Posted on 11/08/2009 8:09:38 AM PST by kristinn
Barack Hussein Obama II, used a crude gay-baiting sexual slur to denigrate Tea Party patriots in a talk with House Democrats yesterday on Capitol Hill, reported the New York Times:
According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”
The word 'teabag' is used to describe a sexual practice popular in the homosexual community. Earlier this year as the anti-big government protest movement exploded across the country, liberals in the media first started calling conservative and libertarian protesters organizing under the Tea Party banner, "teabaggers," in a juvenile effort to gay-bait the protesters. Democrats, including now the president of the United States, have also used the slur.
The gay-baiting slur was used with gusto on MSNBC in April by anchors David Shuster and rachel Maddow. Newsbusters quoted Shuster:
For most Americans, Wednesday, April 15th will be Tax Day. But in our fourth story tonight: It's going to be teabagging day for the right-wing and they're going nuts for it. Thousands of them whipped out the festivities early this past weekend, and while the parties are officially toothless, the teabaggers are full-throated about their goals.
"They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending - spending they did not oppose when they were under presidents Bush and Reagan. They oppose Mr. Obama's tax rates - which will be lower for most of them -- and they oppose the tax increases Mr. Obama is imposing on the rich, whose taxes will skyrocket to a rate about 10 percent less than it was under Reagan. That's teabagging in a nut shell."
Newsbusters also reported the term was used 51 times in one segment on the Rachel Maddow show.
CNN's Anderson Cooper piled on the same week with his own gay-baiting 'teabagging' slurs.
Hat tip Kathyrn Jean Lopez at NRO.
Welcome to FR, newbie.
Exactly. I don’t know why we allow these linguistic butchers ownership of certain words to the point where use of the original results in flagrant attempts at social persecution.
If we wouldn’t relinquish good, serviceable words to these goats and would challenge them and laugh ‘gaily’, while throwing choice word right into their pruney, arch little faces, we might serve our own good purposes, until those who wish to pervert political and social discourse tire of silly games and go home.
And, actually, it isn’t a silly game, but follows a thesis formulated, I believe, by a Berkeley professor so leftists could “own” an argument and win confidence to their causes.
The Boston Tea Party: a time when professors of political correct rhetoric would have been no match for those men and women of steel spines and freedom loving spirits.
Right - and the reply was directed at someone who said a President should never use sexual slang, ever.
Soo... cya.
Exactly. He talks about the people “waving tea bags around” in speeches, as the early tea partiers did. This is a stretch. No doubt he refers to us as teabaggers in private though.
While I've gotten tired of the constant citing of Saul Alinsky here on FR, primarily because I don't think those doing the citing really, truly "get" what they're advocating, this is yet another example of Alinsky's holding the opposition to their own book of rules.
It's constant, it's interspersed throughout the dialogue, and it's meant to do two things: make hardcore leftists who comprise the majority of Rhodes' audience hate conservatives all the more because in their twisted perception it's hypocracy, and to make the rare conservative listening in doubt one of their own, due to turning their own supposed biases against those they're presumed to support. It's a two-edged sword.
Rhodes no doubt actually does consider herself a strong, pro-gay rights supporter. Why should she worry about flinging nasty stereotypes like so much poo, when (insert protected group here) themselves do it all the time?
So you think Obama is the Manchurian Candidate? An empty suit controlled by others who make him believe he’s number one when in fact he’s a pawn in a complex chess game way over his head?
This is possible. We know that other people wrote his books and he can hardly speak without a teleprompter. And we know that all his academic work is a state secret. Why? Perhaps it would expose a low I.Q.
I wonder who would be the Red Queen (or King?) running the chess board? George Soros?
One thing is for certain if this theory is true: Obama has mucho secrets about his life hidden away and any one of them would be enough to destroy him and perhaps send him away to prison.
Blackmail is a very effective tool for a George Soros type to keep his boy focused and on message.
I wonder if he said this before or after he invoked the name of the newly dead at Ft Hood to pass his agenda?
What a class act. /sarc
“I never thought I’d see a president that made slick Willie look good.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
You and me both, who would have believed that we would never see another Dem president who could shine Willie’s shoes?
I’ll concede that you may be right that it was intentional, but you don’t know for sure that I’m wrong because zero is also gaffe-prone, so next time you post to me, if there is occasion for that, please change your tone and approach. It’s rude.
I've always wondered about that. Along with Obamacare we're getting taxes on food/soda because the obese cost more in healthcare. We're getting huge taxes on cigarettes because smokers have more health problems. What about HIV/AIDS? Most AIDS, in this country anyway, is spread through male gay sex and IV drug use. Will we be seeing taxes placed on gay men?
LOL
“I sometimes believe HolyO and his elitist cronies are seriously trying to start a civil war so that they can take control with the military backing them—but then I am comforted in the knowledge that he has rudely insulted our brave military members as well, with his shout outs to friends and nonchalant treatment of those massacred here on American soil and his photo op viewpoint toward those dead returning from other countries, and if he ordered an attack on protesting American citizens such as myself and my children, I would hope and pray they would rebel against him and his cronies as well!”
I think you hit the nail on the head! Indeed, I believe it is the goal of Obama and Company to start a civil war - I mean a violent and very bloody civil war on par with the Russian Civil War of 1918 to 1922, because without the anarchy, death, destruction, famine and confusion of civil war how else can they crush liberty in the most free country in the world?
These people have studied their history. They know that even in the semi-democracy of the Russian Republic after three years of world war there were millions of people willing to fight and die for freedom, so they know that in this country with its 200 year plus Republican history there are even more people willing to fight and if necessary die for liberty.
Yes, the Obama Leftists mean to start civil war, but first they want to reduce most of the population to poverty, disease and hopelessness by way of another Great Depression. They know the seizure of medicine, the nationalization of banks and industry, and “Cap & Trade” restrictions can ONLY lead to the economic destruction of the USA.
Then when we are weak, confused, hungry, living on park benches and under Freeway bridges they will attack in force...
I say since civil war is inevitable with the Left, we move first as is our right under the Declaration of Independence. Never will we be stronger! Every day we delay our rebellion, the Left grows stronger and we grow weaker, and the outcome of victory for the forces of liberty less likely.
Then somebody better remind him that such abuse can lead to horrible, irreversible consequences. But every drug abuser thinks they will be the one exception.
But how do the poor CHILDREN of narcissists fare?
This isn’t the first time he’s used the phrase. I saw an interview back in April where he pretended to have no idea about the protests, and made a tea bagger joke back then as well.
Sorry. I can’t abide anyone suggesting HolyO is innocent. Not being rude, being factual.
That is a protected class and they have more rights than
you and I have.
For you and every one else on this thread that doesn't understand the meaning of teabagger, go here and read definition number two.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.