L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

j-mac · Jan 2, 2012

Boo Radley said:
I've seen those numbers disputed, but even if true, would not give us a true picture of the overall size.

Well, here we go...down the rabbit hole of nothing is ever empirical enough for you. I tell ya what Joe, instead of your usual tactics of debate that go down this road of frustration, why don't you be crystal clear, and tell me what would suffice for you?

j-mac

1Perry · Jan 2, 2012

Grant said:
Please answer the question before you ask one.

It doesn't?? If Rosa Parks were part of a mob do you feel her name would be so revered today? Perhaps you should take a moment to consider that.

MLK was a part of a mob.

1Perry · Jan 2, 2012

Boo Radley said:
I've seen those numbers disputed, but even if true, would not give us a true picture of the overall size.

Really it's irrelevant. I know it's not your arguement. Our right to protest does not matter if it includes 10 million, 100,000, 10,000, 100 or even 1.

j-mac · Jan 2, 2012

1Perry said:
Really it's irrelevant.

Actually it isn't. It is relevant when the OWS supporters try and bring legitimacy to their protest by saying things like they do. Pretending to represent not just a majority of people, no, but 99%. And when those in here like Boo try to muddy the waters by comparing turn out to that of tea party events, in some sad attempt to parity, and comparison when there really is little.

Our right to protest does not matter if it includes 10 million, 100,000, 10,000, 100 or even 1.

Not one poster in here including myself says that is the case, so you can stop building that man of straw right now. The comparison is made like I said because the OWS supporters are grasping for anything that would lend legitimacy to their misguided cause, and will stoop to any and all dishonesty to do such as well.

j-mac

1Perry · Jan 2, 2012

j-mac said:
Actually it isn't. It is relevant when the OWS supporters try and bring legitimacy to their protest by saying things like they do. Pretending to represent not just a majority of people, no, but 99%. And when those in here like Boo try to muddy the waters by comparing turn out to that of tea party events, in some sad attempt to parity, and comparison when there really is little.

99% was likely closer than "Mission Accomplished".

The point being, most all people with a message that want conveyed use these types of statements.

Not one poster in here including myself says that is the case, so you can stop building that man of straw right now. The comparison is made like I said because the OWS supporters are grasping for anything that would lend legitimacy to their misguided cause, and will stoop to any and all dishonesty to do such as well.

j-mac

You do not have to agree with them for their protesting to be valid.

j-mac · Jan 2, 2012

1Perry said:
99% was likely closer than "Mission Accomplished".

Bad analogy.

The point being, most all people with a message that want conveyed use these types of statements.

Doesn't make them valid, or even comparable.

Then again some people use straw man arguments like:

You do not have to agree with them for their protesting to be valid.

j-mac

1Perry · Jan 2, 2012

j-mac said:
Bad analogy.

Sure, because you don't like it. Neither were exactly spot on were they?

Doesn't make them valid, or even comparable.

Then again some people use straw man arguments like:

j-mac

Basically it's your only justification so far.

j-mac · Jan 2, 2012

1Perry said:
Sure, because you don't like it. Neither were exactly spot on were they?

Basically it's your only justification so far.

good grief....Are there any adults on the boards tonight? Any at all?....

j-mac

1Perry · Jan 2, 2012

j-mac said:
good grief....Are there any adults on the boards tonight? Any at all?....

j-mac

I make a point, you dismiss it without any real comment and then think you have the high road? Really, your complaint is with them using 99%?

How many Tea Party meetings do you suppose tea was actually served at?

j-mac · Jan 3, 2012

1Perry said:
I make a point, you dismiss it without any real comment and then think you have the high road? Really, your complaint is with them using 99%?

How many Tea Party meetings do you suppose tea was actually served at?

No Perry, My complaint is the childish nature of liberals, progressives, either declared or pseudo intellectual, supposed independents, others, undisclosed, moderates, or any other dumb assery that gets posted on these boards in the form of supposed debate.

Now Perry, until recently you and I, although not always eye to eye had some minor agreement on some things, but as is the usual case with those who can't stand when there is someone else that disagrees with their POV, the resort is usually with weak ass arguments, to attack personally, demean, and ridicule their opponent. It is a well worn strategy of the far liberal left since the days of Allenski, and most recently unmasked to the masses through the utter failure of messaging from the current administration. So you will excuse me if I dismissed your irrelevant arguments, or at the least the ones that were so void of actual point as to be utterly laughable.

Here is hoping beyond hope Perry, that tomorrow is a new day, and one where we can hopefully discuss things without the mundane back and forth that I can get from any run of the mill freshman young man or woman in here parroting their Marxist profs views in here....think about it, and let's give a try k?

Night.

j-mac

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

j-mac said:
Well, here we go...down the rabbit hole of nothing is ever empirical enough for you. I tell ya what Joe, instead of your usual tactics of debate that go down this road of frustration, why don't you be crystal clear, and tell me what would suffice for you?

j-mac

NO. I said even if true, it would not answer my question. If there are more rallies around the country, it is possible to overall number is larger for OWS. I don't know which is large, which is why I asked. It seems to me no one knows, so claims that one is seem to be rather silly to me.

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

1Perry said:
Really it's irrelevant. I know it's not your arguement. Our right to protest does not matter if it includes 10 million, 100,000, 10,000, 100 or even 1.

Oh, I agree. I was merely questioning those two who were arguning over size when the I don't know that anyone has counted.

j-mac · Jan 3, 2012

Boo Radley said:
NO. I said even if true, it would not answer my question. If there are more rallies around the country, it is possible to overall number is larger for OWS. I don't know which is large, which is why I asked. It seems to me no one knows, so claims that one is seem to be rather silly to me.

Well, I can see why the numbers would want to be downplayed by those who support the chaos from OWS. Like I said earlier, it is about legitimacy. But, we can absolutely focus less on numbers, and more on message, what ever you think that is.

j-mac

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

j-mac said:
Well, I can see why the numbers would want to be downplayed by those who support the chaos from OWS. Like I said earlier, it is about legitimacy. But, we can absolutely focus less on numbers, and more on message, what ever you think that is.

j-mac

I personally think both the tea party and OWs have been a tad incoherent to say the least. But, if we want to talk numbers, I think we should have some. As for legitmacy? What makes one legitmate and the other not? A single person can have a valid complaint, and thus legitmate. So, it can't really be numbers alone, can it?

j-mac · Jan 3, 2012

Boo Radley said:
I personally think both the tea party and OWs have been a tad incoherent to say the least. But, if we want to talk numbers, I think we should have some. As for legitmacy? What makes one legitmate and the other not? A single person can have a valid complaint, and thus legitmate. So, it can't really be numbers alone, can it?

Do you think a single person with a 'valid complaint' could be heard these days? Numbers bring coverage. OWS knows this, Tea Party knows this. And it also depends on what you consider valid. Griping about having to pay back loans that you yourself signed for, is just an example of what I would consider to be a rather dumb complaint....Can I get an *uptwinkles*....

j-mac

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

j-mac said:
Do you think a single person with a 'valid complaint' could be heard these days? Numbers bring coverage. OWS knows this, Tea Party knows this. And it also depends on what you consider valid. Griping about having to pay back loans that you yourself signed for, is just an example of what I would consider to be a rather dumb complaint....Can I get an *uptwinkles*....

j-mac

Depends on how he goes about it, but being heard doesn't make something legit or not legit.

Yes, young peopel signed loans, being as worldly and as smart as they are at 18. Saddled themselves with thousands of dollars of debt, only to find the job they got didn't make snough to pay the loan. Such assholes. And we all know this is the single, only thing OWS is about. That said, it might be helpful to actually listen to the complaints, which are largely about government favoring business and wealthy over working folk. And to that, they have a point. from corporate welfare to bailouts to silly tax breaks, government has favor business. And when we look closely at the relationship between money and politics, we all should be at least a little outraged. That some are so affraid of business and wealthy that they seek to appease them at the cost of their own welfare saddens me. But, here we are.

j-mac · Jan 3, 2012

Boo Radley said:
Depends on how he goes about it, but being heard doesn't make something legit or not legit.

Absolutely.

Yes, young peopel signed loans, being as worldly and as smart as they are at 18. Saddled themselves with thousands of dollars of debt, only to find the job they got didn't make snough to pay the loan.

Maybe it would have helped to not chose courses of study that had no real chance of financial success in the real world. In fact, following that line, they could just as easily go after the collage system for ripping them off.

Such assholes.

I didn't say that....Why do you think students are assholes?

And we all know this is the single, only thing OWS is about.

Again, I didn't say that did I? Come on Joe, make your argument without putting words in my mouth will you?

That said, it might be helpful to actually listen to the complaints, which are largely about government favoring business and wealthy over working folk. And to that, they have a point.

Sure they do, but their anger is myopic, and poorly focused.

from corporate welfare to bailouts to silly tax breaks, government has favor business. And when we look closely at the relationship between money and politics, we all should be at least a little outraged.

And where are the OWS rallies against the governments role in this? Surely not reported, largely I think to the MSM's relationship to Obama.

That some are so affraid of business and wealthy that they seek to appease them at the cost of their own welfare saddens me. But, here we are.

I think that many people that have jobs today are worried about where Obama is taking this country as it concerns business. These are not the best of times in case you haven't noticed.

j-mac

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

j-mac said:
Maybe it would have helped to not chose courses of study that had no real chance of financial success in the real world. In fact, following that line, they could just as easily go after the collage system for ripping them off.

Well, a world with just doctors and lawyers isn't likely to happen.

I didn't say that....Why do you think students are assholes?

You missed the point. Try again.

Sure they do, but their anger is myopic, and poorly focused.

Same as the tea party.

And where are the OWS rallies against the governments role in this? Surely not reported, largely I think to the MSM's relationship to Obama.

That's silly and incorrect. It has been largely reported.

I think that many people that have jobs today are worried about where Obama is taking this country as it concerns business. These are not the best of times in case you haven't noticed.

j-mac

Different subject, and not what I'm speaking to. It is the constant need to give breaks and to and appease business and wealth that is a problem. The giving away of all worker advantage just to see business walk away all the same.

Kreton · Jan 3, 2012

That said, it might be helpful to actually listen to the complaints, which are largely about government favoring business and wealthy over working folk. And to that, they have a point. from corporate welfare to bailouts to silly tax breaks, government has favor business.

The government and big businesses do work very closely together. And people continue to say how much they don't like it. But in the end they keep putting these same politicians in office. And they keep giving as much money as possible to these big businesses. What is the consequence of all these things that people don't like? Re-election and more money.

OWS taking to the parks, attempting to disrupt civilians, taking out aggression on police, ruining small business and all in all helping these big businesses while at the same time inconviencing ordinary people's day to day lives didn't do a damn thing to help their "cause". If OWS wants to make a difference they need to focus their attentions on replacing officials who are corrupt or who are working against their interests. Many people seem to have it stuck in their heads that it's either Dems or Reps that are working against them. People need to realize it's both. Politicians are screwing things up, not one party. These same people who are sick of big business needs to make a point by not supporting these companies. That means stop giving them truck loads of money. Not just bitching at them for not being nicer. These politicians and businesses don't give a damn about what you say. Or how big your sign is. What they care about is your votes and your money.

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

muciti said:
The government and big businesses do work very closely together. And people continue to say how much they don't like it. But in the end they keep putting these same politicians in office. And they keep giving as much money as possible to these big businesses. What is the consequence of all these things that people don't like? Re-election and more money.

OWS taking to the parks, attempting to disrupt civilians, taking out aggression on police, ruining small business and all in all helping these big businesses while at the same time inconviencing ordinary people's day to day lives didn't do a damn thing to help their "cause". If OWS wants to make a difference they need to focus their attentions on replacing officials who are corrupt or who are working against their interests. Many people seem to have it stuck in their heads that it's either Dems or Reps that are working against them. People need to realize it's both. Politicians are screwing things up, not one party. These same people who are sick of big business needs to make a point by not supporting these companies. That means stop giving them truck loads of money. Not just bitching at them for not being nicer. These politicians and businesses don't give a damn about what you say. Or how big your sign is. What they care about is your votes and your money.

There is a limit to what such protests can do, true. But what politican can be elected that won't have ties to business?

j-mac · Jan 3, 2012

Boo Radley said:
Well, a world with just doctors and lawyers isn't likely to happen.

Are Lawyer's and Doctor's (although the Doctor's may argue that they can't pay their loans either considering how their profession is being attacked through HCR) the only professions that make enough to pay back the obligations they signed up for? And even if that is the case, don't collages have the responsibility when advising the 18 year old student freshman, that a degree in Philosophy won't turn out well when it comes time to pay off the cost of that degree? And don't collages have the responsibility to hold cost of these classes down, rather than just taking a look at what a bank will loan and then increasing their cost to meet that threshold?

You missed the point. Try again.

What point were you trying to make with calling students 'assholes'?

Same as the tea party.

Not hardly...how many OWS candidates are out there for the '12 elections?

That's silly and incorrect. It has been largely reported.

Really? Where? I haven't heard of widespread rallies against the government.

Different subject, and not what I'm speaking to.

Then why'd you bring it up?

It is the constant need to give breaks and to and appease business and wealth that is a problem.

Attracting business is one thing we hire our politicians for. I would argue that they are supposed to be our spokesperson as to why it is advantageous to do business in a particular town, state, country.

The giving away of all worker advantage just to see business walk away all the same.

Without a job, a worker is not a worker of anything are they?

j-mac

Kreton · Jan 3, 2012

But what politican can be elected that won't have ties to business?

Sadly none. Both political parties are set up so that they put in office who they want in office. Most elections come down to two choices. Who the Dems tell you to vote for and who the Reps tell you to vote for. Neither serves the interest of the general public. Neither party will allow anyone to get onto one of their tickets who will promote change or go against the grain of the party for what that person believes would be in the general public's

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

muciti said:
Sadly none. Both political parties are set up so that they put in office who they want in office. Most elections come down to two choices. Who the Dems tell you to vote for and who the Reps tell you to vote for. Neither serves the interest of the general public. Neither party will allow anyone to get onto one of their tickets who will promote change or go against the grain of the party for what that person believes would be in the general public's

I largely agree.

Blue_State · Jan 3, 2012

muciti said:
Sadly none. Both political parties are set up so that they put in office who they want in office. Most elections come down to two choices. Who the Dems tell you to vote for and who the Reps tell you to vote for. Neither serves the interest of the general public. Neither party will allow anyone to get onto one of their tickets who will promote change or go against the grain of the party for what that person believes would be in the general public's

I agree as well. I feel that is why we should limit the Federal Government's power. You have a better chance to affect your local politics.

Boo Radley · Jan 3, 2012

Blue_State said:
I agree as well. I feel that is why we should limit the Federal Government's power. You have a better chance to affect your local politics.

More change the system. Find a way to remove money from the equation. This would likely improve everything involved.

BTW, money and the link to business is at every level and not just the federal level.

L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

j-mac

1Perry

1Perry

j-mac

1Perry

j-mac

1Perry

j-mac

1Perry

j-mac

Boo Radley

Boo Radley

j-mac

Boo Radley

j-mac

Boo Radley

j-mac

Boo Radley

Kreton

Doesn't know

Boo Radley

j-mac

Kreton

Doesn't know

Boo Radley

Blue_State

Boo Radley