IDBillzFan Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 One of the comments said "reminds me of kindergarten" That pretty much sums it up. Man, the only thing missing from that video was a chick crying about a dying tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 I only saw the beginning of that but why the hell are they repeating everything the idiot with the bullhorn says?? Because they're sheeple One of the comments said "reminds me of kindergarten" That pretty much sums it up. I liked the one where the only difference between that rally and Animal Farm was a farm They don't have Koch bought sound systems Baaah Baaaah Baaaah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Yes.period. I'm a business owner, I know first hand. Really, is your business worth $141 million because mine is. Spare me the lecture...thanks. For clarification though, I'm not talking about regulation of small businesses. I'm specifically referring to the regulation of Wall Street. People don't invest their retirement portfolios in your business so if you go belly up no one other than you or your family gives a ****. When the general public has a vested interest in your success or failure than you should be required to act in a manner that's financially sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picnic Table F'er Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 If the Tea Party does not join OWS, it is more evidence their movement was based purely on racism. They claimed the Tea Party was anger at bailouts and out of control spending. If that was true, they would join OWS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 How would you classify the Community Reinvestment Act and its subsequent modification? Regulation or deregulation? The problem with words like "regulation" is that they tend to be used to broad brush everything. I don't consider the CRA to be either, it's more of an intrusion into private sector business that the government doesn't belong it. The CRA is a shining example of what happens when the government oversteps their bounds. The government shouldn't be in the mortgage business. If you don't qualify for a loan then you don't get one, you shouldn't be given a house just because your poor or lazy. For almost 100 years banks worked like they were supposed to. That changed with Reagan and Larry Summers. Deregulation has allowed a borderline criminal, incestuous relationship between the government, Wall Street, Investment banks, traders etc. Business has got to have a "regulatory" body that insures that they comply with the law and engage in sound financial practices. The "meltdown" is evidence of what happens when the kids are allowed to run the kindergarten class. History has not shown that capitalism is capable of self regulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 (edited) Really, is your business worth $141 million because mine is. Spare me the lecture...thanks. For clarification though, I'm not talking about regulation of small businesses. I'm specifically referring to the regulation of Wall Street. People don't invest their retirement portfolios in your business so if you go belly up no one other than you or your family gives a ****. When the general public has a vested interest in your success or failure than you should be required to act in a manner that's financially sound. So the general population only has a vested interest in the success of publicly traded companies? Edited October 9, 2011 by Chef Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 If the Tea Party does not join OWS, it is more evidence their movement was based purely on racism. They claimed the Tea Party was anger at bailouts and out of control spending. If that was true, they would join OWS. The idiots are really coming out of the woodwork. Lets review: Tea Party - Wants less government in business. Less (or at least no more) taxes, less government [particularly social] spending. OWS - Wants more government control of business. Wants more taxes [on who they determine is rich], more goverment [particularly social] spending. But thanks for stopping by and talking out of your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 The idiots are really coming out of the woodwork. Lets review: Tea Party - Wants less government in business. Less (or at least no more) taxes, less government [particularly social] spending. OWS - Wants more government control of business. Wants more taxes [on who they determine is rich], more goverment [particularly social] spending. But thanks for stopping by and talking out of your ass. Care to address my last post to you? You know, where you called me out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Care to address my last post to you? You know, where you called me out? Refresh my memory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 The problem with words like "regulation" is that they tend to be used to broad brush everything. I don't consider the CRA to be either, it's more of an intrusion into private sector business that the government doesn't belong it. The CRA is a shining example of what happens when the government oversteps their bounds. The government shouldn't be in the mortgage business. If you don't qualify for a loan then you don't get one, you shouldn't be given a house just because your poor or lazy. For almost 100 years banks worked like they were supposed to. That changed with Reagan and Larry Summers. Deregulation has allowed a borderline criminal, incestuous relationship between the government, Wall Street, Investment banks, traders etc. Business has got to have a "regulatory" body that insures that they comply with the law and engage in sound financial practices. The "meltdown" is evidence of what happens when the kids are allowed to run the kindergarten class. History has not shown that capitalism is capable of self regulation. You can call the CRA an "intrusion" but I say it is regulation that artificially changed the natural order of things. Not everyone can be a homeowner and pay for it themselves. So this was bad regulation championed by Carter and double-downed on by Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 I only saw the beginning of that but why the hell are they repeating everything the idiot with the bullhorn says?? Because they are all free thinkers and celebrate individuality! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 If the Tea Party does not join OWS, it is more evidence their movement was based purely on racism. They claimed the Tea Party was anger at bailouts and out of control spending. If that was true, they would join OWS. You realize Herman Cain popularity is from those racist tea partiers right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 So the general population only has a vested interest in the success of publicly traded companies? Here trying reading this. it's a bit dated but it the philosophy is sound: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2008/oct/20/00006/ You can call the CRA an "intrusion" but I say it is regulation that artificially changed the natural order of things. Not everyone can be a homeowner and pay for it themselves. So this was bad regulation championed by Carter and double-downed on by Clinton. I don't disagree. The CRA combined with the deregulation policies of Reagan, Bush and more importantly Larry Summers set all of us up for the perfect storm. When there's no accountability, greed becomes the master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) They don't have Koch bought sound systems No, but they do have ones from Soros (I suppose a shallow statement deserves a shallow comeback) If the Tea Party does not join OWS, it is more evidence their movement was based purely on racism. They claimed the Tea Party was anger at bailouts and out of control spending. If that was true, they would join OWS. On a serious note, I see the media is desperately trying to find their version of the tea party left. I say, give them ALOT of air time, give them what they want. Middle of the road people may share some of the frustrations against Wall Street, but they don't identify themselves with the people who are the face of this movement. Much like the massive protests of the 60's and early 70's, many people were againt the VietNam War, but they didnt like the protesters themselves and Nixon went on to win his election by a large margin. Edited October 10, 2011 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 On a serious note, I see the media is desperately trying to find their version of the tea party left. I say, give them ALOT of air time, give them what they want. Middle of the road people may share some of the frustrations against Wall Street, but they don't identify themselves with the people who are the face of this movement. Much like the massive protests of the 60's and early 70's, many people were againt the VietNam War, but they didnt like the protesters themselves and Nixon went on to win his election by a large margin. That brings up and interesting question. The Tea Party was dramatically changed due to the intrusion of the far right. I'm sure the OWS movement will be changed due to the far left. Is it possible to have an independent political movement anymore without the big 2 parties trying to adopt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 The disparity in news coverage is staggering. The Tea party protests were mostly average rank and file middle aged suburbanite Republicans whose only objective was to show their numbers and state their grievances. They've alway been looked at skeptically through the eyes of the media as extremists and racists, despite a shocking lack of violence, disruption, or "hate speech" growing out of any of their protests. OWS, on the other hand, is comprised of actual extremists who are admittedly anti-capitalist, and are actively seeking to physically impose their will such as to disrupt the ability of others to conduct business, and they're treated like well-intentioned protesters, peacably assembling to state common sense grievances, who are maybe a little eccentric (said with a big smile). Times like this make it excrutiatingly clear just how skewed to the left most major media is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Because they are all free thinkers and celebrate individuality! Because they are all free thinkers and celebrate individuality! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Because they are all free thinkers and celebrate individuality! Reminds me of an old Steve Martin routine where he had the entire audience recite his Non-Conformists Pledge. I promise to be different! I promise to be unique! I promise not to repeat things other people say! Edited October 10, 2011 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 The disparity in news coverage is staggering. The Tea party protests were mostly average rank and file middle aged suburbanite Republicans whose only objective was to show their numbers and state their grievances. They've alway been looked at skeptically through the eyes of the media as extremists and racists, despite a shocking lack of violence, disruption, or "hate speech" growing out of any of their protests. OWS, on the other hand, is comprised of actual extremists who are admittedly anti-capitalist, and are actively seeking to physically impose their will such as to disrupt the ability of others to conduct business, and they're treated like well-intentioned protesters, peacably assembling to state common sense grievances, who are maybe a little eccentric (said with a big smile). Times like this make it excrutiatingly clear just how skewed to the left most major media is. How could you not notice? Here is a nice little fact, in over 2 years of the Tea Party there have been 0 arrests. In a little over a month's worth of OWS demonstrating there have been over 1200 arrests and a few injured people. However, if you see the coverage from most of the media, OWS is a wonderful organic movement, on the other hand, Tea Partiers are a bunch of disruptive angry racists. So again, Facts, 0 arrests in countless protests, and over 1200 with injuries in about a months worth of demonstrations. This is why you have media organizations such as FOX that are dominating ratings, because they are basically the only network that covers the other side of the coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 How could you not notice? Here is a nice little fact, in over 2 years of the Tea Party there have been 0 arrests. In a little over a month's worth of OWS demonstrating there have been over 1200 arrests and a few injured people. However, if you see the coverage from most of the media, OWS is a wonderful organic movement, on the other hand, Tea Partiers are a bunch of disruptive angry racists. So again, Facts, 0 arrests in countless protests, and over 1200 with injuries in about a months worth of demonstrations. This is why you have media organizations such as FOX that are dominating ratings, because they are basically the only network that covers the other side of the coin. Also dude, Fox is not the preferred nomenclature. Faux News, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts