That'll Teach the Birthers!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Twisp

As unlikely as it sounds, when I watch news on TV, I usually watch Shepard Smith. He is very smart, seems pretty honest, and I have watched him call out a few guests on his show when they were not be completely honest, on both sides if I recall correctly. And I watch Chris Matthews sometimes, although I find his voice very grating for some reason.

I used to like Shepard Smith when he first started out - same with Sean Hannity. Now they both just seem corked and ready to explode. LOL! I'd rather listen to Neil Cavuto.

I can't stand Chris Matthews. Sometimes I wish someone would walk up to him and punch him in the face. Although I've never cared for him, the "tingle up the leg" sealed it for me concerning him. LOL!

You know whose voice gets on my nerves? Sarah Palin. I think she is very patriotic and I wish her the best, but I can't stand her voice. Michele Bachman is a close second. Sounds like she has sinus problems all the time. Great ladies, but hard on the ears. LOL!

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by BeenThinkin

Twisp.... This is my last post on this subject. But really if you're not trying to be "vulgar" why don't you just say Tea Party. Why do you have to use the other terms. What is your purpose for doing so. Is it a way to be as ugly ("vulgar") about those horrible people that are a part of this movement. And by the way, the majority that describe the Tea Party with the other term is the liberal media and their followers.

I'm afraid your play on words has had it's intended affect. You could call someone a donkey.... but there is another term for donkey that would get a whole lot quicker response, if you used it! So, you just used the term that would come as close to being vulgar? Why else do you insist and argue about it's use.

God bless you. Hope I have not been offensive with my words

Been Thinkin

If you look at the posts where I first started using it, please tell me how I alluded to it being used in a vulgar way.

The reason that I did not say "Tea Party" is because the term teabagger came to my mind first as an appropriate descriptive term for them. If the first term that had come to my mind was "people who think Sarah Palin walks on water" then I would have used that.

I am not arguing for its use so as much as defending it's non-vulgar definition. Just because it is vulgar to some does not mean it is vulgar to all. As I asked ndavid, are you unable to look at the word teabag in regards to actual tea without thinking it is vulgar? The same concept applies here.

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I used to like Shepard Smith when he first started out - same with Sean Hannity. Now they both just seem corked and ready to explode. LOL! I'd rather listen to Neil Cavuto.

I can't stand Chris Matthews. Sometimes I wish someone would walk up to him and punch him in the face. Although I've never cared for him, the "tingle up the leg" sealed it for me concerning him. LOL!

You know whose voice gets on my nerves? Sarah Palin. I think she is very patriotic and I wish her the best, but I can't stand her voice. Michele Bachman is a close second. Sounds like she has sinus problems all the time. Great ladies, but hard on the ears. LOL!

If we are talking mannerism and cadence, I cannot stand Megyn Kelly on Fox. I have no idea what it is, she just causes me to instantly switch the channel. I am sure it is an issue on my side, as she seems like a competent journalist.

Not a big fan of Hannity. I enjoy O'Reilly every once and a while. As for Palin, her voice is annoying, but her winks and gotcha's and hopey changey phrases annoy me more than anything else. I do not like cutesy stuff.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Twisp

If we are talking mannerism and cadence, I cannot stand Megyn Kelly on Fox....

Yeah, but the young lady is "easy on the eyes" and very sharp mentally also. Sure beats looking at the little old ladies on The View or listening to their ignorance.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Twisp

If we are talking mannerism and cadence, I cannot stand Megyn Kelly on Fox. I have no idea what it is, she just causes me to instantly switch the channel. I am sure it is an issue on my side, as she seems like a competent journalist.

Not a big fan of Hannity. I enjoy O'Reilly every once and a while. As for Palin, her voice is annoying, but her winks and gotcha's and hopey changey phrases annoy me more than anything else. I do not like cutesy stuff.

I agree with you on Megyn Kelly. I think she is very intelligent, but way too aggressive in a "jerk" kind of way. lol

I only listen to Hannity if I know he will be interviewing someone that I want to listen to. I like O'Reilly pretty well myself. Bad temper, that one. LOL!

I agree with you on Sarah's phraseology and mannerisms. I guess those things are her trademarks which she doesn't want to change.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Sam

Yeah, but the young lady is "easy on the eyes" and very sharp mentally also. Sure beats looking at the little old ladies on The View or listening to their ignorance.

I have to agree with you there.

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by Sam

Yeah, but the young lady is "easy on the eyes" and very sharp mentally also. Sure beats looking at the little old ladies on The View or listening to their ignorance.

LOL. I was not going to say that, but I was aware of it. lol. She is smart, also.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Twisp

What else would they be called? It is cumbersome to write out " a person affiliated with the Teabag Party" every time. On top of that, it is only slang if you take it that way. I am sorry if you cannot see that word and automatically think of an obscene definition, but that is your issue, not mine. Do you take issue when someone makes tea? Do you tell them not to use the term teabag, since it offends you, but instead refer to it as "a bag filled with sundry spices to enhance the look and taste of water'?

This word has been used many times on this forum, and truly, this is the first time I have seen someone have an issue with it. Stop thinking of it as an obscene term and there won't be an issue.

Twisp read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Twisp

If you look at the posts where I first started using it, please tell me how I alluded to it being used in a vulgar way.

The reason that I did not say "Tea Party" is because the term teabagger came to my mind first as an appropriate descriptive term for them. If the first term that had come to my mind was "people who think Sarah Palin walks on water" then I would have used that.

I am not arguing for its use so as much as defending it's non-vulgar definition. Just because it is vulgar to some does not mean it is vulgar to all. As I asked ndavid, are you unable to look at the word teabag in regards to actual tea without thinking it is vulgar? The same concept applies here.

That's not the problem. Can I use the F word without being vulgar? Yes but it will still sound vulgar to most. At one time the F word was a common term to mean fornication. Same with other words. Can I speak of burning faggots and not offend someone?

faggot
late 13c., "bundle of twigs bound up," from O.Fr. fagot "bundle of sticks," from It. faggotto, dim. of V.L. *facus, from L. fascis "bundle of wood" (see fasces). Especially used for burning heretics (a sense attested from 1550s), so that phrase fire and faggot was used to mean "punishment of a heretic." Heretics who recanted were required to wear an embroidered figure of a faggot on their sleeve, as an emblem and reminder of what they deserved.

Let's come up an an acronym like "TPM" for Tea Party Member? ok?

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Twisp read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging

I know what the other definition of a teabagger is. My point is that I did not use the word in a vulgar way in this thread. That word is often used to describe an obscene act, but another definition of that word is to describe people that are part of the Tea Party. Some words have multiple definitions, which is the case of this word. All definitions of a word are not vulgar just because one is.

If I had made some type of implication that I was referring to the vulgar definition, I could understand the 2 or 3 people getting upset. I did no such thing. I merely understand that many people in the Tea Party movement have brought tea bags (the actual bag of tea, not a vulgar act) to their demonstrations, therefore causing the public at large to refer to them as teabaggers. Really, it is a simple connection. If people want to go straight for the more vulgar definition and bypass the actual definition, I can do nothing about that.