Others already posted links to the hundreds. My doing it as well would have been pointlessly redundant.

I guess it goes down to how you define "plenty of hate". I wouldn't say there were plenty of counterprotesters there, though I did see two.

Not incorrect, post 150 you quoted what John Irvine wrote, after the NY Times quote on his page. I said you left out what he wrote before the NY Times quote, and added it.

http://cellar.org/attachment.php?att...1&d=1288669681



I think this is what Yusuf meant when he talked about Rushdie. :rolleyes:

So how is that different from what the press did at Tea Party events?

Why wouldn't people give the same deference to the Tea Party?

Because when the pictures of the tea party signs are posted, there are dozens and dozens of really hateful signs, with no point but name calling. I've seen funny signs too, some rather clever ones, but the hate signs are in the majority. Now that may be because the hate signs are better posting material, but there are so many of them, they can't be isolated instances.

The other thing is the interviews with tea party attendees, where when asked what they're upset about, can only respond with slogans and slurs. Because of who's doing the interviews, and why, I figured it was like Jay Leno's man on the street bit. Talk to a hundred people, and pick out the idiots to make the clip, so I wrote that off.

But when I talk to people, real live working(or not) people, I get the same response from 90% of them. That bothers me a lot. It's ok they disagree with Obama, but these people are really and truly clueless. When they tell me Obama isn't a citizen, their taxes have doubled in the last two years, or Obama caused the recession, I know they're out in lala land.

That's depressing because these people are being used, and in my opinion to fuck themselves and the country.

I agree with you and would say that on that same note when you talk to people about what Obamacare is going to do for them, or how, when Obama got elected, what people expected Obama to do for them was filled with equally clueless comments and expectations. It was obvious that they were told one thing, or at least believed what they had been told in the run up to the election and they got something different. Maybe that contributed to the huge loss yesterday.

I never actually attended any Tea Party events in this area, but we passed by quite a few over the last year or so, I never saw a single hateful sign at any of them. They just looked like ordinary folks. But you know the press, which is liberal by and large, will seek out the pictures of the extremists to further denigrate those they disagree with and then try to repeatedly pass and post those as the mainstream. The NAACP tried it and failed in a big way to paint the organization as racist. At first they were passed off as "astroturf", and now supporters effectively used the system to oust long standing incumbent politicians. That is a good thing IMHO. They were a success. So much for "astroturf"...

Bruce, if you are such a great mind, let's see your ass go to three TEA parties and find something out for yourself. My experience of TEA parties does not remotely resemble what you think you're seeing.

If you're going to content yourself with hostile secondhand accounts, how are you escaping bigotry, I wonder?

I don't have to go there, I've got you.

You do have to go there, and three times: I won't do.

After all, you're more interested in putting me down and pleading to remain mired in your darkness occasionally, than in engaging in personal growth.

I'm more interested in growing than in putting you down. Nor am I here to steer you wrong.