Forum Post: A Must Read for Trolls and Spammers
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 19, 2011, 8:57 a.m. EST by nocasualobserver
(21)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Welcome. We’re glad you are here.
Our cause exists because of you. You are the very quintessence of and define our movement. Without you there would be no need to occupy Zuccoti Park, Wall Street, Chicago, Peoria, Madrid, Mannheim, or any other place. Because, you see, it’s not capitalism, it’s not the economy and it’s not politics that create the problems we are attempting to address, it is the attitudes, experiences and actions of people like you. “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” Likewise, capitalism doesn’t impoverish people, people impoverish people. Your posts help to distill the issues and catalyze us into action. The tone and content serve as a reference point and indicator of our success in hitting the mark. Without them, it would be more difficult to measure our own progress.
Your presence indicates awareness on your part. Awareness is the first step in understanding, and hopefully, acceptance. If you take the time to, and with an open mind, read our posts thoroughly and attempt to learn the causal factors behind them, you may come to understand them. As you know, it’s sometimes difficult to write clear, coherent, succinct posts about an issue when passions are inflamed. But please don’t let that stop you from attempting to learn more about us. That doesn’t mean you would, by extension, support our cause, but understanding may give you pause the next time you feel a need to write a post that is designed to inflame rather than bring resolution. We really are more alike than we are different.
Your presence indicates fear. Fear is a strong motivator. The greater the fear, the more virulent the opposition. The fact that you take the time, and time is money in your view, to post on this forum indicates your need to attempt to distract us from our vision and goals. The belligerent, infantile and expletive-laced manner that characterizes most of your posts is an outward, recorded demonstration of the kinds of people with whom we are dealing. Your posts are expressions of an inner rage at seeing something unfold before your eyes in which you are not taking part but opposing in futility. They show that you are an outsider who stands to lose more than you gain. And they show that you only understand an exclusive win-lose mentality instead of an inclusive win-win one. Regardless of the outcome, you will all still be our brothers and sisters.
Or, maybe your presence simply indicates that you are amused by what is taking place around the world and are apathetic toward any outcome. If, in some way, we are providing entertainment value for you, then we have unwittingly served a noble purpose. Laughter really is the best medicine. Please continue to enjoy the entertainment and in true capitalist fashion, pay for the medicine by sending a donation to OWS. You can find the address in other posts. Don’t forget, we are not a charitable organization so your contribution is not tax-deductible.
Peace.
We are all very lucky people to live in an age where we can influence the outcome of government by voting. In the not too distant past, voting was not universal. If you don't like what the government is doing, you have a perfectly legal, simple and non-violent way of expressing it, just vote. We do have a democracy, everyone can vote, so what is all the fuss about? Is there corporate greed? Yes. Corporations are merely groups of people. Every action by them is decided upon by a person, and usually that person is highly incentivized to try to make the corporation succeed and earn more money. This is good because it means the corporation has more money, can pay its employees and everyone wins. Sure, the owners of the corporations win too, and you may say they win too much. But if they win too much, then employees can protest this by simply working somewhere else. So a balance must be struck, and who enforces this balance? The bosses who offer a certain pay, and the employees who choose to stay or not.
I believe corporate America is an awesome and powerful institution that has produced wonderful innovation and technology (google, apple, IBM, etc) and without the powerful incentives provided by greed, none of this would be possible.
So if you feel like you are not being paid enough for what you do, think about who sets your pay? If you think you are worth more, look for someone who will pay you more. If no one will pay you more, then perhaps its because your services are not really worth what you think they are worth.
I'm not saying the system is perfect, but I am saying the system has provided the US with a powerful platform to dominate world politics, and technology for decades, so perhaps don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Corporations are not merely groups of people, but institutions that because of limited liability separate themselves from human beings.
Don't think for a moment that people really decide anything. If the CEO of an oil company all of a sudden thinks that the environment is more important than this business cycle's profit, he will immediately be fired.
Yes - when he said this :
" Every action by them is decided upon by a person, and usually that person is highly incentivized to try to make the corporation succeed and earn more money."
he forgot to add :
That person is also heavily insulated from having to suffer any personal consequences for any decisions he makes that break the law, inflict mass suffering on mankind, destroy the environment, etc etc.
Where does that much-touted-by-the-right personal responsibility come in?
The corporation is a group of people who act without conscience and without fear of consequences.
The CEO won't be fired for just thinking this, however he/she may be fired if their actions become counter to the owners of the company, which is of course fair enough. We cannot ask the owners of a company to be held hostage to the employees (even the CEO!), employees should work for the mutual benefit of the owners and the employees.
Corporations are merely groups of people with special laws and regulations regarding their actions. Limited liability merely means shareholders are only liable for the amount of money they have injected into the company. And why should they be more liable than that? If I buy 10% of a company for $1000, and if someone in the company makes a mistake and gets sued, then I should only be liable to lose my $1000, I shouldn't have to then fork out even more! That's what insurance is for!
Corporations are not faceless entities that devour people's souls. They are groups of people trying to earn a living and in doing so make a salary for themselves, and pay a dividend to the owners. The dividend is fair because the owners gave employees a place to work, organised the factory, got the suppliers, borrowed the money from the bank, and paid for the insurance. The employee wages are fair because they spent their time making the cars/ipods/furniture etc. If the wages are not fair, then the employees quit and move elsewhere. If the dividends are not enough to the owners, then the owners also quit, but when they quit the company shuts down and everyone loses their job. And that is certainly a bad plan for everyone.
"Corporations are merely groups of people with special laws and regulations regarding their actions."
"We are all very lucky people to live in an age where we can influence the outcome of government by voting. In the not too distant past, voting was not universal."
Well, you've come to the crus of this: now, because of the supreme court ruling, their money can be more powerful than the long held ideal of one person, one vote. Corporations that want to influence the outcome of elections (and therefore how and what representatives, well, "represent") can simply buy elections outright--and the people who are elected.
So, when oil companies want to influence, say, environmental regulations--or maintain tax incentives for drilling which they no longer need--they can simply give as much many of their windfall profits to various campaigns of members of congress who will then be beholden to them.
So, you baseline premise is inaccurate, to wit, "we can influence the outcome of government by voting." "We," apparently can't, because "we" dont' have endless coffers of cash with which to influence policy makers.
In this regard, btw, this is also about the revolving door--enjoyed by republicans and democrats alike--between government posts and lucrative corporate posts. This is another "institutional" way that voters are disenfranchised by an opaque system of insider dealmaking.
Lastly, this isn't about corporations, per se, although they are enjoying the lowest taxes in decades and should stop sitting on $2 trillion and start hiring people. This is mostly about greed and inequity. Although if you're of a mind, rent "The Corporation." It's an excellent documentary that outlines the genesis of corporations, how they acquired "human rights," and why, according to the World Health Organization's human personality inventory, they tend to be somewhat sociopathic.
Peace.
Political parties are voted in by people. Not companies. Companies can donate money to political parties which is used for ads which can persuade people but its the votes that matter. Sure you may not be able to donate millions to a party, but you can gather people who think like you and get enough of them you can form a lobby group which if large enough, politicians will listen to. All with very little money.
Oil companies can influence politics, which of course is a good thing. Oil companies employ thousands of people. So these thousands of people's jobs are safer and better if politicians listen to the oil company. But it doesnt have to be oil companies. ALL companies that are big enough and represent enough people should donate and try to get politicians to listen to them because they represent all their emnployees
--No, political parties aren't voted in: members of political parties are voted into office.
--Companies can sway the outcome of elections with their cash--that's the main point here. No one should have to gather together people to fight to tilt that inequality back in their favor against corporate interests. This places a burden on people that is absolutely not the point of our plural system of democracy, which is increasingly becoming a "corporatocracy."
You don't have to agree; but that's what #OWS is in very large measure against.
As for oil companies, they lobby members of congress to keep tax incentives to drill oil. People like Eric Cantor, who have said, let's make students pay for the interest on their loans now (while ignoring calls to eliminate oil drilling tax breaks) are more than happy to continue to do the bidding of big oil. And why? Well, let's take a look at the numbers:
http://www.usnews.com/congress/cantor-eric/industries
Oh, lookie there, Mr. Cantor received $500,000-plus from energy industry interests.
"ALL companies that are big enough and represent enough people should donate and try to get politicians to listen to them because they represent all their emnployees"
Now this actually made me laugh. Man, you really do not understand this concept at all. First, corporations don't necessarily represent the interests of all their employees. That's simply not true. In the case of oil companies, for example, they are making record profits, yet, not all employees see those profits. And even if they did, that's really not the point. The point is that corporations shouldn't use their undue influence on members of congress at the expense of the taxpayers. So, while someone like Cantor wants those who can least afford to pay for the debts incurred for, say, illegal war in Iraq, he tries to help entities that are least vulnerable and who are making record profits and getting $4 billion a year in tax breaks that they don't need. That is not democratic--that's what is called plutocratic.
But hey. Good luck with your argument. And please, share it broadly. It'll only steel the resolve of the people who are against it. Like me. And all the people in the growing #OWS movement.
Cheers! Groobiecat (BTW: This is what horizontal Democracy looks like: http://groobiecat.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-ows-functions-horizontal-direct.html)
Oil companies will represent the concerns of themselves of course. That is the shareholders. The employees benefit from this because they get paid by the company and so will also benefit in terms of better job security (if the company is profitable, then it can afford to pay company salaries, pensions, health insurance etc.). So should they influence government? Yes. Do they do it at the expense of tax payers? Most tax payers work for companies. So No, its not at the expense of tax payers because most taxes come from people employed by companies.
Plutocratic means rule by a small group of rich. What the US has is rule by three state run branches, the president (well off, but not uber-rich), parliament (congressmen and senators are often well-to-do but uber money is certainly not a requirement, and the judiciary (also not uber rich). The uber rich has a say through their votes (very few) and their ability to influence politics through campaign donations. But in the end the donations just mean more ads, and ads in my mind are not convincing. Real argument and policies are.
"So No, its not at the expense of tax payers because most taxes come from people employed by companies."
Flawed logic. The point is that corporations have lower and lower taxes, and in this case, the oil industry enjoys a tax break it doesn't need. Does it use that $4b a year to lower the price of gas? Noooo. It usees it to fatten the accounts of its top managers. Yet, taxpayers continue to subsidize this. It's insane. More aggrandizement for the super rich.
I know what plutocratic means--that's why I included the word in my response. And that's exactly what #OWS is fighting.
And no need for the civics lesson, okay sport? I worked on Capitol Hill and in the Federal government. I know how the system works--all too well.
"But in the end the donations just mean more ads, and ads in my mind are not convincing. Real argument and policies are."
That's the crux. "In your mind"? Dude, no. They work. FOX works. People are easily swayed--the more ads and the more "messaging" the more people are moved. Doesn't matter how true they are or not. Why do you think campaigns need cash? Not to get out more flyers. It's for advertising. Because that works. Maybe you're in the minority who does his homework on arguments and policies and weigh the merits of each. Great. But you're in the minority.
FOX is effective because it takes a message, and says it over and over and over again. Karl Rove is equally effective with this tactic.
But congratulations--you've landed at the main issue. That's how corporations influence politics. Exactly. Right. There. Simple logic: Give money, endless. Elect the politician who now owes us with his/her vote. Election time again? Repeat the process.
!
While company tax is lower than personal tax, the money must eventually land in a person's pocket for it to be of any use to a person. It can land there as a dividend, which is then taxed as personal income, or as a salary, again taxed as personal income. Tax payers ARE employees mostly.
While you may have worked capitol hill, not every reader will have.
Do political ads work? They probably do, but that's why both sides of politics present ads in roughly equal measure. So everyone can listen to both sides and decide for themselves.
Do I think the current balance is right? No. More public funding for campaigns would be good, and would lessen the reliance of politicians on donations. If this is the main argument, then lets not confuse this with anti-capitalism, and anti-government, and anti- everything. Instead FOCUS on political campaign donation reform.
I'm not anti-everything. I do well. I make good money. I'm trying to make the system more equitable. Increasing taxes a bit on the least vulnerable and reining in egregious gambling excesses in a rigged financial system run amok isn't radical, really, it's common sense.
The movement is organic and growing. What the ultimate demands will be are hard to know, although getting money out of the political system will undoubtedly be high on the "to do" list.
Many people on the forums are anti-everything. This post is a reaction to that.
This forum isn't terribly representative of much, I'd say, other than a lot of uncivilized discourse. Perhaps that's what's needed. But at some point, this forum, like the movement, will need to be more focused. It's just a matter of when...
"If you don't like what the government is doing, you have a perfectly legal, simple and non-violent way of expressing it, just vote. We do have a democracy, everyone can vote, so what is all the fuss about?"
Many of us feel we've been wasting our vote on "the lesser of two evils" for far too long. I want to stop voting for "evil" even if it is the lesser of two.
The two parties have become almost identical, with the exception of some planks on social issues which in the scheme of things, I find rather unimportant.
We have the USA Patriot Act still in full force and effect, a huge prison population and a drug war that is causing more misery than it prevents while sucking up billions of dollars every year, unprosecuted fraud in the banking system, too big to fail banks that still might fail at any time, despite infusions of capital from taxpayer money, more & more killing & imperialism overseas...and nothing changing...Im glad the people are finding their voice outside of the do-nothing political system.
I agree there are lots of things that can be improved. If this movement is to succeed in getting real change, then it needs to find focus, because there are too many people that are just anti- entire system. What we need is a focused agenda on what needs to be improved rather than an amorphous hatred of the entire system.
We also have another great alternative stated in the First Amendment...We The People have the right to Peacefully Assemble. Another way that demonstrates Democracy!
Exactly. What a great democracy we have! Lets be grateful for it. Yes there are things that need improving, so perhaps focus on what exactly we want to improve. We need specific things or else the movement will just end for lack of focus.
With you all the way, Grateful. This is how 99% really think about this great country!
bravo!
Can we get dildoe's in the park?
Nice presentation , ! Never creeper like you gonna a success !
NIce post, thank you
Great Post! Thank you.
Not very casual and will overlook the direct and implied character insult towards infantile behavior, but over all not badly written, just a little immature, just a little.... Maybe a little arrogant also. I would suggest read and read again, calm down and read again, then post : ) Love you OWS.
It was not intended to be a direct or implied insult to anyone but my personal description of a behavior that characterizes many of the posts to which I am referring. i.e it was my attempt at defining a troll or spammer. I think there is a great sea of difference between my description of a behavior and a direct personal insult. Even so, my apologies if I offended anyone.
Thanks for the feedback. As I've advised in other posts, don't throw the baby out with the bath water, metaphorically speaking. Every one has a different style of writing and contributing. I'm sure my style appears arrogant to some and even infantile to others. But it's a style in which I attempt to invite openness, dialog and compromise. If I have failed in this, then I have failed utterly.
I readily admit that sometimes I respond in kind, to a point. I attempt not to cross the line into personal insults and name calling. If anyone ever sees a post in which I cross that line, I hope you will call me on it. I don't necessarily turn the other cheek but then neither do I engage in a race to the bottom.
Then throw the union hats out I'll join you
This post needs to be a sticky! Mods! make it happen.
We do not need their money as people portray us as beggars. We already have half a million. This is just beginning.
I agree that the movement (for lack of a better word) has become a platform for all kinds of people espousing all kinds of issues. Unless we can all collectively get beyond labeling an idea, concept or position liberal, conservative, right wing, Republican, Democrat we will continue to spin our wheels and remain in a state of inertia.
If there's one common, undeniable message from all of the authentic posters, it's that people are hurting. I think the OP is simply stating that authentic posts should be read with an open mind and maybe even a little proclivity toward compassion. When you're hurting and you're not sure what's causing the pain, sometimes you lash out. That doesn't take a great deal of intellect to understand. I know it's an oft overused quote but it's still applicable. "Seek first to understand then to be understood." Stephen Covey...I think. :-)
I fall into the second category, I am here because you amuse me. I do come with an open mind in an attempt to understand your point of view and I stay for the amusement.
capitalism is a race where the top performers get rewarded. socialism is a race where everyone wins the same crappy thing. communism is a socialistic race, with a big fence around it so you can't leave.
most of the OWC die-hards seem to be the socalistic type, who either showed up late or weren't prepared, but they want a piece of the best prize.
nothing is free, my friend, you have to work for it.
crystalize a message in this movement and work for the prize.
nothing will be handed to you.
I took part in the socialist race a few times and I found aesthetic beauty in the crappy prize I won. Give socialism a chance!
and a resource based economy is not a race, but rather everybody working together to all reach the finish line, and the prize is the participation itself.
Excellent post.
Strong post, Sir. I agree that being aware of the situation and thus reading a lot on the forums and articles is important. Though i see a problem: Many of the people who are in this movement are, with all due respect, of a simple nature, just like these spammers and trolls you're describing. I wouldnt know how someone like that can possibly understand what this movement is up to, even i wouldnt have fully understood what the idea probably looks like if i didnt study marxism. I think for all of us to understand is most important.
I say we create some kind of structure on these forums, alternatively a site which explains this whole thing, that will make all of us understand what exactly is happening, what exactly is our goal, and what exactly needs to be done.
The goals,structures and objectives of occupywallstreet were recently posted today.It is clearly defined. Everyone,supporters of #ows,trolls spammers alike should take the time to read #ows article today.
I agree with your assessment of the nature of many people. Intellect should not be a determinant of one's participatory role in self-governance. (And I don't think that's what you're suggesting.) 'Low information' voters are the most prolific voters in our system and have probably determined the course of many elections. It's so very easy to abdicate any responsibility to educate yourself and to attempt to understand the issues that affect you. I am always shocked at the number of people I meet and talk with who vote for politicians that support programs that will hurt them personally or attempt to kill programs that benefit them. The 'voting on principle' rationale is a cop-out. Many times their 'publicly stated' principles belie a set of hidden principles when it comes election time. But more to your point of how to educate people -
I think most people are motivated by how something - a program, a law a rule - affects them personally. That's not an inherently incorrect way to understand something so long as you also judge it on a larger scale. How would it affect your family? Your neighbor? Your community? Your country? Needless to say, even these decisions aren't easy. But we have to get beyond the 'what's in it for me' attitude. I think some people have perverted the mantra of 'live life to its fullest' and used it to justify greed. Helping people to understand that compassion must be an over-arching guiding principle is one of the best educational opportunities we can offer.
Maybe this is what you are looking for?
http://occupywallst.org/forum/maybe-this-will-get-the-support-of-mainstream-medi/
Can you help explain all the Marxist quotes on this forum? The voices coming from OWS do not reflect your post. You seem sane. Too many want to redistribute all the wealth. I am for changes but not a big fan of Stealing.
I do not judge quotes, concepts, ideas or potential solutions based on how others have previously judged or labeled them, therefore they do not need an explanation from me. If the concepts behind the quotes can bring about a more equitable, sustainable and compassionate society, I will not dismiss it out of hand; I will give it my attention and time.
The voices coming from OWS are many and varied, as I 'm sure you have seen/read. I won't believe in, nor will I support, a solution that destroys people's innovative spark and incentive to use that spark to create goods and services that benefit people. I believe a larger group can benefit from a solution that may affect a smaller group if it relieves poverty, stress, anger and lost productivity from spending so much time defending a system that fosters those same negative things. Some think that the redistribution of wealth and stealing are synonymous. It belies a sense of entitlement that often proves hard to defend. The redistribution of wealth is already taking place on a grand scale. (I'm assuming you are speaking of a distribution of wealth that takes from you personally and gives to someone else.)
I've worked my entire life (working now), supported my country through military service and have not accumulated a great deal of wealth over the years. I am a public servant (some may call me a career bureaucrat, but again labels aren’t important) and admit to periodically lamenting the lack of money and stuff. But if a redistribution of wealth, even mine, were to eliminate many of society's ills, then all of society would benefit I believe. I have seen this occur where I work and it is not atypical. It’s not always a popular concept but people benefit nonetheless. The benefit you receive might not be the same benefit others receive because it sounds as though you are mostly motivated by the accumulation of wealth – no offense meant – which allows you to make your own personal decisions about what benefits (stuff) you want.
What some call 'stealing' is also taking place now in many people's views. Whether it's your local government enacting a zoning ordinance, the federal government paying subsidies that reward overproduction of crops or CEOs taking obscene bonuses during tough economic times, it's all the same - someone thinks it’s stealing. The zoning ordinance may condemn part of your land and the compensation you receive for it may not reflects its true value, in your opinion. The federal subsidy paid to farmers (from taxpayer’s money)in the midwest to grow more corn than can possibly be used domestically is designed to guarantee them a certain price/bushel. The CEO is given a bonus that suggests that it was him/her alone responsible for the profits of a company. The landowner, the taxpayers, employees and shareholders may all lament that what was theirs was stolen from them. Wealth redistribution and stealing, however you characterize it, is taking place now. Why not attempt to design and construct a system that helps everyone accumulate wealth in a manner more befitting a civilized nation and that benefits more than a minority of society?
The entitlement system designed by the Democrats (not trying to pick on them here). Specifically is designed to keep the poor ...poor. All entiltment programs for the poor limit what they can have in their checking and saving accounts. Also it limits the wealth they can have.
I own a small business. If I fail tomorrow I cannot get Unemployment. I would have to lose whatever wealth I have accomulated to get governemtn assistance. This is no assitance for the self reliant individuals in this society. Only chance would be charities. The problem with redistribution is who decides who gets what. Seems like gutting the corruption is the answer...the government never is.
There are many erroneous assumptions in many posts. Allow me to address four of the most prevalent.
1) No one political party is more to blame for where we are now than another. If you believe that it is, then you really need to become more engaged in the debate and open your mind. There are 235 years of American political history and each party has had equal shares of poor judgement and insight.
2) Corporations are not the savior of the world nor is government evil incarnate. The reverse is also true. Government created the laws which allow corporations to exist. Corporations enjoy the protection of the government. The government receives taxes from corporations. Corporations receive lucrative contracts from the government. They need each other and to suggest that 'government is the problem' is tantamount to saying corporations shouldn't exist.
3) Government workers are no less or more motivated than any other employees in any other sector of the economy. Both businesses and government have their share of freeloaders and inspiring leaders. Find those inspiring leaders in both kinds of organizations and hold them up as an example for others instead of finding only the fault in one.
4) Cited sources of information do not make the assertions they support indisputable. Sometimes we need to think 'intuitively'. Many people on these boards suggest that assertions without facts are baseless. Our intellect complements our intuition. An assertion without facts is no less true or false than one with facts. Disputes about the sources of facts and labeling the source of facts as liberal, conservative, right wing or left wing only serve to further confuse. Think intuitively about a statement or assertion and check your intuition against the facts provided instead of accepting the facts as indisputable just because they support your position.
I try to differentiate between the posts on these forums and the actual OWS movement. Many of the posts are NOT OWS participants. Some are trolls, some are liberals trying to push a liberal agenda. Just keep in mind that the posts do not directly reflect the OWS.
BrianC...trying to find a post that reflect OWS is nearly impossible. This is a problem.
That is true. Considering that the OWS cannot agree on a list of demands or solutions means these forums are a free for all.
You're not a big fan of stealing?
Good... Then you will help us get the kleptocrats out of office and the thieving bankers that back them as well.
I agree as well, but that's not an OWS-only movement, that's everybody. Please don't take credit for something that you don't own.
The original point of the poster was that any new system cannot rely on distribution of wealth already earned, only new wealth. In other words I worked hard to buy my house, my car, my cottage but i'm curious if your idea is to make me part with my hard work for your cause?
I think the very concept of 'ownership' is really what is called into question here.
Also, I don't recall 'taking credit' for anything. If you are referring to the phrase 'help us', I don't really see how there's anything proprietary about that request.
You sound like a whining MovOn.org-er, complaining that OWS beat you to actually getting up and doing anything.
Also, if you're not aligned with OWS, then why are you even here?
Are you sincerely looking for information or are you just here to...
TROLL!
Are you serious? Under a new system you'd reallocate my assets if I'm deemed not "deserving" ???
Who'd make this outrageous decision?
You only THINK that they are 'your' assets.
That's my labor value you've stolen, pig!
Wow, sorry I hit a nerve with you. I had questions but I guess you are more interested in slamming the tough questions with a TROLL comment.
Sweet!
Real Questions.
Set 'em up!
I sure hope so.
Thanks for "unwittingly served a noble cause" for me. LOL. Two weeks reading these inane posts and it is most definitely for the amusement. Hard to believe the true LACK of education among you 1%er's. If this is emblematic of your intelligence, you all have a point about not paying for THAT education.
Apart from the amusement, yes I am fearful of what a minority MOB can do to our society but believe me, you WILL be put down when it comes to that
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAuvD00D0RA
Yeah, and my posts have shown many her to be utterly false.
I like turtles
Our presence indicates anger that you are so arrogant as to think that you speak for us. Our presence indicates disgust that your whiny entitlement is becoming representative of a generation that is actually very hardworking and driven. Our presence indicates a need to make it known that you are not 99% of this country. You are in fact such a small percentage of people that you can fit yourselves into a park while the actual 99% of the country continues their daily routines of going to work, managing households, going to school, volunteering in the community, and picking up all the pieces of life that you are neglecting while you camp in your makeshift commune.
Thank you for your comments. Well, at least I got the anger part right.
I certainly do not presume to speak for you and agree that to do so would be arrogant. We have elected officials that take on this role. Nor do I presume to represent 99% of the people in this country. I, along with many others on these boards and across the nation and world, represent ourselves but also realize that our convictions are shared by many others who are not present. I’m sure you are familiar with the ‘tip of the iceberg’ analogy. It may apply in this case, notwithstanding your assertion that we are only 1%. Surely you can also conclude that there are many more supporters than you see in the park, on the streets or on these boards. In fact, I would wager that many of the people that you meet continuing their daily routines support our cause in some form or fashion. I for one work 9 hours/day, manage a household, volunteer for charitable organizations and still find the time and energy to commit to this cause because I believe in it. What do you believe in, other than a daily routine?
[Removed]
That was very insightful, I'm almost afraid to take it seriously : )
Yes I am afraid. The liberals have been ruining America since the Great Depression. Even worse than the liberal politicians are the stupid dopes who keep voting for them again and again. You people have already brought Detroit to hell. And if anyone takes the time to reply, please use facts or statistics. I've only met a handful of liberals who have ever given me facts in an argument. Most of the time, their responses involve calling me "heartless" or "racist"
Maybe you should attempt posting without the use of pejoratives, personal insults or labels. That may get you a like response. Only when you move beyond the desperation of name calling yourself will people take you seriously.
If you think a lack of facts is the exclusive domain of one group or that it causes you to erroneously conclude that people without facts are ignorant, then you aren't really engaged in the debate or open-minded.
Here Here!
What pejoratives did I use? If you're offended by "stupid dope" you have issues. I could've said "f%cking idiot" but i chose not to, since I'm not Bill Maher (of course I haven't seen any liberals complaining about his language)
To clarify: people who time and time again do not use facts to back up their statements are ignorant.
Pickles are made from cucumbers. What citations do you need to attest to the factual basis of that statement?
So, let's assume all of your statements in your response are true, shall we? Give me the factual basis, with citations, that support your statement "The liberals have been ruining America since the Great Depression." Or "You people have already brought Detroit to hell."
If you don't post with facts why would expect people to respond with facts? If you don't post specifics don't expect people to respond with specifics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hhJ_49leBw not a rickroll, might change your mind about a few things try to watch the whole thing and hear it out, it's only 13mins
I did listen to it and it's quite disturbing, but not in the same sense you find it disturbing, I'm sure. This video completely destroys any credibility you had for providing facts to back up assertions. I'll point out just one glaring example of erroneous information and you can take it from there.
At 8:21 “…antifreeze, the main ingredient used in meth.”
Antifreeze contains mostly ethylene glycol, a potent toxin that will crystallize the kidneys in animals, causing death, and is fatal if ingested by humans. Neither antifreeze nor ethylene glycol is an ingredient for making meth.
http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/ethylene-glycol-intoxication/overview.html
http://citizensagainstmeth.org/meth_ingredients.html
http://www.mappsd.org/Meth%20Common%20Ingredients.htm
http://www.crystalmethaddiction.org/Crystal_Meth_Ingredients.htm
Fiscally Conservative , Socially Liberal! Government out of my pants and out of my wallet!
Thank you, nice to hear someone with a brain around here.
thx, doin' what i can....I love this country even with it's numerous problems....