Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

Delirium

Republican Convention Features Sexist Anti-Hillary Buttons: ’2 Fat Thighs, 2 Small Breasts’

Bannasidhe

koth wrote: »

Republican Convention Features Sexist Anti-Hillary Buttons: ’2 Fat Thighs, 2 Small Breasts’

:rolleyes:

jank

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Evidence, not proof.

So that's a no then.

robindch

jank wrote: »

So is he or is he not a member of the GOP or Tea Party. Its a very simple question. Yes or no will suffice. If yes, show me a link. You guys should know all about proof right? You are trying to claim an assertion without any proof. A big no no for atheists. Or does that go out the window when it comes to mocking people you don't agree with?

Jank, you should really read people's posts before replying to them.

I didn't say that Joyner was a teabagger as you seem to think. Instead, I said that he's "an elderly teabagger (or an elderly man with teabagger sympathies)".

Nodin and joseph_brand have helpfully supplied the evidence you need about the elderly man's teabagger sympathies. Do let me know if you need evidence to of the "elderly" or "man" claims.

BTW, one doesn't provide "proof" for claims, just indicative evidence, as Genghiz has helpfully pointed out. Neither does one "claim an assertion" - I think you mean "assert a claim" or perhaps "make an assertion" (though in that case, making an assertion without proof is fine, since expecting proof in this instance constitutes a category error). Hope this helps.

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

See here and here.

Two opinion pieces (by the same author mind) telling us that Rick Joyner is 'linked' to the tea party and GOP yet provides no actual proof of said links beside saying nice things about Sarah Palin. Where is the actual empirical evidence that he is a member of a tea party movement and a member of the GOP. Has he ever attended a tea party meeting? A republican convention? After all this is a thread detailing things the GOP do, not 'GOP and everyone we don't like'. Please be more accurate in future. The plebs might get confused.


It is OK JP, maybe next time you want to diss the republicans maybe stay within the bounds of actual republican members. It is quite simple really.

joseph brand wrote: »

You could have looked it up yourself, if you didn't believe. We atheists, and I think I can speak for ALL OF US, aren't content with being spoon fed. So we often resort to looking for the information ourselves, from more than one single source.

Multiple sources but by the same author? :pac: How *cough* enlightened of you.

Sarky

Oh cheer up jank.

jank

robindch wrote: »

Jank, you should really read people's posts before replying to them.

I didn't say that Joyner was a teabagger as you seem to think. Instead, I said that he's "an elderly teabagger (or an elderly man with teabagger sympathies)".

Nodin and joseph_brand have helpfully supplied the evidence you need about the elderly man's teabagger sympathies. Do let me know if you need evidence to of the "elderly" or "man" claims.

BTW, one doesn't provide "proof" for claims, just indicative evidence, as Genghiz has helpfully pointed out. Neither does one "claim an assertion" - I think you mean "assert a claim" or perhaps "make an assertion" (though in that case, making an assertion without proof is fine, since expecting proof in this instance constitutes a category error). Hope this helps.

Ah the ultimate get out of jail card. He likes some things the tea party does so hey lets lump him in with all the rest and paint massive broad stokes and begin the daily circle jerk. Perhaps we can call Obama a terrorist because of the links with Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Of course this is not to mention the mental comparisons to the Taliban you made.

Also telling that you constantly use the word 'teabagger' with its sexual connotations to describe a political faction. The term is banned in the politics forum as some kids got their kicks out of the term. One would think a mod would show some leadership but hey this is A+A.

jank

Sarky wrote: »

Oh cheer up jank.

Thanks mate. I will try. How is your dog lately?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

jank wrote: »

Ah the ultimate get out of jail card. He likes some things the tea party does so hey lets lump him in with all the rest and paint massive broad stokes and begin the daily circle jerk. Perhaps we can call Obama a terrorist because of the links with Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Of course this is not to mention the mental comparisons to the Taliban you made.

Also telling that you constantly use the word 'teabagger' with its sexual connotations to describe a political faction. The term is banned in the politics forum as some kids got their kicks out of the term. One would think a mod would show some leadership but hey this is A+A.

you know your life will be a lot easier if you just leave these idiots to their collective circle jerks. you're not going to convince any of them of anything. give up, stick on a movie. relax.

Turtwig

Oh look there goes that thing called 'civility'. Come back! Come backk!!!*




* I apologise to the grammar pedants about the excessive exclamation marks.

robindch

jank wrote: »

One would think a mod would show some leadership but hey this is A+A.

Mods don't "lead" here in A+A, as the forum is a discussion group, not a political party.

Instead, mods enforce the forum charter which, to judge from your continual head-shaking, finger-wagging and intemperate fist-waving, you appear to have forgotten again.

joseph brand

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

you know your life will be a lot easier if you just leave these idiots to their collective circle jerks. you're not going to convince any of them of anything. give up, stick on a movie. relax.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVznerpOkTI

joseph brand

jank wrote: »

Ah the ultimate get out of jail card. He likes some things the tea party does so hey lets lump him in with all the rest and paint massive broad stokes and begin the daily circle jerk. Perhaps we can call Obama a terrorist because of the links with Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Of course this is not to mention the mental comparisons to the Taliban you made.

Also telling that you constantly use the word 'teabagger' with its sexual connotations to describe a political faction. The term is banned in the politics forum as some kids got their kicks out of the term. One would think a mod would show some leadership but hey this is A+A.

Can you honestly say that you think he's a Democrat? Coming out with the sort of nonsense reserved only for the Teabillies.

Maybe you can counter our claims?

Nodin

jank wrote: »

So that's a no then.

Did you read up on the organisations hes involved with?

jank

robindch wrote: »

Mods don't "lead" here in A+A, as the forum is a discussion group, not a political party.

Instead, mods enforce the forum charter which, to judge from your continual head-shaking, finger-wagging and intemperate fist-waving, you appear to have forgotten again.

So why do you knowingly use a derogatory term to use a political faction. Would it be OK to call a LGBT group the 'dyke group' or the 'fag party'. No it wouldn't so why lower yourself to 'teabagger'?

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

Can you honestly say that you think he's a Democrat? Coming out with the sort of nonsense reserved only for the Teabillies.

Maybe you can counter our claims?

Maybe he is neither, did anyone think of that? I would not call members of the Westboro baptist church members of the tea party or the GOP, nor would I call members of Black Panther, US Communist Party or Bill ayers indicative members of the Democratic party. Fox news probably would on the latter so there you go. It seems the Fox News tactic of smear is the way to go.

joseph brand

jank wrote: »

So why do you knowingly use a derogatory term to use a political faction. Would it be OK to call a LGBT group the 'dyke group' or the 'fag party'. No it wouldn't so why lower yourself to 'teabagger'?

Was this comment made, tongue-in-cheek? So many opportunities for a double-entendre.

You're not comparing like with like. The LGBT community have been oppressed and have had to fight for equal rights. Then there's gay bashing (physical violence).

What oppression have the bigoted, xenophobic, racist, christian Teabillies had to fight?

I've no doubt that Robin would not allow the terms '****** party', 'cracker party' or 'gook party', which would all be highly offensive. Tea Baggers though, just like Repubtard*, don't have the same connotations. It's not that complicated.

From the dictionary.

Repubtard
A retarded Republican, which in itself is a double negative, due to the fact that Republicans are already retarded.

Repubtard's favorite channel is FOX (Forgotten Old Xenophobes - previously referred to as Freaks On Xanax) News.

They are responsible for outsourcing and offshoring cause they save some money to donate to other Repubtard candidates in upcoming presidential elections. Repubtards also favor toddlers carrying semi-automatic's, a supposedly advanced nation without healthcare, war-mongering, tea bagging, and tax breaks for the rich (which they embellish by stating that trickle-down economics works, which of course it doesn't, but greed-at-top economics is what they practice.)

They also believe that $7 million dollars isn't "wealthy enough". Additionally they are in favor of cutting education, social security, stem cell research, social programs, and sending American manufacturing overseas for cheap labor and higher revenue, etc. pretty much everything that makes an advanced industrial country...well...an advanced industrial country.

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

Was this comment made, tongue-in-cheek? So many opportunities for a double-entendre.

You're not comparing like with like. The LGBT community have been oppressed and have had to fight for equal rights. Then there's gay bashing (physical violence).

What oppression have the bigoted, xenophobic, racist, christian Teabillies had to fight?

I've no doubt that Robin would not allow the terms '****** party', 'cracker party' or 'gook party', which would all be highly offensive. Tea Baggers though, just like Repubtard*, don't have the same connotations. It's not that complicated.

From the dictionary.

So because a group has not been oppressed in the past its OK to stoop to namecalling? Really? I cant find that in the charter.


From the Charter.

2. Respect the right of people to hold religious or irreligious beliefs which are different from yours. Forum moderators reserve the right to take action against posts or posters which they deem to be offensive or intended to inflame.

Here is an idea, how about NO name calling?

PopePalpatine

I prefer "Fearmongering Obnoxious Xenophobes" TBH.

Corkfeen

Conservatives call them 'teabaggers' too so it's not exactly a derogatory term and merely an informal term,not our fault that it draws forth vulgar images and connotations in your mind. :rolleyes:

robindch

Having just checked "teabagging" on urban dictionary, it'll be "teabillies" from now on.

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

Having just checked "teabagging" on urban dictionary, it'll be "teabillies" from now on.

:eek:

Learn something new everyday!

Sarky

Did you all miss the few days where Tea Party folks proudly declared themselves Teabaggers before they actually realised what they were saying? God, I never laughed so hard at politics.

PopePalpatine

Well, they seem to have the intellectual abilities of a 12-year-old COD player who teabags. :pac:

robindch

Sarky wrote: »

Did you all miss the few days where Tea Party folks proudly declared themselves Teabaggers before they actually realised what they were saying?

Video or GTFO!

Sarky

Will you make do with some links?

Tea Party functions sell "Proud to be a teabagger" badges.

Tea Party protestors waving signs advocating teabagging.

Conservative author and Tea Party activist Andrew Breitbart posted this video to try and reclaim the term It might be a spoof, but Tea Party folks aren't well known for being able to make fun of themselves.

Overheal

From 2009. I haven't heard Tea Party supporters call themselves that in a long time. For the sake of civility the terminology is against the charter on a couple forums here.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/27/top-dem-actually-refers-to-ted-cruz-supporters-as-tea-baggers/

At this point its become part of the rhetoric in Washington: not something nice you say to refer to someone, unless you're trying to piss them off.

For those of you keeping score at home, the White House and its allies have in the past few weeks referred to President Obama’s opponents as terrorists, hostage takers, arsonists, and anarchists.

But you're right I don't think many of them were aware of what would happen if you looked that word up on the internet.

Sarky

Overheal wrote: »

From 2009. I haven't heard Tea Party supporters call themselves that in a long time.

People in trying not to draw attention to hilariously embarrassing f*ckup they made shocker.

Overheal

Quite. But that doesn't mean we should perpetuate the "Teabagger" rhetoric.

Politics parent forum charter wrote:

Keep your language civil, particularly when referring to other posters and people in the public eye. Using unsavoury language does not add to your argument. The following words are not permitted specifically by this charter:

Scumbag (or a variant)
Beard(s)
Crusties
Teabagger(s)
Unwashed hippies (or a variant)
Zanu-FF
sheeple
zionazis



This is not an exhaustive list, and Moderator discretion remains.

Bannasidhe

Overheal wrote: »

Quite. But that doesn't mean we should perpetuate the "Teabagger" rhetoric.

Politics parent forum charter???

Did I take a wrong turning at Albuquerque?