The PWS - Protect Wall Street movement

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

However, Atheists, the ACLU, and other groups have been instrumental in changing the landscape of what Christmas means to various people and have imprinted a certain "tolerance" for other religions. Anyway, when was the last time Islam was considered pagan? It is mainstream religion, and they even accept Jesus as a prophet.

I am not sure what beef you have with the idea of tolerance for the religions,
would a devote Christian be any less faithful if they tolerated Islam without
reservation? In case you haven't paid attention, there is a very vocal faction
in both the Christian and Islamic worlds that teach that other religions and
people are evil because of their religious affiliations. Evangelical America
constitutes a huge portion of that voice here in America, they preach
intolerance for various groups and several religions, including Islam and LDS.
This intolerance is used by people who are involved in the business of war
to drum up support for more business, AKA war, because religious institutions
have created the psychological framework to kill the evil Christians, Jew, Muslimers
etc, etc...

My point is, I don't think you have examined the reasons for promoting tolerance,
it is not always spot on, but it is not a communist plot either. Men and GOVERNMENTS
usually capitalize on the strength, zeal and intolerance of a religious state and climate,
not god.

edit on 20-11-2011 by mastahunta because: (no reason given)

I understand completely the so-called "Tolerance" thing. Let's add a baby Creche in front of all mosques now to be fair and tolerant. And demand the Creche be displayed during Ramadan

edit on 20-11-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Good, I understand the intolerance thing too. Maybe we can waterboard some Muslimics
in time square to prevent another nuclear attack on American soil! .

reply to post by mastahunta


Ok that's just really bad taste. Ruined a perfectly good moment of humor. You are the one who started a thread poking fun at people who don't go along with the collectivist Utopian nightmare called OWS with your obviously sarcastic remarks. And you are attacking me for the same approach. How ironic, but what's new?

There is no violent communist agenda.

There may be some naiive individuals down there who embrace the likes of Karl Marx, but the movement is not a communist movement.

The news is painting a dichotomy because the OWS movement is unorganized and vague.

Their message and angst is toward greed and corruption. It is possible to fight fraud, greed and corruption without instantly supporting communism. It is actually possible to understand capitalism, it's place in our history, and embrace it for what it is meant to be. One does not become a communist because he feels slighted by corporate greed and or fraud.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by mastahunta

 

Ok that's just really bad taste. Ruined a perfectly good moment of humor. You are the one who started a thread poking fun at people who don't go along with the collectivist Utopian nightmare called OWS with your obviously sarcastic remarks. And you are attacking me for the same approach. How ironic, but what's new?

I thought my use of the always funny, Muslamics was just fine myself...
You know, Christ spoke of tolerance and peace, while a huge block
of his followers preach intolerance and the need for war.

Funny thing is, I think you are a part of the collectivists group here,
you pose the exact same arguments and "logic" as every other person
who opposes OWS, while OWS is accused of not being organized
as a collective group. Further more, I think it is much more Utopian to
think that this government and financial system is going to change
by electing YET ANOTHER set of politicians, who are all,
POLITICIANS . I mean that solution is not utopian in the slightest...

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by mastahunta

 

OMG my post was done in jest in answer to the ridiculous claim that all the people who are not pro OWS must of necessity be followers of televangelists.

You and Fallen both have taken it entirely too seriously.
I am not going to continue this with either of you.

Chill already both of you.

You need a little help as you have become so confused by your own internal argument with yourself over what you were or were not doing. You keep crying that it was in jest but what did I read 3 posts full of?

So, although my post was made in half jest, it is true mostly.

The removal of the Creche is true though. I've just given you several examples.

Please it was sarcasm at best. Do you not get that? However, Atheists, the ACLU, and other groups have been instrumental in changing the landscape of what Christmas means to various people and have imprinted a certain "tolerance" for other religions.

Oh, now I get it. In jest. Oh so funny.

Get over yourself. You made up something completely ridiculous to make some point against OWS. You failed on all accounts and wasted half a page spinning your wheels screaming "IT WAS A JOKE AND I PROVED IT WAS TRUE!!!!"



You do not even seem to understand why you made this particular thing up or how it was supposed to help your case anymore. You sure do seem worked up about it though. Just stick with reality, facts, and the truth. Then your argument will not seem so loosely cobbled together from other people's thoughts. So far I have yet to see anything from you I have not already heard from Michael Savage and this Oreally fake war on Christmas crap.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by mastahunta

 

Ok that's just really bad taste. Ruined a perfectly good moment of humor. You are the one who started a thread poking fun at people who don't go along with the collectivist Utopian nightmare called OWS with your obviously sarcastic remarks. And you are attacking me for the same approach. How ironic, but what's new?

Well his sarcasm actually resembles sarcasm and does not need an essay explaining it as such to get over the lack of resemblance and his humor is funny. Those might seem like subtle differences but with regard to that last complaint, it seems to be the entire crux.

Originally posted by mastahunta

Did OWS take over your government with slow and methodical infiltration?

No, our government willingly allowed themselves to be taken over by corporate interests. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Did OWS, bribe your politicians into making laws that stripe you of your tax money?

Our government accepted the bribes. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Did OWS make turn collapsing Americas economy into a successful business plan?

Our government allowed a central bank to regulate our economy. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Did OWS destroy the vigor of your business?

Our government created restrictive regulation that retards economic growth and prosperity, yet gave corporate interests the power to kill small business. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Did OWS initiate the pain and suffering of the people in your communities?

No, our government did. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Do I have to go on?

No.

/TOA

reply to post by The Old American


You cannot be serious. It was not their fault because they were allowed to do it? My cousin was shot to death last year. I want to hear you come give this speech about how it was not the fault of the shooter but the government who deregulated guns to the point he was allowed to have one.

Originally posted by FallenWun
reply to post by The Old American

 

You cannot be serious. It was not their fault because they were allowed to do it? My cousin was shot to death last year. I want to hear you come give this speech about how it was not the fault of the shooter but the government who deregulated guns to the point he was allowed to have one.

edit on 20-11-2011 by FallenWun because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-11-2011 by FallenWun because: (no reason given)

Occupy Reading Comprehension: Join the movement! I never said it wasn't the fault of corporations, banks, or investment houses. But is it the fault of the scorpion that stings you, or the first that burns you? Sorry about your cousin; why would I argue that the shooter had no responsibility in the shooting? That would be ridiculous.

A question: do corporations, banks, or investment houses call or visit you hundreds of times a day begging for your support of this or that cause? No? Why is that, I wonder? Could it be that you're not powerful enough to give them the authority they need to work the way they want to? Our government has the power to give to Wall Street. Wall Street simply accepted it. Both were irresponsible, but if government hadn't had that much power to begin with, we might not be in this mess. But OWS isn't OWH (Occupy White House), is it? No, it's OPWMTWW (Occupy the People With the Money That We Want!) It was over-powered government that created our problems, not Wall Street

But try to explain that to anyone who believes government can fix everything, and has one hand over their eyes and the other outstretched, waiting for Mother Government to put something in it.

/TOA

/TOA

Originally posted by The Old American
No, our government willingly allowed themselves to be taken over by corporate interests. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Why are you equating OWS with the government?

For the sake of answering - Our government is MASSIVE as you know, but the idea
of stating that our government willingly allowed themselves to be taken over is
a bit like being perturbed at the liquid nature of water. What politician does not willingly
want to win an election? The process of winning an election, in these modern times
is typically predicated with accepting money to compete in the first place. The entire
nature of willingly being taken over by corporate interests is inherent in the politicians
career before the politician is even dubbed a representative of the people.

Saying NO to wall street does not work as far as I can tell. Once laws are formulated
the politicians have to decide upon how to treat Wall Street, I know that many opponents
to OWS think treating Wall Street unfairly, with unrestirictive laws is the to go, but I think
that attitude is a large part of the problem. Can you stop the behavior of a murderer by making
the job of murdering harder to prosecute on behalf of the law?

Our government accepted the bribes. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

are you putting your fingers in your ears and sticking out your tongue as you type?

How much do you want to bet that virtually everyone you voted for in the last election
took bribes, in the form of campaign contributions? Does this not mean that you are
the enabler here for voting at all?

Why don't YOU list ten (down from my previous attempt of 20) politicians who are good and
say NO to bribery.

Our government allowed a central bank to regulate our economy. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

Yes and it has been that way for nearly 100 years, are you willfully espousing Utopian whims?

When congress gets the opportunity to formulate laws, certain politicians like to liberalize the policy
towards the banks and Wall Street and those politicians are not akin to my thinking, you should
stop voting for those people if you want someone to defang Wall Street. Instead, these politicians
destroy key components to regulation that could prevent fraud and systematic failure, based upon
the centralized banking system that is currently in place.

Our government created restrictive regulation that retards economic growth and prosperity, yet gave corporate interests the power to kill small business. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

And how about the regulations that are chopped up by alleged free marketers, that are used to SPUR
economic growth, but only make the big boys stronger. Again, my liberal cohorts are not accused of
being to kind on big business, hence drill baby drill, the desire to abolish the EPA and many other things
which are championed and spear headed by... Wall Street and their holdings.

Why you even "went there" and said "retards economic growth" - I mean who is in the tank for
business here? Economic growth has sky rocketed for the corporate sector, it has not retarded.
What has retarded is the pay for the average person, that is who I wish to champion. I think if
the little guy is ok , the big guy will do even better, kind of the opposite of trickle down...

Trickle down, the idea certain ideology cites as a way to promote economic growth by helping out
the big guy, you know the same group of politicians who tear down vital regulations to help
the big guys, just like TRICKLE DOWN theory supports, so that economic growth is not retarded.

No, our government did. All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged.

They didn't survive cancer? All they had to do is just say "no"

They got mauled by a bear? All they had to do is just say "no"


All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged

Is this a code for, "Give up and pray"?

Really TOA... As I said before, I have a feeling you are afraid that examining the health of
capitalism in America means destroying it. But I assure you TOA, capitalism can not
get more messed up than it is right now, it will benefit greatly from getting off your
ancient talking points and figuring out ways be truthful about the system we are living in.
Companies and business's that are in good faith have nothing to worry about do they?
But the bad actors that fund the government, every campaign and create these corrupted
practices might need to be broken up. If you cannot see that

"All they had to do was say "no" and Wall Street would've been de-fanged"

is quasi magical and utopian in sentiment, then I am not sure if you can ever honestly evaluate
the way this system works.

Originally posted by The Old American
Occupy Reading Comprehension: Join the movement! I never said it wasn't the fault of corporations, banks, or investment houses.

My reading comprehension is just fine thanks. Your writing my need a tweak because I can still see your post and it still says what I thought it said the first time. The government is the problem for ALLOWING thigns to happen. Tell me you did not just post that.

But is it the fault of the scorpion that stings you, or the first that burns you? Sorry about your cousin; why would I argue that the shooter had no responsibility in the shooting? That would be ridiculous.

I would not argue that. That is the line of reasoning you presented.

A question: do corporations, banks, or investment houses call or visit you hundreds of times a day begging for your support of this or that cause? No? Why is that, I wonder? Could it be that you're not powerful enough to give them the authority they need to work the way they want to? Our government has the power to give to Wall Street. Wall Street simply accepted it. Both were irresponsible, but if government hadn't had that much power to begin with, we might not be in this mess. But OWS isn't OWH (Occupy White House), is it? No, it's OPWMTWW (Occupy the People With the Money That We Want!) It was over-powered government that created our problems, not Wall Street

OH, you have no clue who you are upset with or why. Got it.

But try to explain that to anyone who believes government can fix everything, and has one hand over their eyes and the other outstretched, waiting for Mother Government to put something in it.

/TOA

/TOA

No one is stopping you from moving to Somalia where government will get totally out of your way. Sitting in the US and bitching about the US having a government is just stupid.

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by FallenWun
reply to post by The Old American

 

Occupy Reading Comprehension: Join the movement! I never said it wasn't the fault of corporations, banks, or investment houses. But is it the fault of the scorpion that stings you, or the first that burns you? Sorry about your cousin; why would I argue that the shooter had no responsibility in the shooting? That would be ridiculous.

Dang, you going after fallen's skill surrounding the English language, in any capacity, is pretty bold I
must say... You entire last response to me was ridiculous sorry to say, it might have felt
good, but it was about as practical as a water raft made out of solid gold. Blaming everything
on the government, when you know they are already "scorpions" sure does a lot to solve things a?

A question: do corporations, banks, or investment houses call or visit you hundreds of times a day begging for your support of this or that cause? No? Why is that, I wonder? Could it be that you're not powerful enough to give them the authority they need to work the way they want to?

Could it be the same if you use
the same premise on lobbying congress, huh? How can you trickle down prosperity and un-retard
economic growth if you are not able to employ massive amount of people? So what is the point
of your opinion? Or mine? by your measure politicians should not care about what we think.
Maybe PWS actually thinks that money should be the main dictatorial force in life, that would
help make sense of the entire aversion to OWS.

Our government has the power to give to Wall Street. Wall Street simply accepted it. Both were irresponsible, but if government hadn't had that much power to begin with, we might not be in this mess.

OK??? So if you get bit by a scorpion, are you going to sit around damming the lord swet baby Jesus for
bestowing the stinger on the scorpion, or are you going to take action?

But OWS isn't OWH (Occupy White House), is it? No, it's OPWMTWW (Occupy the People With the Money That We Want!) It was over-powered government that created our problems, not Wall Street

Protect Wall Street, alive and well! Please tell me how this logic works... if you respond to any of this

How will Wall Street behave better, if they are able to create their own laws and policies?
You talked about retarded growth earlier too, so which is it???

More growth or responsible policy that might lead to less growth?

Wall street lobbied for many of the policies that the government enacted, but guess what?
the people that agree to these policies usually are concerned about retarded growth... I am
just saying, it is like you are damning your own ideas and in that not really caring about
ethics or responsibility that Wall Street has in their position. I guess in your world, murders are
irresponsible because the government didn't throw them in a cage after they were born...

But try to explain that to anyone who believes government can fix everything, and has one hand over their eyes and the other outstretched, waiting for Mother Government to put something in it.

This last line is just dumb, this is your leathery hide talking, not the intelligent human being you are.
Funny thing is you are talking about Wall Street, always has a hand outstretched and a bottle of
special oil in the other... Guess who meets more with mother government, OWS or Wall Street?

edit on 20-11-2011 by mastahunta because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-11-2011 by mastahunta because: (no reason given)

I am noticing something here. The PWS croud keeps offering "advice" to go protest in DC instead of wall street because that is where the real criminals are who took bribes and changed rules to allow the people that offered the bribes to do things that had been illegal for a reason and remained unethical for same. So...why do they keep trying to "help out" with this advice?
Well aside from the fact that there are protests in DC for a moment, I am looking at the reactions.

Politicians Mostly being quiet. On the right, they appear to view this as a leftist movement and thus supporting Democrats and therefor condemn it out of hand if they speak up at all. On the left, they are mostly afraid to touch it because they have no real idea how it is going to play out for their political careers and that is all any of them are concerned about.
-Quiet political calculation.Fear. Lack of stance.

Wall StreetBalcony champagne toasts to the protestors. Spreading a letter threatening to take away the measly menial necessary jobs the protesters have if they don't stop this "class war" before it reaches its inevitable conclusion...apparently. Taking the time and money to drop thousands of McDonald's applications on the crowds.
-blatant mockery and disdain. No expression of innocence or confusion over the protest. Threatening and condescending mockery.

As a simple character study, who do I want to side with?
Well neither.
OK, who would I want to target more or as a priority?
The pricks sipping champagne and laughing while another bank fraudulently forecloses on yet another house it will later turn out to not have owned after the damage is long done due to the bundling schemes made up and profited off of by the asshats sipping the champagne or the politicians being politicians, no different than the candidates running to replace them?

I see what the TEA party bragged about doing to Washington in the 2010 elections. I also see how quiet they have been since when it comes to bragging about what change that has made in the way politicians in Washington act.

But the people that made exorbitant salaries and bonuses while enjoying tax breaks on a great deal of their income because they found a way to actually just screw regular folks out of their money through a system of borderline legal machinations. Turns out, a lot of them were not legal at all and it also turns out that after you lose your house and months later a court decides you should not have, it does not magically repair the damage done to a family that lost their home and spent a great deal of money trying to pay fees they had no business paying just to have it stolen from them. Fraud paid for that champagne and they used it to laugh regular people who pay all their taxes.

They need to keep their advice to themselves. Their are protests in DC. That is not the only roach in town and right now it is bought and sold by a different roach that needs to be put in its place.

As many have tried to say, it is not the fault of Wall Street, it was just doing what it was allowed to do; no regard being given to the fact that they paid good money to make it so that they were allowed to. So by that defense so rabidly given by the PWS crowd then they must clearly understand that is Washington is not going to put them in their place, someone else needs to. I think the people they are mocking instead of buying off might be better off doing it than any politician.

Protect wall street is still alive and kicking,

...anything and everything to keep from examining the role of obscene
wealth and political influence in our country. Ayn Rand and Ronald
Reagan's gift that keeps on giving, fairy tales to incite guilt upon
wanna be, billionaire piss carriers.