Good Grief Occupy Wall Street Imbeciles Release 13 Demands Including “$20 Minimum Wa

[oreo]

I'm all for wall street but lets get the corruption out. It will take a long long long time but heck we can do it. Do you really trust what is happening there? Or are we being hoodwinked? None of you here can really answer this question. Either can I although none of you will ever admit it. cowards.

Of course--everyone would agree to rid Wall Street of corruption. We also want to eliminate corruption within our federal government.

But destroying Capitalism--would destroy all of us--and it looks like most of this group wants this--or they want to take from others to have more for themselves. That doesn't work in this country--because you take away the INCENTIVE for people to try to get ahead. And when you do that--every American in this country will be sitting on their asse's waiting for a hand-out--until eventually there are no hand-outs--because no one is working hard--no one is willing to risk investmentl to open a business, etc. etc. etc.

I would like to ask some of these protesters this. If they are in college and work hard to get those A's--would they mind spreading their A's around to others who do not work as hard as they and whom are flunking so they can bring their grades up to C's.

If they say NO--they wouldn't do that--then they're FRAUDS. If you're going to spread the wealth around--you might as well do it with grade point averages too.

 

[Avatar4321]

The only way to eliminate corruption in wall street is to eliminate it in ourselves and in our government.

 

[oreo]

The only way to eliminate corruption in wall street is to eliminate it in ourselves and in our government.

I am not corrupt????

 

[Avatar4321]

The only way to eliminate corruption in wall street is to eliminate it in ourselves and in our government.

I am not corrupt????

You are the only one who can answer that. Well, God can too. But that's something you and Him need to figure out and if there is even alittle corruption in you, you need to fix it.

I honestly can't say Im not corrupt. But I can say im trying to improve. It's just hard to measure whether there has been any real improvement.

 

[AVG-JOE]

From the Occupy Wall Street website, via Picket and Loesch:

The opinion of one solitary person, representing no one but himself.

OWS is decentralized and non-authoritarian. There is no "official list of demands."

You can keep telling yourself that, but NO ONE is buying it and EVERYONE is JUST LAUGHING AT THEM..
I hope those college kids look back someday and see how they were used as dumb dope dupes. Especially when they have to fill out a resume FOR A JOB..

Todays hippies are tomorrows yuppies.

It's the circle of life.

 

[LOki]

You haven't read any of my posts, have you?

I've read your 3 replies to me.

Nonsense.

Or don't you remember writing this:

No Marines putting the boot to cop jerk-faces? :frownyface:​

Marines defending girls armed with signs and chalk from the aggression of statist thugs with an over-developed sense of entitlement to use force, is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT notion of the use of force than what you're projecting upon me.

So you think the protesters have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Oh! A game! A funny little game of retarded presumption!

Ok, I'll play...

To answer your question, I think the protesters have the right to peacefully assemble and make their point ... even if their point is patently retarded and it makes Wall St. firms uncomfortable.

So Mr. Presumpto, you think that Wall St. firms and the police have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

 

[The Gadfly]

You want a revolution, you fight it your own damn self.


Typical leftist...wants someone else to do the work, then you claim credit.

You're a hoot! However, if you're into monarchies, theocracies, feudal aristocracies, or if you're a corporatist, or a fascist, then you may validly refer to me as a leftist.

Regardless, you're a typical statist ... convinced you're morally entitled to dictate with force how everyone else should behave.

You haven't read any of my posts, have you?

Your ignorance aside, it's not me advocating forcing behavior with the threat of violence -- YOU are.

Or don't you remember writing this:

No Marines putting the boot to cop jerk-faces? :frownyface:​

Yet another example of why the returning soldiers they spit on and cursed should have been turned loose on the Left back in the sixties, until the streets ran red with hippie blood, and the leftists were either killed, imprisoned, or beaten into permanent submission. God, how I would have loved clubbing, bayoneting and shooting that treasonous, stinking, unwashed, filthy communist rabble. A worthless waste of oxygen and space, the whole cowardly, infamous, scummy lot of them! This country would have been better off with the filth of our generation removed from it!

 

[daveman]

Thanks for the thanks and all daveman, but you're missing the point. Communists aren't stupid even if there are stupid communists. Same can be said for Republicans, Democrats and Catholics.

The point is that Jones was stupid. At least I hope he was stupid. Anyone stupid enough to lie that stupidly does not deserve the liar label.

Sorry, Joe. Communists ARE stupid. It's a fact.

Sorry daveman, we're going to have to agree to disagree on anything that involves a sweeping generalization statement like that.

Not vetting a story about the deployment of US Marines on American soil prior to using the news in a public speaking engagement is stupid, disagreeing with you on how useful a tool in society 'government' can and should be is just a disagreement.

The fact that a Proud Conservative and a Liberal American Mutt can both see stupid where political stupid lay means there's hope for America.
Every American vote counts. Even the Commies, Klansmen & Fags.

Remind me to someday lay out my reasoning for the conclusion that Communists are stupid.

 

[daveman]

I've read your 3 replies to me.

Nonsense.

Marines defending girls armed with signs and chalk from the aggression of statist thugs with an over-developed sense of entitlement to use force, is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT notion of the use of force than what you're projecting upon me.

So you think the protesters have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Oh! A game! A funny little game of retarded presumption!

Ok, I'll play...

To answer your question, I think the protesters have the right to peacefully assemble and make their point ... even if their point is patently retarded and it makes Wall St. firms uncomfortable.

So Mr. Presumpto, you think that Wall St. firms and the police have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

That's true. Now, can you show where they have? I can show where the protesters have broken the law.

 

[daveman]

You're a hoot! However, if you're into monarchies, theocracies, feudal aristocracies, or if you're a corporatist, or a fascist, then you may validly refer to me as a leftist.

Regardless, you're a typical statist ... convinced you're morally entitled to dictate with force how everyone else should behave.

You haven't read any of my posts, have you?

Your ignorance aside, it's not me advocating forcing behavior with the threat of violence -- YOU are.

Or don't you remember writing this:

No Marines putting the boot to cop jerk-faces? :frownyface:​

Yet another example of why the returning soldiers they spit on and cursed should have been turned loose on the Left back in the sixties, until the streets ran red with hippie blood, and the leftists were either killed, imprisoned, or beaten into permanent submission. God, how I would have loved clubbing, bayoneting and shooting that treasonous, stinking, unwashed, filthy communist rabble. A worthless waste of oxygen and space, the whole cowardly, infamous, scummy lot of them! This country would have been better off with the filth of our generation removed from it!

Agree that they're scummy, but I can't agree with wholesale murder. Sorry. Idiots saying stupid things is part of the First Amendment that we both swore to support and defend.

 

[California Girl]

Well, it isn't now.

It never did. Stop lying.

Altering posts is against the rules of the board.

And it wasn't a lie. It was an opinion.... based on observations of this bunch of morons.

Twit.

 

[The Gadfly]

You haven't read any of my posts, have you?

Your ignorance aside, it's not me advocating forcing behavior with the threat of violence -- YOU are.

Or don't you remember writing this:

No Marines putting the boot to cop jerk-faces? :frownyface:​

Yet another example of why the returning soldiers they spit on and cursed should have been turned loose on the Left back in the sixties, until the streets ran red with hippie blood, and the leftists were either killed, imprisoned, or beaten into permanent submission. God, how I would have loved clubbing, bayoneting and shooting that treasonous, stinking, unwashed, filthy communist rabble. A worthless waste of oxygen and space, the whole cowardly, infamous, scummy lot of them! This country would have been better off with the filth of our generation removed from it!

Agree that they're scummy, but I can't agree with wholesale murder. Sorry. Idiots saying stupid things is part of the First Amendment that we both swore to support and defend.

True enough, but when it degenerates into violence (as it did in the sixties, and as some on the Left have threatened in this case) THEN, the First Amendment no longer applies; that's not speech, that's riot and attempted insurrection, and I still say that should have been dealt with then, and should be dealt with now, with an iron fist. They want war in the streets, I say let's stop talking and start fighting... and this time, FINISH IT, once and for all. This ain't about "peaceful protest", it's about the violent radicals who did (and will again) take it to the next level.

 

[Full-Auto]

I've read your 3 replies to me.

Nonsense.

Marines defending girls armed with signs and chalk from the aggression of statist thugs with an over-developed sense of entitlement to use force, is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT notion of the use of force than what you're projecting upon me.

So you think the protesters have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Oh! A game! A funny little game of retarded presumption!

Ok, I'll play...

To answer your question, I think the protesters have the right to peacefully assemble and make their point ... even if their point is patently retarded and it makes Wall St. firms uncomfortable.

So Mr. Presumpto, you think that Wall St. firms and the police have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Tell me how stopping commerce is legal and we can go from there.

 

[LOki]

So you think the protesters have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Oh! A game! A funny little game of retarded presumption!

Ok, I'll play...

To answer your question, I think the protesters have the right to peacefully assemble and make their point ... even if their point is patently retarded and it makes Wall St. firms uncomfortable.

So Mr. Presumpto, you think that Wall St. firms and the police have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Tell me how stopping commerce is legal and we can go from there.

Oh? You want to play too?

Fine. To answer you, there is nothing about commerce that makes it inherently legal; so stopping illegal commerce is patently legal, and is something that the police should be engaged in--rather than violating the 1st amendment rights of girls armed with signs and chalk.

Now you tell me how violating 1st amendment rights is legal, "and we'll go from there".

Hint: It isn't.

 

[AmericanFirst]

okey dokey...
links in article at site.


SNIP:
Posted by Jim Hoft on Monday, October 3, 2011, 3:58 PM

These imbeciles are just as dumb as we thought. Occupy Wall Street protesters posted a proposed list of demands on their website today.
Thankfully, most American fifth graders aren’t this stupid.

A demonstrator dressed as a “corporate zombie” takes part in an Occupy Wall Street protest in lower Manhattan in New York October 3, 2011. The Occupy Wall Street protests moved into their third week on Monday with demonstrators camping out in Zuccotti Park. (REUTERS/Mike Segar)

From the Occupy Wall Street website, via Picket and Loesch:

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

read the rest with comments at..
Good Grief… Occupy Wall Street Imbeciles Release 13 Demands Including “$20 Minimum Wage” and “Across the Board Debt Forgiveness For All” | The Gateway Pundit

They are nothing more than fanatic socialists.

 

[Full-Auto]

Oh! A game! A funny little game of retarded presumption!

Ok, I'll play...

To answer your question, I think the protesters have the right to peacefully assemble and make their point ... even if their point is patently retarded and it makes Wall St. firms uncomfortable.

So Mr. Presumpto, you think that Wall St. firms and the police have the right to break the law?

Hint: They don't.

Tell me how stopping commerce is legal and we can go from there.

Oh? You want to play too?

Fine. To answer you, there is nothing about commerce that makes it inherently legal; so stopping illegal commerce is patently legal, and is something that the police should be engaged in--rather than violating the 1st amendment rights of girls armed with signs and chalk.

Now you tell me how violating 1st amendment rights is legal, "and we'll go from there".

Hint: It isn't.

I will stop you before you embarrass yourself.

They stopped traffic. Illegal. Traffic is commerce.

 

[Katzndogz]

The level of ignorance is ASTOUNDING! I mean just astounding. Whoever dreamed this list up and whoever agrees with them has absolutely no idea how the world really works. None. They are so used to mom and dad giving in to stop the screaming that they cannot imagine a world that will slap them upside the head instead.

 

[LOki]

Tell me how stopping commerce is legal and we can go from there.

Oh? You want to play too?

Fine. To answer you, there is nothing about commerce that makes it inherently legal; so stopping illegal commerce is patently legal, and is something that the police should be engaged in--rather than violating the 1st amendment rights of girls armed with signs and chalk.

Now you tell me how violating 1st amendment rights is legal, "and we'll go from there".

Hint: It isn't.

I will stop you before you embarrass yourself.

They stopped traffic. Illegal. Traffic is commerce.

Blocking traffic is not a first amendment right.

It's good that you stopped. Too bad it wasn't before you embarrassed yourself.

 

[Truthmatters]

before social security, 50% of senior citizens lived below the poverty line. social security is paid for... it is not charity. it is not a hand out.

you are very, very young. you seem to have no understanding of what a society should be. the randian/tea party would would be an extraordinary ugly one.

but i'm sure the koch brothers would love it.

SS is NOT paid for. It is a TAX. The government takes part of the wages of the individual and places the money into the general fund. The money is replaced with IOU's.
Hence the reason why the system is broken and cannot sustain itself.
Social Security was never meant to be something on which to live. It is a supplement.
In my opinion, the US should have followed the system in Canada.
Each employer and worker pays a 4% tax of their income. That money is placed into a pension account which the government cannot touch. Upon the worker's retirement, he or she begins receiving periodic checks.
Here's a link...This is the type of system we should have had here. Not the slush fund DC politicians have been stealing from all these years.
SS is OUR money. The concept should have been is we get it ALL back after we retire.
SS is a sneaky dastardly concept. We were taken to the cleaners and left with the bill.
link....General Information About The Canada Pension Plan.

I absolutely agree that we should move towards a Canadian pension model. However, it is run by the government. But when they passed the law, it was stated very clearly that the fund was to be run as a professional fund with zero political interference, so the politicians can't get their grubby hands on it.

We would be so so much better off with that system than SS.

Yes like a "LOCK BOX" that so many made fun of a few years back

 

[bitterlyclingin]

(The George Soros funded, SEIU's Stephen Lerner and Van Jones lead Wall Street protest marches on)

"Back in 1984, Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick warned us what would happen if the San Francisco Democrats took over.


They said that saving Grenada from terror and totalitarianism was the wrong thing to do – they didn’t blame Cuba or the communists for threatening American students and murdering Grenadians – they blamed the United States instead.

But then, somehow, they always blame America first.

When our Marines, sent to Lebanon on a multinational peacekeeping mission with the consent of the United States Congress, were murdered in their sleep, the “blame America first crowd” didn’t blame the terrorists who murdered the Marines, they blamed the United States.

But then, they always blame America first.

When the Soviet Union walked out of arms control negotiations, and refused even to discuss the issues, the San Francisco Democrats didn’t blame Soviet intransigence. They blamed the United States.

But then, they always blame America first.

When Marxist dictators shoot their way to power in Central America, the San Francisco Democrats don’t blame the guerrillas and their Soviet allies, they blame United States policies of 100 years ago.

But then, they always blame America first.

The American people know better."

The Occupy Wall Street Fools #iamthe53 | RedState