Two weeks into Occupy Wall Street protests, movement is at a crossroads

Sez you. Obviously a whole lot of people disagree with you.

In any case, I can't believe I have to keep explaining that the argument is that the Tea Party has been far more influential and politically effective than Occupy.

Whether or not the policies the TP supports will prove to be advantageous to America, remains to be seen. Your judgment of of these policies is entirely premature.

Once again, irrespective of whether or not you agree with either movements tenets, one has made much more of a practical difference than the other.

This a plain and simple truth at this point in time.

I contend that truth will not change in years to come, but I suppose we'll see.

I'm consistent and if I am consistently in disagreement with you, it's not surprising, nor something that I regret.

I'm not surprised that you stand by your "manipulated rabble" comment either.

In the obverse, those who have acted as Tea Party members have seen recalls and demonstrations against what they have imposed through government fiat such as destroying government unions, and creating handicaps for voters.

If you believe that is "influential," you just don't understand the American people, and you've been ignoring the outcry from educators, police, and firefighters.

Well every once in a while is better that virtually every time I post.

I stand corrected on your origins, but that means you write posts as if you were the cynical child of affluent parents. You need to take hold of your Working Class roots more.

I am a baby boomer and was a hippie, but I gave up that indulgence when I had kids. Of course I generalize, and sometimes foolishly, but clearly so do you or I would not engage with you, so spare me the high horse riding.

You've misjudged me:

My motto isn't "**** you Jack, I'm OK," it's "**** you Jack if you want what I have but are not prepared to work as hard as me."

You object to "Occupiers" and yet employ "Teabaggers." Pretty rich.

Scroll back in this thread and you will see that I have acknowledged that some of the concerns expressed by Occupy are legitimate. Some of them are simply expressions of selfishness and ignorance, and it wouldn't matter if they had establishment supporters for them, they would remain the same.

Surely many if not most of the Occupiers would describe themselves as Progressives or Liberals --- some will call themselves radicals, and yet what you are describing is a reactionary response to change.

I too am a product of the working class, and my generation really took it in the neck. When we were young we were promised one result, and after we worked our asses off to obtain that result the rules got changed. That's life though. I could have stomped my feet and insisted on the benefits that I had been tacitly promised or I could adapt and thrive. I chose the latter approach and it has served me well.

Do I have a lot of sympathy for folks who make stupid decisions for selfish reasons, and then find themselves fucked? No I do not.

If you take out huge loans to attend an Ivy League school so you can get a Sociology degree, and find yourself without a job and in debt...Wow, what a surprise!

And...if you are not prepared to adapt and thrive, then take actions that have some chance of changing the scenario. Camping out in public parks, beating tribal drums, and throwing paper airplanes at the executive offices of banks ain't going to do it.

This is why I have such ill regard for Occupy: Babies wail because they are hungry or their diapers are filled with ****. Adults affect change.

If only your arguments kept pace with the quality of your expression.

This response, alas, is yet another crock.

The Tea Party is motivated by "malignancy?" Slick rhetoric, but, for once, offer some substantiation for your skillful blather.

All Occupy has done is wail...no organization, no action...never a revolution.

This has nothing to with understanding "The American People."

Please recalibrate your bullshit governor.

Let me try one last time to explain this in a way that has a chance of breaking through your ideological barricades.

For example:

I want the government to invade Iran; you do not.

Both of us make our beliefs known by staging demonstrations and such.

I spend my time and money getting candidates who agree with me elected to congress. You just keep on wailing.

I have been far more effective than you.

Capiche?

Well, we haven't invaded Iran yet, and it looks like we're not going to; so, how effective have you been on this issue, exactly?

Cycloptichorn

I do not "wail." I have written to President Obama on many issues. I also vote in every election. Your use of "capiche" is not only misplaced, but ignorant as well.

From Wiki:

It's a hypothetical. Surely someone has nimble-minded as you can grasp the concept.

Thick as a brick.

Since you really can't respond intelligently, you resort to ad hominems. LOL

You should know that an ad hominem is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative . I'm not convinced Finn employed the device. I think a brick that took pride in its thickness would envy you.

spendi, You don't even understand simple words that are commonly used.




Finn wrote,

Young US military man speaking truth.

Good. I almost always appreciate the level of your posts. Also, I'm glad they finally settled on a message - beyond "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore." We're almost three months into the protests, but better late than never.

LOL indeed.

Whether or not 'Thick as a brick" is an ad hominem, I confess that I have a breaking point when it comes to the seemingly willful thick-headedness of posters.

Case in point: Your insistence on arguing that the measure of political influence is based on a quality of results that cannot be determined for years to come.

This is a thickness that indeed bricks might envy.

Thick as **** is a better turn of phrase.

I've found that bricks tend to be thicker than ****.

Ian Anderson agrees with me.

Turns of phrase are more dependent on the cadence of words than physical reality.