For Those Who Don't Understand What Occupy is REALLY About (Obviously LOTS of you)

[IndependntLogic]

I think you exist. I just think that if you are part of the OWS you sound just like the ones interviewed on TV. Know little, answer questions like you have your head stuffed up your rear, and you never post anything of substance here on the forum. I hope you say more when you speak than you say on the forum or you are wasting peoples time.

I'll make this easy for you, tell us just how you would accomplish one of your goals, in detail with specific means while explaining just what your one goal is. Do that and let's see if you are up to discussing politics without spouting a lot of meaningless rhetoric as you have so far.

Happy to - and since you have actually brought up issues, I won't return your insults.

Here's one goal: Reduce the Level of Influence that Corporations, PACs and Unions have on elections.
How to accomplish this:
1. Public Financing.

Not in a million years would this work. No matter how hard you try to keep citizens money out of an election you can't. The USSC has already found that trying to limit political campaign money donations is unconstitutional in many ways. You can't legislate to reverse a supreme court decision. You would have to get a constitutional amendment.

Six of our senators started a move to do exactly that. Now ther are eight or nine.

Talk about a non-sequitur, this takes the cake. No discussion deserved. It simply won't/can't happen in a free society.Like it? Of course not, no more than I like Soros and his money buying the best government it can afford. But again, a non-sequitur.

You like to talk about goals. HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO GET ANY OF THAT DONE? Big talk, no action.

Are you ALWAYS such a hostile azzhole? I mean, I dont pretend that my ideas are flawless but I think there are thing about our government and "business as usual" that could be improved. Yet, when you asked about ideas, I offered some without insult. You? Well, you offe rnothing to improve the way things are and are a complete f-ing azzhole toward anyone who discusses the possibility of change. I guess that's just who you are. Enough of this.

Do you want to eliminate money influencing politicians? Prohibit lobbying of any kind. Do you want to reduce Corporate buying influence and favors? Eliminate Corporate taxes, then the favors would be cut in half overnight. Now that's workable, and the taxes can be made up by taxing individual income taxes on the dividends.

But you still haven't brought up OWS as it played out in the streets. OWS is nothing but a bunch of anarchists blowing of steam, and each other.The fact is, your goal, to end corp and union influence in elections is good, but you haven't the faintest idea how to do it. At least you haven't explained anything yet.

The ability for Special Interests to influence our politicians and through them, dictate policy, would be reduced.
We think this would be great for America.

You are talking fantasy world. If you want to eliminate corporate or union influence on politicians you have to be willing to think outside of the box.

Union money is big, even if unions themselves are small potatoes now, less than 12% of our work force. The way to eliminate big union money is to pass legislation at the federal level outlawing closed shops; to outlaw union influence on big business, such as trying to stop Boeing from building Air Craft in South Carolina. No big union influence on corporations, not big union influence on politicians.

Corporate money will never be banned from campaign funding. But their influence can be reduced by eliminating the means by which congress can grant favoritism with special tax exemptions.

If you really want to create an atmosphere in which big campaign spending is an issue, go back to the original means by which our president was selected. The state legislatures selected the presidential electors in a quantity based on the state population. The state legislatures also selected the Senators from that state. By going back to the original way elections remain as they should be, local. All elections should be local as that is the only way voters can know the candidates.

Then take the 10th amendment seriously, and make it work the way it is stated. The federal government should have on authority or means to do anything not specifically delineated in the constitution, giving back to the states the right to run their affairs according to the wishes of their citizens. This alone will go a long way to limit corporate influence on the government if that federal government does not have the power to exercise the favoritism.

That is what I mean about telling us HOW to reach your goals; just spouting the same list of things over and over serves no purpose.

As stated above. Enough of this. Fine. You are ever so brilliant. The government is perfect in every way. Nothing could be improved. Only your ideas are worth civil discussion.

You would make a fine politician.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So far is acts like a ghost the way he flits from one subject to another without ever saying anything.

I have offered him many analysis of the "ideas" of the Shitters.

Let's talk about "Public Financing," the act of letting government bureaucrats determine who may run for office, ergo who is elected. When government determines the candidates, elections are a farce.

Yet this is what the Shitters hold forth as a "solution," the end of free elections and the selection of candidates by government employees. You see, when you are talking about "public financing," then anyone seeking office must first get the blessing of those approving said financing. As good SEIU members, you can be certain that no one opposing the expansion of public employees and the obscene pensions they receive would ever get past the gate keepers.

So this is the Shitters, just typical leftists with their foot on the throat of liberty, crushing the life out.

 

[dnsmith35]

Happy to - and since you have actually brought up issues, I won't return your insults.

Here's one goal: Reduce the Level of Influence that Corporations, PACs and Unions have on elections.
How to accomplish this:
1. Public Financing.

Not in a million years would this work. No matter how hard you try to keep citizens money out of an election you can't. The USSC has already found that trying to limit political campaign money donations is unconstitutional in many ways. You can't legislate to reverse a supreme court decision. You would have to get a constitutional amendment.

Six of our senators started a move to do exactly that. Now ther are eight or nine.

Talk about a non-sequitur, this takes the cake. No discussion deserved. It simply won't/can't happen in a free society.Like it? Of course not, no more than I like Soros and his money buying the best government it can afford. But again, a non-sequitur.

You like to talk about goals. HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO GET ANY OF THAT DONE? Big talk, no action.

Are you ALWAYS such a hostile azzhole? I mean, I dont pretend that my ideas are flawless but I think there are thing about our government and "business as usual" that could be improved. Yet, when you asked about ideas, I offered some without insult. You? Well, you offe rnothing to improve the way things are and are a complete f-ing azzhole toward anyone who discusses the possibility of change. I guess that's just who you are. Enough of this.

Do you want to eliminate money influencing politicians? Prohibit lobbying of any kind. Do you want to reduce Corporate buying influence and favors? Eliminate Corporate taxes, then the favors would be cut in half overnight. Now that's workable, and the taxes can be made up by taxing individual income taxes on the dividends.

But you still haven't brought up OWS as it played out in the streets. OWS is nothing but a bunch of anarchists blowing of steam, and each other.The fact is, your goal, to end corp and union influence in elections is good, but you haven't the faintest idea how to do it. At least you haven't explained anything yet. You are talking fantasy world. If you want to eliminate corporate or union influence on politicians you have to be willing to think outside of the box.

Union money is big, even if unions themselves are small potatoes now, less than 12% of our work force. The way to eliminate big union money is to pass legislation at the federal level outlawing closed shops; to outlaw union influence on big business, such as trying to stop Boeing from building Air Craft in South Carolina. No big union influence on corporations, not big union influence on politicians.

Corporate money will never be banned from campaign funding. But their influence can be reduced by eliminating the means by which congress can grant favoritism with special tax exemptions.

If you really want to create an atmosphere in which big campaign spending is an issue, go back to the original means by which our president was selected. The state legislatures selected the presidential electors in a quantity based on the state population. The state legislatures also selected the Senators from that state. By going back to the original way elections remain as they should be, local. All elections should be local as that is the only way voters can know the candidates.

Then take the 10th amendment seriously, and make it work the way it is stated. The federal government should have on authority or means to do anything not specifically delineated in the constitution, giving back to the states the right to run their affairs according to the wishes of their citizens. This alone will go a long way to limit corporate influence on the government if that federal government does not have the power to exercise the favoritism.

That is what I mean about telling us HOW to reach your goals; just spouting the same list of things over and over serves no purpose.

As stated above. Enough of this. Fine. You are ever so brilliant. The government is perfect in every way. Nothing could be improved. Only your ideas are worth civil discussion.

You would make a fine politician.

You seem to have problems with understanding what you read. You have yet to discuss how to accomplish the goals you say you want accomplished. I have not touted my personal opinions, only listed a few reasons why you have yet to post anything substantive.

PS, your attempts at separating what I say and what you say by using different colors makes it more difficult to read. Why not separate with quote balloons?

BTW, if you look back you will find that I don't so much attack you or your reasoning, I attack your lack of expressing a cogent manner to accomplish your goals.

When you decide to tell us how anything will work or get passed into law, let us know.

 

[dnsmith35]

IndependentLogic:

Let me help you out here. When addressing politics beyond just the general stage one must consider the goal, list the ingredients with which the goal is accomplished, then give the method of achieving that goal using the available ingredients. Simply stating some general goal and a few details that may or may not help achieve that goal is not sufficient to expect people to accept your premise and your desires.

Its like cooking; not only do you need a list of ingredients, you need directions in how to use those ingredients to accomplish the desired end result. That is what is missing in your posts and why people are insulting your expressions, not you, but your posts. An example follows:

Dinner today will be Thai Shrimp.

1.5 to 2 lbs shrimp (small to medium in size)
1 cup sweet and sour sauce
1 cup chopped onions
1 cup chopped green pepper
1/2 cup chopped celery
1/4 cup chopped parsley
1 tbs chopped garlic
1 tbs butter
salt, black pepper, red pepper to taste

Melt butter, then saute all vegetables until clear cooked. Stir in sweet and sour sauce. About 2 minutes prior to serving add shrimp and cook on low until shrimp is done. Serve with/over rice.

Once the recipe is prepared and one finds some personal problem with the result, then experiment a little, but don't give up if it didn't come out perfect the first time.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Not in a million years would this work. No matter how hard you try to keep citizens money out of an election you can't. The USSC has already found that trying to limit political campaign money donations is unconstitutional in many ways. You can't legislate to reverse a supreme court decision. You would have to get a constitutional amendment.

Six of our senators started a move to do exactly that. Now ther are eight or nine.

Talk about a non-sequitur, this takes the cake. No discussion deserved. It simply won't/can't happen in a free society.Like it? Of course not, no more than I like Soros and his money buying the best government it can afford. But again, a non-sequitur.

You like to talk about goals. HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO GET ANY OF THAT DONE? Big talk, no action.

Are you ALWAYS such a hostile azzhole? I mean, I dont pretend that my ideas are flawless but I think there are thing about our government and "business as usual" that could be improved. Yet, when you asked about ideas, I offered some without insult. You? Well, you offe rnothing to improve the way things are and are a complete f-ing azzhole toward anyone who discusses the possibility of change. I guess that's just who you are. Enough of this.

Do you want to eliminate money influencing politicians? Prohibit lobbying of any kind. Do you want to reduce Corporate buying influence and favors? Eliminate Corporate taxes, then the favors would be cut in half overnight. Now that's workable, and the taxes can be made up by taxing individual income taxes on the dividends.

As stated above. Enough of this. Fine. You are ever so brilliant. The government is perfect in every way. Nothing could be improved. Only your ideas are worth civil discussion.

You would make a fine politician.

You seem to have problems with understanding what you read. You have yet to discuss how to accomplish the goals you say you want accomplished.

I have not touted my personal opinions, only listed a few reasons why you have yet to post anything substantive.

Exactly. Like all good ConservaRepubs, you're capable only of criticizing those who try to come up with solutions. You never actually offer any yourself. Zero. Any azzhole can try to pick apart the ideas of those working to make things better.
PS, your attempts at separating what I say and what you say by using different colors makes it more difficult to read. Why not separate with quote balloons?

Don't know how to do that.

BTW, if you look back you will find that I don't so much attack you or your reasoning, I attack your lack of expressing a cogent manner to accomplish your goals.

Actually, you have been quite insulting and uncivil from the get go. You're not quite like the azzholes who refer to all Occupiers as "sh1tters" but it's not like anyone on The Right has said "The reason I think Graham Leach Bliley should stay in effect is because..." The motus operandi for the drone-set is "You don't exist! ALL OWs is compiled of the people I want to believe they are!"

When you decide to tell us how anything will work or get passed into law, let us know.

As mentioned so many times, it's obviously becoming a waste of time: turn the movement political. Occupy Washington. Occupy the Vote.

You may now continue your petty insults, and telling me about how I never discuss issues or how to accomplish goals....

 

[dnsmith35]

You seem to have problems with understanding what you read. You have yet to discuss how to accomplish the goals you say you want accomplished.

I have not touted my personal opinions, only listed a few reasons why you have yet to post anything substantive.

Exactly. Like all good ConservaRepubs, you're capable only of criticizing those who try to come up with solutions. You never actually offer any yourself. Zero. Any azzhole can try to pick apart the ideas of those working to make things better.
PS, your attempts at separating what I say and what you say by using different colors makes it more difficult to read. Why not separate with quote balloons?

Don't know how to do that.

BTW, if you look back you will find that I don't so much attack you or your reasoning, I attack your lack of expressing a cogent manner to accomplish your goals.

Actually, you have been quite insulting and uncivil from the get go. You're not quite like the azzholes who refer to all Occupiers as "sh1tters" but it's not like anyone on The Right has said "The reason I think Graham Leach Bliley should stay in effect is because..." The motus operandi for the drone-set is "You don't exist! ALL OWs is compiled of the people I want to believe they are!"

When you decide to tell us how anything will work or get passed into law, let us know.

As mentioned so many times, it's obviously becoming a waste of time: turn the movement political. Occupy Washington. Occupy the Vote.

You may now continue your petty insults, and telling me about how I never discuss issues or how to accomplish goals....

You have mentioned many times the same non-substantial posts. I have no need to insult you, you show your ignorance every time you speak around the subject instead of making sense. You may actually have a few good points. All you have to do is discuss them instead of whining about being insulted. When/if, do you plan to discuss an issue coherently? Just once would be enough.

And stop trying to pass off what you do know or want as OWS philosophy, because with only a very few who CALL themselves supporters of OWS actually have even a faint idea about what they are protesting.

One other thing, even though I agree with what some people try to pass of as OWS political view points, I hope they do not achieve a single thing with the anarchy they are using as a method of advancing those issues. Anarchy is not the way to do it. Go to the polls and vote. Just on general principles, we should never ever allow a rag tag group of anarchist bullies get their way. That is bad precedent even if you and I both want their stated purpose.

 

[IndependntLogic]

As mentioned so many times, it's obviously becoming a waste of time: turn the movement political. Occupy Washington. Occupy the Vote.

You may now continue your petty insults, and telling me about how I never discuss issues or how to accomplish goals....

You have mentioned many times the same non-substantial posts. I have no need to insult you, Then I guess it's a compulsion you simply can't control.

you show your ignorance Thank you for immediately proving my point.

every time you speak around the subject instead of making sense. You may actually have a few good points. All you have to do is discuss them instead of whining about being insulted. When/if, do you plan to discuss an issue coherently? Just once would be enough.

Obviously, it's a waste of time with you.

And stop trying to pass off what you do know or want as OWS philosophy, because with only a very few who CALL themselves supporters of OWS actually have even a faint idea about what they are protesting.

Really? You've spent that much time in camps? At GA's? On Groups calls? Thought so. But you just "know". Oh wait that's right. The MSM told you that. Okay well I'm not a de-programmer so as said earlier, waste of time.

Occupy Politics

 

[Bern80]

I believe the point is the OWSers are hypocrites until they show they want ALL corporate influence on government abolished.

Actually, they want to be the recipients of the corruption, not the victims. This has always been the case of the left. Give me everyone else's money to spend as I see fit but never touch mine.

So, from old 3rd age, or CNN forums?

BTW, I understand your philosophy, I just disagree that those who cannot fend for themselves should be allowed to flounder without assistance. I disagree with helping those who can help themselves.

I believe that since the left has habituated "charity" as being a government function, there is no way we can ever go back to the self sufficient ways of the past. How do you "uneducate" a person who has been habituated to the easy way out?

I don't see that many here are suggesting we don't help people that can't help themselves. I guess the biggest issue I have with the left is that they seem to believe that group of people is far larger than it is. Look at the thousands of OWSers. Are these really people that simply are not capable of improving their own lot in life? I don't buy it. Think of what these people could accomplish if they took as much time actually working the problem of their financial situation rather than organizing protests. I'm sorry, but this entire OWS movement boils down to personal accounability and a larage group of people that simple don't want to be held accontable and think it's someone elses job to make their lives better.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Actually, they want to be the recipients of the corruption, not the victims. This has always been the case of the left. Give me everyone else's money to spend as I see fit but never touch mine.

So, from old 3rd age, or CNN forums?

BTW, I understand your philosophy, I just disagree that those who cannot fend for themselves should be allowed to flounder without assistance. I disagree with helping those who can help themselves.

I believe that since the left has habituated "charity" as being a government function, there is no way we can ever go back to the self sufficient ways of the past. How do you "uneducate" a person who has been habituated to the easy way out?

I don't see that many here are suggesting we don't help people that can't help themselves. I guess the biggest issue I have with the left is that they seem to believe that group of people is far larger than it is. Look at the thousands of OWSers. Are these really people that simply are not capable of improving their own lot in life? I don't buy it. Think of what these people could accomplish if they took as much time actually working the problem of their financial situation rather than organizing protests. I'm sorry, but this entire OWS movement boils down to personal accounability and a larage group of people that simple don't want to be held accontable and think it's someone elses job to make their lives better.

??? You can't magically think your financial situation away without cashflow.

 

[pvsi.]

I guess a lot of people here just believe what the MSM and Right Wing E-media
tell them. This would be the only explanation for some of the posts I've seen.
So I thought I'd help! Here is a C&P from a great OWS site. It will give you
guys a better idea of why you should support us! Here ya go:

"1. We don't want to End Capitalism, We Want to End Corporatacracy.

I know perfectly well what the movement is about and I support the demonstrators. but when some "officials" of the movement who now rent offices on wall street for the donated money can not return my phone calls (I could contribute more then anything else to the movement) then you know they are too busy usurping power/donations, and are no different then any other socialist monkey bunch.

 

[Bern80]

So basically, your goal is intentional stupidity?

Not his, your goal appears to be stupidity. paulitician was right.So you are suggesting the links you have posted actually reflect the opinions of the OWS? They don't. They only reflect the opinions of some people like you who are trying to project their own opinions onto the OWS. Of course Paul is unelectable, part of which are the idiotic ideas of his which correspond to the people trying to project their opinions onto the OWS.

NM. Ron Apaulcolyte. Should have known that things like facts, evidence, logic and issues would be something you would avoid. You guys are EXACTLY like Republicans that way...

Where are your facts? I see a lot of unsupported assertions from you and others like you. I see you throw around the Republican comment like you know something. You don't. You are nothing but a useful idiot. You have no idea what real republicans want, nor do you know what we moderate democrats want. I don't mean as an ultimate goal (most of we moderates want the same things), but rather how to achieve that goal. Rattling off a list of "wants" like you have copied from your left wing talking points site is nothing but a repeat of your typical rhetoric. Where is the meat of the issues? The why, the how, the specific kinds of legislation to accomplish what you say you want. Cut your bullshit and try to post some specific ways to accomplish what you have said, but you must recognize those lists do not come from the OWS people because they haven't the brains to understand the issues; something they have proved over and over.

Well don't look at the OWS sites posted and don't discuss the specific issues and ways to accomplish what we seek in the OP.

I am a member of OWS. I speak at General Assemblies often. I'm quoted on a lot of their sites and the blogs of other members all over the country.
Apparently you don't think I exist. The hundreds of people I've talked to and interacted with don't exist. Move along. Nothing to see here. Believe what you are told to believe. Those people are ALL exactly as the MS tells you because the MSM and internet are always 100% accurate. Okay. That is of course, your choice. And there are a LOT of people just like you.

It's perfectly understandable.

And yet for every one of you, there's some dude misquoting Kennedy or some kid suggesting the role of government is to provide for your basic needs or peopple demanding we tax the rich for no other reason than that they're rich.(watch the video). The simple fact is, OWS is not one idea, or even one set of ideas like the ones you posted in your OP. It is many, yours just happen to be the most moderate, least socialistic of them and I'm afraid you're in the minority.

Andrew Shapter: Mike Myers Visits Occupy Wall Street

You will notice there is no commentary in this video or reference to any media outlet. It is simply filming the movement in New York and lots of them.

 

[dnsmith35]

You have mentioned many times the same non-substantial posts. I have no need to insult you, Then I guess it's a compulsion you simply can't control.

you show your ignorance Thank you for immediately proving my point.

every time you speak around the subject instead of making sense. You may actually have a few good points. All you have to do is discuss them instead of whining about being insulted. When/if, do you plan to discuss an issue coherently? Just once would be enough.

Obviously, it's a waste of time with you.

And stop trying to pass off what you do know or want as OWS philosophy, because with only a very few who CALL themselves supporters of OWS actually have even a faint idea about what they are protesting.

Really? You've spent that much time in camps? At GA's? On Groups calls? Thought so. But you just "know". Oh wait that's right. The MSM told you that. Okay well I'm not a de-programmer so as said earlier, waste of time.

Occupy Politics

You keep suggesting that I have not personally spent a lot of time in the "camps" or "group calls. Bullshit. that is as weak an excuse as can be given. The MSM has told me nothing. I get very little information from the MSM and like it or not I had two of my own personal family in the NY OWS and got personal feed back at the impotence of their "protest". You can't win a debate by announcing that someone else has gotten misinformation. It shows how truly uninformed you really are. I have seen the scenes they videoed. I have heard the recordings made first hand. When called while they were there I told them what I wanted to know, and I got it. The actual OWS is nothing but a ragtag group of anarchists.

Some left wingers have tried to project their interest onto the OWS. Some people like you have done that too.

Regardless, you have yet to post a substantive message about what they or you want. You post goals which most Americans want, liberal and conservative alike but so far have not been specific about how you believe those goals can be realized. So far you have been a typical useful idiot spouting left wing talking points.

Get your crap together and post some substance. Someone may actually agree with you. For the moment you have not said enough for anyone to accept your point of view.

 

[Bern80]

So, from old 3rd age, or CNN forums?

BTW, I understand your philosophy, I just disagree that those who cannot fend for themselves should be allowed to flounder without assistance. I disagree with helping those who can help themselves.

I believe that since the left has habituated "charity" as being a government function, there is no way we can ever go back to the self sufficient ways of the past. How do you "uneducate" a person who has been habituated to the easy way out?

I don't see that many here are suggesting we don't help people that can't help themselves. I guess the biggest issue I have with the left is that they seem to believe that group of people is far larger than it is. Look at the thousands of OWSers. Are these really people that simply are not capable of improving their own lot in life? I don't buy it. Think of what these people could accomplish if they took as much time actually working the problem of their financial situation rather than organizing protests. I'm sorry, but this entire OWS movement boils down to personal accounability and a larage group of people that simple don't want to be held accontable and think it's someone elses job to make their lives better.

??? You can't magically think your financial situation away without cashflow.

I see. You think cashflow comes first and action comes second. Silly you. No wonder people like you have problems.

 

[dnsmith35]

So, from old 3rd age, or CNN forums?

BTW, I understand your philosophy, I just disagree that those who cannot fend for themselves should be allowed to flounder without assistance. I disagree with helping those who can help themselves.

I believe that since the left has habituated "charity" as being a government function, there is no way we can ever go back to the self sufficient ways of the past. How do you "uneducate" a person who has been habituated to the easy way out?

I don't see that many here are suggesting we don't help people that can't help themselves. I guess the biggest issue I have with the left is that they seem to believe that group of people is far larger than it is. Look at the thousands of OWSers. Are these really people that simply are not capable of improving their own lot in life? I don't buy it. Think of what these people could accomplish if they took as much time actually working the problem of their financial situation rather than organizing protests. I'm sorry, but this entire OWS movement boils down to personal accounability and a larage group of people that simple don't want to be held accontable and think it's someone elses job to make their lives better.

??? You can't magically think your financial situation away without cashflow.

The OWS is a group of anarchists who haven't got much knowledge about what they really want and how to accomplish it.

In addition, we should never give into anarchism, either liberal or conservative anarchists. That is not who freedom works. It may be how to start a revolution ( a shooting one) but not the way to call for political or economic change..

 

[Oddball]

In addition, we should never give into anarchism, either liberal or conservative anarchists. That is not who freedom works. It may be how to start a revolution ( a shooting one) but not the way to call for political or economic change..

I know anarchists...I've worked and partied with anarchists...Anarchists are friends of mine.

The occupy douchebaggers are no anarchists.

 

[dnsmith35]

In addition, we should never give into anarchism, either liberal or conservative anarchists. That is not who freedom works. It may be how to start a revolution ( a shooting one) but not the way to call for political or economic change..

I know anarchists...I've worked and partied with anarchists...Anarchists are friends of mine.

The occupy douchebaggers are no anarchists.

I disagree. Possibly I spoke too nicely about them and gave them more credit than I should have. They are protesting like anarchists, they behave like anarchists, they smell like anarchists (one of my friends told me they were worse from a sanitary point of view than the festival on the river). Call a spade a spade.

 

[Faun]

In addition, we should never give into anarchism, either liberal or conservative anarchists. That is not who freedom works. It may be how to start a revolution ( a shooting one) but not the way to call for political or economic change..

I know anarchists...I've worked and partied with anarchists...Anarchists are friends of mine.

The occupy douchebaggers are no anarchists.

I disagree. Possibly I spoke too nicely about them and gave them more credit than I should have. They are protesting like anarchists, they behave like anarchists, they smell like anarchists (one of my friends told me they were worse from a sanitary point of view than the festival on the river). Call a spade a spade.

This nation was founded on anarchism.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So, from old 3rd age, or CNN forums?

BTW, I understand your philosophy, I just disagree that those who cannot fend for themselves should be allowed to flounder without assistance. I disagree with helping those who can help themselves.

I believe that since the left has habituated "charity" as being a government function, there is no way we can ever go back to the self sufficient ways of the past. How do you "uneducate" a person who has been habituated to the easy way out?

I don't see that many here are suggesting we don't help people that can't help themselves. I guess the biggest issue I have with the left is that they seem to believe that group of people is far larger than it is. Look at the thousands of OWSers. Are these really people that simply are not capable of improving their own lot in life? I don't buy it. Think of what these people could accomplish if they took as much time actually working the problem of their financial situation rather than organizing protests. I'm sorry, but this entire OWS movement boils down to personal accounability and a larage group of people that simple don't want to be held accontable and think it's someone elses job to make their lives better.

??? You can't magically think your financial situation away without cashflow.

hey, Burger King is always hiring.

 

[dnsmith35]

I know anarchists...I've worked and partied with anarchists...Anarchists are friends of mine.

The occupy douchebaggers are no anarchists.

I disagree. Possibly I spoke too nicely about them and gave them more credit than I should have. They are protesting like anarchists, they behave like anarchists, they smell like anarchists (one of my friends told me they were worse from a sanitary point of view than the festival on the river). Call a spade a spade.

This nation was founded on anarchism.

No, revolution. This pitiful display of anarchism has not nor will ever elevate itself to any more than a minor noise in history. It bullcrap. Those idiots don't really even know what they want. Only some of the people looking in from the outside looking in try to attach some significance where none really exist. Case in point, independent illogic.

 

[Oddball]

In addition, we should never give into anarchism, either liberal or conservative anarchists. That is not who freedom works. It may be how to start a revolution ( a shooting one) but not the way to call for political or economic change..

I know anarchists...I've worked and partied with anarchists...Anarchists are friends of mine.

The occupy douchebaggers are no anarchists.

I disagree. Possibly I spoke too nicely about them and gave them more credit than I should have. They are protesting like anarchists, they behave like anarchists, they smell like anarchists (one of my friends told me they were worse from a sanitary point of view than the festival on the river). Call a spade a spade.

Nonsense....They're protesting like communists.

Real anarchists mind their own business and don't clamor to statist goon politicians to bend to their demands.