Drifting by the Storm

MookiesLawMookiesLaw Posts: 158
edited February 2012 in A Moving Train
Assuming it's ok to start a thread on this as i'm not discussing moderator actions.

The term Tea bagger doesn't horribly offend me. What it does do though is the same thing it does when i see someone call a democrat a "libtard" or a supporter of OWS a "occutard". It makes me realize that the individual is not interested in honest or reasonable debate, nor are they interested in acting like an adult. These people can't win a debate or discuss issues reasonably based on facts alone so they resort to the above tactics and i prefer not to engage them in conversation.

Do we call Democrats "jackasses" whenever referring to them because they have chosen a donkey as their party animal, and thus conveniently deciding its not an insult but is simply calling them what they've set themselves up for by their own actions. See how ridiculous that line of thinking is?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Well, ? I hate to say this however, this is the mentality of your train riders. Us occutards and libratards welcome intelligent humans to our fight, together, and we want YOU to hop a good train. :lol:
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,430
    MookiesLaw wrote:
    Assuming it's ok to start a thread on this as i'm not discussing moderator actions.
    I notice the moderator didn't discuss their actions either and I'm glad. The reason the last thread on this topic was locked should be obvious. I think we should all consider giving the mods a break and giving each other a break. We're all adults so lets discuss things as adults. If we want to joke around a little, fine humor is a good thing now and then but that's not the same as picking fights. If we want to post here, we are obliged to post by the rules. If we want to post anything and everything we want to we should post on an anarchist site.

    Have a great weekend everyone. Peace. Listen to Love Boat Captain. Be safe.
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • brianlux wrote:
    MookiesLaw wrote:
    Assuming it's ok to start a thread on this as i'm not discussing moderator actions.
    I notice the moderator didn't discuss their actions either and I'm glad. The reason the last thread on this topic was locked should be obvious. I think we should all consider giving the mods a break and giving each other a break. We're all adults so lets discuss things as adults. If we want to joke around a little, fine humor is a good thing now and then but that's not the same as picking fights. If we want to post here, we are obliged to post by the rules. If we want to post anything and everything we want to we should post on an anarchist site.

    Have a great weekend everyone. Peace. Listen to Love Boat Captain. Be safe.
    I've never had a problem with the Mods. I do have a problem when threads are closed and debate is stifled though just because certain people can't abide by the rules and show respect towards their fellow Jammers even when we disagree Politically.

    I see no reason why this can't be discussed in a civil manner, hence my post. Civil, non confrontational and with respect to anyone that wishes to participate in a reasonable manner.

    Happy Friday all.
  • CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    i never really got the whole "tea bagger" thing. we had a name for this whole racist redneck shit before. republican.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    MookiesLaw wrote:
    The term Tea bagger doesn't horribly offend me. What it does do though is the same thing it does when i see someone call a democrat a "libtard" or a supporter of OWS a "occutard". It makes me realize that the individual is not interested in honest or reasonable debate, nor are they interested in acting like an adult. These people can't win a debate or discuss issues reasonably based on facts alone so they resort to the above tactics and i prefer not to engage them in conversation.

    Same with when people say "Obamacare".
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    I read many of the threads here. Often, I'd like to jump in on some of the conversations, but sometimes they turn divisive, dismissive, inflammatory, meanspirited, and...sort of pointless, in the end.

    Despite the (good?) intentions.

    Isn't the whole point of this place to foster healthy debate? Maybe not change minds, but learn and understand and maybe even respect different views in a constructive way?
  • the title of this thread, regardless of post content, will get it locked. if you really want open discussion, you'd have named it something that hasn't been banned in the past.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • the title of this thread, regardless of post content, will get it locked. if you really want open discussion, you'd have named it something that hasn't been banned in the past.

    The original thread was locked prior to me being ale to participate in it. I have changed the Thread title to something that as far as i'm aware has not been banned in the past.

    Feel free to participate.
  • hedonist wrote:
    I read many of the threads here. Often, I'd like to jump in on some of the conversations, but sometimes they turn divisive, dismissive, inflammatory, meanspirited, and...sort of pointless, in the end.

    Despite the (good?) intentions.

    Isn't the whole point of this place to foster healthy debate? Maybe not change minds, but learn and understand and maybe even respect different views in a constructive way?
    Yes, very true. People need to put aside partisan bickering and focus more on what is actually being discussed which would then create more reasonable and interesting debate.
  • MookiesLaw wrote:
    hedonist wrote:
    I read many of the threads here. Often, I'd like to jump in on some of the conversations, but sometimes they turn divisive, dismissive, inflammatory, meanspirited, and...sort of pointless, in the end.

    Despite the (good?) intentions.

    Isn't the whole point of this place to foster healthy debate? Maybe not change minds, but learn and understand and maybe even respect different views in a constructive way?
    Yes, very true. People need to put aside partisan bickering and focus more on what is actually being discussed which would then create more reasonable and interesting debate.

    that barely happens when you have people facing each other in person, nevermind on a message board. I have gotten carried away at times, and I've been "timed out" for it a couple times. I've learned my lesson. But some don't.

    most people have something meaningful to say. unfortunately, in emotional and extremely divisive topics, those aren't the ones that get noticed.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    hedonist wrote:
    I read many of the threads here. Often, I'd like to jump in on some of the conversations, but sometimes they turn divisive, dismissive, inflammatory, meanspirited, and...sort of pointless, in the end.

    Despite the (good?) intentions.

    Isn't the whole point of this place to foster healthy debate? Maybe not change minds, but learn and understand and maybe even respect different views in a constructive way?

    Yeah, I'm in total agreement. I wasn't going to post on this thread because I'm sick of combativeness lately. It's why AMT gets a bad reputation, from the inflammatory and mean-spiritedness on here. This thread surely will get locked.
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    CH156378 wrote:
    i never really got the whole "tea bagger" thing. we had a name for this whole racist redneck shit before. republican.
    is this kind of what the point is ... you just took an entire political persuasion and labeled it
    something terrible ... like you can't see clearly the individual.

    We are all individuals and should stop labeling ...

    this done mostly out of contrary and hate
  • What the Hell?

    Is this like throwing up my Bat Wings spot light for your thread or something?

    what the hell?

    lol
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • OK... so as I recall the history...

    When the president was first elected, a group of non-specifically upset and mostly-rightwing people made a stab at attention with what really was - I'll admit this - a very clever public disobedience rally.

    They wanted to harken back to the days of the Boston Tea Party where the people revolted being taxed without having any political representation. It was part of what lead to the revolutionary war and was one of the coolest moments in American History.

    So much so that it's picture is still on the Snapple bottle. I think. It was... do they still make Snapple?

    Anyway.

    This group said they were having a TEA Party and said that "TEA" stood for "Taxed Enough Already" which many people agree with. I personally think that some Americans are, in fact, taxed enough and I think others aren't taxed nearly enough. But I digress.

    Their one mistake was not opening up Urban Dictionary before their press release when they said they were going to "Tea Bag Obama." And an internet meme was born. You see, the younger generation and most sexually active people know that "Tea Bagging" is also a name for a sexual act. And the liberal press had a Field Day with making all the Tea Bagging jokes, often accompanied by a rather unfortunate picture of an older woman wearing a hat that had two tea bags dangling from it, looking like... well... testicles. Which is what is involved in the sexual act called "Tea Bagging."

    The Tea Party realized their mistake a bit too late, suddenly tried to disavow their original use of the term "Tea Baggers" (Which THEY CALLED THEMSELVES AT FIRST) and in their 180° tail spin, claimed that it was the evil "Libturds" who had called them that and started up the phony indignation machine.

    IT didn't help that many of the subsequent Tea Party rallies had some hysterical moments, including people dressed wearing powdered wigs, Uncle Sam costumes, goofy hats and garish Red/White/Blue ensembles. And lots of video with a few of them edited to make it look like they were all extremely clueless, didn't even have a vague grasp on issues and would say things like "get your government hands off my medicare" or "I hate socialism" while they were taking the public transit.

    I figure the people of the Tea PArty have suffered enough and I'm willing to stop using terms like "Tea Turd" and "Bagger" and "Moran*" but I reserve the right to at least laugh at people who complain about a "Socialist, Communist, Fascist Emperor" which is a contradiction in so many terms is rips a hole in the time/space continuum.








    *the term "moran" comes from a picture of a man at a Tea Party rally holding a sign saying "Get a Brain Morans!" with the word "moron" very obviously misspelled.
  • brandon10brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    A little note to add to the thread. The people that are being called teabaggers choose to be part of that group. People that are black, hispanic, white, gay, handicapped, asian, or jewish do not have a choice.

    So please do not equate being called teabagger with names like faggot or coon. It's not at all the same. It's not even in the same ballpark.
  • brandon10 wrote:
    A little note to add to the thread. The people that are being called teabaggers choose to be part of that group. People that are black, hispanic, white, gay, handicapped, asian, or jewish do not have a choice.

    So please do not equate being called teabagger with names like faggot or coon. It's not at all the same. It's not even in the same ballpark.

    +1
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    teabagger

    1. A fascist right-wing conservative who opposes affordable healthcare by shouting at public gatherings.

    2. A fascist conservative who protests living wages, affordable healthcare, and corporate accountability by dipping his nutsack into the mouth of another right-wing moron.

    3.A teabagger also often fails to acknowledge that George W. Bush and his neo-conservative minions perpetrated one of the boldest and most egregious executive power grabs in the history of the United States. Furthermore, teabaggers mistakenly continue to blame a newly elected President Obama for all that ails the United States of America, based on a grossly flawed perception of reality (including latent racial prejudice) and despite the fact the U.S. economy collapsed on the previous administration's watch.

    4.A conservative republican who protests against income taxes by rubbing their nutsacks in each other's faces.

    5.Teabaggers are also known to base their misguided, right-wing-media-inspired beliefs about President Obama on stupid conspiracy theories about totalitarian takeovers, FEMA camps, etc., despite the fact these very same theories have been circulating around on the Internet for years, and were originally ascribed to neo-conservative cabalists at a time when Barack Obama had not even entered national politics. Teabaggers also are known to be particularly paranoid, xenophobic and intolerant, especially with regard to immigrants and anyone who isn't white.

    6.Naive dreamers who think that capitalism is some kind of romantic exchange of goods between the farmer John Wayne and the horse breeder Gary Cooper, and the dominion of monopole corporations and banks is "socialism".

    7.Allegedly they don't want government involved with your everyday life - except when it comes to gay marriage (FORBID IT!) and all the other things that make baby Jesus cry.
  • CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    8.A douche who whines about govt spending after his party went on a spending rampage with bankrupt policies and morals, a party that started a war for no reason and who spends money only to protect the rich.

    Crazy teabaggers who make less than 50K are getting bent over desks and screwed by Republican millionaires but then they whine about how the Democrats are hurting them.

    9.A person who believes that wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on war and tax cuts is okay and that criticizing the president automatically makes you an anti-American traitor, but only if the president is a white Republican. If the president is a black Democrat, it's suddenly okay to brandish assault weapons at his rallies, call him a communist socialist Marxist racist Nazi terrorist nigge...whoops, Muslim. Teabaggers are typically obese inbred southern WASPs who are still upset that they lost the Civil War. Most of them can't spell worth a damn and think "nuclear" is pronounced "nookyular". Despite what they say, 99% of teabaggers are white and Republican.
  • I reserve the right to at least laugh at people who complain about a "Socialist, Communist, Fascist Emperor" which is a contradiction in so many terms is rips a hole in the time/space continuum.

    Actually,
    TEXTBOOK, HISTORICAL Socialism
    IS
    Communism.

    The ONLY difference between Textbook Historical Socialism and it's not so "cutesie" counterpart, Communism is a disagreement over the METHOD OF REVOLUTION.
    PERIOD.
    Communists believed that the capitalist system could withstand internal political pressure and that the only method of achieving REVOLUTION was through VIOLENT CONFLICT.

    Socialists believed that over a long enough period, the internal pressures brought to bare on the Capitalist system ALONE would be enough, and that REVOLUTION could be achieved through an internal NON-VIOLENT reaction of the masses against their government. In other words, through the use of propaganda and social planning, by having their socialist agents infiltrating capitalist governments, media corporations, and educational institutions, that they could gradually superimpose their system on top of the capitalist one, and that over time the capitalist system could be weakened enough and driven far enough in to the red through deliberately reckless policy and overturning of moral values that THE PEOPLE WOULD RISE UP PEACEFULLY AND SAY "WE'VE HAD ENOUGH". (btw, doesn't this sound a WEE bit like what we have going on now? wink wink)

    The only REAL difference between Socialism\Communism (LITERALLY IDENTICAL except for THE MEANS OF REVOLUTION) and Fascism is the METHOD OF CONTROL OF PRODUCTION.
    In a Socialist\Communist system the money flows directly through the government, which outright owns and runs production. In a Fascist system, the sly devils ascribe the planning power directly to their own corporations which more or less ignore\have in their back pocket the government, except for the rules that they themselves (the owners of industry) want to have the government impose on "the market" (barriers to entry against competition).

    Essentially, in Socialism\Communism, the State Owns Production
    and in Fascism, Production Owns the State (though this is usually obscured from the "common folk").
    Either way, it is the same situation, with an elite dictating down to the masses and running production.

    Given that the United States is still in a hybrid state ...
    in other words ... the Elite One World planners who so desperately want technocratic control over the globe (the same breed that worked through the Fabian Socialist Party of yore, and who were the money behind Communism of the early 20th Century) have done enough to work their political will in to US policy (since at LEAST McCarthy's day) that it has more than a few planks of the Communist Party installed but lacks the glaringly obvious framework that many expect of an outright Socialist\Communist country ... while still maintaining the some of the functional framework of capitalism ... but capitalism run in such a Crony \ Top Down, Central Monetary Planning method that it could HARDLY be called "Free Market" "Capitalism" ... it would almost RIGHTLY SEEM that the United States Political Economy IS some sort of hybrid Socialist-Fascist eocnomy.

    To go EVEN FURTHER, if you try to research "WHAT IS FASCISM", you will start to see that it is POORLY DEFINED FROM THE OUTSET, stems from a more insular\isolationist economic world view (lets face it, most Fascist economies in recent history have been nations AT WAR with a larger set of nations, and is usually the primary reason they are both fascist - imminent need for government control - and insulated - all production is desperately needed WITHIN the country ... if they aren't at war, they usually were JUST PREVIOUSLY, and the "Fascism" is a political hold over\throw back) ... essentially "Fascism" as an ECONOMIC TERM is more nebulous than not ... and the concrete differences between Fascism (as popularly understood) and Socialism\Communism ARE RELATIVELY FEW (and also poorly defined)

    Go ahead.
    Try it.
    Actually try and ARTICULATE enough differences in terms to rip that space time continuum apart. I'm big in to macrocosmic-quantum (talk about a contradiction) anomalies!

    :D:D:D
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • I reserve the right to at least laugh at people who complain about a "Socialist, Communist, Fascist Emperor" which is a contradiction in so many terms is rips a hole in the time/space continuum.

    Actually,
    TEXTBOOK, HISTORICAL Socialism
    IS
    Communism.

    The ONLY difference between Textbook Historical Socialism and it's not so "cutesie" counterpart, Communism is a disagreement over the METHOD OF REVOLUTION.
    PERIOD.
    Communists believed that the capitalist system could withstand internal political pressure and that the only method of achieving REVOLUTION was through VIOLENT CONFLICT.

    Socialists believed that over a long enough period, the internal pressures brought to bare on the Capitalist system ALONE would be enough, and that REVOLUTION could be achieved through an internal NON-VIOLENT reaction of the masses against their government. In other words, through the use of propaganda and social planning, by having their socialist agents infiltrating capitalist governments, media corporations, and educational institutions, that they could gradually superimpose their system on top of the capitalist one, and that over time the capitalist system could be weakened enough and driven far enough in to the red through deliberately reckless policy and overturning of moral values that THE PEOPLE WOULD RISE UP PEACEFULLY AND SAY "WE'VE HAD ENOUGH". (btw, doesn't this sound a WEE bit like what we have going on now? wink wink)

    The only REAL difference between Socialism\Communism (LITERALLY IDENTICAL except for THE MEANS OF REVOLUTION) and Fascism is the METHOD OF CONTROL OF PRODUCTION.
    In a Socialist\Communist system the money flows directly through the government, which outright owns and runs production. In a Fascist system, the sly devils ascribe the planning power directly to their own corporations which more or less ignore\have in their back pocket the government, except for the rules that they themselves (the owners of industry) want to have the government impose on "the market" (barriers to entry against competition).

    Essentially, in Socialism\Communism, the State Owns Production
    and in Fascism, Production Owns the State (though this is usually obscured from the "common folk").
    Either way, it is the same situation, with an elite dictating down to the masses and running production.

    Given that the United States is still in a hybrid state ...
    in other words ... the Elite One World planners who so desperately want technocratic control over the globe (the same breed that worked through the Fabian Socialist Party of yore, and who were the money behind Communism of the early 20th Century) have done enough to work their political will in to US policy (since at LEAST McCarthy's day) that it has more than a few planks of the Communist Party installed but lacks the glaringly obvious framework that many expect of an outright Socialist\Communist country ... while still maintaining the some of the functional framework of capitalism ... but capitalism run in such a Crony \ Top Down, Central Monetary Planning method that it could HARDLY be called "Free Market" "Capitalism" ... it would almost RIGHTLY SEEM that the United States Political Economy IS some sort of hybrid Socialist-Fascist eocnomy.

    To go EVEN FURTHER, if you try to research "WHAT IS FASCISM", you will start to see that it is POORLY DEFINED FROM THE OUTSET, stems from a more insular\isolationist economic world view (lets face it, most Fascist economies in recent history have been nations AT WAR with a larger set of nations, and is usually the primary reason they are both fascist - imminent need for government control - and insulated - all production is desperately needed WITHIN the country ... if they aren't at war, they usually were JUST PREVIOUSLY, and the "Fascism" is a political hold over\throw back) ... essentially "Fascism" as an ECONOMIC TERM is more nebulous than not ... and the concrete differences between Fascism (as popularly understood) and Socialism\Communism ARE RELATIVELY FEW (and also poorly defined)

    Go ahead.
    Try it.
    Actually try and ARTICULATE enough differences in terms to rip that space time continuum apart. I'm big in to macrocosmic-quantum (talk about a contradiction) anomalies!

    :D:D:D


    just a guess. you have a lot of cats, don't you?
  • I reserve the right to at least laugh at people who complain about a "Socialist, Communist, Fascist Emperor" which is a contradiction in so many terms is rips a hole in the time/space continuum.

    Actually,
    TEXTBOOK, HISTORICAL Socialism
    IS
    Communism.

    The ONLY difference between Textbook Historical Socialism and it's not so "cutesie" counterpart, Communism is a disagreement over the METHOD OF REVOLUTION.
    PERIOD.
    Communists believed that the capitalist system could withstand internal political pressure and that the only method of achieving REVOLUTION was through VIOLENT CONFLICT.

    Socialists believed that over a long enough period, the internal pressures brought to bare on the Capitalist system ALONE would be enough, and that REVOLUTION could be achieved through an internal NON-VIOLENT reaction of the masses against their government. In other words, through the use of propaganda and social planning, by having their socialist agents infiltrating capitalist governments, media corporations, and educational institutions, that they could gradually superimpose their system on top of the capitalist one, and that over time the capitalist system could be weakened enough and driven far enough in to the red through deliberately reckless policy and overturning of moral values that THE PEOPLE WOULD RISE UP PEACEFULLY AND SAY "WE'VE HAD ENOUGH". (btw, doesn't this sound a WEE bit like what we have going on now? wink wink)

    The only REAL difference between Socialism\Communism (LITERALLY IDENTICAL except for THE MEANS OF REVOLUTION) and Fascism is the METHOD OF CONTROL OF PRODUCTION.
    In a Socialist\Communist system the money flows directly through the government, which outright owns and runs production. In a Fascist system, the sly devils ascribe the planning power directly to their own corporations which more or less ignore\have in their back pocket the government, except for the rules that they themselves (the owners of industry) want to have the government impose on "the market" (barriers to entry against competition).

    Essentially, in Socialism\Communism, the State Owns Production
    and in Fascism, Production Owns the State (though this is usually obscured from the "common folk").
    Either way, it is the same situation, with an elite dictating down to the masses and running production.

    Given that the United States is still in a hybrid state ...
    in other words ... the Elite One World planners who so desperately want technocratic control over the globe (the same breed that worked through the Fabian Socialist Party of yore, and who were the money behind Communism of the early 20th Century) have done enough to work their political will in to US policy (since at LEAST McCarthy's day) that it has more than a few planks of the Communist Party installed but lacks the glaringly obvious framework that many expect of an outright Socialist\Communist country ... while still maintaining the some of the functional framework of capitalism ... but capitalism run in such a Crony \ Top Down, Central Monetary Planning method that it could HARDLY be called "Free Market" "Capitalism" ... it would almost RIGHTLY SEEM that the United States Political Economy IS some sort of hybrid Socialist-Fascist eocnomy.

    To go EVEN FURTHER, if you try to research "WHAT IS FASCISM", you will start to see that it is POORLY DEFINED FROM THE OUTSET, stems from a more insular\isolationist economic world view (lets face it, most Fascist economies in recent history have been nations AT WAR with a larger set of nations, and is usually the primary reason they are both fascist - imminent need for government control - and insulated - all production is desperately needed WITHIN the country ... if they aren't at war, they usually were JUST PREVIOUSLY, and the "Fascism" is a political hold over\throw back) ... essentially "Fascism" as an ECONOMIC TERM is more nebulous than not ... and the concrete differences between Fascism (as popularly understood) and Socialism\Communism ARE RELATIVELY FEW (and also poorly defined)

    Go ahead.
    Try it.
    Actually try and ARTICULATE enough differences in terms to rip that space time continuum apart. I'm big in to macrocosmic-quantum (talk about a contradiction) anomalies!

    :D:D:D


    just a guess. you have a lot of cats, don't you?

    My GF has 2, which I tolerate well.
    I'm not that warm on cats, but i like Kat alright.
    More of a Dog person myself, but its whatevs.

    Why?
    Cuz i type too much?
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
Sign In or Register to comment.