All imprisoned Wallstreet Protesters should apply for political Asylum in Switzerland!!!
You're all highly welcome in Switzerland!!!
Political asylum in Switzerland
Any person who is threatened or persecuted in their home country in accordance with criteria recognised under international law will be granted asylum in Switzerland.
http://www.ch.ch/schweiz/00157/00176/index.html?lang=en
Great idea! Offer them a
Great idea! Offer them a free ticket to join Roger's Swiss ashram where they can spend their days smoking dope and re-posting fringe articles.
Agreed! Nice thought, but I
Agreed! Nice thought, but I suppose it would stop their protests and any benefit they may have.
Occupy Wallstreet: The
Occupy Wallstreet: The American Revolution just kicked off, Congrats People of America!!!
Is this the beginning of a
Is this the beginning of a movement of people in America who are not obsessed with money? If so it is a minority, but welcome nonetheless.
Thinking about
Thinking about Revolution
"What do we mean by the Revolution? The war? That was no part of the revolution; it was only an effect and consequence of it. The revolution was in the minds of the people, and this was effected from 1760 – 1775, in the course of fifteen years, before a drop of blood was shed at Lexington.”
–John Adams, Letter to Thomas Jefferson, August 24, 1815
The full document is posted at
http://newdemocracyworld.org/revolution/Thinking.pdf
These morons are no Adams or
These morons are no Adams or Jefferson.
Neither are you, but at least
Neither are you, but at least they have a pair!
Perhaps there is a good
Perhaps there is a good reason Roger is attrated to the "revolution". Perhaps the reason is they have so much in common.
'Occupy Wall Street' out of touch with reality
So if Roger wants to buy them a ticket to Switzerland, hey--I'm all for it! Otherwise, it's time for these over-indulged narcissists to re-direct their energies into something productive....like bathing and a job.
Strange,A FOX News poll asked
Strange,
A FOX News poll asked about the relevance of the protests and the answer was quite different.
http://yfrog.com/o01kd3j
I would say Mike's evident hypocrisy in defending the Tea Baggers and smearing the Occupiers must be an ideological spasm.
There is no hypocrisy because
There is no hypocrisy because there's no comparison between the goals and solutions of two movements.
The FOX poll demonstrated what we all know, there is a general dissatisfaction with the financial and tax structures in this country. Even the Tea (Taxed Enough Already) Party will agree with that. So what?
That's where the superficial agreement ends. The OWS offers a a lot of angst, without any answers. They feed into Obama's class warfare narrative. Unlike the Tea Party rallies, the OWS has resulted in nearly a thousand arrests, openly anti-semitic and racist speech, aberrant social behavior like defecation on police cars, sex in public, violence, etc.
Perhaps you can share some information on the number of arrests and violence at Tea Party Rallies so we can compare without hypocrisy. Or maybe there is an OWS manifesto in your pocket that illuminates us on what they are "for" and not just what they are "against"?
And the best part is the Democrats and Big Labor are uniting behind them and recreating the conditions that fostered the rise of "Reagan Democrats" who crossed party lines to vote Republican, when the Liberal Left crossed the lines of sanity. So believe me, I'm grateful for the OWS morons and any useful idiots that gravitate to them.
Your lack of any critical
Your lack of any critical evaluation of the links you post really hurts the credible parts of what you are saying.All those links either don't say what you claim they do, are planted unverified garbage, or simply have no context.
The arrests are real, but the nature of the protest is quite a bit more serious than "Tea Parties", with their birther blather, etc.
The two movements are quite different, of course but I think they are motivated by the same events... and of course the government response to those events. It may be quite useful that OWS have united around the very basic problem that exists with investment banking and lending institutions. There has been a lot of mis information and planted information about the demands of the movement, but here is the "working list" of demands for you:
Pretty funny list of
Pretty funny list of "demands". Might as well throw in demands for free beer; it's just as likely in their reality. None of these are demands worth serious consideration. This is just a desparate Leftist gambit to counter-act the effectiveness of the Tea Party.
I especially like the paragraph about the Buffet Rule. How about a corrollary to the Buffet Rule where Warren Buffet pays his own freaking taxes before demanding I pay more?
But it's hugely entertaining. Should I be looking for you in the crowd somewhere? Hopefully, not the guy crapping on the police car...
So therefore you are for
So therefore you are for investment banking and commercial banks being unified, essentially putting chronic gamblers in charge of your savings.
Many more people are being arrested for protesting the crimes committed by investment banking fraud committed in 2008 which brought about an economic collapse. You side with the bankers
You support the continued corporatization of American politics by allowing corporations to spend what they want to smear, discredit, corrupt, etc. election results. This, of course, is evidence that you are an astro turf salesman and corporate shill. This is often the drift of anything you post here.
Now, taxation is a different matter. Corporations should pay their fair share, but in the US the tax rate for corps is too high and the lobby too strong so the result is a Swiss cheese of loopholes that favour the politically (lobby wise) active corps who corrupt the system. A lower rate with fewer loopholes would increase revenue and reduce the incentive to cheat or game the system. You don't think anything need be done because, and I quote "None of these are demands worth serious consideration". Nice.
You don't believe in protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. You support cheating essentially. Very nice there Deacon.
You support Lobbyists. This one is surprising as I thought that the Tea Party was against special interests. Anyway, it's all very revealing about you and what you stand for.
"Revolving Door Legislation". You SUPPORT the revolving door of government which allows regulators and politicians to collect their ill gotten gains for undermining the public trust of their positions. Maybe you fit or may fit into this category?
The last one, corporations right to personhood, well that's a gimme of course. What kind of astro turfer would you be if you didn't tow that line. Still, that you don't think the power of corporations over the daily lives and the politics of your country and mine are worthy of discussion, well, why do you come here? Really.
The fact that I find the
The fact that I find the demands of the protestors to be patently ludicrous, does not give you the justification for making leaps of illogic about what I support. I reject the straw men you are attempting to label me with. In fact, if I chose to employ your tactics, I could well assert that your support of Adbusters means you are anti-semitic as well.
As for Soros connection to Adbusters, there is more than just an allegation. In fact, it is Soros' Tides Foundation which financially supports Adbusters. Is that just a coincidence?
So I guess that means you are a Communist as well! As you can see, two can play that game, but it's not really productive.
We have already agreed that abuses in the financial sector have taken place, the guilty should be punished, and the system needs to be reformed. It's the nature of the reforms and the tactics required to achieve them where we part ways. I do believe the marketplace should have integrity, I don't support cheating, and I am not a deacon, but thanks anyway.
Corporate taxes in the US are some of the highest (if not the highest) in the world which stifle growth and inspire corporations to relocate overseas. That's one of the reasons I kind of like Cain's 9-9-9 proposal, though I have some concerns about it too.
Buffet Rule on fair taxation
Let's just examine this one for instance. Just who exactly are "the rich" and what is a "fair" share? Might that not be relevant?
Here is a cogent starting
Here is a cogent starting point for a discussion on who "exactly are the rich" or the 1%ers, and no it does not include you Mike. Stop imagining anyone is asking you for more.
"...who "exactly are the
Regretfully no, I am not a 1%er, but I do not have to imagine the Left is asking me for more. The fact is, the Left is targeting anyone it deems as "rich" and is quite flexible in it's definition. It has been as low as $200K for joint income and increases in Capital Gains taxes affect ALL income brackets, not just the 1%. Anyone with a retirement account--IRA, 401k, etc. depends on the growth of those accounts for their retirement. Capital Gains taxes syphon off the funds that would have been reinvested and grown exponentially.
And like many, you apparently are under the misperception that corporations pay taxes. The truth is corporations are in the tax collection business, not the tax paying business. All those taxes you want the evil corporations to pay are simply passed on to the consumer in higher prices.
So you have yet to answer the question, what is a "fair share" to you? 50%...75%...100%??? The top 1% are already paying 38% of the entire tax burden. The top 25% (including me) are paying 86% of all federal incomes.
I actually sympathize with OWS anger over banking abuses and so does the Tea Party. But that's as far as it goes. The Tea Party wants reform--the OWS wants revolution. The OWS goals and tactics are ludicrous and moronic. They are hopelessly misguided not to target the Obama Administration and congress for creating and perpetuating the economic policies of crony capitalism that contributed and the housing loan scandal under Dodd/Frank that bears equal responsibility with the banking industry abuses for the economic collapse.
Nor am I making this about me. There are legitimate reasons not to overtax the 1% who are job creators. You are not going to fix the system or create more jobs by taxing the 1% at 100% and confiscating their wealth as well. When was the last time you got a job from a poor man? You are buying into the whole class warfare canard and the Seven Myths of the Top 1%.
BTW, it appears the trend
BTW, it appears the trend sympathetic to the OWS crowd has turned as more people become aware of how devoid this movement is of any legitimacy. Here is your true astro-turf movement fueled by big labor and Democrat ideologues.
Occupy Wall Street Protesters: 36% Favorable 41% Unfavorable
I like that you willfully
I like that you willfully underestimate the movement for your own reasons. I think that is important now that Tea Bagging has achieved it's nadir and has sent disruptive representatives to Washington. That is a model for OWS protesters to follow, and maybe it will result in good policy and a great turn out in the next election.
"astro-turf" is the exclusive trade mark and brand of the teabaggers I'm afraid. OWS is a Canadian sponsored movement. That's right, we're tired of the wingnuttery and US citizens voting and protesting against their own interests. (See TPM demands)
"astro-turf" is the exclusive
I like how you complain about my links and fail to check your own. In fact, yours demonstrates just how "astro-turf" this movement truly is since by definition, Canadian origin is not a grass roots movement at all. You're not the 51st state. Canadian-sponsored and Gorge Soros funded protests hardly represents grass roots in America. Sounds more like genuine imported astro-turf.
The grass roots of America are sick of free-loading carpet baggers no matter what their origin. The more interesting question is what direction the OWS movement will take. The Tea Party never turned violent and always acted as a responsible reform movement. By contrast, the OWS has always been fundamentally unlawful and is quickly moving from "occupation" to "assault".
How grass roots is OWS if it requires Labor unions to recruit and pay protestors?
Heh, American Stinker. Good
Heh, American Stinker. Good one.
If you had read, or comprehended the link I posted, then you would be aware that the support from Soros is alledged (as always with the nuttier conspiracy folks) and that Adbusters is very transparent about their role in getting this started. Why you don't understand the difference between an organization OPENLY suggesting and promoting civil actions and a group of super rich anonymous suger daddies bankrolling a self proclaimed "grass roots" movement is curious. Or maybe not.
Iron Mike I read
Iron Mike
I read your links "occupation to assault" and "Labor unions to recruit and pay protestors?"
The first article on American Thinker "Predicting the Weatherman" is about a gathering of momentum in the OWS numbers & contains further links to other sources, one of which contains reports of police using mace & tasers on protesters, 80 arrests were made, mainly for "disorderly conduct & obstructing vehicular & pedestrian traffic". One person was arrested for assaulting a police officer. If anything, the report is about police assault on protesters rather than the other way round & doesn't actually support his view very well. It then goes on to bring in The Weathermen from 1969 & attempts to make a link between them & the current OWS protests in a speculative fashion. Not very convincing [in my view].
The second link "Labor unions to recruit and pay protestors?" if you actually read it, is a job ad by the Working Families Party whose agenda is "economic & social justice, corporate accountability, job creation, environmental protection, & investment in education & healthcare". They don't mention anything at all about protesting Wall Street. The headline at the top "Fight to hold Wall Street Accountable Now!" etc, is not part of their job ad & seems to have been added by someone else. I wonder from the comments after this article how many actually read the job ad at all, and whether you did.
Carey, In American
Carey,
In American Thinker article, the author identifies the phases of a protest movement and uses historical examples of movements that result in change, those that turn violent, and those which fizzle out. Given the genesis of the OWS movement, it bears unmistakable resemblance to those in the sixties which turned deadly. No, there is guarantee that OWS will follow suit, but compared to the Tea Party movement that was peaceful, non-violent, and resulted in political change (2010 Congressional elections), the OWS has demonstrated violence and the propensity for more. Whether you are convinced or not is your right, but the author is offering a warning and we'll see which one of you is right.
You need to follow that WFP trail a little further. They are deeply involved with OWS.
...And a better explanation of the ad here.
"The headline strongly suggests that the position entails getting paid to protest, since the headline stresses that the job will hold “Wallstreet [sic] accountable now” and that the new hire will make a “differnence [sic]” and “get paid.” The body of the ad doesn’t specify what the duties of the position will be, although it does stress that it’s not going to be a job that involves complicated policy formation, or presumably proofreading:
“Direct action” usually means protesting. In other words, WFP wants Astroturfers, presumably to join other Astroturfers who tire of their career at Wall Street in the coming days."
If you are known by the
If you are known by the company you keep, perhaps all of you who rally behind OWS should take a look at who else is standing shoulder-to-shoulder with you in solidarity.
"It’s not quite the ringing endorsement they were hoping for but Occupy Wall Street protesters on Monday receive the support of the American Nazi Party, more commonly referred to as the ANP.
Also known as the National Socialist Party the group released the following statement on their website:
The ANP isn’t the first communist movement to back Occupy Wall Street, the Communist Party USA has also backed protesters and during a board member speech on Saturday in Chicago they told the crowd:"
(No subject)
http://youtu.be/lVSpYrIfNtUPr
http://youtu.be/lVSpYrIfNtU
Profanity laced, but an accurate and common view of OWS and why it's more important than the astro turf Koch brother movement.
I'm still waiting for you to
I'm still waiting for you to explain the OWS nexus of Communists, Nazis, Racists and Canadians.
I don't need to explain that
I don't need to explain that to you at all. You know the answer to your rhetorical question, you just want your defence of tea party racism validated. If there are kooks and weirdos at OWS then that's your first amendment at work. No one invited them. Glenn Beck and Fox news did invite your kooks and weirdos, so you own them.
Except the wackos at OWS are
Except the wackos at OWS are not the exception (like the Tea Party); they are the rule! And they are becoming well-known by the company they keep. It is a strange collaboration of Soros Socialists, Nazis, Communists, and even racists like David Duke and sixties bomber re-treads like Bill Ayres expressing support for OWS. The really funny part of all this is seeing you continue to defend OWS and their daily vitriol, violence, vulgarity, perversion, and drug abuse. At some point you have to disavow them or you become tarred with the same brush. I'm really trying not to enjoy your dilemma, but it sure is hard. :-)
Look, you have no evidence of
Look, you have no evidence of any of that kind of behavior. Although there is a good deal of mixing of activist cultures on the street, I'd say that the only perpetrators of violence have been the police from ALL accounts but
FOX
So, I don't own or disown the movement, I watch with interest. I also tend to point out your smears that are invariably unfounded and hysterical.
Go back to your corporate evangelists on FOX and stop wasting your time on hyperbolic nonesense here. No one listens to you, or if they do, they quickly point out that you are incorrect, do not read what you cite, and so on.
Best to you and yours of course,
Brendan
Here's one especially for
Here's one especially for Roger.
Look, you have no evidence of
Nope. No evidence at all..
That's not evidence of
That's not evidence of behavior. It's evidence that many interests are exercising their first amendment rights, not that they are behaving violently as you claimed. They are breaking misdemeanor laws to bring attention to massive fraud in the US finacial sector. That is why they are not occupying Washington. The origin of all the problems are with the Wall Street banksters.
Please have a read of Matt Tiabi's article for a coherent view of the OWS and what underlies it.The vast majority of the activists echo these sentiments, not the fringe you seem to believe make your case.
It's quite clear that the basis for protest on WALL STREET has everything to do with the corruption and unfairness we have all witnessed since 2008. Not one banker was arrested.
Mike,You don't know anything
Mike,
You don't know anything about the internet, do you? The image of the defacating kid was from a 2008 anti war protest and the burnining car and protester lobbing something is also not from OWS. Don't believe the smear campaign. Just relax and look into what you post maybe?
I know a fair amount about
I know a fair amount about the internet and if you know as much as you claim, you will have no problem finding the same evidence I did. That's why the cartoon of the media coverage of OWS is so funny. And you are buying into it all, focusing on the minority of sane protestors in OWS and the minority of wackos in the Tea Party.
True, I pulled some pictures that represented what is actually happening, including the kid defecating. But that does not mean what's represented is not happening, including a LOT of protest defecation to go around including police cars. If a pictures says a thousand words, these pictures write volumes. Their behavior has been characterized by drugs, violence and calls for violent overthrow of the government. Funny how the Tea Party calls for reform and the OWS calls for revolution and you find common cause with the latter? I know you are sympathetic to their frustration--so am I, but I will not excuse their behavior which removes all credibility and legitimacy.
These losers are the driving forces in OWS which I claim exist and you steadfastly deny. The movement includes and has been endorsed by the leadership and populated by the drones of the Communist Party, Nazi Party, and Anarchists and that does not even cause you to pause and wonder why?
Ah Mike...Tsk...tsk...can't
Ah Mike...
Tsk...tsk...can't even own up to it when you make such a stupid mistake. As someone who could care less about this issue, I don't have a side, but Brandon has whopped you good on this one. Passing off fake pictures?!!! How low are you willing to go to make your ridiculous point?
FYI, I just read this today...doesn't seem to support any of your claims either.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/where-are-the-anti-semites-of-occupy-wall-street/2011/10/24/gIQAP89eDM_story.html?tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost
So the fact you find an
So the fact you find an "opinion" column that denies anti-semitism means it isn't there? Geez, you're as gullible as Brendan!
So, this last statement is
So, this last statement is not even anti Semitic. That's in there because FOX hires dumb individuals to entertain other dumb individuals. It follows that they would not be able to define antisemitism.
The really offensive part of the article was in the sidebar where it claims:
As Chris pointed out. I am at
As Chris pointed out. I am at pains to understand why conservatives are going to such extremes to smear a movement that does have a point by their own admission no less.
Nope, I'm completely at ease
Nope, I'm completely at ease with anybody claiming to support OWS, even the Pope. They are, at present, only really supporting the First Amendment right of the people to protest some obvious and serious problems - that we have agreed upon - in the financial sector. Whatever else they try to bring from their own personal or organizational agendas is irrelevant. A weak straw man combined with false pictures. I'm wondering if you are misinformed or actively trying to push the FOX agenda here.
To claim that the OWS movement is taking on board any of the politics, opinions or other ideas of the fringe groups you name is a profoundly dishonest way to smear a protest movement that as yet has not made demands, and this seems to frustrate you and the corporate fear mongers.
To claim that the OWS
It is these very fringe and conflicting ideological movements which are appropriating the OWS by their own claims, not mine. There is nothing profoundly dishonest or a smear by me pointing it out. What you choose to ignore is your business, but it does not make it go away. You seem to be confused as to the demands of the OWS since ealier in the thread you povided the proposed demands that you now apparently claim have not been made. I think this is the fundamental anarchy of the OWS that earns my disdain, not my fear.
You seem to be confused as to
I posted the working draft of their demands. It's (apparently) a democratic process that is being discussed by those in the movement. I posted it because you inferred that such a process, or thought process does not exist, another false claim on a long list of false or fake information you choose to post.
If old anti-fornicators, such as yourself and Henry would just ignore them and let them exercise their rights without insisting on police brutality, the movement would quickly become boring and probably transform into something more productive and less public. As it is, attacks and brutality are being met with resistance. So what? Ying/Yang
If old anti-fornicators, such
Lol. Can't speak for Mike, but if they were just camping out in favor of fornication, I'd be out there with them.
Oh, and btw, the movement has already become boring -- this despite the efforts of the media to show these bums in the best possible light. Any legitimacy they may have had has been almost completely undone by the behavior Mike and I have pointed out. The majority of Americans don't approve of the protests (but of course, HuffPost looks chooses to put it another way.)
Why would I talk to them? They chant banal slogans when they're not sleeping or drum on plastic buckets, stink up the nearby coffee shops and drug stores, and they've made a mess of a nice little park -- and in the process, by the way, disrupted the lives of many of the city's homeless, who use the park as a gathering place and a contact point for agencies providing them with services. Same is true of parks in NY, I've read. (Ironic, isn't it, that this movement, mostly made up of jobless middle-class or better 20-somethings, touting their populist outrage, have kicked the truly disadvantaged out of one of the few spaces they can claim as their own?)
As to me or anyone else inisting on police brutality, far from it. The police should leave them alone (unless reacting to protester violence or distruptions of the rights of others, which of course is all they have done, despite your backwards take). Sanitation workers should also leave them alone. I'd also suggest that local vendors and businesses, in addition to leaving them alone, deny them use of their restrooms if they're not actually purchasing anything. They should also feel free to deny them access if they offend other customers by their actions or because of their lack of hygiene, as should operators of public transportation, for the same reasons.
When the 99% (which seems to be actually something closer to 37%) get tired and too dirty even for each other, start suffering from exposure from sleeping outside, and the novelty of being leaderless, rudderless and pointless wears off, they will no doubt decamp. Most certainly (in Eastern and Northern cities, anyway) by the time the first snow flies.
This is like talking to
This is like talking to Statler and Waldorf
True -- funny, smart AND
True -- funny, smart AND good-looking ... (and they don't much like no-talent hacks, either!)
Some great OWS signs for your
Some great OWS signs for your enjoyment
Nice
Nice
Here is a more straight
Here is a more straight forward review of the protesters, their make up and interests, taken from a survey of 200 of them. Interestingly, this survey would have been dome by the WSJ on the 200 or 300 most hard core of the occupants who stay night and day, not the thousands and thousands who sympathize and agree with them starting a movement this way. So one could argue that even though these stats are very favourable to the OWS, the larger constituency involved make this a very focused protest indeed.
Turns out you should get down
Turns out you should get down to your local OWS Mike. Your connection on earth to the all mighty is telling you so. Get ye with the flock!
So you going to add the Rat to that list of insane allies of OWS you are keeping? I'd be OK with that by the way.
For someone with claims of
For someone with claims of internet savvy, you sure got taken for a ride on this one. I regard NPR with the same regard as you do the American Thinker. Both are advocacy sites, not news. The Wapo is a little more even and notes:
The fact that the church espouses social justice and economic reform are far from new. And we both agree the protestors have frustrations that are real and deserve a response. But it is a huge leap to then claim the Pope supports the protestors as if he endorsed their incoherent and unrealistic demands, or their tactics. He certainly finds nothing in common with the Nazis, Communists, Racists like David Duke, and anarchists like Bill Ayres. I'm surprised that you too would not disavow them. Nothing surprises me with Mono.
Post new comment