Tea Baggers Protest In DC
by Big Dog on Oct 11, 2009 at 12:24 Political
The Tea Party protests are comprised of people from all walks of life and all political persuasions. These are people who are tired of out of control government and want real reform in how it is run. The moniker Tea Party is a reference to the celebrated Boston Tea Party:
The Tea Party was the culmination of a resistance movement throughout British America against the Tea Act, which had been passed by the British Parliament in 1773. 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. Wikipedia
The morons on the left attacked Tea Party protesters (the modern day ones) as a bunch of conservative racists and used disparaging words when referring to them. One such phrase, used by the likes of Jeanine Garafalo and Anderson Cooper, is Tea Baggers. Tea Bagger is a vulgar reference to a sex act commonly associated with homosexual men though heterosexuals can engage in the act. Lesbian women are the only group that cannot engage in this particular act.
The references to the Tea Party protesters contained a lot of sexual innuendo and the phrase Tea Bagger is almost always one of them.
In DC this weekend, there is a protest going on and the group contains actual tea baggers. DC is the site of a gay protest where homosexuals are looking for Obama to keep his word on rescinding the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy of gays serving in the military, homosexual marriage, and any number of other gay agenda items. Those topics and their validity are for another post at another time.
Barney Fwank, an openly gay member of Congress, thinks the Tea Baggers in DC are not being as effective as they could if they stayed home and protested their members of Congress in home districts. He has a point with regard to this weekend because most members of Congress are in their home districts for the Columbus Day holiday (which is about a week long for them). The Tea Baggers will be protesting but just who will they be protesting to?
The Tea Bagging crowd even has dissension in its ranks because some in the group agree with Fwank, they think they should be protesting their own officials at their home bases. Those who decided on a national protest are tired of working the home crowd and want to appeal to Obama directly. He did not let them down and appeared at a dinner and vowed to end DADT:
“I will end ‘don’t ask-don’t tell,'” Obama said Saturday night to a standing ovation from the crowd of about 3,000 at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay civil rights advocacy group. He offered no timetable or specifics and he acknowledged some may be growing impatient.
“I appreciate that many of you don’t believe progress has come fast enough,” Obama said. “Do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach.” My Way News
Many of the Tea Baggers are skeptical because the agenda has not moved quickly enough for them. They want an end to DADT NOW. It might happen and if it does every gay who fought for it should have to enlist in the military and back up what they wanted. If that were a requirement they would not be fighting for it.
Obama is not moving quickly enough for them but they should cut him some slack. He has had to work on lowering sea levels (a messiah can do this), eliminating CO2 (so we can all die), wrecking the economy, fighting a losing battle for the Olympics, increasing unemployment, running up huge deficits, attempting to take over health care, going on a number of mini vacations with his Klingon wife, and selecting a dog. Along the way he had to make time for his I might do something in the future Nobel Appease Prize.
The Tea Baggers, like any other group that supports the left, expect payback NOW. They supported Obama and they want their piece of the pie right now. They see him paying back his supporters in the unions and in ACORN and they want theirs. This is why they sashayed into DC to protest.
They are entitled to that right as Americans but I wonder. Will Cooper, Garafalo and the other liberal morons report on this protest and if they do will they call the protesters Tea Baggers since it more aptly describes them.
Or is that vulgarity reserved exclusively for the people who protest out of control government?
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: barney frank, dadt, gays, homosexuals, Military, Obama, tea baggers
I think it’s important to note that the label “tea baggers” was initially applied by Fox News, and the tea party protesters themselves. That’s why so many people found it to be such a hoot. I would also like to point out that being gay doesn’t necessarily mean one is into tea bagging. As you said yourself, heterosexual folks do it too, and gay women can’t do it. Ironically, I’m willing to bet that out of the 2,000,000+ folks (sarcasm) that attended the actual tea party protest, more than a couple of them were into tea bagging behind closed doors. Not that there is anything wrong with it.
Sounds like Seinfeld- and that’s a weak excuse.
What excuse? I didn’t excuse anything. I’m just explaining why the label has stuck as it has.
The label stuck because the libs have fun using it. The question is, will they use the same term for these protesters.
I am willing to bet we hear crickets chirping…
Randy, you have a source for the claim Fox used it first?
I’ll do one better, due to further investigation it seems that the reporter at Fox News may have been having some fun at the expense of the Tea Party protesters as well, seems they were threatening to tea bag a bunch of folks in DC.
Here is the Wikipedia link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging
Here are links to the folks threatening the tea bagging:
http://www.reteaparty.com/2009/02/27/rick-santelli-is-as-mad-as-hell-chicago-tea-party/
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3640/3313864503_16bcc382fa.jpg?v=0
Think about it for a second, if folks were fighting mad at you and to show how outraged they are they threatened to tea bag you, you would probably be rolling on the floor laughing at them. I know I would.
The fact that the protesters did not know the definition of the term, but all the libbers do- well that kind of makes its own statement, don’t you think?
The libs just ought to call themselves The Party With Little or No Morality.
Soft, or squishy morality is none whatsoever,
I mean, take a good hard look at the “Czars”- I would not let one of them on my property, much less in my house, if they were bleeding to death.
I’d be afraid I would catch something infectious.
Randy- I wasn’t aware you were familiar with tea-bagging.
What does that say about you?
BLK: “What does that say about you?”
DAR
It says he is more knowledgeable than you.
Since when is more knowledge a bad thing?
Those who find it amusing that these Tea people would so ignorantly fall into their own trap, might get a kick out of GW Bush’s Favorite Painting.
D.
Blake,
If consenting adults want to participate in tea bagging, I really don’t see anything immoral about the act. It’s just funny that the term was used in a threatening manner by people that didn’t know that it had a much more common connotation. I’m giggling about it right now as I am typing.
I am not sure I follow Randy. The wording for the one site is suspect when the heading is to Tea Bag DC but then it goes on to describe putting a tea bag (a real one) in an envelope and mailing it to them. This was used instead of dumping tea in the water, which is illegal.
Whether it was a play on words or the person did not know what it meant, I cannot say. But I fail to see how anyone at Fox had anything to do with it.
Rick Santelli is on CSNBC
Rick Santelli never said anything about teabagging.
You can clearly see from Maddow’s April 9th show that she points out cases of folks on Fox using the term “Tea bag” on air.
Add that to Randy’s source using the term Tea Bag on April 1st and you can see that some folks in the movement clearly used the term “tea bag” before liberals started using it to make fun of the movement.
Didn’t they use the term tea bag because they were sending actual tea bags to DC?
The people like that skank Garafolo used the term to denigrate people as opposed to sending tea bags.
The point though, and try to keep on it, is will the same people call the gay protesters tea baggers?
Yes, indeed they did use the term “tea bag” to mean sending tea bags. That’s what is so funny about it. I don’t see your point.
Also, you can’t call a bunch of homosexuals tea baggers when you have no proof they even tea bag. It’s not like every gay man is a tea bagger. Nobody is going to call them that because it’s dumb. Your joke’s not funny and is pointless.
I know it stings to see the tea party movement made fun of using it’s own language, but can we leave the homophobia on the sidelines?
It does not sting to see this because the attention and the demeaning jibes mean that it is effective. It is rather sad to see supposed journalists resort to childish humor to disparage patriots.
Why is it funny to take their comments out of context? If you said you needed a tea bag to make a cup of tea should we make childish jokes about that?
No, not all of the gay men are tea baggers that is beside the point. The point is, if there were ever a time to use the reference this would be it but the MSM chooses to save the remarks to disparage Americans who have legitimate complaints.
It is only pointless to those who fail to see what takes place.
And once again, you inject something that is not true. There is no homophobia. That would indicate a fear and I have no fear of them. I don’t care what they do in private but when they make it public they are subject to the same ridicule that other protesters, including the tea party attendees, are subject to.
Or are you saying those who mock the tea party movement have some phobia with regard to the protesters?
It’s not a matter of meaning or context. Insisting that it is just makes you look like a fool.
If the folks that sparked the liberal jokes had simply been saying “Let’s send tea bags to DC” then it wouldn’t have lead to any joke. Instead they said “Let’s tea bag DC!”
If I was making a cup of tea and I needed a tea bag it wouldn’t lead to a joke. If I was making a cup of tea and I said “I’m going to tea bag this cup of water!” then I’d be the butt of jokes. It’s pretty straight forward.
Sorry, but this is just like your jokes about gay scout leaders being called “back packers” that you’ve made in the past. You have a history of anti-gay jokes and suggesting that gay rights activists should be called tea baggers more than folks who said they were going to “tea bag DC” just adds to the list.
And don’t start on this garbage about public and private. They are protesting for equal rights in DC, not the right to tea bagging, so stop pretending you have a right to your crude jokes.
Actually Bigd, you just reveal you don’t know what you are talking about. Teabagging has nothing to do with being gay.
See:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagger
And I learned something new. In a double irony, notice definition number four:
“4) a person who is unaware that they have said or done something foolish, childlike, noobish, lame, or inconvenient.”
Wow.
D.
I don’t know, Adam- Can we?
And apparently you refuse to see the point- yes, it is true that not all the homosexuals are tea-baggers- just as it would be true for sure with all the Tea Party patriots-
So the point would be it would be just as erroneous to call one side this slur as it would be to call the other.
And people wonder why discussion is so contentious-
Adam, you are already the butt of jokes- no pun intended, although anyone who read your comment probably had a chuckle, as I did.
Why, there are sooooo many ways for you to take that.
So let me get this straight. They have a right to protest but I have no right to crude jokes? Under what Constitution do you find that I do NOT have that right?
So when Garafalo calls people tea bagging redneck racists it is a joke?
The first time that the people in the MSM (supposedly respected journalists) used this it might have been a joke but they are using it now to be demeaning and to quash dissent, which as I recall, use to be patriotic to people like you.
As for crude jokes about gays, guilty. As I am with crude jokes about other groups including people who represent my nationalities.
Amazingly, when people like John Kerry demean our troops and later say it was a joke you are silent. Make a joke about a self proclaimed victim group and people are bad.
Bigd: They have a right to protest but I have no right to crude jokes?>>
DAR
Crude jokes are great. But again, it’s not that it’s just a bad joke, or a crude joke, it’s that the joke backfires in your face (no pun). It doesn’t work. It just reveals the joke is on you.
Saying the teabagging label should be applied to a gay event just reveals your naivete/innocence. It’s kind of cute I suppose.
Bigd: “So when Garafalo calls people tea bagging redneck racists it is a joke?>>
DAR
No, that’s just a statement of fact. A bit of a wide brush though. Do you ever paint with a wide brush? Or should I say, do you ever NOT paint with a wide brush?
D.
——————-
“Consider further the variety of overtly racist rhetoric that has plagued American politics since last year’s election season. Haley Barbour’s “right hand” speaking at a racist conference. Racist emails circulated by Republican staffers. Republicans demonstrating in Klan outfits. Republican mayors depicting the White House behind a watermelon patch. And a variety of campaign tactics which included mailings depicting Barack Obama’s face surrounded by fried chicken and watermelon, posters and websites attempting to link Obama to bin Laden, the Republican vice-presidential candidate praising a racist writer, and more.”
LINK.
We’ve been cataloging some of the republican racism against Obama since May of 2008.
Skank Garofalo hasn’t made a statement of fact for the last twenty years.
What- now those aren’t just as crude as Garofalo’s “humor”?
If her s is in bounds, so are the rest (and some ARE damn funny, even if objectionable)
As Randy would say, “Not that there is anything wrong with that.”
Poor,poor nobamma- he has to put up with some heckling- and some of it might even be based on the color of his skin-
Wow! Get a life and get over it. He’s free, black and twenty one- in this country, you have the right to be offended, as Skanky would say, “Straight Up.”
What Garafalo said is not a statement of fact. Even Darrel’s convoluted logic could not show it as fact.
I don’t recall saying that tea bagging was exclusively gay. In fact, I said it was commonly associated with a gay act.
Tea Bagger is a vulgar reference to a sex act commonly associated with homosexual men though heterosexuals can engage in the act. Lesbian women are the only group that cannot engage in this particular act.
That is a fact. You, on the other hand, said it has NOTHING to to with being gay. Your own reference states:
7.tea bagger
a girl or gay guy who sucks balls, the ball sack is the t bag.
The fact that it says …or gay guy, shows that it is an act associated with straight and people and homosexual men. Just as I stated.
No one said that it had anything to do with being gay, unless a man is doing it to another man, then it has everything to do with being gay (in that instance).
Read for comprehension Darrel. Did not say it meant a person was gay or that it was an exclusively gay thing. Only that it commonly referred to an act performed by gay men. It does.
Bigd: “I said it was commonly associated with a gay act.”>>
DAR
It isn’t.
Bigd: “You, on the other hand, said it has NOTHING to to with being gay.”>>
DAR
It doesn’t.
Hey, there was a football game the other day, and there were men there, let’s call it a teabagger event. That’s how stupid your “joke” is.
You guys screwed up and ignorantly and hilariously labeled your own movement something to do with teabagging. It was a very funny mistake. But it’s time to pull up your zippers and get over it.
D.
Darrel, what about the racist emails circulated by the Democrats during the primaries?
It is nothing but stupidity to claim that tea parties have anything to do with racism. There are surely some racists at the events just as there are racists at other events, even events with leftists.
I bet there were racists at the gay protest. In fact, look at how racist the gays were when they were upset about losing Prop 8. They were calling blacks the N word and causing all kinds of hatred. Where did you mention that?
what just kills me about Dar and Adam, and the rest, is that they ignore how far we have come in this country- I remember separate drinking fountains, and separate entrances- I know just what racism is, and it is not many of these things Dar say are racist- those are political.
D and his ilk jerk like a frog’s leg in the frying pan, and he has no true clue what life was like back then.
For them, it is always racist- the glass is half empty perpetually.
How sad.
BLK: “I remember separate drinking fountains, and separate entrances-”
DAR
Fondly?
Evidently, the part where he said “ignore how far we have come in this country” escaped you or you would not have to ask.
Unless, of course, you are one who ignores.
The Democratic Party was the party of racism in America despite what Garafalo and her ilk thinks.
See, this is just what I mean- He has no idea, none at all.
He’s a rebel without a clue.
Well you are certainly right, we do not have the right not to be offended.
If people do not like it, tough sh*t.
I did not say it was a joke. Adam referred to it as such. I was asking a question.
And yes, it does have something to do with being gay if gay guys are doing it to each other.
We know the point of this post is not to defend the Tea Party movement or to talk about the gay rights protest. It’s just to get in free jab at gay people.
It’s been so long since you made some one of your classic offensive statements about gays. It’s been so long since you brought up Barney Frank just so you could remind us he’s gay. It’s been so long since you had to pretend to be offended that your garbage about gay people was called into question.
The only thing missing from this conversation is my favorite: “I don’t hate gay people. I have friends who are gay!”
Who’s going to step up and deliver that gem of an excuse for why you’re not really being a bigot when they say and then defend statements about protesters being tea baggers just because they are gay?
Oh Snap! Here it comes- the racist, or in this case the “bigot” card- I was wondering how long it would take for that one to be played- looks like Adam has run out of logical arguments here.
The point of the post was the blatant hypocrisy on the part of the left, but you wouldn’t recognize it if it slapped you in the face.
I think the Promise Keepers are planning another convention. I think they are going to allow women this time but if they weren’t I wonder if it would be funny to call it a tea-bagging event since after all, in the past, you had to have one to attend.
Bigd said [main article above]: “In DC this weekend, there is a protest going on and the group contains actual tea baggers.”
DAR
The reason this doesn’t work (and reveals you are taking a swing at gays and missing), is, all large groups with men “contain actual tea baggers.”
Most groups are just smarter than to refer to themselves this way!
D.
groups such as the free thinkers?
If it’s okay for people to use the term “teabaggers” as a derogatory, sexual-innuendo laden reference to some protesters, is it then okay to call this weekend’s protesters “butt pirates” and “carpet munchers”? Is that acceptable? You can’t have it both ways (no pun intended).
And I don’t really consider the Urban Dictionary a credible source – but I appreciated the link because I found some of the entries very entertaining!
I get the point of the post and I agree – there still remains a terrible double standard when it comes to certain groups and homosexuals are now one of them. They are doing their best to make the mainstream cater to their wants and desires because they’re different. And I believe you are right on the money about wanting what they are due based on their support of BO. I agree totally – they think it’s their turn and they’ve waited long enough.
No, that’s not how it works. You can’t just call gay people butt pirates and expect it to be funny. However, if a straight laced anti litter group showed up all riled up to protest all the cigarette butts smokers throw on the ground, and they called themselves the Butt Pirates, then we would all point and snicker and make jokes. It’s funny in the same way Free Republic signs being held proudly by folks that don’t get out enough read “Tea Bag Liberal Dems before they Tea Bag You”.
Well actually you can – we have freedom of speech (for now). But I still fail to see how one form of sexual reference insult differs from the other. It’s only OK because homosexuals are one of those protected groups and conservatives are always fair game to mock, insult, or criticize. And for the record, I think that sign is funny and I read it more as “Screw them before they Screw you” because you know that is precisely what they are going to do. Bend over ya’ll…
Well, actually, you can cal gay people butt pirates and have it be funny- you just need to remove the “stick of political correctness” from your hind end in order to see the comedy- but (no pun here) I doubt people like you will refuse to enjoy the fact that you CAN make fun of groups- that used to be acceptable, and I refuse to change, just because some people (and liberals at that) are priggish about their humor.
We used to have Irish jokes, Polish jokes, Aggie jokes, lawyer jokes, and truly, they were all interchangeable in the basic premises- and they would poke gentle fun at whatever group was the subject du jour- now we are a humorless people, and I refuse to participate in a PC “Humor- free” zone here.
Deal with it.
It would also be OK if it were a gay person just like blacks can make fun of other blacks. And then again they can make fun of whites but whites ARE FORBIDDEN from saying anything negative about other groups or they are racists and prejudice and all that PC crap. I like your thinking, Blake, life was funnier when we could all laugh with each other rather than griping at each other.