• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Labor Unions Join Wall Street Occupiers for "Mass Rally'

haymarket said:
After reading the various threads on this same subject here, and paying special attention to the vitriolic responses from those on the right side of the political spectrum, two dominant themes appear

1) this is a new and different type of protest that seems to defy leadership, a core goal, and adopts methods and tactics far different than many others we are use to seeing. Because of that his confuses many and even angers them since it is the 'shock of the new' and it bewilders and confuses them..... and they don't like that one bit.
Click to expand...

:) I think you are confusing "angry vitriol" with "uproarious ridicule". I can't encourage big unions to tie their image to the police-car-poopers and museum-invaders enough. after that, I urge them to join the campaign against the Boy Scouts and Motherhood. :D

but perhaps we should leave well enough alone. as Napoleon taught: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is busy committing suicide."

2) The intensity and anger that so many right wing posters have displayed obsessing over these rather minor events is entirely due to their adoration of capitalism and the corporatists who control Wall Street and our economic system and the threat they perceive from a bunch of unwashed modern hippies carrying around Mao's little red book, the bio of Leon Trotsky and a bomb making manual from August Spies.. or so they would have us believe. They see their meal ticket threatened and - for the first time in a longtime - see protest against what they hold dear. Many on the right are simply sycophants of corporatism and the wealthy and they will do their best to defend their masters as a way of self protection. It is the first instinct of any organism to protect itself and the toadies of capitalism are responding in knee jerk fashion.
Click to expand...

:lamo speaking of vitriol....

fascinating, however, the logic used. what about the federal employees on this forum who are having great fun making light of these people?
 
MaggieD said:
I think their focus is so broad as to have no focus at all beyond disruption.

Personally, I think they should all focus on Big Bank Foreclosure Procedures. People lose their homes for various reasons. They may have lost their jobs; maybe their interest rate reset and, because their home isn't worth what they paid for it, they can't refinance; maybe they've just decided, "Ya' know what? I owe $300,000 on my home, and it's only worth $250,000. I'm going to walk away."

There's lots of places to put blame for the fact that most people lost 25% of the value of their homes; but one of those places is definitely Wall Street. And in no small measure.

So. How do the banks handle people whose mortgages are delinquent? They foreclose. Oh, they may "do a work out" with some of them; but those are far and few between. In most instances, they begin foreclosure proceedings immedately. In most states, foreclosure can take a year or more. The people living in the homes stop paying their mortgage and resign themselves to the fact that they're going to be evicted down the road...so they live there rent-free. They don't care anymore because the house they bought three years ago for $300,000 is only worth $250,000 today. When they're forced to move, many of them strip the house of the light fixtures, appliances, plumbing fixtures...heck, some of them even take the hot water tank and air conditioner. And, of course, they stop taking care of the home because, frankly, who gives a damn anymore? And eventually, after a year or so, they move out.

When the foreclosure proceedings are completed, the bank hires contractors to put the house back into saleable condition -- they're easily dropping $15-$20,000 into repairs. And thousands into attorneys' fees, etc. They begin paying the real estate taxes and other expenses (like heat/lawncare, etc.) on the homes immediately....paying off the arrearage as well as current taxes. Then they put these distressed homes on the market, flooding the market and driving prices down even further. Eventually, maybe a year later, after easily laying out 50,000 or more, they sell the home for $225,000.

Had they offered the original owner forgiveness on $50,000 of their debt, the bank would have saved money, the real estate market wouldn't be flooded with distressed properties, real estate would stabilize, a family wouldn't have their credit trashed and have gone through the terrible process of losing their home.

We bailed out the banks big-time. So they could screw distressed homeowners with impunity.

Demonstrate on that. And, one more thing -- demonstrate against our government for not holding even one of these jamokes responsible for this debacle.
Click to expand...

To add to a great post, in some states now, banks are handing the keys of these house to the government, free of charge, so they can get out of all the costs of getting the house sold, and get a tidy little tax break instead. The state then bulldozes the house, and either uses the combined properties to make a park, or a low income housing project. So angry.
 
MaggieD said:
I think their focus is so broad as to have no focus at all beyond disruption.

Personally, I think they should all focus on Big Bank Foreclosure Procedures. People lose their homes for various reasons. They may have lost their jobs; maybe their interest rate reset and, because their home isn't worth what they paid for it, they can't refinance; maybe they've just decided, "Ya' know what? I owe $300,000 on my home, and it's only worth $250,000. I'm going to walk away."

There's lots of places to put blame for the fact that most people lost 25% of the value of their homes; but one of those places is definitely Wall Street. And in no small measure.

So. How do the banks handle people whose mortgages are delinquent? They foreclose. Oh, they may "do a work out" with some of them; but those are far and few between. In most instances, they begin foreclosure proceedings immedately. In most states, foreclosure can take a year or more. The people living in the homes stop paying their mortgage and resign themselves to the fact that they're going to be evicted down the road...so they live there rent-free. They don't care anymore because the house they bought three years ago for $300,000 is only worth $250,000 today. When they're forced to move, many of them strip the house of the light fixtures, appliances, plumbing fixtures...heck, some of them even take the hot water tank and air conditioner. And, of course, they stop taking care of the home because, frankly, who gives a damn anymore? And eventually, after a year or so, they move out.

When the foreclosure proceedings are completed, the bank hires contractors to put the house back into saleable condition -- they're easily dropping $15-$20,000 into repairs. And thousands into attorneys' fees, etc. They begin paying the real estate taxes and other expenses (like heat/lawncare, etc.) on the homes immediately....paying off the arrearage as well as current taxes. Then they put these distressed homes on the market, flooding the market and driving prices down even further. Eventually, maybe a year later, after easily laying out 50,000 or more, they sell the home for $225,000.

Had they offered the original owner forgiveness on $50,000 of their debt, the bank would have saved money, the real estate market wouldn't be flooded with distressed properties, real estate would stabilize, a family wouldn't have their credit trashed and have gone through the terrible process of losing their home.

We bailed out the banks big-time. So they could screw distressed homeowners with impunity.

Demonstrate on that. And, one more thing -- demonstrate against our government for not holding even one of these jamokes responsible for this debacle.
Click to expand...

Congratulations MaggieD

From no where comes the voice of reason but before I go on lets deal honestly with facts to my knowledge this is what I would consider a real grass roots movement, it is a young movement, strong leaders have not yet come to the front that is not saying they are not there.

I am a high school drop out I received my GED while serving in the US army, now being perfectly honest I was kicked out of HS two of them in fact I had a problem with bullies and being bullied, there was this mind set that boys will be boys meaning that no one was going to come to your aid plus my step father told me he never wanted to hear of me backing down from a fight he indicated that the whooping he would give me would be much worst then the whooping some HS kid would give me. So I fought losing most of the time. I have to add to that I was dealing with a great deal of frustration and disappointment I had a problem remembering things it started in 6th grade and never stopped, My earliest child hood memories included a strong desire to be a medical researcher for my 5th birthday I asked for and received an electronic microscope, medical researchers have to go to college, I knew by 8th grade that was not ever going to be a possibility.

Some people are targeted they can't help it, in 9th grade I found myself a gang leader, at 17 after completeing Basic, AIT, and jump school I found my calling as a bonified killing machine, the army recognized my talent and sent me to Fort Dix to help trainees learn the skills they would need to survive in combat. I learned that being a DI was a lot harder then it looked the glory was gone and I had to find a way to instruct trainees most of them older then I was. So I decided the best way for me was to get as many trainees as I could involved in a supervisiory capacity. It worked better then I could have ever imagined every platoon that went through training with me broke every post record for efficiency.

Let me assure you of some thing I was never the sharpest knive in the drawer and I knew it, being in the right place at the right time and having the necessary skills is the key to success and I just seemed to be in the right place at the right time and had the required skills and work ethic to succeed, I had one other attribute that escapes many managers, I knew that if I was to be successful in my job I would need the skills and experience of those who I worked with. I was very successful as a manager I went as far as possible with the education I had because I knew that I could be as intelligent as the most intelligent person that I worked with or I could be another hard working person in a crew

Why have I put members through this ancient history because I learned how to brain storm a problem I learned how to assemble and launch a team.

Maybe as you look at the OWS demonstrators they look like a disorganized group of people with wide ranging ideas. When I look at them and read their demands I see a leaderless brain storming session in progress. I think the best ideas come from people who just speak up without fear of being ridiculed by their suggestions. At some point a leader or a number of leaders will come out of the ranks and put a reasonable mandate together that addresses as many of the concerns that can be reasonably be expected to be resolved. This is a grass roots movement a movement loosely arranged awaiting a leader or a number of leaders to emerge.

We the people need this movement. I read an article written by a wall street insider who is apparently ready to accept a leadership role, the writer can articulate his points, has Wall Street experience and has a reasonable mandate so I am going to post it here and then again as an entry if I can figure out how to do it.

Dear Occupy Wall Street: Will You Stand with Me?

October 7, 2011

By Shah Gilani, Capital Waves Strategist, Money Morning

Dear Occupy Wall Street Demonstrators,

Let me start by saying that I applaud your initiative. Grassroots protests are the essence of democracy. And as we've seen with the Tea Party movement and the Arab Spring, nonviolent protests are a powerful way to effect meaningful change.

Yet even though I'm 100% behind you in spirit, I can't fully support your cause.

Don't get me wrong, I want to join you. But I can't - not yet, anyway.

And the reason why I can't support your ultimate goals is a simple one: I don't know what they are.

So how about this? I'm going to tell you what I stand for. I'm going to tell you what my goals are. And if you agree, then we can stand together. And i f you agree with me, I won't wait another minute before joining you whenever and wherever I'm needed.

So here it goes.

The reason I'm already leaning towards your side is that the fountainhead of your disgust seems to be "Wall Street."

Now, I don't know what Wall Street means to you. But to me, it means all the crony capitalists and market manipulators whose calculators and spreadsheets say the present value of their self-serving greed is worth discounting all of America's future.

That's the Wall Street that I'm committed to fighting - the Wall Street that's littered with greed and corruption.

But to me, the "Wall Street" we're fighting against is not synonymous with capitalists. The enemy we share doesn't include the entrepreneurs and self-starters that have built this country up brick by brick.

So if you think socialism is better than capitalism, you can count me out. If you think that redistributing earned income from hard working Americans to support lazy, self-indulgent, able-bodied crybabies is fair, count me out. If you think that making a lot of money, fairly and honestly, is un-American, count me out. And, if you're thinking about violence or destroying other people's property, count me out.

But if you're mad that Wall Street money has bought our Congress; if you're mad that there's an oligarchy of banker puppeteers pulling the strings of the U.S. Federal Reserve; if you're mad that Wall Street is hell-bent on toying with the stock market and turning the screws on fixed-income investors, parents, and retirees to expand their profit margins; and, if you are mad that "too-big-to-fail" banks can wreck the economy and get bailed out, only to become bigger bullies while tens of millions of Americans lose their homes, jobs, and retirement savings, then I am solidly with you.

And, if you're with me, we agree that we need to tear down Wall Street to rebuild Main Street!

That's where we stand, hopefully united.

Now let me offer up a list - a manifesto, if you will - that you may or may not choose to adopt. But remember, I'm not trying to hijack your movement. I just want to offer some vision and clarity.

So these are the goals I'd like for us all, as fed-up Americans, to undertake:

1.Break up too-big-to-fail banks so they aren't threatening our financial system .
2.Investigate failed banks for fraud, and indict and incarcerate guilty parties.
3.Scale banker bonuses progressively with long-vesting stock options.
4.Legislate pay claw-back provisions and criminal statutes for bad banker behavior.
5.Eliminate volatility-inducing high-frequency-trading and ETF program arbitrage.
6.Make all derivatives exchange traded, highly margined, and transparent.
7.Limit credit default swaps to two times the value of at-risk underlying credits.
8.Mandate exhaustive studies of the potential market impact of newly created financial products.
9.Create simple, effective, light-touch regulations with heavy criminal penalties .
10.Cap Wall Street's political contributions and make them transparent.
11.Audit the Federal Reserve and limit its lending to domestic banking institutions.
12.Give the Consumer Protection Finance Bureau (CPFB) criminal indictment powers, including over the Federal Reserve.
13.Make Wall Street answer to the needs of Main Street, not the other way around.

Please don't get me wrong. It's not that there aren't plenty of other things in the United States that need fixing. I think we'd all agree we need to simplify and "fairify" the tax code, if not throw it out altogether. But, your movement is Occupy Wall Street, so let's stick to that.

There's one last thing. I'm certain that with thousands of supporters you'll find a broad spectrum of ideas and beliefs. That we may be united in belief does not necessarily mean we are all alike .

Take me, for example. In some ways, I am a "Wall Street" guy, and in other ways I am one of the 99% you claim to represent. I want an opportunity to make a good living, honestly and fairly. But, like all of you, like all of America, I am sick and tired of the powerful, moneyed oligarchy that runs America profiteering off the backs of hard working Americans.

That's why we need strong, transparent and fair capital markets and honest, smart leaders. The two aren't incompatible.

So what I'm saying is that I'm ready to join your revolution, if you're ready to accept a Wall Street insider who's determined to restore the system's integrity - not destroy it.

And that's why you're going to hear more from me every week, as I call Wall Street's biggest players onto the carpet. And I can promise you this: Some of the indictments I make are going to shock you.

Sincerely,

Shah Gilani
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
:) I think you are confusing "angry vitriol" with "uproarious ridicule". I can't encourage big unions to tie their image to the police-car-poopers and museum-invaders enough. after that, I urge them to join the campaign against the Boy Scouts and Motherhood. :D

but perhaps we should leave well enough alone. as Napoleon taught: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is busy committing suicide."



:lamo speaking of vitriol....

fascinating, however, the logic used. what about the federal employees on this forum who are having great fun making light of these people?
Click to expand...

You and I do not even live in the same America. Its amazing how totally and completely clueless the far righties are on this whole thing. And the sad thing is it is a willful ignorance - a choice of ignorance - a decisions which says "I do not understand and I do not want to understand and nothing you can do or say will ever make me understand so don't even try."

Bod Dylan was right ---- something is happening here and you don't know what it is. Nor do you want to.
 
When you're not in a position of power, hurting those that are is a typical emotional response . This stems from the "nothing to lose" phenomenon.

i.e. I screwed up and goofed off, partied and treaded water in my career until 35. Of course, while others busted ass in their career, I minimized work, and maximized my gain. So when lay offs occured, guess what, I was bottom 10%. So, a chance to make those others misreable? Yeah! Hell yeah! And then we'll say we're the 99%, rather than the bottom 10%, because we're C students, you can't expect us to get the facts straight....

Very similar to how people love to see those on top fall (see various celeb phenomenon).

Because the vast majority of us that know people like cpwill who write:
. I work hard, educate myself on the side, and come from little enough - and I will likely retire a multimillionaire; and be making above the median wage before I'm 35.
Click to expand...
Has seen time and time again that if that attitude is put into practice, there is no reason those dreams won't become a reality (barring health/nature issues).

Hell, I bet most people in positions of corporate power salivate every day about having hard working, self motivated, financially driven individuals who want to do what it takes. Unfortunately, those types are few and far between.
 
Last edited:
Ockham said:
It's a colorful euphemism to describe the malaise of our society and forgetting what is fiscally important both as a nation and individually.
Click to expand...

euphemismn euphemism [ˈjuːfəmizəm]
a pleasant name for something that is unpleasant Pass on' is a euphemism for `die'.
mal·aise (m-lz, -lz)
1. A vague feeling of bodily discomfort, as at the beginning of an illness.
2. A general sense of depression or unease: "One year after the crash, the markets remain mired in a deep malaise" (New York Times).

Just my 2 cents but he doesn't seem particularly angry - it may be that your perception is being modified by the written word and the in formalness of a political forum posting.
Click to expand...

Okay he is not angry he is just hateful but not angry

cpwill hatred? nah, my hatred is reserved for those who specifically rate it. I just don't respect the boomers very much - they took a great thing and have generally F*&('d up everything they touched. my folks are boomers - and are smarter than most of the rest of their generation. never divorced, lived beneath their means, and taught me to do likewise.

Again... you're interpretation seems lost in translation.
Click to expand...

ha·tred (htrd)n.
Intense animosity or hostility.
an·ger (nggr)
n.A strong feeling of displeasure or hostility.

Your right I was not able to see the difference between hatred and anger but that's me I am a baby boomer one of those he sterotyped as
; just a generation of people taking the reins who had decided to buy into instant gratification as a personal, governing, and financial philosophy.
Click to expand...
 
EarlzP said:
euphemismn euphemism [ˈjuːfəmizəm]
a pleasant name for something that is unpleasant Pass on' is a euphemism for `die'.
mal·aise (m-lz, -lz)
1. A vague feeling of bodily discomfort, as at the beginning of an illness.
2. A general sense of depression or unease: "One year after the crash, the markets remain mired in a deep malaise" (New York Times).



Okay he is not angry he is just hateful but not angry



ha·tred (htrd)n.
Intense animosity or hostility.
an·ger (nggr)
n.A strong feeling of displeasure or hostility.

Your right I was not able to see the difference between hatred and anger but that's me I am a baby boomer one of those he sterotyped as
Click to expand...

Today's Democrat Party, hardly the party that I grew up with and one that I supported. What specifically do these people expect to accomplish and why do Democrats support the protestors

Democrats Offer Solidarity To Wall Street Protesters | Fox News
 
EarlzP said:
Your right I was not able to see the difference between hatred and anger but that's me I am a baby boomer one of those he sterotyped as
Click to expand...

One must try not to take things so personally especially when someone else is generalizing, which tends to happen a lot of discussion forums.
 
haymarket said:
After reading the various threads on this same subject here, and paying special attention to the vitriolic responses from those on the right side of the political spectrum, two dominant themes appear
Click to expand...

I effing hate and despise these types of arguements that are deigned to demonize anyone you see as having a position different than you. If you have a problem with an arguement someone makes, address them. I consider myself *right* and if you can show where I've done that here, I'll own up to it. Yours is the arguement of the weak. Pick a faceless enemy and argue against them.

Grow a pair and debate someone who can actually debate back.
 
EarlzP said:
Congratulations MaggieD

From no where comes the voice of reason but before I go on lets deal honestly with facts to my knowledge this is what I would consider a real grass roots movement, it is a young movement, strong leaders have not yet come to the front that is not saying they are not there.

I am a high school drop out I received my GED while serving in the US army, now being perfectly honest I was kicked out of HS two of them in fact I had a problem with bullies and being bullied, there was this mind set that boys will be boys meaning that no one was going to come to your aid plus my step father told me he never wanted to hear of me backing down from a fight he indicated that the whooping he would give me would be much worst then the whooping some HS kid would give me. So I fought losing most of the time. I have to add to that I was dealing with a great deal of frustration and disappointment I had a problem remembering things it started in 6th grade and never stopped, My earliest child hood memories included a strong desire to be a medical researcher for my 5th birthday I asked for and received an electronic microscope, medical researchers have to go to college, I knew by 8th grade that was not ever going to be a possibility.

Some people are targeted they can't help it, in 9th grade I found myself a gang leader, at 17 after completeing Basic, AIT, and jump school I found my calling as a bonified killing machine, the army recognized my talent and sent me to Fort Dix to help trainees learn the skills they would need to survive in combat. I learned that being a DI was a lot harder then it looked the glory was gone and I had to find a way to instruct trainees most of them older then I was. So I decided the best way for me was to get as many trainees as I could involved in a supervisiory capacity. It worked better then I could have ever imagined every platoon that went through training with me broke every post record for efficiency.

Let me assure you of some thing I was never the sharpest knive in the drawer and I knew it, being in the right place at the right time and having the necessary skills is the key to success and I just seemed to be in the right place at the right time and had the required skills and work ethic to succeed, I had one other attribute that escapes many managers, I knew that if I was to be successful in my job I would need the skills and experience of those who I worked with. I was very successful as a manager I went as far as possible with the education I had because I knew that I could be as intelligent as the most intelligent person that I worked with or I could be another hard working person in a crew

Why have I put members through this ancient history because I learned how to brain storm a problem I learned how to assemble and launch a team.

Maybe as you look at the OWS demonstrators they look like a disorganized group of people with wide ranging ideas. When I look at them and read their demands I see a leaderless brain storming session in progress. I think the best ideas come from people who just speak up without fear of being ridiculed by their suggestions. At some point a leader or a number of leaders will come out of the ranks and put a reasonable mandate together that addresses as many of the concerns that can be reasonably be expected to be resolved. This is a grass roots movement a movement loosely arranged awaiting a leader or a number of leaders to emerge.

We the people need this movement. I read an article written by a wall street insider who is apparently ready to accept a leadership role, the writer can articulate his points, has Wall Street experience and has a reasonable mandate so I am going to post it here and then again as an entry if I can figure out how to do it.
Click to expand...

Talk about a terrific success story!!!! I think your take on the Wall Street demonstrators makes a lot of sense. I sure hope you're right.

As to YOU, my friend, you are a natural born leader; discovered it; steered yourself in the right direction; and are an American success story! Love it!!!
 
haymarket said:
You and I do not even live in the same America. Its amazing how totally and completely clueless the far righties are on this whole thing. And the sad thing is it is a willful ignorance - a choice of ignorance - a decisions which says "I do not understand and I do not want to understand and nothing you can do or say will ever make me understand so don't even try."

Bod Dylan was right ---- something is happening here and you don't know what it is. Nor do you want to.
Click to expand...

:) hey, maybe your right, hay. maybe it's the age of aquarius, finally coming into it's own. but right now, I think you are guilty of alot of wishful thinking.


the ONE good solid silver lining out of all of this is that now the base of the right and the left have both (theoretically) rejected bailing out "too big to fail" institutions.
 
EarlzP said:
Okay he is not angry he is just hateful but not angry
Click to expand...

angry at the boomers? well, currently they seem poised to do their best to ruin my childrens' future - that does occasionally get me a bit hot under the collar, as it would for any parent.

ha·tred (htrd)n.
Intense animosity or hostility.
an·ger (nggr)
n.A strong feeling of displeasure or hostility.

Your right I was not able to see the difference between hatred and anger but that's me I am a baby boomer one of those he sterotyped as
Click to expand...

well, if it makes you feel any better, thus far the generation ya'll raised (badly) is even worse than you. never has their been a least accomplished, or more narcissistic generation than the ones raised under the cultural teachings of the Boomer Movement.
 
Misterveritis said:
He wants to generate massive social change...much like the one term Marxist president Obama. When a leftist says those things what do you think he means?
Click to expand...

it means he advocates change for the majority, to level the economic playing field, even if it comes at the expense of higher taxes for those 1%ers

your turn. show us where he has advocated for the businesses employing union employees he represents to become state owned

do so, and you will have made your case that he is a socialist. fail to do so and you will prove that your argument is all wet
 
justabubba said:
it means he advocates change for the majority, to level the economic playing field, even if it comes at the expense of higher taxes for those 1%ers

your turn. show us where he has advocated for the businesses employing union employees he represents to become state owned

do so, and you will have made your case that he is a socialist. fail to do so and you will prove that your argument is all wet
Click to expand...

If you truly wanted to "level the playing field". you would lower the tax rates on the rich, and raise them on the lower 90%, to include the lower 47% who pay no income tax now. The levelest playing field would be the same flat tax rate on everyone's income. Somehow I do not think that is what these moochers are advocating.

If you want to raise tax rates on investment income and capital gains, then go for it. However, you would be competing against other country's tax rates for such discretionary money. You could easily chase investment away, just as we have chased jobs away by our high corporate rates.

As for Obama advocating unions, his new JOBS bill, and the "infrastructure" spending it earmarks, requires that all employees on these jobs are either Union, or if not, that they are paid union scale. **** that.

This is all class envy BS.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
If you truly wanted to "level the playing field". you would lower the tax rates on the rich, and raise them on the lower 90%, to include the lower 47% who pay no income tax now. The levelest playing field would be the same flat tax rate on everyone's income. Somehow I do not think that is what these moochers are advocating.
Click to expand...
That's actually very true... in reality Obama doesn't want to level the playing field. That's a misnomer. It's called demanding the rich pay the way for those who are not rich; aka, class warfare.

And yes, the fairest method of leveling the playing field would actually be a flat tax and the only person advocating such a thing is Herman Cain.
 
Conservative said:
Today's Democrat Party, hardly the party that I grew up with and one that I supported.
Click to expand...

That is because in your day anybody with a brain called it the Democratic Party. But Rush thanks you for following orders.
 
haymarket said:
That is because in your day anybody with a brain called it the Democratic Party. But Rush thanks you for following orders.
Click to expand...

Better do some research on the term Democrat Party as there is an entire Wikipedia page on Democrat Party, hardly a Rush term
 
megaprogman said:
My reasoning for this is of course due to the basis of liberalism which is entirely about the greater good.
Click to expand...
It's easy to justify a lot of things with the "greater good".

Whenever I hear "greater good" I think of Huxley's "Brave New World".
 
To the surprise of no one, except possibly the brain dead liberals, here's a quote from an article late today:

In an email sent Monday morning, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Director Robby Mook appealed for signatures to an online petition in support of those who want "to let billionaires, big oil and big bankers know that we're not going to let the richest 1% force draconian economic policies and massive cuts to crucial programs on Main Street Americans."

Read more: Democrats Offer Solidarity To Wall Street Protesters | Fox News
Click to expand...

100% astroturf. That's all this is. Phase one of the Obama reelection campaign.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
To the surprise of no one, except possibly the brain dead liberals, here's a quote from an article late today:



100% astroturf. That's all this is. Phase one of the Obama reelection campaign.
Click to expand...

DCCC buy in to class warfare! Yay!
 
Eighty Deuce said:
100% astroturf. That's all this is. Phase one of the Obama reelection campaign.
Click to expand...

Here is the problem and why this doesn't bother me. When you make statements like this you actually have to back them up or the people get disenfranchised. We see it with Obama's current ratings.

Yes, people may get initially excited but in a year when nothing has been accomplished, the rhetoric will be meaningless. There are a certain segment that (D) or for that matter (R) means evreything to. For those who voted to give Wall Street all of this money to try and pretend that it wasn't them doesn't work with those who they must convince. The middle.
 
megaprogman said:
My reasoning for this is of course due to the basis of liberalism which is entirely about the greater good.
Click to expand...

that is incorrect - as the class warfare rhetoric we have been seeing the past few months demonstrates. liberalism has become about very specific good for very specific groups. they are defended with the language of "greater good", but somehow we must always damage others to achieve that good for those groups...



if the plan is to rob peter to pay paul in order to get pauls' vote; okay. fine. but let's not pretend peter is improved by the exchange.
 
cpwill said:
angry at the boomers? well, currently they seem poised to do their best to ruin my childrens' future - that does occasionally get me a bit hot under the collar, as it would for any parent.
Click to expand...

If you raise your children the way that I raised mine you won't have any thing to worry about, unlike you mine even learned to be respectful. My daughter and you are the same age, she is a doctor she worked and went to college at the same time, oh and I am a grand parent my grandson just started school. Yes sir my generation really blew it they gave their kids any thing they wanted and now those same kids want them to give up their SS, You don't have a problem with SS do you? I see these HS kids today driving these hot new cars, I had to buy my first car with money I made and so did every one of my friends, my parents gave me clothes to wear, a roof over my head, food in my belly and a train ticket to the induction center the day I turned 17.

I taught my daughter that their was nothing more important to her then her education, if her grade average dropped from 99 to 98 I was in with her teachers to see what I had to do to get her back on track, she learned to work and be self sufficent and to be respectful of others and BTW she believes that retired people are entitled to collect SS.

I don't care what generation you are from each and every one of us has different life experiences that shape us as we grow up, for you to sterotype one age brackett as good or bad says a lot about you

well, if it makes you feel any better, thus far the generation ya'll raised (badly) is even worse than you. never has their been a least accomplished, or more narcissistic generation than the ones raised under the cultural teachings of the Boomer Movement.
Click to expand...

What generation raised you? Your 35 you must be the child of a baby boomer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom