Not white? Sorry, you can't be student council presidentFollow

That wasn't too long compared to other threads where the amount of paragraphs were closing in on spam.

Because I was deleting the stuff you quoted in your first reply as you wrote it, therefore I dismissed everything besides "You don't provide evidence." I at least linked an article that had a good chunk of citations in it to support the position that Teabaggers are racist. You kept going on and on about how that had nothing to do with the topic of discussion at hand, which I already agreed to and edited the OP hours ago to fix it.

Therefore, anything said about that is no longer relevant, and no longer worth wasting my time. Or yours, for that matter, but you seem to really love wasting time here, so don't let me stop you.

I read one book of hers, and I want the time spent reading it back in the form of an extra six-hour nap.

You're absolutely right. Thank you for pointing this out to me.

I want what Smash smokes.

I was under the impression it was the other way around. The R's didn't want to be associated with the wing-nuts so they craftily gathered them all together under the grouping tea-baggers (who, in their right mind, would make their own movement and call it tea-bagging???)

Yeah, I think Elinda is smoking something...

No, I'm not. I was responding to Smash.

Um... Because they didn't call it that? Even if you didn't know that the label was created by a smallish number of liberal commentators in order to denigrate the Tea Party movement and was then picked up (amid much snickering) by the major news networks), you were halfway through the Occam's Razor bit on your own. Of course they wouldn't!

Regardless of how and why, the reality is that the platform and ideas of the Tea Party has resonated with a large number of people. And it's not about racism or bigotry, no matter how desperately the left wants those things to be associated with them. The central theme of the Tea Party is fiscal responsibility. Small government. Smaller taxes. It's not rocket science.

The problem is that somewhere along the line, the left associated big government with civil rights. Thus, many people who've accepted that association simply automatically condemn any opposition to big government as a violation of civil rights. Think about how often conservatives are called bigots, not because they did anything to hurt someone based on some minority group, but purely because they oppose some spending program or benefit aimed at a minority group. It happens so often that I suspect most people don't even notice when they make the switch mentally.


The OP is a great example. A clearly racist act is just assumed to be associated with conservatives. Why? Not because conservative principles have a darn thing to do with bigotry, but because conservative principles oppose big government programs.

Helps to convince himself he is, though, and that's what he's all about.

It doesn't make Joph right either. What does make me right is a timeline of the events. The movement was called the Tea Party. They had a tax day event in which the proposed that people send tea bags to Washington. Someone made a joke sign saying something like "Tea bag them before they Tea bag us". Whether or not the sexual connotation of the joke was apparent to the person who wrote it or not is irrelevant. The liberal media (specifically Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow) picked that up and began calling them "teabaggers", and that term got picked up by the mainstream media as well.

The Tea Party never called themselves teabaggers. Once again though, we have the left finding some small example to make a joke out of and then extending a label to an entire group of people. But I guess when you don't have any actual principles to base your positions on, you have to do everything you can to denigrate those who do.

This is a post in which I assert that I, too, have seen Napoleon Dynamite.