Occupy Wall Street

[JC]

Are we or are we not a representative democracy?

No, we are a representative republic. Do you not agree that the rule of law is superior to the rule of man. I believe the founders warned us against "democracy".

[cybotron r_9]

Are we or are we not a representative democracy?

No, we are a representative republic, akin to a constitutional republic. A representative democracy lacks a written constitution for limiting the majority.

[JawZ]

You know Jawz, you should be a politician, because you know everything and are never wrong...... at least you never admit when your wrong.

In your own words "'ll stop right there. The US was established as a democracy." WRONG, We were established as a Republic, then you change tactics "Are we or are we not a representative democracy?", the question was not what we currently are, it was what we were established as and you were simply wrong.

You always put words in people mouths, misquote them, change your story to fit your needs and NEVER admit fault..... your a politician.

the word republic implies in our country...democracy. Just as in the old USSR...Union of Soviet Socialist Republics...republic means socialism. So without further ado, what exactly does Republic mean to YOU in the US????? the problem is that you guys throw the word Republic around to protect your screwball GOP tactics which have been failures since before Reagan. You guys have zero comprehension of a Republic within the framework of our Constitution.

Like it or not...we WERE established as a democracy no matter how much the GOP wishes to differ to meet their own fvcked up agenda. It's now a trend that every time the people rise up and exercise their democratic rights, the GOP jumps up and says that there is no democracy...it's a republic!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL! But I'll be damned, the friggin Tea Party should loves exercising their rights as supporters of the Republic hehehe.

So finally, we were established as a democracy and now we are a Corporatocracy. Don't like it, do something about it.

[RaisinCain]

RaisinCain, since it's very obvious you are a staunch Democrat and strong Obama supporter, name anything he has done since he has been in office that has benefited this country and the people in it?

I'm not so anti Democrat, Clinton wasn't a bad President, I'm just VERY anti Obama, he has run this country into the ground and done his best to push his socialistic policies on us.

Well he lifted Bush restrictions on embryonic stem cell research for one. Which is going to be beneficial to everyone. I'm not a Democrat or anything else for that matter. I can't stand Big Government but I do believe giving credit where credit is due.

[mnosteele52]

the word republic implies in our country...democracy. Just as in the old USSR...Union of Soviet Socialist Republics...republic means socialism. So without further ado, what exactly does Republic mean to YOU in the US????? the problem is that you guys throw the word Republic around to protect your screwball GOP tactics which have been failures since before Reagan. You guys have zero comprehension of a Republic within the framework of our Constitution.

Like it or not...we WERE established as a democracy no matter how much the GOP wishes to differ to meet their own fvcked up agenda. It's now a trend that every time the people rise up and exercise their democratic rights, the GOP jumps up and says that there is no democracy...it's a republic!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL! But I'll be damned, the friggin Tea Party should loves exercising their rights as supporters of the Republic hehehe.

So finally, we were established as a democracy and now we are a Corporatocracy. Don't like it, do something about it.

See here you go again, it's NOT what it MEANS to me or you, there is a definition of what a Republic and Democracy are, since you don't know exactly what the definitions are:

Democracy:
A government of the masses.
Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.
Results in mobocracy.
Attitude toward property is comunistic-negating property rights.
Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate. whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.
Results in demagogism license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.
Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success.
A certain Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship."
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.

Republic:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.
Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.
Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.
A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.
Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.
Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world.
A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of:
an executive and
a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create
a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize
certain inherent individual rights.

From Democracy versus Republic

From those definitions I would definitely say we were (and still should be) a Republic.

Also, here is a video for you to better understand [video=youtube;j7M-7LkvcVw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7M-7LkvcVw[/video]

[mnosteele52]

Well he lifted Bush restrictions on embryonic stem cell research for one. Which is going to be beneficial to everyone. I'm not a Democrat or anything else for that matter. I can't stand Big Government but I do believe giving credit where credit is due.

Wow, that's it, you voted for and support a guy that has run this country for 4 years and that is all that you can come up with? I will agree that is a good thing, I don't believe with cloning anyone or thing, but embryonic stem cell research does have it's place and definite benefits.

[RaisinCain]

Wow, that's it, you voted for and support a guy that has run this country for 4 years and that is all that you can come up with? I will agree that is a good thing, I don't believe with cloning anyone or thing, but embryonic stem cell research does have it's place and definite benefits.

I don't vote and quit trying to portray me as someone that I am not- you don't know me. Also, I can come up with a whole lot more than that but I am not going to do your homework for you and spend my time listing everything that he has done. Do your own research.

[Paft]

I don't vote

Then you have no valid voice. If you don't vote, you have no right to complain - you couldn't be bothered to try to change the situation, after all.

[Paft]

Edit: Double post.

[RaisinCain]

Then you have no valid voice. If you don't vote, you have no right to complain - you couldn't be bothered to try to change the situation, after all.

If you really think that you are changing the situation your are seriously mislead or delusional. I pay taxes- THAT is what gives me the right to express my thoughts and opinions. Weather or not I vote is a personal opinion and my voice is not weakened.

[Prey521]

If these cult like, chanting nutjobs are the "99%", then count me the hell out. Talk about creepy.

[video=youtube;3QZlp3eGMNI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eG ... r_embedded[/video]

[RaisinCain]

Anyway...
http://www.forkparty.com/17789/22-aweso ... s-pictures

[JawZ]

See here you go again, it's NOT what it MEANS to me or you, there is a definition of what a Republic and Democracy are, since you don't know exactly what the definitions are:

Democracy:
A government of the masses.
Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.
Results in mobocracy.
Attitude toward property is comunistic-negating property rights.
Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate. whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.
Results in demagogism license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.
Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success.
A certain Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship."
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.

Republic:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.
Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.
Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.
A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.
Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.
Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world.
A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of:
an executive and
a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create
a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize
certain inherent individual rights.

From Democracy versus Republic

From those definitions I would definitely say we were (and still should be) a Republic.

Also, here is a video for you to better understand [video=youtube;j7M-7LkvcVw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7M-7LkvcVw[/video]

LOL...those are the poorest and loosest defintions I've ever seen. First there are two major differences here. In government, there is type and form so you need to start there. What's even more funny is that the GOP rails against, and even caters to the extremes in order to rail against it without having even the slightest idea about type and form. The GOP wants it's own minority rule over the majority's will.


so let's get back to the key question here...

Who initiated TARP and why when it went against the majority will of the people? the answer is President Bush.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... d-bailouts

Lets also mention that Bush turned a record surplus into a record deficit between 2001-2005 with the farce of a war in Iraq. What's interesting and what I'm HOPING you'll see is that BOTH parties are morally and ethically corrupt and devoid of any great ideas. What we need is to gut the government and start fresh or have another civil war.


The bottom line for me is this...I'm actually on your side and don't wish to argue. I voted for Obama because I couldn't allow Palin to be in any position of power. Obama has continued failed policies of the Bush admin and for that alone, he needs to go. the current field of GOP candidates sucks. I want the GOP to rediscover it's core values and I believe those core values were best espoused by Barry Goldwater...NOT Ronald Reagan. Specifically for 2012, I want an opt out option for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. I want all my money back. And I want all new enrollments in either to stop by 2020. I want total campaign finance reform. And I want all corporate affairs to be governed by one simple litmus test...it's the same test we all use in the medical community...do no harm. I have nothing against big business, just unethical business practices. Our government footprint is way too big and is unsustainable. I could go on and on and on.

[RaisinCain]

^ This.

[Paft]

Awesome. Occupy Wall Street in San Diego reveals their true agenda. I was walking downtown to find out what all this protesting was really about, straight from the horse's mouth so to speak, and upon querying a few of the protesters, I found myself terrified. Here's a few bullet points:

* Complete criminalization of guns - all gun owners should be jailed and put to death as violent criminals.
* A maximum yearly income where the rest of the money you make is taken by the government.
* Taxation that increases proportional to the income you earn (10K = 10%, 20K = 15%, ..., 250K+ = 50%).
* Decriminalization of illegal drugs.
* Banning private health care altogether and forcing everyone on a government system.
* Banning corporations and forcing any chain larger than X stores (I heard 3, 5, 10 as common numbers) to split off and become single owner stores.
* Forcing all businesses to turn all profits over to the government.
* Banning all campaign contributions from any non-private individual, to include people who work in the public sector (military, teachers, police, etc).

And you all are trying to tell me that these OWS idiots are sane and right? In what world is this sane? In what world is this NOT an attack on Capitalism, and an attack on people who are successful? These demands are like something from a left-wing paradise, not from the United States or anything in our history.

[Roody]

FWIW I appreciate you guys keeping this discussion civil.

[Shinobi]

FWIW I appreciate you guys keeping this discussion civil.

I appreciate that this thread is not locked out. I am reading this thread, and I am learning about the protest.

Please correct me if I am wrong...

The protest is about a lot of individual issues that people have, however... the main issue that is being resounded.. is that corporations have a strangle hold on politicians and the government, and the people are suffering because of that. Be it, jobs, foreclosures ECT.

Also, it seems that the group "anonymous", is a major player in all of this.

Am I right on that?

[mnosteele52]

LOL...those are the poorest and loosest defintions I've ever seen. First there are two major differences here. In government, there is type and form so you need to start there. What's even more funny is that the GOP rails against, and even caters to the extremes in order to rail against it without having even the slightest idea about type and form. The GOP wants it's own minority rule over the majority's will.


so let's get back to the key question here...

Who initiated TARP and why when it went against the majority will of the people? the answer is President Bush.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... d-bailouts

Lets also mention that Bush turned a record surplus into a record deficit between 2001-2005 with the farce of a war in Iraq. What's interesting and what I'm HOPING you'll see is that BOTH parties are morally and ethically corrupt and devoid of any great ideas. What we need is to gut the government and start fresh or have another civil war.


The bottom line for me is this...I'm actually on your side and don't wish to argue. I voted for Obama because I couldn't allow Palin to be in any position of power. Obama has continued failed policies of the Bush admin and for that alone, he needs to go. the current field of GOP candidates sucks. I want the GOP to rediscover it's core values and I believe those core values were best espoused by Barry Goldwater...NOT Ronald Reagan. Specifically for 2012, I want an opt out option for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. I want all my money back. And I want all new enrollments in either to stop by 2020. I want total campaign finance reform. And I want all corporate affairs to be governed by one simple litmus test...it's the same test we all use in the medical community...do no harm. I have nothing against big business, just unethical business practices. Our government footprint is way too big and is unsustainable. I could go on and on and on.

OK once again you have completely lost me. When did the key question EVER become about who initiated TARP??????? The key question is that you said we were founded as a Democracy when we were not, we were founded as a Republic and you won't admit your wrong. Once again you try and change the subject and start going on a rant about Bush...... where did that even come from?

To be honest we are both way off topic here, the actual topic is about "Occupy Wall Street".

But to get back to the ACTUAL question at hand..... were we founded as a Democracy or a Republic, it's Republic PERIOD. Here are the actual definitions from Webster so don't dispute it saying it's incorrect.


Definition of DEMOCRACY
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercise by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government
3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy — C. M. Roberts>
4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

Definition of REPUBLIC
1 a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government
b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government
c : a usually specified republican government of a political unit <the French Fourth Republic>
2 : a body of persons freely engaged in a specified activity <the republic of letters>
3 : a constituent political and territorial unit of the former nations of Czechoslovakia, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Yugoslavia

[mnosteele52]

Awesome. Occupy Wall Street in San Diego reveals their true agenda. I was walking downtown to find out what all this protesting was really about, straight from the horse's mouth so to speak, and upon querying a few of the protesters, I found myself terrified. Here's a few bullet points:

* Complete criminalization of guns - all gun owners should be jailed and put to death as violent criminals.
* A maximum yearly income where the rest of the money you make is taken by the government.
* Taxation that increases proportional to the income you earn (10K = 10%, 20K = 15%, ..., 250K+ = 50%).
* Decriminalization of illegal drugs.
* Banning private health care altogether and forcing everyone on a government system.
* Banning corporations and forcing any chain larger than X stores (I heard 3, 5, 10 as common numbers) to split off and become single owner stores.
* Forcing all businesses to turn all profits over to the government.
* Banning all campaign contributions from any non-private individual, to include people who work in the public sector (military, teachers, police, etc).

And you all are trying to tell me that these OWS idiots are sane and right? In what world is this sane? In what world is this NOT an attack on Capitalism, and an attack on people who are successful? These demands are like something from a left-wing paradise, not from the United States or anything in our history.

Scary isn't it? What makes you posting this better than anything is that you asked the questions from random people yourself, so nobody can't say the media picked out some loons and twisted their answers. What these people really want is Socialism.

[Ken]

Let me give a simple definition- A Democracy is ruled by the majority, a Republic is ruled by laws... See the difference...

Be happy that our fore fathers had the sense to know that just because a majority believes something, it does not make it true or correct… In order for there to be an average intelligence, half the people must be below average…
With all of the access to education, we still seem to be regressing into a bunch of thoughtless fools that believe what we want, damn the facts… Quick to jump to a conclusion that sounds good and never truly understand the issues, much less actually look for the facts…
Let’s continue to pat ourselves on the back and proclaim what great people we are, what a great country we are!

[Roody]

I appreciate that this thread is not locked out. I am reading this thread, and I am learning about the protest.

Please correct me if I am wrong...

The protest is about a lot of individual issues that people have, however... the main issue that is being resounded.. is that corporations have a strangle hold on politicians and the government, and the people are suffering because of that. Be it, jobs, foreclosures ECT.

Also, it seems that the group "anonymous", is a major player in all of this.

Am I right on that?

In a nutshell yes. That's correct.

[Roody]

Let me give a simple definition- A Democracy is ruled by the majority, a Republic is ruled by laws... See the difference...

Be happy that our fore fathers had the sense to know that just because a majority believes something, it does not make it true or correct… In order for there to be an average intelligence, half the people must be below average…
With all of the access to education, we still seem to be regressing into a bunch of thoughtless fools that believe what we want, damn the facts… Quick to jump to a conclusion that sounds good and never truly understand the issues, much less actually look for the facts…
Let’s continue to pat ourselves on the back and proclaim what great people we are, what a great country we are!

It seems in the last 10 years that any attempt to question how our leaders do things is met with claims of being unpatriotic or accusations of racism. During Bush's time in office those unpatriotic claims were at a high volume. With Obama in office questions of racism abound unfortunately.

[Ken]

Unfortunately, 9-11 changed history as well as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, at least in the US… Often times we seem to get carried away with something, with out putting much thought in to it... Grab it and run with it!

I remember trying to explain to my son how the concentration camps of WW2 were located just on the outskirts of many cities, yet the people in the cities said they had no clue what was going on... “Dad, how did the people NOT know what was happening”? It is easy when eyes and minds are closed, just look the other way…

Quite sad really... Oh well, it is my understanding that much of the atrocities will be written out of history for the PC crowd as no one should be made to feel bad for it... The sad part is those that don’t learn from the past are condemned to repeat it… In truth, many will do it willingly with great desire, just as before…

It makes me think of poisoning dogs. Most dogs are untrained and will accept food from what ever source it comes from. The dogs never ask themselves why someone is giving them free food, what they will have to do to get this free food, what it will cost, who will pay, what will be the consequences… They eagerly gobble down the free food from a stranger and then lie down and die with out any thoughts about it…

[JawZ]

Let me give a simple definition- A Democracy is ruled by the majority, a Republic is ruled by laws... See the difference...

Be happy that our fore fathers had the sense to know that just because a majority believes something, it does not make it true or correct… In order for there to be an average intelligence, half the people must be below average…
With all of the access to education, we still seem to be regressing into a bunch of thoughtless fools that believe what we want, damn the facts… Quick to jump to a conclusion that sounds good and never truly understand the issues, much less actually look for the facts…
Let’s continue to pat ourselves on the back and proclaim what great people we are, what a great country we are!

Type and form my friend. It seems that those two disctions have been lost on folks. Again, our country was founded as a democracy. Let me make it easy for you. Are we a Democratic Republic or a Socialist Republic? Pick one or the other. After you choose, we'll move on to the next question.

[mnosteele52]

It seems in the last 10 years that any attempt to question how our leaders do things is met with claims of being unpatriotic or accusations of racism. During Bush's time in office those unpatriotic claims were at a high volume. With Obama in office questions of racism abound unfortunately.

With this "movement" Roody, they are called unpatriotic because they actually have signs that read "Socialism is NOT a dirty word".... really.... socialism. I agree that what happened on Wall Street with the bailout was wrong.... but they didn't do the bailing out, politicians did, so this ought to be "Occupy Capital Hill". As I said previously in this thread, politicians are the one's to blame, not just Obama and Democrats although they did make it much worse with the their spending, as I also stated previously, Obama spent more in his first year and a half in office than all other presidents combined, this is where the problem lies. Don't hate big corporations, just hit them where it hurts and ban them, don't buy their products if you don't agree with them. But these people are out protesting about Capitalism, that's what makes America what it is. It is VERY obvious from the news clips, websites (Occupy Wall Streets own site), news articles etc. that they are a bunch of extremists that really have no common goal, they all have this sense of entitlement that they deserve as much as the guys who go out and work 80 hours a week to be successful when they don't even have a job. If you aren't part of the solution they you are part of the problem and they aren't solving anything. I want someone to answer the question Why are you protesting Wall Street when politicians are the one's who enable big corporations to do what they do. They are the one's passing the laws and bailing everyone out and letting them fund their campaigns along with having so many tax loopholes for them to make the money they do? That brings me back to Herman Cain, 9-9-9, read it, very simple and we all benefit and it removes the loopholes.

Then you have the union representatives out there..... seriously?!?! It is SO obvious that this is a planned diversion to keep people from seeing the REAL problem...... Obama.

Although I don't 100% agree with the Tea Parties they are organized and actually have a mission statement an actual goal and purpose:

Tea Party Patriots Mission Statement and Core Values


Mission Statement

The impetus for the Tea Party movement is excessive government spending and taxation. Our mission is to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.

Core Values

Fiscal Responsibility
Constitutionally Limited Government
Free Markets


Fiscal Responsibility: Fiscal Responsibility by government honors and respects the freedom of the individual to spend the money that is the fruit of their own labor. A constitutionally limited government, designed to protect the blessings of liberty, must be fiscally responsible or it must subject its citizenry to high levels of taxation that unjustly restrict the liberty our Constitution was designed to protect. Such runaway deficit spending as we now see in Washington D.C. compels us to take action as the increasing national debt is a grave threat to our national sovereignty and the personal and economic liberty of future generations.

Constitutionally Limited Government: We, the members of The Tea Party Patriots, are inspired by our founding documents and regard the Constitution of the United States to be the supreme law of the land. We believe that it is possible to know the original intent of the government our founders set forth, and stand in support of that intent. Like the founders, we support states' rights for those powers not expressly stated in the Constitution. As the government is of the people, by the people and for the people, in all other matters we support the personal liberty of the individual, within the rule of law.

Free Markets: A free market is the economic consequence of personal liberty. The founders believed that personal and economic freedom were indivisible, as do we. Our current government's interference distorts the free market and inhibits the pursuit of individual and economic liberty. Therefore, we support a return to the free market principles on which this nation was founded and oppose government intervention into the operations of private business.

Our Philosophy

Tea Party Patriots, Inc. as an organization believes in the Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and Free Markets. Tea Party Patriots, Inc. is a non-partisan grassroots organization of individuals united by our core values derived from the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America, the Bill Of Rights as explained in the Federalist Papers. We recognize and support the strength of grassroots organization powered by activism and civic responsibility at a local level. We hold that the United States is a republic conceived by its architects as a nation whose people were granted "unalienable rights" by our Creator. Chiefly among these are the rights to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The Tea Party Patriots stand with our founders, as heirs to the republic, to claim our rights and duties which preserve their legacy and our own. We hold, as did the founders, that there exists an inherent benefit to our country when private property and prosperity are secured by natural law and the rights of the individual. As an organization we do not take stances on social issues. We urge members to engage fully on the social issues they consider important and aligned with their beliefs.

[Roody]

With this "movement" Roody, they are called unpatriotic because they actually have signs that read "Socialism is NOT a dirty word".... really.... socialism. I agree that what happened on Wall Street with the bailout was wrong.... but they didn't do the bailing out, politicians did, so this ought to be "Occupy Capital Hill". As I said previously in this thread, politicians are the one's to blame, not just Obama and Democrats although they did make it much worse with the their spending, as I also stated previously, Obama spent more in his first year and a half in office than all other presidents combined, this is where the problem lies. Don't hate big corporations, just hit them where it hurts and ban them, don't buy their products if you don't agree with them. But these people are out protesting about Capitalism, that's what makes America what it is. It is VERY obvious from the news clips, websites (Occupy Wall Streets own site), news articles etc. that they are a bunch of extremists that really have no common goal, they all have this sense of entitlement that they deserve as much as the guys who go out and work 80 hours a week to be successful when they don't even have a job. If you aren't part of the solution they you are part of the problem and they aren't solving anything. I want someone to answer the question Why are you protesting Wall Street when politicians are the one's who enable big corporations to do what they do. They are the one's passing the laws and bailing everyone out and letting them fund their campaigns along with having so many tax loopholes for them to make the money they do? That brings me back to Herman Cain, 9-9-9, read it, very simple and we all benefit and it removes the loopholes.

Then you have the union representatives out there..... seriously?!?! It is SO obvious that this is a planned diversion to keep people from seeing the REAL problem...... Obama.

Although I don't 100% agree with the Tea Parties they are organized and actually have a mission statement an actual goal and purpose:

I understand. Although I support their right to picket I do think they are being too extreme with their ideals. In general I believe people are more moderate than the ones who make the news.

[JawZ]

With this "movement" Roody, they are called unpatriotic because they actually have signs that read "Socialism is NOT a dirty word".... really.... socialism. I agree that what happened on Wall Street with the bailout was wrong.... but they didn't do the bailing out, politicians did, so this ought to be "Occupy Capital Hill". As I said previously in this thread, politicians are the one's to blame, not just Obama and Democrats although they did make it much worse with the their spending, as I also stated previously, Obama spent more in his first year and a half in office than all other presidents combined, this is where the problem lies. Don't hate big corporations, just hit them where it hurts and ban them, don't buy their products if you don't agree with them. But these people are out protesting about Capitalism, that's what makes America what it is. It is VERY obvious from the news clips, websites (Occupy Wall Streets own site), news articles etc. that they are a bunch of extremists that really have no common goal, they all have this sense of entitlement that they deserve as much as the guys who go out and work 80 hours a week to be successful when they don't even have a job. If you aren't part of the solution they you are part of the problem and they aren't solving anything. I want someone to answer the question Why are you protesting Wall Street when politicians are the one's who enable big corporations to do what they do. They are the one's passing the laws and bailing everyone out and letting them fund their campaigns along with having so many tax loopholes for them to make the money they do? That brings me back to Herman Cain, 9-9-9, read it, very simple and we all benefit and it removes the loopholes.

Then you have the union representatives out there..... seriously?!?! It is SO obvious that this is a planned diversion to keep people from seeing the REAL problem...... Obama.

Although I don't 100% agree with the Tea Parties they are organized and actually have a mission statement an actual goal and purpose:

I agree with everything you've said but to what extent are we going to do something about it???? Vote the next morally and ethically bankrupt person in to fix a morally and ethically depraved institution?

[mnosteele52]

I agree with everything you've said but to what extent are we going to do something about it???? Vote the next morally and ethically bankrupt person in to fix a morally and ethically depraved institution?

Personally I truly believe Herman Cain would make REAL change in Washington, more than any President has in a long time. He is truly different, a true American success story and an honest person who does what he believes is right, not what politicians, bankers, CEO's , Corporate America etc. want him to do. I know you don't agree with all that he says, but I also think you are taking some of these things the wrong way, not the way he intended them. Go to his website and read about him, he calls it like he sees it and isn't afraid to say what's on his mind, even he says he's not politically correct. I have been hooked on him for over a year when he made a video stating he would run for the Presidency. Bottom line, he is a true American with morals, ethics and honesty something that has been foreign to Washington for a LONG time.

[JawZ]

Personally I truly believe Herman Cain would make REAL change in Washington, more than any President has in a long time. He is truly different, a true American success story and an honest person who does what he believes is right, not what politicians, bankers, CEO's , Corporate America etc. want him to do. I know you don't agree with all that he says, but I also think you are taking some of these things the wrong way, not the way he intended them. Go to his website and read about him, he calls it like he sees it and isn't afraid to say what's on his mind, even he says he's not politically correct. I have been hooked on him for over a year when he made a video stating he would run for the Presidency. Bottom line, he is a true American with morals, ethics and honesty something that has been foreign to Washington for a LONG time.

Internally, I think the GOP needs to do a better job of vetting their candidates. Too many people fragments the party. I would love to see Cain and Ron Paul debate the issues. But I also wish Christie would run but he won't.

[mnosteele52]

Internally, I think the GOP needs to do a better job of vetting their candidates. Too many people fragments the party. I would love to see Cain and Ron Paul debate the issues. But I also wish Christie would run but he won't.

I totally agree, I do think Christie will run in the future. Ron Paul, he completely lost me with the comments about Osama bin Laden being an assassination and the President could be impeached over it....... um yea it was an assassination..... so what, we are in the middle of a war. Anyone who starts the crap about bring these terrorists to trial, they don't have the balls to lead this country.

[JawZ]

I totally agree, I do think Christie will run in the future. Ron Paul, he completely lost me with the comments about Osama bin Laden being an assassination and the President could be impeached over it....... um yea it was an assassination..... so what, we are in the middle of a war. Anyone who starts the crap about bring these terrorists to trial, they don't have the balls to lead this country.

Ok, the whole Presidential assassination program is fubar. It was OK to assassinate Bin Laden but it gets murky when we target US citizens. This is where we can start to talk the pros and cons of a republic with more specificity. What Ron Paul is railing against, is the accumulation of power by one branch of our government. In effect, we have a controlling oligarchy. This is one reason why Obama MUST BE DEFEATED. So Paul's comments, while on the extreme, are trying to push the envelope of the core point...which is too much Presidential power.

[mnosteele52]

Ok, the whole Presidential assassination program is fubar. It was OK to assassinate Bin Laden but it gets murky when we target US citizens. This is where we can start to talk the pros and cons of a republic with more specificity. What Ron Paul is railing against, is the accumulation of power by one branch of our government. In effect, we have a controlling oligarchy. This is one reason why Obama MUST BE DEFEATED. So Paul's comments, while on the extreme, are trying to push the envelope of the core point...which is too much Presidential power.

Then I can see his point, but he seems like he's a little too far out there.

[JawZ]

Then I can see his point, but he seems like he's a little too far out there.

He's far out there for sure but nobody really challenges him. Iv'e watched him on C-Span and people are really uncomfortable with his line of questions. He grills people but hes so nice about it. But moderates would be wise to incorporate his core message into their own ideologies. IF there is one thing about Ron Paul that I really like is how he brought to light how untouchable the Federal Reserve is.

[mnosteele52]

Did you see Herman Cain on Hannity tonight? If not you need to watch these two videos

http://video.foxnews.com/v/121159294100 ... et-part-1/

http://video.foxnews.com/v/121158293200 ... et-part-2/

He talks about all the things we have discussed here and goes into more detail about them.

[JawZ]

Did you see Herman Cain on Hannity tonight? If not you need to watch these two videos

http://video.foxnews.com/v/121159294100 ... et-part-1/

http://video.foxnews.com/v/121158293200 ... et-part-2/

He talks about all the things we have discussed here and goes into more detail about them.

I watched it but this is what concerns me. When he siad that people are jealous of the success of Wall St., I had to pause because Wall St FAILED regardless of any economic policies. Wall St created the derivatives market which is wholly criminal in construct. The politicians on the Hill turned a blind eye to this dark market. So it comes down to ethics to me. Would Herman Cain call the Wall St firms that engaged in trading in this dark market criminal, would he prosecute them, and would he change the economic policies to prevent these dark markets both now and in the future from operating illegally. Now I say they are illegal because the "will" of the people has been clear but our legislators have so far done nothing but pass one act which hasn't been enforced to this day.

This is the heart of the matter for me.

[Roody]

Obama added more to the national debt in his first 18 months in office than all Presidents combined in the history of the United States, he isn't a big part of the problem, he IS the problem.

Bloomberg TV disagrees with your remark here. In fact during the debate last night as they were leaving to go to commercial they stated that Obama had raised the debt by 4 trillion while Bush raised it 5 trillion. Now Obama could blow by Bush's 5 trillion and if he wins another term it's probably likely he does, but as of now the statement that he contributed more to the debt than all combined isn't even close to being true according to Bloomberg and the national treasury.

[mnosteele52]

Corporation that owns Zuccotti "Protester" Park Wins $168 Million Loan Guarantee from Obama DOE!

[RaisinCain]

Hasn't anyone figured this out? THEY ARE ALL THE SAME! Reps, Dems, etc. Wake up.

[Debbie]

Corporation that owns Zuccotti "Protester" Park Wins $168 Million Loan Guarantee from Obama DOE!

Guess what....Diana Taylor, Mayor Bloomberg's girlfriend, is on the Board of Directors of the Corporation that owns Zuccotti Park.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm...........