Occupy Wall Street: The Movement Grows

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I disagree. I think it was the plethora of left leaning groups that did get the word out on facebook/twitter and that others liked the idea and followed along.

Well, all I can tell you is that I was there and you were not. I'm telling you, as an eyewitness, that you are wrong.

As far as you personally are concerned I don't doubt that you are being honest.

However, the idea originated in the minds of these big, well funded, left leaning political thinktanks.

(BTW I totally understand where you are coming from, i've been in those shoes)

 

[Big Fitz]

You know perfectly well that those "grievances", cannot be rectified within the framework of the constitution.

I know nothing of the sort, and neither do you. Let's look once more at the listed grievances, and I'll suggest some solutions.

"They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage."

Solution: debt relief for mortgagees, and regulations on the mortgage industry to make foreclosure more difficult.

Result, buying a house becomes impossible for anyone who doesn't have $300,000 cash.

Why would anyone lend you money that you don't have to pay back?



No comment



Monopolies have been created by government. Do you treat cuts by gouging yourself with a knife?



**** PETA. You got a problem, become a vegan.



**** the unions, they are the biggest part of the problem.



GIMMEE GIMMEE GIMMEE

Why shouldn't YOU have to work for free so that I can have free hamburgers and fries?



Gee, why would they do that? You Marxists are so ******* reasonable....



Or better yet, repeal the bullshit EPA regulations and enforce anti-trust laws against SUIE, the AFL/CIO and the Teamsters.

You Marxists LOVE monopolies, as long as they are YOUR monopolies.



Don't you have to end the constitution to do that...

OOPS, you are the End the Constitution group, sorry...



Communism, the one size fits all or we send you to a gulag answer of the "End the Constitution" protestors!



So you want to outlaw the income tax and the 1040 form? (No greater invasion of privacy exists in this nation.)



I think it means that Fox News hasn't been shut down and the reporters for it haven't been put to death as the "End the Constitution" protest wants.

"They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit."

Solution: enforcement of laws protecting the rights of consumers.

Who has deliberately declined what?

Why are Marxists such pathological liars?

"They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce. They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them. They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil. They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit."

Solution: campaign-finance reform to remove the corruption from politics.

"They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit."

Solution: strict enforcement of existing laws and regulations designed to prevent such things, and amending of laws and regulations where needed.

"They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media."

Solution: growth and development of alternative new media to supplant the dinosaurs. (We're already doing that one.)

"They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt."

Solution: abandon capital punishment.

"They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad. They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas. They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts."

Solution: end the American empire and bring our troops home.

Now, you may or may not agree that these are problems, and even if you do you may or may not agree with the solutions I've suggested, but the fact remains that NONE of them are unconstitutional.

Got bored with the idiocy...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Uncensored2008 again.

 

[Dragon]

No Dragon, that is not the question.

It's what you and one or two others have said or implied: that OWS is out to destroy the Constitution. Do you now retract that statement?

The Federal government invalidating a legally binding contract by interfering with the execution of collateral execution in a secured loan is unconstitutional - no question and no debate.

Wrong. There are at least two clauses in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that empower Congress to do this. One, most obviously, is the regulation of commerce clause. Congress is allowed to (and does) regulate the mortgage industry, and laws governing how mortgages in default may be collected are well within its powers. Second, the provision of relief in the form of financial aid to mortgagees is covered by the taxation clause, in that it is the spending of money to promote the general welfare. There is nothing unconstitutional about either of these actions.

 

[Luissa]

By that theory a bank robber who says "please" and "thank you" without hurting anyone must not be prosecuted. I'd go along with that if he/she stole only YOUR money.

So people should not be allowed to protest peacefully?

Yes, without question.

However blocking traffic takes it beyond peaceful and into the realm of insurrection. As blocking traffic interferes with commerce.

TRL blocks traffic in New York, should they have arrested the teenie boppers?

 

[WillowTree]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQQiFW2YDLM&feature=related]SEIU Planned Destruction of Capitalism - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

So people should not be allowed to protest peacefully?

Yes, without question.

However blocking traffic takes it beyond peaceful and into the realm of insurrection. As blocking traffic interferes with commerce.

TRL blocks traffic in New York, should they have arrested the teenie boppers?

YES!

TRL sucks

 

[Luissa]

I guess the question was too hard for Dragon... or maybe he really doesn't want to answer - at least, not honestly.

Which begs the question. Do the left really want to tear up the Constitution and create a new America?

You know full well that's what they want.

Dragon ducked the question instead of lying, he deserves some credit for that shred of integrity.

Yep, that is what we want. And we want to put Castro in the White House.

 

[Luissa]

Yes, without question.

However blocking traffic takes it beyond peaceful and into the realm of insurrection. As blocking traffic interferes with commerce.

TRL blocks traffic in New York, should they have arrested the teenie boppers?

YES!

TRL sucks

Good thing they cancelled it.

 

[California Girl]

No, it isn't. One could use subversion to undermine the Republic.... as in the Cloward/Piven strategy.

The Cloward/Piven plan would not have undermined the Republic nor was that their intention. They wanted to undermine welfare as it existed in 1966, with a view towards pushing the government to replace it with a guaranteed income. Had they accomplished this, the U.S. would have remained a republic and the Constitution would have remained in force. If you regard the creation of a guaranteed income as "undermining the republic," then you are using the word "republic" to mean something it doesn't ordinarily mean. I would add that their plan was not only non-forcible but in fact perfectly legal. (And of course, it also didn't work.)

As I said: the only way to overthrow what is normally meant by the phrase "our constitutional republic," i.e. the U.S. government as established by the Constitution, is by force, either a coup d'etat or a popular revolution. I would not support either of those. And that is the only answer I can give you, until you clarify exactly what YOU mean by the phrase.

I know what the phrase means, thanks. It is you who appears to need it spelled out for you.

I know exactly what Cloward/Piven does. I've studied the strategy. You might think that dodging it by arguing the toss over words makes you clever but it does not. It was, and remains, a straightforward question.

And you refuse to answer it with a straightforward response. I'll take that as your response... that the Constitutional Republic is not your priority to defend. I would have respected you if you had had the courage to say so outright. There really is no need to hide.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

TRL blocks traffic in New York, should they have arrested the teenie boppers?

YES!

TRL sucks

Good thing they cancelled it.

Wait for it.....wait for it.....


Capitalism at work!!!!

 

[Luissa]

YES!

TRL sucks

Good thing they cancelled it.

Wait for it.....wait for it.....


Capitalism at work!!!!

Cancelling TRL is Capitalism at work?
ONe could say TRL is a form of democracy and maybe even socialism. People vote for videos, then MTV shared the videos the people voted for(sharing the wealth). Is it still socialism if you don't want what they are sharing?

I wonder how many of those posters used to camp out at TRL when they were younger? Some how we can blame Carson Daily for this whole thing???

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Good thing they cancelled it.

Wait for it.....wait for it.....


Capitalism at work!!!!

Cancelling TRL is Capitalism at work?
ONe could say TRL is a form of democracy and maybe even socialism. People vote for videos, then MTV shared the videos the people voted for(sharing the wealth). Is it still socialism if you don't want what they are sharing?

I wonder how many of those posters used to camp out at TRL when they were younger? Some how we can blame Carson Daily for this whole thing???

Yes the show sucked bad so advertisers wouldn't pay good money to advertise on it.

That made it not profitable enough for MTV so they cancelled it.

Capitalism at work

I was talking about it being cancelled not the actual show itself

 

[Dragon]

It is you who appears to need it spelled out for you.

[Exasperation.] That's exactly what I've been saying, jackass! I need you to spell out what you mean by it.

I know exactly what Cloward/Piven does. I've studied the strategy.

Then why do you say that it was aimed at overthrow of the republic when it obviously wasn't? If Cloward/Piven had worked and we had a guaranteed income for everyone, how would the Constitution have been overthrown? Would we no longer have Congress passing laws? Would we no longer elect a president every four years? Would we no longer have an independent judiciary as defined by Article III? Would we have a monarchy? A dictatorship? Anarchy and chaos in the streets?

No, none of these things; we'd just have a guaranteed minimum income for everyone. Now you may not like that. You may disapprove of it. But to call it "the end of the republic" is sheer unjustified hyperbole.

And you refuse to answer it with a straightforward response. I'll take that as your response... that the Constitutional Republic is not your priority to defend.

So in other words, you are dishonestly asking a trick question. You refuse to clarify what you mean -- a perfectly reasonable request -- and that by itself proves that you are being disingenuous here.

I will give you the best answer I can give. I am not in favor of abolishing the Constitution of the United States, nor of overthrowing the government established according to the Constitution. If that is what you mean by "our Constitutional Republic," then I am not against our constitutional republic.

If, as the example of Cloward/Piven suggests, you mean by "our Constitutional Republic" not merely the republic as established by the Constitution but a governing policy that adheres to conservative principles, then I am indeed in favor of overthrowing that, peacefully and by means that are within the limits imposed by the Constitution itself. But in that case, you are using the phrase "constitutional republic" dishonestly and with a deliberate attempt to deceive.

 

[Big Fitz]

Well, the Occupados have metastasized to Minneapolis, so the cannabis scented cancer has spread here now. I have to drive by the Federal Courthouse twice today, so I'll mention what was going on come Sunday night when I get back.

I expect what I'll see is gonna fall somewhere between embarrassing, pathetic and ******* stupid.

 

[Big Fitz]

Good thing they cancelled it.

Wait for it.....wait for it.....


Capitalism at work!!!!

Cancelling TRL is Capitalism at work?
ONe could say TRL is a form of democracy and maybe even socialism. People vote for videos, then MTV shared the videos the people voted for(sharing the wealth). Is it still socialism if you don't want what they are sharing?

I wonder how many of those posters used to camp out at TRL when they were younger? Some how we can blame Carson Daily for this whole thing???

Like Air America... if nobody watches it, it loses all revenue streams, because it can't sell advertising, and can't pay the bills, and as socialist as they may be, ideology doesn't feed the bulldog, money does..

 

[Luissa]

Wait for it.....wait for it.....


Capitalism at work!!!!

Cancelling TRL is Capitalism at work?
ONe could say TRL is a form of democracy and maybe even socialism. People vote for videos, then MTV shared the videos the people voted for(sharing the wealth). Is it still socialism if you don't want what they are sharing?

I wonder how many of those posters used to camp out at TRL when they were younger? Some how we can blame Carson Daily for this whole thing???

Yes the show sucked bad so advertisers wouldn't pay good money to advertise on it.

That made it not profitable enough for MTV so they cancelled it.

Capitalism at work

I was talking about it being cancelled not the actual show itself

I know, I was giving you shit.

I have no problem with regulated capitalism.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Cancelling TRL is Capitalism at work?
ONe could say TRL is a form of democracy and maybe even socialism. People vote for videos, then MTV shared the videos the people voted for(sharing the wealth). Is it still socialism if you don't want what they are sharing?

I wonder how many of those posters used to camp out at TRL when they were younger? Some how we can blame Carson Daily for this whole thing???

Yes the show sucked bad so advertisers wouldn't pay good money to advertise on it.

That made it not profitable enough for MTV so they cancelled it.

Capitalism at work

I was talking about it being cancelled not the actual show itself

I know, I was giving you shit.

I have no problem with regulated capitalism.

I just told bigfitz that you knew what I meant and were just messing with me because we like to play with each other like that (you can take that out of context anytime )

 

[Uncensored2008]

It's what you and one or two others have said or implied: that OWS is out to destroy the Constitution. Do you now retract that statement?

How disingenuous. I hope you don't think such an act is clever?

Wrong. There are at least two clauses in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that empower Congress to do this. One, most obviously, is the regulation of commerce clause.

So you believe that the INTERSTATE commerce clause (take care with the wording) empowers congress to confiscate property from one and give it to another?

You think that in the State of Montana, Jerome takes a loan on a house for $150,000 from "Small Town Capital" in West Yellowstone. Jerome doesn't pay the mortgage, but in your mind congress has the authority to confiscate the home from Small Town Capital and give it to Jerome?

Not the case. Even the outrage of Kelo v. New London doesn't foray into the direct theft of property for the purpose of enriching a private concern.

To impugn property rights violates section II and the 9th and 10th Amendments to the constitution. No case law has ever supported the theft by congress of real property for the benefit of a third party.

Congress is allowed to (and does) regulate the mortgage industry, and laws governing how mortgages in default may be collected are well within its powers.

ONLY in the instance that the mortgage company is involved in interstate loans, if a financial institution operates within the boundaries of a state, the US Congress has no authority at all.

Second, the provision of relief in the form of financial aid to mortgagees is
covered by the taxation clause,

ROFL

Are you nuts?

First off, there is no such thing as the "taxation clause," this is a fabrication of your own imagination. The power to tax is derived from the Uniformity Clause of the constitution, Article 1, section 8. The clause very clearly states the purpose for which congress may tax;

Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

in that it is the spending of money to promote the general welfare. There is nothing unconstitutional about either of these actions.

Sorry, violates the uniformity clause in that it is not applied in a uniform manner but involves theft of real property from one set of citizens on behalf of another.

 

[Luissa]

Wait for it.....wait for it.....


Capitalism at work!!!!

Cancelling TRL is Capitalism at work?
ONe could say TRL is a form of democracy and maybe even socialism. People vote for videos, then MTV shared the videos the people voted for(sharing the wealth). Is it still socialism if you don't want what they are sharing?

I wonder how many of those posters used to camp out at TRL when they were younger? Some how we can blame Carson Daily for this whole thing???

Like Air America... if nobody watches it, it loses all revenue streams, because it can't sell advertising, and can't pay the bills, and as socialist as they may be, ideology doesn't feed the bulldog, money does..

Really?

 

[Luissa]

Yes the show sucked bad so advertisers wouldn't pay good money to advertise on it.

That made it not profitable enough for MTV so they cancelled it.

Capitalism at work

I was talking about it being cancelled not the actual show itself

I know, I was giving you shit.

I have no problem with regulated capitalism.

I just told bigfitz that you knew what I meant and were just messing with me because we like to play with each other like that (you can take that out of context anytime )

You just like to play with me while I watch tv.