I’ve created the following design, and set up a CafePress store for those who might like to show this off at their local Occupy rally.
78 thoughts on “Occupy vs. The Tea Party”
Comments are closed.
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Blogs For Victory 
TEA = patriots, employed, employers, vets, God fearing good people
OWS = commies, anarchists, atheists, dirt bags, rapists, thieves, dopers, dupes, TRAITORS, democRATs.
Dear neocon1: When the Tea Party originally registered their name it was T Party; others just assumed the “ea” was missing from Tea. They’ve recently corrected this fallacy to it’s more accurately descriptive name of Terrorist Party in keeping with their modus operandi of assaulting and terrorizing everyone who disagrees with them in the slightest.
Occupy Wall Street on the other hand is mostly creative unemployed people. Since they started OWS they are no longer unemployed or homeless people sleeping on the streets they are “protestors”.
bristol dumbshit
crack?
or does insanity run in the family?
briston dumbcan
quoting the Count
pretty well sums up OWS
“Count d’Haricots October 21, 2011 at 7:36 pm #
Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers”
OWS is creative alright, if you consider intestinal sculpture on a police car to be a form of art.
They’ve recently corrected this fallacy to it’s more accurately descriptive name of Terrorist Party in keeping with their modus operandi of assaulting and terrorizing everyone who disagrees with them in the slightest.
Where in the hell did you come up with that?
Just think of it as more of that ‘intestinal sculpture ‘ his kind finds so emblematic of their worldview.
If wanting the constitution of the USA to be honored by the liar in the OIval Office and Congress is a terrorist plan, I plead guilty!
Here Neo, I fixed it for you.
commies, anarchists, atheists, dirt bags, rapists, thieves, dopers, dupes, TRAITORS, democRATsTrash bagging 60’s re-enactors.😛
You really can’t argue with someone carrying an American flag…
Zoom in to see the “Made In China” label.
Yes, Matt is anything but subtle.
The original Tea Party was a rising up against The East India Corporation, who paid no taxes while the locals had to pay up. OWS is much closer to THAT than David Koch/Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks Tea Party.
wrong again stooge…the original tea party was about taxation without representation…OWS is about redistribution of wealth…its about lazy axx con artists who dont want to work but want a share of the profit…
the constitution never guaranteed anything like that…there is no “constitutional” requirement for food stamps for adults that will not and do not work…and that all OWS is about…
I love the RRL’s frantic effort to apply its own reality of control by wealthy radicals to the truly grass-roots TEA Party. Poor babies, they truly can’t comprehend the possibility of people actually thinking for themselves, actually KNOWING what they believe instead of being fed progagandic pap by their betters, actually having and understanding a coherent political philosophy, actually knowing the history of this nation, and in general being the opposite of the Leftist and pseudo-leftist sheeple represented by the trolls here.
All they can do is flop around helplessly and bleat “They HAVE to be just like us, told what to think and run by powerful entities behind the curtain. They HAVE to be, because that is the only political model we understand!”
And they prove this all the time, by mindlessly regurgitating what they have been told they think. This time around, Halliburton and Bush are being replaced by Dick Armey and the Koch brothers in the attack rhetoric of the RRL, but it’s the same old same old, the zombie trolls listening to Schultz and Rhodes, et al, and charging around repeating what they have been told to think, no matter how stupid it is.
“All they can do is flop around helplessly and bleat “They HAVE to be just like us, told what to think and run by powerful entities behind the curtain. They HAVE to be, because that is the only political model we understand!””
Yeah, that’s the TP for ya: Ignorance and projection running wild. Naturally, you find that very appealing.
Could someone explain the design? Is it a youngster on a skateboard getting out of a cab or a person pulling down their pants and flashing the police or someone throwing up on a carpet or what?
Is it meant to imply that Tea Party people are jingoistic sheep that wouldn’t know free speech if it hit them in the head and the OWS crowd is made up of individuals willing to challenge government authority even if it means being pepper sprayed by the police?
you cant figure that out?
it must be your reprobate mind
I’m probably reading way to much into it, but it looks to me like the guy on the Tea Party sign is headed in the direction of the rally carrying an American flag, symbolizing the patriotic nature of the Tea Party, while the kid on the skateboard is fleeing the OWS protest while the police car is heading toward the protest, probably responding to something illegal that the twits in the OWS protest have done, possibly even the kid fleeing on the skateboard. Who knows — He may even be the kid who sh*t on the police car.
Bardolf, lol, sure it’s a someone on a skateboard, there is absolutely no way it could be some trash bagger with his pants down dumping on that cop car.
Sometimes I wonder about you 🙂
I stopped wondering a long time ago.
Yuuuup
liberalism is a mental disorder.
There are obviously some on this blog who don’t have the slightest idea what the Tea Party movement is all about. As one who is active at both the local and state level, let me fill you in.
First and foremost, the Tea Party is NOT A PARTY, and I see little evidence that it wants to be. It’s a movement; a movement largely made up of people who have never been active in politics before. The main driving force, and this is pretty universal from hundreds of TP folks I’ve talked to, is the desire to insure that future generations will have at least the same amount of freedom and prosperity that we have had. It’s sort of comes down to the old adage, “if not us, who; if not now, when?”
Admittedly, the Tea Party started out as an elderly, mostly white phenomenon. That’s beginning to change. I’m starting to see more and more young and middle aged people at TP events. There are still few blacks who are involved, but the ones that are, at least the ones I’ve met, are not only active, but active in a leadership roll. The entitlement mindset that the Left has instilled into the majority of the black population since the advent of the Great Society and The War on Poverty is an extremely tough dynamic to overcome. The way the Left has exploited and continues to exploit the black population is, IMO, one of the great socio-political tragedies of my lifetime.
The biggest mistake that the media is making at present WRT the Tea Party is either not recognizing or, more likely, misrepresenting the fact that the Tea Party is evolving from a “rally” mentality, to a grass-roots political organization. Time and time again, I’ve seen local and national articles about how the Tea Party is fading away. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The results of the 2010 election, with the gain of 63 House seats, 6 Senate seats and nearly 700 state legislative seats created the realization by millions of largely politically illiterate people that they could make a difference. That mindset is now at work across the country, searching out and working to elect individuals who, first and foremost, are honest, and second, understand that we need to get back to basic Constitutional principles if our republic is to survive
Spook wrote, “There are obviously some on this blog who don’t have the slightest idea what the Tea Party movement is all about. As one who is active at both the local and state level, let me fill you in.”
So let me ask, do you think that you or Matt or NeoClown have the slightest idea of what the Occupy Wall Street movement is all about? ‘Cause none of you are active in it, and your collective comments pretty much confirm that you are just making it up as you go along.
Watson,
I can’t speak for Neocon, but do you have some specific comments of mine that you take issue with?
So watty, unless you are a member of the Occupy Anywhere crowd you cannot defend them nor speak for them as well?
How do you know if anyone is off the mark on their comments of the Occupy Wherever crowd if you are not a member?
Or are you?????
We let the Occupy Somewhere crowds’ actions and words speak for themselves. The Tea Party’s actions and words speak for themselves also, but you need the spin and distortions of the liberal media to portray the crap that you drones regurgitate here.
Based on your comments about anything, we know that you make it up as you go along or regurgitate mindless talking points.
OK, so Watson doesn’t seem to be able to come up with any specific comments I’ve made that were invalid because I’m not part of OWS.
Let’s see; polls show that 1/3 of the OWS protesters believe violence is an acceptable tactic. Do you need to be part of the movement to comment on that? More importantly, given that statistic, do you need to be part of the movement to comment on the likelihood that the movement will eventually result in violence?
Protesters have been interviewed on national television and have said they want to destroy capitalism. Do you need to be part of the movement to comment on that?
The movement has received the endorsement of the American Nazi Party, the American Socialist Party, Communist Party USA and the Chinese Communist Party. Do you need to be part of the movement to comment on that?
There have been numerous reports that many of the protesters are being paid a significant amount of money, and that George Soros and numerous unions are the funding behind the movement. Do you have to be part of the movement to comment on that?
OK watty, here is some more examples of THEIR OWN WORDS and THEIR OWN ACTIONS for what they want for you to ponder…..
… or do you still contend that those who reported this information are incapable of reporting this informtion because they are not members of the Occupy Wherever movement.
http://www.bluegrasspundit.com/2011/10/occupy-san-fransisco-let-people-print.html?utm_source=co2hog
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/22/more-american-flag-desecration-from-the-wall-street-occupiers/
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/22/moonbat-mom-of-the-year-abandons-banker-husband-four-children-to-join-wall-street-occupiers/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2011/10/22/protesters-occupy-ge-ceo-jeff-immelts-connecticut-front-lawn/
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/22/occupy-oakland-its-this-fucked-up-system-that-makes-us-racist-and-violent/
Occupy Dayton: “F’ The Military, F’ Your Flag And F’ The Police”…
http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/10/23/nyu-professor-explains-to-occupywallst-crowd-how-a-marxist-america-will-work/
Sook, watty is infamous for making ludicrous comments and disappearing without response.
watsondouche
This army about to confront Occupy Wall Street
New book exposes radical socialists behind well-planned movement
A book that exposes the radical nexus behind “Occupy Wall Street” is set to officially launch next week at the movement’s downtown Manhattan park headquarters, WND has learned.
Red Army: The Radical Network that must be defeated to save America” exposes the extremists behind Occupy Wall Street along with the radical socialist network that seized political power in Washington over decades, shaped Obama’s presidential agenda and threatens the very future of the U.S.
“Red Army” documents how these radical groups are working to spread America’s wealth and transform the country into their vision of a socialist utopia.
Recent research by “Red Army” authors Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott documents the Occupy Wall Street movement is well-planned by seasoned extremists and not the spontaneous uprising it claims to be, while alleging the radicals behind the movement maintain White House connections.
Read more: This army about to confront Occupy Wall Street http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=357977#ixzz1bjuYAz6r
Well, Democratic pollster Doug Schoen let 200 of the OWS crowd speak for “what they are all about”.
…………
President Barack Obama and fellow Democrats are making a huge mistake in backing the Occupy Wall Street movement, says ace pollster Doug Schoen. And they may well pay the price in next year’s elections, Schoen, who has worked for both Bill and Hillary Clinton, writes in The Wall Street Journal.
“Last week, senior White House adviser David Plouffe said that ‘the protests you’re seeing are the same conversations people are having in living rooms and kitchens all across America. . . . People are frustrated by an economy that does not reward hard work and responsibility, where Wall Street and Main Street don’t seem to play by the same set of rules,’” Schoen writes.
“Yet the Occupy Wall Street movement reflects values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people — and particularly with swing voters who are largely independent and have been trending away from the president since the debate over healthcare reform.”
Schoen’s firm polled 200 protestors in New York City and found them to be “radical left-wing” ideologues.
Among the findings:
• A whopping 98 percent say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and 31 percent would support violence.
• Only 15 percent of the protestors are unemployed.
• While an overwhelming majority of demonstrators supported Obama in 2008, only 48 percent say they will vote for him next year.
• Almost two-thirds, 65 percent, say government has a moral responsibility to guarantee all citizens access to affordable health care, a college education, and a secure retirement, regardless of the cost.
• More than three-quarters, 77 percent, favor raising taxes for the rich, but 58 percent oppose raising taxes for everyone.
Polling numbers for the general public provide quite a contrast, Schoen notes. They show that 41 percent of Americans view themselves as conservative, 36 percent as moderate, and only 21 percent as liberal.
“That’s why the Obama-Pelosi embrace of the [protest] movement could prove catastrophic for their party,” he writes.
“Having abandoned any effort to work with the congressional supercommittee to craft a bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction, President Obama has thrown in with those who support his desire to tax oil companies and the rich, rather than appeal to independent and self-described moderate swing voters who want smaller government and lower taxes, not additional stimulus or interference in the private sector.”
w!
“First and foremost, the Tea Party is NOT A PARTY”…
OK, then, let’s start calling it the Tea Movement instead. That should clear up any confusion. I wonder who the genius was who thought it was a good idea to call it a Party in the first place; probably some far left nut case.
Perhaps if you had any knowledge of American history you would understand the reference. Till then you can just keep showing off your ignorance. No one cares if you understand or like the name. You are irrelevant.
Surely, touchstone, you are not comparing this modern day ‘movement’ to the original Colonists who objected to the Tea Act because they believed that it violated their right to be taxed only by their own elected representatives.
CO,
I’ve often wondered why they called it the Tea Party in the first place. I guess it sounded better than SEA (spent enough already) Party, but, in reality, it’s the obscene amount of income not yet earned by future generations that has been spent in the last decade that is driving the Tea Party more than it is taxes. Our local group doesn’t even have “TEA” in the name.
c0
see arguing with idiots pgs 13-69
cO
OK, then, let’s start calling it the Tea Movement instead.
call it what ever you want Kanuck EH?
NOBODY cares
Kanuck
lets call the democRAT party, the COMMUNIST party.
Sorry, spook, I don’t hang on your every word. The point is your implication, which is that unless you are a Tea Party member, you don’t understand it. I just wanted to know if you think you know what OWS is al about. And if so, why? Because you clearly aren’t a participant.
As for Clown, the fact that he cites wnd.com as the source for explaining the true motivations of OWS speaks volumes. Hilarious.
Watson,
I only know what I’ve read and seen. The media coverage of the OWS movement has been substantially greater than for the Tea Party, which the media has largely tried to paint as a bunch of elderly, white racists. If the media coverage is accurate and unbiased, then I have a pretty good idea of what’s driving the Occupy movement across the country, certainly enough to comment on it, and especially on an anonymous political blog. You still haven’t said what comments of mine you take issue with, or was this just another instance where you really didn’t think before you typed?
Spook, I take issue with the statement you just wrote.
On the one hand you claim that the media coverage of the Tea Party unfairly paints it as “a bunch of elderly, white racists.” (And in a previous post, you pretty much state that the only way to know what the Tea Party is really about is to be a part of it.)
And then on the other hand, you assume the media coverage must be “accurate and unbiased” in their coverage of OWS, and that therefore “you have a pretty good idea of what’s driving the Occupy movement.”
Do you not see any irony in your position? Talking about failing to think…
Spook, I take issue with the statement you just wrote.
You have a serious reading comprehension problem, Watson.
(And in a previous post, you pretty much state that the only way to know what the Tea Party is really about is to be a part of it.)
Nowhere in that post did I say that, “pretty much” or otherwise.
And then on the other hand, you assume the media coverage must be “accurate and unbiased” in their coverage of OWS
I didn’t assume anything. What I said was, “If the media coverage is accurate and unbiased, then I have a pretty good idea of what’s driving the Occupy movement across the country”. Perhaps, for nitpicking pinheads like you, I should have added, “if the media coverage is inaccurate and biased, then what I think I know about OWS may also be inaccurate. Do you think the media coverage of OWS has been accurate and unbiased?
“Do you not see any irony in your position? Talking about failing to think…”
He clearly does not, but he’s not really set up to do that. He has two goals here:
1) Defend the TP
2) Attack OWS
These goals are each in their own silo, so there doesn’t need to be any consistency between the two. The fact that his own defense of the TP applies perfectly to his own attacks on OWS will always elude him because his mentality doesn’t allow him to make that connection; attacking the other side and defending his side are two entirely separate things with entirely separate rules for him.
He clearly does not, but he’s not really set up to do that. He has two goals here:
1) Defend the TP
2) Attack OWS
OK, Wally/Bodie/Jeffy/Slccr, here’s your chance to do more than just be the monkey in the zoo throwing his own excrement at passersby. Tell me what I’ve said about OWS that is inaccurate. Keep in mind that, in an earlier thread, I said I agreed with some of the rationale behind the protests.
We’re going to have to go one step at a time here, Spook, because you’re going to be resistant to each and every step toward the truth, as is your wont.
So, let’s start with the easiest one: You’re very taken with the notion that because some Nazis have voiced support for OWS, that implies a fundamental commonality between OWS and Nazis. Well, Nazis have voiced support for an organization that you personally belong to (the Oath Keepers); does that imply fundamental commonality between you and Nazis? Can we start referring to you and/or your group as “Nazi-endorsed” each and every time you and/or your group comes up?
Think it through, OK? Then we’ll get into astroturfing, threats of violence, logical coherence, and all that other fun stuff.
So, let’s start with the easiest one: You’re very taken with the notion that because some Nazis have voiced support for OWS, that implies a fundamental commonality between OWS and Nazis. Well, Nazis have voiced support for an organization that you personally belong to (the Oath Keepers); does that imply fundamental commonality between you and Nazis?
If we’re going to have a conversation, Wally, the first thing we need to agree on is not to make things up to support our POV. Except for an obscure blog post from 2 years ago, I am unable to find any evidence of Nazi support for Oath Keepers, much less an endorsement from the American Nazi Party.
Want to try again?
Sorry spook your protests ring hollow. You complain that the media is misrepresenting the Tea Party–“The biggest mistake that the media is making at present WRT the Tea Party is either not recognizing or, more likely, misrepresenting the fact that the Tea Party is evolving from a “rally” mentality, to a grass-roots political organization”–and yet you seem to know all about the OWS entirely from what you’ve “read and seen.” Where? Where have you read and seen this stuff? The media?
Let’s just cut to the chase.
1. Do you believe the media fairly represents the Tea Party movement?
2. Do you believe the media fairly represents the OWS movement?
3. Do you believe you must be a participant in the Tea Party movement to truly understand it?
4. Do you believe you must be a participant in the OWS movement to truly understand it?
I’d hope you would be consistent, but your comments in this thread suggest otherwise.
I didn’t make it up at all, Spook–Nazi support for the Oath Keepers is in plain view–though your determination that facts you don’t like are therefore invalid is exactly what I expected, and that exact reaction, which I could see coming miles away, is why I said we would have to walk through this step by step. I suggested you think this through; clearly, you have not done so. Instead, you fell back on your favorite defense mechanism–“that goes against my beliefs, therefore it doesn’t count.” You’re doing a terrific job demonstrating your hypocrisy, but really, watson’s four points lay that hypocrisy of yours out pretty simply, though when he hopes you’ll be consistent, he’s hoping against all evidence.
and yet you seem to know all about the OWS entirely from what you’ve “read and seen.” Where? Where have you read and seen this stuff? The media?
I don’t know what to tell you, Watson. If you haven’t read media accounts and seen the dozens of You-tube videos from various Occupy demonstrations, then you have no business even questioning my motives. I read from a lot of national on-line sources: WAPO, NYT, MarketWatch (WSJ, Yahoo Finance, LA Times, just to name a few. I purposely don’t search out the tabloids like WND, Newsmax, etc. because I know they’re going to be biased to the extreme.
Let’s just cut to the chase.
Yes, let’s do.
1. Do you believe the media fairly represents the Tea Party movement?
As I said before, as an active participant since the very beginning (Spring 2009), I do not believe they do. I believe the left leaning national media is scared to death of the threat that the Tea Party represents to the status quo.
2. Do you believe the media fairly represents the OWS movement?
I honestly don’t know. From your earlier comment, you appear to not even be aware that there has been media coverage of OWS, fair or otherwise. My earlier post attempting to clarify the Tea Party movement is based on personal experience. My comments on OWS are based on a considerable volume of material that I have viewed and read. I invited you to call me on anything that you think I’ve said that you believe to be unfair or untrue. So far you have declined to do so.
3. Do you believe you must be a participant in the Tea Party movement to truly understand it?
No, but that’s why I made my original comment to clarify what I viewed as misconceptions about the Tea Party, both by commenters on this blog and by the media.
4. Do you believe you must be a participant in the OWS movement to truly understand it?
No, but I’m still waiting for someone who is (or at least knows someone who is) to correct any misconceptions I have. The biggest problem I see with the entire Occupy movement is that, unlike the Tea Party which has a fairly narrow focus (rule of law, constitutional principles and smaller, more accountable government), the Occupy movement is made up of a hodgepodge of disenchanted, disenfranchised, disillusioned individuals. I suspect there are some whose primary focus is to spur accountability in the banking and investment sector and that is commendable, but, according to a recent poll, there are also 30% who believe violence is an acceptable tactic, and a substantial number who have publicly stated that they want to destroy capitalism.
I hope that satisfactorily answers your questions. Your turn.
I didn’t make it up at all, Spook–Nazi support for the Oath Keepers is in plain view
And yet you can’t provide ANY evidence, can you, Wally?
Instead, you fell back on your favorite defense mechanism–”that goes against my beliefs, therefore it doesn’t count.”
Coming from one who doesn’t even profess to have any actual beliefs, that’s hilarious. Actually, I’m one of the few on this blog that constantly challenges my beliefs on a regular basis. I’ve repeatedly asked for anyone (including you) to correct any misconceptions I have about the Occupy movement. Instead all I get are your silly little gotcha games and snarky comments. Well, I guess if that’s all ya got……………..
watsondousche
REFUTE the article or STFU
ridicule,& mock = alinsky 101
the tactic of Morons who cant handle the truth.
Spook, you’re a gentleman for taking the time to respond. Have to give you that. 🙂
My beef is that you seem unwilling to concede that the media is just as capable of misrepresenting the OWS as it is the Tea Party. I think you are being disingenuous, but that’s just the way you come across to me. Perhaps others see it differently.
You say that the media does not fairly represent the Tea Party–a belief based on your personal experience. Fair enough. And yet, the best you can do with regard to OWS is to merely say that you don’t know if the media is biased–presumably because you have no personal experience with which to judge. But that doesn’t stop you from forming an opinion about OWS based on the media coverage you have seen, the quality of which you have admittedly can’t judge. It just sounds like a cop out, Spook. A convenient way to justify your beliefs about the OWS, which are based on zero firsthand experience. And for bonus points, you fallback on the old canard that the national media is left leaning and scared to death. You say you have talked with hundreds of Tea Party members. Why don’t you go talk to some OWS folks and see what is truly going on?
Why do you not think that the media is likely just as screwed up misrepresenting the OWS as it is the Tea Party? Oh right, I forgot: They’re left leaning and scared to death. You already know from first hand experience the media’s ability to misrepresent something you are directly involved with. It doesn’t seem like much of a stretch to assume that they are probably just as bad at reporting about OWS. At best, it seems that you of all people would HAVE to start from the presumption that they are just as adept at misrepresenting OWS as they are the Tea Party, because you know from firsthand experience how inaccurate they can be.
And then you throw in some unreferenced statistics in an attempt to damn the OWS, like 30 percent who believe violence is an acceptable tactic. It took me all of one minute to find a CBS poll that found that 24% of Tea Party members believe it is sometimes justified to take violent action against the government. Hardly a meaningful difference. Or do I need to be a Tea Party member to bring that up?
“And yet you can’t provide ANY evidence, can you, Wally?”
Starting your whack-a-mole game already, Spook? Yikes. This page has a surfeit of links to get you going, not that I expect such facts to have any impact on you whatsoever because of your favorite defense mechanism identified above.
I again invite you to think this through before responding; I again am confident that you won’t.
My beef is that you seem unwilling to concede that the media is just as capable of misrepresenting the OWS as it is the Tea Party. I think you are being disingenuous, but that’s just the way you come across to me. Perhaps others see it differently.
I tried, Watson; I really did. I can only take just so much circular argument and blood starts to shoot out of my eyes. I won’t let you waste my time again.
Starting your whack-a-mole game already, Spook? Yikes. This page has a surfeit of links to get you going
Yeah, Wally; that was the one obscure blog post I found also — from 2 years ago, shortly after Oath Keepers was founded. Got anything a little more recent?
My confidence in the notion that you will refuse to think before responding and instead will fall back on your previously identified favorite defense was obviously well-placed confidence, Spook. I’m curious, though: Why is it, exactly, that you refuse to deal with facts? Do you just find facts to be naturally hostile territory?
And what of the TP’s belief in violence? Or the Oath Keepers’ belief in violence, for that matter? Got an explanation for your hypocrisy there? I noticed that you preferred to run away from watson rather than face that. But that’s just a coincidence…right?
Watson and Bodie,
Do you find it ironic that the Oath Keepers are comprised largely of the base of Democratic voters? ie; Union members?
The Oath Keepers is a non-partisan, apolitical group of current soldiers, veterans, fire fighters, and police officers who have pledged to honor their oath to defend the Constitution of the United States and disobey official orders that are clearly in violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
My confidence in the notion that you will refuse to think before responding and instead will fall back on your previously identified favorite defense was obviously well-placed confidence, Spook. I’m curious, though: Why is it, exactly, that you refuse to deal with facts? Do you just find facts to be naturally hostile territory?
You have so thoroughly beaten and humiliated me that I’m just at a loss for words, Wally. Be sure to go on over to HuffPo and KOS and tell them how you beat ol’ Spook to the ground and stomped on him. Would you like me to send you some kind of plaque?
“Would you like me to send you some kind of plaque?”
Not at all. I would much prefer that you stop hiding behind excuses, own up to and attempt to correct your hypocrisy, and, above all, start thinking. Are you up for any of that?
Not at all. I would much prefer that you stop hiding behind excuses, own up to and attempt to correct your hypocrisy, and, above all, start thinking. Are you up for any of that?
No, I have to bow to your superior intellect and just admit that I’m no match for you. I guess you’ll have to engage someone else in the future.
“No”
Well, I guess it’s a good thing that you’re at least being honest about being an excuse-making, non-thinking hypocrite. I appreciate the admission.
IMO it takes a big man to bow out gracefully as Retired Spook did, and an extremely small man to write what Wallace wrote.
Thanks for the kind words, J.R.. I should have known better than to try to engage Wally in the first place. As you can tell from his posts, he’s a mentally disturbed individual, not at all unlike the black knight in the Monty Python bit. I’m one of those people who is always trying to save injured animals, but I guess some are just beyond help.
It wasn’t a total loss for you, Spook–like I said, it’s good that you’ve dropped the charade and admitted to being a hypocrite who hides behind excuses. Admission is the first step toward correction.
Wallace, you’re sick, dude. Seriously, you need to get professional help.
It’s sick to prove Spook wrong, show him the hypocrisy he’s indulging in, and get him to admit that he’s hiding behind excuses? Well, that’s interesting, I’ll give you that. But really, you should be glad for Spook here–he’s finally dropped his charade, but it’s up to him to build on that success and truly start thinking things through instead of reverting back to his habit of hiding behind excuses for his double standards. Maybe instead of being mad at me, you should help him with that.
Gee wally, you make an ass of yourself once again: “It’s sick to prove Spook wrong, show him the hypocrisy he’s indulging in, and get him to admit that he’s hiding behind excuses?”
I see that you are a stranger to sarcasm or is it you inability to comprehend the written word.
Your continued bungling in attempting to “debate” is just too hysterical for words.
Pathetic.
Ha Ha Ha
Fox Business Anchor Calls Joe Biden ‘Numb Nuts’ on the Air, Says He‘s ’Talking Out of His Backside’
BINGO……..
Good vid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouyNzCfsAq4
Wonder how much longer she will have her job? Or if she will be forced to apologize to vp numb nuts. Too bad telling the truth these days can get people in trouble.
GMB
they can replace here with this “guy”
Neo, I think he is over qualified for Fox News, fit right in with the gang a pmsnbc. 😛
Skateboarder? HA!
That’s a figure of a OWS with pants around his ankles crapping on a police car.
Here’s some video entertainment for Watson and Wally.
spook
what utterly completely Fn brain dead IDIOTS
did they ever hear of the IRON CURTAIN?????????
clue
it WASN’T to keep people OUT!!
Looks like a guy on a skateboard wisely leave the Occupy event. Unless you’ve seen that crappy photo, the more likely the pic to be misinterpreted.
“misinterpreted” now there’s a word the T Party is familiar with.
markNodeal
how is that?