Talk-Polywell.org

The dems. They have to be. I don't think I have ever seen such a separation from reality, even from crazy people:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... usual.html
More of the same:
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/13/i ... k-schumer/

Jccarlton wrote:The dems. They have to be. I don't think I have ever seen such a separation from reality, even from crazy people:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... usual.html
More of the same:
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/13/i ... k-schumer/

I can't believe they don't know what it means - tea bagging that is. It is not part of reasonable political debate to regularly refer to your opposition as engaging in degrading sexual acts. At least not in my mind.

And then Reids comments about our president on top of all this tea-bagger stuff just makes me shake my head. I have been struggling with how to rephrase his "bad choice of words" in a way that is not a bad choice of words. How do you say that he is light skinned and doesn't speak like a negro in a nice way. His skin pigmentation is less harsh? He isn't all that black? At least he doesn't talk getto? His Harvard education comes through in his speech much more than his african-american roots? He talks more like his mother than his father? I can't do it. Which tells me that it actually wasn't the words that were the problem - it was the thought.

This is supposed to be the intellectual party? Republican's are the dumb hicks right? No, calling people tea-baggers and commenting that your leader was elected because he wasn't all that black is not the sign of an intellectual. And, defending these kind of actions is even worse.

Well since Michael Steele isn't all that light and since there is still plenty of Negro in his speech I guess that the Dems have nothing to fear from the tea-bagging Republican party this year. Heck, there is even a really dark negro tea-bagger running for congress as a Republican in Texas. No chance he can win. Fear not Harry. This year will be a cake walk for you guys.

I think this plan of talking about where we put our balls will work out just fine for you and Chucky and everyone else.

Lots of definitions for "tea bagging" here - the words have multiple meanings, definitions and usages. Some of them political.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... =teabagger
Pick your favorite, or pick the most appropriate for context.

When the argument devolves into insults it means one side has lost the argument.

Or is too wound up to do their argument justice.

Betruger wrote:Or is too wound up to do their argument justice.

Thus making my point. Rationality has flown the coup.

Aero wrote:Lots of definitions for "tea bagging" here - the words have multiple meanings, definitions and usages. Some of them political.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... =teabagger
Pick your favorite, or pick the most appropriate for context.

The context was established when this insult was first used by comedians and on MSNBC. The context and implications were established. Can't change it now.

MSimon wrote:

Betruger wrote:Or is too wound up to do their argument justice.

Thus making my point. Rationality has flown the coup.

In a victors-write-history sense yep. A calamity's when the fidgety debater actually had a winning argument and takes it with him to the grave.

Betruger wrote:

MSimon wrote:

Betruger wrote:Or is too wound up to do their argument justice.

Thus making my point. Rationality has flown the coup.

In a victors-write-history sense yep. A calamity's when the fidgety debater actually had a winning argument and takes it with him to the grave.

Stalin - millions to their graves
Mao - more millions
The Austrian Corporal - a piker compared to the above two

Yep. Socialism has a knack for sending people to their graves.

And yet all three lost the argument. Go figure.

The disconnect just keeps on going:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ ... l#comments