The Occupy Wall Street Movement is WORKING!!!

[Dragon]

lame excuse

LOL. Since I demonstrated that I HAVE, in fact, read the posts you listed, obviously I don't NEED an excuse.

Where's yours?

 

[georgephillip]

"Washington - Roughly 3,000 unemployed workers from around the country are expected in the nation's capitol next week for four days of protests with labor, religious and social justice groups that say Congress cares more about America's wealthiest 1 percent than it does the masses of struggling middle-class families."

They don't want your property, Stupid.

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

They don't know what they want, they are just like a bunch of zombie lemmings following a dimwitted pied piper, bitching about corporations while filming with SONY and CANON cameras, talking on ANDROID and APPLE phones, playing games on their APPLE iPads and drinking lattes at STARBUCKS.......... that and using MCDONALDS for their restrooms.......what a weak assed joke you hypocritical jerks are

Are you capable of understanding how someone could spend their money on a corporation's product and still expect the corporation to pay its fair share of taxes?

The three thousand unemployed Americans you call "lemmings" are crystal clear about what they want starting with an extension of federal unemployment benefits.

What's your answer to this protestor:

"'What exactly is a person is supposed to do who is simply not being hired?' she asked. 'Are we just supposed to die? Are we supposed to commit suicide? Are we supposed to starve to death homeless and on the streets..."

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

 

[georgephillip]

Read the posts 1070, 1072 -1074.

I did, of course. Your statement that he should take his blinders off was a total non sequitur having nothing to do with your earlier discussion about whether the left does the same thing (which he acknowledged but insisted there was no one of the same competence on the left doing it).

Since your talk about blinders had nothing to do with that earlier conversation, it stands by itself, and his response had everything to do with that.

lame excuse

"1. Don't say 'capitalism.'

"'I'm trying to get that word removed and we're replacing it with either "economic freedom" or "free market,"' (Frank) Luntz said. 'The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we're seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we've got a problem."

Do you think capitalism is immoral?

Are you defending Wall Street?

How Republicans are being taught to talk about Occupy Wall Street | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

 

[georgephillip]

And your post had nothing to do with what we were talking about. Color me surprised.

If Frank Luntz is correct and the public is coming to see capitalism as immoral, will that make it easier or harder to install Newt or Mitt in the White House?

The piss poor failed policies and the worsening economy under Obama will help to install Mitt or Newt in the White House.

Would Newt or Mitt be more likely than Obama to prosecute the top executives of Wall Street banks for an epidemic of mortgage fraud the FBI began warning about in 2004? You should be willing to consider the possibility this "worsening economy" is failing because of structural and not cyclical reasons.

 

[SFC Ollie]

"Washington - Roughly 3,000 unemployed workers from around the country are expected in the nation's capitol next week for four days of protests with labor, religious and social justice groups that say Congress cares more about America's wealthiest 1 percent than it does the masses of struggling middle-class families."

They don't want your property, Stupid.

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

They don't know what they want, they are just like a bunch of zombie lemmings following a dimwitted pied piper, bitching about corporations while filming with SONY and CANON cameras, talking on ANDROID and APPLE phones, playing games on their APPLE iPads and drinking lattes at STARBUCKS.......... that and using MCDONALDS for their restrooms.......what a weak assed joke you hypocritical jerks are

Are you capable of understanding how someone could spend their money on a corporation's product and still expect the corporation to pay its fair share of taxes?

The three thousand unemployed Americans you call "lemmings" are crystal clear about what they want starting with an extension of federal unemployment benefits.

What's your answer to this protestor:

"'What exactly is a person is supposed to do who is simply not being hired?' she asked. 'Are we just supposed to die? Are we supposed to commit suicide? Are we supposed to starve to death homeless and on the streets..."

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

Maybe she could try applying for a job that she is qualified for? Or maybe take a job she considers beneath her station while she gets more schooling or training? I retired from the Army in 1993. I didn't look for work for a few months, I took a well earned vacation. But once I started looking I was not without a job for longer than 2 weeks. (Until I had to quite for health reasons) And yes I was way overqualified for several jobs I took. But today these people have 99 Weeks of unemployment. 2 years......... My God Man, if you cannot find a job in 2 years you really have a problem..... Unless of course the unemployment check is more than what jobs offer at the time. then you are simply a drain on the rest of us.....

Take whatever job is available, If you don't like it then work towards something better. But take the job.................

If I was able, I could go to work next week. And chances are I could pick from 5 or 6 different jobs. I don't feel one bit sorry for these young pups....

 

[georgephillip]

"Washington - Roughly 3,000 unemployed workers from around the country are expected in the nation's capitol next week for four days of protests with labor, religious and social justice groups that say Congress cares more about America's wealthiest 1 percent than it does the masses of struggling middle-class families."

They don't want your property, Stupid.

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

Seems they are playing a kindergarten came of Hotter or Colder. They were freezing on Wall Street. By going to DC, they are getting warmer. If they make it over to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, they will be burning. Therein lies the root of their problems.

"10. Always blame Washington.

"Tell them, 'You shouldn't be occupying Wall Street, you should be occupying Washington. You should occupy the White House because it's the policies over the past few years that have created this problem.'

How Republicans are being taught to talk about Occupy Wall Street | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Washington and Wall Street serve the 1%.
It doesn't matter which tools occupy the White House or Congress.
Change will come when hundreds of incumbents are FLUSHED from DC in a single news cycle.

 

[georgephillip]

They don't know what they want, they are just like a bunch of zombie lemmings following a dimwitted pied piper, bitching about corporations while filming with SONY and CANON cameras, talking on ANDROID and APPLE phones, playing games on their APPLE iPads and drinking lattes at STARBUCKS.......... that and using MCDONALDS for their restrooms.......what a weak assed joke you hypocritical jerks are

Are you capable of understanding how someone could spend their money on a corporation's product and still expect the corporation to pay its fair share of taxes?

The three thousand unemployed Americans you call "lemmings" are crystal clear about what they want starting with an extension of federal unemployment benefits.

What's your answer to this protestor:

"'What exactly is a person is supposed to do who is simply not being hired?' she asked. 'Are we just supposed to die? Are we supposed to commit suicide? Are we supposed to starve to death homeless and on the streets..."

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

Maybe she could try applying for a job that she is qualified for? Or maybe take a job she considers beneath her station while she gets more schooling or training? I retired from the Army in 1993. I didn't look for work for a few months, I took a well earned vacation. But once I started looking I was not without a job for longer than 2 weeks. (Until I had to quite for health reasons) And yes I was way overqualified for several jobs I took. But today these people have 99 Weeks of unemployment. 2 years......... My God Man, if you cannot find a job in 2 years you really have a problem..... Unless of course the unemployment check is more than what jobs offer at the time. then you are simply a drain on the rest of us.....

Take whatever job is available, If you don't like it then work towards something better. But take the job.................

If I was able, I could go to work next week. And chances are I could pick from 5 or 6 different jobs. I don't feel one bit sorry for these young pups....

I'm not sure what employment qualifications the young woman I quoted has acquired. According to the link she recently moved from Toledo to New York to improve her chances.

I didn't have much trouble finding work in '93 either, even though I doubt very much my work ethic ever matched yours. In those days any downturn in the economy was cyclical in nature. Time would take care of whatever problem caused the recession.

That may not be the case today.

American capitalism may be structurally incapable of providing enough jobs for those who need one without sacrificing investor class incomes. Apparently, the global economy functions very well for investors by selling to the richest 20% of consumers worldwide.

If that's the case, 99 months of UE benefits might not be enough for some of the 99%.

 

[Againsheila]

They don't know what they want, they are just like a bunch of zombie lemmings following a dimwitted pied piper, bitching about corporations while filming with SONY and CANON cameras, talking on ANDROID and APPLE phones, playing games on their APPLE iPads and drinking lattes at STARBUCKS.......... that and using MCDONALDS for their restrooms.......what a weak assed joke you hypocritical jerks are

Are you capable of understanding how someone could spend their money on a corporation's product and still expect the corporation to pay its fair share of taxes?

The three thousand unemployed Americans you call "lemmings" are crystal clear about what they want starting with an extension of federal unemployment benefits.

What's your answer to this protestor:

"'What exactly is a person is supposed to do who is simply not being hired?' she asked. 'Are we just supposed to die? Are we supposed to commit suicide? Are we supposed to starve to death homeless and on the streets..."

Unemployed and Liberal Groups to Hold Protests in DC | Truthout

Maybe she could try applying for a job that she is qualified for? Or maybe take a job she considers beneath her station while she gets more schooling or training? I retired from the Army in 1993. I didn't look for work for a few months, I took a well earned vacation. But once I started looking I was not without a job for longer than 2 weeks. (Until I had to quite for health reasons) And yes I was way overqualified for several jobs I took. But today these people have 99 Weeks of unemployment. 2 years......... My God Man, if you cannot find a job in 2 years you really have a problem..... Unless of course the unemployment check is more than what jobs offer at the time. then you are simply a drain on the rest of us.....

Take whatever job is available, If you don't like it then work towards something better. But take the job.................

If I was able, I could go to work next week. And chances are I could pick from 5 or 6 different jobs. I don't feel one bit sorry for these young pups....

I used to think anybody that really wanted a job could get one. Then my husband was unemployed for three years. It took me more than a year to find a job, and I was willing to take anything. I remember the first time I actually got an interview. I showed up only to have them tell me that their budget had been cut and the position was no longer available.

My friend has been unemployed for two years and she's been long everywhere, including fast food joints. They don't want to hire you when you're 50.

The job I finally did get, I worked for a year and 1/2 before it went to India.

Things are not like they used to be and if you can get a job in this economy in a reasonable amount of time, you are LUCKY!!! You should recognize that fact.

 

[Meister]

I did, of course. Your statement that he should take his blinders off was a total non sequitur having nothing to do with your earlier discussion about whether the left does the same thing (which he acknowledged but insisted there was no one of the same competence on the left doing it).

Since your talk about blinders had nothing to do with that earlier conversation, it stands by itself, and his response had everything to do with that.

lame excuse

"1. Don't say 'capitalism.'

"'I'm trying to get that word removed and we're replacing it with either "economic freedom" or "free market,"' (Frank) Luntz said. 'The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we're seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we've got a problem."

Do you think capitalism is immoral?

Are you defending Wall Street?

How Republicans are being taught to talk about Occupy Wall Street | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Dude....what I'm saying is that both the dems and the repubs do this kind of word game...it isn't a one party thing. Both parties even take polls on which words to use and not use. Try not to be so naive with your one upsmanship.

 

[Meister]

lame excuse

LOL. Since I demonstrated that I HAVE, in fact, read the posts you listed, obviously I don't NEED an excuse.

Where's yours?

The only thing you demonstrated is that "you're"(for Sheila) a buffoon.

 

[Againsheila]

lame excuse

LOL. Since I demonstrated that I HAVE, in fact, read the posts you listed, obviously I don't NEED an excuse.

Where's yours?

The only thing you demonstrated is that your a buffoon.

That would be "you're" as in "you are", I hate it when people degrade other people while showing their own stupidity.

 

[Meister]

LOL. Since I demonstrated that I HAVE, in fact, read the posts you listed, obviously I don't NEED an excuse.

Where's yours?

The only thing you demonstrated is that your a buffoon.

That would be "you're" as in "you are", I hate it when people degrade other people while showing their own stupidity.

Why hate people for that, Sheila? The guy didn't know what he was talking about with George and myself. You might want to look up the word buffoon, I was only showing what he was trying to do.

 

[Ropey]

lame excuse

LOL. Since I demonstrated that I HAVE, in fact, read the posts you listed, obviously I don't NEED an excuse.

Where's yours?

You haven't demonstrated anything that I can see and please describe your use of the term non sequitur applied to the conversation. You use it bt the qualification of totally makes as much sense as being totally pregnant versus pregnant.

I await your clarification of the non sequitur.

 

[Dragon]

The only thing you demonstrated is that "you're"(for Sheila) a buffoon.

When you don't have anything to say, it's generally best to say nothing.

Now, do you have any comment on whether "everyone" actually thinks the way you do or not?

 

[Againsheila]

The only thing you demonstrated is that your a buffoon.

That would be "you're" as in "you are", I hate it when people degrade other people while showing their own stupidity.

Why hate people for that, Sheila? The guy didn't know what he was talking about with George and myself. You might want to look up the word buffoon, I was only showing what he was trying to do.

I did not say I hate people for that, I said I hate "it", meaning the behavior, not the person. For example, if I called you stupit, I would be ashamed and embarrassed, but I wouldn't hate myself, I'd hate that I made such a stupid mistake at the worst possible time.

 

[Meister]

That would be "you're" as in "you are", I hate it when people degrade other people while showing their own stupidity.

Why hate people for that, Sheila? The guy didn't know what he was talking about with George and myself. You might want to look up the word buffoon, I was only showing what he was trying to do.

I did not say I hate people for that, I said I hate "it", meaning the behavior, not the person. For example, if I called you stupit, I would be ashamed and embarrassed, but I wouldn't hate myself, I'd hate that I made such a stupid mistake at the worst possible time.

Doesn't bother me in the least, he knows exactly what I meant, and that's what counts.

 

[Dragon]

You haven't demonstrated anything that I can see and please describe your use of the term non sequitur applied to the conversation.

Sorry you can't see it. I was accused of having not read several posts precursor to the one I quoted, and I demonstrated knowledge of what was in those posts, thus proving that I had read them.

What I mean by non sequitur is a statement presented in follow-up or refutation to something else, but that actually has nothing to do with it. The conversation between Meister and GeorgePhillip went something like this:

GP spoke of a GOP strategist using Orwellian quasi-Newspeak to change the terms of discussion and manipulate opinions.

Meister responded (in post 70) with "George, don't you think the same type of strategy isn't developed from the left?"

GP responded (in post 72) with "The left tries to do exactly the same thing. So far they haven't found anyone nearly as competent as Frank Luntz at crafting the perfect political message. If Frank honestly believes the public is coming to see capitalism as immoral, this will make it much harder to put Newt or Mitt in the White House next November."

Meister responded (in post 73) with "Please take your blinders off and look at the world the way that everyone else does."

This is the non sequitur: a response that is not a response. It has nothing to do with what was being discussed right before it.

GP's response (in post 74) with "Something tells me we are going to have trouble agreeing on "everyone." Almost everyone I know agrees with the following:"

Followed by a statement that GP is alleging that everyone he knows agrees with.

His statement has nothing to do with what was being discussed before, but it is a perfectly sound response to what Meister had immediately said, which ALSO had nothing to do with what was being discussed before.

 

[Meister]

The only thing you demonstrated is that "you're"(for Sheila) a buffoon.

When you don't have anything to say, it's generally best to say nothing.

Now, do you have any comment on whether "everyone" actually thinks the way you do or not?

You are talking about how both parties use certain words and catch phrases, and omits certain words and catch phrases, right? That's what George and I was talking about.

I think most if not all (excluding yourself, of course) think this.

 

[Ropey]

You haven't demonstrated anything that I can see and please describe your use of the term non sequitur applied to the conversation.

Sorry you can't see it. I was accused of having not read several posts precursor to the one I quoted, and I demonstrated knowledge of what was in those posts, thus proving that I had read them.

What I mean by non sequitur is a statement presented in follow-up or refutation to something else, but that actually has nothing to do with it. The conversation between Meister and GeorgePhillip went something like this:

GP spoke of a GOP strategist using Orwellian quasi-Newspeak to change the terms of discussion and manipulate opinions.

Meister responded (in post 70) with "George, don't you think the same type of strategy isn't developed from the left?"

GP responded (in post 72) with "The left tries to do exactly the same thing. So far they haven't found anyone nearly as competent as Frank Luntz at crafting the perfect political message. If Frank honestly believes the public is coming to see capitalism as immoral, this will make it much harder to put Newt or Mitt in the White House next November."

Meister responded (in post 73) with "Please take your blinders off and look at the world the way that everyone else does."

This is the non sequitur: a response that is not a response. It has nothing to do with what was being discussed right before it.

No, that does follow. It is not a non sequitur...

 

[Meister]

This is just getting to be to damn funny.