Teabaggers vs. Progressives

[lyonspotter]

I understand the hatred of the teabagger movement on DU (much of it is justified in all its complexity and various forms of argument). But I'd like to speak in their defense for a moment if only to praise the love of liberty and freedom. But first, a full disclosure:

I voted against all republican presidential candidates as soon as I was old enough, as while I was a child in the 80s I developed an intrinsic hatred for the policies of Reagan/Bush...I voted for Clinton in 96, Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, etc... but this isn't about me specifically, nor is it about voting...(and what is of note: Olbermann doesn't vote, so are you going to discount what he says based on the fact he doesn't vote?)...

It is about people on the Right who are finally (and I mean FINALLY) becoming aware that what Bush has done has been continued into a new administration... Where is the repeal of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the removal of our troops from an illegal war in Iraq, etc., etc., etc?! We wanted CHANGE! It has not been delivered. Don't say, 'give Obama more time.' It didn't take much time at all for him to go against the promises he spoke of, such as repealing the "Patriot" Act which is an assault on liberty. He was in support of its re-authorization and Bush's tyrannical revised FISA.

My hope, I repeat, my hope...is that we can see passed the left-right paradigm long enough in order to remember that what the Founding Fathers envisioned in terms of human liberty has been greatly assaulted and transgressed. It is a shame that the Democratic Party has not repudiated Bush's attack on our Democracy, but has cowed to the tyranny that Bush imposed... Let us remember as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson both similarly expressed, "A republic that is willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserves neither and will lose both." This is what I see in the teabagger movement, that sentiment. And if only the teabaggers and progressives could unite in the common goal of restoring our rights, we would be ever so much the more powerful to have a government that finally exists to serve us and not the other way around!

[sinkingfeeling]

1. You haven't paid much attention to what the tea baggers are saying then. They strongly support

the Patriot Act and FISA. They object to spending any tax dollars on the citizens of this country and would be OK if we started a 3rd. war with either Iran or North Korea.

[lyonspotter]

2. Perhaps you and I are both...

...cherry-picking the statements/sentiments of teabaggers. Those I have heard have followed the line of Ron Paul on the issues you just noted. FISA is in violation of the 4th amendment for example, and therefore is unconstitutional and should be repealed in its current form.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. SOME of the teabaggers are Ron Paul folks

The vast majority are crazy far right wingnuts.

[Ter]

42. I think almost half are Ron Paulites

The Patriot Act is poison to them. Many believe a 9/11 conspiracy as well, and blame Bush!

[lyonspotter]

45. Yep. nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

54. Perhaps where you live

Here the vast majority are not Ron Paul followers. They are just the insane far right fringe.

[cali]

65. you forgot racist. they're largely insane far right racist fuckwads.

[lyonspotter]

67. Not all of them...

...yes, many of them.

But what I have been doing by initiating this thread is to show that it is a non sequitur to hold that those in the teabagger movement who want our rights restored do so only as a result of racism. What about all the African Americans involved in the movement?

Some just want the changes made to our rights to be reverted back to what the Constitution held before Bush pushed for so many changes. If you think all people in the movement are racists, you have grouped all the people into one category, which is eerily similar to how racism works.

[proud2BlibKansan]

83. "ALL" the African Americans involved in the movement?

ROFLMAO

Better tell them to come on out and show themselves. Where they been hiding?

:rofl:

[lyonspotter]

84. Well...

F o r E x a m p l e: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2byjQjTvFyA

At 0:40-0:45.

You don't have to believe what his stated soundbite position is, but he is in fact African American, and is expressing his concerns in concert with the overall teabagger movement.

A lot here on the left see the white bigots on youtube and think that these people comprehensively represent the entire movement.

[proud2BlibKansan]

85. One guy?

BFD.

What is it with teabaggers and numbers? They lie about how many showed up on 9/12 and now we are to believe that ONE African American makes this a diverse group?

This crap makes my brain hurt.

[lyonspotter]

86. Right, "one guy."

Are you seriously going to make me go to youtube?

If you don't want to believe, I don't suspect it matters how many times I give you answers to your questions.

[lyonspotter]

87. Dig around...there's more where this came from...

So much for for the argument that the teabagger movement is based on racism! Is KRS-One racist when he speaks against Obama? Is Alan Keyes? People who are African American are opposed to Democratic policies that continue the Bush policies, and not because of race. You've swallowed the race propaganda ---> hook, line, sinker.

Here's "one girl": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV6bNpNU4ls











http://www.nikolasschiller.com/blog/index.php/archives/2009/09/12/4118/

http://www.nikolasschiller.com/blog/index.php/archives/2009/09/12/4118/

[proud2BlibKansan]

96. Alan Keyes is an insane lunatic who disowned his own daughter because she was gay

I'm sure there were a few Jews who supported Hitler's policies too.

And since you like to post pictures from teabag rallies, here are a few more:

[lyonspotter]

99. You are completely, completely missing my point...

...you don't have to agree with any of their positions. You may very well think these people are insane.

But how does it make any sense to argue that these African Americans are motivated by racism as to why they joined the Bagger movement?

That's the point! You can't just say, all baggers are racists......unless you want to sound like a a simpleton.

[proud2BlibKansan]

111. I never said they were all racists

You must be mixing me up with someone else you are arguing with in this thread.

[Raineyb]

114. There's always been a small number of black people who throw their

lot in with racists. So what?

[lyonspotter]

115. The 'so what' in all this is...

...that the teabagger movement at its inception professed that the government has enacted an assault on the Constitution. Because many here on DU see their dissatisfaction with Obama as steeped in racism, I provided a bunch of images that show that African Americans are making similar statements as the whites are making at these rallies and marches, against the control the government has exacted since Bush, and that is likewise ongoing now. Black people are not allowed to say such things? No, they are. And it shows the movement is not necessarily based on race.

Yes, some racist people have joined the bagger movement, because racists invariably do exist. I've met some racist Democratic Party supporters too, believe it or not. If you saw an African American at a rally against Bush, would you assume racism motivated his/her presence there?

The bagger movement started off as an initiative based largely on the ideas professed by Ron Paul. I followed the movement at its inception because I really appreciated the speeches of Ron Paul, and figured that if there weren't a Dennis Kucinich around, Paul would be my second choice.

[Raineyb]

116. Having a sprinkling of self hating, venal and or just plain stupid black people

in their otherwise racist gatherings does not preclude them from being racist. As I said there has always been a small group of black people who are perfectly willing to allow themselves to be used by the people of the teabaggers ilk just so people like you will say "See there are black people in the crowds the larger group can't be racist." Well they can be and are and having a few token black faces in the crowd does not change their racist rhetoric nor does it seem to stop them from holding up their racist signs. As they cannot manage not to keep their racism under wraps even for the few token black people they actually have there shows exactly how racist they are. I generally explain black teabaggers the same way I would explain black Bush supporters; as morons who are willing to be used for a few bits of silver.

BTW, I don't need you or anyone else to lecture me about the number of racists in this country or the party for that matter. I am all to familiar with it thank you very much. Being black in this country does tend to make it rather obvious at a fairly young age.

[lyonspotter]

120. Wow, actually...

(thought experiment) ...after reading this rant, I believe you might very well be a racist. You have said some assumptive and hateful things toward black people above, all of whom you do not know. It is presumption at its finest.

(dose... of... own... medicine... above...)

I stated things above in that way to show that you really can't know the motivations and internal thoughts of a person. You have to go on what they argue. The African Americans at the rallies are carrying signs, for example, that express disapproval of policy. Is KRS-One racist when he says that Obama is just a political puppet that works for the banks, Military Industrial Complex, and insurance companies, just as bush did? No, he is expressing a political sentiment. Beyond that, if you have nothing more in the form of evidence, I won't find the argument very convincing.

[LeftishBrit]

137. Ron Paul is terrible on almost all issues!

Says that 'just because someone needs health care doesn't mean they have the right to it' (and he's a *doctor*!) Opposes even the relatively limited social safety net that America has now. Still opposes the Voting Rights Act. Hard-right-libertarian on economic issues, yet anti-choice for women. Ultra-nationalist xenophobe. Etc.

I have an essay in my journal about the dangers of Ron Paul, and why a non-American should even worry about an American politician who will probably never be president. And the reason is *exactly* the point in this thread: that anything that tempts progressives to think that they can make alliances with or support far-right-wingers is an extreme danger that could lead to the rise of so-called 'anti-establishment' far-RW groups, even true neo-fascists, to power.

At least Ron Paul opposed the Iraq war, even if for all the wrong reasons. Most 'teabaggers' don't even do that.

[LeftishBrit]

136. He probably means 'both' by 'all'

After all, the BNP just got its first non-white member. Anyone can be a lunatic, whatever their race, ethnicity or religion.

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. Yes I agree

[rantormusing]

69. If that was true,

he would have done a lot better in this last election.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. My problem with them is hypocrisy. Astroturf (funded by Armey et al), not grass roots, often.

And you get many people who benefit from the very things they are supposedly against - so any elderly tea baggers who gladly accept medicare are being dishonest and hypocritical to not want others who are in need to get help. And it is the over the top, divisive hyperbole - holocaust signs, threats of violence against Obama.

So not as black and white as you lay out.

[lyonspotter]

4. With respect to hypocrisy...

How can we say that we are not hypocrites as well? We in the democratic base are generally outspoken against innocent life being killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. The most glaring example of our hypocrisy is that of partial-birth abortion. What is more innocent and defenseless than a human life in the mother's womb?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lyonspotter]

8. I'm not a 'we' or a 'them'...

I am someone who believes killing innocent human life is wrong, trying to maintain a consistent view of human beings in Iraq or in the womb as deserving a right to life. Do you believe killing is wrong?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lyonspotter]

29. Not a "troll"...

How simplistic!

I just don't buy - hook, line, and sinker - every single ideologically divisive point of either party.

[lame54]

30. But you sure like to ask those "have you stop beating your wife" questions

[lyonspotter]

32. Wow...

If we are relegating the issue of "is killing wrong" to be in the same camp of questions, then I am somewhat dumbfounded. I believe it is a question everyone must ask and think about.

A person shouldn't be forced to choose between being ant-war and anti-abortion. I believe all killing is wrong. Being against the party on one issue - that of abortion - doesn't make anyone a troll.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lyonspotter]

20. I'm not a bagger...

But I'm certainly a hypocrite, as I think all people fall short of what they know is right. I'm not an exception to this.

And in that sense, I would like you to flesh out how it is morally right for a woman to choose to kill innocent human beings, just because it is her "choice."

Again, I believe killing of all human life is wrong. That's my position. I am anti-war, and anti-abortion. Does that mean I can't be a supporter of the Democratic Party? That means I must be a wingnut or a 'bagger'?

I am not a teabagger, but I don't think they have everything "wrong" as many here think they do. I believe they are very wrong in supporting Bush's wars, yet opposing the wars when Obama carries them forward. I have opposed the violence at both ends and against both administrations. It is not a "just" war just because our guy is in the WH.

[annabanana]

72. a fetus that cannot survive outside the womb is not a human being

it is "protohuman" at best

[lyonspotter]

73. A child removed prematurely at 5 months can still survive with

great medical assistance. The medical assistance is not a womb, and yet we would still call that which was prematurely removed a human being.

It isn't an elephant.

[annabanana]

74. medical assistance is dark sided

[lyonspotter]

75. Huh?

When did we start talking about Star Wars?

[proud2BlibKansan]

97. You are actually comparing a premature birth with a late term abortion?

Please don't tell me you're a male. If you are, this conversation is over.

[lyonspotter]

101. No, that is not what I compared...

...I established that when a premature "entity" comes out of the womb at 5 months and is sustained through medical assistance, we do in fact it a "human being". The commenter tried to assert that we should not call the fetus a human being until the mother gives birth, arguing (in short) that it is just a parasitic cluster of cells.

That I am male has nothing to do with this. I believe I should speak out against the killing of people in Iraq, and that has nothing to do with being male either.

In stating that you will terminate this discussion with me just because I am male, I would ask for you to consider whether you are treating me with a similar form of bigotry that you assume all men have when they want to protect the innocent lives of babies. Men can and should defend the innocent lives of those being massacred elsewhere around the world such as Iraqi women, men, and children, and there is no exception to the current subject either based on gender.

[proud2BlibKansan]

110. So now it's an "entity" and not a baby?

I meant what I said about men. Unless it's your baby you have no right to tell a woman she can't have an abortion. Until men can get pregnant I don't care to discuss abortion with them, especially the ones who think they have the right to tell a woman what to do with her body.

[leftynyc]

102. Question

Are you prepared to charge and sentence a woman who has an abortion for murder?

[lyonspotter]

105. Hah, been watching Tweety?

Do you believe the fetus is not a human being? Would you kill a human being? Would you feel you should be charged if you murdered a human being?

Let's flesh this out then......I would say for consistency's sake, that if it is a crime to commit murder, there would need to be some form of punishment. If I killed a person, there would be repercussions.

Do you believe Bush needs to be prosecuted for his illegal wars and the deaths of all the innocents, not to mention those he tortured in violation of international law? I believe we very much have need for lawful repercussions for crimes.

[leftynyc]

109. I don't need Chris Matthews

to know the anti-choice argument is a crock of shit. So you do think that women should be arrested, charged, convicted and perhaps even executed (it is pre-mediated) for an abortion. Cuz the rest is just posturing. And in answer to your question, no I don't think it's murder because until the fetus can survive outside the womb, it's not a person in my eyes..

Your question about bush is off topic and besides the point. He wouldn't be convicted of anything in a US court and we don't belong to the World Court.

[lyonspotter]

112. The argument...

...that abortion is not murder, as you say, "because...the fetus can(not) survive outside the womb" is a weak and unconvincing argument. You are alleging that the fetus is not a person unless it can survive outside the womb, but this point of view overlooks the fact that a child removed prematurely at 5 months can still survive with great medical assistance. The medical assistance is not a womb, and yet we would still call that which was prematurely removed a human being. It isn't an elephant. The fetus is housed within another person who has rights, but among the creeds of our democracy is a right to life and liberty for all persons, and this absolutely should include the fetus which has personhood (regardless of being in the womb or not, as shown above. A baby born after the 9th month can also not survive without perpetual care, but it suddenly has rights because it is outside of the womb?).

[leftynyc]

118. Yes - that's right

Once the fetus can survive outside a woman's body, he/she does have rights. Do those rights supercede those of the mother? That's a judgement call. So your beef is only with "late term" abortions? The vast majority of abortions are done in the first trimester (almost 90%) - when there is no hope of survival without a womb.

That also didn't answer my very simple question. Would you be in favor of a law that would charge, convict and perhaps execute a woman for murder for having an abortion? Yes or no would suffice.

[lyonspotter]

121. As for repercussions...

I already said I am for a law that would charge and convict a person who did in fact commit an abortion, because I hold the fetus to have the right to life and liberty, which means its termination is murder. However, I don't believe in the death penalty, so no... I do not believe a woman who has an abortion should be executed.

Let me ask you a question now (admittedly it is a sort of impossible question given the parameters of the question itself)..... You were at one time a cluster of cells in the first trimester, and likewise I was too at one point. Do you think you could support the idea of you having been aborted? Why, or why would you not support that actual historical decision? I know that I am glad I was given the chance to live and experience life, with all its hardships as well as beauty.

[leftynyc]

122. Had my mother aborted

me and my twin, I wouldn't be around to worry about it. That was simple enough.

[lyonspotter]

123. That is precisely why I said it was an impossible question...

...but what the question gets at is this: don't you value your life, the possibility of experience, achievement, love, change, struggle, growth...all the other things that happen in the course of a lifetime? I just don't advocate the termination of one life at the hand of another, and I've stated that here in many ways and in many contexts. I feel I'd be incredibly inconsistent to argue on behalf of the Iraqi innocent civilians and not on behalf of the unborn, who are even more defenseless.

Anyhow...impasse reached... Be well.

[LeftishBrit]

138. For that matter...

we were both once unfertilized eggs and sperm. If that egg and that sperm had not come together at a specific time, I would not exist. By your argument, ANYTHING that prevents the development of a baby, including birth control, abstinence, or even just good/bad timing, is wrong.

If I had been aborted, I wouldn't be around to care, any more than the many unfertilized eggs that never got the chance to become my many non-existent older siblings.

[TicketyBoo]

144. What if

your mother was not legally capable of choosing life for you? What if she wished she had been able to have an abortion? What if she treated you like you were excess baggage every day of your life?

Would you still be glad you were "given the chance to live and experience life, with all its hardships as well as beauty," then, do you think?

There are enough abused and neglected children in the world, without wishing for more. Every child deserves to be wanted. Life isn't worth anything without that, in my opinion.

[NRaleighLiberal]

17. And you didn't answer my question about the acceptance of Medicare benefits

by those who wish to deny it to others. How can you live with yourself with that twisted logic? You are not a patriot and a good American - you are a one issue voter who has been brainwashed by Faux news and right wing lies.

[lyonspotter]

21. I don't watch Fox. NT

[NRaleighLiberal]

22. and again you don't answer my question.

[lyonspotter]

25. I absolutely concede that

your question over medicare reveals both their bias and hypocrisy! I have no qualms with admitting that. They don't have it all figured out for certain. And they are wrong on several things.

But the fact I want to raise is, they have become aware of the violation of rights that has transpired. This is good. I wish that we could somehow work together to restore the rights that have been ravaged by the legislation of the past 8 years. There is much to fix.

[NRaleighLiberal]

27. And on that we agree. Bush took us on a disaster trip.

We have to start somewhere to fix it, but being a party of NO to all Obama doesn't fix a thing.

I have two daughters who have no health care. They are smart kids, good kids, but have jobs or situations where it is impossible for them - one has a preexisting condition, the other working a non-profit following two years in the Peace Corps. If something happens to them, my wife and I have the choice of having it just ruin them, or taking us down with them.

And that is not right - not when the very organizers of the Tea Bagger events have so much in excess of what they need.

[lyonspotter]

28. I am sorry to hear of your family's predicament...

...I likewise do not have healthcare.

My hope - and whole reason for starting this thread - is that the ideas where teabaggers and progressive agree (that rights have been taken away, fundamental rights) can be a place where we harness the bountiful energy from both camps to regain what has been lost...

They are finally admitting Bush did is wrong, very wrong. Can't we see great gain in that?!

[NRaleighLiberal]

31. Admitting is one thing....putting he, Cheney and others behind bars would be true progress.

What the Bush admin did was show that there is no penalty for lying. Unless we make an example, it will only get worse - and in fact it is worse - each Sunday on the news talkshows, every day on the news, there is bald faced lying.

Our culture is in deep trouble, I fear.

[lyonspotter]

35. Let's do it!

And that is part of the reason for the deep dissatisfaction I have with Obama right now. We need to put the criminals of the last administration behind bars, at the very, very least! I know that there are all sorts of delicate and complex arguments people protect Obama with as to why he doesn't want to push for their prosecution, but I just don't find any of those convincing, because it would set the disastrous precedent you just mentioned.

[lame54]

39. bullshit

[lyonspotter]

43. Hannity and O'Lie-lly...

...are propagandists that would make Goebbels proud.

There...happy?

[lame54]

46. So, I see you're a Glenn Beck fan

[lyonspotter]

48. ugh...do I need to list the entire network by name?

[lame54]

49. He's not exactly a key grip

[lyonspotter]

51. Absolutely not...

...in fact, he is one of the most important deceivers on the network.

I think Hannity is probably the biggest loser of the bunch, and that is why I named him first.

I also have disdain for Megyn Kelly Anne Coulter, and Michelle Malkin, but did not mention them either.

[Kalyke]

24. There is no such thing as partial-birth abortion.

It's late term and it's very rarely ever used except in cases in which the fetus has died or is dying or to save the life of the mother. A dead or dying fetus can cause serious risk to the woman carrying it because of the gases and toxins emitted by decay.

And "human life in the mother's womb" is a loaded statement. Until the age of viability - usually around 20-22 weeks - any person learned on this subject can effectively argue that such "life" is merely a parasitical collection of cells.

No liberal, however, argues in favor of abortion. It's not my business to tell you to abort or not to abort - all of those decisions are yours and may be shared with your doctor, your mate and your God, if you believe in one.

[lame54]

41. very well put

[lyonspotter]

56. "It's not my business to tell you to abort or not to abort"

If abortion is the killing of an innocent human life, then it is in fact your business to tell someone that they are committing a wrong. It wouldn't work for me to say, "It is not my business to tell you to kill your spouse or not to kill your spouse." So what you are saying is that the fetus is not a human being, yet all of us came through the biological process of being a fetus to the state we are now. I just find the argument unconvincing that a fetus is not a human being. "A parasitical collection of cells"? Each of us were such a parasite. (I say this with a respectful tone) ---> If your mother had opted to abort you, would you support this decision, and why?

I also would like to address the idea that partial-birth is used only when the fetus is already dead. If that were indeed the case, I have no moral concern with it as a medical procedure. However, as senator, Obama opposed legislation to protect children who are born alive (Link: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama_and_infanticide.html), either as a result of an abortionist's unsuccessful effort to kill them in the womb, or by the deliberate delivery of the baby prior to viability. I find this appalling. It is just as wrong as all the errant bombs and bullets that kill innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc.

[uppityperson]

93. "If abortion is the killing of an innocent human life"

Late term abortions are rarely done except in cases in which the fetus has died or is dying or to save the life of the mother. You'd rather the pregnant woman and the fetus die, rather than her having a medically necessary abortion and living.

Wild.

[lyonspotter]

100. Well, not 'wild'...

...it is absolutely compassionate to save the mother if the fetus threatens her life.

As I said, it is wrong, in my view to terminate innocent life. If abortion is being used as a means of birth control or convenience, I believe that is wrong. I don't believe in killing innocent life, and a baby is the most defenseless human being there is.

[proud2BlibKansan]

53. There is no such thing as partial birth abortion

FAIL

[lyonspotter]

68. "Fail"?

What is your stance on it?

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. There is no such thing as partial birth abortion so I have no stance

It makes no sense to have a stance on something that doesn't exist.

[uppityperson]

92. wtf is a "partial-birth abortion"? What "hypocrisy" are you talking about?

[Cosmocat]

60. Does anyone for ONE SECOND believe ...

that if John McCain and Sarah Palin were in the white house, and make no mistake, BO might be too corporate leaning for our tastes, but those idiots would have been worse ...

Does anyone for ONE SECOND believe if those two twits were pres and VP, that we would ever have heard of teabaggers?

This is simple and pure partisanship jacked up on racism ...

[lyonspotter]

61. I'm making lemonade here!

See an opportunity and use it for the betterment of the situation.

It seems all anyone on the left/right want to do is fight with the opposition, instead of seeing this as an opportunity to reach very important ground that denounces Bush for the evil that was done and the treason committed.

[treestar]

5. A President cannot repeal an Act of Congress

passed during a previous administration.

[lyonspotter]

6. But a president like Lincoln...

...can in fact put the powers in motion such that a 13th amendment comes into being. Obama pledged to change the assaults against the Constitution imposed by Bush, and that is what he should be held accountable to do.

[treestar]

13. He might be working on it

No one seems to make anything of the fact it takes years to do things like that. Certainly Lincoln needed time, too.

but ultimately, Congress is part of it.

[lyonspotter]

15. Thanks for that last comment. NT

[lyonspotter]

16. (self-delete for duplicate post)

[depakid]

9. My problem with teabagger is that they're idiots- know nothings

Can't even recognize the difference between past and passed- yet they cite Jefferson and Franklin.

What a joke.

[lyonspotter]

10. So you are a grammarian?

"Can't even recognize the difference between past and passed" is not a complete sentence.

And who said I am a teabagger? Not I.

[depakid]

37. LOL.

seriously, though. Have you been to one of their events? Talked with them?

The ones who aren't delusional (sometimes quite literally) have no idea what they're talking about. You might as well be talking with children about St. Nicholas when they cite Jefferson or Franklin. Or somebody.

My favorite instance was with a guy waving a big sign that said: READ THE CONSTITUTION.

I politely asked him: how many articles are in The Constitution? He looked befuddled and said, wait- I have a copy here in my backpack!

:rofl:

Again- politely, I told the guy that if he's going to be waving a sign around, he ought at least to know the basic divisions of the document that he's ranting about. They are, in fact- important clues to the contents.

Lasted about 45 minutes with that bunch before my curiosity waned.

[lyonspotter]

40. I have not been to an event...

...but have seen a lot of cut-up clips from the web. I hear what you are saying about many who appear to need a primer on the Constitution.

But what I am saying is that there is a movement among them where they do know that fundamental rights, big ones like the 4th amendment, have been transgressed (Patriot Act, FISA, etc). We would do well to dialogue, inform, and work together (as far as that is possible) to regain what has been taken away by Bush.

[depakid]

47. Have a look sometime and see for yourself:

I did:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5467525

[lyonspotter]

50. Yes, I have seen those types of images and vids...

I have, however, not been to one of their events in person.

They are not all informed. But when I see stuff like this, I applaud loudly:



We need to harness this type of teabagger energy and passion, correcting it wherever it may be erroneous, and much will be achieved.

Those with the most power are quite happy that we are so divided in terms of "teabagger-progressive," "pro-choice vs pro-life", etc. We can agree that rights have been transgressed, sacred rights. We can both agree that Bush initiated it, and Obama is carrying such things forward to this day. We need to move together to restore things, and quickly.

[depakid]

55. What does the Fed do?

[lyonspotter]

58. Well, where to start ...

Where to start with what is wrong with the Fed?!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7070727&mesg_id=7070727

The banks the Fed bailed out are outsourcing to India, for starters, as the link above attests.

[Taverner]

11. Teabaggers are angry Whites who have channeled that anger into racial hatred and anti-Science

[bain_sidhe]

18. Teabaggers and Progressives are alike in one respect

They both feel a deep anger at the state of affairs in this country. IMHO, Teapartiers have both the cause and the solution wrong... and are being manipulated by people who not only don't have their best interests at heart, the teapartiers' best interests aren't even on the manipulators' radar. But I can't deny that the teapartiers represent a segment of the populace that have finally, finally woken up to the dysfunctional nature of our society.

During the bush years, I fervently wished that the people would "WAKE UP!" and see what was happening to our society. Well, I got my wish, 8 years too late. Now that they've woken up and seen the mess, they're blaming the wrong people, and proposing the wrong solutions. But I do not deny that they do so out of a deep, visceral anger. They have reason to be angry; their lives are harder, poorer, and meaner, and there's no relief in sight. They just don't understand what it is that has made their lives so hard. Maybe we can help them understand, but I have my doubts about that. They have been "programmed" to reject anything said by anyone other than the manipulators who hold them in thrall.

I don't have any answers, but I can recognize a kindred spirit - that is, one who is related by anguish, if not by ideology.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

26. tip of the hat to the tea baggers

They get media coverage and we do not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here's the gimick.

Tell everyone that 1,000,000 people showed up so that the MSNBCs, CNNs, et. al. go out, cover the event, show the jack-a-lopes only to tell us that just 3,000 people showed up...ha ha ha...not the 1,000,000 Fox is reporting.
:rofl: Fox is so stupid!! ha ha ha!

No they're not. They've got MSNBC and CNN doing their dirty work. :grr:


In the meantime, I've been in two major marches in Chicago since the end of October. The 3 day demonstration of the American Bankers Association conference got a 5 second snippet on MSNBC in the background of some nonsensical Contessa Brewer rant over why we were out there. There were 5000 people marching across the Michigan Ave bridge to the Sheridan Hotel, the sight of the conference.

Last week, HCAN organized a march on the insurance companies, which were holding their annual conference downtown. I doubt we hit 1000, but it was a pretty big deal. Wendell Potter, former Cigna exec turned whistle blower, addressed the conference then met us out front and reviled them.

The cameras were there. Helicopters overhead. Anyone notice us?

[tekisui]

33. Nice post, Beck.

:eyes:

[W_HAMILTON]

34. Teabaggers have distorted...

...the teachings of our founding fathers the same way they have distorted the teachings of Christianity.

[lyonspotter]

36. I definitely agree...

...with the second half of your statement!

[W_HAMILTON]

38. You should agree with the first as well...

...because it's true. Where were these teabaggers during the Bush administration? These teabaggers are many of the same people that supported Bush to his last day. Where was the public outcry when Republicans passed Medicare Part D, the only thing they did to address Medicare in the last decade, and something that was completely unpaid for?

These teabaggers are nothing more than the same 'ole anti-Democrat Bush supporters with a spiffy new schtick provided to them by Fox News.

[lyonspotter]

44. Fox News usurped their movement...

...and twisted it, deceiving many.

Our job is to remind the baggers of what Bush has done, and what they claim Obama has continued. This is where progress can happen. Restoration of rights. No more spying, no more trashing the 4th amendment, etc.

[W_HAMILTON]

89. No, they didn't.

They created it. Even if you claim they didn't, Fox News certainly promoted it and caused it to grow bigger (or at least SEEM bigger) than it really is.

It's very innocent of you to think that these teabaggers are anything other than just anti-Democrat right-wingers. If Bush was doing these same sorts of things, they would claim that he is doing it for the country and decrying us as anti-American. It's just the same old, same old, dressed up in 1700s garb.

[lyonspotter]

90. You just go right ahead and believe that... NT

[W_HAMILTON]

91. It's the truth.

You don't see the "real" teabaggers getting into fights with the "fake" teabaggers at these protests. They all believe the same things. They all are Fox News heads. They all kept silent when Bush did these things, and now in an "uproar" over Democrats doing things. There would be no teabagger movement without Fox News. You would be right if they weren't hypocrites, but they are. If they weren't, we would have heard of the teabaggers back during the Bush administration.

As I said, they are, as Colbert famously referred to them as, the backwash, just with a new schtick.

[proud2BlibKansan]

52. They hate Obama more than they hate Bush. Don't kid yourself.

They also aren't all that interested in liberty. If the left embraced liberty the teabaggers would be against it.

Also Obama never said he was going to repeal the Patriot Act.

[lyonspotter]

57. I would imagine you are right...

...that they hate Obama more than Bush. But where we have them is that they have to admit Bush is the cause of the tyranny they are currently bemoaning and alleging.

As for Obama and the Patriot Act: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gV4GMZV3SY
(The original yahoo report is now down)...

[lame54]

63. They don't HAVE to do a damn thing...

and they won't

when will you stop pushing this alternative teabagging reality

[lyonspotter]

64. Everything in their movement is not...

...as you have depicted it.

I try to see some positive in what has happened and is happening. Yes, there are nuts from the right. You are not saying anything we don't know.

The entire point is to have our elected representatives do what they have sworn to do, which is to uphold the Constitution. The baggers are admitting the leaders are not being as faithful to their sworn vows as they legally need to be and are mandated to be. The Patriot Act is an assault on our rights. Again...GOOD that baggers are saying this, Finally! We have been saying it from the left for 8 years.

[uppityperson]

94. "they have to admit Bush is the cause..."? No, they don't have to. And they don't.

Be nice if they would see that, but they don't. And no, they don't "have to admit Bush is the cause..."

[lyonspotter]

104. Sorry, but I have seen many assert disdain for

what Bush did, but you are kind to only watch the youtube clips showing those who are upset with the continued push for greater control under Obama.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

62. What do you mean, during graduate school of course?

I am in my mid 50s and have never been more liberal than I am now.

Something tells me you really don't want to talk to us. You're a typical wingnut who calls US hateful and doesn't see the hate in your own words.

I can't stand what you right wingers did to America and see no reason to have a conversation with you beyond asking what kind of pizza you like.

Now run along back to freeperville and tell them all about the mean libruls you tried to talk to.

[lyonspotter]

66. I agree with you. The poster was trying to...

...connect the idea of "liberalism" in the university to that of "having a misled ideology." Non sequitur.

[rantormusing]

76. I'm very skeptical of the Teaparty movement.

I think a slim minority are Ron Paul leading libertarians that know the libertarian party isn't a contending platform for electoral change yada yada yada, but cling to this movement in hope to see small government and substantial change. I think that minority is desperate to see some kind of political change, and that's my opinion on why you would find Ron Paulers or libertarians in the teabagging party.

Now, i think, the majority are people who buy that resurgent communist Obama antichrist Glenn Beck garbage. I think years of rants/talking points equating the democratic party with commie leftwing terror etc has led to the tea party protests. The timing is just too convenient to insinuate otherwise. The majority are republicans who may be fed up with their party, but have not realized that despite 4 decades passing, the best that party could do was produce a minuscule version of the Goldwater momentum in the person of ROn Paul, and at that time they deemed him unworthy. No changes in the size of government, endless wars, taxes as far as the eye can see, and a constant assault on individual liberties they so desire, the Republican party has meant nothing at all. Forty years and a time warp, i imagine any republican current or former would be mad.

What is needed is discussion about what you think the role of government should be, level of taxation, basically, what are we paying for, or intend to pay for.

This is a purely needed and rational topic that needs, must be discussed. I don't see the tea party as a part of that, i see a bunch of people who are desperate for Obama to be their boogie man. Respect and credibility have to be earned, i wish them luck.

[lyonspotter]

77. Very well put.

Thank you.

[rantormusing]

78. anytime man,

I'm actually a Ron Paul fan, i don't care they can ban hammer me. In 2008, i rooted for Ron Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel, the uniting theme was honesty. I felt they were honest, no matter if i had disagreements with various parts of their respective platform. The rest, IMHO, are performers. I tend to reject political labels, they really don't do any good, but if i had a gun to my head, i would probably say something like left libertarian, whatever that means. It boils down to not wanting to tell people how to live, work, and play. I lot of people get their rocks off controlling others.

[lyonspotter]

79. Absolutely...

I wholeheartedly agree. I would also say, for lack of good labels, that I am "LEFT-libertarian"! ...Things are complex, and the two-party system seeks to divide and conquer! It is an overall scheme to control. Those in power have perfected it to the form of high art.

[Batgirl]

80. DUzy!

"If only the teabaggers and progressives could unite in the common goal of restoring our rights, we would be ever so much the more powerful to have a government that finally exists to serve us and not the other way around!"
:rofl:

This plan would probably make sense to anyone who happened to be cryogenically frozen for most of the period between 2000-2008.

Everyone else is aware these "teabaggers" (I prefer the original terminology: freeper wingnuts) weren't concerned about the Constitution when there was a Republican in the White House, and they won't worry about it the next time there is a Republican in the White House.

Regardless of any melodramatic proclamations to the contrary.

Your praise of teabaggers' "love of liberty and freedom" is quite heartwarming tho.

[lyonspotter]

81. In what way...

...does such sarcasm and negativity help towards the progress that needs to be made in this country?

[Joe the Liberal]

82. I really can't stand teabaggers, I don't buy their whole "movement".....

I don't even know where to start, they just embody everything that is wrong with this country.

Where were they the past 8 years when Bush/Cheney were wiping their asses with the constitution? Where were they when Bush/Cheney were pillaging the country? Oh that's right they were right on the side lines cheering them (Bush/Cheney) on, they were 100% complicit. These are the same people who claim to support liberty and freedom and yet vote in people who destroy and take away both.

These are the same people who rally against "guvmint run health cur" and yet take full advantage of medicare and other government programs.

These are the same people who claim to be pro-life and support the rights of the unborn but at the same time they are highly against stem cell research which could potentially save millions already here. Not to mention they rally against health care reform which would also save millions of lives and lower the deficit (so much for fiscal conservatives). I guess a fetus is all that matters to them, people already here can drop dead. Also, these pro-life teabaggers are "pro-life" and pro-death penalty, the hypocrisy is vast.

These are the same people who claim to be "fiscally conservative" and time and time again vote for people who bankrupt the country.

These are the same people who actually think republican policies benefit them when history has shown over and over again that they don't, unless you're a millionaire of course.

These are the same people who support war but only if it's someone else who has to go and fight them, enter the chickenhawks.

These are the same people who would turn this country into a theocracy if given the chance and yet espouse liberty and freedom but only for white christian males, gays and minorities need not apply.

I could go on and on but in the end they are just despicable people and some of the biggest hypocrites on earth.

[lyonspotter]

88. Did I miss somewhere...

...that they are all racists?

I too wish they would have been outspoken regarding the transgressions against liberty enacted by Bush/Cheney, but it's better late than never.

[uppityperson]

95. Except they're not speaking about against Bush/Cheney transgressions.

I'd still call this never.

[lyonspotter]

124. They were shouting quite loudly...

...against Bush and his assaults on liberty when Ron Paul was more at the forefront. Things have gone in several directions since then, unfortunately... and Hannity and Beck had a whole lot to do with that. They co-opted the movement. When has Hannity or Beck ever agreed with anything Ron Paul ever said?

[NoSheep]

103. EXACTLY WHAT is "better late than never"? Those people are idiots. YOU haven't been paying attention

Or, you are what I think you are.

[lyonspotter]

107. Be careful with what you are trying to allude...

Look at the host of deleted comments above, each of which came out and said it.

I am no troll, but I do in fact think for myself.

The media has usurped the bagger movement, both the left media and right.

The movement started with "Ron Paul" types that were sick of what Bush had done. Hannity and others came on board and drafted all the bigots they could find, to corporatize the movement, and make it look bad to the left. You wouldn't know that, because you might watch a little too much Olbermann who conveyed, amongst other things, that teabaggers are racist and ignorant, even though I posted a ton of images above that show there is a great number of African Americans in the movement who are sick of the control that happened under Bush and continues to this day against the Constitution.

[uppityperson]

134. "a ton of images above" bullshit. From your link (above) "striking lack of racial diversity"

"What struck me as interesting was how predominantly white & middle class the vast majority of demonstrators were. It got to the point that I made the effort to photograph any people of color present at the march. While this might come across as racial profiling, I did so because it was the first demonstration that I’ve ever attended that showed such a striking lack of racial diversity."

I can tell you "do in fact think for myself" if you can post that link and your "ton of images" (actually 5 un-sourced pictures) as validation for "great number of African Americans

There is no "great number of African Americans". There is no "ton of images". You "think for yourself"? Bullshit

[lyonspotter]

135. I have an idea...

How about you toss around a bunch of expletives...because that will make ya seem real, real tough, lol... while you are trying (yes, I emphasize 'trying') to undermine whether someone else thinks for himself... meanwhile, how about you just keep on parroting the same cherry-picked propaganda you have swallowed hook, line, and sinker, that everyone in the bagger movement is a racist...even though evidence has been provided above that people of different races have opposed Obama's policies (which are a continuation of Bush's) as part of the teaparty movement...

I could send you 500 more links of evidence where people of different races have spoken against the changes we have suffered in this country the past 9 years, but you won't believe so there is no point in going to such an effort...you'll continue to believe that the baggers are comprehensively a movement against the President only because he is black.

Gotta place you on ignore. Respectfully, I don't exchange with people who have a fascination with bovine excrement.

[uppityperson]

143. Don't like disagreers, so put us on ignore. Gotcha. Rather than do what you say you "could", you ign

Your link specifically refutes what you claim. So you put me on ignore.

You "could" send me 500 more links, but instead decide I "won't believe", so don't, but put me on ignore.

You assert I parrot the same cherry-picked propoganda, which is what? "There is no "great number of African Americans". There is no "ton of images". You "think for yourself"? "


Refutation of your assertions by your posted links. Mind reading and more. Probably best to put me on ignore.

Or is it truly ONLY because I said "bullshit"?

Good grief.

[NoSheep]

141. Perhaps you should STOP thinking for yourself as your brain is broken.

[lyonspotter]

142. Nice dig.

This thread sank to... what... the 4th page?

Thanks for the evaluation of my thinking capacity. I take it to heart.

[raccoon]

98. Great post. And besides that, they suck. nt

[tekisui]

106. RW apologia. The tea-nuts are paranoid and ignorant.

They have allowed themselves to be whipped up by a idiot speaking in generalities.

[Jim__]

108. Teabaggers are scum - here's a link.

Teabaggers ridiculed a woman telling the story of the death of her pregnant daughter - at least partly due to lack of health insurance (link). People like that do not love ... liberty and freedom. People like that are scum - end of story.

[lyonspotter]

113. Yes, that is dreadful...

...however, some democrats are likewise scum, but I would never argue that "because some are scum, all must be." To conclude something like that is just as ridiculous and bigoted as it is steeped in poor reasoning.

[Jim__]

117. No. I've been to protests where some people act badly.

Generally the people around them tell them to stop. I've never seen one of the teabaggers tell another to clean up their act. While they're ridiculing a person about a death in her family, none of them steps up and tells them to act human. They go there with the knowledge that this is how this group behaves. They are all part of it, if not directly, by willingly participating with the group that behaves like that.

[TicketyBoo]

125. Take a look at the entry in Wikipedia

regarding the history of the movement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_protests

And see if you still think you want to throw in your lot with these people.

I don't think so.

They are against most of the things most Democrats support. They are far from a grassroots organization and have despicable people in the background running things.

They are not our friends.

[lyonspotter]

126. Wiki is not always a poor source for information...

...but it also is not the most robust. I recall an entry for the former basketball player Bill Walton that read, "Bill Walton lost his virginity before his father." Somewhere around 2006, I think.

Just goes to show Wiki is not always the most reliable, nor its writers always credible, nor clear (I mean, that statement above is as irrelevant as it is just bad writing).

[TicketyBoo]

129. I'm aware of the limitations of Wiki.

However, it is a good place to start when you're looking for information.

I read the link before offering it. It seemed reliable to me at the point I posted the link (although I'm aware that it can change minute-by-minute).

The simple truth is that these groups did not spring up as a grassroots movement. They are backed by Republican operatives, including Dick Armey. Why they can't find people who can spell to make their signs is more than I can figure. Maybe they think that those crudely made signs are proof that they are grassroots? No, it just makes them look stupid.

[lyonspotter]

127. At this point...

...our main friends, in general, are those who support liberty and do not want any further rights taken away...and want the previous rights taken away by bush to be given back.

The teaparty movement has become corrupted quite a bit by the corporate media (most notably Fox News), but they awakened many in the beginning to the fact that we need to march toward a restoration of rights.

[TicketyBoo]

128. Baloney.

Olbermann has been railing against the loss of individual freedoms for years. I specifically remember night after night when he lamented the loss of habeas corpus.

Where were these Republican-backed tea-partiers back then? Nowhere to be seen. These lunatics are a direct result of Democrats' success at the polls.

THEY ARE NOT OUR FRIENDS.

[lyonspotter]

130. And where is Olbermann now?

Why has he not shouted and railed against Obama and his support of the Patriot Act?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x13788

We all should be a little skeptical of the left-right ping pong match that has been going on the past 15 years. When your team is in the WH, you can't stand down. But if both sides come together out of concern for personal liberty, we have something. It's necessary, now. You can feel negative about those people all you want. What I am choosing to do is to try to meet fellow Americans in the middle, even if I disagree with them on other doctrines.

[TicketyBoo]

132. We did get habeas corpus back, you know?

Be careful of whom you accept as a friend.

[bergie321]

131. The problem with the teabaggers

Is that most are too stupid to realize how similar the desires they espouse are to the progressive movement. They have gone so far to the right that they are practically left now.

[LeftishBrit]

133. 'Liberty and freedom' when used by the Far Right...

generally mean the unfettered liberty and freedom of the well-off, the strong, the healthy, the majority-group members to trample all over the poor, the weak, the ill, the minorities.

Real liberty for all means sufficient social safety net, and sufficient regulation, to protect EVERYONE'S basic rights, not just the 'tough' or 'successsful'. Coercion by the threat of extreme poverty is just as much coercion as is coercion by the threat of being locked up by the police. You are not free if you are starving to death. You are not free if an employer can oppress and fleece you, because the alternative is starving to death. You are not free if you are desperately ill and dying for want of basic medical attention.

Teabagger 'liberty' often comes down to 'freedom not to pay my taxes'.

And that is not even taking into account the vicious racism, xenophobia, sexism, and social intolerance that are so often associated with the right.

There is nothing to praise about the 'teabaggers' and far-right-wing movements everywhere. They do not oppose the status quo because they want something better, but because they want something worse: e.g. a return to the early 19th century at best, the Middle Ages at worst. And any collaboration with them by progressives will only enable what is essentially a form of fascism.

'And if only the teabaggers and progressives could unite in the common goal of restoring our rights, we would be ever so much the more powerful to have a government that finally exists to serve us and not the other way around!'

And if only the teabaggers and progressives could unite, the progressives could either be crushed, or corrupted into conniving at destroying the poor and sick and minorities everywhere. Collaborations with 'Blue Dogs' may be bad enough, but collaborations with 'teabaggers' far worse.

(And never equate this from me with blind support for any party. I had 10 years of Blair. I was betrayed by my preferred party's leaders, about as much as anyone could be. Many of my dreams were destroyed by Thatcherism - and then again by New Labour's carrying on the policies of Thatcherism for 12 years now, with a very slight improvement since Blair left. But I am NOT going to collaborate with the BNP just because they don't like New Labour either!)

[rantormusing]

139. I actually hope for a third party rising up

It's a bit of a corny answer since everyone says it will never happen, but i think those people are wrong, it can and i think will happen. If not, then we're Friggin doomed because we have two parties that are very similar to each other in thought, convention, and deed. I'm going to go off on a couple of tangents here that are a little radical, but thems the breaks. People talk about 1984 when trying to bust out the totalitarian boogie man, but it doesn't work that way. I think we're very close to a totalitarian future, and the book i would use as a rallying cry to point out the signs would be Stephen King's The Running Man. Read the book and extrapolate. Death and reality tv, corporate controlled media and govt, it's not too far away. It could just be me, but when i read the news/tv, or think about current events, it just strikes me as similar to one of those authoritarian themed movie we've seen before. Heck I"M sure we've all seen the movies where secret govt/corporate base conveniently located on some third world island accidentally looses a monster on the world.....or zombies. I think we're at that point sans zombies.

Our current govt makeup is theater with the professionalism/accomplishments of the Transportation security administration.

Back to the teaparties, I doubt the way further will follow conventional Republican or Democratic thought. I didn't vote for Obama, he hadn't done enough to earn my trust or vote, and the way he's going, i doubt if i'll be voting for him in 2012. But these tea party goers and those who are sympathetic to them, pounced on Obama the very first day in office. That's a bit telling, it proves to me that their just playing politics. It makes me mad, because we do need some massive protest against the Federal Reserve, congress, corporate crime, government crime/abuse, but the teabaggers are unreliable. There's a libertarian website/magazine that i used to like reading. They love to swear up and down that they're not Republicans, don't like Republicans etc etc, but when i check it out, what do i find? They defend the teaparties to their dying breath, kissing up to so called libertarian friendly republicans, a constant chorus of democrats are the ones to blame for this mess, and Obama, it's his fault to. This started happening right after the inauguration.

What it comes down to is, IMO, this is the makeup of the tea parties. People who are just looking to fight Obama, scared or serious, mad at bush and the Republicans or not, they've found their punching bag, and happily, it conforms to the type of person they're constantly hating on.


THANKS FOR READING

www.declarationnovel.blogspot.com

[lyonspotter]

140. Thanks for the post!

I think they pounced on Obama from the first day because they saw who gave the campaign money (2 billion) and expected immediately to get more of the same as we had seen from Bushco. It didn't help that McCain was bought and paid for too.... hence, we need a left-leaning liberty-loving third party.