Tea-Partiers Spit on "nigger" and "faggot" Congress Critters

[Michael Tee]

<<Where is Occams razor when you really need it?>>

Good question.  I guess once one accepts the power of social taboo (in this case the taboo against racist politics) then Occam's Razor, if it takes in the reality of all three factors:  racism, the taboo against racism, the need for secrecy IS the simplest explanation for the absence of overt racism in the Tea Party's public utterances.


<<It isn't possible that Racism is simply unpopular, it has to be very widespread and popular but entirely covert , like an occult cult that everyone is in .>>

I think it's dying a slow and lingering death.  The society is nowhere near as racist as previously but it hangs on tenaciously in large (but shrinking) segments of the population.  Also, as it's dying down, events can fan the flame and it will blaze briefly again before continuing its decline.

[sirs]

LOL....so basically, the absence of racism is proof positive of racism.  Let's see, where did we see this before?......oh yea, lack of any evidence of a cover-up regarding going into Iraq or lying us into war, is proof positive of a cover-up & lying us into war.  Lack of evience/proof that the election was stolen is proof positive that the 2000 election was stolen

I'm confident there are other Tee-leaf examples

[Plane]

<<Where is Occams razor when you really need it?>>

Good question.  I guess once one accepts the power of social taboo (in this case the taboo against racist politics)

Why should I accept that?

then Occam's Razor, if it takes in the reality of all three factors:  racism, the taboo against racism, the need for secrecy IS the simplest explanation for the absence of overt racism in the Tea Party's public utterances.

  The reality of all three factors has to be assumed in order to accept this incident as proof of the reality of all three or any one of them?

<<It isn't possible that Racism is simply unpopular, it has to be very widespread and popular but entirely covert , like an occult cult that everyone is in .>>

I think it's dying a slow and lingering death.  The society is nowhere near as racist as previously but it hangs on tenaciously in large (but shrinking) segments of the population.  Also, as it's dying down, events can fan the flame and it will blaze briefly again before continuing its decline.

I don't know if you understand the operation of Occams Razor or not, if there is a simple explanation why search out a complex explanation?

[Universe Prince]

Give it up, plane, FIVE WITNESSES WHO WERE WITH CONGRESSMAN LEWIS heard the shouts of "nigger" from the crowd.

http://tinyurl.com/yc7jehl

Another time, while sailing close to the shore, Walter was steering his boat when he saw someone on shore waving his arms. He waved back smiling and kept going, and in another 30 seconds we hit bottom. Walter looked around and said. 'What just happened?' I replied, 'Didn't you hear what that guy was yelling? He was yelling, 'LOW WATER.' He looked at me and said, 'I thought he was saying, 'HELLO, WALTER.'

And also, I feel I should point to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondegreen.

The point being that claiming something was heard doesn't mean that something was actually said.

[Universe Prince]

Personally, I am not in the least surprised.  I know the American people.

What fully nonsensical thing to say. Not even the people who live here "know the American people". He gets to claim Americans are racist because he knows they are, but he's upset (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/index.php?topic=9338.0) because some Republicans/conservatives talk about "what the American people want." Michael's arrogance is nothing if not extravagant.

[sirs]

Give it up, plane, FIVE WITNESSES WHO WERE WITH CONGRESSMAN LEWIS heard the shouts of "nigger" from the crowd.

http://tinyurl.com/yc7jehl

Another time, while sailing close to the shore, Walter was steering his boat when he saw someone on shore waving his arms. He waved back smiling and kept going, and in another 30 seconds we hit bottom. Walter looked around and said. 'What just happened?' I replied, 'Didn't you hear what that guy was yelling? He was yelling, 'LOW WATER.' He looked at me and said, 'I thought he was saying, 'HELLO, WALTER.'

And also, I feel I should point to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondegreen.

The point being that claiming something was heard doesn't mean that something was actually said.

NOR does it debunk the theory that they were Democrat plants, which would fit Chicago-style politics, quite nicely

[BT]

Michael is in character now.

[Michael Tee]

<<Why should I accept that [the power of the social taboo against racist politics]?>>

I see it, so I accept it.  Racism, or the open expression of it, seems taboo.

<<I don't know if you understand the operation of Occams Razor or not, if there is a simple explanation why search out a complex explanation?>>

Sometimes the complex explanation happens to be true.  Sure I understand the operation of Occam's Razor, I think I made a mistake in trying to rationalize its application here.  Or at least in the way that I tried to rationalize it.  Let me try again. 

The Congressman and five others with him say they heard shouts of "Nigger" from the crowd.  Simplest explanation?  They heard shouts of "Nigger!" from the crowd.

There.  That's better.

[Plane]

<<Why should I accept that [the power of the social taboo against racist politics]?>>

I see it, so I accept it.  Racism, or the open expression of it, seems taboo.

<<I don't know if you understand the operation of Occams Razor or not, if there is a simple explanation why search out a complex explanation?>>

Sometimes the complex explanation happens to be true.  Sure I understand the operation of Occam's Razor, I think I made a mistake in trying to rationalize its application here.  Or at least in the way that I tried to rationalize it.  Let me try again. 

The Congressman and five others with him say they heard shouts of "Nigger" from the crowd.  Simplest explanation?  They heard shouts of "Nigger!" from the crowd.

There.  That's better.

While reporters holding microphones did not.

I offered two explanations simpler than supposeing that these guys have more sensitive ears than regular humans or that the microphones were the less sensitive veriety.

[sirs]

Now, let's add the just as valid, if not more so, qualifier to the latest Tee-leaf claim.....

<<I don't know if you understand the operation of Occams Razor or not, if there is a simple explanation why search out a complex explanation?>>

Sometimes the complex explanation happens to be true.  Sure I understand the operation of Occam's Razor, I think I made a mistake in trying to rationalize its application here.  Or at least in the way that I tried to rationalize it.  Let me try again.  

The Congressman and five others with him say they heard shouts of "Nigger" from the crowd.  Simplest explanation?  They heard shouts of "Nigger!" from the crowd, that had Democrat plants strategically placed.

There.  That's better.

[Michael Tee]

<<While reporters holding microphones did not.>>

Yeah.  Microphones that were unable to pick out one single word from all the words that were shouted.
Occam's Razor, once again:  if the mikes couldn't pick up "Traitor!" "Commie!" or any other word in the English dictionary, the likeliest explanation is that they couldn't pick out ANY word, not that the only word they could pick out would have been "Nigger!" had it been uttered.

<<I offered two explanations simpler than . . . that these guys have more sensitive ears than regular humans . . . >>

Well, that would have been kind of a pointless effort, unless you can prove that Congressman Lewis and the other five people who heard the shouts of "Nigger!" were not "regular humans."  Actually, Nazi Party literature might help you out there big-time - - didn't they claim also that blacks were not "regular humans" but in fact constituted a wholly different "sub-human" species?

<<or that the microphones were the less sensitive veriety.>>

Doesn't seem to matter how sensitive or what variety, the point you can't seem to get around is that they weren't picking up ANY distinct word from the crowd, and so if they couldn't pick out any single word, how the hell would they be expected to pick out the N-word?

plane, with all due respect, I don't think you've ever offered any explanation that even came close to the utter simplicity of this one:  Those racist bastards were shouting "Nigger!" at Congressman Lewis, and the Congressman and the four or five other people with him all heard them shouting "Nigger!"

Simpler than that, plane, it does not get.  They shouted "Nigger!" at Congressman Lewis, and Congressman Lewis heard them.  FIVE PEOPLE all heard them.  Give it up, plane.  Believe me, you will not find a simpler explanation.  That is it.  The simplest.

[Plane]

<<or that the microphones were the less sensitive veriety.>>

Doesn't seem to matter how sensitive or what variety, the point you can't seem to get around is that they weren't picking up ANY distinct word from the crowd, and so if they couldn't pick out any single word, how the hell would they be expected to pick out the N-word?

plane, with all due respect, I don't think you've ever offered any explanation that even came close to the utter simplicity of this one:  Those racist bastards were shouting "Nigger!" at Congressman Lewis, and the Congressman and the four or five other people with him all heard them shouting "Nigger!"

Simpler than that, plane, it does not get.  They shouted "Nigger!" at Congressman Lewis, and Congressman Lewis heard them.  FIVE PEOPLE all heard them.  Give it up, plane.  Believe me, you will not find a simpler explanation.  That is it.  The simplest.

Were these shouts said useing sound waves?

If they were then these microphones would have the best tool on earth for recording them .

You cannot decide whether the croud can or cannot be heard distinctly saying any words.

But you have complete confidence that a man can hear better than a microphone in the same location.

The ONLY word ,that is distinct, is this one?

That might be possible if they were said at a low level by someone closer to the congressman than to the microphone , 15 times .

If shouted over a microphone at the congressman so that the congressman could hear it, the microphone could also have recorded it.
......fifteen times.

Look at the videos availible, there were mikes in every direction there is no where that an opprobrious shouter could have beenisolated from the mikes but also proximate to the congressmen.

I do not accept that the chatter of the croud was unintelligable and intelligable both at the same time , this is an impossibility whether it is simple or not.

I think that people eager to beleive a lie will indeed beleive it  .

[sirs]

Look at the videos availible, there were mikes in every direction there is no where that an opprobrious shouter could have beenisolated from the mikes but also proximate to the congressmen.

I do not accept that the chatter of the croud was unintelligable and intelligable both at the same time , this is an impossibility whether it is simple or not.

I think that people eager to beleive a lie will indeed beleive it  .

Give that man a cigar

[Michael Tee]

<<Were these shouts said useing sound waves?>>

All shouts are transmitted by sound waves.

<<If they were then these microphones would have the best tool on earth for recording them .>>

Obviously they weren't the best tool on earth, because they didn't record them.  Yet five people heard them.  Also, the entire crowd was yelling and shouting.  It was bedlam.  Yet, unless you believe that all of them were shouting gibberish, you have to assume that some of them were shouting actual English words.  If you assume that some of what was shouted was in words in English, then you have to note from the recording that you yourself heard that NOT ONE SINGLE WORD WAS CAPTURED, which pretty much puts the kibosh on your "best tool on earth."  

Get over it, plane, in the midst of a shouting mob with probably hundreds of words being shouted, the "best tool on earth" didn't pick up a single one of them.  

<<You cannot decide whether the croud can or cannot be heard distinctly saying any words.>>

I don't have to decide a God-damn thing - - FIVE PEOPLE, the Congressman and four others near him, heard the N-word many times.

<<But you have complete confidence that a man can hear better than a microphone in the same location.>>

Obviously yes.  The microphone didn't pick up one distinguishable word from all that noise.  Obviously the Congressman would have heard anyone shouting in the crowd in his vicinity, and what he heard, his companions all heard too.  Yet none of the mikes picked up any of it, or any other word.  It's too obvious for words.

<<The ONLY word ,that is distinct, is this one?>>

Of course not.

<<That might be possible if they were said at a low level by someone closer to the congressman than to the microphone , 15 times .>>

Ridiculous.  Who the hell would speak in a low level to the Congressman in that din?

<<If shouted over a microphone at the congressman so that the congressman could hear it, the microphone could also have recorded it.
<<......fifteen times.>>

plane, THOUSANDS of words were probably shouted while the cameras were rolling and the cameras didn't pick up even one of them.  Why in God's name do you think they could pick up "Nigger!" when they couldn't pick up one out of thousands???  You're just talking crazy.

<<Look at the videos availible, there were mikes in every direction>>

That's bullshit too, there were a limited number of mikes and no matter which way they pointed, NONE of them picked up a single word.  Was every one of them pointed to a spot that was totally devoid of human presence?   Wherever they pointed, there was probably somebody shouting something, but not one single word was picked up.   Are you saying that no mike was pointed towards any person in the crowd, or that whoever it was pointed at remained silent for as long as it was pointing at him?

<<there is no where that an opprobrious shouter could have beenisolated from the mikes but also proximate to the congressmen.>>

plane, your theory is just plain crazy.  There were plenty of people in the crowd, and as far as I could see, not one of them was speaking directly into a mike.  It did not happen.  

<<I do not accept that the chatter of the croud was unintelligable and intelligable both at the same time , this is an impossibility whether it is simple or not.>>

You still don't get that a mike is not a human ear?  That a mike can't pick up everything that a human ear can pick up?  That's YOUR  problem, nobody else's.  Why do you think videotapes of criminal activities, phone calls, ABSCAM bribes, etc., all come with subtitles, how the hell do you think the people in the videotapes understand one another's phone conversations, do they have to read the subtitles too?    The more you try to deny the obvious, the crazier your theories and scenarios become.

<<I think that people eager to beleive a lie will indeed beleive it  >>

Well, you certainly are an excellent demonstration of THAT.  If you want to believe that Congressman Lewis imagined being called nigger or made it all up, you have certainly exhausted all rational and irrational hypotheses  to wriggle out of a painfully obvious conclusion.  I've never seen anyone fight harder against an obvious truth than you.  

[Plane]

<<Were these shouts said useing sound waves?>>

All shouts are transmitted by sound waves.

 ... I've never seen anyone fight harder against an obvious truth than you.  

ah progress!
I was worried that you thought that the shout was being transmitted by ESP or majic.

Sound is a form of energy .

 If there is a lot of background noise and I want to shout something understandable at you I must speak up to be heard above the noise , if there is a microphone between me and you it will receive more of this energy than you will.


     Now you need to decide something , pick one.

1.The shouts of the croud were unintelligable.

That is one;

2.The shouts of the croud were understandable.

That is two.


I am sorry but I can't let you have both.