Pam Spaulding is one of those libs who honestly seems to believe that the Tea Parties are all about Whitey getting his hate on because the POTUS is black. There’s nothing new about this. It’s the same meme that they were spouting prior to the election, when they were saying that the only reason one mightn’t vote for Obama was racism.
Obviously, then, she quotes with approval J’inane Garofalo’s asinine interview with Olbermann, and she’s managed to find three pictures from the Tea Parties that she believes clinch her case. No, it’s certainly not possible that any of the attendees of these events have any political-philosophical reasons for opposing Obama’s policies. Any reasons that they may give are presented merely to give color to the ugly racism that inspires them, in truth. Forget that business about Obama trebling the national debt, the lies about those earning less than $250k seeing not a dime in new taxation, or the exponential growth of the public sector, or the unprecedented government intrusion into the private sector, or the polling data that showed that race was a bigger factor among Obama voters: all red herrings, according to Pam. Never mind, too, that the impetus behind the Tea Parties is broadly anti-incumbent, Pam follows the talking points and attributes them all to the “GOP base.”
(via Darleen)
As part of her expose, she mentions a brave bicyclist of color riding through one of the crowds, with an STFU message for them. Could it be that the rider felt secure enough that the crowd would be non-violent that he was unconcerned for his safety in counter-protesting? No, obviously he was risking life and limb.
The contrast between the Tea Party rallies and the G20 protests, marked by vandalism and violence, could hardly be more stark. And the leftie press was concerned with heaping opprobrium on the behavior of one side, only. Horror of horrors, Texas’s Rick Perry came out in defense of state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. But what is it that has been going on here in Vermont for years now, that the leftists seem to believe is a righteous protest?
The Second Vermont Republic is a nonviolent citizens’ network and think tank opposed to the tyranny of Corporate America and the U.S. government, and committed to the return of Vermont to its status as an independent republic and more broadly to the dissolution of the Union.
You can go and read the principles on which the movement is founded at the site, and discover that it’s backed by the Middlebury Institute. You’ll note that there’s no allusion at all to the US Constitution there.
The craziest of the many crazy things brought forth in Pam’s diatribe is her reference to the lack of “class” on the part of some of the protesters, even as she engages in the homophobic “teabagging” smear, one that was perpetrated ad nauseum by television reporters. Jeff has already deconstructed the “limbic system” argument offered by famed neuroscientist Garofalo, here, but hey, what are facts, when you can simply shout, RACIST?
So, let’s not proceed by implying that the left may have some strange bedfellows, please. And apart from Ziegler being manhandled at USC and Tancredo being deprived of his First Amendment rights at UNC-CH, we’ve now got CNN pulling the Roesgen video off the web with bogus copyright claims.
Texas’ Rick Perry.
Thanks, USCitizen. I must have had the word “press” on my mind for some reason.
I heard that mentioning secession is racist because of the slavery connotations. I always knew you Vermonters were racists.
But the Tea Parties are about Baracky being a lesbian. I can’t believe Pam missed that.
If you outlaw, say, automobiles, no one but outlaws will drive. Or, if you prefer, anyone who drives will be an outlaw.
Indeed.
Rick Perry is a defeated politician man walking. He’s a true fuckin’ idiot with a ten-dollar haircut. Once we get him out in the open we will cut him down in the tall grass just as we did with Santa Ana. He’s outnumbered and engaged in a battle he has no chance of winning.
Garofalo is a different story, I’d so do her.
You’re thinking of Chris Dodd, hor.
She’s probably already a lesbian, thor, but if you really want to cement her convictions, by all means show her your microbiology.
Pam is right about the teabagging. The juvenile use of the word is really outrageous…
Thor named his left hand “Garofalo?
thor, I am sure you are trying, but it is hard with you and women, given you are still down in mom’s basement and all.
And don’t knock $10 haircuts, they get the job done.
Serr8d, I bet you butt boink Easter bunnies. That’s about as funny as you get.
Confessions of a right wing “hater”.
Milbank better be careful about being grouped in with right wing extremists. Charles Johnson is watching!
Simon Cowell’s creation? Is thor Jeff G’s creation? Not quite as emotionally compelling.
For a while people though thor was a parody. Most of us have just come to accept that he’s just a sad, sad little man.
Here’s a new guy question for a lazy Sunday:
Is thor a for-real leftard or just a troll spewing lefty nonsense to get a rise?
I honestly can’t tell.
@14
Ooops. Didn’t see that.
So, I’m assuming he’s NOT being “satirical”?
Mark Steyn and Pam enjoy a cuppa of tea!
It is le vice Anglais
But his right hand’s always available for his Russian gal…
The right wing is losing the next generation by not promoting teabagging.
“…we’ve now got CNN pulling the Roesgen video off the web with bogus copyright claims.”
Look at the bright side of that, Dan. It shows they are at least still capable of being embarassed. If they had been promoting it and trying to get it to go even more viral (“look how we stood up to the WINGNUTZ in our unbiased pursuit of facts!!11!1) then we would have passed some line I don’t think we want to.
You asked LTC John, here is the here is the CNN Roesgen video.
More from Founding Bloggers.
You want a little bias mixed in your tea? CNN and crack cub reporter Susan Roesgen are ready to help!
Attn., All Progressive Groupist Narcissists: my essence now inhabits each of your Whole Foods teabags. Drink it. Tea will never taste the same again.
I just hope the essence is not this, because that would be so wrong. Even against Progressive Groupist Narcissists.
Garofalo is a black supremacist
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Comment by Muledriver on 4/19 @ 8:05 am #
Comment by Carin on 4/19 @ 7:58 am #
Comment by serr8d on 4/19 @ 8:22 am #
Please ignore the lying ignoranus.
Thank you.
Warning! the Great Whale Sharmuta is prowling these waters..
I was curious to check at LGF earlier today, and was kinda humored to see his how sensitive he is. It would seem that the smallest amount of criticism – nay reflection – gets you banned.
You know, his house, his rules. It’s just perplexing. Why bother having comments?
I think now that Pam Spaulding quotes Jeneane as some sort of liberal sage means we can safely ignore anything she may say in the future. Beneath contempt. The both of ’em.
Well if Sharmutta is around, let me repeat that Charles Johnson is a yellow coward and afraid of any discourse.
I had a friend who had a female cat named Sharmutta that was always pregnant, it means slut in Hebrew and Arabic.
Carin, I think his actions are a last ditch effort to wratchet up the blog count. Blogging burns one out and Charles is pretty toasted. It is too bad. I don’t necessarily disagree with him on vaccines, evolution, etc. I get the whole history of WFB driving the Birchers out of the conservative tent. I am one of those amnesty folks who agreed (in part) with John McCain, but I do not see Gates of Vienna and Atlas Shrugs as racist blog sites because they defend some Flemish anti immigration party (that has the audacity of requiring assimilation of immigrants and supports Israel).
But Charles is no WFB. He is a yellow coward. I am sorry but merely saying that Neo Nazis and Tim McVeigh should not be labled broadly “right wing” because it just plays into Neopalitano’s guilt by association meme is not wrong.
Dan, here is a screen cap I did from the Founding Father’s vid on a clearly biased sign!
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff182/darleenclick/blog%20images/teaparty_chicago.jpg
and, of course, Republicans who voted for the Porkorama are never held to account, eh?
Here’s a barely-focused Republican-smacking sign at Nashville’s Tea Party, Darleen. It’s apt.
serr8d
There was close to 2,000 people at the Rancho Cucamonge Tea Party … and the majority of signs were, as Dan said above, anti-incumbent. The ire is directed against any congresscritter voting for a bogus stimulus bill that will quadruple the deficit in the first year alone.
Joe – it does not mean slut in Arabic. It is the eqiivalent of bitch.
Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana died on 21 June 1876 of natural causes.
“Pam’s House Blend – always steamin'”
Just so. It also draws flies.
You are not going to get through to someone like that. The extreme factual cherry-picking and reasoning by anecdote are second nature, not something the deluded individuals have enough self-awareness to recognize in themselves. She gets positive feedback for this crap. The reward cycle is strong in this one.
Joe – it does not mean slut in Arabic. It is the eqiivalent of bitch.
I have always heard sharmutta used in the context of slut, and that was in Egypt. You may be right that sharmutta technically means bitch in Arabic. The fact that the Hebrew word, sharilla, closly matches it on slut supports the slut translation.
[…] Here. […]
Did the Boston Tea Party have paper mache puppets and anti-McDonald’s literature? I forget.
Which of the two contrasting contemporary events — the G20 and the tea party rallies — had more in common with the original boston tea party?
B. The original BTP was a protest against state overreaching. The G20 protestors are demanding that the state extend its reach even further.
Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana died on 21 June 1876 of natural causes.
Has anyone thought to begin a database of things about which thor hasn’t a clue, yet carries on endlessly? Is there a computer anywhere of sufficient size and speed to access such a file?
Here is FoxNews promoting the TeaParty Movement by publishing an AP filing which states without challenge that
and quoting an exchange between David Axelrod and, I presume, Bob Shieffer thus:
Way to go foxy Fox, covering your tracks ex-post-facto, very clever.
“The original BTP was a protest against state overreaching”
By giving the east india company a tax cut?
“Did the Boston Tea Party have paper mache puppets and anti-McDonald’s literature? I forget.”
It had the vandalism. Don’t know how many anti-corporate pamphlets were written against the owners of that tea.
Re: #46. OK, actus has now officially had his hole in the line up filled… Not exactly something we had all been clamoring for, to be sure.
If you or your RTC eKoNumiSt buddy knew anything of Texas history you’d have understood the reference was to that of his surrender. But you didn’t because As.Usual.You.R.Fuck.N.Bendejos.
By giving the east india company a tax cut?
Yes. As well as charging tariffs on other companies tea.
As.Usual.You.R.Fuck.N.Bendejos.
If you really wanted to be edgy you should have said something about his leg.
Don’t matter; you’re so obscure and cool that no matter how you do it it’s gonna ROCK!!!
I think what gave Santa Ana away was his silk underwear. What gives thor away is his propensity to smell of it.
Comment by Jay on 4/19 @ 3:41 pm #
Please ignore the cocksucking bandwidth thief liar.
Thank you.
Comment by serr8d on 4/19 @ 3:44 pm #
Please ignore the retarded marmoset.
Thank you.
Looks like I presumed wrong. It was Harry Smith doing the Axelrod interview, not Bob Schieffer.
[…] and excellent observations here, which she picked up from dear Dan Collins of Protein Wisdom here. My thanks to her for bringing this to my […]
Bendejos
Acho que se queria dizer “pendejos,” seu viado sujo.
“pendejos,â€
I thought that was the correct spelling and pronunciation; but being that it was coming from the god of thunder I figured Bendejos was the way we would have to say it now.
“Bendejos”.
Hahahahah!
Add Spanish to the seemingly endless list of subjects of which whoreboi is brutally ignorant.
Grew up in Texas, lives in Florida, but doesn’t know the one Spanish word that he hears directed at him multiple times per day.
That level of ignorance takes actual talent.
Hahahahah!
We (allegedly, I should say) have one of Santa Ana’s wooden legs in the Illinois State Military Museum. And I thought it was cool that MG Aziz wanted to give us two AK-47s for helping him out around Basrah. Not quite the same…
Hola, bendejo, estas mas estupido.
Chinga tu madre, maricon.
[…] Protein Wisdom: Pam’s Soused Bender […]
#39
You ain’t just kiddin! The last time your friends invaded Texas they burned a bunch of kids to death.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/20/napolitano-returning-vets-too-stupid-to-avoid-extremists/#comment-2119686
This is me opening a can of worms, I know, but what the heck.
The US Constitution provides a method by which states may enter the union; it doesn’t provide a method for a state to leave. If it did, that method would have been used in 1861. Short of a constitutional amendment providing a legal process there is no method by which a state can secede short of rebellion. This includes any treaty provision, as no treaty can override the US Constitution, it cannot permit what is prohibited, it cannot permit what is required, it cannot order something down differently than what the Constitution says.
Secession is not a legal option.
Neither was the Declaration a legal option in that sense, was it? Not that that would challenge the clearly correct position I think you’ve take viz the Constitution, MikeyNTH. Just to say, much of politics (all?) has to begin in an extra-legal position, doesn’t it?
Not all politics begins with an extra-legal opinion, no Sdferr. The Declaration and the Revolutionary War were just that – extra-legal to overthrow the existing governmental relations. Insurrection and secession are extra-legal, which makes the call for insurrection and secession unConstitutional.
I know some have argued that secession is a power reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment (see comment threads at Hot Air), but it is my opinion that it truly is not a state issue as much as a federal issue, and under the federal government. Secession affects not only that state but every other state in the union, as does the admission of a state, which is why admission is left to the federal government and the states’ representatives in Congress. I do not think it is strange that the federal constitution does not mention secession because the authors of that document were practical, hard-headed men who had just gone through a revolution. It would be strange, I think, if they provided a method for the dissolution of the union they were creating in that document, short of amendment.
There is an important sense in which, however, this can be read as possible, if we push the beginning of any particular politics back through whatever antecedents (ancestors) it may have had, through the antecedents of that antecedent, etc, etc, to the point at which we arrive in an originary politics, that is to say, an originary founding (and these have been noted often to entail criminal wrongdoing, btw, as Machiavelli pointing to Romulus, or Cain and Abel). This sort of event could have happened (probably did) in many parallel instances across the history and places of the earth. And those instances can be seen to resolve in an important argument, namely that argument over the conditions in the pre-political “state of nature” in which men found themselves, from which, it happens, our nominal notions of “equality” and “purpose” of politics happens to derive.
On such a basis politics is extra-legal. Commonly, politics takes place within a political system. Going outside that system goes outside of politics as commonly understood, and involves the overthrow of that political system.
That does not mean that insurrection and rebellion are not to be done, for their could very well be good reasons for doing so, but an appeal to legality is very strained. No political sysyem that I know of provides for its dissolution by insurrection.
The Declaration of Independence provides a long list of greivances the American colonies had with Great Britain, but the document by its own existence was an admission that politics within the system would not provide the solution, and only overthrowing the system would a solution be found. And it isn’t treason – if you succeed.
But legal? No. It wasn’t legal. Just? Necessary? I think so. But not legal.
A quibbling argument, perhaps; but if anyone wants to go down that path (secession and/or insurrection) I want those persons to honestly know what they are doing – in my opinion.
I don’t disagree at all Mikey, I think you have it aright.
Though I don’t think of founding a politics as constituting an exception, exactly, since without some founding someplace we’ve got no politics at all. And that whole problem of *getting it right* seems, on its face, as grave a political problem as can be and well worth the puzzling over again and again.
Well, I’ll close out with this because in a few hours I will be in bed, and I do need to wind-down and not do all of the internet stuff that “angries-up the blood” as Grandpa Simpson would put it.
We never get politics right because we are human, and it is part of human-relations. We can’t really get family relations to be in harmony; how can we get relations with non-family members in harmony?
The best political systems leave some room for “slop”, for squabbling. A system that is too tight leads to it locking up until dynamiting the system is the only way out of it. The only thing I want with respect to that is to have people seriously understand what that means. There is the possibility of getting worse, you know. Or better. Anytime secession/rebellion is spoken of all possibilities are on the table.
You know, both Robert Lee and George Thomas were Virginians. Both were career army officers. Both were honorable men. They made separate decisions. When the political system is dynamited – who knows what will result?
Or, I might add, undermined slowly and imperceptibly over decades or scores of years, who knows what will result?