The 53%: We are NOT Occupy Wall Street

Ockham said:

So because you say you are a framing carpenter that's supposed to give you cred on the interwebz? Lots of people work hard - the military's no free lunch either, neither is picking vegetables as an immigrant, or being a small farmer, or a thousand other jobs. :roll:

Click to expand...

I was a framing carpenter, up until the illegal Mexicans took over the trade. I certainly don't want cred on the interwebz. Will aimed the "you need to work hard" statement at me. I just wanted him to know that I'm no stranger to hard work. What do you do for work?

Conservative said:

No, I didn't miss the point and look forward to you posting a corresponding list of radicals that supported the T.E.A. Party opening and in the media?

Click to expand...

When people were trashing the Tea Party because of a couple of racist assholes at the rally's, were you right there with them accusing the Tea Party of being racist as a whole? It all boils down to making broad generalizations. In this case, you are doing it by using guilt by association. If you truly gave a **** about being honest and having integrity, you would treat both sides equally. However, you have a partisan agenda, just like most people do. So yes, you did miss the point. And no, I'm not going to provide a list of radicals that were associated with the Tea Party because I don't give enough of a **** about it. I don't want to sink to your level and pretend that I actually care about being honest and having integrity, when it's really about bolstering my own partisan agenda.

Ockham said:

Depends... how do you think I meant "Sweet List"?

Click to expand...

Seems to me you meant it in that you were excited that there was a list of groups of questionable character who supported OWS which you believe will hurt confidence in OWS. Essentially, I think you meant it as a cheer in support of guilt by association tactics.

Second... I don't remember a list of associations with the Tea Party - could you remind me when/if that happened?

Click to expand...

Thanks for the intentional obtuse and oblivious response Ockham. I seem to remember me stating "Type of response" not "exact response" in my post, did I not? I never suggested there was a list posted in the exact same fashion. I suggested that the tactic....pointing out groups or people who supported the Tea Party as a means of insulting, degrading, and questioning the legitimacy of the Tea party was done routinely with them and I never seemed to see you shouting out with glee at the attempts of guilt by association tactics in those instances.

Third ... my point was and still is, OWS and the TP are not for the same things. As far as I can tell, there are possible 2 issues which they agree on. My comment is very much identifying a political and strategic play being made to tie the two together to give credibility to OWS, which I find amusing.

Click to expand...

Really, that's your point? Because your first sentence had nothing to do with that.

It doesn't bode a lot of confidence in OWS actually

Click to expand...

Actually, the very fact that your next line is going "...or the attempt to give credibility" seems to suggest that your first line was decidingly NOT about the attempt to compare the two. So ONE of your points may've been about suggesting OWS and the TP as the same thing is wrong, which I agree with. But ONE of your points was also suggesting that because questionable people support OWS that it should cause one to question the confidence in the movement....yet when Racists or Birther's supported the Tea Party I never heard you suggest that was something that didn't bode a lot of confidence for that group. On the contrary, I seem to remember...perhaps I'm wrong, you can correct me...that you were one to argue that you can't judge the entire movement based on individual parts.

What part is confusing you Zyph? I'll be glad to clear it up for you.

Click to expand...

None of those parts are confusing me Ockham, though based on the fact you didn't seem to remember the points you made in your very own post perhaps its not I that am confused.

Mickey Shane said:

I was a framing carpenter, up until the illegal Mexicans took over the trade. I certainly don't want cred on the interwebz. Will aimed the "you need to work hard" statement at me. I just wanted him to know that I'm no stranger to hard work. What do you do for work?

Click to expand...

My point which you seemed to miss, is anyone can claim they do anything which supports their point. You may or may not be what you say... my second point was the military is not picnic either, which you seemed to dismiss as hard work. What I claim to do or not do is irrelevant for the same reason I stated: anyone can do anything that supports their point.

Conservative said:

It is a "Sweet List" in that it points out the hypocrisy of those involved in the OWS rallies in that they have no problem being associated with those groups.

Click to expand...

So if questionable groups or people support a movement, anyone still taking part in said movement is indicating they have no problem with those groups or people? That's your view point?

Dr_Patrick said:

When people were trashing the Tea Party because of a couple of racist assholes at the rally's, were you right there with them accusing the Tea Party of being racist as a whole? It all boils down to making broad generalizations. In this case, you are doing it by using guilt by association. If you truly gave a **** about being honest and having integrity, you would treat both sides equally. However, you have a partisan agenda, just like most people do. So yes, you did miss the point. And no, I'm not going to provide a list of radicals that were associated with the Tea Party because I don't give enough of a **** about it. I don't want to sink to your level and pretend that I actually care about being honest and having integrity, when it's really about bolstering my own partisan agenda.

Click to expand...

I look forward to seeing the list of radicals that supported the T.E.A. Party opening in public like the radical group supporting OWS. Thanks in advance. Your outrage over posting the list of radicals against OWS is nothing more than an attempt to divert. What you want to ignore are those radicals because you know the harm it does to the OWS radicals.

Zyphlin said:

So if questionable groups or people support a movement, anyone still taking part in said movement is indicating they have no problem with those groups or people? That's your view point?

Click to expand...

Questionable groups? LOL, did you even read the list and check out the references where those groups gave speeches of support? It isn't a small list nor is it what any true American would call a "good" group supporting another misguided movement all in an attempt to destroy the U.S. Private sector economy. What exactly do all these groups and individuals have in common?

Conservative said:

I look forward to seeing the list of radicals that supported the T.E.A. Party opening in public like the radical group supporting OWS. Thanks in advance. Your outrage over posting the list of radicals against OWS is nothing more than an attempt to divert. What you want to ignore are those radicals because you know the harm it does to the OWS radicals.

Click to expand...

I'm not going to provide a list of radicals because I don't give a **** about it. I don't give a **** about the list of radicals you provided, because I don't care about the OWS, nor do I give a **** about any list about the Tea Party because I don't care about them. If you had read my post you would see this. The only outrage stems from your partisan hypocrisy.

Dr_Patrick said:

I'm not going to provide a list of radicals because I don't give a **** about it. I don't give a **** about the list of radicals you provided, because I don't care about the OWS, nor do I give a **** about any list about the Tea Party because I don't care about them. If you had read my post you would see this. The only outrage stems from your partisan hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

If you don't give a **** about it then you are part of the problem not part of the solution. I am waiting for that proof of hypocrisy. I have no use for any of those individuals or groups because they all have the same goal in life, to destroy the American economy and thus the free enterprise, capitalistic economy. That is what made this country great so if you don't condemn the groups and their activities then you are indeed part of the problem.

Conservative said:

Questionable groups? LOL, did you even read the list and check out the references where those groups gave speeches of support? It isn't a small list nor is it what any true American would call a "good" group supporting another misguided movement all in an attempt to destroy the U.S. Private sector economy. What exactly do all these groups and individuals have in common?

Click to expand...

Wait so does that mean that I can also associate other people on your list with each other? How about the Nazi Party? Since Obama is on that list does it mean that he's a nazi? Or since Communists are on that list, does it mean that Nazis are Communists? What about the Black Panthers and the Nazis? It doesn't seem to me like they would get along too well, but there they are. So they must share the same ideology if they would both support the OWS. Actually, let's look at it this way; since some men and women support the OWS as well does that mean that we are all Nazi Communist Black Panther Islamists? Good lord, we must kill ourselves to rid ourselves of this evil!!!11

Dr_Patrick said:

When people were trashing the Tea Party because of a couple of racist assholes at the rally's, were you right there with them accusing the Tea Party of being racist as a whole? It all boils down to making broad generalizations. In this case, you are doing it by using guilt by association. If you truly gave a **** about being honest and having integrity, you would treat both sides equally. However, you have a partisan agenda, just like most people do. So yes, you did miss the point. And no, I'm not going to provide a list of radicals that were associated with the Tea Party because I don't give enough of a **** about it. I don't want to sink to your level and pretend that I actually care about being honest and having integrity, when it's really about bolstering my own partisan agenda.

Click to expand...

The occupiers are doing a fine job of reinforcing those generalizations, too.

Conservative said:

Questionable groups? LOL, did you even read the list and check out the references where those groups gave speeches of support? It isn't a small list nor is it what any true American would call a "good" group supporting another misguided movement all in an attempt to destroy the U.S. Private sector economy. What exactly do all these groups and individuals have in common?

Click to expand...

Well that was a nice little rant, but since you quoted my post and didn't answer my question I'll ask you point blank again

So if questionable groups or people support a movement, anyone still taking part in said movement is indicating they have no problem with those groups or people? That's your view point?

I'm not fan of the OWS movement, but I'm not going to jump around and hoot and hollar in a "smear by association" campaign against them anymore than I did when the liberals tried that kind of thing towards the tea party. There are plenty of substantitive things to disagree with OWS about without having to go "They're bad becuase [x] also supports it"

I'm part of that "47%", and I'm still not part of the OWS crowd because I see their methods as pointless and unproductive. In fact, more than anything, they are simply wasting taxpayer money without providing any real solutions to the problems.

As I've been saying for a few days now, complaints are fine as long as with those complaints you include some honest, reasonable, and workable solutions to each specific problem. Just complaining about general problems and offering overly simplified or unrealistic solutions is not helping and just makes a person look like a whiner.

Conservative said:

If you don't give a **** about it then you are part of the problem not part of the solution.

Click to expand...

Coming from you, I'm completely fine with that.

I am waiting for that proof of hypocrisy. I have no use for any of those individuals or groups because they all have the same goal in life, to destroy the American economy and thus the free enterprise, capitalistic economy. That is what made this country great so if you don't condemn the groups and their activities then you are indeed part of the problem.

Click to expand...

I don't condemn those groups because I don't care enough to. They have nothing to do with me. I also support freedom of speech.

Dr_Patrick said:

Wait so does that mean that I can also associate other people on your list with each other? How about the Nazi Party? Since Obama is on that list does it mean that he's a nazi? Or since Communists are on that list, does it mean that Nazis are Communists? What about the Black Panthers and the Nazis? It doesn't seem to me like they would get along too well, but there they are. So they must share the same ideology if they would both support the OWS. Actually, let's look at it this way; since some men and women support the OWS as well does that mean that we are all Nazi Communist Black Panther Islamists? Good lord, we must kill ourselves to rid ourselves of this evil!!!11

Click to expand...

What it means is all those individuals and groups have basically the same ideology that the American free enterprise and capitalistic system is wrong and has to be destroyed. All members of that list promote a large central govt. and govt. control of production with a massive central govt. in control of all basic needs of the American people. If you cannot see that then you are out of touch with reality.

Zyphlin said:

Well that was a nice little rant, but since you quoted my post and didn't answer my question I'll ask you point blank again

So if questionable groups or people support a movement, anyone still taking part in said movement is indicating they have no problem with those groups or people? That's your view point?

I'm not fan of the OWS movement, but I'm not going to jump around and hoot and hollar in a "smear by association" campaign against them anymore than I did when the liberals tried that kind of thing towards the tea party. There are plenty of substantitive things to disagree with OWS about without having to go "They're bad becuase [x] also supports it"

Click to expand...

Such is life, you are who you associate with and if you bury your head in the sand then you are guilty by lack of interest.

roguenuke said:

I'm part of that "47%", and I'm still not part of the OWS crowd because I see their methods as pointless and unproductive. In fact, more than anything, they are simply wasting taxpayer money without providing any real solutions to the problems.

As I've been saying for a few days now, complaints are fine as long as with those complaints you include some honest, reasonable, and workable solutions to each specific problem. Just complaining about general problems and offering overly simplified or unrealistic solutions is not helping and just makes a person look like a whiner.

Click to expand...

Protests on either side rarely result in any concrete or practical solutions. I think people protest because it makes them feel like they have a voice. I don't foresee any group bending to the will of the people over a protest, so it is essentially pointless.

Ockham said:

My point which you seemed to miss, is anyone can claim they do anything which supports their point. You may or may not be what you say... my second point was the military is not picnic either, which you seemed to dismiss as hard work. What I claim to do or not do is irrelevant for the same reason I stated: anyone can do anything that supports their point.

Click to expand...

OK, yeah. For as much as I diss TD for his constant horn-tooting, I guess I should have realized what you were saying.

GIs work pretty hard, mostly depending upon what field they stick you in after they tell you that a recruiter can't place you in a job.

Conservative said:

What it means is all those individuals and groups have basically the same ideology that the American free enterprise and capitalistic system is wrong and has to be destroyed. All members of that list promote a large central govt. and govt. control of production with a massive central govt. in control of all basic needs of the American people. If you cannot see that then you are out of touch with reality.

Click to expand...

All of those groups have basically the same ideology? Are you ****ing kidding me?

:lol:

You really need to do some research on some of those groups.

Just because you don't agree with their viewpoints doesn't mean that they are all out to destroy America.

Dr_Patrick said:

Coming from you, I'm completely fine with that.



I don't condemn those groups because I don't care enough to. They have nothing to do with me. I also support freedom of speech.

Click to expand...

LOL, so since you don't see an apparent problem for you then it isn't a problem in reality? You don't care enough because? You think that OWS represents the best America has to office? What is their "beef?" Seems you have a choice you either recommit yourself to personal responsibility and individual rights to wealth creation or your silence gives these people the support they need to destroy our economic system

Dr_Patrick said:

All of those groups have basically the same ideology? Are you ****ing kidding me?

:lol:

You really need to do some research on some of those groups.

Just because you don't agree with their viewpoints doesn't mean that they are all out to destroy America.

Click to expand...

Are you really this naive? apparently so. Keep burying your head in the sand and one of these days you are going to wake up and wonder what happened.

Conservative said:

Such is life, you are who you associate with and if you bury your head in the sand then you are guilty by lack of interest.

Click to expand...

Gotcha. Well thank you for this. I'll be sure to remember your view on this for the future.

Its also good to know that the Tea Party has no issues or problems with Birthers.

Zyphlin said:

Seems to me you meant it in that you were excited that there was a list of groups of questionable character who supported OWS which you believe will hurt confidence in OWS. Essentially, I think you meant it as a cheer in support of guilt by association tactics.

Click to expand...

Clearly an assumption on your part. I meant it facetiously actually... as well as meaning it in a surprising way since there were sources provided. Clear?

Zyphlin said:

Thanks for the intentional obtuse and oblivious response Ockham.

Click to expand...

It's much better than the ignorant and assumed conclusive response Zyphlin.

Zyphlin said:

I seem to remember me stating "Type of response" not "exact response" in my post, did I not?

Click to expand...

You clear intent was to claim hypocrisy on my part, pointing out an example of the Tea Party and also alluding to a similar instance. I'm simply asking when that occurred so I can review an apples to apples comparison. Since you didn't provide one, I'll simply ignore the comment as baseless knee jerk reactionary comments.

Zyphlin said:

I suggested that the tactic....pointing out groups or people who supported the Tea Party as a means of insulting, degrading, and questioning the legitimacy of the Tea party was done routinely with them and I never seemed to see you shouting out with glee at the attempts of guilt by association tactics in those instances.

Click to expand...

For a tactic to be valid, the tactic has to have some shred of information that lends the tactic validity, else the tactic is ignored. Again, you're assumptions are not my problem... you see what you want to see which is out of my control. I guess you see hypocrites where you want to see them.

Zyphlin said:

Really, that's your point? Because your first sentence had nothing to do with that.

Click to expand...

Amazingly... I can make more than one point at a time.

Zyphlin said:

Actually, the very fact that your next line is going "...or the attempt to give credibility" seems to suggest that your first line was decidingly NOT about the attempt to compare the two. So ONE of your points may've been about suggesting OWS and the TP as the same thing is wrong, which I agree with. But ONE of your points was also suggesting that because questionable people support OWS that it should cause one to question the confidence in the movement....yet when Racists or Birther's supported the Tea Party I never heard you suggest that was something that didn't bode a lot of confidence for that group.

Click to expand...

Can you post when Racists and Birthers supported the TP? I promise to reply to the post with "Sweet list!" just to make you feel better about it.

Zyphlin said:

On the contrary, I seem to remember...perhaps I'm wrong, you can correct me...that you were one to argue that you can't judge the entire movement based on individual parts.

Click to expand...

What I've agreed to in the past is a radical minority of any group is not reflective of the entire group. This is a bit different though - these are external groups providing support for OWS. Not quite the same thing.

Zyphlin said:

None of those parts are confusing me Ockham, though based on the fact you didn't seem to remember the points you made in your very own post perhaps its not I that am confused.

Click to expand...

I rarely don't remember my points as you well know. Try to limit the knee jerk reactions wrapped in assumptions is my only suggestion to help your confusion.

Conservative said:

LOL, so since you don't see an apparent problem for you then it isn't a problem in reality? You don't care enough because? You think that OWS represents the best America has to office? What is their "beef?" Seems you have a choice you either recommit yourself to personal responsibility and individual rights to wealth creation or your silence gives these people the support they need to destroy our economic system

Click to expand...

No, I can't speak for everyone. I can only speak for myself. I think that OWS is in response to the fiscal irresponsibility of wall street and the fact that the government seems to cater to the 1% and corporations rather than the 99% of the rest of us. The message has gotten muddled since then. And don't lecture me, because it's not going to make me care any more. It's all political theater, just like every other one of these non issues. The Tea Party was the same.

Dr_Patrick said:

Protests on either side rarely result in any concrete or practical solutions. I think people protest because it makes them feel like they have a voice. I don't foresee any group bending to the will of the people over a protest, so it is essentially pointless.

Click to expand...

See, I don't agree with this either. Many civil rights protests led to big changes of civil rights during the 50s and 60s. And it is hard to contend that Ghandi's protests made no difference. Heck, even some protests in recent years have at least helped bring attention to the problem, without any violence or even resistance to arrest needed. The difference is that those protesting knew exactly what they all wanted, or at least the vast majority.

When Rosa Parks refused to go to the back of the bus it was to protest laws that treated blacks as second-class citizens. There was no need to look for her message or to muddle through what a "reasonable" solution was in that case. Sure, there aren't a lot of protests that are that simple, but the majority of protests that really make a difference are those in which the people have a clear, single message and a reasonable solution (repeal Jim Crow laws, gay marriage, women's right to vote). Even worker strikes and sit-ins that have worked have had clear messages (higher pay, more benefits, better working conditions). And the same thing works at least to a small extent with the corporate world.

I will give one big example that comes to mind in recent history. The Dixie Chicks. Whether you agree with the boycott of them by country music fans in this country or not, you have to at least admit that the protest worked against them. They have not had a country hit in this country since the boycott started.