West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia
Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
Big Daddy Sen. Robert C. Byrd

The 'first tea party'

by: Carnacki

Mon Aug 24, 2009 at 14:50:18 PM EDT


By Carnacki

Why are tea baggers so stupid?

teaparty

The "first" tea party, "35 years" ago, in the Boston Harbor area of Kanawha County.

Via One Citizen in the comments, comes this article which listed some of the signs found at a rally to mark the 35th anniversary of textbook protests in Kanawha County:

"Kanawha County Held the First Tea Party 35 Years Ago."

Perhaps that idiot textbook protestor should go back and read a history textbook.
Carnacki :: The 'first tea party'
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The 'first tea party' | 42 comments
Labeling and name-calling are counter-productive from either side (2.50 / 2)
The Boston Tea Party was a bit more complex than the shorthand "taxation without representation." Americans had very different interests than the British who were making decisions.  Kinda like western Virginia before the Civil War ;-)  We were on the other side of the mountains, and while we had elected representatives, our interests were very different from the Virginians east of the mountains.  Kanawha County in the 70s had two very different cultures under the same government (and probably still does).  People were stressed, as they are now, by unemployment, with the added stress of huge inflation - gasoline and hamburger went from around 29 cents a gallon and a pound to $1.29 very quickly that year.

All of us want control of our lives, and especially how we bring up our children.  I wouldn't have put up with my children being forced to pray in school; they wouldn't put up with their children being taught what they saw as wrong. One of the highest values of democracy is to protect the rights of the minority.

I had a long conversation with a couple of anti-health reform protesters last week, and I could tell they thought I was some kind of idiot for trusting the government with my healthcare - but they didn't come right out and call me stupid.

If someone jumps up during a townhall meeting (4.00 / 1)
and starts yammering about death panels and Communism while holding a picture of Obama with a Hitler mustache drawn in, then I'm not about to sit silently with my hands folded in my lap.

And if you couldn't get those two "protestors" to understand that the government is trustworthy only when Republicans aren't screwing it up, then your conversation with them probably went on far longer than necessary.


GOP Rep.  Patrick McHenry, a key player in helping craft the Republican message, has offered an unusually blunt description of the Republican strategy right now.

McHenry's description is buried in this new article from National Journal:

   "We will lose on legislation. But we will win the message war every day, and every week, until November 2010," said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., an outspoken conservative who has participated on the GOP message teams. "Our goal is to bring down approval numbers for [Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and for House Democrats. That will take repetition. This is a marathon, not a sprint." source

By the way, JAWVMM, since the Health insurers have reportedly mobilized of its 50,000 employees to  defeat the public option Which works out to roughly 1,000 per state), there's a pretty darned good chance that you wasted your time even talking to them. So why NOT point out to everyone else in the room that you know a shill when you smell one?  

[ Parent ]
Just think we'll get further by trying to understand than by demonizing (0.00 / 0)
They were real, actual local residents. They said they didn't trust Bush, Obama, or government in general.  Given that they were natives of a state where many elected officials and government employees of both parties are known to have been bought or coerced by coal, timber, oil and gas, etc. for more than a century, not to mention having employed both state and federal troops against its citizens (albeit not recently), it is not an entirely irrational point of view.

I talked to them because I wanted to know how they felt about the current state of health care and try to understand their objections to the current reform.  Besides discovering that their objection was too much government control of anything, I eventually discovered they believed that the public option would be the only option available if they lost their current insurance.  I think they actually even believed me when I explained that insurance exchange would include private insurance.

[ Parent ]
That bogus "I just don't trust government, PERIOD" meme is one that all these shills are using. (4.00 / 1)
I respect your right to an opinion, but the chances are that you've been duped, and actually wasted your time talking to them. It has already been established that many, if not most of these "protesters" are local insurance employees. They've been uncovered as having prepared for this showdown for years, right down to maintaining lists of employees willing to participate in local political action so that most of them already have their act down cold.  And on top of that, the insurance industry has been spending somewhere between $1.4 and $2 Million PER DAY for quite a while now to protect their profits. Their market research has given them all sorts of psychological tricks to get you to flinch.

If you think they were "for real", then why did we never see these greedy teabag twits protesting back when Bush was throwing trillions away on Cheney's business venture in Iraq?  Ask yourself why are they bothering to protest Obama's attempt to fix the health insurance industry but not Bush's torturing of "furriners"?

So after you got these two who don't trust government to run anything BOTH to admit the public option sounded feasible, did they suddenly drop their "Obama = Nazi" signs and ask for communion?

The chances of those two being real protesters is between slim. Most of them are being paid specifically to foment doubt of all Democrats for the purpose of wresting political clout back for their neocon puppets. But if your protesters weren't insurance industry shills, then the odds suddenly jumped ten-to-one that they joked about the look on your face when they agreed with you on the public option ...all the way back to their Klavern.

If that's the case, then good luck on ever getting them to vote "D" on anything.

[ Parent ]
So now *I'm* too stupid to spot a shill (0.00 / 0)
Their sign said "Sick, Sicker."  You have no idea whether these particular people or any of the teabaggers protested the Iraq war - plenty of people did.  And people are much more likely to protest something that directly effects them - healthcare - than something that doesn't - the Iraq war. They didn't agree with me on the public option (and I wasn't trying to convince them) but they did go away with some more information, and so did I.

You have been duped if you truly believe that everyone who is opposed to to the public option or healthcare reform in general is a shill of the insurance companies.  There is legitimate dissent and a lot of concern out there. It is being stoked by the insurance companies, and by the GOP because they just want to win at any cost to the country. Dismissing all dissent as insincere doesn't advance our cause. I know lots of "just folks" that don't trust government, period. You need to get out more and listen to a variety of people.

[ Parent ]
this is a conspiracy now? (0.00 / 0)
An insurance industry plot?  Wow.  That's a new one.  I thought this was all being drummed up by Glenn Beck and Fox News.
[ Parent ]
Yes (2.50 / 2)
But thinking the first tea party was 35 years ago in Kanawha County displays a level of stupid that has to be mocked.


When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.
[ Parent ]
did you ask them about Medicare, etc.? (0.00 / 0)
It's amazing the level of brainwashing the corporate media is capable of.

About 40% of the population already get their health care insurance through the government. You don't seem them asking the government to stop providing it.

[ Parent ]
No, (0.00 / 0)
they were too young for Medicare.  One had private insurance as a retiree through her employer and was concerned that her employer would drop coverage for retirees if reform passed.  This is a legitimate concern, especially if you have been told that the public option is the only option.

A lot of people on Medicare have bought the argument that the reform will decrease their benefits because of the funding from Medicare cuts - you can call them "eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse," but a lot of people don't think that you can really find that kind of money that way - especially if they already believe that governments naturally have a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse - why would that change?  Of course, McCain's health care proposal also called for saving about the same amount in the same Medicare cuts - but that hasn't been loudly pointed out.

People on Medicare have less to gain from reform than most people, and perceive they have more to lose.

Look at the MoveOn/SurveyUSA redo of the NBC/WSJ August poll
http://www.surveyusa.com/clien...

More people 60-70 are "paying a lot of attention" to the issue than anyone else.  More people 60-64 think a public option is "extremely important" than any other age or other group, except those who identify themselves as liberal - and 18-24 year-olds.  These two groups are also the strongest supporters specifically of the Obama plan. I think that's because the younger ones are more likely not to have employer insurance and the older ones are worried about losing coverage before they are eligible for Medicare - or having to continue working to maintain coverage.  65-70 year-olds believe more than most other groups that their choice of doctors and treatments will be limited.

[ Parent ]
i had a conversation with one man who crossed the street (4.00 / 1)
he did not believe i did not work for some group and was being paid to be there, i think my knowledge of the bill and being able to refute his list from libery.edu took him back a little. i came with my own sign:

insurance is rationing
who do you support capito?
we need reform now

11 april 1974. my last quarter at berkeley. reading that article just amazed me having lived close to oakland. we had our share of john birchers in my home town out there in the desert. they did not like the idea of a high school kid trick or treating for UNICEF. the call to impeach the former governor was a billboard i remember.

school board bombing. just wow. over books. by "reverends". the navy base was segregated by rank and cal was such a diverse campus. i have a hard time understanding people being proud of censorship by intimidation.

the sandbox here is full of lots of characters, from the conservative troll to the edgy old lefty. sometimes the boys play rough and leave it all on the field. i hope you come back.

NFTT: Support My Team or I Will Dance

[ Parent ]
Not gone (4.00 / 1)
- just out of that particular conversation.
[ Parent ]
These folks were domestic terrorists. period. (4.00 / 4)
They attacked a school and the BOE. They should be loathed and condemned.
They staged violent attacks to advance their Taliban-esque agenda.
They weren't the original tea party. They were the original Tim McVeighs.
Funny how the right excuses and praises these idiots, but wants to obsess over Bill Ayers and distort history so it looks like he's a close associate of Obama.
You nailed it heath_harrison. (4.00 / 2)
Not only are they now calling themselves terrorists, they're being applauded by Republican leaders for doing so.

According to the Redding Record Searchlight, an incident broke out at a town hall at Simpson University in Redding on Tuesday when Herger signaled encouragement to a 67-year-old town hall attendee, Bert Stead, who called himself a "proud right-wing terrorist."

US House Representative Wally Herger, of California's 2nd congressional district reportedly replied to the comment,

"Amen, God bless you,"  "There is a great American." source  

Never forget that Republicans soundly criticized the Department of Homeland Security's warning (pdf file) against right wing terrorists.  Not only that, they mischaracterized its contents for the purpose of politicizing it.

But then it's only natural for Republicans to distrust what comes out of Homeland Security, since the Bush's first Homeland Security chief admits that Dick Cheney had been using the agency as a political bludgeon all along.

Photobucket
The Mad Tea Party by Mark Bryan

[ Parent ]
Best characterization of the Bush Admin. I've ever seen! (4.00 / 1)
Thanks OC for posting this pic, I love it! Alice doesn't live here anymore, thank God.
[ Parent ]
A few of them were violent - (0.00 / 0)
most weren't.  A few in the anti-war movement in the 1960s were violent; most weren't.  Those who resort to violence should be condemned. But comparing the Kanawha textbook protesters to the Taliban is way over the top. It either trivializes the Taliban or demonizes the Kanawha protesters.
[ Parent ]
Those who didn't walk away when the violence broke out are morally guilty. (4.00 / 1)
Just like the Republican party is doing now with the gun-totin' bullies at these townhall scream fests, they took full advantage of the violence. To excuse some as being nonviolent is like excusing Massey's stockholders for not actually running a drag line on a mountaintop removal site.

BTW I was a very active anti- Vietnam war protestor, and I assure you that there was actually very little violence connected to that movement.

There was, however, a massive covert effort pushed by http://mediamatters.org/resear... to LIE about the protesters back then.  I personally stopped an infiltrator from throwing a Molotov cocktail by knocking him out. I know he was an infiltrator because the SOB admitted it when he later personally arrested me on a bogus and unrelated charge (which was later dropped).  Regarding the Kanawha County book protest, I know folks involved in it from the beginning who didn't do anything but gloat over the attention their "certain faction" was getting.

In for a penny, in for a pound is how the law looks at it.  Its just too bad that at the time Bob Wise or Charlotte Pritt wasn't governor instead of Arch "vertical stripes make me look slim" Moore, or the outcome likely would have been far different, with quite a few conservatives wearing vertical stripes for their complicity.

Anyone who now wants to get all touchy-feely with these rightwing jerks can spare me the plea on their behalf because they'll let their partners puncture your tires just as easily as they snicker at you behind your back.

[ Parent ]
"there was actually very little violence connected to that movement" (0.00 / 0)
Days of Rage
Army Math Research Center
Kent State
over 30 ROTC buildings burned or bombed

and those are just the major incidents.

I was a Vietnam protester, too, and didn't see a lot of violence here in West Virginia or the one DC rally I went to, but there certainly was elsewhere.

[ Parent ]
So you're positive that Kent State's violence was the fault of the protesters, right? (4.00 / 1)
But just not yours.

And you claim that you were an active VietNam war protester. So tell me. At what point did you either try to stop the violence, or else walk away? Kent State?

In for a penny, in for a pound, dude.

It sounds to me like your guilty conscience has you overcompensating now by trying to suck up to those "protesters" who left their hooded sheets back in the car.

Their signs said "sick" and sicker", but did you ever ask them what THAT meant?

[ Parent ]
Kent State (0.00 / 0)
The ROTC building at Kent State was burned as part of escalating violence in the town and on the campus before the National Guard came in for what resulted in the fatal confrontation.  Some protesters were violent; they weren't the ones that died.  Both sides were at fault, and relative innocents died.

Violence and hatred on either side just breeds more hatred and violence.

[ Parent ]
just read up on it... (4.00 / 1)
I had never realized the ROTC building that was burned down was scheduled for demolition.

National Guard now have rubber bullets and other less lethal means for crowd control. (This creates it own problems like cops overusing tasers.)

Protesters are now even more carefully taught how to engage in non-violent protests and remain ever mindful of provocateurs.

It's really not fair to just say "both sides were at fault" at Kent State. Only one side killed anyone, innocent bystanders at that.

[ Parent ]
Clem (0.00 / 0)
Got to have that "fair and balanced" centrism where the "lefties" and the innocents were just as much to blame for stopping the assault rifle rounds as the National Guard troops were for firing them.

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.
[ Parent ]
I didn't say equally at fault. (0.00 / 0)
The original point was whether or not there was violence during the Vietnam protests, on the part of the protesters.  There was.  The left is not pure and perfect.  The right is not pure and perfect.  Even the center is not pure and perfect. And the ethics are relative to the situation.

But looking at people as left, right, center, teabaggers, "corporatists," from here, from away from here, from the geographic right wing of the state ;-), making assumptions based on that and attacking their character, is bigoted. Sometimes I think bigotry is evenly distributed across the political spectrum.

I'm not a centrist. I'm fairly complicated, politically.  I think I'm usually to the left of most WV Democrats, if we have to put everything on one line.  There are really only particular issues and coalitions, and they are relative and changing.  The point of politics is to empower the people, and that means listening to and communicating with everyone.  Bigotry shuts off that communication.

Go read Rules for Radicals

[ Parent ]
I have (0.00 / 0)
Mockery is one of the tools to use.

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.
[ Parent ]
Mock those in power (0.00 / 0)
Mock the Republican leadership, mock the Democratic leadership, mock Don Blankenship, mock Randy Huffman, mock the right-wing media.  Mockery is an excellent tool, but the battle is always against those in power, not against our fellow citizens, however misguided we think they are.  Do not mock them.
[ Parent ]
JAWVMM (0.00 / 0)
"However misguided we think they are?" No, I'm all for shades of gray on many things, but there are also many things where people either are or are not misguided and it has nothing to do with our judgement of them. It simply is. Those who put forth shameful ideas deserve to be shamed.

There are people who are not persuadable and if you spend more time canvassing and with street level activism, you'll learn the sad lesson that you have your 1s and 2s, your 3s and 4s and you'll have your unpersuadables. The only thing you can do with them is move on. Trying to educate them or inform them is a waste of time that can be better spent trying to reach people who are truly persuadable.

The NY Times article you emailed is a perfect example of people we CANNOT reach.

I'll let Joe Klein explain why:

Now, the story was a bit of a phony. The fellow in question admitted to receiving most of his news from Fox, Rush and Drudge--which means that he never experiences actual news, at all. But still, you wonder where he got such a bizarre notion about Obama's health care intentions--especially since any plan that passes will dramatically improve breast cancer treatment for a great many women, especially those currently without insurance, since it emphasizes preventive care.

snip

Needless to say, there is no plan to nationalize or socialize health care. This letter, therefore, is a disgraceful scam, intended to scare the living hell out of already frightened and militantly uninformed people --Fox News viewers who think the sky is falling because a Muslim-Socialist-furriner is in the White House. I'd like to see the leaders of the Republican Party disown this poisonous swill. But they won't--because the real leaders of the Republican Party (Fox, Rush and Drudge) are spreading it.

Those people DON'T want to be reached and trying to reach people like that is a waste of time that could be better spent elsewhere. The rightwing is made up of the willfully ignorant and until they are mocked instead of treated as if their views deserve equal respect as sane views they'll continue to elect the Bushes and Cheneys.

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

[ Parent ]
I agree (0.00 / 0)
that the best strategy is to concentrate on persuading the most persuadable.  One of my lifelong rules has always been "never argue with a fundamentalist" (and that doesn't just include religious fundamentalists.)  I don't agree that the right wing is entirely made up of the willfully ignorant.  If it were, then mockery wouldn't persuade them.  If it isn't, mockery won't persuade them.  Contempt, derision, and ridicule cut off communication with the person mocked, so if you are wrong about whether they are persuadable, you have lost an opportunity for no good reason.  Mockery is useful only when it is used to persuade others of the moral bankruptcy or ignorance of someone in power - and then only when other methods have failed.

If I haven't learned by now I probably never will.  My first street-level experience was in the Rockefeller-McGovern campaign.  One of the first door-to-door encounters I had was with a woman whose only question was what we were paying for votes.  I didn't try to persuade her (or buy her vote).

[ Parent ]
JAWVMM (0.00 / 0)
Mockery is useful only when it is used to persuade others of the moral bankruptcy or ignorance of someone in power - and then only when other methods have failed.

I disagree for several reasons. To not mock and shame those who are wrong as you do their leaders with the same viewe takes an even more patronizing point of view towards them than mocking them. I believe people whether "ordinary folks" or the party leaders hold the power to make their own decisions. People-powered politics is not just a catch phrase and not just for the left. To say just the leaders deserve the mockery is to say that the "ordinary folks" who hold the same view as the Limbaughs and Blankenships had no alternatives than to be rubes. They did. They made their choices just as their party leaders did.

That's why it is patronizing to say the right wingers are not willfully ignorant. They had the same access to factual information as everyone else. They chose not to read or listen to it. They chose to be sheep. No one made them listen to Limbaugh and Hannity and decide to oppose their own best interests. They did it to themselves. They had 8 years of undiluted Bushism and they are still going back to the Kool-Aid table for yet another glass. They're doing it of their own free will. To think otherwise that they did so unknowingly is to hold them in even less regard than I do when I mock them.

The real purpose of the mockery isn't to persuade the person being shamed. What is the point of a conversation with them? If you've truly canvassed, you know that even if you convince one of them on the facts, they simply move on to their next point, never acknowledging when they are wrong. The real audience for the mockery is not the target, but the surrounding audience. Treating the rightwing idiots like the tea bagger with the sign above with respect lends them your credibility when instead they should be targeted for derision so that not only they but their views are discredited and laughed at by others.

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

[ Parent ]
Sorry (0.00 / 0)
I guess when I said "Mockery is useful only when it is used to persuade others" I wasn't as clear as I should have been that the "real purpose of the mockery isn't to persuade the person being [mocked]" (not quite the same as shaming).

I think it is perfectly possible to have respect for a person, and treat them with respect, while disagreeing with their ideas and abhorring their beliefs.  

Clearly you are unpersuadable on this issue, so I'll move on.

[ Parent ]
JAWVMM (0.00 / 0)
Yet you're willing to patronize them by treating them differently than their leaders who hold the same ideas and beliefs as they do?

I guess the difference between you and I is I believe power comes from the people and people have to be held to account for their ideas and beliefs as equally as their "leaders."

What you propose is not treating people with real respect, but treating them differently than you would their "leaders." That comes down to treating them as inferiors to their superiors where as I'm all for mocking and shaming them equally.

But I've been down this path before. So feel free to move on.



When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

[ Parent ]
Hate the sin, love the sinner. Mahatma Gandhi (0.00 / 0)
Maybe when I grow up I'll understand, but I don't, right now, understand.  Your saying "if you spend more time canvassing and with street level activism, you'll learn..." (and when I said I had, doubted me - "If you've truly canvassed") is not patronizing -- and my saying "The point of politics is to empower the people, and that means listening to and communicating with everyone" is?

It seems to me that calling people "rubes, sheep, right-wing idiots, stupid, willfully ignorant" and saying "they should be targeted for derision so that not only they but their views are discredited" is more than patronizing and condescending, which at least imply some pretense of respect.

Yes, I am advocating that people deserve to be "treated as if their views deserve equal respect as sane views" - or at least as if the people deserve equal respect.

That you are Napoleon or Jesus Christ is an insane view.  That the Democrats passed Medicare to get a foot in the door for socialized medicine, and have been trying ever since to expand it to everyone is a sane view; a rational case can be made for it.  That America currently still needs coal to power the lights, air-conditioning, and manufacturing is a sane view.

Whether everyone should have health care provided by the government, paid for by the government, or paid for by themselves if they can afford it is an underlying issue, and so is how much control the government should have over our lives.  As I said earlier, some people have perfectly rational reasons for not trusting government.  Has the government of West Virginia, on the whole, proved to be trustworthy in protecting the land and the people?  Are we not discussing right now the fact that the person in charge of environmental protection is instead protecting coal companies? Did the National Guard kill innocents at Kent State? Did the US Army kill West Virginia miners trying to unionize? Do we want backdoors into email servers, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office?

Whether the mountains of southern Appalachia should be dismantled, the air and water polluted, and its people driven into disease and poverty to provide power for America and greater profits for the mining industry is an underlying issue.

I think we here believe that we all need to make sure that everyone has good health care, and that at least some government control of health care is acceptable.  I think we here believe that the land and people of the southern Appalachians shouldn't be sacrificed any longer for the good of the rest of us.  I think that most of the country agrees on the first, and if they understand the real price of the second, as they eventually did for "blood diamonds," for example, they will agree on the second.  I think we will get further toward getting agreement by spending our time listening to the hopes and fears of the other side than bashing them over the head, literally or figuratively.

[ Parent ]
That "both sides were responsible" is no more than rightwing shinola. (0.00 / 0)
But you've obviously swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

Tell me true, JAWVMM -does this sound familiar to you at all?

Friday evening downtown began peacefully with the usual socializing in the bars, but events quickly escalated into a violent confrontation between students and local police. The exact causes of the disturbance are still the subject of debate, but bonfires were built in the streets, cars were stopped, police cars were hit with bottles, and some store windows were broken. The entire police force was called to duty as well as officers from the county and surrounding communities.

Geewhiz, that sounds a whole lot like Sunnyside in Morgantown "back in the day" to me. It actually looked a lot like it, too. BUT THAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE PROTESTER'S VIOLENCE AT KENT STATE UNTIL THE COPS AND THE MAYOR DECIDED TO ESCALATE SOURCE

So let's get something straight right here and now. Ordering the National Guard to shoot unarmed students is a whooole lot more violent than students flipping over unoccupied police cruisers, breaking windows or even setting fire to unoccupied buildings (if, in fact, they did). So you need to get your head on straight, pal.  These rightwingers meant business back during Kent State. They had the same "winner take all" attitude during the Kanawha County book protests, and they certainly mean business now.

You and I both know that the wingnuts who insist on strapping on guns and hanging out at these town hall functions are doing it just to keep normal folks away. The threat of personal harm is an extremely powerful inducement to the public to steer clear, and these thugs know it. But unlike you, I'm the type of guy who, given the opportunity, would take the firearm from Joe the Plumber in the blink of an eye.

Apparently you're the type who'd rather plead with him to not use it.  The difference is that he'd think twice about bringing it to the next townhall after I knocked him out, shucked it down, and tossed it back at him.

Like I said before, I respect the fact that you're coming at this from a whole different point of view. But I'm not about to forgive all those "holier than thou" rightwingers who now want us to believe they weren't complicit in the Kanawha County violence.

Oh, and one more thing. Comparing the VietNam protests all across the U.S. to the violence in Kanawha County in an attempt to explain why you chose to "dialogue" with those two Ron Pauliac losers is a pretty strong signal that you've got some deep guilt issues that you need to deal with. I suggest that you get an attitude adjustment ASAP.  Until than, please steer clear of me in the event that you decide to attend another townhall meeting.

Do us both a favor and totter quietly on over to the geezer bench where papaw needs someone to whisper apologies for the town parking meters requiring quarters instead of nickles, and you'll be A-Okay.  

[ Parent ]
That "both sides were responsible" is no more than rightwing shinola. (0.00 / 0)
But you've obviously swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

Tell me true, JAWVMM -does this sound familiar to you at all?

Friday evening downtown began peacefully with the usual socializing in the bars, but events quickly escalated into a violent confrontation between students and local police. The exact causes of the disturbance are still the subject of debate, but bonfires were built in the streets, cars were stopped, police cars were hit with bottles, and some store windows were broken. The entire police force was called to duty as well as officers from the county and surrounding communities.

Geewhiz, that sounds a whole lot like Sunnyside in Morgantown "back in the day" to me. It actually looked a lot like it, too. BUT THAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE PROTESTER'S VIOLENCE AT KENT STATE UNTIL THE COPS AND THE MAYOR DECIDED TO ESCALATE SOURCE

So let's get something straight right here and now. Ordering the National Guard to shoot unarmed students is a whooole lot more violent than students flipping over unoccupied police cruisers, breaking windows or even setting fire to unoccupied buildings (if, in fact, they did). So you need to get your head on straight, pal.  These rightwingers meant business back during Kent State. They had the same "winner take all" attitude during the Kanawha County book protests, and they certainly mean business now.

You and I both know that the wingnuts who insist on strapping on guns and hanging out at these town hall functions are doing it just to keep normal folks away. The threat of personal harm is an extremely powerful inducement to the public to steer clear, and these thugs know it. But unlike you, I'm the type of guy who, given the opportunity, would take the firearm from Joe the Plumber in the blink of an eye.

Apparently you're the type who'd rather plead with him to not use it.  The difference is that he'd think twice about bringing it to the next townhall after I knocked him out, shucked it down, and tossed it back at him.

Like I said before, I respect the fact that you're coming at this from a whole different point of view. But I'm not about to forgive all those "holier than thou" rightwingers who now want us to believe they weren't complicit in the Kanawha County violence.

Oh, and one more thing. Comparing the VietNam protests all across the U.S. to the violence in Kanawha County in an attempt to explain why you chose to "dialogue" with those two Ron Pauliac losers is a pretty strong signal that you've got some deep guilt issues that you need to deal with. I suggest that you get an attitude adjustment ASAP.  Until than, please steer clear of me in the event that you decide to attend another townhall meeting.

Do us both a favor and totter quietly on over to the geezer bench where papaw needs someone to whisper apologies for the town parking meters requiring quarters instead of nickles, and you'll be A-Okay.  

[ Parent ]
Sorry, I've got better things to do (0.00 / 0)
As the Monty Python skit says, this isn't argument, this is abuse.  Shouting at people who are on the same side is even less productive than shouting at the people on the other side. And clearly you have no idea of the meaning of respect, so please do not use the term to me.

I have wasted way too much time on this - most of my time for the last month has been spent supporting the public option - three Saturdays at information tables and rallies, preparing for same, researching, and countless email discussions with people who are opposed. I'll just go back to that.

[ Parent ]
curious question (0.00 / 0)
Does anyone in the Tea Party movement call themselves 'teabaggers' or is that just some juvenile epithet making wordplay on a homosexual slang term?
actually, they did (4.00 / 1)
A number of the rightwing sites were going by that term a few months ago. The RNC was one of many that used it.
They made references to "teabagging Obama" as well.
Until everyone started making fun of them and it blew up in their face.

[ Parent ]
The fact that you've referred to that term as homosexual reveals much about you, doesn't it? (1.00 / 1)
By the way, who DID let the doggy-style out?
[ Parent ]
I have yet to see a single productive (0.00 / 0)
comment from you about anything.  It is a fact that 'teabaggers' was chosen as an epithet because it's a slang term for a gay sexual practice and this sort of sexualizing the context of anything one wishes to "pwn" (I believe that is the current term) is straight out of 6th and 7th grade.  It's on the same level as thinking "heh heh, he said balls" is automatically funny, or thinking "cunt" and "tool" are appropriate terms of insult.  All that should have gone out the window by not later than age 16.  Most "activists" never grew up, never did anything meaningful with their lives, never met any real challenge or had any real rite of passage into adulthood, which is why most activists act like 6th graders.  Because in many ways, they still are, continually replaying 6th grade feuds between playground cliques.  Progressive lefty activists, movement conservative Republican activists, doesn't matter, they all live in their echo chambers and act like middle schoolers toward the other side while refusing to see the exact same behavior on their own side.  This is a very good case in point: "Tea Party, heh heh, let's call them teabaggers, heh heh, he said teabaggers".
[ Parent ]
Like I said, you pegged yourself when you attributed that term to homosexuality, pal. (0.00 / 0)
Most of us already had you pegged as little more than an ankle biting corporate apologist.

You've now accidentally let us know that you're very likely a homophobe as well

Who's best fit to let doggy-style out of THAT closet other than himself?

woof

[ Parent ]
Right (0.00 / 0)
The fact the "progressive lefties" were right about everything from the Iraq war to the politicization of terror alerts by the Bush administration in the run up to the 2004 elections makes us the same as the movement conservatives and shows we "never grew up" or did "anything meaningful with our lives."

Any other stereotyping or projecting you want to do while here?

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

[ Parent ]
I just did a word search regarding your comment. (0.00 / 0)
The only person who has ever used the "c" word on WVA BLUE is you.

And so once again, sir, you have defined yourself pretty accurately.

Photobucket

woof

[ Parent ]
whose slang term? (4.00 / 2)
Why would it only be teh Gays?

Language NSFW: Tea Bagging - Sex and the city

It's also a slang term for a particular victory dance (crouching over a corpse) in first-person shooter games. You can search out your own videos for that.

[ Parent ]
Kim Cattrall, English raised in Canada, not a gay man (0.00 / 0)
then again there were never any women in the Month Python cast either

NFTT: Support My Team or I Will Dance
[ Parent ]
The 'first tea party' | 42 comments
Premium Advertiser

blog advertising is good for you

Welcome!

( Home )
Menu

Click here to join!

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About
- About WVaBlue.com
- Send us news at wvablue@gmail.com
-  Subscribe in a reader

Advertisers


Support WVaBlue

Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere

Proudly displaying the West Virginia Red, White, Blue, Green and Orange.

Join me at http://www.350.org


WVa Democrats
  • Sen. Jay Rockefeller
  • Sen. Joe Manchin III
  • Joe Manchin for Senate (2010/2012)
  • Rep. Nick Rahall (WV-03)
  • Secretary of State Natalie Tennant
  • Auditor Glen Gainer
  • Treasurer John Perdue
  • Agriculture Commissioner Gus Douglass
  • Attorney General Darrell V. McGraw
  • Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as Gov.
    		•
    Declared Candidates
  • Jeff Kessler
  • John Perdue
  • Natalie Tennant
  • Earl Ray Tomblin
  • Rick Thompson
    		•

    Copyright 2011 West Virginia Blue
    Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
    This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, dedicated volunteers and participation by members of this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong solely to their respective authors.
    Powered by: SoapBlox