On 8/9/13 12:43 PM, Boating All Out wrote:

I see some people here actually think that those using
the name "Tea Party" shouldn't be dismissed out-of-hand.
That's plain nuts. What, somebody here was "troubled"
when somebody else "dismissed" the "Tea Party?"
Crazy ****.

Plain arrogance to suppose that most people wouldn't do
otherwise.
There is no "Tea Party" except a loose coalition of
crybabies. No platform with detail, just a bare-
bones plan to **** up everything.
Crybabies slamming their hands into their food.

I've always dismissed them, just as I do the
Libertoonians, which might as well be called "Tea Party"
now. The wacko Libertoonians and "Tea Party" have
coalesced.
But I just now understand the truth behind calling them
"Tea Baggers." That's a crude term, used by low-lifes.
When originally used to describe the "Tea Party" it
probably was used to describe the fact that "Tea Party"
"members" would show up at their inane "meetings" with
****ing tea bags stapled all over their persons.

"Teabagger" was the term used at least from 2009 as a derogatory
"descriptor" of the Tea Party movement, and for those who first used the
term to describe these crazies, the etymology had nothing to do with tea
bags. It was and is crude, and deliberately so.

The tea party groups were and perhaps still are funded by a few
multimillionaires who like having grass roots crowds of morons who are
easy to manipulate.

The tea party is part and parcel of the modern Republican party. It has
subsumed the GOP, as it were.