http://apnews.myway.com/article/20111014/D9QC1I60…
So let me get this straight. A public park open to all of New York cannot be cleaned because protesters won't listen to a reasonable, fair and simple request? The park was slated to be cleaned in 1/3rds so it wasn't as if there needed to be a full removal.
Why would the Mayor give in to these people. They pretend to be peaceful or law abiding, yet have no issue with ruining the park for all true New Yorkers.
These people epitome the section 8 stereotype. Try and help and all they do is ruin the place.
I hope an ice age hits NYC this season.
Let them sit in their own stink. When winter hits they'll leave, it's fucking COLD and WINDY down there. I walk only 15 minutes and it SUCKS, I can't imagine anyone lasting more than a couple of days out there.
Wait, I thought they held off the cleaning because the protesters spent all night cleaning?
Protesters cleaned up some, but you need to really clean the place. I mean picking up isn't the same as hosing it down.
End of the day the park needs to be thoroughly cleaned. I think the 1/3rd at a time was a nice compromise. The protesters are worried they will be kicked out, but ended of the day, if the parks management wants them gone, they are gone.
Its not even a public park. The park is owned by Brookfield, Inc. They wanted to clean it since they own it, and they are afraid of damage to wires underground.
By clean I hope you mean a fissure opens in the earth's crust and swallows all these incompetent dumb dumbs whole. Either that or Chuck Norris shows up with a flame thrower to disinfect the area.
It's REAAAALLLLYYYY hard not to taunt the protesters. I don't even care that much about the debate, but that small child in me that used to get the barking dog behind the fence all worked up just wants to poke a stick in the face of the protesters to rile 'em up for the hell of it.
Finding out the cleaning wasn't taking place was some of the worst news I received today.
This is the epitome of the entitlement in this country. They ruin the park for everyone else. Have no goals, demands or agenda. Just squatting in a park, costing the city millions (which will be paid not from them, but from the taxes of the very people they are against).
It's times like this I am glad I live on the beach, 1,000+ miles away from NYC.
looking like heads are starting to roll
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/14/wall-street-protesters-clash-with-…
At least it rained some in NYC. Not as effective as a power wash but it's better than nothing. I also love when the news broke out that the city had canceled their washing plans, the protestors stood up with brooms raised above and screamed in glorious victory. Haha. Please.
If last winter was any indication, those protestors are going to be in for a long cold snowy winter.has anyone seen this?
http://www.youtube.com/embed/wrPGoPFRUdc
I stopped watching after 20 seconds. I think ANT alluded to this in his post(s) on the inequality discussion. Taxpayers already pay for K-12 education. Why should this be carried over to college? If you want a free collegiate education, move to Venezuela or Cuba.
Watch the whole thing....some people don't even have their facts straight/know why they're protesting. lol
Weren't Tea Baggers crying foul when liberal websites posted videos of idiots with racist/nonsensical signs trying to claim that the entire movement was racist and dumb?
Isn't the biggest criticism that the OWS protesters aren't coherent and have no feasible or clear goals? I think it's intellectually dishonest to then post videos of cherry-picked individuals from the protest with the implication that "lol look at these idiots, they all want to go to college for free and no one knows why they are protesting".
I could stand out in front of Harvard Yard for hours and interview random students and be sure to find a few idiots with kooky ideas. It would be absurd for me to then post heavily edited video on Youtube with the implication "look how dumb and weird Harvard students are!"
Let's try to keep the discussion a little less circle-jerky, most of us are more intelligent than that.
Actually, the majority of the OWS protesters are like the guy in this video.
Right, and every Tea bagger is a racist. commence the circlejerk.
Actually, their stated and affirmed demands are incredibly socialistic, including a living wage regardless of if you work or not and free college (through debt forgiveness to everyone).
So commence dropping true knowledge.
OWS is absolutely not anything near the Tea Party.
I understand that it may be heavily edited...but if you feel so strongly about something that you go and protest, at least know about some of the major arguments against your cause.
When have I said they don't have a message? They do and it is socialist in nature.
If the Tea Party is funded by the Koch brothers, that is wonderful. The Koch family is funding a movement that roots itself in the Constitution and core of what this country is about.
Last time I checked, a limited federal government and upholding the Constitution was pretty much in line with America. Canceling student loan debt and paying someone regardless of if they work or not isn't.
Bam! More knowledge dropped all over your face bro. Tell me when you want me to stop schooling yo ass.
Last I checked Socialism was an economic system where the means of production where controlled by the state or workers. Try again.
Because if you don't agree with it it's anti-American and unconstitutional?
What a delightful young man you are.
Yes, if you think government should continue to grow and redistribute income you are pretty anti American.
The Federal government was intended and meant to be limited in nature. Sorry that what you want isn't what this country was founded on.
I am also glad that you grabbed the first line of Wikipedia. Socialism has many modern forms and social democracy is one of them. Paying people to not work, from the taxes and efforts of those who do work , is socialistic.
I can do this all day bro. You better get a lobster bib to handle all the info I am throwing on you. Get yo book and yo paper, schools in session.
I'm glad you get to be the one who decides is and isn't American.
Yes, it was, well over 200 years ago. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the United States government always has to remain that way, that's why we kind of have this thing called "amendments" where the people, through their elected representatives, get to decide what government they want.
The constitution also allowed for the keeping of slaves and denial of voting rights to everyone except for property owning men. Are we to slavishly hold to that simply because it was written 200 years ago and cannot be changed? The constitution is not infallible.
Or paid attention in high school history classes? But no, that's such an obscure little fact I had to have gotten it from wikipedia.
Sure it does, but you use the term "socialism" as a pejorative in order to tie democratic-socialist ideas with the USSR and its satellites It's disingenuous at best. If you meant "democratic-socialist" then say it. Don't hide behind demagoguery just because Rush Limbaugh and anchors on FNC can get away with it. [/quote]
If by dropping knowledge you mean parroting the latest talking points you read on NewsMax, save your breath. I'm sure all your friends at work nod along enthusiastically when you wax philosophical about objectivism and what the founding father's REALLY meant (because they were of course a monolothic entity with the same views on every issue which also happen to be the one's you believe in) but I already get the same e-mail forwards you do from my 86 year old grandfather.
Even though I already have a job and no longer need WSO for its useful abilities, I sometimes come back and always get treated to Anthony's endlessly circlejerking on his Republican causes / incredibly hateful speech. Nothing makes me smile like watching a man waste his life away getting pissed off at people through a computer and acting like a big man. Do the people you work for know how much time you spend on here? Do you even have a job yet? I guess if I was 28 and had to go back to a Masters program I'd debate high schoolers on the internet too.
OWStreeter's are people. Gay people are people. People who disagree with you are still people.
Grow up
Wow, so you have a job and come back just to stalk me. Damn dude. No homo, but find a better hobby. Your worshiping of me is frightening.
Also, you took the effort to create a new account just to comment on he hahhahhahah
And I am the one who is a loser.
@JLSN - how about I just piss some knowledge in your face now?
If you support things that are unconstitutional and you, because you somehow think you are smarter than the founding fathers of this nation, think America should be radically different, then yes, you are un-American.
To be an American is to simply enjoy and support this nation. A nation founded on 10 unalienable rights. The Constitution is America's greatest export and one of the worlds most influential documents.
I am not making any decision, nor am I the arbitrator of all that is American, but when you start thinking you know better and that we shouldn't follow that great document anymore, you become someone who does not follow the ideals that make this country great.
AKA un American. Nazi's are un America, Communists are, on and on.
Get a towel, because it is going to get wet here with the golden shower of knowledge you are begging me to shower you with.
Please show me where in the Constitution it says owning of slaves is a right? Please show me where it says that the Federal Government should somehow trump states rights or not be limited in nature?
Suck on it brah.
With your obvious contempt of anyone who disagrees with you and your inability to argue effectively without vulgar insults I guess I shouldn't be surprised you subscribe to such a selfish philosophy.
So these "founding fathers" It's un-American to disagree with, about them.
I suppose you are referring to Thomas Paine, who proposed "To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property"
Or his thoughts on ending poverty "There are, in every country, some magnificent charities established by individuals. It is, however, but little that any individual can do, when the whole extent of the misery to be relieved is considered. He may satisfy his conscience, but not his heart. He may give all that he has, and that all will relieve but little. It is only by organizing civilization upon such principles as to act like a system of pulleys, that the whole weight of misery can be removed."
The "father of the revolution" appears to be rather anti-American in your estimation, am I wrong?
With your obvious contempt of anyone who disagrees with you and your inability to argue effectively without vulgar insults I guess I shouldn't be surprised you subscribe to such a selfish philosophy.
So these "founding fathers" It's un-American to disagree with, about them.
I suppose you are referring to Thomas Paine, who proposed "To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property"
Or his thoughts on ending poverty "There are, in every country, some magnificent charities established by individuals. It is, however, but little that any individual can do, when the whole extent of the misery to be relieved is considered. He may satisfy his conscience, but not his heart. He may give all that he has, and that all will relieve but little. It is only by organizing civilization upon such principles as to act like a system of pulleys, that the whole weight of misery can be removed."
The "father of the revolution" appears to be rather anti-American in your estimation, am I wrong?
With your obvious contempt of anyone who disagrees with you and your inability to argue effectively without vulgar insults I guess I shouldn't be surprised you subscribe to such a selfish philosophy.
So these "founding fathers" It's un-American to disagree with, about them.
I suppose you are referring to guys like Thomas Paine, who proposed "To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property"
Or his thoughts on ending poverty "There are, in every country, some magnificent charities established by individuals. It is, however, but little that any individual can do, when the whole extent of the misery to be relieved is considered. He may satisfy his conscience, but not his heart. He may give all that he has, and that all will relieve but little. It is only by organizing civilization upon such principles as to act like a system of pulleys, that the whole weight of misery can be removed."
The "father of the revolution" appears to be rather anti-American in your estimation, am I wrong?
George Washington owned slaves, just that didn't make it into the Constitution. I fail to remember the amendment in the Constitution which reflected Paines wish?
Please enlighten me, maybe post me a link to where I can find this? I see to not see it.
Honestly, I am just trolling you. I have these debates all the time and I could give a shit at this point. Liberals always want to take from others, rather than giving themselves or donating their own time. It will never change. Increase my taxes and I will donate less, shift funds into tax advantaged accounts or simply purchase less. All will have negative effects on the economy. Sorry, but that is what will happen on a large scale.
Basic economics doesn't jive with liberal pipe dreams and "good intentions"
I hope the USA becomes just like Europe. The EU is thriving and an economic and fiscal powerhouse right now.
1) I didn't insult you. Relax.
2) Selfish? In your opinion. I don't want to force you to believe and act in the way I believe. Yet you seem to think it is fine to use the government as your "muscle". Because YOU think I should do something or donate to what YOU think is best, you want the government to increase taxes and funnel these funds to YOUR idea of what is best.
Man, sorry that you detest liberty and freedom as much as you do. Sorry that this country was founded on personal freedom and 10 inalienable rights. Keep wishing and hoping for your large government and European tax system.
All to help the poor that liberals pretend to care so much about, yet don't actually do one fucking thing to help, outside of creating more government agencies or taxing people who work for their money.
Keep up the good work comrade.
Quo facere quia nam voluptatem sint. Omnis omnis cupiditate animi et eius quisquam voluptas. Nihil accusamus repellat quia rerum aliquid sint. Voluptatem corrupti nihil minima ad esse voluptates ex. Deserunt eius ducimus occaecati dolor reprehenderit ut. Harum et quidem ratione voluptatem ullam. Voluptatem temporibus quia dignissimos enim repellendus nulla.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Neque omnis dicta provident dolor vel cupiditate. Consectetur repellendus et reprehenderit a exercitationem aperiam molestiae. Qui omnis eligendi eveniet esse. Voluptatem molestiae veniam dolor repellat fugit cupiditate qui natus. Ut eaque nam voluptatem id ut aut dolorem.
Ut et explicabo eligendi culpa aut hic. Quidem minus excepturi harum aut velit omnis repudiandae. Ut delectus quod ipsam atque soluta impedit repellendus mollitia.