...and if you have any knowledge of recent slang, you'd find that completely hilarious and ironic. But jokes aside, it's reported that she will be speaking at a Tea bagger's conventionin Tennessee.
Now what does this mean? Nothing, really. All it does is give the tea baggers a face, which really doesn't do much anyway. The tea baggers sort of stemmed off of the Palin support at the end of the 2008 election anyways, so she's just reinforcing their beliefs. Furthermore, this actually hurts the GOP, because now they've just lost one of their youth leaders to a third party. (I consider the tea party to be a third party) Also, this draws support away from the GOP because the GOP failed to hop on this Tea party bandwagon when it started.
Does this mean Palin's running for office in 2012? Probably not. But it sure is starting to look like it.
New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams
At 1/8/10 09:42 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: ...and if you have any knowledge of recent slang, you'd find that completely hilarious and ironic. But jokes aside, it's reported that she will be speaking at a Tea bagger's conventionin Tennessee.
No irony there and not really too funny.
Now what does this mean? Nothing, really. All it does is give the tea baggers a face, which really doesn't do much anyway. The tea baggers sort of stemmed off of the Palin support at the end of the 2008 election anyways, so she's just reinforcing their beliefs. Furthermore, this actually hurts the GOP, because now they've just lost one of their youth leaders to a third party. (I consider the tea party to be a third party) Also, this draws support away from the GOP because the GOP failed to hop on this Tea party bandwagon when it started.
Major parties don't join on third party bandwagons anymore, Palin hurt the party more than helped it, she completely alienated a huge branch of potential republicans which seriously hurt the future of the party.
Who cares about the Teabaggers?
Does this mean Palin's running for office in 2012? Probably not. But it sure is starting to look like it.
She'll probably run, she'll lose undoubtedly.
At 1/8/10 09:42 PM, BrianEtrius wrote:
Does this mean Palin's running for office in 2012? Probably not. But it sure is starting to look like it.
She will get elected president on the 4th Monday of the 6th week of Smarch, under a mighty flock of pigs and Sasquatches.
At 1/8/10 09:52 PM, morefngdps wrote: No irony there and not really too funny.
Come on, it is funny because they picked a pretty stupid name and are stilling calling themselves that.
Major parties don't join on third party bandwagons anymore, Palin hurt the party more than helped it, she completely alienated a huge branch of potential republicans which seriously hurt the future of the party.
To the contrary, I think she could really unite the GOP because being a good hardcore conservative. Furthermore, the Tea Party was right up the GOP's alley. It supported what the GOP's view on Obama and effectively could of helped the Republicans in several key swing states.
Who cares about the Teabaggers?
Well, it's interesting to see how partisan we've become as a country in terms of political parties.
She'll probably run, she'll lose undoubtedly.
By all means, I really do hope see runs to see that she fails. She's got support, but nowhere enough.
New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams
At 1/8/10 10:05 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: Come on, it is funny because they picked a pretty stupid name and are stilling calling themselves that.
Really not a stupid name unless you're 14 or younger.
To the contrary, I think she could really unite the GOP because being a good hardcore conservative. Furthermore, the Tea Party was right up the GOP's alley. It supported what the GOP's view on Obama and effectively could of helped the Republicans in several key swing states.
Doubtful, she'd lose as many states as she won, if not more. The conservative side is slowly dying off and the republican party needs to adapt to fit that, it's happened in the past and as the party adapts they become winners again.
Well, it's interesting to see how partisan we've become as a country in terms of political parties.
We haven't and we most likely won't for a long, long time.
By all means, I really do hope see runs to see that she fails. She's got support, but nowhere enough.
Interesting considering you just said that she has enough support to rally the GOP and potentially lead them to victory.
At 1/8/10 10:05 PM, BrianEtrius wrote:At 1/8/10 09:52 PM, morefngdps wrote: Who cares about the Teabaggers?Well, it's interesting to see how partisan we've become as a country in terms of political parties.
I think it's more of an interesting statement about the maturity level of partisan politics in the United States than anything. Think about it. Instead of addressing what's wrong with the Tea Party movement or addressing what they stand for, you jumped to the obvious sexual joke. It would be like me making a joke about the horton brigade, dumbasses, the rainbow coalition, or the lettuce bikini broads.
Republicans, Democrats, G.L.A.A.D, and P.E.T.A. in that order.
At 1/8/10 10:54 PM, morefngdps wrote:At 1/8/10 10:05 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: Come on, it is funny because they picked a pretty stupid name and are stilling calling themselves that.Really not a stupid name unless you're 14 or younger.
Calling yourself the teabagger party knowing current slang makes that an embarrassing name to choose. Would you be defending the Cocks and Holes party if there was one? I mean they're just referring to roosters and pitfalls right? Nothing funny about that name at all right? What about the Cleveland Steamer Society? They represent the steam ship operators living in cleveland so their name can't be funny in any way right?
What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing
At 1/9/10 12:22 AM, Rideo wrote: Calling yourself the teabagger party knowing current slang makes that an embarrassing name to choose. Would you be defending the Cocks and Holes party if there was one? I mean they're just referring to roosters and pitfalls right? Nothing funny about that name at all right? What about the Cleveland Steamer Society? They represent the steam ship operators living in cleveland so their name can't be funny in any way right?
I seriously hope you're joking. Taking an argument to it's extremes is NOT a valid argument, so using things that are FAR more 'slangish' yet make far LESS sense is not a good argument.
And yeah, coincidentally I didn't laugh at any of your juvenile attempt at humor, not that I'm trying to be elitist or anything, it's just not funny...
Take fucking logic 101 before you decide to argue anything.
At 1/9/10 12:42 AM, morefngdps wrote: And yeah, coincidentally I didn't laugh at any of your juvenile attempt at humor, not that I'm trying to be elitist or anything, it's just not funny...
Take fucking logic 101 before you decide to argue anything.
My god, you need to get a sense of humor. If you can't see anything comical in the name you either are denying it to seem superior (despite your denial of this) or have a serious problem understanding the opinions of others. Besides what would taking a logic class have to do with my argument that you are simply being an elitist ass?
Oh there's nothing funny about it so you have to be immature to find it funny because I said so, and I'm not elitist I'm just right.
I'm not saying don't defend the party policy, but god damn you are really stretching here if you think there's nothing at all to be said about bad name choices.
What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing
At 1/9/10 12:53 AM, Rideo wrote: My god, you need to get a sense of humor. If you can't see anything comical in the name you either are denying it to seem superior (despite your denial of this) or have a serious problem understanding the opinions of others. Besides what would taking a logic class have to do with my argument that you are simply being an elitist ass?
Oh there's nothing funny about it so you have to be immature to find it funny because I said so, and I'm not elitist I'm just right.
I'm not saying don't defend the party policy, but god damn you are really stretching here if you think there's nothing at all to be said about bad name choices.
Are you kidding? Teabaggers? That's just really not that funny. Maybe a slight chuckle when you first hear it but seriously, it pretty much stops there when it comes to humor. Stop trying to stretch it to make it look funny, it's really not that funny. When I first heard it I didn't go straight to LOL TEABAG LOL. I went to, "Where did that name come from?"
Get the fuck over yourself.
Here's some sarcastic humor for you:
"OMFG ELITIST GUY DIDN'T LAUGH AT MY JOKE HE MUST THINK HE'S BETTER THAN US OMFG WHAT A FAG."
At 1/9/10 12:42 AM, morefngdps wrote: NOT a valid argument,
Speaking of Logic why don't we cover some basic ground?
The defintion of a valid argument.
A valid argument is an argument in which the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. Whenever the premises are true the conclusion must also be true.
Premise of my argument : The name The Tea party is comical because it implies a sexual position when the context of the party itself is political and held to be serious.
So in short my premise of my argument could be said to be that the name The Tea party is comical because of it can be linked to a sexual position. As long as the premises is true then the conclusion [that the name the tea party is comical] is also true. Since comedy is a matter of personal opinion there is no way that my premise can be false therefore I presented a valid argument.
We could go further to what spurred my first rebuttal, that being you saying it is only comical to 14 year olds. Well I'm 21 years old and find it funny so therefore the premise of your argument [that it is only comical to 14 year olds] holds to be false and therefore your conclusion that it is not comical is also false.
What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing
At 1/9/10 01:04 AM, Rideo wrote:At 1/9/10 12:42 AM, morefngdps wrote: NOT a valid argument,Speaking of Logic why don't we cover some basic ground?
Why someone who hasn't taken logic would try to invoke it is beyond me.
The defintion of a valid argument.
A valid argument is an argument in which the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. Whenever the premises are true the conclusion must also be true.'
Amazing, correct! Google comes through yet again!
Premise of my argument : The name The Tea party is comical because it implies a sexual position when the context of the party itself is political and held to be serious.
Ooh, man that's funny.
So in short my premise of my argument could be said to be that the name The Tea party is comical because of it can be linked to a sexual position. As long as the premises is true then the conclusion [that the name the tea party is comical] is also true. Since comedy is a matter of personal opinion there is no way that my premise can be false therefore I presented a valid argument.
Hmm. Amazing that you think you know it all in your limited wisdom. Perhaps you can Google "fallacy" and learn what the fallcy of argumentum ad extremum is. It's quite pertinent to this discussion!
Now we examine your logical premise, "The Tea Party is comical because it can be linked to a sexual position." and your rationale being that comedy is subjective. Well, indeed comedy is subjective, so what is true for you, is NOT true for me always. And since you decided to play semantics, you've already presented your side as weak due to your earlier argument.
Also on the topic of semantics and shitty arguments, if X is true, it does NOT always mean Y is true
(x being your premise and y the conclusion, obviously). Which is part of logic 101, which you seem to have googled briefly and learned nothing about. The first thing you learn is your argument structures.
E.x. All St. Bernards are dogs.
I have a St. Bernard.
I have a dog.
X=>Y
Z=>X
THEREFORE
Z=>Y
This argument has true premises and a true conclusion.
Now watch the magic I work here!
Cats are mammals.
Dogs are mammals.
Therefore, dogs are cats.
Look, TRUE premises and a FALSE conclusion!
What YOU said is:
X=>Y (X = The name The Tea party is comical because it implies a sexual position; Y= LOL.)
THEREFORE
Z=>... Nothing. (Z= The context of the party itself is political and held to be serious)
You have half an argument, and a flawed one at that.
Now I bring up the BARE ASSERTION FALLACY!
Please click that.
We could go further to what spurred my first rebuttal, that being you saying it is only comical to 14 year olds. Well I'm 21 years old and find it funny so therefore the premise of your argument [that it is only comical to 14 year olds] holds to be false and therefore your conclusion that it is not comical is also false.
To this I say: THE FALLACY FALLACY!
Hmm. So because my premise was wrong, and I do admit it was wrong, I should have said most instead of only, my conclusion must be wrong... Wait, no, it's still correct, it's not funny.
At 1/9/10 01:27 AM, morefngdps wrote: Hmm. Amazing that you think you know it all in your limited wisdom.
How bout you just stop pretending you're not trying to act superior? Because every post is full of insults and attempts to portray superiority. Calling someone a know it all while simultaneously attempting to prove you are ultimately correct contradict. You can either accept it as a matter of opinion or go one to keep trying to prove you know better.
I'm done with this argument, you win. Happy?
What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing
At 1/9/10 01:33 AM, Rideo wrote:At 1/9/10 01:27 AM, morefngdps wrote: Hmm. Amazing that you think you know it all in your limited wisdom.How bout you just stop pretending you're not trying to act superior? Because every post is full of insults and attempts to portray superiority. Calling someone a know it all while simultaneously attempting to prove you are ultimately correct contradict. You can either accept it as a matter of opinion or go one to keep trying to prove you know better.
I'm done with this argument, you win. Happy?
Yep, I'm happy. You wouldn't have posted here if you weren't trying to prove something. Don't make this bitter and try to guilt trip me or whatever bullshit you're doing.
If there's one thing I hate on newgrounds its everyone who loses, because when they do they either just quit or try to save face, it's seriously embarrassing.
At 1/9/10 01:38 AM, morefngdps wrote: Yep, I'm happy. You wouldn't have posted here if you weren't trying to prove something. Don't make this bitter and try to guilt trip me or whatever bullshit you're doing.
Not doing anything, just think this topic should get back on topic and tired of going on with what is a pointless and petty argument with someone who takes their self a bit too seirously.
If there's one thing I hate on newgrounds its everyone who loses, because when they do they either just quit or try to save face, it's seriously embarrassing.
What else should they do, blow up and die? You have a skewed view on how people should have conversations man, it's not all about domination and proving you're right.
What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing
At 1/9/10 01:42 AM, Rideo wrote:
If there's one thing I hate on newgrounds its everyone who loses, because when they do they either just quit or try to save face, it's seriously embarrassing.What else should they do, blow up and die? You have a skewed view on how people should have conversations man, it's not all about domination and proving you're right.
It's a debate bud, not a conversation, it's the politics forums. What do you expect? I believe the key point in a debate is to make your point better than the other person.
And it's not THAT they lose, it's the way they go out. Morefngdbs just ignores posts in which he clearly loses, which I think is the worst way to do it. What makes it really bad is that he continues to post in the thread and reply to my other comments, even when I point him to the post he missed.
He's like cellardoor only stupider...
Seriously... the name is fucking funny. Get over it.
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
i thought i might ad that "the Teabagger movement" is what the major media dubbed them because its actually called the TEA party (taxed enough already) oh... and FYI they actually consist of mostly republicans and is not currently a political party but a protest organization funded by companies like Exxon Mobile (big oil) but they claim to be grassroots... so i hope this ends the pointless arguing and sparks an interest in some of you to investigate the big picture...
after attending a TEA party in person and seeing how much money went into it i knew something was fishy considering i have been to things like the RNC and DNC or the Pittsburgh G20 and seeing what grassroots really is...
you remember the big TEA party in Washington DC on Sept. 12th? well it might have been worthwhile if the president or other politicians were in town... speaking of... do you remember people on fox news telling people to go to Washington?... grassroots protest movements do not get free advertising on republican mass media outlets you can chalk that up as donation...
where am i going with all this?... Sarah Palin is just going to speak to a bunch of angry citizens and tell them what they want to hear... not saying that i disagree or agree with all of it but lets be serious... who walks into a demonstration and says things the large group of people holding signs with wood poles go against?
as far as the TEA party speech being yet another tool for a possible run at office i must say that her campaign methods are very clever... look at it this way... on her book tour she not only shook the hands of all those people but also had the time to have short conversations with all of them... to me it seems like its a new approach at the idea of the rock star president with methods not as well utilized by others... i cant say i support Palin but you got to admit she does have a large chunk of the countries ears...
I saw the thread's title and got an erection.
When all else fails, blame the casuals!
America once brushed off Japan as harmless because it was so far away.
To those who thing the tea party is a harmless thing that is actually killing the GOP, I would say if nothing else it might actually fix the GOP and make it conservative again. the GOP has this mental problem with wanting to appease the "moderates" (read liberals).
as far as the tea party being funded by the oil and insurance companies? that just bullshit being thrown out by the liberals to discredit them.
The Tea party is looking to elect real fiscal conservatives to office. Once the GOP realizes it won't survive by trying to beat the democrats at their own game, then they'll either adapt or die off, making room for a new dominate conservative party.
Of course, naturally, the media is going to protray the tea party movement as a 3rd party, in order to try and split them away from the GOP in order to secure Obama's reelection.... Which I seriously doubt he will get at this rate.
I'm not crazy, everyone else is.
Palin reminds me of a stupid female Jackson, who's just missing the awesome dueling.
Also, its a personal opinion that she's a manipulative conniving bitch of a control freak who doesn't really understand politics. And while that may sound very horrible to you, its all there in her aura. She's very conceited to believe a country should vote for her when she couldn't even finish running her state.
Oh, and Rideo, you can't for fit after you've won. Its like handing back a medal.
At 1/9/10 09:01 AM, Ravariel wrote: He's like cellardoor only stupider...
And considering how many arguments you lost to him...
At 1/10/10 12:32 AM, Memorize wrote:At 1/9/10 09:01 AM, Ravariel wrote: He's like cellardoor only stupider...And considering how many arguments you lost to him...
Sorry overshouting people =/= winning... which is exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks!
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
At 1/10/10 12:34 AM, Ravariel wrote:
Sorry overshouting people =/= winning... which is exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks!
Beating someone with a logic argument =/= winning too?
At 1/9/10 11:11 PM, Korriken wrote:
Of course, naturally, the media
Haha yeah, THE MEDIA!!!
That one entity that always sides with the Democrats.
At 1/10/10 01:51 AM, poxpower wrote: Haha yeah, THE MEDIA!!!
That one entity that always sides with the Democrats.
more or less. Remember the big acorn thing with the fake pimp? the media wouldn't touch it until it became common knowledge and they couldn't ignore it without losing face.
Remember what they said about Bush's $40 million inaugural ball? its terrible! its extravagant! it's a party for corporate america! It's a slap in the face to ordinary americans!
Obama's $150 million ball? It's MAGNIFICENT! It's gorgeous!
tea party? a bunch of redneck racist astroturf rabble rousers marching to the beat of the big Oil/insurance. How could there POSSIBLY be people who aren't racists that would dare oppose Obama? and Of course, Keith Olbermann agrees whole heartedly. big surprise there.
Remember Joe Wilson? Racist.
so you tell me.
I'm not crazy, everyone else is.
The only good mike brown is a dead mike brown.
At 1/10/10 07:53 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: pfft as if MSM is biased
Only 3 of those stories isn't biased or deserves attention and coincidentally all of those are made to make the Obama administration look like crap. Further, you're going to tell me now that the only stories main stream media (which includes fox, which actually did run all of those stories), missed are the ones fox picked out that are solely political in nature?
PFFFFFT indeed.
At 1/10/10 10:08 AM, gumOnShoe wrote:
PFFFFFT indeed.
those might not have been worthy of news, but man, when the cover on a book bush read to kids one time was upside down, now THAT was newsworthy! or the time his shirt was buttoned wrong. or the time when he butchered the english language, now that was front page material!
I'm not crazy, everyone else is.
At 1/10/10 11:27 AM, Korriken wrote: those might not have been worthy of news, but man, when the cover on a book bush read to kids one time was upside down, now THAT was newsworthy! or the time his shirt was buttoned wrong. or the time when he butchered the english language, now that was front page material!
No, no, I don't think it ever was front page of anything, it was part of a comedy routine, on Comedy Central. Ever heard of the daily show? Is that what you mean by Main Stream Media? lol
Select between 5 monster racers, upgrade your monster skill and win the competition!
4.18 / 5.00 3,534 Views
Build most powerful forces, unleash hordes of monster and control your soldiers!
3.80 / 5.00 4,200 Views
© Copyright 1995-2014 Newgrounds, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
newgrounds.com — Your #1 online entertainment & artist community! All your base are belong to us.
