Occupy Wall Street Protesters Heckle Michelle Bachmann

By your failure to condemn both sides, I perceive that you think it's OK for the left to interrupt, but not the right. Whatever. I've already stated that I think it's wrong for either side to interrupt. How much clearer can I make it for you?

 

I think moen also sees it it degrees of politeness, huh?

 

Really?

http://news.yahoo.com/police-identify-man-shot-self-vermont-protest-212919983.html

 

That is definitely a matter of perspective!

 

If that's true then you are the exception.

 

Well I meant to these speeches and things but yeah OK. Regardless it's still the exact same methods that the tea party used. No talk of 2nd Amendment solutions either.

 

No, no "talk" of Second Amendment solutions... just utilization of such.

 

Solutions? I thought that was what the supreme court did.

 

2nd Amendment "solutions"? What does this mean?
What's next?

 

Oh forgive me. I was referring to Second Amendment Remedies. Made the post at 2:30 in the morning. In case you missed it "second amendment remedies" was a phrase used by Sharon Angle during the 2010 election season in reference to her opponent Senator Reid. And people got upset because it kinda sounded like she was saying someone should shoot him. Because she also said to "take him out". Then Sarah Palin put bull's eyes on different parts of a map indicating different people and one of those people got shot in the face. That's what I was talking about.

A gang related fight in Oakland, and an idiot with a lack of fire arms safety lessons do not indicate that violence inherit in the protest. There's a lot of people in one place for extended amounts of time. Sometimes stupid people show up and do stupid things. Other reports I've seen where people show up with guns have ended up with the protesters asking the armed person to leave and reporting him to the authorities when they didn't. I've been to some Occupy events and know a lot of people who at a lot of them right now. What I've heard and saw is a lot of people with with a genuine concern for the direction of this countries future trying to figure out how to fix it, and being really nice to each other.

 

But none of this fits the picture that the Right has painted for itself. Without violence on the part of the protesters it's rather harder to justify a police crackdown not to mention police excesses than it would be otherwise. Therefore, since in RW eyes the protestors ought to be violent, should be violent, need to be violent, they are in fact violent. And the crackdowns can proceed apace and those among the protestors who don't have them can all go out and get jobs.

 

Heck, I just base my perception on local media reports. You know what I'm talking about- sexual assaults, stabbings, drug dealing, theft, trafficking in minors- that may be petty to you but I view it as kinda serious.
By the way, the OWS/Flea Bag movement is my area has disbanded due to lack of interest. Wa Wa Waaaaaa

 

I do believe that you are trying to insinuate that that your opposition is violent. Here is some of what your side has to say about it. They are a bit more direct;

"Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. "

"Rush Limbaugh choking on his throat fat – that you know, to me, that is not a threat. I can’t, I wish I could, but I can’t reach into his throat and jiggle up his throat fat so he suffocates. I can’t do it.”

"They say it's a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like [Nazi propagandist Joseph] Goebbels. You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That's the same kind of thing."

"The Republican V.P. nom would be "gang-raped by my big black brothers" if she enters Manhattan"

 

Once again you pull the statement by someone on THIS forum in another thread to make some kind of point which fails. Show me where people in the Occupy movement have suggested these kinds of actions. I am not talking about some anonymous poster on an Internet forum, but policy statements from members of the OWS movement. The fact that moen1305 said that here is NOT a reflection of anyone but moen1305.

The OWS is a different beast and you need to realize it.

 

I really have to wonder about some of the quotes he posts and how on earth do they have anything to do with the topic at hand. I think that he keeps these little out of context quotes in a special place and keeps trotting them out regardless of whether they fit anything or not. They never do. rlm is just a joke that I ignore regularly.

 

Sure now you condemn both sides. Welcome to the party. Are you dressed as Captain Obvious?

 

And just what do Sara Palin and her bull's eyes have to do with OWS? I was talking about what you posted, not what you thought it should have said.

 

Is that what you consider a response? Glib humor? You still haven't addressed the issue I raised as to whether or not you condemn both sides. You're quick to condemn one side, but when the shoe is on the other foot it's not quite as comfortable, is it? You twist and turn more than a Celtic knot.

 

It doesn't. However, I didn't bring up Sarah Palin or bulls-eyes.

 

Humm??? The first post to mention Sarah in this thread is:

And that is exactly the thread I was talking about and to.