Oakland’s Day Of Reckoning

Things are going to come to head tomorrow. In a classic example of the tail wagging the dog (and it could only happen in a city with a weak liberal mayor bent on appeasing the crowds to the detriment of common sense) Occupy Oakland (ohhh, don’t they sound official?) has decided to declare a general strike:

Occupy Oakland has scheduled a general strike throughout the California city for Wednesday. What does that mean? “No work. No school. Occupy everywhere,” the group’s website explains. “Shut down the city.”

And: “All banks and corporations should close down for the day or we will march on them.”

“Blockade everything.”

Occupy Oakland activists have not only free speech rights but also the power to stomp on other people’s rights.

Oakland Mayor Jean Quan — a committed left-winger — at first welcomed the protests. But with rats, vigilantism and too much stink, City Hall soured on the ensuing squalor. Too late, Quan discovered that if you give them an inch, they will take Frank Ogawa Plaza. Let them remain downtown and they threaten to trash other parts of the city.

So what is a good capitalist to do? If you own a business in Oakland, what’s the point of opening up shop tomorrow? What’s the point of even going in to work tomorrow? As if times were not hard enough, let’s shut down and damage whatever businesses are trying to make a living, share the misery.

Where before there was at least a modest attempt to keep the chaos (and filth) pretty much limited to Frank Ogawa Plaza, but with a spineless mayor who has given back the plaza to the protestors after the police cleared them out once (Was it Patton who said that he was always advancing because he did not like paying for the same real estate twice?) the Oakland PD is left baffled as to what their role should be.

The Oakland police union released a statement today saying its officers are confused about Mayor Jean Quan’s stance on the Occupy Oakland encampment and what they are being asked to do for Wednesday’s citywide general strike.
—–
“That’s hundreds of city workers encouraged to take off work to participate in the protest against ‘the establishment,’ ” said the union, which represents 645 officers. “But aren’t the mayor and her administration part of the establishment they are paying city employees to protest? Is it the city’s intention to have city employees on both sides of a skirmish line?”

What a clusterfark. The chief of police quit last week over a no confidence vote of that mayor of theirs, she does not have their backs. And tomorrow the whole city could blow up.

One of the smartest guys on the internet is over at PJTV. Bill Whittle has the ability to boil down the common sense of an issue to nice palatable portions, here is his take on snowflake occupiers:

A sense of entitlement, ingratitude, lack of perspective, all correct but add a few more life lessons that mommy and daddy did not teach them:
1)You are not special
2)Life is not fair
3)Government does not owe you a decent wage, a job, a house, a car, or an even a level playing field
4)Those that have made it, that have worked and pay taxes, these folks are not your private ATM’s, whatever benefits you do get from the government, these people pay for and sooner or later they will say ENOUGH, you can fleece a sheep many times but can only skin them once, the prosperous already feel skinned, don’t push your luck.

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    Makes me wish, ever so slightly, that I owned a bank there so I could send in goons with rubber hoses to clean out the “occupiers” with extreme prejudice…

    Where’s Rudy? He’d know how to handle these twerps…

    Thumb up 0

  2. CM

    As if times were not hard enough, let’s shut down and damage whatever businesses are trying to make a living, share the misery.

    Not sure that’s an argument that would work.

    Although I guess you could go on a little protest of your own with a placard that reads:

    “We demand that you do things by halves!”

    Be sure not to yell it out too loudly, or get in anyone’s way. You could even do it in your backyard to be sure.

    (Not mocking you…just going with it)

    Thumb up 0

  3. Poosh

    As I understand this, this is not an act of protest or free speech etc. This is an act of violence instigated by the Occupy folks. I’m sure they don’t see it that way but that’s because they don’t actually care about the real issues that underly what they pretend to be caring for.

    Great Bill Whittle video! Cheers.

    Thumb up 1

  4. CM

    I’m sure they don’t see it that way but that’s because they don’t actually care about the real issues that underly what they pretend to be caring for

    Yeah yeah, sure. That’s easy to say.

    Thumb up 0

  5. Mississippi Yankee

    Bill Whittle frightens me a little, mostly because I can’t ever remembering disagreeing him. And it’s not like I’m unexposed to him, PJTV comes to my inbox about 3 times a week.

    Thumb up 0

  6. InaneGoldfish

    how is this not a call to commit crimes… Entering a business with the intent to vandalize [or to commit any other crime] is a commercial burglary … (PC459 2-4-6 +1 for a 463 allegation … for each and every one of them, and i sure hope the DA files charges (somehow i think they wont though except in the most egregious circumstances if at all)… just my thoughts

    Thumb up 2

  7. CM

    Easy because you don’t actually care about any real issue that underlies the strength of feeling. You and others just dismiss it all and spend all your time pointing out why the Tea Party protests were far superior, and how the OWS people are just all violent retards. Because they’re liberal. Etc etc ad naseum.

    Thumb up 0

  8. CM

    Are you talking about the people being violent, or all the others that aren’t?

    You retard.

    I must be, engaging in this gutter-level shit. ;-)

    Thumb up 0

  9. Poosh

    Did the tea party engage in ANY violence?

    Did they occupy grounds and violate any laws/demand/force the authority around them to suspend any laws to accommodate them?

    Did they threaten to “eat” the government?

    Did the Tea Party pollute and denigrate any of the areas that they protested in/on?

    Did the Tea Party threaten/did actually march past specific and targeted PRIVATE citizens’ property potentially intimidating the occupants which probably included children?

    Did the Tea Party steal from eachother?

    Did any tea party member RAPE another tea party member?

    Did the Tea Party get a stamp of approval from the President of the United States of Americas who claimed he would be a uniter?

    Thumb up 6

  10. CM

    Do the answers to your questions make a difference to the quality of any of the actual arguments? To the legitimacy of what is behind the anger and dissatisfaction? In either protest movement?

    As I just said:

    You and others just dismiss it all and spend all your time pointing out why the Tea Party protests were far superior, and how the OWS people are just all violent retards. Because they’re liberal. Etc etc ad naseum.

    Thumb up 0

  11. Poosh

    To the legitimacy of what is behind the anger and dissatisfaction?

    YES. It means EVERYTHING. It’s about authenticity.

    Someone who claims to have deep caring feelings and love for his fellow man (i’m the 99%!) and feels the system, or part of it, is bad because it negatively affects his fellow man’s freedom, liberty, and happiness and well-being (the spreading of wealth increases all those things right? it’s about fairness right?) – who then commits acts which affect and are detrimental to the same people’s liberty, freedom, happiness and well-being – as is the above “strike”, which will probably directly damage people’s right to work and go about their business unhindered or uncoerced, will decrease for that period of time many other’s happiness, liberty, well-being etc. Shut down the city? How people small businesses or people being paid on a daily basis will lose money which will have a very negative affect if they miss a day’s work, if the city is shut down for a day ( a temp, for example, who is paid daily and denied pay for a day s/he does not work, might now fail to make his/her rent, because of this, for example – or whatever example you might choose).

    The fact that they simply do not give a shit demonstrates they are inauthentic and is a massive indicator that something else is driving them other than what they claim. It makes them illegitimate.

    Thumb up 4

  12. CM

    By that reasoning the whole Tea Party is illegitimate (and apparently inauthentic) because there is an example of violence. Therefore they don’t give a shit.

    http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/statement_teapartyviolence/

    This proves they just want to pay less tax so they can get more money, because they’re greedy fucks who couldn’t give two shits about those they stepped over on the way up.

    Patently that’s absurd.

    Honestly, I don’t think you’re even trying now. Any disturbance harms people, so if you do it you clearly don’t care about harming people?
    That’s really your argument to dismiss the entire OWS movement and all arguments and everyone in it?

    something else is driving them other than what they claim. It makes them illegitimate.

    Again, if you can’t even conceive that opinions other than your own can be sincerely held…..

    Why even bother?

    Thumb up 0

  13. Poosh

    I would use other arguments to dismiss the whole OWS, i.e the fact that they come from the usual hard-left wing groups. Socialists, communists, students, whatever. Not representative of the “left” let alone 99% (most Democrats are not socialists). If they were representative of liberals then I would expect them to be, to behave and gather, exactly like the Tea Party – after all half the USA vote Democrat … so a real liberal movement would look no different to the Tea Party protests.

    I was talking about those engaging in this specific action in the text about the specific action, in terms of authenticity. If you are an OWS who does not approve of what these other Occupy Oakland people are doing, and, obviously, have not joint them, then I can’t claim you’re inauthentic, on those grounds. That’s kinda obvious isn’t it? Do I really need to say that? But on a whole the OWS has a pattern. There is no pattern at the tea party that is negative. And your link, let’s assume she was innocent, is one person, I never said the OWS were all rapists because of one rape.

    I appreciate that the above goes back and forth but I think each individual piece of text indicates to whom I am referring to.

    I think confusion might have occurred near the top, so to clarify, what I thought was clear, we are not saying they are “all violent” but that those who are violent are violent, and it’s a substantial number.

    I would argue that many “peaceful” acts the OWS have engaged in – including occupation itself of grounds that should be public for EVERYONE, is an act of violence, though is a different argument about different principles.

    Thumb up 2

  14. Poosh

    Again, if you can’t even conceive that opinions other than your own can be sincerely held…..

    Look seriously. It’s late so. It’s baffling that I have to write this.

    I say I am sincerely holding an opinion that Mr. X is a threat to the general public well-being, his actions damage other people’s well-being. I say I sincerely care about well-being, because if I did not, I wouldn’t be protesting.

    I am gonna protest Mr. X.

    So I carry out some “blockades” and violate the rights of others to their own free choice and well being by shutting down shops, blocking roads, stopping the free movement of citizens. Doing this, I hope Mr. X will listen or more people will oppose Mr. X.

    ^ in the above it seems none of this seems to follow. If you REALLY cared you would not carry out actions that clearly violent the rights of people – the same rights you claim to care about. THUS you are insincere.

    It’s like brining a gun to a protest against guns, in case you get attacked. You”re protesting the violation of people by violating people.

    Thumb up 1

  15. richtaylor365 *

    So far everyone has missed (or not commented on) the part of the story that I find most appalling. From my above link:

    The city is allowing employees to participate in the strike that Occupy Oakland has called, the union said, while all officers have been ordered to work.

    “That’s hundreds of city workers encouraged to take off work to participate in the protest against ‘the establishment,’ ” said the union, which represents 645 officers. “But aren’t the mayor and her administration part of the establishment they are paying city employees to protest? Is it the city’s intention to have city employees on both sides of a skirmish line?”

    Here you have a rabble, who decides on their own that it would be a good idea to shut down the particular city that they are camped in, then the mayor of that city, technically the boss and head official, decides on her own that she is simpatico with the movement and gives all city employees permission to join the rabble. I’m scratching my head trying to come up with a incident where this has ever happened before, anywhere. If mayors can be impeached, could there possibly be more clearer grounds? a total abdication of her duties and responsibilities as a city official. This is stunning to me. If Reagan was still governor he would call in the National Guard and place that mayor under arrest.

    Thumb up 0

  16. CM

    I would use other arguments to dismiss the whole OWS….

    Right, you’re dismissing them ALL on issues not relevant to the actual arguments.

    a real liberal movement would look no different to the Tea Party protests

    Who are you to say what a protest should/would look like? It could be tha any protest that goes on for this long would have the same issues. Later on you state, as though it’s fact, that the number involved in violence is substantial – on what basis do you say that? Where is your evidence?

    I was talking about those engaging in this specific action in the text about the specific action, in terms of authenticity.

    Which specific action? Rich’s opening piece is about a call for a general strike. Nothing even remotely about a specific violent action. The only person advocating violence before your initial comment was Seattle Outcast, and that’s IN RESPONSE to the general strike.

    If you are an OWS who does not approve of what these other Occupy Oakland people are doing, and, obviously, have not joint them, then I can’t claim you’re inauthentic, on those grounds. That’s kinda obvious isn’t it? Do I really need to say that?

    You just suggested the movement was illegitimate. And now you’re saying only those in Oakland, or those engaging in violence, are illegimate? Which is it?
    It’s not obvious what you are saying. You appear to be arguing two conflicting things.

    But on a whole the OWS has a pattern. There is no pattern at the tea party that is negative. And your link, let’s assume she was innocent, is one person, I never said the OWS were all rapists because of one rape.

    And now you’re back to the whole movement being illegitimate, with the pattern comment. And then right back to acknowledging that certain acts don’t make the movement/arguments illegitimate. Yikes. The pace is quickening.

    I appreciate that the above goes back and forth but I think each individual piece of text indicates to whom I am referring to.

    You got back and forth within even the same post.

    I think confusion might have occurred near the top, so to clarify, what I thought was clear, we are not saying they are “all violent” but that those who are violent are violent, and it’s a substantial number.

    Those that are violent are violent? WTF?
    “We” are not saying? Who else are you speaking on behalf of? If they are violent, does that make your arguments illegitimate?
    And again, what are you basing your “substantial number” fact on?

    I would argue that many “peaceful” acts the OWS have engaged in – including occupation itself of grounds that should be public for EVERYONE, is an act of violence, though is a different argument about different principles.

    Well then that further undermines your Tea-Party-comparison argument. Wherever the Tea Party have met (on public land) that land is unable to be used by anyone else at that time. Ergo, by your argument, the Tea Party are violent too.

    Thumb up 0

  17. CM

    So the Mayor can (and should) stop public employees from going on strike?
    When public employees go on strike in other situations, they’re doing it without some required permission?

    Thumb up 0

  18. Poosh

    All banks and corporations should close down for the day or we will march on them

    Which is problematic. They should have reasonable right to protest after lengthy negations. But because of the violence involved in the Occupy movement, this demands the need for police. It is quite confusing… will they actually shut down anything though? I mean if it turns out to be 30 people, and a lot of these protests are just skeleton crew from my understanding, they won’t be shutting down much.

    I did have one “problem” with what you wrote, I do think Government is there to provide a “level playing field”, as I understand that, that’s quite important. The removal of “arbitrary barriers” to success and the active prevention of those who use violence or cohesion etc to make the playing field uneven.

    Thumb up 0

  19. richtaylor365 *

    Come on, CM, in this instance I think you are either being obtuse or unduly argumentative, you know the answer to both those questions?

    Thumb up 2

  20. richtaylor365 *

    I do think Government is there to provide a “level playing field”, as I understand that, that’s quite important.

    The government has an obligation to make sure that everyone plays by the same rules, that’s all. If you and I have competing Italian restaurants and my place is in a better location and I have better cooks than you, my business flourishes and yours struggles, that’s the way it goes. The field is not level and will never be because I have better players (cooks) then you, you either innovate (hire better cooks, and get a better location) or you go under, that is the free market.

    That is what I meant.

    Thumb up 0

  21. Poosh

    Well then that further undermines your Tea-Party-comparison argument. Wherever the Tea Party have met (on public land) that land is unable to be used by anyone else at that time. Ergo, by your argument, the Tea Party are violent too.

    I only read this statement of yours, at the bottom, because this was such a fail I can assume the rest was equally a fail and not worth my time now?

    The Tea Party did not occupy any ground in an illegal manner. They went through all the permits, obeyed all laws, even unfair laws, to the letter. The did their few hours, then left.

    They did no occupy public spaces and parks, demand the laws not apply to then, not legally gain the various permits … haven’t I written this list today? Anyhoow, to occupy public parks etc and camp there, to stay there, to deny these areas that are for everyone over a prolonged period of time (the tea party have not done this), is an act of domination and violence, though not overt. They are denying, knowingly, these areas to others as those areas are intended. These scum are in the UK doign it right now outside a Cathedral, costing the building income every day and denying others their right to enjoy that building. What does a cathedral have to do with fleet street anyway?

    So that’s the distinction, it’s obvious so I can’t be bothered with reading the rest. I mean it’s just getting ridiculous now. TAKE THAT AS A WIN if you like.

    Thumb up 0

  22. Poosh

    I forget the details, author and name, but there is a short story/novel about the dangers/desires of leftists and liberal thinking written some decades ago. In order to create “an even playing field” (I see what you mean now) > what happens is, those of stronger abilities, will, and physical strength have heavy chains attached to them to “level the playing field” and attractive people are forced to wear bags over their heads or something. Grim stuff.

    Thumb up 0

  23. CM

    You can’t be bothered with the actual arguments (you know, the substantive parts) of the OWS protests, and now, likewise, you can’t be bothered with my arguments. At least you’re consistent I guess……

    I certainly don’t take anything here as win. In this case, I see it as a loss for reasonable human interaction.

    Thumb up 0

  24. CM

    about the dangers/desires of leftists and liberal thinking

    When I was young I was convinced there were bogeymen hiding under my bed. Then I got a bit older.

    Thumb up 0

  25. CM

    When I worked in the public sector in London there were strike days (the union was called UNITE if I remember correctly). The mayor was certainly sympathetic to the strikers. There was no issue with those public sector employees in my office taking the day off to strike. Not even remotely any sort of threat. Quite the opposite.
    (Not that I have ever striked a day in my life. I was there as an in-house consultant, so wasn’t directly employed by the Council)

    Thumb up 0

  26. Manwhore

    1)You are not special
    2)Life is not fair
    3)Government does not owe you a decent wage, a job, a house, a car, or an even a level playing field
    4)Those that have made it, that have worked and pay taxes, these folks are not your private ATM’s, whatever benefits you do get from the government, these people pay for and sooner or later they will say ENOUGH, you can fleece a sheep many times but can only skin them once, the prosperous already feel skinned, don’t push your luck.

    1.) Neither are you, but you clearly hide behind being an arm of the most socialist part of our country. You are a socialist.

    2.)It is not. That is why losers join unions. they are hacks who need to hide behind a shield. Does this shoe fit?

    3.) Government seems to owe you one? you should be the Grand Wizard of this movement, you socialist. With all your pension, free benefits, free life, etc. all on the tax payer dime you have the gall to talk shit. You should be STFU right now. You’re at least what they ask for, at worst what will be the butt end of consequnce.

    4.) Aww, fuck off. the California taxpayer is your ATM. You put in your introduction post here that you live off a generous pension care of the State of California. So don’t be all “internet tough guy”.

    Props for a genius troll post. It seems that’s all your capable of.

    Thumb up 0

  27. balthazar

    Actually in most states police and fire are either barred by their contract from striking and/or its against the actual law in the state. Once again CM, you dont know what your talking about.

    YES the mayor should stop the police and FD from going on strike. If they do they are in violation of the law and/or contract, fire them if they do strike.

    Thumb up 2

  28. Poosh

    Keep telling yourself that CM.

    Arguments are only fruitful if the other party has command over logic and reasoning, which you do not. So I’m not gonna waste my time explaining point after point merely because you have no ability to understand them. That’s not “not being able to argue” – I can’t even get to the issues if you can’t even understand the words on the paper. Why should I, or others for that matter, sit and waste 15 minutes explaining to you that you don’t understand what I/we just wrote as your response demonstrates you simply did not understand the point. It’s boring.

    Thumb up 0

  29. Poosh

    What that Ken Cunt Livingstone lol.

    Police are not just “normal” public sector workers, same with the military. That’s basic logic. If there’s a strike, who’s going to police it?

    Thumb up 0

  30. richtaylor365 *

    Great, but you (I think) have spent enough time in the states to know that we don’t operate like Europe, we don’t have regular “Strike” days. It is the mayor’s job to make sure that the city and it’s public services run smoothly, how is that possible if there is no one to perform those services since they are all on the picket line? And this part:

    I’m scratching my head trying to come up with a incident where this has ever happened before, anywhere

    Was also a clue. A mayor might have to deal with a worker strike in her city from time to time but I have never heard of one in this country aligning herself with the action and giving her workers permission to strike.

    Thumb up 1

  31. richtaylor365 *

    Time to feed the troll

    I usually just ignore you, like most people here, figuring that since you have never produced anything even remotely compelling or astute in the history of this blog (why think that would change now?), but even trolls need their nose smacked by the rolled up newspaper of reality from time to time, if nothing else, to remind them what a bad dog they are.

    3.) Government seems to owe you one?

    Yes, they do, they owe me one under a contract (do you know what that is?) .OK dumbass, time for some education, don’t fall asleep. A contract is when two party’s agree to something, ya know, like I will give you this or agree to this in exchange for you giving me that or agreeing to that. Much like the one you signed , if you even have a job, where your company agrees to pay you this amount for these services you render. I know, it’s complicated stuff, read that part again a few more times. So your company “owes” you your paycheck, still confused? Figures.

    Pensions are not that hard (for most people) to understand but naturally, they are above your pay grade. Every month for 30 years I paid a percentage of my salary (along with what the state contracted to pay in) into my retirement, just like a 401K( oops, there I go again, throwing out stuff you don’t understand) and when I retired, PERS sends me a portion of what I already paid in. So the money that I am getting each month came from two sources, the money I already paid in the system in the past and the money the state paid into the system in the past, get it?

    You put in your introduction post here that you live off a generous pension care of the State of California.

    And if you were paying attention (I know, when pigs fly) you would know that I don’t even need that money. I figured out long ago that California was going bankrupt, I prepared for the eventuality that those pension checks would dry up so I have other revenue streams, I could wipe my ass with those checks. But lately I just cash them knowing that you, being a citizen of California, had a small part in funding them, hopefully you think of me every time you pay your state income taxes, if you pay any at all, if not then your parents who you probably leach off of.

    We have had this conversation before, if you are so envious of my station in life I can get you an application (for the life of me though, I don’t know what you are qualified to do since most jobs involve some level of critical thinking and you have shown zero aptitude at that). I told you before, coveting what others have is no way to go through life, get off your ass, put that xbox down, get out of your mom’s basement and go making something of yourself, And quit whining about what other people have, it’s not manly.

    But you keep nipping at my heels like little chihuahua, everyone must have a purpose in life, that is yours.

    Thumb up 4

  32. Hal_10000

    Yeah, I noticed that too, that the mayor is basically throwing in with OWS. Even though their demands, at this point, remain incredibly nebulous, stupid or contradictory (fix the banks by getting the government more involved!)

    IT’s one thing to let people protest — I tend to support a hands off approach unless there is actual violence. It’s another thing to throw in with them.

    I mean, what the fuck is the mayor and city government supposed to protesting against? Themselves? “Fight our power! End our corruption!”

    Thumb up 0

  33. AlexInCT

    This is Bill Ayer’s plan writ large to destabilize the system and have the collectivist come storming in to “save the day”. The more this plays out, the more I start thinking the WH is behind this shit.

    Thumb up 1

  34. AlexInCT

    As I have said: this is the DNC machine playing out Bill Ayer’s plans. Hopefully we will squash it long before it gets to the point where in his own words, some 25+ million people need to go into concetration camps and be disposed off eventually, as the new collectivists masters start building utopia. Fuck the OWS people and the demcorats.

    Thumb up 2

  35. AlexInCT

    I mean, what the fuck is the mayor and city government supposed to protesting against? Themselves? “Fight our power! End our corruption!”

    They are protesting, people that feel the private sector should not be looted and are daring to say enough is enough. If you will pardon the example, they are like a pimp who loots his whores income to keep himself riding in the sweet luxury car(s), with the latest and nicest threads, and all decked up in bling and such, getting angry and then bitchslaps the hos when they act up and ask to keep more of their money. In short, they are pissed that the prostitutes – that is us working people – are stupid enough to think they should keep more of the pimps’s money and have dared to say so, and are itching to lay a good beat down while telling us it is for our own good and because they love us. Have another hit on the crack pipe and shut up after that too..

    Thumb up 0

  36. Seattle Outcast

    That’s been obvious to me since the beginning.

    Ulsterman’s blog predicted it some time before it happened as part of Obama’s leaked campaign plan.

    Thumb up 0

  37. AlexInCT

    Make fun of it all you want: it’s the only defense those like you have for this shit. The problem is that there is now a track record of buried scandals and uneblievably anti-demcoratic behavior by these assholes, and there is no hiding it despite the media’s heavy effort to d so. That you continue to shill for them only makes me wonder if you are being paid or if you are just that stupid/insane.

    Thumb up 0

  38. CM

    Make fun of it all you want: it’s the only defense those like you have for this shit.

    Making fun is my only defence against speculative conspriacy theories? Why would I even need a defence?
    Makes no sense.

    That you continue to shill for them only makes me wonder if you are being paid or if you are just that stupid/insane.

    That you keep believing my laughing at you (and criticising or mocking) is in any way shilling for (or defending) anyone doesn’t leave me wondering about you at all.

    Thumb up 0

  39. Manwhore

    And if you were paying attention (I know, when pigs fly) you would know that I don’t even need that money. I figured out long ago that California was going bankrupt, I prepared for the eventuality that those pension checks would dry up so I have other revenue streams, I could wipe my ass with those checks. But lately I just cash them knowing that you, being a citizen of California, had a small part in funding them, hopefully you think of me every time you pay your state income taxes, if you pay any at all, if not then your parents who you probably leach off of.

    Straight from the horse’s mouth, this is what the public “servant” thinks of us. A check he could wipe his ass with, and a simp he’s ( by his own account) taking advantage of.

    I rest my case.

    Thumb up 0

  40. AlexInCT

    Making fun is my only defence against speculative conspriacy theories?

    Actually making fun of it while pretending that there is no reason to worry is part & parcel of the very problems I point out.

    Why would I even need a defence?
    Makes no sense.

    I agree. You make no fucking sense. You are however doing an awesome job validating exactly what every whiney liberal ass is like though, and for that you need to be thanked.

    Thumb up 0

  41. CM

    You are however doing an awesome job validating exactly what every whiney liberal ass is like though, and for that you need to be thanked.

    Poor Alex, having to put up with someone pointing out how fact-free he always is. Diddums.
    No wonder you think the world is full if whiney liberal asses. They’re actually just refuting your ridiculous garbage and so you have to dismiss them as whiney liberal asses as your only form of defence. Actually going through the facts/evidence/arguments clearly never works.

    Thumb up 0

  42. AlexInCT

    Poor Alex, having to put up with someone pointing out how fact-free he always is.

    This coming from you made me laugh. Hard. What? Is this what you are reduced to after I have wiped the floor with your mentally challenged ass too often? Pfeh,,,

    Thumb up 0

  43. CM

    You’re claiming that YET again? Even though it STILL makes you sound 13 years old (even more than normal)?
    Where did that happen?
    Oh, that’s right, you don’t do specifics/evidence/facts…….

    Careful though, don’t trying running circles AND wiping the floor at the same time. You’ll spill your meds. And Bill Ayers is likely to take the opportunity to set up another concentration camp while you’re not looking. He’s hiding under your bed right now you know. Go look now if you don’t believe me.

    Thumb up 0