those same people screamed about Janet Jackson’s nipple? What’s going on here? Are we sliding down the slippery lubed slope of Republican Fetish reality shows now? Will Sarah Palin in a bikini be involved somehow?
I am of course talking about the “teabagging” (smirk) parties the right-wingers are planning on tax day. A day to celebrate the rich and let them know how much the participants want to pay more taxes so that the rich can get richer. A day to protest the socialism of Eisenhower, Reagan, and Bush Sr. (41). A day to let Glen Beck get even more teary. Teabagging (smirk) is the “in” thing right now. What next? Will Republicans go public with other until-now hidden sexual practices? Republican Water sports? Republican Scheisse videos?
I’m not really against this. People can do what they want in the privacy of their own bedrooms. I’m just surprised that they’re taking teabagging (smirk) so public. And Fox is right in the middle of it all, sponsoring and encouraging this affront to decent society! Won’t someone think of the children??
The links above are SFW. Here are various (broken) links, mild but still probably NSFW. The leading “h” is missing:
Wikipedia link:
ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_bagging
Hilarious Sex In The City snippet:
ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGNWCwCrUKk&feature=player_embedded
Short Pecker (the John Waters movie) snippet:
ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYO4Q4bdLrY#t=4m58s
It’s not just “right-wingers.” A lot of people from both sides of the political spectrum are upset at the trillions that Washington is throwing around with nary a care in the world or an idea of where the money is going and how it’s being used…after all, they’ll just print out more little green pieces of paper. I wasn’t happy when Bush did it and I’m not happy that Obama has added more to it.
The John Water’s film “Pecker” clip is worth checking out for an actual depiction of teabagging that dates back to 1998. It’s not as if the left wing just thought this up - it’s been out there in the culture (well, at least the more disreputable corners of the culture) for a long time.
They call them “tea parties,” not tea bagging, you pervert. Making a big deal about the term this way makes as much sense as saying that when Obama is talking about the plans to cut the deficit in half, he’s going to be “cutting” and we ought to watch him 'cause self-harm is a psychological issue.
Hey, they’re the ones who are using the term teabagging. Watch that Rachel Maddow piece (here’s a YouTube link, if Huffington gives you the heebie-jeeies, being a liberal site and all). The loons have been Twittering to “teabag Obama.” They have a Facebook page where they urge people to “teabag Obama” and they even hold signs that say things like “Tea bag the liberal Dems before they Tea bag you!!” (as if any self-respecting Democrat would want to teabag a freeper) so I’m not just making this up. They’re the ones saying it. They’re the ones using the term without the slightest idea what it means in popular culture, just like they’re holding “Tea parties” without the slightest idea what that historical event meant or was about. They’re idiots, and it’s just hilarious to watch them make fools of themselves.
Well, so are the inane teabagging parties, so I’m just going with the flow. It’s so much fun to make fun of these silly dips.
The reference is to the original protests against the old British colonial tea taxes - peaceful protest is part and parcel of the US political protests. There’s funny, and there’s lame - I suppose that gratuitous GoP-baiting passes for humor, but the stretch here is too much. If you want competent sex/GoP humor, leave it to Dan Savage - at least the Santorum jokes were funny.
Forcing sexual humor into tax protests is just forced and lame.
Nonsense - it’s a tradition that goes all the way back to the “Cock gobblers” of fifteenth-century England, poultry farmers who slaughtered and ate a portion of their male livestock rather than pay the increased tax on breeding roosters that King Edward IV demanded.
See, that’s what’s so funny. The vast majority of Americans are (or soon will be) seeing tax cuts, and the only taxes that are raised are those of the wealthiest Americans. These weirdos are protesting that THE RICH will have to pay more taxes (while still being nowhere near what the taxes used to be on the rich), not that they themselves will have to pay more taxes. It’s absolutely hilarious.
I’m sorry, the rich can do quite well without a bunch of loony freepers protesting on their behalf.
It really all has to do with the fact that Obama won.
I’m with ivylass on this point. Obama’s budget bothers me. I think it’s a good sign that his budget avoided accounting tricks, and put major expenses like The War into the budget (where it belonged in the first place, and should have been put after the second year let alone the fourth). But I think it’s bad that the projected deficit for his first year’s budget is - what - $800 billion dollars?!?? :eek: That’s a number that would make Carl Sagan blanche.
Since Obama’s been in office less than 100 days, I remain hopeful that he will stick to his word and reduce spending and deficits in the future. I admit that’s naive optimism, given the budget track record of all presidents in my lifetime except for Bill Clinton. And Bubba got lucky! The Internet came along so he could have Uncle Sam “do more with less (money)” and it actually happened, and he had boom times to pump up Uncle Sam’s income. I don’t think there will be another technological revolution like that on Obama’s watch. I think Obama will have to budget the old fashioned way, by cutting programs, raising taxes, and by hoping an improving economy increases revenues enough. I have yet to see program cuts. If the Republicans win ANY seats in 2012 they will fight tax cuts until their dying breath (and again as zombies). And heaven only knows what the economy is going to do. Also, with all the new spending and old spending going on, boom times may not fill the coffers enough.
I’m not so upset about the budget that I am willing to engage in double entendre based protests, but I am less than happy about it.
To the OP, even if the original organizers of these events had not heard of “tea bagging” in a sexual context wen they started the protests, I’m sure they all know about it by now. If I knew anyone involved in, or even supporting, one of these events I’d tell them privately about the alternative meaning. I suspect the continued use of the term “tea bagging” is meant to get additional PR for the events (for example as a sarcastic thread in a snarky message board ), and as yet another attempt of the Pubbie party apparatus to be “cool” “modern” and “hep” with all the young “cats” and the “lingo” they use at the “malt shop”. :rolleyes:
You do realize that he’s not spending money just for shits and giggles? We’re having a little economic problem, as you may have heard, and the best way to get out of a depression is to inject money into the economy, by spending it. Huge deficits aren’t a good thing, but you gotta do what you gotta do to fix shit.
), and as yet another attempt of the Pubbie party apparatus to be “cool” “modern” and “hep” with all the young “cats” and the “lingo” they use at the “malt shop”. :rolleyes: