# NBC reporter to Black Tea Party member: Have you ever been uncomfortable?



## Melensdad

*RACIST B*TCH*

The video is 11 seconds long:  
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...a_party_have_you_ever_felt_uncomfortable.html


----------



## loboloco

Perfect answer, I would sit and drink a brew with him


----------



## HarryG

loboloco said:


> Perfect answer, I would sit and drink a brew with him


 


Ditto.
The LIEberal left is the biggest enemy to race relations in this country.


----------



## Melensdad

HarryG said:


> Ditto.
> The LIEberal left is the biggest enemy to race relations in this country.



The woman reporter stuck me as being such an obvious bigot that it was laughable.  The man gave a great answer, but honestly I wouldn't have blamed him if he had spat in her face for asking the question as she did.


----------



## loboloco

JMO, but it seems to me that the liberals are the ones that have a race hang up.
Far as I'm concerned, if you bleed red you're normal.


----------



## muleman RIP

They should put the same effort into investigating what the government is doing to this country. They jump on the chance to report on the tea party groups but don't follow up on our elected officials.


----------



## Cityboy

Melensdad said:


> *RACIST B*TCH*
> 
> The video is 11 seconds long:
> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...a_party_have_you_ever_felt_uncomfortable.html


 
You guys are amazing. Looking for the evil lib bias around every corner. lol. CG and I watched it last night, and thought the guy gave a perfect answer. I made the comment that it would be a topic on the right wing blogs tomorrow, and yup, here it is. 

How anyone can make a comment like the one above, especially after calling Mak2 out for using the term "Teabagger" is quite interesting. Is one slur more credible than another?

And you guys like to say it's only the "lefties" that do this? The extreme right looks just as ridiculous as the extreme left. Each side thinks it's slurs are credible because they are "true" to their leanings. 

Can you all not see the irony here?


----------



## loboloco

Actually, CB, there are some of us who find the very question offensive.  Why should that man have felt uncomfortable?  Just because he's black?  That question shows racist assumptions on the reporters part.  Therefore she is racist.  A bitch, I don't know.
I find that question as offensive as I would a sign saying "NO BLACKS OR DOGS ALLOWED".
Racism and prejudice is offensive irrespective of the political beliefs of the person.
But, as I previously stated, I see racist assumptions more from the liberal side than I do from conservatives or libertarians.


----------



## Melensdad

As lobo said, the question itself is the offensive action.  To claim she is racist is nothing other than to state the obvious.  So say she is a B*TCH may overstate the point, but the fact is that if a conservative would have asked a liberal the same question this would have made national headlines, might have even become another "teachable moment" at the White House, and clearly would have landed the conservative with the 'racist' label.  That is simple fact.

Mak2 constantly and consistently referring to anyone in the Tea Party groups as tea baggers and consistently insulting them intentionally.  This woman reporter seems so clueless that she apparently doesn't even realize how elitist and racist she sounds.


----------



## Cityboy

Melensdad said:


> Mak2 constantly and consistently referring to anyone in the Tea Party groups as tea baggers and consistently insulting them intentionally. This woman reporter seems so clueless that she apparently doesn't even realize how elitist and racist she sounds.


 
So what you are saying is your name calling has more credibility than Maks?


----------



## Melensdad

To claim the reporter is a racist, when she is obviously a racist, is accurate.

To infer, constantly, that the tea party members are anything other than mainstream, despite all the evidence that shows they are mainstream, is NOT accurate.


----------



## loboloco

Melensdad said:


> To claim the reporter is a racist, when she is obviously a racist, is accurate.
> 
> To infer, constantly, that the tea party members are anything other than mainstream, despite all the evidence that shows they are mainstream, is NOT accurate.


Be careful Mel, you'll confuse him with the facts.


----------



## Melensdad

loboloco said:


> Be careful Mel, you'll confuse him with the facts.



Sorry.


----------



## Cityboy

Melensdad said:


> To claim the reporter is a racist, when she is obviously a racist, is accurate.
> 
> To infer, constantly, that the tea party members are anything other than mainstream, despite all the evidence that shows they are mainstream, is NOT accurate.


 
No. You are trying to create a strawman argument. You called her a bitch:



Melensdad said:


> *RACIST B*TCH*


 


loboloco said:


> Be careful Mel, you'll confuse him with the facts.


 
No confusion at all. Skurka called this woman a bitch. Now, what I want to know is how you guys justify namecalling by the the right is somehow more credible and legitimate than namecalling from the left?


----------



## mak2

I dont think calling them the name they adopted(teabaggers) is the same as calling someone a bitch.  If you are a (I am not really sure what to call them anymore) nonleft leaning individual, the rules are different.


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Cityboy said:


> No confusion at all. Skurka called this woman a bitch. Now, what I want to know is how you guys justify namecalling by the the right is somehow more credible and legitimate than namecalling from the left?



We generally don't moderate name calling of celebrities, politicians, or "public people".  However considering that there are a lot of people here that strongly support the Tea Party, then it becomes an issue when people use derogatory terms that apply to the members.  I'm sure you, BC, and mak wouldn't appreciate it if people made a bunch of derogatory statements towards marines - even though the comments weren't targeted specifically at you.  That's the logic we are trying to adhere to.

The political name calling from both sides "right" and "left" is an issue that is not easy to moderate while retaining members.


----------



## mak2

PBinWA said:


> We generally don't moderate name calling of celebrities, politicians, or "public people".  However considering that there are a lot of people here that strongly support the Tea Party, then it becomes an issue when people use derogatory terms that apply to the members.  I'm sure you, BC, and mak wouldn't appreciate it if people made a bunch of derogatory statements towards marines - even though the comments weren't targeted specifically at you.  That's the logic we are trying to adhere to.
> 
> The political name calling from both sides "right" and "left" is an issue that is not easy to moderate while retaining members.



No, saying anything bad about the Marine Corps really does piss me off. Marines have fought and died for this cournty for over 200 years, the TBers havent.  Completely different than being in a RW political cult like the TBers.  People on the right on this column can and do say anything they want about the left, yet even not getting the exactly proper terminology exactly correct offends you guys. I dont care, just pointing out the obvious.

Teabagger does not equal bitch.  Teabagger does not equal Marine.


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

mak2 said:


> No, saying anything bad about the Marine Corps really does piss me off. Marines have fought and died for this cournty for over 200 years, the TBers havent.  Completely different than being in a RW political cult like the TBers.  People on the right on this column can and do say anything they want about the left, yet even not getting the exactly proper terminology exactly correct offends you guys. I dont care, just pointing out the obvious.
> 
> Teabagger does not equal bitch.  Teabagger does not equal Marine.



It's all about perception mak and I think my point was made.  Since I respect both the marines and the Tea party then I won't go down the path I want to go down.


----------



## Cityboy

PBinWA said:


> The political name calling from both sides "right" and "left" is an issue that is not easy to moderate while retaining members.


 
Not asking for moderation, only common sense from all posters involved with any discussion. Just pointing out that it is hypocritcal from both sides, for example, to call Pelosi a bitch or to call Palin an idiot. 

Makes both sides look ridiculous. Just like referring to the TEA Party as "Teabaggers" is a sexual slur. I suggest my left of center friends google "teabagging" if they do not understand this. And the vitriol is just as extreme from the right, and what makes it worse, is the delusion that the rights slurs are somehow more justified than those of the left. 

There are 2 safe web sites you guys can go to to flock with your birds-of-a-feather to slur the other side unabated. That's Free Republic and Democratic Underground. 

_There are few places that both sides can be discussed civilly._ 

*FF could be one of those places. *But only if both sides can knock off the back-handed slurs and clever excuses to attempt to disguise those slurs to fit within the civility rules.

Are we intelligent adults, or just older versions of school yard name-callers?


----------



## mak2

PBinWA said:


> It's all about perception mak and I think my point was made.  Since I respect both the marines and the Tea party then I won't go down the path I want to go down.



What path and what point?  Bitch is ok, but teabagger is an insult. Preception?


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

mak2 said:


> What path and what point?  Bitch is ok, but teabagger is an insult. Preception?


Calling a reporter (a public figure and not a member here) a bitch is OK.  Using the term teabagger in a derogatory context is not because it applies directly towards members here that identify strongly with the movement.

Is that clear enough for you yet?


----------



## mak2

Oh it is very clear.  Thanks.


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

mak2 said:


> Oh it is very clear.  Thanks.



Just like using the term libtard, DemocRAT, and other terms is also not cool.  AFAIK, it is not a bannable offense - we just want people to stop going out of their way to piss each other off.


----------



## Cityboy

PBinWA said:


> Calling a reporter (a public figure and not a member here) a bitch is OK.
> Is that clear enough for you yet?


 
Seeking clarification here. So calling Palin an idiot is OK then? 

And calling Bush a "Chimp" would also be OK?


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Cityboy said:


> Seeking clarification here. So calling Palin an idiot is OK then?
> 
> And calling Bush a "Chimp" would also be OK?



AFAIK - it is OK and no one has been banned for it.  Just don't cry foul when people slam Pelosi and Obama.

Of course, none of them get you on the high road.


----------



## Cowboy

Cityboy said:


> Seeking clarification here. So calling Palin an idiot is OK then?
> 
> And calling Bush a "Chimp" would also be OK?


 

 Well I dont know if the Chimp would be very happy  . Just a joke folks


----------



## Cityboy

PBinWA said:


> AFAIK - it is OK and no one has been banned for it. Just don't cry foul when people slam Pelosi and Obama.
> 
> Of course, none of them get you on the high road.


 
The point is getting lost in the minutia. Please read this again:



Cityboy said:


> Not asking for moderation, only common sense from all posters involved with any discussion. Just pointing out that it is hypocritcal from both sides, for example, to call Pelosi a bitch or to call Palin an idiot.
> 
> Makes both sides look ridiculous. Just like referring to the TEA Party as "Teabaggers" is a sexual slur. I suggest my left of center friends google "teabagging" if they do not understand this. And the vitriol is just as extreme from the right, and what makes it worse, is the delusion that the rights slurs are somehow more justified than those of the left.
> 
> There are 2 safe web sites you guys can go to to flock with your birds-of-a-feather to slur the other side unabated. That's Free Republic and Democratic Underground.
> 
> _There are few places that both sides can be discussed civilly._
> 
> *FF could be one of those places. *But only if both sides can knock off the back-handed slurs and clever excuses to attempt to disguise those slurs to fit within the civility rules.
> 
> Are we intelligent adults, or just older versions of school yard name-callers?


----------



## mak2

AFAIK is a political movement in Southern Africa or "as far as I know."


----------



## Cityboy

Cowboy said:


> Well I dont know if the Chimp would be very happy  . Just a joke folks


 
Now THAT was funny!


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Cityboy said:


> The point is getting lost in the minutia. Please read this again:



I read that.  The issues you have is more to do with YOUR perceptions of right and wrong and how YOU want the place to be run.

FF is what it is.  The moderators do try to be fair but at the same time we are never going to appease everyone.  If you want to hang around and make off handed jabs at the moderators then sooner or later you may get banned.  We aren't here to take shit from members that are second guessing our every moves or pointing out our every flaw.

Or you can just realize that perhaps this place isn't for you and move on.  No one is forcing anyone to stay here. 

Even when we try to enforce civility without out enforcing strict rules it appears we get attacked.  It doesn't make for a happy moderating team.


----------



## Cityboy

PBinWA said:


> I read that. The issues you have is more to do with YOUR perceptions of right and wrong and how YOU want the place to be run.
> 
> FF is what it is. The moderators do try to be fair but at the same time we are never going to appease everyone. If you want to hang around and make off handed jabs at the moderators then sooner or later you may get banned. We aren't here to take shit from members that are second guessing our every moves or pointing out our every flaw.
> 
> Or you can just realize that perhaps this place isn't for you and move on. No one is forcing anyone to stay here.
> 
> Even when we try to enforce civility without out enforcing strict rules it appears we get attacked. It doesn't make for a happy moderating team.


 
My post had absolutly *nothing *to do with moderation, and *everything *to do with the way individual members interact with and treat each other.

But you have made crystal clear your position and intent.


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Cityboy said:


> My post had absolutly *nothing *to do with moderation, and *everything *to do with the way individual members interact with and treat each other.
> 
> But you have made crystal clear your position and intent.



I'm glad I made something clear.  Remember that the moderators are here to enforce the rules,  it is not the members job to act as policeman or to cry wolf at every single thing they think is a violation.

We moderators do let a lot of stuff slide.  We don't really want to be policeman.  Too much moderation makes no one happy.  Just like a bunch of complainers makes no one happy.  If you don't like something someone posted then voice your opinion and move on.  There is no reason every thread needs to argued ad nauseum.  People are never going to agree.


----------



## Cityboy

PBinWA said:


> I'm glad I made something clear. Remember that the moderators are here to enforce the rules, it is not the members job to act as policeman or to cry wolf at every single thing they think is a violation.
> 
> We moderators do let a lot of stuff slide. We don't really want to be policeman. Too much moderation makes no one happy. Just like a bunch of complainers makes no one happy. If you don't like something someone posted then voice your opinion and move on. There is no reason every thread needs to argued ad nauseum. People are never going to agree.


 
Again, I have said absolutely zero about moderation. Why are you going on and on about it?


----------



## XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Cityboy said:


> Again, I have said absolutely zero about moderation. Why are you going on and on about it?



I'm trying to get my point across about where the responsibility lies in enforcing how the content and direction of the site is to be "policed".  I agree that you made no specific comments about the moderators but since the moderation team makes up a majority of the "good ole boys" it may be construed as such.

Anyways, I'm out for the day so don't expect any replies back from me.


----------



## pirate_girl

First of all, that woman reporter.. what an asinine question to ask that man.

Secondly, what's so wrong with referring to those whom are active in the Tea Party movement as tea-baggers?

They are a protest movement using tea bags themselves in symbolic fashion on signs, wearing them.. etc..


----------



## mak2

pirate_girl said:


> First of all, that woman reporter.. what an asinine question to ask that man.
> 
> Secondly, what's so wrong with referring to those whom are active in the Tea Party movement as tea-baggers?
> 
> They are a protest movement using tea bags themselves in symbolic fashion on signs, wearing them.. etc..



I did not know, until long after I developed the habit of saying tea bagger, it had sexual connotations.  I do think I get attacked for using it because it is eaiser to attack than my position on topics.  BUt that is fine and I will use tea partier or maybe TP for short, if that is OK with everyone.


----------



## Cityboy

pirate_girl said:


> Secondly, what's so wrong with referring to those whom are active in the Tea Party movement as tea-baggers?
> 
> They are a protest movement using tea bags themselves in symbolic fashion on signs, wearing them.. etc..


 
This is why many TEA partyers feel offended by thge term "teabagger, PG:

*Warning! Graphic sexual image! Do not click this link with underaged people or children watching!!*


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging

Kind of surprised to see an image like that in wikipedia, but it pretty much leaves no doubt as to the meaning of the term.


----------



## pirate_girl

The term teabagging is childish and vulgar within the sexual connotation.
However, I don't see where that applies here at all in this discussion, and it hasn't.. has it?


----------



## pirate_girl

Cityboy said:


> This is why many TEA partyers feel offended by thge term "teabagger, PG:
> 
> *Warning! Graphic sexual image! Do not click this link with underaged people or children watching!!*
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging
> 
> Kind of surprised to see an image like that in wikipedia, but it pretty much leaves no doubt as to the meaning of the term.



Yes, I understand that.


----------



## RobsanX

pirate_girl said:


> First of all, that woman reporter.. what an asinine question to ask that man.
> 
> Secondly, what's so wrong with referring to those whom are active in the Tea Party movement as tea-baggers?
> 
> They are a protest movement using tea bags themselves in symbolic fashion on signs, wearing them.. etc..



It's kinda like you can't say "I'm feeling very gay today!" anymore!


----------



## Cityboy

pirate_girl said:


> Yes, I understand that.


 
It's just assumed that when someone left of center uses the term it is intended as a slur. I've seen both sides use it innocently on rare occaisions, but for the most part, it is intended as, and recieved as a slur. And as with all slurs, all rational discourse then ends and the "nanny-nanny-poo-poo" playground behavior begins.


----------



## pirate_girl

RobsanX said:


> It's kinda like you can't say "I'm feeling very gay today!" anymore!


Exactly Rob!


----------



## pirate_girl

Cityboy said:


> It's just assumed that when someone left of center uses the term it is intended as a slur. I've seen both sides use it innocently on rare occaisions, but for the most part, it is intended as, and recieved as a slur. And as with all slurs, all rational discourse then ends and the "nanny-nanny-poo-poo" playground behavior begins.


Well John, dunno what to say.. so I won't..


----------



## mak2

So hey Rob, do you feel pretty gay most days?


----------



## RobsanX

mak2 said:


> So hey Rob, do you feel pretty gay most days?



Actually, this is how I feel most days! 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye7PIyIcCro"]YouTube- West Side Story 1961 - "I feel pretty"[/ame]


----------



## RobsanX

That reporter can learn a thing or two from this guy!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2e0_1271374900


----------



## mak2

RobsanX said:


> Actually, this is how I feel most days!



See, you get my humor, why dont the rest of these guys?


----------



## SShepherd

Cityboy said:


> Not asking for moderation, only common sense from all posters involved with any discussion. Just pointing out that it is hypocritcal from both sides, for example, to call Pelosi a bitch or to call Palin an idiot.
> 
> Makes both sides look ridiculous. Just like referring to the TEA Party as "Teabaggers" is a sexual slur. I suggest my left of center friends google "teabagging" if they do not understand this. And the vitriol is just as extreme from the right, and what makes it worse, is the delusion that the rights slurs are somehow more justified than those of the left.
> 
> There are 2 safe web sites you guys can go to to flock with your birds-of-a-feather to slur the other side unabated. That's Free Republic and Democratic Underground.
> 
> _There are few places that both sides can be discussed civilly._
> 
> *FF could be one of those places. But only if both sides can knock off the back-handed slurs and clever excuses to attempt to disguise those slurs to fit within the civility rules.*
> 
> Are we intelligent adults, or just older versions of school yard name-callers?


 

hey..something we can agree on


----------



## Doc

SShepherd said:


> hey..something we can agree on


Me too!  

Thanks CB.  We are getting the point across to all, slow but sure.


----------



## RobsanX

mak2 said:


> See, you get my humor, why dont the rest of these guys?



Do they have a sense of humor?


----------



## mak2

RobsanX said:


> Do they have a sense of humor?



Maybe that is what's wrong with them.


----------

