According their website, The Tea Party Tracker was founded by the NAACP, Media Matters, Think Progress and New Left Media
Take a look at their Gallery for the proof of the intolerance of people like me. As the link says, "See photos of Tea Party extremism from around the country." You should enjoy it.
People see what they want to see.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Mal, if you're going to progress to making threads on a political subject of your interest, please make them have a coherent concept.
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: The moral of 9/11 this year: A few obviously extreme individuals should not be taken to reflect the character of the nation, religion, or larger group they belong to.
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Mal, if you're going to progress to making threads on a political subject of your interest, please make them have a coherent concept.
People who can't understand the concept of A+B=C accuse me of rambling. Logic is a wonderful thing, but some people react to it with slander.
Our nation was more free under Bush. Under Bush you could carry a sign that said, "**** the president" or "Kill Bush". Now, an offhanded remark in a bar will get you a visit from the Secret Service and a hick in a swamp gets a visit from the FBI for threatening to burn a Koran.
I'm sorry people don't like my posting "style". It is difficult to respond 10 to 1 and when I do, the other 9 jump on me for being a coward for not responding to their individual posts. Intolerance of different opinions is nothing new to progressives. They eat their own as well.
If only the tea party could get away with "**** the President" and "Kill Obama" signs....
You were much freer under Bush.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will admit to being sort of flabbergasted when the media leapt on a couple of Obama-as-Hitler signs and called them out for being hideously offensive, when "Bushitler" was, like, a thing (is that what kids these days call a "meme"?) at leftist protests from 2000-2008. I mean, I think comparing either guy to Hitler is pretty absurd, but the hypocrisy, when I first saw it, was pretty startling.
In one example, I saw footage of the same reporter flipping out at a Tea Partier for an Obamahitler sign, and then footage several years earlier of her chuckling at a guy in an oversized Bushitler mask and calling him a presidential "lookalike."
I will say, however, that Bushitler has a certain linguistic flow that you don't get when you use Obama's name instead. So the left has that going for it.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The difference is that nobody in the democratic party could give a crap about what the leftist extremists thought. On the other hand you have the Republican party which is completely controlled by these tea party freaks.
Posts: 739 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry people don't like my posting "style". It is difficult to respond 10 to 1 and when I do, the other 9 jump on me for being a coward for not responding to their individual posts. Intolerance of different opinions is nothing new to progressives. They eat their own as well.
Actually they accuse you of never, ever responding to posts which flatly prove the basis of your opinion wrong, with linked evidence. Your opinion is your own, but you don't get to make up your own facts. You then ignore it when you get called on them, moving instead to another set of talking points which are, in turn, proven wrong, and the cycle continues.
In this case, I'll bet cash money I could spend thirty seconds googling and find several instances of people making "Kill Bush" statements getting investigated, but it would do me no good because you'd never acknowledge it.
For the record, I think anyone making any sort of kill-the-president statements, even for presidents I don't like, should be looked at. One of them might be serious. In the past, several have been.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
The new rightwing nutjob talking point is that Bush gets threatened, no one cares and no one gets arrested, Obama gets threatened and everyone goes overboard. Untrue. The Secret Service investigates all credible threats and a lot of silly ones, and they make arrests based on severity. Every year, under every president, they overreach in the name of security. And I can't say I blame them.
Are there biased reporters who overlook threats to opponents? Yes, on both sides, and they deserve to be pointed out and ridiculed.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dan_Frank, you're much more reasonable than malanthrop, so what do you think about that? Can you, at least, dispense with this nonsense that there is some sort of conspiracy in the works that threats against Obama are taken more seriously than threats against Bush?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you yet again Chris. I read your first post and was already opening Google to look up at least 3 I remembered from the Bush years, when low and BEHOLD.....you had already done so.
The moron who wanted to burn the Koran is from near me, and it wasn't a single Koran, or a private belief. It was a "Burn the Koran Day" event, and the guy played to the media to get prime time coverage. He was hardly the victim of anything.
The town WAS going to charge his church for security, because you know damn well that if they had not protected him and something had happened mal and people like him would have tried to use that as "proof" of some sort of government wrongdoing. LOL
I think Bush was a horrible President, but if anyone I knew threatened his life in any real way I would have been calling the Secret Service myself. He took away far more freedoms that Obama has (or ever will), and tried to expand executive privilege FAR beyond what it's intent was to start with, but he was no Hitler.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Dan_Frank, you're much more reasonable than malanthrop, so what do you think about that? Can you, at least, dispense with this nonsense that there is some sort of conspiracy in the works that threats against Obama are taken more seriously than threats against Bush?
Oh, certainly. I strongly doubt that the seriousness of threats (or what the secret service perceives as threats) is significantly different for either president.
Excepting Fox news, it does seem to me that the Tea Party gets more negative media coverage than leftist protests got; it get smore coverage in general of course, because it's a major movement instead of a fringe. But when media outlets bothered to notice leftist gatherings, they tended to gloss over the crazier protesters and present the overall message of the protest as reasonable and sane. And speaking as someone who has been to a lot of Berkeley and SF protests... they aren't. Usually.
But I also acknowledge that what may look like the media misrepresenting the Tea Party to me could look like impartial coverage to someone... well, less sympathetic to the Tea Party.
Likewise, a lot of people who seem awfully leftist to me consider themselves centrist or moderate. And my partner considers herself fairly centrist, but I think if you examined her political views one by one, most people wouldn't call her a centrist or a moderate.
I think the idea of being a centrist or a moderate appeals to a lot of people. But now I'm getting waaaaaaaay off topic.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
