“The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A protester was spotted with a sign saying, “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You.” <So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology. But others ran with it and ran with it. ”

http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=Mjk1YmRjNzIxNmUwMTI0ZWYxZWU4OWU2MzFiOWJmNDE

Is that clear now?

Looks like the Right just tea-bagged themselves.

Republitards need to quit their bitching already and just be glad they called themselves Teabaggers and not donkey punchers.

Speaking of teabagging, it is sort of ironic that George Alan Rekers, co-founder of conservative Family Research Council, was recently caught returning from a 10-day trip to Europe with a male escort he found on Rentboy.com.

I think conservatives should just Shut the Hell up about it and take it with good humor.

Wow, this is a great thread you started, Frances. You must be so proud. Is that what you had in mind when you dreamed of being a journalist? Oh wait, that’s probably why you’re stuck here writing crappy blogs instead of writing somewhere reputable. Keep up the great work!

Olby on Obama’s “teabagger” comment: You asked for it

Ah, this again. Some guy at an early tea party was photographed carrying a “Tea Bag the Democrats Before They Tea Bag You” sign, and henceforth, unto eternity, all tea partiers are expected to politely endure being derided in those terms. We started it — and by “we,” I of course mean some random guy and a few others — and therefore we must accept the consequences. Forever. Which, in an odd way, makes perfect sense: Not only does it follow the guilt-by-association mania by which any one tea partier is responsible for the sins of any other member, but it also illustrates the left’s unwillingness to accept blame for its own smears. It simply can’t be the case that they’re going into the gutter because they enjoy it; they’re too virtuous for that. It must be that we asked for it.
It’s almost not worth pointing out that Olby’s selectively quoting from National Review here — what would “Countdown” be if he provided full context? — but I’ll point it out anyway. Here’s Jay Nordlinger’s passage in fuller flower:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/06/olby-on-obamas-teabagger-comment-you-asked-for-it/

Which, in an odd way, makes perfect sense: Not only does it follow the guilt-by-association mania by which any one tea partier is responsible for the sins of any other member, but it also illustrates the left’s unwillingness to accept blame for its own smears. It simply can’t be the case that they’re going into the gutter because they enjoy it; they’re too virtuous for that. It must be that we asked for it.

Wow, Allahpundit has got you guys pegged just about right. Classy bunch!

MichelleF says:
May 7, 2010 at 1:46 am
“Wow, this is a great thread you started, Frances. You must be so proud. Is that what you had in mind when you dreamed of being a journalist?” Oh wait, that’s probably why you’re stuck here writing crappy blogs instead of writing somewhere reputable. Keep up the great work!”

Indeed.

Frances Martel wrote in this blog “Is Bozell unaware that– without getting into too much detail– straight people can teabag, too?”

Well MARTEL, are you unaware that straight people can sodomize as well?

Both sexual acts are used as a negative gay connotation.

If I were a person of high office who chose to classify a group of people as “sodomites,” I would currently be ducking torches thrown at my person.

The Tea Party Patriots are going to exact their revenge on these creepy communist crudballs in November. And again in 2012. One Term Wonder is going down!

Give it a rest! The ignorant tea partiers first used the term themselves. They want to be called something else now. Fine, I’ll call them Mentoists if they want, but there is no fault for using the term they stole from the adult entertainment industry. Speaking of adult entertainment ….

MichelleF says:
May 7, 2010 at 1:53 am

And the photo they always point to, to justify their claim that the “teabaggers” started it, the one with the sign “tea bag liberal dems, before they tea bag you” is being held by a KID.

http://rsiasoco.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/2009-03-18-tea_bag_dems.jpg

I have to agree that it is a pejorative term – used in the same manner as f*ggot. Although, I would compare the President’s use more in line with calling Tea party Americans c*ck suckers, than f*ggots.

The Real Royal King: So does that mean that the N word is acceptable to all blacks because I heard a black use the word once? As a matter of fact the N word is used in rap songs. So it must really be ok than. Whats your feelings on that?

Obviously gay straight people teabag.

Thank you so much for sharing with us your very foul language. Sara N. Italy. I’m sure you are very popular with sailors on leave.

Michelle F – Andrew Breitbart has used the term teabagger and said that he is a “proud teabagger” – Are you asking him for an apology?

Fun fact:
May not have all the much to do with this particular conversation but then again, it may be completely relevant.

Presidential candidate Andrew Jackson was the first Democrat ever to be associated with the donkey symbol. His opponents during the election of 1828 tried to label him a “jackass” for his populist beliefs and slogan, “Let the people rule.” Jackson was entertained by the notion and ended up using it to his advantage on his campaign posters.

Presidential candidate Andrew Jackson was the first Democrat ever to be associated with the donkey symbol. His opponents during the election of 1828 tried to label him a “jackass” for his populist beliefs and slogan, “Let the people rule.” Jackson was entertained by the notion and ended up using it to his advantage on his campaign posters.

The point of this is, both parties went on to embrace symbols that they themselves did not come up with and in the case of the Dems was thought of to be a ‘slur’ against them. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the ‘Tea Bag’ become more a symbol for the Tea Party movement. Wear it proud, it’s obviously annoying the opposition, and it would annoy them more if it was embraced by the party.

Sorry, almost forgot the reference:
http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/donkey-elephant.html

I’m going to start the Salad Tosser Party. We will throw lettuce at our rallies and townhall meeting.

Vote Salad Tosser Party and give the Democrats a licking this November.

Does anyone with half a brain believe that this was the original connotation? It certainly has morphed into a convienient handle for the left with LSDNBC’s help. If anything very un-presidential thing to say, but this has become the norm, sad indeed.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagger

HanzoSword says:
May 7, 2010 at 10:10 am
Michelle F – Andrew Breitbart has used the term teabagger and said that he is a “proud teabagger” – Are you asking him for an apology?

Of course not. There is a difference in saying something the vile way liberals mean it and in a way that is mocking liberals for using it.

I feel members of the Tea Party had no no idea what a “teabagger” was. MSNBC was the origin of the tea-bagging monicker in APRIL 2009 along with Anderson Cooper of CNN. Both networks wonder why they are failing in the cable news business when they manage to offend a major portion of their available audience.

Regardless of whether it’s a gay slur or a non-gay slur, it’s a slur and really has no place outside the festering hothouse that is Daily Kos.

Moderate says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:22 am
I feel members of the Tea Party had no no idea what a “teabagger” was.

Guilty as charged. I had NO idea.

On Wed. night’s Sean Vanity show, Vanity’s favorite discredited pollster, Dick Morris, called members of the Tea Party “teabaggers”. Twenty minutes or so later Vanity was all over the president for using the term. Guess they got their talking points confused.

Humpty, could it be just as simple as Morris misspoke when he called them ‘teabaggers’, kinda like when Biden or Kennedy or other Dems referred to Obama as Osama?

You see when you hear something over and over, it just gets ingrained into your head. It’s simple psychology really.

humpty dumpty says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:44 am
On Wed. night’s Sean Vanity show, Vanity’s favorite discredited pollster, Dick Morris, called members of the Tea Party “teabaggers”. Twenty minutes or so later Vanity was all over the president for using the term. Guess they got their talking points confused.

Michelle F – Andrew Breitbart has used the term teabagger and said that he is a “proud teabagger” – Are you asking him for an apology?

Of course not. There is a difference in saying something the vile way liberals mean it and in a way that is mocking liberals for using it.

I can’t decide if the left is too stupid to understand this or just like to play dumb so they can continue to use it.

MichelleF says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:20 am

Of course not. There is a difference in saying something the vile way liberals mean it and in a way that is mocking liberals for using it.

—

How do you discern the intent, Michelle. You may be one of the world’s foremost phrenologists, but have you actually come in such contact with a large body of liberals?

Frankly I’m not asking anyone for an apology. I’m simply pointing out a fact. The whole controversy is silly, ridiculous, and for the most part a waste of time.

By the way, are any of you actually thinking that the president used the term derogatorily?

This IS a tempest in a tea pot.

I’ve missed the obvious, haven’t I. You’ve mastered cyberphrenology! Brilliant, I say: Brilliant!

This IS a tempest in a tea pot.

—

Loose, I should hope. Let’s not go about teabagging our brew.

So, TRRK, are you against Hate Crime legislation.
Hate Crimes based on ‘intent’. Knowing what’s in the heart and mind more than the action itself.

How do you discern the intent, Michelle. You may be one of the world’s foremost phrenologists, but have you actually come in such contact with a large body of liberals?

I think you can, again, just playing dumb.

Great analogy Zakk. I for one can hardly wait for king’s response.

Zakk, hate crime legislation is procedural and not substantive in nature. It creates a rebuttal presumption of intent based on the nature of the victim. The burden of proof is changed to require a perpetrator to prove he did not have such intent. It’s like a host of other laws. A common presumption is that the husband of a woman who has given birth is the father of the child. The law requires he prove he is not. So, I don’t get too worked up by this issue. Having said that, I’m not sure that we really need this body of law, and I am not in favor of most laws which shift the burden of proof. Remember, too, “hate crime” is not free-standing, but an enhancement. I have to say that with federal civil rights crimes, which kick into play, generally in Alabama, when White perpetrators or crimes against African Americans go unpunished by those pesty nullification jurists, the hate crimes enhancement can go away.

I am pleased to see a rightist concerned with civil and procedural rights. Most rightists seem to want anyone accused of a crime to be summarily executed.

I like to see the good rightist emerge from time to time. We need them.

TRRK, I think you could have summed that up with ‘no, I’m not in favor of hate crimes.’

Yes, the hate crimes label is essentially useless. When the crime is against a white person, you will never hear the term applied. According to Department of Justice and FBI crime statistics, black on white crime is currently much more prevalent than white on black (the King will only refer to the deep south of the past. Ignore those pesky present-day stats. Anyone who looks at those is a racist!)

‘Yoke of oppression, sting like a bee, Christian males, Amerika, etc., etc.

The Boston Tea Party was the culmination of a resistance movement throughout British America against the Tea Act. Colonists objected to the Tea Act for a variety of reasons, especially because they believed that it violated their right to be taxed only by their own elected representatives.

The American Tea Party is the culmination of Republicans losing the 2008 presidential election. “Teabagger” is appropriate.

Remember a few years back, that white couple was abducted, she was raped and murdered and he was murdered by a group of blacks. I’m trying to remember if that was considered a hate crime. I don’t think that it was.

Channen Christian and her boyfriend in Knoxville, Michelle. Not a peep of it being a hate crime. That term only applies if it’s white on black or straight on gay. And if you try to apply it any other time, you’re obviously a racist homophobe.

MichelleF says:
May 7, 2010 at 2:36 pm
Remember a few years back, that white couple was abducted, she was raped and murdered and he was murdered by a group of blacks. I’m trying to remember if that was considered a hate crime. I don’t think that it was.

—

Well, duh! “White” is not a suspect classification. It couldn’t have been treated as a hate crime under presenbt law. What’s the problem Michelle? You wanted the perpetrator disemboweled, then hung, then decapitated, then electrocuted? When is it enough for you rightists?

HAHA, so i’ve been told. But ironically, only on this site.

Just the rationalization I’d expect from you King.

Regarding Barry Obama and Larry Sinclair, one is the teabagger and one is teabaggee. The question is which was which or did they take turns

The King says: “White is not a suspect classification.” What the hell does that even mean? Michelle and I were saying that when that group of blacks tortured and killed that white couple in Knoxville, no mention was ever made of it being a hate crime. It seems that in the left wing mind, only white people are capable of hate.

He knows what we meant, Writer. He’s just afraid to say out loud that he thinks that hate crimes can’t be against Whites because we are in fact the racists. And it’s only white, conservative people capable of hate, not all whites.

I’m waiting for the King’s ‘yoke of oppression’ speech. Whenever I ask him why it’s okay for him to insult and stereotype white southerners, but it’s not okay to stereotype blacks or other minorities, he launches into this spiel that whites have never faced the ‘yoke of oppression’. That’s the line he uses to excuse his own bigotry.

What is it about the phrase you don’t understand? It’s not that complicated; please think it through and re-submit a response. Thank you.

By the way Brent Bozell is a big fat tea-bagger…with a bad haircut.

Thoughtful as always, Ted.

Which phrase is that, Ted?

Hello,everybody,the good shoping place,the new season approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar!
===== http://www.fashiongoods.us ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

UGG BOOT $50

Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $33

Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $33

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $12

New era cap $9

Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18

FREE SHIPPING

Sean vannity is just looking for ‘something” “anything” he can use against the left. Vannity is a bigot tea baggot himself.

The Real Royal King says:
May 7, 2010 at 2:54 pm
MichelleF says:
May 7, 2010 at 2:36 pm
Remember a few years back, that white couple was abducted, she was raped and murdered and he was murdered by a group of blacks. I’m trying to remember if that was considered a hate crime. I don’t think that it was.

—
Well, duh! “White” is not a suspect classification. It couldn’t have been treated as a hate crime under presenbt law. What’s the problem Michelle? You wanted the perpetrator disemboweled, then hung, then decapitated, then electrocuted? When is it enough for you rightists?”

Interesting, this started because trrk scoffed at someone assuming she knew the intent of someone else. Here he is assuming the intent of everyone having a particular political orientation. Sounds like a bigot to me, why are you a bigot trrk? Why don’t you favor holding everyone equal under the law, why do you favor treating people of different “classes” differently under the law? Why do you mix civil and criminal law when presenting an example? Is it hand waving or just plain lying?