11/5/2011 1:52:33 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4jYdCaHrjQ

[Edited on November 5, 2011 at 4:23 AM. Reason : a metric shit-ton of peepulz]

11/5/2011 4:14:35 AM

^i cant help to think "What if God had some ant spray" lol

11/5/2011 5:42:43 AM

"pack_bryan bot is malfunctioning"

lol. this entire 'protest' is a bot. it's a bot mentality and has no objective other than programmed to be a total waste of time to you the protestors and the police keeping you from raping 14 year olds in public parks


but it's been great throwing haymaker after haymaker at you in systematic verbal fashion every day.

gotta keep this thread high on the list for all to see the dumbassery going on you're openly supporting lol

11/5/2011 6:11:28 PM

Did you mean systematic?

And you're right, I actually don't know where I'm going to keep all this hay.

11/5/2011 6:39:23 PM

i think you've bottomed out man. time for your smokebreak to collect your thoughts and try again? lol

11/5/2011 6:43:44 PM

#ThingsToSayToMarkBlock

11/5/2011 6:53:50 PM

while your mind is busy thinking of strategies to defend your indefensible positions read this:


An "Occupy Wall Street" protester threw a violent fit in a McDonald’s after employees refused to give him free food.
Fisika Bezabeh, 27, ripped a credit-card reader from a counter and threw it at workers at about 2:30am local time Friday at the downtown Manhattan restaurant, which has become a bathroom spot for protesters.

11/5/2011 7:05:57 PM

Again I don't understand what kind of response these non-sequiturs are aiming for.

"One idiot threw a credit card machine at somebody, so wow you're right America does have a strong middle class and absolutely no problems with social mobility and economic injustice after all!"

Is that it?

11/5/2011 7:14:41 PM

Quote :

"Everybody I saw was peaceful and the atmosphere was actually convivial."

shutting down a port is anything but peaceful. it's economic warfare. but, I'm glad that you are fucking stupid enough to think that standing on someone else's property and refusing to leave is "peaceful"

Quote :

"Why is gas at $3.50/gallon? Would the oil companies still make billions if there was a government-imposed price cap at $1.25/gallon?"

oh look. an idiot is proposing price caps. Ask Cuba how well that works. Ask the Soviet Union how well that works. Hell, ask the banks how well that works with debit card transaction fees.

Quote :

"Gas is sold by the same oil companies at much lower prices in other areas of the world"

True. and we are most certainly subsidizing the gas consumption of other nations. Would you rather other nations not have any access to gasoline?

Quote :

"but vice taxes on tobacco are right"

really? you are against vice taxes? Such taxes are one of the legitimate functions of governments. You use such taxes to discourage unwanted behaviour without outlawing it. or, would you rather that smoking be illegal?

Quote :

"Just doing the simple math on $480.00 per week X 50 weeks shows how it's impossible to live a quality life with that income. "

where are we guaranteed a "quality life?" moreover, what constitutes a "quality life?" Many americans in "poverty" today live like kings compared to the rest of the world. and then, maybe this should be evidence that you don't want to be so unqualified that you are only able to get jobs like that. Maybe it should be motivation to *gasp* pay attention in school and work your ass off.

Quote :

"Wanting a job that pays enough to be able to drive your car to work and other local places"

looking at a car as a necessity is part of the problem in America. It's a fucking luxury, dude!

Quote :

"Everyone should have a vehicle, some form of home entertainment, food, and adequate living space per person. This isn't unreasonable or unable of being accomplished if the social and economic forces aren't set up to work against the working American."

And there is your problem. It is most certainly unreasonable to say that everyone should have a car and home entertainment. jesus, man.

[Edited on November 5, 2011 at 7:53 PM. Reason : ]

11/5/2011 7:33:34 PM

11/5/2011 7:38:45 PM

^ and that, too was wrong. they had zero right to disrupt a business in legitimate and legal operation. I'm sorry that you think that trespassing is ok. tell me that you still think it's OK when I show up at your house and refuse to leave

the only redeeming value of the sit-ins is that those people intended to pay, but the business was too fucking stupid to accept their money because the people had the wrong color of skin. Contrast that with the Occupy Dumbasses in Oakland who blocked the entrance to the port and allowed no one in and who had zero desire to actually spend money or engage in a business transaction.

[Edited on November 5, 2011 at 8:01 PM. Reason : ]

11/5/2011 7:54:12 PM

defending legal segregation, i see. goddamn, you're a bootlicker.





just another cop, upholding the law




just another firefighter, upholding the law




just some cops, keeping the peace

[Edited on November 5, 2011 at 8:11 PM. Reason : ]

11/5/2011 8:05:01 PM

lol @ equating these dick heads to the civil rights movement

what next, jihadists are the new feminists??? lolololol

11/5/2011 8:16:59 PM

^^^
lolwut?

11/5/2011 8:24:34 PM

moron, have a nice read:

lol. this is as good as it gets. undercover reporters amongst the tent cities. deny it. they are bots for the MAN. it can't be true!!


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/my_in_tents_night_amid_anarchy_of_ush5s5NscUZincUN0tF0yO

"all these f--king people are not doing financial accounting while we’re calling for it from the larger corporations,” says the transgender leader. “A lot of good people are quitting.”
A day later, a female-only “safety tent” would be erected to shield women from predators.
Organizers plan to add a medical tent, as well as others designed to provide safe sleeping for gay, transgender and co-ed groups.
The threat of rape is very real here -- for women and men."

lol

[Edited on November 6, 2011 at 9:43 AM. Reason : .]

11/6/2011 9:41:28 AM

You're laughing at people getting raped?

That's sick.

11/6/2011 10:27:33 AM

Quote :

"OWS is not against the free market"

Bullshit.

11/6/2011 10:37:16 AM

^

11/6/2011 11:08:26 AM

I think OWS is too disorganized to have any sort of unified goal or even opinion.

I see myself sometimes supporting certain aspects of what they complain about, and then the next thing I read makes me kind of want to see them take the business end of a water cannon.

11/6/2011 11:11:04 AM

^^^
they aren't. they are against contemporary capitalism.

capitalism is a subset of free markets.

11/6/2011 12:57:17 PM

Quote :

"Contrast that with the Occupy Dumbasses in Oakland who blocked the entrance to the port and allowed no one in and who had zero desire to actually spend money or engage in a business transaction. "

Got it. So only paying customers are allowed to bitch and protest when they feel the sting of oppression.

11/6/2011 1:18:03 PM

^^ Bullshit. They are against that, too, but there's a pretty widespread anti-capitalist/free-market streak. Maybe you're describing yourself, and that's fine, but let's not paint these motherfuckers as free-marketeers who just want want the system to work as it should.

11/6/2011 1:27:38 PM

That seems to be the character of the Occupy Raleigh protesters based on the communications of their facebook group, I guess I can't speak to the OWS folks.

11/6/2011 1:30:56 PM

"sting of oppression"

who the fuck is being oppressed? people act like there is slavery going on where people don't have a chance to beef up the resume and work for some of these fortune 500 companies and make big bucks one day.

fuck OWS and their lazy bitch ass mentality

11/6/2011 4:31:56 PM

^^I personally know a lot of the people that make up the backbone of Occupy Raleigh, and none of them are like that.

[Edited on November 6, 2011 at 4:34 PM. Reason : f]

11/6/2011 4:34:11 PM

but if you go carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao/
you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow

11/6/2011 4:36:13 PM

girl died today of a drug OD at the occupy vancouver protests

11/6/2011 4:38:04 PM

Quote :

"There's nothing wrong with wanting a job that lets you pay your bills. Wanting a job that pays enough to be able to drive your car to work and other local places, keeping your apartment at a comfortable temperature, having health and auto insurance, watching cable tv and surfing broadband internet, and eating enough food so that you aren't hungry doesn't mean that you are lazy and feel entitled to a handout. It wouldn't take much common sense to make all of those things accessible to the average American."

i really have a problem with that statement.

"average" American? do even know how many people don't have access to 3 meals a day in this country? who don't have a car, not by choice but those that can't afford it? who don't have internet, or cable tv?

i have no doubt that there are legitimate gripes against "corporate america" but fuck if i'm gonna agree that these people are legitimate in an argument where they think it's their right to live comfortably.

my one job didn't pay enough for me to pay off my medical bills and my car payment and shit, so you know what i did? i waitressed part time to pay the bills. you do what it takes to get by - not bitch and moan and destroy a fucking mcdonalds for not giving you free food. that's just stupid.

(sry double post)

11/6/2011 4:44:43 PM

^exactly. 94% of the world just said in unison: "fuck you, i've never experienced a/c and you demand it"

11/6/2011 4:52:11 PM

^^Or, you know, you could try and change things so that people don't have to work menial labor jobs with no opportunity for advancement for 16 hours a day in order to meet their minimum requirements for survival, most likely inadequately.

I just don't understand the whole "I had a really shitty time so everyone else should too" mentality.

11/6/2011 4:59:04 PM

No, it's more like "There is no free lunch, and what you want to do to ensure that people don't have a shitty time isn't worth it. The medicine is worse than the disease. I know this because I had a shitty time for a while, too, and I made it through OK."



Look, I'm with you dipshits on taking action against "crony capitalism", or "corporatism", or or whatever you want to call it. I'm with you on fixing our taxation system to account for the point at which things become regressive due to income largely being "unearned" (although I don't care for that term) and instead coming from capital gains and dividends. I think that there would be widespread, overwhelming popular support for this if approached and framed correctly.

I disagree on Wall Street being the proper venue for your hissy fit.

More importantly, though, those couple of noble causes are lost in a sea of dumbass, jealous, fringe-leftist, populist entitlement culture, and as long as that's the case, you will never get anything but pepper spray and billy clubs, and neither I nor most of America will give a damn for you.

11/6/2011 5:13:13 PM

That's not at all what I'm saying. And I'm sorry that you decided to simplify my statement into your short quote.

The American dream is all about picking yourself up and working hard to accomplish what you want. If that means you have to work a few jobs then do be it.

While I do admit (like I said above) that there is a culture that seems to encourage corporate greed, it is not the governments job to level the playing field for every Tom Dick and Harry.

11/6/2011 5:17:07 PM

it's wrong that corporations can buy candidates and write their own legislation

this needs to be fixed

it's also wrong when police brutality is tolerated as long as it's against someone you disagree with

[Edited on November 6, 2011 at 5:18 PM. Reason : ds]

11/6/2011 5:17:20 PM

I'm curious as to what you're considering "the medicine" here that's worse than the disease. I also don't think see this as asking for a free lunch, unless you consider a lot of the programs that every other developed country has to be free lunch. Except that, if that's the case, there must be a free lunch if all these other people are getting it.

Also ^^ it's pretty sad when we've apparently gotten to a point where our citizens' dreams are just to pay off their medical bills.

[Edited on November 6, 2011 at 5:21 PM. Reason : ]

11/6/2011 5:18:08 PM

we free-market types would love to make healthcare less expensive so that everyone could afford it, but some among us are more concerned with extending really goddamn expensive healthcare to everyone.

[Edited on November 6, 2011 at 5:25 PM. Reason : i'm not OK with police brutality. i'm perfectly OK with loathing both protesters and police.]

11/6/2011 5:24:54 PM

What makes our healthcare so much more expensive then?

11/6/2011 5:40:02 PM

youre scum if you compare these fuckheads to anyone who participated in the civil rights movement.

11/6/2011 5:48:13 PM

you are wrong about that

but i wouldn't go as far as to call you scum for being wrong

11/6/2011 5:48:50 PM

^^^well, our culture of litigation is part of it. we also need to divorce health insurance from employers.

actually, i'll just stop there and post this. I haven't scrubbed it in detail, but broadly speaking, I think it's on the right track:

http://docs4patientcare.org/prescription

[Edited on November 6, 2011 at 5:50 PM. Reason : we take a blank-check approach to healthcare, and from there don't really have proper competition.]

11/6/2011 5:49:20 PM

Quote :

"It is most certainly unreasonable to say that everyone should have a car and home entertainment. "

Everyone should be able to afford a cup and ball for home entertainment purposes

11/6/2011 5:52:31 PM

^^I agree that we need to separate healthcare from employers, but I have pretty serious concerns that forcing everyone individually to buy private insurance is the best answer. Nationalized healthcare would encourage preventive medicine, bring admin costs down and help businesses. Tort reform is a piece of the puzzle, but studies have shown that it doesn't really make up a big part of our costs: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/meme-busting-tort-reform--cost-control/2011/06/02/AGpb0DHH_blog.html

I keep hearing that opening up insurance across state lines would do a lot, but there are a ton of health insurance providers in every state and that level of competition hasn't done dick to bring down prices.

11/6/2011 6:07:08 PM

There is certainly a lot more to it than tort reform...particularly because really going all-out with tort reform would have its own drawbacks.

11/6/2011 6:23:07 PM

Was posted?

http://www.youtube.com/v/I0pX9LeE-g8&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0

11/6/2011 6:47:01 PM

^How dare he operate a camera! He probably had to pay money for that, and he's not supposed to have money! Hypocrite! He deserved it!

11/6/2011 7:06:53 PM

Quote :

"I keep hearing that opening up insurance across state lines would do a lot, but there are a ton of health insurance providers in every state and that level of competition hasn't done dick to bring down prices."

opening it up across state lines to increase competition isn't what would help it would be no longer requiring insurance companies to keep up with different rules/laws in all of the different states that they operate in. take blue cross blue shield. while they're headquartered in NC (i believe) they also operate in DC/Maryland/Virginia (that i know of for sure). So because they can't be one company working in 4 different states, they have to be four separate entities, one of each state.
if they could consolidate into one blue cross blue shield, it would save them a considerable amount of money.

the idea of tort reform:
it's not the lawsuits per se that cost the doctors themselves a considerable amount of money - it's the insurance premiums that they have to pay for medical malpractice insurance in case they get sued. people are so damned sue happy that doctors have to have it or else they lose their entire practice potentially.

in order for some of the things mentioned to be accomplished, one would need to consider some if then statements.

ie. if you want nationalized healthcare and tort reform then you need to realize that if you're ever in the situation to need to sue, then you either your reward amounts are much lower OR you don't get to sue period. or if you want nationalized health care then you need to realize that your own insurance premiums could go up as a result of legislation that seeks to accomplish that. oh wait, they already did.



i'm just saying that if you say that you want the government to step in and make all these things more affordable, or make things more fair, or nationalize healthcare then you need to accept that certain things in your life will change. the government is not this magic bullet that can fix all of the inequities that have developed over the past quarter century. these inequities have developed because humans (overall) are selfish and greedy and want to succeed and most don't care at what cost. the politicians are going to do what keeps them in office. the money keeps them getting re-elected. so they do what the people with the money want.

if you want money out of politics, then you're limiting free speech (because as the supreme court has ruled, money = free speech)

just think about the long term before you start ranting about how the government should do this or that.

/rant

11/6/2011 7:30:35 PM

I made a total mental error coming home from the marathon tonight and got off at Fulton St. Bad call - some of these assholes had broken off from their main camp and were parading around the area giving a fucking headache on my way home

11/6/2011 7:40:11 PM

^^
As far as your first argument, did you even look at what TheDuke posted?

Quote :

"1. Increase competition by allowing individuals to purchase health insurance across state lines. In state capitols across the country, powerful lobbying groups have successfully added various mandates to legally allowed health insurance policies in each state. There are several thousand such mandates, averaging 45 per state. Each mandate adds to the cost of the health insurance coverage, and collectively they dramatically increase the cost of coverage. These mandated regulations are enforced by insurance regulators in each state, and the interstate sale of health insurance is prohibited. A national competitive health insurance market must be established. In a national free market, insurance providers would list the coverage provided and the associated cost. Individuals and families can and should choose the specific coverage they need, rather than be compelled to purchase coverage that they do not find desirable or necessary. They should be able to obtain insurance coverage from any provider in any state. Market forces would eliminate providers who provide poor service, just as it does in other sectors of the economy."

Maybe you'd get more efficiency, but that wasn't what I was responding to and the fact remains that, in order to be profitable, they still have to screw people out of coverage.

I also know what the idea of tort reform is. Read the article I posted, it's all about malpractice insurance premiums.

Also, Obamacare is not nationalized healthcare. It's a mandate that everyone has to buy private insurance. That was the cornerstone of Hillary's healthcare plan and the reason I favored Obama over her in the primary.

I'm well aware of the long term consequences of all these things. I know my taxes would increase. I think it's worth it to have a country that's worth a damn.

11/6/2011 7:54:24 PM

Quote :

"Was posted? http://www.youtube.com/v/I0pX9LeE-g8&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0"

wow. never miss an opportunity to be an asshole, i guess.

11/6/2011 8:05:24 PM

i like how one of the dicks spray painted "THIS IS OURS" in front of the cops. with all the taunting and testing and probing, it's like they are begging for it.

11/6/2011 9:55:24 PM