[SoNotHer]

Well, I hate to revert to adolescence (at least for something like this), but the only response I have is a big "W" on my forehead and a gum-snapping "Whatever" rolled off my lips. :-0

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I keep thinking I need to know how the enemy is thinking, how they are going to come at this movement. But it's annoying to read this stuff and truly sometimes I wonder if it's really necessary cause it just puts me in a bad mood. On that note, here let me share it with you.

My comments are in parenthesis. I only made one when I really couldn't resist because truly this shit needs no commentary it speaks for itself.

What the Right is saying about the Occupy Wall Street movement

It’s a mob

The movement is made of spoiled lazy trust fund kids
(odd since it arose organically out of anger over pervasive economic injustice)

The movement lacks the nerve to engage in violence.

They’re mad. They’re getting violent. They don’t have a plan to work within the parameters of a civil society (The Constitution).

They are quite literally throwing a temper tantrum and demanding that “the rich” fork over more money to the government. Despite the predictable failure of Progressivism, they still think “the rich” paying more in taxes is going to lead to them getting a job. It’s almost sad to watch. I’d pity them if they weren’t a bunch of arrogant entitled brats.

The tea party inspired OWS.

Fewer people have participated in all the Occupy movements combined than attended just one tea party rally on the Washington Mall.

In comportment, OWS is to the tea party as Lady Gaga is to Lord Chesterfield.
(This one actually rendered me speechless. So many thoughts flowed in at once that I gave up trying to articulate them. I’m truly gobsmacked.)

This “movement” has no idea what they’re going to do beyond “occupying” public parks across the country. They’re under the impression that simply making a lot of noise will somehow magically force Congress to pass the legislation necessary to make the changes they’re demanding. There is no plan B. What you see now – the drum circles and chants and signs – is all they have. And they wonder why normal people see this “movement” as the temper tantrum it is?

Demands posted in OWS' name include a "guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment"; a $20-an-hour minimum wage (above the $16 entry wage the United Auto Workers just negotiated with GM); ending "the fossil fuel economy"; "open borders" so "anyone can travel anywhere to work and live"; $1 trillion for infrastructure; $1 trillion for "ecological restoration" (e.g., re-establishing "the natural flow of river systems"); "free college education."
(This reminds me of the outcry the Right had regarding The Promise of America, a program teaching kids to read. They claimed the program spewed offensive socialist propaganda by saying horrible things like the People’s basic needs must be met. Needs for housing, education, transportation, and health care need to be overseen by our government system. Labor laws should ensure that people work in safe environments and that they are paid fairly for the work they do. Really controversial stuff apparently.)

It’s going to get ugly. And they’re going to lose.

OWS casts Barack Obama and the Democrats as the problem and will ultimately cost the Democrats the election.

Republicans support the tea party. Democrats don’t support OWS.

Occupy Wall Street is a loosely knit movement with opaque goals.

You cannot compare OWS to the tea party because the tea party attracted substantial financial backing.
(they really don’t get it do they?)

The tea party appeals to middle-class Americans who not only tend to have more money than the angry young people who are at the core of the “Occupy” movement, but who also tend to vote.

Do Democrats really think that casting Barack Obama as the enemy of business is going to win him this election? The real problem, politically speaking, with building a Democratic tea party on the back of Wall Street is that it is unlikely to elect more Democrats
(there is actually a sensical point in there somewhere, but first you have to accept the premise that OWS is the Democratic version of the tea party.)

Political instability caused by protesting is not good for the economy. (ya, cause things have been going so great until now.)

Protesting against business – or even just big business- is not going to lead those companies to hire more people
(Well, this assumes that they were actually hiring Americans in the first place. Most of Wall St companies don’t actually produce anything. They are giant gambling casinos. Manufacturing corporations are already moving their jobs and production overseas and getting big tax breaks to break our backs.)

Does OWS really think that this is how we boost consumer confidence?
(I guess they aren’t kidding when they say they don’t understand what all the protesting is about. The message really isn’t clear to these chowderheads.)


A couple of reference links so it doesn't look like I pulled this crap out of, well you know.

http://www.therightsphere.com/2011/1...nti-democracy/

http://www.newsmax.com/GeorgeWill/Oc...0/14/id/414495

http://www.newsmax.com/Estrich/Wall-...0/14/id/414455

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1...A0conservatism