Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: "Elizabeth Warren can run for president. She should run for president. And despite her denials, she probably will."

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 19, 2015, 8:06 a.m. EST by factsrfun (8851) from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

It will be interesting to see Dividers on here start to attack Elizabeth Warren if and when she starts moving toward running I expect the assault to be full scale before she announces, should she choose to do so.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/01/run-warren-run/384490/

83 Comments

83 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

Your expectations regarding those attacks on Warren are realistic. They will certainly come from the poser posse if she becomes the nominee. Until then, they will attack Clinton relentlessly hoping to prevent Clinton, whom polls suggest could beat Romney from becoming that nominee. It's a calculated strategy to help Romney win. Or whatever pig the Republicans end up nominating.

For the record, I believe your support of Warren is legitimate. I'm not a fan but I do feel that she is the best from the lousy pool we have to chose from so far.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8851) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

People come by to "down-vote" but don't bother to comment, their ego driven bullshit is not winning over young folks the way it did before the Nader-Bush-Gore debacle. The trend is very bad for the GOP I fear it may be too late though.

[-] 1 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 2 years ago

People don't comment here because they do not want to discuss DEMOCRATS&REPUBLICANS-and YOU will be sure to DRAG THEM INTO any& ALL discussion.We want to discuss how we can do things for ourselves AND YOU WON'T ALLOW any such thing.

[-] 3 points by MattHolck0 (3867) 2 years ago

it's in the bags

I suggest you start dressing up your 2028 republican or democrat

because we don;t recognize change

[-] 1 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 2 years ago

I do not believe in Democrats or Republicans.I do not believe the current System represents 99.9% of Americans.I believe the current system should be set aside in favor of a New System that is based on The People creating&voting on legislation without Representatives who can be corrupted by Lust for Power or Greed for Wealth.We have the technology,and we need to use it to govern ourselves.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8851) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

and Jerry Falwell didn't believe humans could change the climate, people can believe or not believe in all kinds of crap it's the real world where shit happens though, and in the real world people win elections and do stuff.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

We have the technology,and we need to use it to govern ourselves.

Is that - exactly why we seem to have such a widespread problem with hackers getting into places that should be sealed tighter than a drum?

To deny the public the right and ability to participate directly in directing government.

[-] 2 points by MattHolck0 (3867) 2 years ago

56 k could do that

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8851) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I just saw a guy on TV before Obama he had to pay $1100/month for his medicine, he couldn't buy it sometimes, now he pays $5/month and always has it, you should ask him if he feels the change, but I forget it's not about others it's all about you right Matt?

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 2 years ago

Ain't that the truth

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8851) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

has logic got you all tied up? you can't discuss the real world because it might require you to take a real action instead of sitting around talking about angels dancing on a pinhead

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

They sure as hell do want to discuss Democrats and Republcans. They drag them into nearly every discussion. But only for the purpose of discouraging potential voters. In particular, potential voters who lean to the left.

That's the idea. To give conservatives an edge on election day.

Trashyharry, I've never suspected you of being a closet conservative. But after that comment, I have to ask.

Do you feel that Mitt Romney would have done a better job than Obama?

Please don't dodge the question. The answer is yes or no.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

Enough is enough. The Democrats feed into the hands of the Republicans. They WORK together. That SOTU last night was just a big blah blah to keep the carrot dangling in the faces of the regular people. Give 'em enough so that they don't revolt. Make 'em think we really do care about them. Make a great speech that means ABSOLUTELY nothing. Say a bunch of things that will NEVER happen. Wake up to what is really going on in this country, would you? You are living in a Corporatocracy. We live in a world RUN by corporations They have bought out EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR POLITICIANS. Don't kid yourself. NONE are better than the other.

That is why we are here, on OWS, trying to fight OUTSIDE the ill system that we find ourselves in. Quit criticizing people for having convictions and for being true revolutionaries. It's hard enough when you think about how this website is treated, how regular people can no longer Sign Up to post here. This place used to be open to all of humanity. Why isn't it anymore? Good question. Do we really have to fight among one another?

[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

You were doing within reason until you said "NONE are better than the other.".

I can destroy that claim into a million pieces with one word.

Keystone.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/01/21/republicans-unanimously-reject-bill-keystone-oil-united-states.html

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

You are naive. If the Dems didn't make everyone think they are on the side of the people there would be a revolt. The carrot dangling of the Dems is what keeps this corporate endeavor going.

Yeah! The Dems have our back! NOT.

[-] 1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

No I'm not naive. I've said it a thousand times and I will say it a thousand more. Perhaps, you will acknowledge the plain English I have been using all along after I repeat myself another 998 times.

I HAVE NEVER SAID THE DEMS ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE PEOPLE. I HAVE NEVER SAID THEY HAVE OUR BACK. WHAT I'VE SAID OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER IS THAT DEMOCRATS ARE THE LESSER EVIL WHEN COMPARED TO REPUBLICANS.

From now on, I will create new pages here and on my own blog site dedicated to each user who fails to comprehend plain English.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

There are facts and there are analyses of the facts. I agree with you that the Dems are the lesser EVIL as that is a fact. But I disagree with the analysis that the thing to do is support the lesser evil. I don't believe in supporting the lesser evil. I believe in creating lasting change by finding options that are actually not evil at all.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I don't understand why you wouldn't support ending the worst evil in government as at the very least being a stepping stone to eliminating ALL evil from government.

Even your Ideal = "I believe in creating lasting change by finding options that are actually not evil at all."

Has to have a starting point of implementation. I don't see your putting out a whole cloth one time instant fix - nor do I see anyone else doing so. If You have one though - you will find me enthusiastically on board.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

Good grief. I've been voting Democrat my entire life except for voting Green in the last Presidential election in a state where Obama had no chance of losing. I would not have voted Green, to be honest, if I was in a swing state.

We need a lot more than what the Democrats have to offer. It's like settling and marrying the bad boyfriend when you really can do better.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

That - does not - go to answer why - you do not support removing the greater evil in office as a stepping stone towards removing ALL evil from office. That does not go towards you would pick on someone for forwarding the idea of removing the worst evil from office as a step towards removing ALL evil from office.

What your comments do support - is - apathy - is - opting out - because you attack the idea of getting rid of the blatantly evil and offer nothing as to getting rid of it all all in one fell swoop - which you "seem" to be saying is the only thing that should be done "at ALL".

So save the good grief statement and just try to join reality in a reasonable manner.

[-] 3 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

DK... the problem is....

we can not be successful trying to go after a single group ... the members of that group will rise up united against us....

it's like going after a religion ... and not a specific faction or specific members of the religion...

it's an un-winnable approach....

however if we went after all corrupt politicians for instance .... regardless of side....

the good guys ... (if any) of both sides would support us.... and we will have better odds at success ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Fact of the matter - yes - going after one group (explicitly) will polarize that group into even "insane" unity.

Even going after all of the -

"if we went after all corrupt politicians for instance"

  • will polarize them the same.

It is a battle either way - a battle of waking up the people to the facts of what is being done to them and by whom and for what reasons - and then getting that public to vote the assholes out.

Your site for educating the public on issues and who is voting for and who is voting against the issues - will - go to polarizing the public's opponents to unity. A unity which they already have and are funded for having.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

||| >>> ".... will - go to polarizing the public's opponents to unity. A unity which they already have and are funded for having.... "

maybe ... but it IS the People who have the vote... not the funders

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 0 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 minute ago

||| >>> ".... will - go to polarizing the public's opponents to unity. A unity which they already have and are funded for having.... "

maybe ... but it IS the People who have the vote... not the funders

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

"maybe ... but it IS the People who have the vote... not the funders"

It is still the same battle to be fought = waking up/educating/opening the eyes of the public.

[-] 2 points by turbocharger (1756) 2 years ago

It's pretty simple.

Seems how you are one of the older boomers who really can't grasp how the system works, I will try to explain it to you. Although I think I have before. But I've done a lot of drugs, so maybe I'm thinking of someone else.

When you follow your strategy, it makes turning things around impossible. This is because despite focusing on the "lesser" evil, you are indeed then endorsing something that is more evil than the previous evil.

The scale of corruption can be ever increasing, while still giving you two choices that are corrupt (even if one is less than the other).

So while you are attempting to remove something corrupt from office, you are actually endorsing the overall corruption because its - in the name of the great Shooz (anyone seen that ornery old bastard?) a system based on precedents.

You felt that Obama was less corrupt than Romney. You are most likely right. However, but endorsing the less corrupt, you are still lowering the bar on what is acceptable (as proven by "liberals" now voting for war criminals, never ending bombs, torture, wall st bailouts - to me that is most ironic. A group marching and protesting bailouts and then people coming on their websites and telling them to vote for the people who are forcing the bailouts.)

Hope that clarifies how the system works when the people don't participate.

(#3rdPartyUprising)

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

No, DKA, you're not going to tell me how to think. The problem with democracy in the U.S. is that we are only offered two options that have a chance to win. That is not democracy. A two party system tries to force people to vote for candidates they don't believe in. Give us some options. I like the Green Party. You are telling me I can't vote for the candidate I like. That is not democracy.

And, take your condescending comments to someone else. No need to reply to me.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (22340) 0 minutes ago

Says the defender of apartheid and a political system that fails this country miserably.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

I defy you to show me where I ever did such a thing- OH wearer of blinders & supporter of double standards.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

OH thank you for your wisdom you defender of all that is good and righteous . . . . oh wait a mo . . . is it good and righteous - for you to condemn Israeli terrorism while approving of Hamas terrorism? Yeah don't listen to me or to anyone else as your stinking . . . . scuse . . . thinking is so clear and fair and just to ALL.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

Says the defender of apartheid and a political system that fails this country miserably.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

hehehe ... wow DK... maybe a lil too much whiskey last night ? ... ;)

[Deleted]

[-] 4 points by turbocharger (1756) 2 years ago

"Seriously now!!! All you got inya is a minus 3??? Damn are you weak or super timid - as - ya gotta realise that Justine just does not care about this site - so why be so damned timid - BRING IT ON. Like it makes a difference anyway - you stupid immature cowardly shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

" - so - where and how have I talked DOWN to you?"

This from the ban hammer of moderators. What a joke.

Another great moment from the clueless organizer lol.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

How old R U anyway? 16? 12? younger? I would guess fairly young - as - you still act like a child. Instead of reasoning to explain your thinking - you throw insults at those who would ask you about some of the things you espouse. Things like your ( rightly so ) condemning Israeli terrorism committed upon the west bank while at the same time you (wrongly) espouse approval of Hamas and their terrorist actions. This seems very childish. Do you have any explanation as to why it is wrong for the Israelis to be terrorists but it is OK for Hamas (or anyone else) to be terrorists?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

How is it - that - you could have days of back and forth with thrashing masks and never get upset - especially when he was being severely nasty to you. Is it - that - after all this time that we find out that he is also you?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

R U downvoting me yourself? Or is that someone being gallant for you? What part of all of this protest and dissension to what is going on that is ruining our world do you find as being as congenial as going to the park for a pick-nick? If you can not take honest criticism without feeling bullied - well then - you have no business spouting off with anything that comes to your mind because that "YOU" think that it is God's Gospel.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Can you only be beautiful when everyone agrees with everything you say? I remember giving you many compliments for your comments and inputs and your accepting them happily. Back then you were also complimentary of many things that I posted. But now it seems that if I don't agree with you fully and without reservation - well - gee - you get upset and start slandering.

I guess that you are not comfortable with hearing any sort of criticism.

Criticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"To criticize does not necessarily imply "to find fault", but the word is often taken to mean the simple expression of an objection against prejudice, or a disapproval of something."

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Do you charge everyone who disagrees with you as being condescending to you? Is that because you find it easier than trying to explain your positions?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You are telling me I can't vote for the candidate I like.

I never told you that. What I have said in the past -

https://occupywallst.org/forum/elizabeth-warren-can-run-for-president-she-should-/#comment-1055541

And I don't believe that that comment restricted any voting. So tell me or better yet - show me where I told you you couldn't vote the way you wanted.

BTW - what is your definition of condescending? As I always thought that it meant that someone felt superior to another and demonstrated that by talking down to them - so - where and how have I talked DOWN to you?

[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

Have you found any?

[-] 4 points by Renneye (3874) 2 years ago

Niiice!!

Here's another that I can add to your respectable list.

Sweden's 'Demoex' - using technology to help citizens participate in 'Direct Democracy'.

http://www.ted.com/conversations/1213/why_don_t_we_use_technology_to.html

[-] 3 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

cool .... I like that page ... and http://www.whitehouse.gov/open ...which I havn't seen before ... thanks !!!

[-] 2 points by MattHolck0 (3867) 2 years ago

I'm real reluctant to think that just some shiny coupon page

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22772) 2 years ago

Excellent, we can keep adding things here. :)

[-] -2 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

How did they work out this past November? How do you expect them to work out by November of 2016?

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

MC ... I have always .... near election time... pushed to vote for the Dems..

(mostly... however in local elections I have sometimes found that the gop candidate is more honest than the dem one) ...

anyway... once the elections are over ... I get back to trying to push for new ways.... that don't support the status quo.... we do need to find a better way....

the two party system ain't getting it... or doing it ...

[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

Evolving to a point where we elect third party or independent candidates is a very slow process. To date, only a few have made their way into Congress, all of whom lean primarily in one direction or the other. I'd be willing to bet that they are all corrupt though possibly to a lesser degree.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Allegiance to a party and a party line - what a way to destroy government for the people.

[-] 0 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

what is your blog site... btw ?

[-] -1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

at quick glance ... interesting stuff !!! thanks !! ... I'll dig deeper later

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 2 years ago

People who Lost Faith in the Democrats&Republicans began camping in a park in Lower Manhattan in mid September of 2011.I was one of those people.We came to be called Occupy because all of us felt that if we stood our ground in a Public Place,we would STOP being Invisible People who politicians just IGNORE.You go on ahead and call me any dirty name you want.I no longer respect you because you are a Blustering Blowhard who doesn't have the Balls to go after the Right Wing Dingalings.Call me whatever you want-as long as it Fits with your Persecution Fantasy-Same Difference-Grist for your CrazyMill.

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

But those people were almost entirely united regarding the 1% mantra. They shared heavily overlapping views on fiscal policy. They wanted policies designed specifically to alter the division of income and wealth back in favor of the lower majority. Aside from their hypocritical consumer behavior regarding the purchase of smart phones and their occasional support of hypocritical celebrities claiming to support OWS, they were primarily united against the rich and their Wall Steet juggernauts. For this reason, their was mutual support expressed here, all over the web, and on the street.

Back in 2011, the very year you cite in your attack on me, differences between fiscal conservatives and fiscal liberals here were stated outright. No punches were pulled or dodged. The conservatives here were determined but they were also outnumbered. The fiscal liberals by comarison, were well received by virtually every user with the exception of blatant conservatives. I was somewhat of an odd ball for my absolute refusal to make or accept excuses for any celebrity including those aligned with Democrats. Aside from that, I was well received and very appreciated overall. In fact, my user rating went from '0' to way over '2300' in just over three months. At the time, only two or three users had higher ratings. All of whom, like me, were fiscal liberals promoting fiscal liberalism in addition to, not in place of protest.

In January of 2012, for personal reasons, I stopped cold on virtually all forms of activism, including use of this site (save it). When I returned two years later, early in the election year of 2014, I noticed that things had changed somewhat. Most of the fiscal liberals had stopped posting. One of the most popular that I knew of to remain, Zendog, had his account restricted as I recall and then terminated by mid 2014. This was acknowledged by several users.

Around that time, I noticed the trend turning heavily towards criticism of Democrats in general and of Hillary Clinton in particular. The same half dozen users were responsible for virtually all of it. Shortly after, the Russell Brand page was posted. I immediately noticed that several of the users who had been attacking Democrats in particular were in full support of Russell Brand. They regarded him as a hero in spite of his multi-deca-millionaire fortune and corporate affiliations. And for what?

Because Russell Brand was making a name for himself as a non-voter. One who claimed to stand with the lower 99%. This in spite of his above average ranking 1% personal fortune of $20,000,000.

Most, if not all of the Democrat bashers, or the IDs anyway, who had come to outnumber the rest of us began screaming in unison. Their message was clear:

DON'T VOTE. DON'T VOTE. DON'T VOTE. IF YOU VOTE FOR ANY POLITICIAN, THEN YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Of course, this message seemed absurd to me because we live in a representative democracy. Politicians WILL be elected unless by some freak of nature, not a single citizen votes, not even the politicians themselves. In which case, politicians would be appointed. The appointing would be done by, that's right. Politicians. For this reason, I found their message to be utterly absurd. Especially with a mid-term election approaching. One with huge ramifications regarding taxes, regulation, climate change and the Keystone Pipeline.

The very same day I began to express my views regarding the absurdity of the 'don't vote' message, I noticed that more and more of my comments were being marked down into negative territory. Since then, my user rating has gone from over 600 to -126. Along the way, it has became painfully obvious. OWS has been taken over by fiscal conservatives posing as disgruntled liberals. It has been taken over specifically to discourage non-conservative voters.

This represented a near total reversal of pattern from that of 2011, the very year you cite in your entry. It was no accident. The timing was critical. For that mid-term election was in fact looming.

Because, 2/3 of American citizens, most of whom lean to the left to some degree sat the election out, the conservatives made huge gains in Congress and all across the country.

Now the specific policies and projects once opposed by the majority here move forward at an unprecedented pace. There will be heavy consequences for the lower majority. Not to mention the natural environment.

It is worth noting that Justine Tunney, otherwise known as Jart, a co-founder of OWS and operator of this website, has sold out the very cause. She has done so for the purpose of promoting Google, her current employer, a high ranking wealth concentrating Wall Street juggernaut. She has also become known for ripping on liberal bloggers. Not in addition to conservative bloggers. But liberal bloggers in particular.

I for one, refuse to sell out the cause no matter what happens to my user rating or my account here. I will continue to say and do everything within my power to help slow the ongoing concentration of wealth. This includes voting against the greater evil and encouraging others to do the same.

That does not make me a fan of any high ranking Democrat. Like I've said many times, I can't name one that I like. But I do see them as the lesser evil when compared to Republicans. Not necessarily on every issue, but certainly on the most important to me by far. The one on which OWS was founded before it's founders sold out the very cause.

And you have the gall, along with turbocharger, Shule, SerfngUSA, johannus, flip and according to flip himself, his wife, to sit there and accuse me of being the enemy.

Well, trashyharry, the loss of respect is mutual.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/evidence-the-calculated-strategy-of-sold-out-ows-c/

[-] 2 points by SerfingUSA (451) 2 years ago

I don't hear anyone here saying they're against voting. People are against voting for the corrupt Duopoly D/R political establishments. These corrupt political parties are financed by the 1%, and ONLY benefit the 1%.

Voters are disgusted and are beginning to wake up. They know that this duopoly, Good Cop/Bad Cop Political Theater is a farce. People are coming to realize that these politicians are proxy legislators for the 1%. They are nothing more than actors, playing a scripted role. Actors who give great speeches, saying what the 99% wants to hear, yet doing ONLY what the 1% wants done.

I think voters should be voting more, not less. If we can bank online, we can vote online. Let's have the voters vote directly on major policy issues. Let the voters become the CEO of Washington. Let the people be at the head of the table in Washington on the big issues. Let's make the Oval office the People's office. Make all politicians our subordinates, not our dictators.

Vote More, not Less. Only, let's start voting for ourselves, and stop voting for the 1%.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

I agree ... I am currently writing a Consensus based voting framework.... that will first rollout as a polling site ... ThePeoplesVeto.com .... but it is engineered to later support secure voting ...

If anyone wants to help with funding... I could certainly get it finished faster !!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You should write a post on Daily Kos.

[-] 0 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

hmmm.... maybe great idea!!!

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

The nice thing about posting on Daily Kos - is - that you can include pictures & vids & links - would be gr8 for an educational introduction to the site as well as a place to post polls to gauge public awareness and prompt use for education and action.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Don't forget to attach a-lot of relevant tag words to your post for the search engine crowd.

[-] 2 points by Renneye (3874) 2 years ago

Damn, Brad! Way to go!

We definitely need this as a base from which to work!

Nothing wrong with putting out feelers for funding here, but there are precious few here with extra income. Of course, there may be someone looking on that could help.

But, I think your best chance of getting funded might be through the public. Have you thought about getting funding through "Public Crowd Funding" with a vehicle such as 'Indiegogo', or some other Crowd funding site?

A google search for 'public crowd funding' brings up a whole slew of them.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

yes I agree Renneye ... also kickstarter... I just don't have a good enough demo finished yet for the proposal ... trying hard ... I have all the major elements working... just not integrated into same page yet....

[-] 1 points by johannus (386) from Newburgh, NY 2 years ago

From the last election where just over a third of eligible people voted, people seem to inherently know that something is drastically wrong.

US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

I do not support people abstaining from voting, as I do think that NOW is an opportune time for a third party candidate. That could also serve as the first step towards systemic change, and a more particpatory democracy, where the people are the leaders, and the leaders are the followers. In the meantime though, until the people are educated more, their lack of participation (voting) is an early sign of their good health, compliments of our rotten political system.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 4 points by SerfingUSA (248) 4 hours ago

DKA, that was a disgusting all night meltdown you pulled on beautifulworld.

You wouldn't be allowed to pull that shit if we were in person. I promise you that little man.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

Hey all puffed up with your bad self. If the conversation had been in person - it sure as hell would not have gone the way it did.

For 1 all of you silent down-voting dickheads would either not have been there or you would not have had your little game to play of silent down-voting.

[-] 2 points by Renneye (3874) 2 years ago

Geez, DK...agree or disagree all you want, no problem, but there's so few of us left...you can't possibly want what's left of the forum to devolve this way.

You know I get on with pretty much everyone here, but last night was uncalled for. If my opinion is of any relevance...then, I think you know that you owe 'beautifulworld' an apology.

Take 'er easy, man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rd8VktT8xY

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Sorry Renneye - most of that rant was aimed at the silent down-voting stinkle team. As for the rest? BW can stand up for herself (or not) - she got condescending with me instead of having a conversation - because she apparently couldn't defend her position - this she did when she said that I was condescending to her (At that point in time I had not been talking down to her - she just decided to use that as a gambit to end a conversation that she should never have started as she was in the wrong and she knew it).

[-] 1 points by Renneye (3874) 2 years ago

Regardless of who it was aimed at and why...that kind of discord is rough on the esteem of the forum. It was poor form, and I think you know it.

That's all I'll say on the matter.

Now are you going to make amends, or am I going to have to take you by your ear and put you in the corner? ;-)

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yep it was poor form to egg on the childish stinkle team using comments to BW. Consider me as sitting in the corner.

[-] 2 points by SerfingUSA (451) 2 years ago

DKA, all 6'4" and 254lbs of me would have EASILY taken care of you. I was a bouncer. I've bounce out a 100 guys much tougher than you.

[-] 2 points by MattHolck0 (3867) 2 years ago

get someone to pay to do that

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Fine Mr Bad ASS now go jerk off and dream about your glory days.

[-] 2 points by SerfingUSA (451) 2 years ago

Old timer, I don't need to dream. I'm still in my glory days.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yeah sure whatever - now go shoot a load of steroids into your butt and play with your joy stick - ya dumb muscle head.

[-] 2 points by SerfingUSA (451) 2 years ago

DKA, your meltdown continues. I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you. You are of ZERO importance to me. It is no achievement whatsoever to win a pissing match with an idiot.

Now go run along little man and write an "Open Letter" to your god Obama.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 0 points by SerfingUSA (252) 0 minutes ago

That's right DKA, I am a Big Man. I'm bigger, stronger and faster than you too.

I'm also alot smarter than you too. You see Dan, once you leave Coon Rapids, they got these things called schools. Us big city folk go to them 'thar schools to get real smart. You learn all kinds of things "folks" don't learn in Coon Rapids. Us big city folk have "street smarts", too. Do they have streets in Coon Rapids? Once you have street smarts, you learn voting RepubliCON or DemoCRAP is a bad idea. You learn writing open letters to corrupt politicians is a bad idea. Us big city folk learn all kinds of things you hillbillies in Coon Rapids don't.

We also learn to keep our head cool, and not have a meltdown on the internet. Now go hunt yourself some squirrels, you don't want to be late for vittles.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

6" and 50 lbs. is not a huge advantage. It takes no more pressure to break your leg than it does to break mine. You are just full of yourself because (apparently) at this point in time you have not met the little guy that will hand you your head. So be happy in your ignorance Big Man. But with your attitude - I do believe that it will only be blind luck that you never meet that little guy who stretches you flat out on the ground.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 0 points by SerfingUSA (252) 0 minutes ago

I'm surprised you yokels up in podunk "Coon Rapids" even have the internet.

You country bumpkins in Coon Rapids are so backwards, you still think writing Open Letters to corrupt politicians will help.

What's for dinner tonight? You had Coon again last night. Try squirrel or possum, you haven't had that since Wednesday.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

6' 4" 245lb. Big Man SMMMAAASSSHHHHH don't need no brains puny humans Big Man SMMMAAASSSHHHHH

Yeah I've met your type before.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 0 points by SerfingUSA (252) 0 minutes ago

DKA, You think that's me getting tough? You don't want to hear what i really want to tell you. Why should i bother though, i'm on the internet, i can't back it up.

What I said to you was NOTHING compared to your meltdown tough guy act against BW last night. You love dishing out hardballs, but if someone throws a nerf ball back at you, you whine like a little bitch.

I'm not being tough. I'm just telling you the reality.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

Well well well - muscle head - YOUR BACK. So much for your BS about not wanting to get into a pissing contest.

Are you back trying to intimidate me over the internet again?

Has it taken you this long to recharge your battery?

Or did you get tired of trying to intimidate the vacuum salesman in the TV commercial by grimacing at him (get a clue - he can't see you sitting there making faces at him and trying to look all looming and terrifying).

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33169) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Whatever muscle head - whatever ya wana tell your self that helps you to get through the day - just remember that it was you who tried to get all tough over the internet.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

Prove it. Then compare your 'glory' to that of this guy, a die-hard liberal.

http://sptattoos.blogspot.com/2012/10/mma-fighter-jeff-monson-snowman.html

Update: I've been watching very closely. This comment received three markdowns within a matter of minutes early this morning. At the approximate time, beautifulworld was online posting a new comment. It was almost immediately marked up. Shortly after, flip showed up with a new page.

Interesting.

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

Gee what a shock. Yet another internet user claiming to be a bad ass. Pathetic.

Well Mr Bad-Ass, not that I have any reason to believe you, but just for the record, would you like to insult this guy for his EXTREMELY liberal views?

http://sptattoos.blogspot.com/2012/10/mma-fighter-jeff-monson-snowman.html

Or would you like to grow up and stay on topic?

Update: I've been watching very closely. This comment received three markdowns within a matter of minutes early this morning. At the approximate time, beautifulworld was online posting a new comment. It was almost immediately marked up. Shortly after, flip showed up with a new page.

Interesting.

[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 2 years ago

First paragraph: That's not entirely true. Both major politcal parties do some good some of the time and a whole lot of bad the rest of the time. There is no need to exaggerate any point to a state of absolution. Neither major party in America is PURE evil. Otherwise, not a single bridge would be built. Not a single pothole would be filled. Not a single cop would show up when you're assaulted or robbed. Not a single firefighter would show up when your house is on fire. Not a single National park would operate. Not a single welfare office would operate.

If your claim were true, then you would not even have the right to say it.

The relevant question is not if or not our leaders are corrupt. That's a given. The question is which candidate is more corrupt. Like I've said many times, it's usually the Republican or Tea Party wacko. Not necessarily on every issue but certainly on the one which OWS was founded on.

If you want to promote any number of independents or third party candidates under the belief that they will somehow rise above the corrupt influence of money and power over money, then knock yourself out. I may even support your candidate depending on the circumstances. But as long as you continue to attack Democrats in particular, as if they are the greater evil, I will post arguments and evidence to prove otherwise. As long as you continue to vilify those of us who still believe in voting for a Democrat over a Republican, especially when no other candidate stands a chance in hell, then I will post arguments and evidence to prove the point in doing so.

If you believe in your third paragraph, then campaign for it. Have your great grandchildren let my great grandchildren know how it works out. For no force on Earth will make it happen anytime this century.

[-] 0 points by johannus (386) from Newburgh, NY 2 years ago

I notice that the list of people that you term "disgruntled liberals" or "posers" is getting longer yet. Even so, you still look more and more like a fraud to me, just saying. I think that I hear the corrupt duopoly calling you, or maybe it's HS.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by johannus (386) from Newburgh, NY 2 years ago

Wrong, the Republican vs the Democrats' "discussion" is strong on here because of the many political hacks that have been on this forum. Those paid people also use diversionary tactics, like putting up long-winded crappy comments and oodles of threads on ebola, and Russell Brand. The objective is to quell this movement by side-tracking it because it is a threat to the corrupt status quo. That's not a surprise to you, is it SMC?!