TeaBagger Joe Walsh Sued:More Than $100,000 In Child Support

We really need to come up with some sexually derogatory term for Democrats since they have no problem using "teabagger" at every opportunity. Pretty juvenile, I thought being a "progressive" was about moving beyond name calling...I guess not.

PrintSmith wrote: So typical of regressives, take an accusation to be the equivalent of a guilty verdict if it can be used as an excuse to create intrigue and demagoguery and forward the politics of personal destruction. Tell me LJ, where is the court decision which proclaims his ex-wife's claims are accurate and true?

Yes, it IS typical of regressives, PS. But which party better fits this definition?
Isn't "returning to previous condition" what you conservatives, especially you constitutional party nuts are all about?

I'll let the second part of the definition speak for itself.

regressive
Definition
re·gres·sive[ ri gréssiv ]ADJECTIVE
1. returning to previous condition: reverting to an earlier, less developed condition or way of behaving
2. taxing poorer people more harshly: describes a tax system in which those with low incomes pay proportionally higher taxes than the wealthy

Now, where was I? Oh yeah, saying that it is very definitely a "regressive" party trait to rush in without all the facts to condemn a political rival. It is done each and every day on Fox News, in the rightwing blogosphere, and on right-wing talk radio. Do you want examples? There are thousands.

AspenValley wrote: Yes, it IS typical of regressives, PS. But which party better fits this definition?
Isn't "returning to previous condition" what you conservatives, especially you constitutional party nuts are all about?

I'll let the second part of the definition speak for itself.

regressive
Definition
re·gres·sive[ ri gréssiv ]ADJECTIVE
1. returning to previous condition: reverting to an earlier, less developed condition or way of behaving
2. taxing poorer people more harshly: describes a tax system in which those with low incomes pay proportionally higher taxes than the wealthy

That's almost humorous AV. We have a group of folks intent on returning this nation to a central government that the founding generation went to war to escape, that is the regression I speak of. Returning to the "progressive" form of government created by that founding generation is not regression, it is a return to the progress the current statists seek to deny with their actions.

As to the second definition, proportionate to what precisely? Certainly the evil rich millionaires and billionaires pay a higher proportion of the tax revenues than the poorer people do. A higher proportion of their income, no, but certainly a higher proportion of the tax revenues given that over half of the nation, the poorer people, pay nothing in federal income taxes at all. Privilege taxes they pay, but not income taxes. The wealthy also pay those privilege taxes, more of them in fact on an individual basis than a poor person exempt from paying federal income taxes pay, plus they pay taxes on their income and taxes on their capital gains. How then can it be claimed that the poorer people pay a larger proportion of the taxes than the wealthy do?

CriticalBill wrote: We really need to come up with some sexually derogatory term for Democrats since they have no problem using "teabagger" at every opportunity. Pretty juvenile, I thought being a "progressive" was about moving beyond name calling...I guess not.

Nah, let the bigotry of the left stand alone CB.

PrintSmith wrote:

CriticalBill wrote: We really need to come up with some sexually derogatory term for Democrats since they have no problem using "teabagger" at every opportunity. Pretty juvenile, I thought being a "progressive" was about moving beyond name calling...I guess not.

Nah, let the bigotry of the left stand alone CB.

Only conservatives would complain about people using a term they used to describe themselves.......I thought being a conservative was all about taking responsibility for your own actions....I guess not.

In this context, a "Teabagger" is a member of the Tea Party movement

You know- what we should do is have a really in-depth discussion on the real definition of "teabagger"- go into all the details, explore the in's and out's so all the lefties really get an understanding of who and what the actual term teabagger is all about.

Invite the kids.

You guys "progressive" enough for that?

archer wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

CriticalBill wrote: We really need to come up with some sexually derogatory term for Democrats since they have no problem using "teabagger" at every opportunity. Pretty juvenile, I thought being a "progressive" was about moving beyond name calling...I guess not.

Nah, let the bigotry of the left stand alone CB.

Only conservatives would complain about people using a term they used to describe themselves.......I thought being a conservative was all about taking responsibility for your own actions....I guess not.

You won't hear a TEA Party member describing themselves as "teabaggers", never have. That is a derogatory term coined by the bigots on the left in response to TEA Party members adorning their hats with tea bags in a not so subtle reference to a specific sex act.

PrintSmith wrote:

archer wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

CriticalBill wrote: We really need to come up with some sexually derogatory term for Democrats since they have no problem using "teabagger" at every opportunity. Pretty juvenile, I thought being a "progressive" was about moving beyond name calling...I guess not.

Nah, let the bigotry of the left stand alone CB.

Only conservatives would complain about people using a term they used to describe themselves.......I thought being a conservative was all about taking responsibility for your own actions....I guess not.

You won't hear a TEA Party member describing themselves as "teabaggers", never have. That is a derogatory term coined by the bigots on the left in response to TEA Party members adorning their hats with tea bags in a not so subtle reference to a specific sex act.

A simple google search gives many, many instances of the term originating with the tea party itself, I think there are 1 or 2 right wing blogs that say no it didn't. But the pictures of tea party members with tea bags hanging from their hats trump it all. Sorry PS......twist and spin all you want.....the image is there.

PrintSmith wrote:

AspenValley wrote: Yes, it IS typical of regressives, PS. But which party better fits this definition?
Isn't "returning to previous condition" what you conservatives, especially you constitutional party nuts are all about?

I'll let the second part of the definition speak for itself.

regressive
Definition
re·gres·sive[ ri gréssiv ]ADJECTIVE
1. returning to previous condition: reverting to an earlier, less developed condition or way of behaving
2. taxing poorer people more harshly: describes a tax system in which those with low incomes pay proportionally higher taxes than the wealthy

That's almost humorous AV. We have a group of folks intent on returning this nation to a central government that the founding generation went to war to escape, that is the regression I speak of. Returning to the "progressive" form of government created by that founding generation is not regression, it is a return to the progress the current statists seek to deny with their actions.

As to the second definition, proportionate to what precisely? Certainly the evil rich millionaires and billionaires pay a higher proportion of the tax revenues than the poorer people do. A higher proportion of their income, no, but certainly a higher proportion of the tax revenues given that over half of the nation, the poorer people, pay nothing in federal income taxes at all. Privilege taxes they pay, but not income taxes. The wealthy also pay those privilege taxes, more of them in fact on an individual basis than a poor person exempt from paying federal income taxes pay, plus they pay taxes on their income and taxes on their capital gains. How then can it be claimed that the poorer people pay a larger proportion of the taxes than the wealthy do?

Blah, blah, blah, all of which is another attempt by PS to say that white isn't white, it's really black. Being a reactionary regressive (defined very succinctly above as returning to previous condition: reverting to an earlier, less developed condition or way of behaving) is, in your parallel universe, somehow to be lauded as the OPPOSITE.

And then you ask me to tell, you precisely, "proportionate to what"? Again, I refer you to the very succinct definition above. It spells it out pretty clearly to you. Since you apparently missed it somehow, here it is again:

"describes a tax system in which those with low incomes pay proportionally higher taxes than the wealthy."

Only a functional illiterate, which you most definitely are not, could fail to understand that sentence the word "proportionally" refers to "income.

Even if the poorer members of our society pay no federal income taxes, most pay state income taxes and payroll taxes and all pay sales taxes and other even more regressive forms of taxation. And a significant portion of the right wants to make EVERY taxpayer pay income taxes, another significant portion wants the so-called "flat tax", which would be obviously regressive on the poor, and another significant portion of you want taxes on the top 33% of taxpayers cut still more or even eliminated.

White is still white, no matter how you try to claim it's really black, PS.

"Regressive" is as good a word to describe the right-wing as can be imagined. The fact that you try to apply it to the left speaks only to a profoundly dishonest tendency of the right in recent years to accuse the left of all of its own sins. It's a psychological manipulation known as projection, and is commonly found in sociopathic behavior, which unfortunately seems to describe a lot of the right wing these days as well.

BearMtnHIB wrote:

In this context, a "Teabagger" is a member of the Tea Party movement

You know- what we should do is have a really in-depth discussion on the real definition of "teabagger"- go into all the details, explore the in's and out's so all the lefties really get an understanding of who and what the actual term teabagger is all about.

Invite the kids.

You guys "progressive" enough for that?

As I already stated, I don't use the term when describing Tea Partiers, but only defined it because Viking demanded a definition.

The fact is, it's a hideously vulgar term. But maybe the Tea Partiers who enthusiastically adopted it without doing their homework bear just a LITTLE responsibility for being ribbed for their folly?