Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Obamunist Censor hates TEA Parties

A readers digest of the listserv conversation wrt TEA parties. A pro-Obama lover attacked a person posting an announcement of a local TEA party

In a recent Gallup Poll.

71% of Americans "have a great deal or a fair amount of confidence in President Obama to do or recommend the right thing for the economy." Just over half (51%) say the same about Democratic leaders in Congress.

Good Luck Melinda. Please let everybody know what Glenn Beck tells you to do next.


Amazingly, another person came to Melinda's defense to this snark attack:

She made an announcement on the WSU Announce listserve. Being considerate of people who want to use the listserve for its intended purpose would be a nice idea. It is surely not necessary for each of us to state our personal opinion of the events announced, or (especially) to insult our co-workers publicly on this Announce forum. It is for announcements……right??


I grew up in an argumentative family, so I take exception with Susan's conclusion that you should eschew arguing with others. Steve, always the chivalrous gentleman, responded with an attack on Susan:


You are right that this is an announce list, but should it be used to promote these phony "grassroots" efforts to convince Americans that they have reasons to be outraged over a 39.6% tax rate? You do realize the taxes they are "protesting" are the rates set by the George HW Bush administration? I guess it was economic nirvana when Reagan had the rates jacked up to 50% back in the 80's.

Please go with Melinda and let us know if they start talking about burning books, or about universities like WSU brainwashing our kids with that evolution hogwash.

Make sure to pump your fist at the Fox News camera and carry your protest sign higher than anybody.

That a girl.


By now, women studies majors were seeing a trend with Steve condescendingly attacking two uppity women in a row & rallied to their defense, if not to the defense of the 1st Amendment right to free speech:

Susan and Melinda:

I personally appreciate hearing about all types of events and happenings in our community. Some I vigorously disagree with. Others I'm totally enthused about. I will ignore the ones I don't like and will pay attention to those I do like. However, what you'll never hear from most of your fellow employees on the list serves are condescending diatribes like we've become used to seeing from a small part of the group. I want you to know that you have every right to be on the announce lists and I encourage you to speak out about happenings or ideas that you want to promote. I think it's about time that everyone has the same opportunity to be heard without people being rude and discourteous.

Is there ANYONE out there who agrees with me? If so, be bold enough to say so. Let's encourage one another to civil discourse.

Thank you.

A knight in shining armor seconded Jodi's sentiment & decided that one good snark deserves another:


I agree, I have been a part of this campus since 1995 and have noticed that if you ignore the rude, childish activities [adagio: aka STEVE >:P] of a certain few they soon go away. So email filter added and looking forward to productive announcements.


Jodi was thirded by a full throated defense of free speech:

What a condescending attitude. Who anointed you chief? Last time I checked I had the right to free speech and assembly without the need to ask permission from you or others. As for use of the list to promote phony efforts, the list has been used to post a lot of individual self promoting posturing not to mention use of work time.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said:
"I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration."

Greg Merkle

Another vote in favor of free speech:

I welcome civil exchanges of ideas, and I try to remember that WSU is a big family with many ideas and personalities. I think respect for differences is the first way for you yourself to be able to be heard. I think it is also the way to learn or hear something new. I do not have to agree with someone (or their ideas or politics) to respect them. I still want to see people post and exchange ideas, so yes Jodi and Wendy, I agree that no insult should silence the love of a good discussion or the will to learn.


A Jiminy Cricket, voice of reason:


You get what you give. Personal attacks are not called for when the original post wasn't an attack in the first place. Yes we have free speech but that doesn't mean free of consequences for our own words.


Jodi returned Greg's support:

What I'd like to get across to everyone is that if someone has a difference of opinion and they want to state that difference, there is a civil or kind way of doing it. No one needs to talk down to anyone else. That pretty much puts an effective end to discussion. The "that a girl" statement at the end of the previous e-mail was not at all respectful to Susan as an adult peer of the writer. I've learned much from people who have vastly different thoughts and opinions from my own. I find I'm much more willing to listen and consider their view point if it's put forth in a civil or kind way.

While I'm not a Hilliary Clinton fan, I do agree with her quote.


Steve, the Democrat who neither likes democracy nor free speech, was having none of it. He proceeded to attack TEA parties as evil racist violent blah blah blah...

Well put. I'm sure Melinda is a big girl, but it wasn't meant as a "personal attack". I wonder if those supporting and promoting these tea parties will accept their responsibilities if violence breaks out or worse someone is attacked or injured. I'm all for civil discourse when warranted, but the manufactured right wing frenzy that is driving this is becoming alarming.


Leftists, of course, never have a problem when their rallies end up with destruction of property or harm to human life. In fact, if you kill a policeman or a judge, that just improves your elite academic cv creds.

The tally so far:

Obamunist censor: I
Free speech advocates: VII


More vulgar snark from the MSM. FYI, "tea-bagging" is a vulgarism for a sex act, for people who've led sheltered lives.


Another snarky email:

I'm getting really confused about who is mad at whom and why. Does
anyone have a chart?


It's rather simple, but to accommodate Byron, I made a chart of who hates whom:

1 comment :

  1. I'm GLAD to see so many libs mad. It's reassuring to know that we are on the right track. MORE TEA PLEASE!!!!!!!!!