You'll remember that far left Oakland mayor Democrat Jean Quan was noticeably tolerant and supportive of the #Occupy Oakland creeps the last time they erupted back in November.Their pestilential encampment was only dismantled by police after it became a major health hazard.
Over the weekend, #Occupy Oakland repaid the city's tolerance by breaking into City Hall and did massive damage to the facility, including seizing American flags and burning them as part of the festivities.They also tore down fencing at the adjacent Henry Kaiser convention center and smashed everything they could get their hands on, including construction equipment left onsite. The #Occupy mob fought with police throughout the entire day, throwing rocks, bottles and other objects at officers. The Police responded by deploying smoke, tear gas and bean bag rounds. They later marched downtown,breaking into a number of buildings including a YMCA and damaging them.Over 300 were arrested.
The riot occurred after #Occupy protesters demanded the use a vacant building as a social center and threatened to to shut down the port, occupy the airport and take over City Hall.
Mayor Quan was typically schizoid about the event, on one hand demanding that the rioters "stop using Oakland as its playground" and on the other hand refusing to condemn the #Occupy movement, blaming on a small "very radical, violent" splinter group within #Occupy for the violence and destruction.
In media stories about this and other incidents, it's notable that no mention has been made of the fact that prominent Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and President Obama have explicitly endorsed the #Occupy protesters and everything they stand for. And that the Democrats and of course Democrat paymaster George Soros have helped finance it.
6 comments:
According to some reports on this the monetary damage from these actions is at around 5 million dollars. I'd suggest giving the bill for this to the Occupy protestors. Of course something like that would make sense.
This is definitely not a radical splinter group. This is indicative of the entire movement. For Mayor Quan to make this statement either means there is actually another agenda at work or they simply don't understand the enemy. Personally I think its the latter. They simply don't understand the enemy.
As for Mr. Soros, he has been so rich and powerful for so long that he has probably become blinded by his ideology and does not fully understand what he is supporting. Again though their could be another agenda at work though.
A good comparison and contrast between the so called tea party and the occupy Wall Street protestors would be as follows. Tea Partier = net tax payer. Occupy Wall Street protestor = net tax reciepient.
Since Occupy protestors are net tax recipients, they are not going to respect the property rights of others. Someone who has to actually pay for the use of things is much more likely to respect it.
I'd suggest requiring the Occupy protestors to provide the manual labor to clean this up. This should be done at gun point if necessary. Also, they should bear the brunt of the milllion dollar price tag it is apparetnly going to take to repair all of the damage.
Now with that said, the mayor and other government officials bear some responsibility for this. They egged this on, provided encouragement for it, nurtured it, provided logistical support for it, and provided monetary support for it. As such, they should not get off scot free as far as responsibility for this. They should be required to help with the cleanup and they should be required to personally pay out of their own personal funds a sizeable portion of the cleanup costs.
With regards to government officials and the roles they played in this several wise sayings come to mind. "Lie down with dogs and you will wake up with fleas." "Whatever you sow you will surely reap." "You made the bed and now you must sleep in it."
By encouraging criminal thugs we've reaped a whirl wind. If the US government is to survive it simply MUST rearrange its priorities. On the one hand, we have the "tea party" who does not wish to overthrow the government. They simply wish to see it reformed so that it operates more efficiently, ridiculous regulations are taken off of the backs of job producers, and taxpayer dollars are spent more prudently. As the taxpayers, they have every right to request and even expect these things.
In contrast, Occupy protestors are largely net tax recipients meaning most of them do not pay taxes. As such, they have no right to demand how government operates. While the taxpayers may listen to what these people have to say and may act accordingly if it is prudent to do so, they are under no obligation to do so.
If the government wishes to survive it should immedialtely open up a dialogue with the "tea party" and work to find solutions to the intractable issues our country faces. I suspect they will come to the cconclusion that this is what needs to happen but it may be to late for them by the time they figure this out.
As I udnerstand it, at one time only property owners could vote. Such a requirment is actually quite sensible, as these are the people who have "financial skin in the game." Perhaps we should think about implementing a simillar requirement today. When idiots who don't pay taxes and people who hate our country are allowed to vote, it will have bad results. Again, one will reap what one sows.
A small radical group that at one point during the day included 2000 people. She must be so far left that she has lost her senses
Since Occupy protestors are net tax recipients, they are not going to respect the property rights of others. Someone who has to actually pay for the use of things is much more likely to respect it.
That's actually not true. The blue states have been subsidizing the red states for years. So called 'conservative' states are net tax recipients, not the left. But don't let facts get in the way or anything, please.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/04/the_red_state_ripoff.html
Rob's brain: Oh my god. A factual point that I can't rebut and don't want my readers to know about. Better not post it or they might start thinking for themselves...
Ah, I see it's time to let the village idiot out of the spam box again.
Actually, Anonymous, I didn't say it, since unlike class warfare pimps like Journolista Klein, our President and you, I see no common sense or reason to differentiate in terms of what red states and blue states contribute to our common Union. That's why we have one.
But since you and your soulmates love to do so for the sake of trying to gain political power, I'll answer:
1)Poster was talking about the OWS creeps specifically, NOT breaking anything down by states. And he's likely correct, although I wouldn't say that since there's no data available.
2)If you look at Klein's map carefully, it includes a number of both Blue and Red States as net tax recipients, like Texas, Ohio Pennsylvania, Vermont...so Klein's breakdown(and yours,since you're parroting) is just stoo-pid.
3) it becomes even more stoo-pid if you look at a county map and start differentiating Red counties from Blue ones.As you know, a lot of Blue States consist of Blue urban areas surrounded by Red counties. Without the taxes and products from the Red counties, guess what happens to those urban areas?
3) Also, this very simplified breakdown leaves a number of things out of the equation...like the cost of federal oversight over states that produce things like energy resources,food products and states that house government and military facilities, which is where the majority of the 'imbalance' comes from. And then there's the human part of the equation. Care to guess what part of the country the majority of our volunteer military comes from? Red counties, troll..and the region that leads per capita? Those rednecks you despise in the South and Midwest. Care to place a value on that? Figure those in and the picture's very different.
It'll be even more different when states like California and Illinois start screaming for bailouts.
Tell me,anonymous. Were you born this stupid. or was it something you had to work at?
BTW, the reason more of your 'comments' don't get posted is because they're normally don't meet guidelines and are exclusively a waste of time and space...but once in a while, the amusement value for me overrides my denying you the undoubted joy you get at being noticed.
Regards,
Rob
BTW, anonymous, from this 'comment' I assume you approve of the OWS creeps damaging public property and breaking the law.
Bravo.
I know many "tea party" activist/supporters and can state definitively that these are net tax payers. What I should have said about OWS protestors is these are very likely net tax recipients. With my background and experience I understand how net tax recipients behave and, as such, can state beyond a reasonable doubt that these individuals of OWS are net tax recipients. Since I know how such folks behave, I know them by how they behave.
It is entirely correct that I was only speaking of OWS people and not by state. For example, when the economy was booming Wall street was doing fabulously well and was very likely paying large raw dollar amounts in taxes. Wall Street is located in a "blue state," Also, we have silicon valley. This is in a "blue state" too. If you'd have read the post, you'd know I was only taling about OWS protestors and not generalizing.
As stated previously, OWS people should be made to bear the cost of the cleanup and they should supply the labor personally that it takes to clean this up. This should be done at gun point if necessary.
Post a Comment