Classy as always…
Michigan’s Governor Jennifer Granholm is the latest democrat to mainstream obscenity. Granholm defended her tax increase proposals by smearing the conservative “teabaggers” who oppose her.
The Blog Prof reported this from Detroit News:
Granholm says Bishop and his Republican colleagues, who oppose any government revenue increase because they view it as a tax hike, are “bowing at the altar of the teabaggers.”
Michigan unemployment remains the highest in the country at 15.3 percent.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:22 am | #1
Altar.
Somehow, the use of the word ‘alter’ in conjunction with the expression ‘teabag’ gives me the chills.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:24 am | #2
So, when is a revenue increase not a tax increase? I’m sure she’s not planning to increase fees because that would impact the dem “priviledged classes”.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:25 am | #3
Jennifer Granholm is a phony pro-infanticide “Catholic” who campaigned for governor in Catholic parishes across Michigan. Shame on those pastors and bishops who allowed her to use the Church for her evil agenda. That’s right, EVIL.
If there were an award for running a state into the ground at warp speed, Granholm would have received it long ago.
Thank God Canadians like her cannot run for president. On the other hand, Mark Steyn would make a better president than either she or King Hussein would.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:28 am | #4
It was on a First Things blog that I found out that “teabagger” was an obscenity. I suspect that most liberlas likewise learn that from conservatives. In others, this is a phony issue. Granholm and others are, if anything, saying “bag” instead of “party” because the former trivializes the movement. They are not using the words as you say they are.
And all you pity partiers should answer this question — teabagging is a gay sexual practice. Why would the gay rights/gay pride pushing Left use it as a term of insult?
October 25th, 2009 | 10:29 am | #5
Sounds like more sour grapes from Dems who find that last year’s YES WE CAN has turned into this year’s NO YOU DIDN’T.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:35 am | #6
The Tea Part Express begins today.
http://www.teapartyexpress.org/
October 25th, 2009 | 10:36 am | #7
Ken,
Are you aware that there is a preview button available to you before you launch your comment?
Please make use of it. You’ll sound like less of a moron. Unless you like sounding stupid?
October 25th, 2009 | 10:37 am | #8
Pelosi said yesterday that its not a tax increase its just the end of a tax cut. Duhhhhhh!
Rule Number 1 for getting re-elected — NEVER ATTACK OR TALK DOWN TO YOUR VOTERS.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:39 am | #9
It appears Ken is indeed retarded.
Ken, I’ll go slow so you can keep up.
Why are the using the term TEA BAG?
It wasn’t know as the Boston Tea Bag Party.
So, I ask you again you pathetic libtard panty waist.
Why are they using the term TEA BAG?
Even a f234ing dimwit like you understands why. Because libtards are hateful bigots.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:44 am | #10
Michigan deserves the like of Granholm. Here’s to a much higher unemployment rate for those idiots.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:45 am | #11
If you disagree with a LIBTARD, you get smeared and called vulgar names.
This is called TOLERANCE.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:46 am | #12
Liberals are hateful, but when they call us teabeaggers, I just imagine teabagging their ugly, whiney, bitchy faces and I smile.
Someone should photoshop Granholm getting teabagged. Actually, do that to all libs who have used that term.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:47 am | #13
It wasn’t know as the Boston Tea Bag Party.
Correct, so why would the Left want to dignify the protests by rhetorically acquiescing to the Right’s attempted analogy to a revered historic event?
October 25th, 2009 | 10:52 am | #14
If you disagree with a LIBTARD, you get smeared and called vulgar names.
“Libtard. retarded. ugy, whiney, bitchy. moron. pathetic. dimwit.” return evil for supposed evil by photoshopping Granholm’s face.
Are you guys in conscious or unconcious self-parody mode this afternoon?
October 25th, 2009 | 10:52 am | #15
Personally, I don’t care what they call us. The slurs say more about them than us.
Let them go ahead and keep under estimating what’s happening.
October 25th, 2009 | 10:53 am | #16
Why is it that liberals have such difficulty restraining their sexual proclivities in public? They’re like walking tourette-afflicted profanity-laced deviance machines.
Jennifer, while it’s nice that you have a homoerotica fetish, please leave that to your private life.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:04 am | #17
Saturday, the clueless Governor of Michigan was quoted by the Detroit News as making it “shake your mailbox day”! Yes, the brilliant Canadian that has run this state into the pits of hell wants Michigan people to shake their mailboxes, to make sure they can withstand the winter!
And then she wonders why we all wish she would just go home to Canada and never return. Most of us ignore her self righteous face, or we just spit at the tv, and cant wait until she leaves. Then Michigan will have a fighting chance. Election fraud put her there, we all know it.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:05 am | #18
Jenny is an increasingly desparate Democrat. She knows exactly what the term means. She is furious because she has used every dirty trick she can think of to get Bishop to cave and increase taxes. To his credit, he has not caved. She is furious and using gay slurs to get more press.
She, like most libs, is dispicable. And desparate. Funny that the libs have all the political power they need and still are impotent and incompetent.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:06 am | #19
Jennifer “won” reelection through heavy use of the unions. She is a disgrace as a gov. and does not even know it. Her constituents, however, do.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:09 am | #20
I agree with Flavia. On one blog I visited recently, someone referred to us as “idiot wingnuts”. I told the guy his ad hominem attack was weak. I prefer to be called an angry un-american, stupid, nazi, racist, redneck, idiot, wingnut, mobster.
I explained it is obvious that the more virulent the attack and ridicule, the more likely I am to see the error in my ways and warmly embrace his marxist worldview.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:18 am | #21
I have attended several events and I am quite frankly pleased to be called a Teabagger! We should co-op the phrase and used it against the other side that would try to slime us. Fight fire with a bigger fire.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:19 am | #22
When Journalists Attack!
http://pajamasmedia.com/eddriscoll/2009/10/24/when-journalists-attack/#
October 25th, 2009 | 11:27 am | #23
Granholm just keeps pandering to the altar of Obama for an appointment of some kind, because she is term-limited, and knows she’s washed up in Michigan. Anyone left in Michigan who thinks she even remotely cares about the devastation she has caused, is an absolute idiot. Jennifer…Michigan wasn’t “Blown Away”, it was “Thrown Away”.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:31 am | #24
I explained it is obvious that the more virulent the attack and ridicule, the more likely I am to see the error in my ways and warmly embrace his [ . . . ] worldview.
Scott, you shuld explain the principle to some of your conservative bretheren here.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:38 am | #25
Granholm is simply trying to deflect any attention from her own failed policies. Last week she was extolling the virtues of creating 30,000 jobs over the next 11 years! She simply has no clue.
While Michigan has had issues following the growth around the car industry of the 50’s and 60’s, the policies of the various democrats of the last 40 years, and the labor unions that promote them, have done nothing to improve the quality of life since.
Michigan is actually suffering the same fate that the USSR suffered. It has far to many centrally controlled interests to recover as an effective US state. Until the people of Michigan understand that they must learn and apply traditional capitalist values, the state of Michigan is doomed to continuous failure.
Looking at the landscape here in California, it is clear that these same lessons will need to be taught here as well.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:41 am | #26
LYNNDH
October 25th, 2009 | 11:18 am | #21
I have attended several events and I am quite frankly pleased to be called a Teabagger! We should co-op the phrase and used it against the other side that would try to slime us. Fight fire with a bigger fire.
I disagree, and I think you are vastly outnumbered on this one. In fact, your suggestion is at least as offensive as the political use of the term, if not more so.
October 25th, 2009 | 11:43 am | #27
Dear Gov of Michigan,
Yes they are because some Republicans understand that it is We The People that YOU people are supposed to be listening to. Gah, it is so annoying.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:00 pm | #28
We don’t need you in here lecturing us. Your side’s social freedoms are destroying the very dignity of humanity and creating a society of pathological hedonism.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:00 pm | #29
That was for Ken.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:14 pm | #30
The Dems are ruthless in disparaging conservatives, so the teabag thing is no surprise (nor are the implausible denials).
Like flailing adolescents they’re confident that when the adults re-take control they won’t be treated with the same disrespect. Which is true. When individual liberty is restored, they too will benefit from it, with equal protection (the real kind, not the Lefty game of playing favorites).
Still, the Left is at its ugliest when its hate and its greed are on full display — which these days is always. I wish they’d snap themselves out of it but they don’t seem to have any sense of moderation.
Teabaggers, indeed.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:17 pm | #31
Robert, why is it that not one of you guys has tried to answer my question in post #4?
And as for “my side’s” social freedoms, you’re not talking to a kneejerk, party line guy.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:20 pm | #32
By the way, I’m not afraid to criticize Democrats either. I think Chris Matthews’ was way off base comparing you guys to the Taliban, and I said so here.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:21 pm | #33
Ken is just posting here, because they don’t listen to him at the liberal sites either. Let’s call a Whaaaambulance to come take him away.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:24 pm | #34
Ken
October 25th, 2009 | 10:28 am | #4
.Is there ANYTHING that the leftists can do -no matter how vile or depraved – that you won’t immediately fall to your knees and apologize for or rationalize?
Anything at all?
October 25th, 2009 | 12:25 pm | #35
Ken
October 25th, 2009 | 10:28 am | #4
It was on a First Things blog that I found out that “teabagger” was an obscenity. I suspect that most liberlas likewise learn that from conservatives. In others, this is a phony issue. Granholm and others are, if anything, saying “bag” instead of “party” because the former trivializes the movement. They are not using the words as you say they are.
With all due respect Ken, I think they know EXACTLY what they are saying, and in doing so, demonstrate the intellect, maturity and grace of a spoiled adolescent.
-
October 25th, 2009 | 12:30 pm | #36
Paul, thanks for the civil reply. If I agreed they meant to be obscene, I would share your judgment.
Solaratov, that’s a reply to you as well, and read post #32.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:31 pm | #37
Comrade governor, your misdirection is not working. Do you think the other 49 states care? The other Dem states are almost as wrecked as yours.
Insults and lies will not save your bankrupt, failed liberal soviet socialist state.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:34 pm | #38
More like “We The People” please!
Go Doug!
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/take_back_the_party_ASPo06GnWtIO2Wsstyd3NM
October 25th, 2009 | 12:37 pm | #39
Ken
Instead of being on here defending and excusing the term, why aren’t you writing Granholm explaining it to her and taking her to task instead of us?
That’s what puts you on “your side”. And you can stay there with the rest of the degenerates. Aren’t you proud?
As for you oh so worthy question, the last word is the answer. Simple as that.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:39 pm | #40
Someone tell comrade governor that no amount of insults and lies will save her bankrupt, failed soviet socialist state.
And, she can’t blame it on conservatives; unless she tried fiscal conservatism, which is not the case.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:43 pm | #41
Ken
October 25th, 2009 | 11:31 am | #24
I explained it is obvious that the more virulent the attack and ridicule, the more likely I am to see the error in my ways and warmly embrace his [ . . . ] worldview.
Scott, you shuld explain the principle to some of your conservative bretheren here.
.You seem to be operating under the mistaken impression that we wish to convert you to the Conservative cause, ken. Not so.
We recognize that liberalism is a mental disease; and so – like the callous yahoos you and yours maintain that we are – we are content to mock you unmercifully in your affliction.
Even you, in your libtard-afflicted state, provide a service: amusement.
Do have a nice day.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:44 pm | #42
I guess that’s what it takes to be a modern liberal. The ability to pretend innocent meanings for derisive gutter terms. Or to will a happy outcome for socialist policies that have only ever resulted in tyranny and misery.
If they’re fooling anyone it would only be themselves. People are losing their jobs, their savings, and their futures — while the welfare machine runs amok. There’s really no time for pretentious preening.
October 25th, 2009 | 12:45 pm | #43
Robert, if you guys could answer my question, you could. You’re arguing in bad faith, although I’ll grant that most of you are probably doing so unconsciously, having for so long chosen to believe the worst of your ideological opponents (as so many of them have done about you), that you have now lost the freedom to believe otherwise. Sin will do that; it blinds us to the truth.
Write Granholm myself? You think she won’t hear from you guys?
October 25th, 2009 | 12:54 pm | #44
Oh the question? On why the Left would try to insult someone with a gay term?
Easy: they’re not anywhere near as enlightened or tolerant as they proclaim themselves. Dems use interest groups as political cannon fodder — the examples are legion. Their nastiness is only inconsistent if you’re deluded enough to think Dems were genuine in their respect for the individual — an impossibility, judging by their policy prescriptions.
(Thought it was a rhetorical question; didn’t realize it was a gimme.)
October 25th, 2009 | 1:04 pm | #45
Ken is one of the few who can hold his nose high like Obama. This prevents him from being able to discern anything that does not comport with this worldview. If he would deign to comprehend, he might see that I did answer his question, to the extent that I choose to and grant its validity. And because we do not share in his enlightenment, he thinks we are imprisoned in our beliefs. He does not realize that many of us have been in different places on the political/ideological spectrum, and have seen where the follies of liberalism lead.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:14 pm | #46
Sorry, Galt, but many Democrats are gay, and most others are decent. Your reply presumes the worst of your opponents, and as such is bigoted.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:28 pm | #47
Arrogance is not sophistication.
Look through the archives, Ken, and see what your fellow travellers have said about conservatives:
Van Jones-Conseravtives are @$$holes
Chris Mathews- They give G*d d@mn awards for this (re Cheney)
MO Dem on house floor to Rep Akin-Shove it up your @ss
Anderson Cooper 180-Conservatives are teabaggers
Charlie Rangel-not enough space here to recount
We are used to the profane insults of the Democrat operatives. Not to mention the smearing of Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, etc. But that doesn’t mean we have to enjoy it. If the only thing you’ve learned while reading this blog is the definition of “teabagger” you are wasting your time (and ours). Move on…pun intended.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:29 pm | #48
Robert, it’s not your ideological disagreement that indicates bad faith, it’s your nastiness and presumption that, well, Democratic ideological disagreement is bad faith. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:31 pm | #49
*
[You have] chosen to believe the worst of your ideological opponents
Sin will do that
*
So the wise and enlightened Ken characterizes opposition to the liberal agenda as “sin”.
And this is in the same paragraph where he castigates us for operating in bad faith.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:35 pm | #50
Oppose their agenda all you want. I oppose some of it too. I respect conservative principles and share some of them. Just don’t presume liberals disagree because they’re bad. That’s what’s sin.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:36 pm | #51
He defends a political party whose platform supports infanticide.
He voted for the biggest fraud ever to run for president. (OF COURSE HE DID.)
He believes that Democrat ideologues’ attacks are made in good faith. Who doesn’t like to be told to shove it up their @$$? Nothing personal unless you’re Barney Frank…
We know your kind, Ken.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:41 pm | #52
Robert, it’s not your ideological disagreement that indicates bad faith, it’s your nastiness and presumption that, well, Democratic ideological disagreement is bad faith
So you come on a thread where we have been insulted and proceed to excuse the insult and point out all of our flaws. And then do the very same thing yourself. You are nothing more than a self-righteous hypocrite.
It is not necessarily ‘Democratic ideology’ that is in bad faith. It is the current liberal/socialist adherents who are effecting radical change under false precepts, trying to hide behind misleading rhetoric, and trying to do so on such an accelerated timeline without regard for our current economic difficulties. In case you haven’t figured it out, we are tired of your illogic, your lack of reason, and your hypocrisy.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:42 pm | #53
“Theirs?” You mean YOURS. News flash, it isn’t a sin to presume some people are BAD. Past behaviour is the best indication of future bahaviour.
Jesus warned us that bad trees bear bad fruit. He said that by their deeds we will know them. Beware of sheep in wolves’ clothing, he taught us.
When a person thinks killing babies is OK, he’s BAD.
The modus operandi of liberals is evil, covered by deceit. Gateway Pundit isn’t a good place for you to peddle lies.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:43 pm | #54
I’m pro-life, and I don’t defend parties, I defend or criticize particular stances, statements, votes, etc., by people of both parties.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:52 pm | #55
Ken
October 25th, 2009 | 1:43 pm | #53
You’re “pro-life”, yet you defend abortion and the practioners thereof. You defend and agree with publicly-funded (tax-supported) abortions.
And I’ll bet that you’re against exemption from providing abortion based on religious or moral conviction, aren’t you?
Do you EVER read what you post from one day to the next?
October 25th, 2009 | 1:57 pm | #56
Ken is a Sanctimonious Prig Troll. He highjacks every thread he inhabits and makes it all about him.
Ken, keep it on topic or go.
October 25th, 2009 | 1:57 pm | #57
“…are “bowing at the altar of the teabaggers.” ”
Does she mean…..listening to their constituents, unlike the Democrats who believe they were elected because they know best.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:00 pm | #58
I’m pro-life, and I don’t defend parties, I defend or criticize particular stances, statements, votes, etc., by people of both parties.
In this instance, you are defending an insulting statement made by a pro-abortion Democrat politican.
And before you argue that you are only pointing out some perceived flaw of ours/mine, in effect and actuality you are defending Granholm.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:05 pm | #59
Doesn’t most of Michigan resemble Lebanon in the 1980’s? Many of Detroit’s public schools have been closed, then ransacked leaving destroyed books, computers, and educational supplies lying out in the open. Michigan can’t create a 30,000/year job without 10 times as much taxpayer money. To be fair, you need the rest of that money for Union slush funds, politican payoffs, and graft. Seems to me that if a governor can’t run her state any better then Mogadishu, we probably should listen to someone else.
Here is just one tiny example of how well Granholm is running her state:
http://detroitfunk.com/?p=1585
I think we’ve had quite enough of her sort of leadership in this country? From bankrupt social programs, to Jimmy Carter’s/Billy Clinton/Barack Hussein-AlChicago’s cowardice in the face of Islam, isn’t it time to tell the anti-American faction (Democrat) of American politics that they have screwed up enough?
October 25th, 2009 | 2:20 pm | #60
The irony is, disregarding the murder if you can, that the majority of babies killed by abortion are minorities. The KKK never killed 1 millionth of one percent as many black babies as white liberals have in recent years. The REAL white racists, and there are just a very few in a nation of 300 million, are in complete agreement with white libs. They want to encourage and keep abortion legal as long as it kills mostly black babies. Just a reality check here people.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:27 pm | #61
I like how they say abortion is justified in the case of incest and rape, yet won’t report these instances to the authorities.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:27 pm | #62
Chisum
October 25th, 2009 | 1:57 pm | #56
Ken is a Sanctimonious Prig Troll. He highjacks every thread he inhabits and makes it all about him.
Ken, keep it on topic or go
Chisum,
You’ve met Ken before, just as I have and did not know it. Think about it.
Chisum, have you ever heard the phrase “Crazy doesn’t tire easily”?
If you haven’t, then I just made that up. Don’t know if I heard it before or not.
But it fits.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:31 pm | #63
Nadadhimmi – some stats please. And guess what, individuals have the right to have an abortion or not – black people are not being forced to have abortions because they are black or for any other reason. Blaming white people, even if they are liberal whites, is like blaming whites for black on black crime. Everyone has a choice.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:39 pm | #64
Crystal,
I see.
So Ken is a Barbie?
Figures. And still boring.
October 25th, 2009 | 2:45 pm | #65
I vote we rename Ken/Barbie.
How about “Stink Circle K”?
October 25th, 2009 | 3:11 pm | #66
Ding-ding-ding.
October 25th, 2009 | 3:16 pm | #67
better to be a teabag-ER than the teabag-EE.
own the insult folks. i proudly respond in the affirmative when asked if i’m a teabagger. grandholm is bucking for a mushroom tattoo from teabag nation.
October 25th, 2009 | 3:18 pm | #68
granholm
my bad.
October 25th, 2009 | 3:55 pm | #69
Chisum
October 25th, 2009 | 2:45 pm | #65
I vote we rename Ken/Barbie.
I was thinking of calling him a Ken Doll, but he’s so fragile, worrying about other people’s feelings [read: Democrats] that I thought it might blow him away.
Let’s just call him Tea Bag Ken. He thought conservatives shouldn’t be offended, so surely he won’t be…
October 25th, 2009 | 5:14 pm | #70
There’s no need to ridicule the Dem — better to simply savor him in his own words. He says it’s “bigoted” to think that his saintly Dems would resort to the locker room slurs that he insists are the domain of the other party.
“Bigoted” and “racist” are the new “LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU”; a way of diverting attention from the Dem business plan: to nurture grievances and pander to victim classes — not for the sake of compassion, but for the sake of power.
That’s what Granholm was doing when she hurled the slur — trying to stifle opposition to yet another expansion of opportunity-killing government spending. Get used to it, you defenders of liberty — they’re going to call you some nasty names. And worse.
October 25th, 2009 | 6:28 pm | #71
“Sasja
October 25th, 2009 | 10:44 am | #10
Michigan deserves the like of Granholm. Here’s to a much higher unemployment rate for those idiots.”
You know, *Sasja,* if you actually lived here you’d know that not all of us voted for this pathetic excuse for a governor.
October 25th, 2009 | 6:48 pm | #72
Galt
October 25th, 2009 | 5:14 pm | #70
There’s no need to ridicule the Dem — better to simply savor him in his own words. He says it’s “bigoted” to think that his saintly Dems would resort to the locker room slurs that he insists are the domain of the other party.
.
So, lil ken/barbie has never been to dkos? He’d better stay away from there – or he’s liable to have an attack of the vapors; and lose faith in his precious dems.
October 25th, 2009 | 6:52 pm | #73
Solaratov, I oppose abortion and taxpayer funds for abortion and adamantly for a conscience clause for health care workers. Are you confusing me with someone else or just making stuff up? And Robert, I’m not defending an insulting statement, not even in the way I think she meant it, as belittling. I think she should not have spoken, but I don’t think she intended to be obscene.
October 25th, 2009 | 7:06 pm | #74
Someone should say to her, “Damn straight, we’re teabaggers! Now, open WIDE, Jenny!”
October 25th, 2009 | 7:19 pm | #75
The obscene aspect of the term “teabagger” has been well-known since it was first uttered, as a pejorative, months ago. (And well before that for anyone who’s ever screened a John Waters film.)
Granholm knowingly used a gutter remark to disparage taxpayers — people regularly abused by the Granholm-types of the Dem party (and the big-government apologists of the GOP).
Thus we have the government class destroying people’s prosperity and calling them nasty names when they object.
Anyone want to try again to defend that? Any more calls for us to see it all as a peculiar but innocent choice of words/actions?
October 25th, 2009 | 7:27 pm | #76
Galt, I just disagree. I could be wrong, but I very much doubt Granholm knew that meaning of the term. I didn’t know it myself, and I neither live in a cave nor have as little time for pop culture as a state governor. And to state the obvious because it seems to be routinely lost sight of here, whether she’s going about it wisely or foolishly, Granholm is trying to create prosperity, not destroy it.
October 25th, 2009 | 8:25 pm | #77
Trying to create prosperity by raising taxes… hurling gutter epithets unknowingly… The only way to accept these as plausible is to conclude that Granholm is inept or unintelligent.
And this is where I give elected officials a benefit of the doubt: they choose their words and they choose their policies.
What on earth did she think she was saying when she said that? It’s not even a term that has an innocent meaning. The closest thing we have is Tea Party from our history books, and if that’s what she meant she would have called them tea-partiers.
But hey, if you think Michigan’s tax policies have any relation to creating prosperity, then I guess you’d be willing to believe Granholm innocently used a strange new word she’d heard on MSNBC. None of it is plausible, but then neither is much of modern liberalism.
October 25th, 2009 | 8:57 pm | #78
Galt, you sound too intelligent for some of that line of rebuttal, and because unlike a lot of folks here you also sound like a nice guy, I’ll respond. What would motivate Granholm to support policies that would hurt the economy and in so doing hurt her chances for re-election?
What on earth did she think she was saying when she said that? It’s not even a term that has an innocent meaning. The closest thing we have is Tea Party from our history books, and if that’s what she meant she would have called them tea-partiers.
Like I said before, Granholm and others are, if anything, saying “bag” instead of “party” because the former trivializes the movement. If she said “Party” she would rhetorically grant them the same link to revered American history they are trying to claim. By subsituting the sarcastic “bag” she is rhetorically denying them that connection.
October 26th, 2009 | 4:59 am | #79
Oh look, a compliment (sort of) meant to make it easier for me to wink at a disingenuous argument.
No, the insults are real: “teabagging” has only one known meaning; “Michigan” has only one known economy.
Michigan’s economic model is about to go national, boys and girls. And when you object they will call you ugly names — just like they currently do to those conservative leaders who occasionally rise to prominence. Some will defend the Dems’ ugly attacks as warranted or innocent. So be ready.
October 26th, 2009 | 5:48 am | #80
Wouldn’t it be great if reporters started asking these politicians to define the term and ask them why they choose to use it?
October 26th, 2009 | 8:21 am | #81
>>>Ken
October 25th, 2009 | 8:57 pm | #78
What would motivate Granholm to support policies that would hurt the economy and in so doing hurt her chances for re-election? <<<
Ken, she's *not* up for re-election. Thank God. Now, it's up to us Michiganders to devise a way to undo all the harm she's done to this state. The sad part it, it may take a long, long time (if ever) to undo it.
October 26th, 2009 | 8:26 am | #82
Ken, she can’t be re-elected. Thank God! Now, it’s up to us Michiganders to devise a way to undo all the harm she and her cronies have done to this state. Not to mention the 2 libloon senators we have.
October 26th, 2009 | 8:42 am | #83
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Juli , Michael Lockwood. Michael Lockwood said: Michigan Governor: Republicans Are Bowing at the Altar of “Teabaggers” http://bit.ly/3wjUlP [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact