See for yourself

[ClosedCaption]

The Tea Party, without exception across the country, has clearly stated objectives expressed in various ways: Persuade our elected leaders to cut back on wasteful spending thus reducing the size and scope of government, work toward a balanced budget, stimulate the economy by encouraging the private sector, and respect individual liberties. . . or . . .replace them with people who will.

The OWS has stated objectives of. . . .what?

If you dont know by now you havent been paying attention. Maybe they need some corporate sponsors like the TP and Fox News to craft and repeat a message.

 

[Swagger]

and they make frequent use of soap and water.

I don't recall any accusations of rapes occurring at Tea Party events either.

And usually the normal police patrols are sufficient at Tea Party rallies, no property damage to report, and clean up already done when they leave. The extra police activity required by OWS is now running into the millions for municipalities where the demonstrations are going on, not to mention extensive property damage and huge messes left for city workers to clean up.

Slightly off-topic, but now you all know why us Brits hate gypsies so much. They exhibit exactly the same negatives you've listed.

 

[Foxfyre]

Cultural difference I suppose, but I don't think we have much of a 'gypsy' problem here in the States and generally portray gypsies somewhat romantically as free spirits. But our experience is not your experience and I don't know how I would see thing with your experience.

But I sure can relate to resentment of the following:

You guys realize we have been talking about a protest of nothing more than a couple hundred people?

I'm hearing that no ones there, its all media hype a ploy for ratings and hopefully thats all it will be. Or it will get just some sheep whipped up into a frenzy and who knows where that'll go. Look I think they have a right to be mad, but what has been the reaction from Wall Street? They don't care... This isn't going to change anything....

I don't know how many people are involved and I don't care. I do know a fair number of them think violence is okay to make a point and I know they're making a huge mess wherever they are congregating and costing honest taxpayers millions of dollars in city assets. That, coupled with the fact that they don't know what they want but they want it now is a royal turn off for honest, hard working Americans. Those who disrespect others are not worthy of respect.

Good for you.... I remember asking you

They are irrelevant... that's all I'm saying I'm not justifying their actions or anything. This story is being spun out of control by the media.

I don't know about that. I think the media that is reporting it--a lot of the more leftist MSM isn't reporting it--is reporting a real problem for those being subjected and even sometimes terrorized by the mobs in the street and encroaching on neighboring homes and busineses. And the cost to the cities is quite real.

The month-old Occupy Wall Street movement continues to grow, claiming it speaks for 99 percent of Americans.

But a new NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll shows only 37 percent of Americans support the movement.

The demonstrators remain loosely organized with no clear goal. And some say that's just fine with them.

"When movements come up with specific demands, they cease to be movements and transform into political campaign rallies," said Legba Carrefour, a participant in the Occupy D.C. protest.

Carrefour works as a coat check attendant despite holding a master's degree in cultural studies.

"It's compelling a lot of people to come out for their own reasons rather than the reasons that someone else has given to them," she said.

The protests, which started in a lower Manhattan park, have drawn hundreds of thousands of followers in cities large and small around the world.

But those protests have proven costly for Manhattan. More than 70 New York protesters were arrested Saturday, at least 40 of them in Times Square.

So far, Occupy Wall Street has cost the Big Apple a whopping $3.4 million.
Occupy Wall Street Reaches One-Month Milestone - World - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

 

[Lovebears65]

See for yourself

I see you're a complete moron!

 

[mskafka]

Keith Boykin: Everything The Media Told You About Occupy Wall Street Is Wrong

For months, people have been claiming "nobody can speak to the TPM, unless you've actually witnessed one yourself. Okay, turn about is fair play then, right?

I love to hear conservatives complaining that the protesters should be in Washington instead of Wall Street, as if the conservatives were really concerned about the most effective way for the demonstrators to make their case.

This location-based argument suggests a limiting "either/or" mentality that you can't be in both places, and also assumes that there's no reason to be on Wall Street at all.

As Herman Cain said recently, "Don't blame Wall Street. Don't blame the big banks. If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself.

But there's a good reason why Wall Street serves as an ideal venue for the demonstration. Unlike politicians in Washington, who have to answer to voters every few years, corporate executives on Wall Street don't have to answer to the public, even though their actions have a huge impact on all of us. It seems to me, the protesters picked a reasonable venue to launch their movement. In fact, judging by the row of satellite trucks parked outside the protest, I'd say Wall Street was exactly the right place to draw attention to their cause.

A lot of people will immediately dismiss this article because it is from the Huffington Post. Just like many of us would have a tendency to ignore an article from Fox News. But this one is an opinion. It doesn't seem to be spun in one direction or another. It's just one guy's opinion of what he's seen. Don't knock it until you read it.

He doesn't seem to be for or against.

 

[Swagger]

What I'd like to see the mainstream media do (sympathetic or therwise) is to ask these 'protestors' how they've been personally affected by Wall St or the various European Stock Exchanges. Then take-down personal details and investigate these so-far unvalidated grievances for legitimacy. You know, so we can all disprove the idea that they're just unwashed layabouts clamouring for the attention they think they and their ilk are entitled to.

That should clear a few things up.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I feel sorry for the plants, trees, grass, flowers in Zucotti park. Our fellow flora, we're not all like what you're having to endure right now.

 

[mskafka]

I feel sorry for the plants, trees, grass, flowers in Zucotti park. Our fellow flora, we're not all like what you're having to endure right now.

Now here's someone with a sense of humor! Someone who understands that sometimes we take ourselves too seriously.

 

[CT9]

The Tea Party, without exception across the country, has clearly stated objectives expressed in various ways: Persuade our elected leaders to cut back on wasteful spending thus reducing the size and scope of government, work toward a balanced budget, stimulate the economy by encouraging the private sector, and respect individual liberties. . . or . . .replace them with people who will.

The OWS has stated objectives of. . . .what?

If you dont know by now you havent been paying attention. Maybe they need some corporate sponsors like the TP and Fox News to craft and repeat a message.

please enlighten me since everybody else who doesn't know is apparently woefully ignorant...

 

[Foxfyre]

Keith Boykin: Everything The Media Told You About Occupy Wall Street Is Wrong

For months, people have been claiming "nobody can speak to the TPM, unless you've actually witnessed one yourself. Okay, turn about is fair play then, right?

I love to hear conservatives complaining that the protesters should be in Washington instead of Wall Street, as if the conservatives were really concerned about the most effective way for the demonstrators to make their case.

This location-based argument suggests a limiting "either/or" mentality that you can't be in both places, and also assumes that there's no reason to be on Wall Street at all.

As Herman Cain said recently, "Don't blame Wall Street. Don't blame the big banks. If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself.

But there's a good reason why Wall Street serves as an ideal venue for the demonstration. Unlike politicians in Washington, who have to answer to voters every few years, corporate executives on Wall Street don't have to answer to the public, even though their actions have a huge impact on all of us. It seems to me, the protesters picked a reasonable venue to launch their movement. In fact, judging by the row of satellite trucks parked outside the protest, I'd say Wall Street was exactly the right place to draw attention to their cause.

A lot of people will immediately dismiss this article because it is from the Huffington Post. Just like many of us would have a tendency to ignore an article from Fox News. But this one is an opinion. It doesn't seem to be spun in one direction or another. It's just one guy's opinion of what he's seen. Don't knock it until you read it.

He doesn't seem to be for or against.

I disagree that he 'doesn't seem to be for or against' based on the clipped portion you have furnished us. It doesn't seem unbiased to me to not understand that an elected official is accountable to the people who elected them, but a corporate executive is a private citizen and cannot and should not be accountable to other citizens for any legal activities in which he or she is engaged. To sympathise with those who seem to think they should be able to dictate to corporate America doesn't look like a detached observor to me.

 

[The T]

Keith Boykin: Everything The Media Told You About Occupy Wall Street Is Wrong

For months, people have been claiming "nobody can speak to the TPM, unless you've actually witnessed one yourself. Okay, turn about is fair play then, right?

A lot of people will immediately dismiss this article because it is from the Huffington Post. Just like many of us would have a tendency to ignore an article from Fox News. But this one is an opinion. It doesn't seem to be spun in one direction or another. It's just one guy's opinion of what he's seen. Don't knock it until you read it.

He doesn't seem to be for or against.

I disagree that he 'doesn't seem to be for or against' based on the clipped portion you have furnished us. It doesn't seem unbiased to me to not understand that an elected official is accountable to the people who elected them, but a corporate executive is a private citizen and cannot and should not be accountable to other citizens for any legal activities in which he or she is engaged. To sympathise with those who seem to think they should be able to dictate to corporate America doesn't look like a detached observor to me.

*Brilliant*

 

[mskafka]

Keith Boykin: Everything The Media Told You About Occupy Wall Street Is Wrong

For months, people have been claiming "nobody can speak to the TPM, unless you've actually witnessed one yourself. Okay, turn about is fair play then, right?

A lot of people will immediately dismiss this article because it is from the Huffington Post. Just like many of us would have a tendency to ignore an article from Fox News. But this one is an opinion. It doesn't seem to be spun in one direction or another. It's just one guy's opinion of what he's seen. Don't knock it until you read it.

He doesn't seem to be for or against.

I disagree that he 'doesn't seem to be for or against' based on the clipped portion you have furnished us. It doesn't seem unbiased to me to not understand that an elected official is accountable to the people who elected them, but a corporate executive is a private citizen and cannot and should not be accountable to other citizens for any legal activities in which he or she is engaged. To sympathise with those who seem to think they should be able to dictate to corporate America doesn't look like a detached observor to me.

I didn't furnish you a "clipped portion". All I did was quote the thread. And since I didn't start the thread, I didn't furnish anything.

Dictate? That's a strong word. My hunch is that much of it comes from this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI]George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America" - YouTube[/ame]

RIP, George. He was a comedian, but he opened people's eyes to many things with his keen perception.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The Tea Party, without exception across the country, has clearly stated objectives expressed in various ways: Persuade our elected leaders to cut back on wasteful spending thus reducing the size and scope of government, work toward a balanced budget, stimulate the economy by encouraging the private sector, and respect individual liberties. . . or . . .replace them with people who will.

The OWS has stated objectives of. . . .what?

If you dont know by now you havent been paying attention. Maybe they need some corporate sponsors like the TP and Fox News to craft and repeat a message.

please enlighten me since everybody else who doesn't know is apparently woefully ignorant...

Wallstreet and bank bailouts, money influence in Washington, unemployment rates, stagnant wages etc. I mean it's pretty much the tea party except OWS blames the corporations and govt, where the TP blames govt and defends or deflects from corporate abuses.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Keith Boykin: Everything The Media Told You About Occupy Wall Street Is Wrong

For months, people have been claiming "nobody can speak to the TPM, unless you've actually witnessed one yourself. Okay, turn about is fair play then, right?

I love to hear conservatives complaining that the protesters should be in Washington instead of Wall Street, as if the conservatives were really concerned about the most effective way for the demonstrators to make their case.

This location-based argument suggests a limiting "either/or" mentality that you can't be in both places, and also assumes that there's no reason to be on Wall Street at all.

As Herman Cain said recently, "Don't blame Wall Street. Don't blame the big banks. If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself.

But there's a good reason why Wall Street serves as an ideal venue for the demonstration. Unlike politicians in Washington, who have to answer to voters every few years, corporate executives on Wall Street don't have to answer to the public, even though their actions have a huge impact on all of us. It seems to me, the protesters picked a reasonable venue to launch their movement. In fact, judging by the row of satellite trucks parked outside the protest, I'd say Wall Street was exactly the right place to draw attention to their cause.

Who are you quoting and where? I love how lefty nitwits lie and pretend it is the truth.

 

[Foxfyre]

A lot of people will immediately dismiss this article because it is from the Huffington Post. Just like many of us would have a tendency to ignore an article from Fox News. But this one is an opinion. It doesn't seem to be spun in one direction or another. It's just one guy's opinion of what he's seen. Don't knock it until you read it.

He doesn't seem to be for or against.

I disagree that he 'doesn't seem to be for or against' based on the clipped portion you have furnished us. It doesn't seem unbiased to me to not understand that an elected official is accountable to the people who elected them, but a corporate executive is a private citizen and cannot and should not be accountable to other citizens for any legal activities in which he or she is engaged. To sympathise with those who seem to think they should be able to dictate to corporate America doesn't look like a detached observor to me.

I didn't furnish you a "clipped portion". All I did was quote the thread. And since I didn't start the thread, I didn't furnish anything.

Dictate? That's a strong word. My hunch is that much of it comes from this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI]George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America" - YouTube[/ame]

RIP, George. He was a comedian, but he opened people's eyes to many things with his keen perception.

Well I can't remember ever taking cues from George Carlin as to what to believe or what to think. I do however pay attention when you LINK an article and express your opinion that the author of the article is 'unbiased' when to my eyes, he is absolutely not unbiased for the reasons I gave. You are of course free to disagree with my perception of the article as I am free to disagree with yours. But when the article itself says that Wallstreet is the appropriate focus for the protests, I think I can safely think I am pretty accurate in my perceptions.

 

[mskafka]

I took cues from him, because in my eyes, he was ALWAYS right.

Indeed we are free to disagree, because we are in America. It's a beautiful thing! One thing that Americans have been accused of, is taking ourselves too seriously. I would post a link to this, but there are too many to post.

Most Americans want the same thing. We are just in a disagreement as to how to get there. If it came right down to it, I would stand next to you as a brother or sister, because we are both Americans, I assume.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I disagree that he 'doesn't seem to be for or against' based on the clipped portion you have furnished us. It doesn't seem unbiased to me to not understand that an elected official is accountable to the people who elected them, but a corporate executive is a private citizen and cannot and should not be accountable to other citizens for any legal activities in which he or she is engaged. To sympathise with those who seem to think they should be able to dictate to corporate America doesn't look like a detached observor to me.

I didn't furnish you a "clipped portion". All I did was quote the thread. And since I didn't start the thread, I didn't furnish anything.

Dictate? That's a strong word. My hunch is that much of it comes from this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI]George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America" - YouTube[/ame]

RIP, George. He was a comedian, but he opened people's eyes to many things with his keen perception.

Well I can't remember ever taking cues from George Carlin as to what to believe or what to think. I do however pay attention when you LINK an article and express your opinion that the author of the article is 'unbiased' when to my eyes, he is absolutely not unbiased for the reasons I gave. You are of course free to disagree with my perception of the article as I am free to disagree with yours. But when the article itself says that Wallstreet is the appropriate focus for the protests, I think I can safely think I am pretty accurate in my perceptions.

It seems like since OWS blames Wallstreet, that means they are pro democrat or anti-republican. I dont get that, Wallstreet is not a political affliation.?

But to say that because OWS is focused on Wallstreet that means they are wrong is just as weird. Even conservatives agree that Wallstreet and Banks are taking the American people for a ride, but conservatives seem to think that because OWS is on Wallstreet and not on 1600 Pennsylvannia they are wrong. That makes no since and dismissing something because you feel they should be doing what you want them to is simularly...weird

 

[Big Fitz]

A lot of people will immediately dismiss this article because it is from the Huffington Post. Just like many of us would have a tendency to ignore an article from Fox News. But this one is an opinion. It doesn't seem to be spun in one direction or another. It's just one guy's opinion of what he's seen. Don't knock it until you read it.

He doesn't seem to be for or against.

I disagree that he 'doesn't seem to be for or against' based on the clipped portion you have furnished us. It doesn't seem unbiased to me to not understand that an elected official is accountable to the people who elected them, but a corporate executive is a private citizen and cannot and should not be accountable to other citizens for any legal activities in which he or she is engaged. To sympathise with those who seem to think they should be able to dictate to corporate America doesn't look like a detached observor to me.

I didn't furnish you a "clipped portion". All I did was quote the thread. And since I didn't start the thread, I didn't furnish anything.

Dictate? That's a strong word. My hunch is that much of it comes from this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI]George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America" - YouTube[/ame]

RIP, George. He was a comedian, but he opened people's eyes to many things with his keen perception.

Beware anyone who gets their news, or social awareness from comedians.

 

[Foxfyre]

I didn't furnish you a "clipped portion". All I did was quote the thread. And since I didn't start the thread, I didn't furnish anything.

Dictate? That's a strong word. My hunch is that much of it comes from this:

George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America" - YouTube

RIP, George. He was a comedian, but he opened people's eyes to many things with his keen perception.

Well I can't remember ever taking cues from George Carlin as to what to believe or what to think. I do however pay attention when you LINK an article and express your opinion that the author of the article is 'unbiased' when to my eyes, he is absolutely not unbiased for the reasons I gave. You are of course free to disagree with my perception of the article as I am free to disagree with yours. But when the article itself says that Wallstreet is the appropriate focus for the protests, I think I can safely think I am pretty accurate in my perceptions.

It seems like since OWS blames Wallstreet, that means they are pro democrat or anti-republican. I dont get that, Wallstreet is not a political affliation.?

But to say that because OWS is focused on Wallstreet that means they are wrong is just as weird. Even conservatives agree that Wallstreet and Banks are taking the American people for a ride, but conservatives seem to think that because OWS is on Wallstreet and not on 1600 Pennsylvannia they are wrong. That makes no since and dismissing something because you feel they should be doing what you want them to is simularly...weird

Wall Street would not be taking anybody for a ride, however, if it was not facilitated by government policy, wrong headed subsidies or regulation, bailouts, and manipulation. Do you blame the fox for taking advantage of you leaving his chickens unattended? Do you blame the dog for eating the pork chop that you dropped on the floor? Do you rail against the thief who took the hundred dollar bill you left in plain sight on the car seat in an unlocked car?

It is no accident that most Wall Street campaign donations went to Democrats this year nor is it coincidental that Barack Obama got the lion's share of his campaign fund from Wall Street. Why? Because that was the party in power.

The fox, the dog, and the thief all did harmful things, perhaps even dishonorable things, but they would not have had the opportunity had you not made it easy and possible to do. If the government had exercised its responsibility to provide proper oversight and necessary regulation, Wall Street would be no problem at all. If we take away Wall Street's ability to buy power and favors from Congress, no problems develop.

The protestors are way misguided railing against the fox, the dog, and the thief instead of demanding that you put the chickens in a secure place, keep the pork chop on the plate, and put away your money and lock the car. You didn't commit the crimes, but you had the power to prevent them.

And no, that is NOT blaming the victim. It IS blaming the one who invites the crime by making it irresistible.

 

[CT9]

If you dont know by now you havent been paying attention. Maybe they need some corporate sponsors like the TP and Fox News to craft and repeat a message.

please enlighten me since everybody else who doesn't know is apparently woefully ignorant...

Wallstreet and bank bailouts, money influence in Washington, unemployment rates, stagnant wages etc. I mean it's pretty much the tea party except OWS blames the corporations and govt, where the TP blames govt and defends or deflects from corporate abuses.

Yes but what are their remedies. The reason the government gets railed by the tea party because they believe shrinking the size of government will solve the problem, as misguided as it is their solution is quite clear where as these people just scream about problems and offer absolutely nothing.