[Vision2020] Teabaggers

[Garrett Clevenger]

This reminds me that some teabagger I've heard want to return to the original constitution.
You know, the one where women don't have the right to vote and slaves have 3/5 voting right (so as to give white slave owners more voting power)
Way to go, tea-m!
Garrett Clevenger

--- On Wed, 3/10/10, Wayne Price <bear at moscow.com> wrote:

From: Wayne Price <bear at moscow.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Teabaggers
To: "Garrett Clevenger" <garrettmc at verizon.net>
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Wednesday, March 10, 2010, 5:52 PM

Garrett,
While the Tea Bag movement has hijacked the name, I'm not so sure they even realize what the 1770's movements were all about!The average colonist was happy being British! 
At that time in the colonies, TEA was not the drink of the average (read that as NOT wealthy) colonist.  Rather they drank cider, because they could makeit locally, and could afford it. Ever wonder why real tea chests of the period have a locks on them? Because it was expensive and the rich didn't want the servants tosteal it!   The original so called "patriots" were nothing more than a bunch of folks with money trying to avoid taxes. Sound familiar? 

Same deal with the folks that shot at government troops on their way to and from Lexington and Concord to bring the GOVERNMENT owned arms and powder back to Boston, so the colonists/traitors/early american terrorists  couldn't use it. Can you imagine today if that happened? Makes me wonder what would happen if theaverage citizens marched on the local National Guard armories so that they could prevent the government from using the arms! Think they would be considered"patriots"?

I have to laugh when I see the fractured history that  George Nethercutt is trying to sell on TV..... Did the boy never read a history book!  I laughed when I saw one aboutGeorge Washington being anti-slavery!  One of the richest slave OWNERS in Virginia at the time! And then there is that scion of colonial america Thomas Jefferson,he not only owned slaves, but would bed them too!  Or was that just for the benefit of the slaves?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 10, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Garrett Clevenger wrote:
Thanks, Joe, you summed up well what I've been thinking.
It is rather presumptious of the teabaggers to think their "tea party movement" is anything close to the real deal back when the colonies were fighting for independence.
The contemporary tea partiers are more like carpetbaggers in that regard, so it seems "teabagger" is a rather appropriate term.
I have no idea what the sexual definition of teabagger is and don't really care to so when I say "teabagger" I'm describing "tea party" people who are exploiting the patriotism of the Boston Tea Party.
But are we really surprised that people who carry guns in the open to rallies and shout down those who disagree with them would be anything less than arrogant?
Teabaggers, indeed.

Garrett Clevenger=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100311/2335cb99/attachment-0001.html