Shut up, grow up, and learn when to mind your own business. Feral is the only one that would politely argue for the conservative side.
Well, I wouldn't go that far - I don't have a side, and I don't really fit political convention; I have issue with facts.
All you texasblue and dbl do is troll the boards, explicitly attack or judge people, and troll some more with your negative views and replies. All the meanwhile thinking you are above everyone else.
That's just what true-believers do.
They make it sound as if they are interested in what you have to say, but if you dare question their beliefs, they can't be civil. So they deride, or insult, or stick their fingers in their ears and shout down. I've observed it in person a hundred times at rallies, protests, debates, meetings, appearances and speeches, from both "sides",
be it New Tea Partiers, or wishful eco-fascists.
They gather, they chant. Praises to their new Gods, and curses to their enemies.
You do what you do when you come across any proselytizers - street preachers, the Scientology Booth, Jehovah's Witnesses, Krishnas at the airport back in the day - passive or aggressive, you ignore them.
The Incitables.
They like to pretend they're wolves, but they reek of the lamb.
And they skin just as easily.
Again, I must beg your pardon. I can be as civil as the next person, if not more so. I have no problem with people whose political or religious beliefs differ from mine and I am quite capable of civil debate on these issues.
But I am RARELY, IF EVER, treated or addressed with civility, even when I try to maintain some modecum of civility.
I learned along time ago that dicussions about religion and ESPECIALLY conservative politics here at SP are nearly always met with extreme hostility and derision by most leftists on this board.
I have been called everything but a child of god here, and that's even when I've been civil.
As I said, true-believers. People tend to get upset when their beliefs are questioned. But to say that it is
only 'leftists' or
only 'atheists' is disingenuous.
So pardon me if I exercise the occasional rhetorical flourish or pointed barb against intolerant and uncivil leftists.
Case in point. Some could look at your posts and see more than pointed barbs. If you attach emotion, or rhetoric that could invoke the same, to your responses, it may not come across as superior debate...it can come across as hostility.
And speaking to your reading habits and opinion of other writers' theories, especially if they compound and fortify your own beliefs, may not come across as intelligent, or even well-read. It may come across as arrogant.
Having spent 30 or so years working in the political and media arena, I've certainly had my fill of rude and crude treatment at the hands of committed leftists with the flexibility of a pane of glass and skin as thick as tissue paper.
Again, this statement could imply that you are an experienced and committed 'rightist', and could be seen as just the same, unbending and sensitive to ideas that may conflict with your own.
And as you've professed a preference for facts, I would like to correct a factual error in your post above.
The contrast between "conservative" (I hate that word because American "conservatives" have always been liberals, as in classical liberal) protests such as Tea Party protests and leftist protests like the many OWS gatherings, or the mobs that usually attend G8, G20 or IMF meetings, could not be more stark.
Of the hundreds of Tea Party protests, there were no arrests of Tea Partiers, the protestors were law abiding, they did not clash with police, they got all the proper permits (where needed) for their events, they did not block traffic or businesses, and they always left the spaces they occupied cleaner than they found it, and they had focused and coherent messages which they acted on on September of 2010, all strictly in keeping with the law (with very few exceptions to all of the above).
OWS, on the other hand, routinely violated the law, illegally "occupying" private and sometimes public property (against various local ordinances), engaged in the destruction of public and private property, blocked traffic and private businesses, fought with police and were arrested by the dozens, engaged in nonsensical sloganeering (we are the 99%), had no coherent message, set forth a stream of selfish redistributionist demands, shouted down any dissenting opinions (even threatening physical violence and even practicing it) and left horrific messes which local municipalities had to clean up at public expense (again, with very few exceptions to all of the above).
In other words, they behaved as you outlined above and much worse.
The differences between the two protest movements could not be more stark.
Just wanted to set the record straight on that.
I'm not quite sure what you are trying to point out.
When I spoke of the New Tea Party, I meant just that. The Tea Party before it was co-opted by the Kochs and the Palins and Bachmanns and other establishment 'republicans', was in most cases, divorced from party politics specifically
because of the view of both parties, sitting in power, colluding with corporate business. That organization no longer exists, and what we are left with is the skeletal remains, with a tri-corner hat and the skin of an anti-Obama 'neoconservative' agenda.
Interestingly enough, OWS started the same, a view of both parties colluding with corporate business, before being co-opted by Soros and Greenpeace and Starbucks.
And you are correct, Occupy saw violence. It also saw
police brutality and repression of civil rights. Just as in the WTO '99 riots, which most view as 'leftist', there are genuinely stupid losers who call themselves 'anarchist' looking to start an undefined revolution. Then again, sometimes they are LEOs in black masks, making excuses to crack down.
I've seen the same at New TP rallies...sometimes, white supremacists in suits circle, sniffing for weak minds. And sometimes, they are LEOs, usually feds, waving the Gadsden and looking to entrap, and again, making excuses to crack down.
Let's not pretend one side is all angels. TP has been arrested in Chicago, Colorado, Wisconsin, Virginia, Iowa, etc. TP in NY was told by police to walk in the road and not obstruct public sidewalks, then down the line, were arrested for obstruction of traffic.
I can give you first hand examples.
A good friend of mine, misguided as he is, started his own chapter. It wasn't long before it was anti-Islam/Obama/Iran and pro-Koch's version of the 'free-market'. He organized local protests at council in his county. Permits and clean and non-violent.
Still arrested for 'disorderly conduct'. I'm sure he would have gotten resisting arrest if it weren't for dozens of witnesses.
Occupy has had a peaceful protest in Center City Philadelphia since the inception of the movement. Few arrests, with a permit dispute. The commissioner issued directives to police regarding rights. He knows his Constitutions, and has my respect so far. He also knows that any rally met by militarized police in riot gear usually ends in disaster.
You take issue with Occupy's coherency and demands, as I do. I could say the same of the New Tea Party.
I could also say they are both wasting their time.
Every movement should be aware of attempts at takeover. Every protest or rally should be aware of
agents provocateur.
Previous Topic
Index
![Carrie Underwood - Marie Claire (June '13) HQ Scans [x 12]](http://thumbnails104.imagebam.com/25575/d35e2e255748329.jpg)
