I realize that every viewpoint out there has some sort of sales presentation out there on some websites.  I had an argument with Anais once about Israel-Palestinian subject and all her arguments were just links to sites that showed the 'horrors' of what Israel had done to Arab children and women, etc.  Of course most of this was out of context, as I'm sure any website pushing a view is going to present a subject.  That's why these forums are a way to see how a rational person can explain his/her viewpoint if he/she actually has a unique viewpoint.  By posting your links you give the appearance of having been brainwashed by some series of presentations you've been subjected to and now you are just repeating 'recruiter'-style one-liners.  It makes me think that deep down, you don't know why you believe what you believe.  So please, explain the above 2 points for me.  If, in explaining your points, you feel the need to slander, please back it up with a legit reason/source, and not vague, derogatory, and unsubstantiated statements.

 

---

I have no opinion on tea party - they are irelevant...

 but what's wrong with palin I know - she's as dumb as a marble table....  I mean simpliest questions .... omg....  and with educational level like hers - no one should operate heavy machinery....

you know I hate clinton beyatch with passion, but that one is an example of a ruthless , smart and educated woman.

Palin might have rudimentary common sense, but is completely screwed in the head with pseudo-Christian crap .....

---

- Независимость - это когда в 20-й раз наступаешь на одни и те же грабли, а русские уже ни при чем....

IntensityInsanity:

Please educate a simple-minded person such as myself why

 

1) Sarah Palin approves of the tea party and therefore is a red flag

Also, since Robert Byrd was a democrat and also a former klan leader, should that be a red flag when considering voting for a democrat like Obama?  Also, Obama's (former?) pastor of 20 years, pastor Wright, since he supported Obama, isn't that a red flag?  I mean, I wasn't planning on ever using such an argument but since you like these childish games by mentioning Sarah Palin, I figured I could do the same and have you explain why I may be wrong to compare.

2)  Since you mentioned Sarah Palin, can you explain what exactly is wrong with her?  I mean, other than slogans, Saturday Night Live skit quotes, and typical left wing or environmental rants, can you explain to me why Sarah Palin is so horrible that that just her liking an organization makes said organization look bad?

 

I know you try to avoid responding to actual points, but you're the one who came back here so I figured you have an interest to debate.  Your "I'm not here to prove anything" statement makes me wonder why, then, you are here?  Should you try to address the above points please refrain from just posting links.  I will not click on these links.  I realize that every viewpoint out there has some sort of sales presentation out there on some websites.  I had an argument with Anais once about Israel-Palestinian subject and all her arguments were just links to sites that showed the 'horrors' of what Israel had done to Arab children and women, etc.  Of course most of this was out of context, as I'm sure any website pushing a view is going to present a subject.  That's why these forums are a way to see how a rational person can explain his/her viewpoint if he/she actually has a unique viewpoint.  By posting your links you give the appearance of having been brainwashed by some series of presentations you've been subjected to and now you are just repeating 'recruiter'-style one-liners.  It makes me think that deep down, you don't know why you believe what you believe.  So please, explain the above 2 points for me.  If, in explaining your points, you feel the need to slander, please back it up with a legit reason/source, and not vague, derogatory, and unsubstantiated statements.

 

But before I educate you any further, did you learn about the tea party official resigning for being racist? And the idiotic teabagger posters? You keep asking for new stuff, and I keep providing you with facts, and then you don't acknowledge it, and just move on to the next topic. I'll spill the beans about Sarah Palin and her idiocy, once you acknowledge that the tea party official resigned for being a racist...

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

 

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

By the way, the judge who struck down parts of this bill is a liberal appointee.  In your topic about a gay judge deciding a gay case, this is clearly a conflict of interest.  Thoughts?

On Palin..  I am certainly not a fan.  However, Palin (or any other visible political fiigure) is on record with thousands of opinions, has endorced hundreds of candidates, and supported or opposed a tremendous amount of legislation.  There are stances among all those things that I would agree with.  I guarantee you, Anton, there are some that you would agree with. Its a shame you have to oppose what you agree with, just because it was supported by Sara Palin.

On the racist guy resigning...  I don;t know the story in all honesty, but I will take your word for it.  I would ask you though, how many people do you think have resigned for the same reasons from political movements and parties, corporations, religious or political institutions, etc, etc, for precisely the same reason?  Sounds to me, by your logic, if you extend the accusation to all other members/employees of all these organizations, the word "racist" ceases to have meaning.  It means simply "human".  With that definition, I can more clearly understand your position

---

"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher

KGBMan:

I have no opinion on tea party - they are irelevant...

 but what's wrong with palin I know - she's as dumb as a marble table....  I mean simpliest questions .... omg....  and with educational level like hers - no one should operate heavy machinery....

you know I hate clinton beyatch with passion, but that one is an example of a ruthless , smart and educated woman.

Palin might have rudimentary common sense, but is completely screwed in the head with pseudo-Christian crap .....

 

Again, as usual, just same old crap, "Sarah Palin is an idiot", etc.  I've heard this many times.  KGB, why bother repeat it.  Are you a parrot?  If you cannot explain why she is an idiot, and give concrete examples, then why bother posting trash.  I described a challange above:  to explain, once and for all, why Sarah Palin is so horrible.  So instead, all you write is that she is dumb as a marble table.  Really?  That's the best you can do?  You read my post above and all you could do is compare her to a marble table?  I'm not impressed.

Again, I am not a big Sarah Palin fan.  I honestly don't know much about her.  The few things I do know, that I've read, that I've seen in interviews, I liked.  She supports Israel, and a few other issues of interest to me.  I really want to know why some leftists out there (or even non leftists) hate her.  But no one can ever explain.  All I hear is trash talk like what you and Anton write.  That's so lame dude...

 

 

---

Egor:

By the way, the judge who struck down parts of this bill is a liberal appointee.  In your topic about a gay judge deciding a gay case, this is clearly a conflict of interest.  Thoughts?

On Palin..  I am certainly not a fan.  However, Palin (or any other visible political fiigure) is on record with thousands of opinions, has endorced hundreds of candidates, and supported or opposed a tremendous amount of legislation.  There are stances among all those things that I would agree with.  I guarantee you, Anton, there are some that you would agree with. Its a shame you have to oppose what you agree with, just because it was supported by Sara Palin.

On the racist guy resigning...  I don;t know the story in all honesty, but I will take your word for it.  I would ask you though, how many people do you think have resigned for the same reasons from political movements and parties, corporations, religious or political institutions, etc, etc, for precisely the same reason?  Sounds to me, by your logic, if you extend the accusation to all other members/employees of all these organizations, the word "racist" ceases to have meaning.  It means simply "human".  With that definition, I can more clearly understand your position

yes, Egor, liberal = gay. You got it!

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

II, let me try.. Although i don't have as pathological and powerful hatred for her as Anton and KGBman do, I don't like her because she does not seem knowledgeable or intelligent an any issue. I can google "dumb palin quotes" and start posting them here, but you and I both know you can do this with any public figure.  Hers, though, are more flagrant, and don;t have to be polled out of context from thousands of speeches.  They are in every other sentence of every speech someone else did not write, and extremely flagrant. I may agree with her (as you do) on a number of issues.  However, I feel that these are forced by the political niche she wants to carve out for herself, often not genuine, are not conclusions of personal intellect (or worse, are), and therefore not trustworthy in any high-stakes game like politics.  To me she is the flip side of Hillary Clinton, a cut-throat appeaser of electorate without substance, except of considerably lower intellect.  If you do want quotes, I can do that.

 

---

"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher

AHTOH:

yes, Egor, liberal = gay. You got it!

Analogy was if gay judge is biased in a gay case, liberal judge is biased in a liberal challange to a conservative bill. 

But nontheless, thanks for the attempt at a strawman argument.  Always entertaining

---

"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher

AHTOH:

But before I educate you any further, did you learn about the tea party official resigning for being racist? And the idiotic teabagger posters? You keep asking for new stuff, and I keep providing you with facts, and then you don't acknowledge it, and just move on to the next topic. I'll spill the beans about Sarah Palin and her idiocy, once you acknowledge that the tea party official resigned for being a racist...

 

Ok, I went and read the link of the 'official' resigning.  I have decided that I will NOT acknowledge that is a racist.  Perhaps in your definition he is a racist, but then again, so am I, Egor, and heck, every white person in the tea movement.  In fact, all those who don't support Obama are racists.  So hey, I am a proud racist then.  Truth is, you have abused the 'racist' word to the point that you have completely devalued it.

But about this 'official', let's see what his crime of 'racism' was.  Quotes from your article:

 

"Last week Williams penned an inflammatory blog post that erupted into a national controversy and fueled debate about the Tea Party movement and racism. Williams later defended the post as satire."

 Ok, so let's evaluate.  We know he wrote something, and someone accused these writings of being racist.  Williams claims it was satire.  Ok, let's read further:

<qyote of Williams> "The media coverage over a recent satirical posting on my personal MarkTalk.com blog risks injuring the Tea Party Express, the tea party movement as a whole, and the people in this movement who I respect and admire so much," Williams said in resignation letter released Friday. "It has become increasingly unacceptable that the media and our domestic enemies continue to anoint me as the official voice of a massively diverse and broad-based movement."

 

Ok, so the resignation doesn't mean he is guilty.  It is common practice that the accused (of racism) in today's society must usually resign for the better good of the group he/she represents ~regardless~ of whether the accusations were true or not.

So, since we are not going to use his resignation as evidence that he is indeed a racist, we have to really dig deeper and find out what it is he said, and discern for ourselves whether or not it was racist enough to label this human being as a racist.  Let's continue:

The article continues:

"Williams wrote the incendiary blog post in response to an NAACP resolution that called on Tea Party leaders to crack down on racist elements in the movement."

Ok, so he was responding to NAACP, who in itself is a racist organization.  National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. This organization is racist even by the title itself.  I'm sure if we reversed things and formed a white organization that did exactly what NAACP does you would be screaming racism.

Ok, but let's actually get to what Williams wrote:

<from the article> "Dear Mr. Lincoln," began the fictional letter posted by Williams. "We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!"

 

This is what makes you label this man a racist?  Seriously?  Do you really just take his racism for granted like that? Deep down, Anton, reading the satire above (please don't deny that that is satire, it is quite clear) do you honestly in your heart feel that you aren't lying to others or yourself by saying that this man is a true racist?  You really don't see his comments as actually a response to the propaganda and lies organizations like NAACP/jessie jackson/al sharpton spread to blacks?  I honestly do believe that the worst enemy of blacks in this country is the very same black leaders and organizations that are keeping blacks inside a box.  A box of false illusions, lies, and most importantly, addiction to these policies - all in return for a vote.

 

But, I digress.  Let's continue with the article:

 

<article quote> Williams went on to write that the Tea Party movement couldn't be racist because it opposed government bailouts for Wall Street banks and big corporations. "Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn't that what we want all Coloreds to strive for?" the posting said. "What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bailouts directly to us coloreds!"

 

Like Egor, I was going to take your word for this racism charge but I figured it wouldn't hurt to actually read the article.  Which perhaps you didn't read?  Because only a retard would read the article and continue not only saying that Williams is a racist, but also the entire organization is racist.  Because of a satirical article that is arguably even anti-racist, actually calling out the other organizations as being the racist ones?  Seriously, Anton?  You are really going to stick with this direction?  Are you in too deep with your rants for you to acknowledge that you have provided NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER of racism from this Williams guy?

 

Even if he was a racist, it wouldn't make the whole organization racist.  But you have even failed to show that this one guy is racist.  But since you do claim this, it makes me lose 100% respect for your use of racist.  Now I know that there is no value in this word when it comes penned from you.  By the way, if you allow yourself to use Williams as an anchor to accuse all tea party people as racists, then MOST CERTAINLY I can accuse Obama and all his voters of being racist because Obama spent 20 years listening to the rantings of a REAL racist, pastor Wriight. But of course, I don't really make such connections.  I am just showing you that I would have far more right to do so with Obama-Wright then you with your completely non-racist case with Williams.

 

So, Anton, please educate me.  I am waiting eagerly on what your next brilliant point will be.  Who will be the next person to be accused of racism?  What other news do you have for us white folk who just all day long gnash our teeth, over all those blacks walking around, free of being slaves.  Oh, how horrible.  By the way, I forgot to mention that if I remember correctly, you're white too, aren't you?  Well, that means you too are a racist, right?  Because a white person just can't not be racist.  Wait, you voted for Obama, so maybe you're not a racist.  Good thing you voted for him.  That was smart.  Otherwise I would be certain that you were a racist.

 

 

 

---

II, so you typed all of this and haven't bothered to see what the dude wrote on his blog? I didn't ask you to comment on the CNN article. I sort of assumed you would have foresight to so to the blog and see that the fuss is all about...My bad.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

II, so you typed all of this and haven't bothered to see what the dude wrote on his blog? I didn't ask you to comment on the CNN article. I sort of assumed you would have foresight to so to the blog and see that the fuss is all about...My bad.

 

The blog is no longer there, but I did find the entire post on a (leftist) website.  Here it is:

<quote>

Dear Mr. Lincoln

We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!

In fact we held a big meeting and took a vote in Kansas City this week. We voted to condemn a political revival of that old abolitionist spirit called the ‘tea party movement’.

The tea party position to “end the bailouts” for example is just silly. Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn’t that what we want all Coloreds to strive for? What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us coloreds! Of course, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is the only responsible party that should be granted the right to disperse the funds.

And the ridiculous idea of “reduce[ing] the size and intrusiveness of government.” What kind of massa would ever not want to control my life? As Coloreds we must have somebody care for us otherwise we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions!

The racist tea parties also demand that the government “stop the out of control spending.” Again, they directly target coloreds. That means we Coloreds would have to compete for jobs like everybody else and that is just not right.

Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government “stop raising our taxes.” That is outrageous! How will we coloreds ever get a wide screen TV in every room if non-coloreds get to keep what they earn? Totally racist! The tea party expects coloreds to be productive members of society?

Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house. Please repeal the 13th and 14th Amendments and let us get back to where we belong.

Sincerely

Precious Ben Jealous, Tom’s Nephew NAACP Head Colored Person

 

<end quote>

 

So, there you have it.  This doesn't change my point.  Clearly you didn't learn in school what satire is.  Otherwise we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

So, Anton, where's all the education you've been promising me?

---

IntensityInsanity:

AHTOH:

II, so you typed all of this and haven't bothered to see what the dude wrote on his blog? I didn't ask you to comment on the CNN article. I sort of assumed you would have foresight to so to the blog and see that the fuss is all about...My bad.

 

The blog is no longer there, but I did find the entire post on a (leftist) website.  Here it is:

<quote>

Dear Mr. Lincoln

We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!

In fact we held a big meeting and took a vote in Kansas City this week. We voted to condemn a political revival of that old abolitionist spirit called the ‘tea party movement’.

The tea party position to “end the bailouts” for example is just silly. Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn’t that what we want all Coloreds to strive for? What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us coloreds! Of course, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is the only responsible party that should be granted the right to disperse the funds.

And the ridiculous idea of “reduce[ing] the size and intrusiveness of government.” What kind of massa would ever not want to control my life? As Coloreds we must have somebody care for us otherwise we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions!

The racist tea parties also demand that the government “stop the out of control spending.” Again, they directly target coloreds. That means we Coloreds would have to compete for jobs like everybody else and that is just not right.

Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government “stop raising our taxes.” That is outrageous! How will we coloreds ever get a wide screen TV in every room if non-coloreds get to keep what they earn? Totally racist! The tea party expects coloreds to be productive members of society?

Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house. Please repeal the 13th and 14th Amendments and let us get back to where we belong.

Sincerely

Precious Ben Jealous, Tom’s Nephew NAACP Head Colored Person

 

<end quote>

 

So, there you have it.  This doesn't change my point.  Clearly you didn't learn in school what satire is.  Otherwise we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

So, Anton, where's all the education you've been promising me?

II, satire is something you and I post here on this dingy forum. We are unknown nobodies, and we are free to post pretty much any marasmatic crap, for kicks. When one is elected to represent a company or a political movement, they must excercise proper judgement and restraint. To "represent", in other words. While I also find the blog posting slightly entertaining I do not think it was proper for him to post that, considering his position with the "party". This is also why he resigned. He posted a stupid "satire" which undoubtedly borders on racist humor. But forget that deusche, he is gone now, but it shows what sort of people are "elected" within tea party. People like Ron Paul or Sharon Angle (the "tea party" candidates). This is why I say the "party" as a whole does not display a whole lot of intelligence. Not in their "messages", nor in their" ideas", not "members" and "represenatives". But if you like the people who fancy themselves after the Boston Tea Party event, yet support Texas Republicans apologizing to British Pertoleum, it's your right. By all means, everyone can freely partake in self-delusion.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

II, satire is something you and I post here on this dingy forum. We are unknown nobodies, and we are free to post pretty much any marasmatic crap, for kicks. When one is elected to represent a company or a political movement, they must excercise proper judgement and restraint. To "represent", in other words. While I also find the blog posting slightly entertaining I do not think it was proper for him to post that, considering his position with the "party". This is also why he resigned. He posted a stupid "satire" which undoubtedly borders on racist humor. But forget that deusche, he is gone now, but it shows what sort of people are "elected" within tea party. People like Ron Paul or Sharon Angle (the "tea party" candidates). This is why I say the "party" as a whole does not display a whole lot of intelligence. Not in their "messages", nor in their" ideas", not "members" and "represenatives". But if you like the people who fancy themselves after the Boston Tea Party event, yet support Texas Republicans apologizing to British Pertoleum, it's your right. By all means, everyone can freely partake in self-delusion.

 

Anton, now you are dodging.  I never argued that as a leader or representative of an organization it was smart to post satire.  But we aren't discussing this.  You said that this man is a racist, he resigned for BEING a racist, and YOU (not me) used THIS GUY (not someone else) as an argument that tea party is RACIST.

 

Now you switch position, and say that, "see I was right.  It is stupid to write such satire given his position.".  True, that it was not wise.  However, this doesn't make him a racist and I feel it is disrespectful of you to ANYONE who has ever experiences racism as well as to ME (because I am debating with you) that you clearly were proven wrong about this racial accusation and yet you continue to maintain your point, just using switch tactics.  How about you openly acknowledge that you showed NO evidence of racism and an apology for your abuse of the racist word.  Because I actually do know people have have been subjected to racism and your rants are a disgrace to these people as well as myself.  Shame on you, Anton for using the racist term as a mere tactic to silence counter-arguments and points of view that differ from yours.

 

Honestly, at this point I no longer have interest to debate this topic anymore.  You have failed to prove ANY points or address ANY issues I have brought up, and to be honest, I already exhausted all my political debate energy a few years ago with the likes of Snake or Anais.  I remember you as a highly intelligent person so I figured I will make the effort to discuss with you here again these old issues, because perhaps you had something new and interesting to bring to the table.  But you don't.  It's the same old crap, spews of racist accusation with no evidence, and no other valid points.  Just a few third-grade level ideas, which as just repeated talk points, with no substance to connect the dots.  On somethings you are right, merely because if I throw mud randomly into the street, eventually I'll hit a few people.  Doesn't make me a good shot, now does it?

---