Occupy Wall Street: The Movement Grows

[California Girl]

There is a 'no family' rule on this site. Leave Willow's family out of your bile, asshole. Or does that rule not apply to you either?

LOL well, that rule, unlike the one you pretended to assert earlier, actually does exist. (I read the rules recently so I know.)

However, I wasn't seriously asking a question about her husband, I was merely pointing out that her question was of the "are you still beating your wife" category: based on a non-factual premise.

Absent evidence that she is beating her husband I assume that she isn't and acknowledge that the question was bogus. But so was her question, for the same reason.

EDIT: Well, actually, I'm afraid you misrepresented the rules once more. There ISN'T a "no-family" rule here. The rule says: "Attacks on family members will not be tolerated."

Even if I had been seriously asking that question, which of course I wasn't, it still wouldn't have been an attack on a family member.

We all know what the rules says. We refer to it as the 'no family' rule. Can you function in society with this level of stupidity?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I look at all these protesters of OWS and I see an opportunity to make some money.

Think of something these whiny entitled pukes will buy and sell it to them.

That's how you don't end up holding a stupid sign and blaming everyone else for your failings.

 

[Dragon]

We all know what the rules says. We refer to it as the 'no family' rule.

If you know what it says, then you also know that what I posted didn't break it.

 

[Mr Natural]

These people need to get serious.

Put down the goofy signs and start smashng windows and burning cars.

a cry for anarchy.. that is typical of left wing lunatics..

Damn right!

When I turn on the news at night, I want to be entertained.

 

[Si modo]

You claim her premiss is untrue. It would only be untrue if capitalism and corporations do not exist.

Wrong. It would only be untrue if we do NOT propose MAKING them nonexistent. Which we don't.

I'm sorry that you cannot figure it out. It's quite simple: Your demands lol are non-conducive to the existence of either.

Moron.

 

[WillowTree]

So your sorry ass broke the rules even though you already knew that action was against the rules?

It's not against the rules.

well then stop beating your wife.

 

[California Girl]

Odd that you accuse me of 'empty rhetoric' that is 'unworthy' of a reply... and by replying show your own desperate need to be seen as my intellectual equal. Clue: You aren't.

I'm quite confident that I am MUCH more intelligent than you are -- so I would agree. We are not intellectual equals.

I'm interested in learning.... which is why I dismiss partisan sources. They won't teach me anything honest.... they will give me spin.... I can spin for myself.

If you were really interested in learning, you would not dismiss ANY sources, although you might treat partisan ones with a grain of salt.

Again, I've given my reasons for my opinions. Hard facts.

The only hard facts you have presented are that Van Jones made a speech calling for a left-leaning populist uprising before OWS began. That proves nothing whatsoever.

I have a wealth of information about Watermelon Man and his buddies. I make it my business to know as much as possible about anyone who is interfering with the Constitutional Republic that I call home. It is a pity that you do not.

Are you gonna answer my hypothetical question or not?

 

[Si modo]

Is Dragon having a meltdown?

 

[Dragon]

Your demands lol are non-conducive to the existence of either.

What demands, and how so?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Tolerates them as opposed to what, taking them out and shooting them? How exactly would you suggest that this individual not be "tolerated"?

The Tea Party asks racists to leave.

It appears that you Marxists ask racists to lead......

 

[WillowTree]

Is Dragon having a meltdown?

Yes, it's time for a diaper change and a drool mop up

 

[Si modo]

Your demands lol are non-conducive to the existence of either.

What demands, and how so?

So, the OWS has no demands?

 

[Dragon]

I have a wealth of information about Watermelon Man and his buddies. I make it my business to know as much as possible about anyone who is interfering with the Constitutional Republic that I call home.

So what information do you have about Mr. Jones that shows him to be in charge of OWS, and that shows OWS to be his creation rather than a grass-roots movement? Note that this would have to be information about OWS itself, not just about Jones.

Are you gonna answer my hypothetical question or not?

Oh, that. Yes, I'll answer it; for what it's worth, if there was convincing evidence that OWS was bent on the forcible overthrow of the government I would not support it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You do realize the Bank Bailout bill was passed before Obama was even elected, right?

I realize that Obama suspended his campaign so that he could go promote it and vote for it.

Didn't you? Do you pay any attention at all, or are the KOS talking points really all the knowledge you need?

 

[Dragon]

So, the OWS has no demands?

I've seen a semi-official list of grievances, but so far no demands, no. Were you thinking of that bogus list of 11 demands that someone or other posted on the OWS web site forum?

 

[Luissa]

Tolerates them as opposed to what, taking them out and shooting them? How exactly would you suggest that this individual not be "tolerated"?

The Tea Party asks racists to leave.

It appears that you Marxists ask racists to lead......

We asked the one guy you guys have video to lead?

 

[Si modo]

So, the OWS has no demands?

I've seen a semi-official list of grievances, but so far no demands, no. Were you thinking of that bogus list of 11 demands that someone or other posted on the OWS web site forum?

Sooooooo, no demands.

Ummm, and the point of the 'occupation' is what if you don't want anything?






(Getting funnier and funnier, here.)

 

[Dragon]

Sooooooo, no demands.

Ummm, and the point of the 'occupation' is what if you don't want anything?

Before I answer that question, I'm going to ask if you're ready now to acknowledge that Willow's question WAS like "are you still beating your wife." Because in the absence of demands that would destroy capitalism, her premise WAS false.

Now, to answer your question, the goal is to present a set of grievances and to start a dialog about how to solve these problems; to bring the excessive influence of corporate greed over the government, and the lopsided nature of our economy, and the decline of the middle class, and the end of the American Dream, into the open and show politicians that there is a big constituency that cares about these things.

Demands will come in time.

 

[California Girl]

I have a wealth of information about Watermelon Man and his buddies. I make it my business to know as much as possible about anyone who is interfering with the Constitutional Republic that I call home.

So what information do you have about Mr. Jones that shows him to be in charge of OWS, and that shows OWS to be his creation rather than a grass-roots movement? Note that this would have to be information about OWS itself, not just about Jones.

Are you gonna answer my hypothetical question or not?

Oh, that. Yes, I'll answer it; for what it's worth, if there was convincing evidence that OWS was bent on the forcible overthrow of the government I would not support it.

I did not say 'forcibly overthrow'. I laid out a hypothetical. I'd like you to answer it as I laid out. It is a straightforward response....

Either:

a. I would not support the destruction of our Constitutional Republic

b. I would support the destruction of our Constitutional Republic in order to replace it with one based on a more socialist agenda.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Oh I walk away to make some money and there are 10 new pages...you bastards!!!!