Leveling The Playing Field: OWS and the Tea Party, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 8 times

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 10:52 AM by sonnny1

reply to post by sheepslayer247

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- America's top central banker "sympathizes" with the Occupy Wall Street protesters and thinks many of their frustrations with the sluggish economy are "understandable." But there's one complaint Ben Bernanke does take issue with: the backlash against the Federal Reserve. "I think that the concerns about the Fed are based on misconceptions," he said at his news conference Wednesday.

Bernanke chides Occupy Wall Street 'misconceptions

Some at OWS get it. Majority,lets just say 98% of protesters don't.

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 10:53 AM by sheepslayer247

reply to post by WTFover

If you read info on some of the links provided in the OP, it becomes clear the the TP began with the special interest money.

reply to post by beezzer

Then you'd be in disagreement with OWS

Actually, this is one of the reasons why I support OWS. That's all many of them want is to revert to the original intent of the constitution. OWS's message has been twisted by partisan naysayers and extremists within.

TO BOTH OF YOU:

I am trying to make this thread an example of how the true intent of the poeple, both TP and OWS, can be manipulated by those they associate with or who funds them. The Right is no better than the left, OWS no better than TP. But are we being consistent in holding each group to the same sort of standards and scrutiny?

I think not.

edit on 5-11-2011 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 11:19 AM by DontTreadOnMe

reply to post by sheepslayer247

I applaud the idea of leveling the playing field, but I don't see much info in your OP that addresses who is behind OWS. A lot of money is pouring and it cannot all be from folks sending in their nickels and dimes.

The issue of Soros' involvement has been addressed here
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and my post in that thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

and read more here
Occupy Wall Street: A Globalist Op Designed to Destroy Efforts to End the Fed

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 11:29 AM by sheepslayer247

reply to post by DontTreadOnMe

You are correct, I did not include any info on OWS and their potential funding/associations because there are many threads making such a case.

I would like to point out though that OWS has not been co-opted yet, unlike the TP. I said yet! When I see that these protests and occupations are being completely funded by left-wing radicals and sponsered by the MSM like the TP, I will no longer support OWS.

We are not to that point yet.

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 11:41 AM by WTFover

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

I am trying to make this thread an example of how the true intent of the poeple, both TP and OWS, can be manipulated by those they associate with or who funds them.

Is it the "true intent of the People" that is being manipulated, or is it what the media portrays as their "intent" or what the mouthpieces of the movement portray? In other words, you said you "support the OWS", but is that a true statement? If so, then you are the one at fault, for permitting your "intent" to be manipulated. Or instead, do you just share some of what others proclaim to be OWS ideals?

I get absolutely furious when I hear someone say "Well, this is what the People want". According to polls, less than half of the country approves of Obama's job performance, so he can't speak to "What the People want", yet he lays claim to. Congress has the approval of less than one-fifth of the country, yet how often do hear them use those words?

Don't fall for the divisive tactics. You see the the Tea Party movement as having originated from monied interests, because you want to trivialize them. You won't permit yourself to see the People of the movement as equal with the People of the OWS movement. It is the People who are important, not the movements.

You said something else interesting in one of your other posts. You suggested only the OWS movement is interested in returning to the founders' intent of the Constitution. What about those associated with the Tea Party movement? Do you view them as enemies of Constitutional principles?

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 11:59 AM by WTFover

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

I would like to point out though that OWS has not been co-opted yet, unlike the TP.

Ooooohhhh. Not yet co-opted by who? Would you mind giving your definition of co-opted?

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 12:00 PM by Dagar

This sums up where the TP are now

www.infowars.com...

A snippet from the piece

Many of us had hoped that Tea Party politicians would be different and would stand up for our liberties and freedoms, but now we can clearly see that many of them will not.

Just trying to help

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 12:24 PM by sheepslayer247

reply to post by WTFover

Is it the "true intent of the People" that is being manipulated, or is it what the media portrays as their "intent" or what the mouthpieces of the movement portray?

You are correct. I did not phrase that statement correctly as that was not what meant. I apologize.

I get absolutely furious when I hear someone say "Well, this is what the People want". According to polls, less than half of the country approves of Obama's job performance, so he can't speak to "What the People want", yet he lays claim to. Congress has the approval of less than one-fifth of the country, yet how often do hear them use those words?

I agree!

You won't permit yourself to see the People of the movement as equal with the People of the OWS movement. It is the People who are important, not the movements.

Yes, I have a hard time saying the people of these different movements are "equal".

As a former TP supporter, I got all excited just as I do for OWS and went down to my local TP rallies. Most people there were interested in returning our Republic to its constitutional roots, etc.

When the speakers began, the first speaker spent about 5-10 minutes on the constitution and corruption. But then he went off on a rant about Obama and socialism. Many of us there did not care about Obama because we knew it was much deeper than that. The next speaker was Bob Vander Platts, head of the Iowa Family Policy Center, and he went off on a rant about gay marriage and how God hates fags!

Well about that time myself and about 35-40% of the people went home. We were there for reasons other than the Christian anti-gay, Obama is a socialist message.

Now fast forward to the latest round of Republican/TP sponsored debates and you have the crowds cheering to just "let them die" in regards to healthcare and the crowds "boo'd" a marine because he was gay. This coming from a movement that loves the military?

Needless to say, its hard to make the case that the TP members that follow that line of thinking are equal to me as a compassionate human, let alone a group of social change. I never have had any problems with Occupy members, even though we disagree on many points, and they have never said anything close to "let them just die!".

Ooooohhhh. Not yet co-opted by who? Would you mind giving your definition of co-opted?

OWS has not been co-opted at all, by anyone even though many people on ATS try to make the case to the contrary.

Co-opted would be that their funding, actions, rallies, protests, and overall message is being dictated by outside forces with money, MSM airtime and direct involvment by politicians.

The TP meets that criteria as stated in my OP. OWS does not....yet and if they are co-poted, I will no longer support them and make it know to all on ATS.

edit on 5-11-2011 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 12:46 PM by WTFover

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

Needless to say, its hard to make the case that the TP members that follow that line of thinking are equal to me as a compassionate human, let alone a group of social change. I never have had any problems with Occupy members, even though we disagree on many points, and they have never said anything close to "let them just die!".

Ummm... Take a look at a Google search of OWS signs. There are some pretty violent and vitriolic messages from some of the People involved with the OWS, as well. Why do you let a few ignorant individuals taint the whole of the Tea Party movement, but ignore those who associate themselves with OWS?

Did you listen to the audio of the booing of the soldier? It was far from the majority of the attendees. Yet, you use that as an excuse to trivialize the entire movement. Just admit you have an agenda. You are not trying to "level the playing field".

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 01:02 PM by sheepslayer247

reply to post by WTFover

I have been at OWS protests in which the the people who were carrying signs that were inappropriate or people making rude or out-of-line comments were asked to leave....or forced to leave by the police. People are very vocal about whats acceptable at these rallies. Of course, there are exceptions.

At the debates, I did not see anyone in the crowd, or even the people on stage set those people straight! Not even Ron Paul!

No one defended the marine? No one defended the value of life? If I was there, you can be damn sure I would have made a fool out of myself and set those people straight as I have had to do at OWS rallies.

Just admit you have an agenda.

Please tell me, what is my agenda? Before you do so, make sure you look at my post and thread history to get a good idea. Otherwise, you may just be way off base.

I will give you one clue though...if you say "Obama supporter, liberal or democrat"....you are wrong.

reply posted on 5-11-2011 @ 03:48 PM by WTFover

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

At the debates, I did not see anyone in the crowd, or even the people on stage set those people straight! Not even Ron Paul! No one defended the marine? No one defended the value of life? If I was there...

If you were there... Exactly! You were not, so you don't know how those people were dealt with. All you know is what the media chose to show you. But, you know what, neither was I. So, I'm not going to speculate that they were taken to the woodshed. Which is what should have happened.

Your agenda is that you want to tear down those with whom you disagree and prop up your own position. But, you want to disguise your ideological agenda as an attempt to "level the playing field".

reply posted on 6-11-2011 @ 01:02 AM by decepticonLaura

Originally posted by WTFover

The real problem is addressed in this Mises quote

The parties of special interests, which see nothing more in politics than the securing of privileges and prerogatives for their own groups, not only make the parliamentary system impossible; they rupture the unity of the state and of society. They lead not merely to the crisis of parliamentarism, but to a general political and social crisis. Society cannot, in the long run, exist if it is divided into sharply defined groups, each intent on wresting special privileges for its own members, continually on the alert to see that it does not suffer any setback, and prepared, at any moment, to sacrifice the most important political institutions for the sake of winning some petty advantage.

...

this. so much this. i've always tried to distance myself from any sort of movement
because they all do this, and they're not even reticent about it.

even down at my local occupy, i hear people getting up and making divisive demands
but i am not giving up on it, not just yet.
because i can see in there a glimmering of hope... many people are willing to listen
and set aside their differences
and every day more people are listening.

reply posted on 6-11-2011 @ 11:16 AM by sheepslayer247

reply to post by WTFover

Your agenda is that you want to tear down those with whom you disagree and prop up your own position. But, you want to disguise your ideological agenda as an attempt to "level the playing field".

Of course I want to prop-up my own position. That's what a debate or discussion is.

I would disagree that I am trying to tear people down that disagree with me. If someone doesn't support OWS, that's fine. Maybe it's just not their cup of tea.

What I am trying to do is point out to those who disagree with OWS, and hold the TP on a pedestal, is that their reasons for not supporting OWS are obviously rampant throughout the TP itself.

It's ideologically inconsistent and dishonest.

reply posted on 6-11-2011 @ 07:09 PM by WTFover

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

It's ideologically inconsistent and dishonest.

..I never have had any problems with Occupy members, even though we disagree on many points, and they have never said anything close to "let them just die!"...

Careful with those glass walls...

reply posted on 6-11-2011 @ 10:41 PM by TheImmaculateD1

The only way we'll even consider linking up with and merging with the TP is that they've got to come down to reality as they have to do the following :

1. Denounce the banks, corporations and Wall Street and end all association with The Federal Reserve!
2. Get rid of this political paradigm.
3. Back the restoration of laws and policies that benefit us all.
4. Stop blaming Obama and all the other bank picked puppets.

That is only a fraction of them and that ain't even anything yet!

edit on 7-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 7-11-2011 @ 01:53 PM by WTFover

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
The only way we'll even consider linking up with and merging with the TP is that they've got to come down to reality as they have to do the following :

1. Denounce the banks, corporations and Wall Street and end all association with The Federal Reserve!
2. Get rid of this political paradigm.
3. Back the restoration of laws and policies that benefit us all.
4. Stop blaming Obama and all the other bank picked puppets.

That is only a fraction of them and that ain't even anything yet!
edit on 7-11-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

Now that is rich! What kind of arrogance makes you think the Tea Party would even entertain the idea? WOW!

reply posted on 7-11-2011 @ 06:20 PM by sheepslayer247

reply to post by WTFover

I wouldn't want the TP to join forces with OWS either. I think they were both born of the same discontent, but the TP has become ideologically inconsistent with it's root cause.

What began as a push against the status quo quickly became a third arm of the Republican party. Ows still remains independent of any party, and I hope they keep it that way.

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^