But you're just perpetuating the pattern. You distort by what you leave out. The point is you're not coming out and actually saying this in 99% of you posts. And I'm not talking about the media here. If they've been mainly peaceful, that's not what YOU'RE talking about, you're talking about the violence. Just like the way you endorse the GOP by bashing democrats but not republicans, even if you never come out and endorse the GOP. It's a pretty obvious tactic.

Listen, these last couple pages were about Oakland...that was a borderline riot.
That riot wouldn't have existed had it not been for the OWS protest.

That's a fact.

Does that mean the whole OWS movement likes to riot? No, they all can't agree on anything.
Does it mean some of them do and really want to fuck with cops? Yes, without a doubt.

Go back and reference that poll taken in Zuccotti park:


By their own admission, a third of OWS in NY condone the use of violence.

That is unacceptable in my eyes, how about yours?

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Nice job. You lose an argument and then distort it with lies. All I said was that Oakland is a violent, dangerous place, with or without OWS.

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

Yeah, violence isn't OK with me. But you've been harping on this since way before Oakland.

Is it OK 30% of "OWS" would support violence to achieve their goals? Well, wtf does that mean? Would that entail killing CEOs? Who answered these questions and how representative a sample is it?

Furthermore, when you get right down to it, the "right" supports violence in Iraq and Afghanistan. Isn't that using violence to achieve their goals? How come you're not applying the same labels to them?

No it's not.
I have friends who live in Oakland and have nice houses and safe neighborhoods.
Stop being ignorant...how many times do I have to call you out on it?

Are you implying the riots would have happened with or without OWS?

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

That's because the violence started in NYC

http://www.douglasschoen.com/pdf/Occupy ... Schoen.pdf
AFAIK, that's the most comprehensive poll taken on-site.

Apples and Oranges...yes, we all want peace, sometimes sovereign nations war with each other. That has little to do with this.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

I make that assumption as well. However, there's only one thing you can count on when you make an assumption.

_________________

So, some violence is OK, as long as it's not against Americans right? Yup, only violence against "authority figures" is wrong, I forgot.

What percentage of the right would you say support violence to achieve their goals? Maybe 96 to 99%? So, why don't I just say every Republican is a gun-toting Rambo wannabe? I mean that's what people in the rest of the world think. I don't because I know that's not true and I don't like to resort to feeding into the two-sided drone that masquerades as political discourse.

The difference here is if there's a group bent on violent overthrow of our government...from the right or the left, I would take up arms against them.

As for our wars being the desire of the "right"



That's as bipartisan as Washington gets.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

So you're arguing here that Congress represents the opinion of Americans. Funny how normally you say exactly the opposite and love to show your little polls of disapproval ratings. Not a good piece of support for your argument there.

You assert the "right" is ok with violence in the form of foreign wars, I'm simply pointing out a majority of Democrats in congress should enjoy a similar label....and that's important because, you know...they have a say in when we go to war, not you or I.

But all of this is a tad off-topic.
If you'd like to talk about the existence of violence at, say a tea party rally, that would be relevant.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

I disagree there. true, it would be a more exact comparison, but I don't think the venue for your violence matters if it's part of your strategy.

As far as Congressional democrats, most deserve that label as well, as well as being called spineless for now backtracking as many of them are. By and large, they're all pieces of shit. Russ Feingold voted against it (and maybe Barbara Boxer?) but otherwise yeah, fuck them. They got what they deserve.

I didn't hear that many people on the left complain when NATO bombs were falling on Libyan citizens.
We all get to pick and choose who we think the "bad guys" are.

If some people think capitalism is the "bad guy" in this country and are willing to use violence against it, well, I strongly disagree and wish them to lose their fight.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

I can understand that. But my point is I want you to stop portraying them as violent and stress the people like your friend who are peaceful and make up the majority of this movement. Just like I'll try to think of people on the right as being more like you and NYIntensity and less like Rush Limbaugh.

Fair enough, but I'd like to stress I'm not manufacturing this stuff...it's happening.

OWS needs to get these people out or run the risk, as pointed out by Mr. Natural, of losing the movement and legitimacy.

EDIT: oh for the record, my friend would totally mix things up with the cops...that's why he got gassed. I wouldn't call him violent though.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

OK...I'm gonna go paint the basement now that this round appears to be over...for now...

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

buddy christ ftw

_________________

Damnit! I'm reading through, and I have a real zinger for the Disney characters party affiliation line. I was going to reference someone as a Hugonaut. But that was over 2 pages ago! We're back on topic now! Damn. Humor wasted. What a crime.

Ham

_________________
Do you believe yet?

Looney Tunes???



While I hate to acknowledge it, Mr. Natural is probably a Ron Paul guy. Either that or he would write in Hunter S. Thompson's name.

So what if he is dead?

_________________
th' only knower of th' cosmic mysteries alive at this time