99% of What? Apparently 99% of all the Morons!

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
What say you "OWS"? Does this so called "Americanist" speak for you? Is this what your movement is all about? Will you "trashtalk" those you don't agree with by calling them "trashtalkers" or will you consider engaging in meaningful conversation. Last night, some of you at the very beginning were there and ready for that meaningful conversation, but so far today, your movement has deferred to "Americanist" allowing this person to do your talking for you. Should your silence be construed as approval of his rhetoric? Is that what you stand for?

I have roughly 15k views and four years of going back to this type movement. I not only called the Middle East uprising, but to everyone's benefit... Set forth a solid plan. Rhetoric is what you spew... Solutions are more my calling.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Will you "trashtalk" those you don't agree with by calling them "trashtalkers" or will you consider engaging in meaningful conversation.

Wow!...................JPZ, usually I concur with your sentiments, but your above statement, coupled with your OP,

"99% of What? Apparently 99% of all the Morons!," surely suggests an introduction is needed......................

Pot meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot.

Parker
MTUBY

reply to post by ParkerCramer


If that "Declaration" I linked of which I am calling moronic is a part of the OWS movement, then why was it so important for people in this movement to distance themselves from it?

Originally posted by ParkerCramer

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Will you "trashtalk" those you don't agree with by calling them "trashtalkers" or will you consider engaging in meaningful conversation.

Wow!...................JPZ, usually I concur with your sentiments, but your above statement, coupled with your OP,

"99% of What? Apparently 99% of all the Morons!," surely suggests an introduction is needed......................

Pot meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot.

Parker
MTUBY

JPZ makes Fox News look good...

reply to post by Americanist

JPZ makes Fox News look good...

Uh-huh. Coming from the man who has accused me of being a "fanatical labeler" and "hypocrite".

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by ParkerCramer

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Will you "trashtalk" those you don't agree with by calling them "trashtalkers" or will you consider engaging in meaningful conversation.

Wow!...................JPZ, usually I concur with your sentiments, but your above statement, coupled with your OP,

"99% of What? Apparently 99% of all the Morons!," surely suggests an introduction is needed......................

Pot meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot.

Parker
MTUBY

JPZ makes Fox News look good...

I would never make that comparison..................I posted because of the irony..........as I stated I usually find JPZ to be tough, but, fair.

Parker
MTUBY

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by ParkerCramer

 

If that "Declaration" I linked of which I am calling moronic is not a part of the OWS movement, then why was it so important for people in this movement to distance themselves from it?

Now, now JPZ.....................I never asked for an explanation of your reasoning for the OP................I simply pointed out the hypocrisy...........................my belief is still (in reference to your OP and your statement) "He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones"

Parker
MTUBY

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Americanist

 

Now with multi-national corporations the question becomes: Could money feasibly pour in from around the World?

Anyone who has ever bothered to take the time to read the United Citizen's ruling would know full well that the SCOTUS told Congress had they limited their legislation to foreign corporations they would not have struck it down.

Now, why doesn't the media want you to know that, I wonder? More importantly, why are politicians - including Obama - clamoring for some sort of Amendment or rebuke of the SCOTUS decision instead of just taking their advice and drafting legislation that limits what a foreign corporation can do politically in this country?

They're paid to play too... It's one big circle jerk with the highest bidder supplying lotion and the lowest bidder the tissues.

And the citizens eat the cookie...

I'm on fire.

And as to this thread. Protests and voting don't do anything, so whatever.

reply to post by ParkerCramer

Now, now JPZ.....................I never asked for an explanation of your reasoning for the OP................I simply pointed out the hypocrisy...........................my belief is still (in reference to your OP and your statement) "He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones"

Long before I created this thread, and as that so called "Americanist" has pointed out, I was speaking my mind in other threads regarding this movement. I didn't just jump in and start name calling, though I was, as you point out "tough" on the protestors. Because I was "tough" the name calling volley began. It is part and parcel of political debate these days it seems.

I stand my ground on this "Declaration of the 99%" and will emphatically insist it is moronic.

You take one single sentence I have written to point to hypocrisy, without answering the question I posed in that paragraph that contained that sentence.

All this "trashtalking" is way beyond hypocrisy at this point, and far to pointless to untangle who was hypocritical first about name calling, but let's make one thing perfectly clear here, when you accuse me of hypocrisy: Your accusation is regarding name calling and nothing more. When it comes to the fierce and adamant defense of unalienable rights for all people, not you, nor anyone else in this site can ever reasonably call me a hypocrite.

When people use "movements" such as this to push forth agendas that are clearly anti-rights, I get worse than "tough", I get mean about it, and I make no apologies for it.

I stuck my foot in my mouth the very moment I pressed enter before even typing one single word of an O.P., I owned up to that. I didn't take any opportunity to trash the thread and start anew, I accepted responsibility for the irony of my mistake. I have nothing to apologize for. I have nothing to shy away from. That "Declaration of the 99%" was moronic!

Those who believe themselves to be a part of this so called "99%" can either embrace that "Declaration" and defend it, or not and even distance themselves from it. Some have entered into this thread and defended it, or at least parts of it, and I have attempted to reply to as many of those as I can, not by name calling, not by belittling them, but by presenting my case. I refuse to hang my head in shame for this.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by ParkerCramer

 

Now, now JPZ.....................I never asked for an explanation of your reasoning for the OP................I simply pointed out the hypocrisy...........................my belief is still (in reference to your OP and your statement) "He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones"

Long before I created this thread, and as that so called "Americanist" has pointed out, I was speaking my mind in other threads regarding this movement. I didn't just jump in and start name calling, though I was, as you point out "tough" on the protestors. Because I was "tough" the name calling volley began. It is part and parcel of political debate these days it seems.

I stand my ground on this "Declaration of the 99%" and will emphatically insist it is moronic.

You take one single sentence I have written to point to hypocrisy, without answering the question I posed in that paragraph that contained that sentence.

All this "trashtalking" is way beyond hypocrisy at this point, and far to pointless to untangle who was hypocritical first about name calling, but let's make one thing perfectly clear here, when you accuse me of hypocrisy: Your accusation is regarding name calling and nothing more. When it comes to the fierce and adamant defense of unalienable rights for all people, not you, nor anyone else in this site can ever reasonably call me a hypocrite.

When people use "movements" such as this to push forth agendas that are clearly anti-rights, I get worse than "tough", I get mean about it, and I make no apologies for it.

I stuck my foot in my mouth the very moment I pressed enter before even typing one single word of an O.P., I owned up to that. I didn't take any opportunity to trash the thread and start anew, I accepted responsibility for the irony of my mistake. I have nothing to apologize for. I have nothing to shy away from. That "Declaration of the 99%" was moronic!

Those who believe themselves to be a part of this so called "99%" can either embrace that "Declaration" and defend it, or not and even distance themselves from it. Some have entered into this thread and defended it, or at least parts of it, and I have attempted to reply to as many of those as I can, not by name calling, not by belittling them, but by presenting my case. I refuse to hang my head in shame for this.

well put JPZ...................I do not believe that I ever insinuated that you should "Hang your head in shame"..........

in your statement "people using this movement to push forth agendas that are clearly anti-rights."

could you please help me to understand how any of the actual protesters, on site, the ones you refer to as morons, not the celebrities, not the politicians, not the info wars specialists............the ones in the trenches..how are they pushing any anti-rights agenda???

could it not be said of you, being anti-rights because, you are calling them morons for at least attempting to address their grievances??................perhaps its not the way that you would do it, but, that still does not make it wrong, nor does it make it anti-rights, and it certainly does not in my opinion make them morons.

Parker
MTUBY

reply to post by ParkerCramer

in your statement "people using this movement to push forth agendas that are clearly anti-rights."

could you please help me to understand how any of the actual protesters, on site, the ones you refer to as morons, not the celebrities, not the politicians, not the info wars specialists............the ones in the trenches..how are they pushing any anti-rights agenda???

First, I have not called any "on site" member who claims to be a part of "OWS" morons. I am willing to take part of the responsibility for your confusion on this issue, given my opening mistake. However, what I have done with the title of this O.P. is to define and narrow the so called "99%" down to a moronic few who are presenting that "Declaration of the 99%" as their agenda. Those who wrote this "Declaration" are morons and have no understanding of our Constitutional government, and far too little regard for unalienable rights.

For those who disagree with my assessment of this "Declaration" and wish to count themselves as part of that "99%", but want to take offense at my accusation, I can only respond: If the shoe fits....

The biggest problem with this so called "OWS" movement is that no one is willing to own up to any other protestors claims. If some say that this movement is about making the "1%" pay their fair share in taxes, and I step in and argue that no one should be paying income taxes and that they are odious and un-American, then invariably someone chimes in and claims that the movement is not about taxing the rich, and will counter that it is about holding corporatism accountable for their malfeasance. In this very thread I spoke to that argument and made my own case that if they want to reign in corporatism it would be a good idea to "occupy" Delaware, a state responsible for incorporating more multinational corporations than any other state, and a state completely and totally unwilling to even consider charter revocation for any malfeasance, and someone chimes in (and if you've read this thread all the way through you know this) and dismisses such a suggestion for an answer as untenable, insisting that just "occupying" to "raise awareness" is all that is needed.

How do you even engage with such disingenuous? Is this not a part of the strategy of this so called "unorganized organized movement"? To claim responsibility for nothing, and shout and blame and shout and blame as if this is blunt weapon to destroy your opponents with?

could it not be said of you, being anti-rights because, you are calling them morons for at least attempting to address their grievances??................perhaps its not the way that you would do it, but, that still does not make it wrong, nor does it make it anti-rights, and it certainly does not in my opinion make them morons.

Hell, Parker, it has been said of me. It isn't true, but why let truth get in the way of zealous rhetoric, right? Perhaps you are merely playing devils advocate, and do not truly believe I am anti-rights simply because I called the authors of this "Declaration of the 99%" morons, but just in case, consider this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And then suggest that I am being "anti-rights", simply because you are uncomfortable with me reducing the number of 99% down to morons instead of the clear implication this movement is relying upon, which would be 99% of the population.

Take note in one of those threads how the O.P. accuses me of being an "anarchist" and even believes that I am a part of this so called "movement" simply because I stood up for the rule of law and the right to peaceably assemble. I have been accused of being an "anarchist" a "fat cat Republican" a "corporatist" and all other sorts of name calling. If you genuinely believe I am anti-rights simply because I exercised my own right to speak freely, then pray tell what do you believe rights are?

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


You seem to think it matters if the corporations are foreign or not.

Since when has moneyed interest of any sort had what is best for the average citizen in mind?

Originally posted by megabytz
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

You seem to think it matters if the corporations are foreign or not.

Since when has moneyed interest of any sort had what is best for the average citizen in mind?

Clarify what you mean by "moneyed interest" and how this somehow as no relation to the "average citizen". Further, do you believe that only "citizens" matter? Are only "citizens" "allowed" rights?

Even further, you are ascribing my assessment of the Citizen's United ruling as being my own ruling. All I said was that the Supreme Court noted that had Congress limited their legislation to foreign corporations the case never would have been an issue.

Personally, I find their notation on this matter somewhat disturbing and a bit disingenuous regarding The First Amendment. My stance has always been, and remains so, that all people everywhere are endowed with certain unalienable rights. The First Amendment has made no distinction as to who these rights belong to other than "people". The First Amendments distinction is in that Congress has no authority to deny or disparage these rights.

However, I pointed out the what the SCOTUS noted regarding foreign corporations in reply to the question specifically about foreign corporations, and that the Supreme Court had considered this and spoke to it.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
What say you "OWS"? Does this so called "Americanist" speak for you? Is this what your movement is all about? Will you "trashtalk" those you don't agree with by calling them "trashtalkers" or will you consider engaging in meaningful conversation. Last night, some of you at the very beginning were there and ready for that meaningful conversation, but so far today, your movement has deferred to "Americanist" allowing this person to do your talking for you. Should your silence be construed as approval of his rhetoric? Is that what you stand for?

You would do well to mind your manners friend... Reveloutions have been started and governments toppled over smaller issues than those which OWS are bringing forward. America is crumbling from internal social decay. The American economy is a beached whale and it will not be rescued and refloated any time soon. The people are ready to cause political and social reform. They are screaming for it. No longer will the working man be subjugated by corperate 'Fat Cats' who are only interested in one two things. Money and Power. No matter the cost to any one else. The collapse of the worlds financial institutions is proof of that.
We have recently seen reveloution around the world and particularly in the middle east. Perhaps it is time for the American underclass to rise up and say NO! This is not okay.
Why should my hard earned tax money goto bail out the very people and corperation that caused the recession in the first place?

HOW IS THAT FAIR?

It's not.

reply to post by hudsonhawk69

You would do well to mind your manners friend...

Why should I mind my manners when I have so many "friends" intent on minding them for me?

The people are ready to cause political and social reform. They are screaming for it. No longer will the working man be subjugated by corperate 'Fat Cats' who are only interested in one two things.

Exactly! There are people "screaming" for "social and political reform" as in looking to the very institutions that have betrayed them to somehow usher in this "reform". Scream all you want, other than noise pollution what do you expect to accomplish?

If you have been "subjugated" by a corporation, you willingly surrendered to that subjugation. No one has forced you to work for any corporation, although corporations have certainly endeavored to close a market system to ensure that few can compete in it, but here is the deal with that: There are very few legitimate reasons government can demand you obtain a license to do business. If you are, say for example, transferring toxic materials on public highways, the state then has a compelling interest in demanding licensing obligations. If you are, say for example, a book seller, then why would you need permission from the state to do this? Yet, most book sellers acquiesce and apply for a business license anyway. Most of those people do not even think to challenge the assertion that before they can be granted this license they must first obtain a federal "tax ID number", and just go along with it. This is the problem, and that problem was created by the foolish acquiescence of people.

As long as people are willing to go along with all these licensing schemes, (brought about by screams for "social and political reform"), your bold assertion that the "people will no longer be subjugated" is just more empty rhetoric. It may make you feel better to pound your chest and howl at the moon, but it will not make that moon whimper and scurry away.

Perhaps it is time for the American underclass to rise up and say NO!

Perhaps it is time for American's to stop classing people. If you identify so much with an "underclass" this is your problem. Me? I am not really sure how I will eat tomorrow and the rest of the week, but I certainly will not go into agreement that my struggles make me a part of some pathetic "underclass". I will endeavor to persevere, and just like the poorest amongst us, will keep working to develop my own wealth and my rightful place as one of the holders of the inherent political power in this country. Money and power is not limited to some "upperclass" and rich or poor, most seek it.

This is not okay. Why should my hard earned tax money goto bail out the very people and corperation that caused the recession in the first place?

Why should you, I, or anyone else be paying income tax at all? If we weren't, do you not understand how this would make "bail outs" difficult for government? The income tax scheme has been used as a justification for wealth redistribution and as long as it was a redistribution from the rich down to the poor, many supported it, now that it has worked in the opposite direction, those who support this income tax are now angry. Not because they see that plunder is wrong. No sir, most are fine with plundering, just as long as it is "them" that is being plundered and not "us".

If the so called 99% were actually that, and all refused to pay this odious income tax, now that would be a revolution! Think that will ever happen? Not as long as plunder is glorified as it is.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

If the so called 99% were actually that, and all refused to pay this odious income tax, now that would be a revolution! Think that will ever happen? Not as long as plunder is glorified as it is.

So why are you not a socialist or communist then? Why do you lean right? You do realise capitalism infers private ownership of the means of production, including the issuance of currency?

This is were european socialism took a wrong turn (knowningly by the elite) and brought us the concept of borrowing from a private central bank or other private business to cover for a defecit in collected funds. Money has to come from somewhere regardless if it is a fiat currency or fixed to some valuabe item and there needs to be a balance of money coming in versus money going out. If a nation is flooded with currency due to government injecting too much money into the economy we get inflation.

So we stop paying income taxes, then what? I am all ears, I just hope you have a smart answer and not "I want anarchy".

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

So we stop paying income taxes, then what? I am all ears, I just hope you have a smart answer and not "I want anarchy".

Eliminating the so called "income tax" is just part of what needs to be done. Putting an end to credentialism is yet another. Insisting that Congress only regulate interstate commerce in the way it was intended to be regulated, which is by preventing the states from undermining each other in terms of commerce and nothing more.

I find it tragic that whenever someone advocates the end of income taxation, someone soon comes along and claims that anarchy would follow, as if the first 140 years of this grand American Experiment were rooted in anarchy. The income tax was not even implemented (with the exception of a limited income tax imposed during the civil war and repealed once debts were paid) until 1913. The U.S. was nothing near anarchy prior to 1913.

Even more absurd is the argument that "socialism" or "communism" is equated with no income taxes. I am not clear how you think all that "socialism" or "communism" gets paid for without it, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Perhaps it is time for American's to stop classing people. If you identify so much with an "underclass" this is your problem. Me? I am not really sure how I will eat tomorrow and the rest of the week, but I certainly will not go into agreement that my struggles make me a part of some pathetic "underclass". I will endeavor to persevere, and just like the poorest amongst us, will keep working to develop my own wealth and my rightful place as one of the holders of the inherent political power in this country. Money and power is not limited to some "upperclass" and rich or poor, most seek it.

Because your fantasy is not reality. That is why! Knowledge and power have always commanded more respect and money than hard work alone. It has always been this way since the begining but the gap and perceived limits between the various social classes changes.

Why should you, I, or anyone else be paying income tax at all? If we weren't, do you not understand how this would make "bail outs" difficult for government? The income tax scheme has been used as a justification for wealth redistribution and as long as it was a redistribution from the rich down to the poor, many supported it, now that it has worked in the opposite direction, those who support this income tax are now angry. Not because they see that plunder is wrong. No sir, most are fine with plundering, just as long as it is "them" that is being plundered and not "us".

If the so called 99% were actually that, and all refused to pay this odious income tax, now that would be a revolution! Think that will ever happen? Not as long as plunder is glorified as it is.

It seems you do not understand what plunder is if you are foolish enough to make that paragraph.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by hudsonhawk69

 

Why should I mind my manners when I have so many "friends" intent on minding them for me?

And I imagine that with your large mouth and sizeable ego that you need every one of your friends to "mind" you

Exactly! There are people "screaming" for "social and political reform" as in looking to the very institutions that have betrayed them to somehow usher in this "reform". Scream all you want, other than noise pollution what do you expect to accomplish?

I'm willing to be wrong but screaming on the streets of Libya started a facinating chain of events... You would have seen it on the news if only you could have had your head removed from so far up your own rectum

If you have been "subjugated" by a corporation, you willingly surrendered to that subjugation. No one has forced you to work for any corporation, although corporations have certainly endeavored to close a market system to ensure that few can compete in it, but here is the deal with that: There are very few legitimate reasons government can demand you obtain a license to do business. If you are, say for example, transferring toxic materials on public highways, the state then has a compelling interest in demanding licensing obligations. If you are, say for example, a book seller, then why would you need permission from the state to do this? Yet, most book sellers acquiesce and apply for a business license anyway. Most of those people do not even think to challenge the assertion that before they can be granted this license they must first obtain a federal "tax ID number", and just go along with it. This is the problem, and that problem was created by the foolish acquiescence of people.

As long as people are willing to go along with all these licensing schemes, (brought about by screams for "social and political reform"), your bold assertion that the "people will no longer be subjugated" is just more empty rhetoric. It may make you feel better to pound your chest and howl at the moon, but it will not make that moon whimper and scurry away.

Live and let die you say? fair comment I concede that I cannot argue with you there... The stupid should die

It strengthens the gene pool.

Perhaps it is time for American's to stop classing people. If you identify so much with an "underclass" this is your problem. Me? I am not really sure how I will eat tomorrow and the rest of the week, but I certainly will not go into agreement that my struggles make me a part of some pathetic "underclass". I will endeavor to persevere, and just like the poorest amongst us, will keep working to develop my own wealth and my rightful place as one of the holders of the inherent political power in this country. Money and power is not limited to some "upperclass" and rich or poor, most seek it.

Yes... And when I no longer live in a classest society I will stop using the phrase. If you do not identify with the down trodden that good for you.

Let's face it... You really are better than the rest of us.

Why should you, I, or anyone else be paying income tax at all? If we weren't, do you not understand how this would make "bail outs" difficult for government? The income tax scheme has been used as a justification for wealth redistribution and as long as it was a redistribution from the rich down to the poor, many supported it, now that it has worked in the opposite direction, those who support this income tax are now angry. Not because they see that plunder is wrong. No sir, most are fine with plundering, just as long as it is "them" that is being plundered and not "us".

If the so called 99% were actually that, and all refused to pay this odious income tax, now that would be a revolution! Think that will ever happen? Not as long as plunder is glorified as it is.

OH... MY MISTAKE. Clearly we should continue to support a finanical system that almost brought about global economic colapse.

And I agree. 'bail outs' are necessary but that in no way makes them fair. I do apologise but I don't recall a single instance when the wealthys money was redistributed 'down' to the poor. I do not wish to 'plunder' the wealth of corperate america but perhaps we could start with a little accountability?

So in finishing. I don't know who you are but clearly you are filled with your own self importance. When you are finished plundering your bottom please feel free to rejoin us here for an intelligent conversation.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Eliminating the so called "income tax" is just part of what needs to be done. Putting an end to credentialism is yet another. Insisting that Congress only regulate interstate commerce in the way it was intended to be regulated, which is by preventing the states from undermining each other in terms of commerce and nothing more.

But we live in a global capitalist enviroment and all the means of production are in PRIVATE HANDS! We do not live in the 18th century anymore with a very basic sub-existance.

I find it tragic that whenever someone advocates the end of income taxation, someone soon comes along and claims that anarchy would follow, as if the first 140 years of this grand American Experiment were rooted in anarchy. The income tax was not even implemented (with the exception of a limited income tax imposed during the civil war and repealed once debts were paid) until 1913. The U.S. was nothing near anarchy prior to 1913.

Yes we had the gold standard and the money was issued by the government directly, thus currency was public!

Even more absurd is the argument that "socialism" or "communism" is equated with no income taxes. I am not clear how you think all that "socialism" or "communism" gets paid for without it, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

If the money belongs to the public, via the government who is our caretaker, then taxes are minimal. Isn't that why people want to abolish the FED and dump the money into the treasury. I am not sure you know as much as you think you know.