Disturbing Trends among OWS Protestors

Here is a random survey of 200 Occupy Wall Street protestors by a Democrat pollster.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204479504576637082965745362.html

98% of those surveyed support civil disobedience and nearly a third support violence to achieve their aims.

Only 15% of those surveyed were unemployed.

Two-thirds to three-quarters supported varying degrees of radical progressive change such as forced redistribution of wealth, "intense regulation of businesses" bordering on fascism, punitive taxes and guaranteed health care.

No conservative group with such a large sample advocating lawbreaking of any sort, especially violence, would ever gain traction among average Americans, no matter how justified and worthy their cause.

Americans have been appalled by videos and photographs showing in full color the universal disregard for personal and property rights, assaults on law enforcement and threats of mayhem by wild-eyed and unwashed youths. The message of the few has been trampled in the trash and the rage of the many.

OWS risks becoming a marginalized fringe of rabble; perhaps it's already too late to reverse this perception.

With all its shortcomings, the current democratic process is the only practical way to change America without risking a major pushback.

We can demonstrate our solidarity in a peaceful, respectful way. We will be noted for that trait. Purity and focus are essential. Peace ...
We want it to grow and people are afraid to attend because of what they see and hear.

During the first GA, I took a picture of a t-shirt imprinted with one of the few quotes I refer to often. (Wish I knew how to link to my picture). It' calms the frustration (anger) I feel with some Christians who are convinced they are the true followers of Jesus. I have met christians, buddists, atheists, jews, hindu, who emulate what I, being a good Southern Baptist refer to as God. Jesus is my biggest hero from an extremely young age. I said all that to share a slogan on a t-shirt. I amuse myself.

Any way, “Preach the gospel always, and when absolutely necessary, use words.” ~ St. Francis of Assisi (1181/1182 - October 23, 1226)

A Godly Man the roman catholic monk. Hero material!!
Peace,
Debbie

Impressions are powerful things. Unfortunately, the impression that many Americans take away from the Occupy protests is not a good one. They see an unruly mob of inarticulate, unkempt, radical youths completely ignorant of economics, current legislation and the political process.

Their only 'solutions' involve forcible redistribution of wealth, absolute statist control of business and gratuitous and counterproductive punitive taxes on the 'wealthy'. Then they cluelessly condemn businesses for moving factories and jobs overseas to escape the greedy, hate-filled grasp of this envious rabble.

(The definition of 'wealthy', BTW, has already been lowered to $200,000 which includes many small businessmen who operate out of their personal accounts for payroll, unemployment insurance, workers' comp and equipment and most assuredly do NOT 'take home' anything close to $200K. It's an historical certainty this figure will continue to be defined downward as the socialist regime runs low on money.)

'Occupiers' have only words, the willingness to engage in mass lawbreaking and civil disobedience and the implicit threat of chaos and violence. Americans rightly reject political change brought about by force, violence and irresponsible demagoguery.

This is absolutely the wrong impression.

This is because the main stream media wants people to think of it like this. We can only fight this so much. I agree that we want to change people's perceptions of us, but by and large that is going to come from all of us doing what we are doing and getting the word out ourselves.

Their media will never help our cause in any significant way, except to confuse and hurt it. That is their only goal and all they know how to do anymore. Changing the media is a large part of this movement, but mostly it will just be replaced by our own media of truth.

Just because he was a pollster for Bill Clinton doesn't mean he's unbiased. The WSJ is owned by Newscorp and this article is pretty firmly biased toward the right ("[President Obama] abandoned any effort to work with the congressional super committee to craft a bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction" lol).

And likewise, research on the Tea Party shows that the "non-partisan" libertarian rhetoric is a sham - major predictors of Tea Party participation are past Republican affiliation, social conservatism, desire to see more religion in government, and racial animosity. It's not really an accident that Michelle Bachman is head of the Tea Party Caucus.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-tea-party.html

And who can forget all of their own rhetoric invoking the possibility of armed revolution (including people openly carrying firearms to rallies) as well? At least Occupy, despite no central leadership, has made some effort to temper those voices, to reach out to businesses and residents affected by the occupation, etc. I don't enjoy drum circles or interpretive dance and I'm pretty invested in everyone being knowledgeable and strategic rather than inflammatory, but ultimately the mainstream media has a vested interest in discrediting OWS and they're going to do whatever they can to those ends.

I have little faith in any polls run by Rupert Murdoch (Newscorp). I don't even consider the Newscorp empire a part of the main-stream media, but a wing of the far right, Koch brothers, ALEC, etc. The main-stream media has one major objective, to make money. That doesn't necessarily mean that they will discredit OWS. MSNBC has found their niche with Rachel Madow, the Ed Show, Al Sharpton (PoliticsNation), and others whom I believe will remain on our side and continue to cover us in a positive way.

Oh, wait.

View all posts by ironhorzmn. We have been trolled.

Here's another troll.

KaptainAmerika

How do we report trolls to the mods?

There's an "Offenders" subforum. I don't know that they need to be banned, just inform everyone of the imaginary DO NOT ENGAGE sign.

granny smith wrote:I have little faith in any polls run by Rupert Murdoch (Newscorp). I don't even consider the Newscorp empire a part of the main-stream media, but a wing of the far right, Koch brothers, ALEC, etc. The main-stream media has one major objective, to make money. That doesn't necessarily mean that they will discredit OWS. MSNBC has found their niche with Rachel Madow, the Ed Show, Al Sharpton (PoliticsNation), and others whom I believe will remain on our side and continue to cover us in a positive way.

So MSNBC has credibility because they treat you in a 'positive way'? But those who treat you in a critical way are right wing shills of the Koch brothers? Listen to yourself.

Can't you guys handle any criticism without trying to marginalize a major and wildly popular news and opinion network?

Have you ever heard of a guy named George Soros? He's bankrolled liberal causes for years and you know exactly what I'm talking about. He probably has his fingerprints all over the OWS mobs. (Who's paying the food and transportation costs for 2 or 3 thousand professional slackers anyway?)

oh wow you're not even trying to concern troll now, just trollolololololin

melittophily wrote:Just because he was a pollster for Bill Clinton doesn't mean he's unbiased. The WSJ is owned by Newscorp and this article is pretty firmly biased toward the right ("[President Obama] abandoned any effort to work with the congressional super committee to craft a bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction" lol).

And likewise, research on the Tea Party shows that the "non-partisan" libertarian rhetoric is a sham - major predictors of Tea Party participation are past Republican affiliation, social conservatism, desire to see more religion in government, and racial animosity. It's not really an accident that Michelle Bachman is head of the Tea Party Caucus.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-tea-party.html

And who can forget all of their own rhetoric invoking the possibility of armed revolution (including people openly carrying firearms to rallies) as well? At least Occupy, despite no central leadership, has made some effort to temper those voices, to reach out to businesses and residents affected by the occupation, etc. I don't enjoy drum circles or interpretive dance and I'm pretty invested in everyone being knowledgeable and strategic rather than inflammatory, but ultimately the mainstream media has a vested interest in discrediting OWS and they're going to do whatever they can to those ends.

Amazing. This guy was good enough for Bill Clinton but he's not liberal enough for you? Is that because he conducted a legitimate survey and reported the findings accurately?

Please tell me exactly what 'invoking the possibility of armed revolution' means? Is it anything like the 'CLASS WAR' posters we've seen recently? Or the calls to 'behead bankers' or 'shoot the 13 most important banking families in front of the White House'?

And those firearms were totally legal at those rallies. Not only the local law enforcement but the Secret Service did not interfere. Go back to the seventies when the Black Panther Party marched in the streets with loaded firearms.

OWS is marginalizing itself. It's scaring average Americans, small and large business owners and investors. This chaos will not encourage anyone to invest in today's economy.

you're not even trying.

Disagreement is not trolling. I'm sorry if you don't like debating. You're free to ignore my posts or do what liberals normally do and retaliate by pulling my account.

I fully expect this to happen soon. It's usually the result of ignorance combined with intolerance.

kewl

@ironhorzman

The WSJ article, which included the author's allleged unbiased poll, was an opinion piece by that author. The following paragraphs from the opinion piece confirm the author's bias.

Today, having abandoned any effort to work with the congressional super committee to craft a bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction, President Obama has thrown in with those who support his desire to tax oil companies and the rich, rather than appeal to independent and self-described moderate swing voters who want smaller government and lower taxes, not additional stimulus or interference in the private sector.

Rather than embracing huge new spending programs and tax increases, plus increasingly radical and potentially violent activists, the Democrats should instead build a bridge to the much more numerous independents and moderates in the center by opposing bailouts and broad-based tax increases.

Put simply, Democrats need to say they are with voters in the middle who want cooperation, conciliation and lower taxes. And they should work particularly hard to contrast their rhetoric with the extremes advocated by the Occupy Wall Street crowd.

Unbiased pollsters, in total contradiction of the author's contentions, confirm that Americans want jobs, want the rich to pay their fair share, and approve of OWS action. Americans' low opinion of Congress can be placed squarely in the hands of the Republicans. Here are the "accomplishments" of Republicans in Congress. They have introduced 99 bills on religion, 71 on family relationships, 36 on marriage, 67 on firearms/gun control, 522 on taxation, 445 on "government investigations" and ZERO on job creation. In addition they have blocked every effort that President Obamas has made to create jobs.

Your own bias is blantantly clear when you invoke the name of George Soros and other radical right talking points which have no basis in fact.

From Media Matters:

Fox's Doug Schoen Claims The Occupy Wall Street Movement "Reflects Values That Are Dangerously Out Of Touch With The Broad Mass Of The American People." In an October 18 Wall Street Journal article, Fox News contributor Doug Schoen claimed, based on in-person interviews his polling firm conducted at Zuccotti Park, that the Occupy Wall Street movement "reflects values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people." [The Wall Street Journal, 10/18/11, via Media Matters]

For more on Schoen's flawed poll, SEE HERE

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110180014

Media Matters is a paid propaganda organ for the Democrat Party. They've received millions from George Soros through their puppetmasters Hillary Clinton, MoveOn.org and the Center for American Progress.

"In October 2010, Soros openly announced that he was donating $1 million to Media Matters, which would use the money to hold “Fox [News] host Glenn Beck and others on the cable news channel accountable for their reporting.”
(http://www.theblaze.com/stories/nyt-soros-donates-1-million-to-fight-fox-and-glenn-beck/)

This $1 million direct Soros grant was the genesis of NewsCorpWatch, a MediaMatters spinoff which openly attacks Fox News with no regard for accuracy, ethics or truth.

Period. Its credibility (EDIT) is nil. Next point.

George Soros has funded many left wing groups either directly or through several groups including Open Society Institute. Only a few examples are listed below:

Emily's List
Health Care for America Now
Democracy Now
Common Cause ($600,000+)
MoveOn.org ($2.5 million+)
NARAL ($450,000+)
Planned Parenthood ($950,000+)
People for the American Way ($450,000+)
America Coming Together ($7.5 million+)
Human Rights Campaign (200,000+)
National Council of La Raza
National Resources Defense Council
National Organization for Women
Project Vote (ACORN front responsible for massive nationwide voting fraud)
Southern Law Poverty Center
Think Progress

The Koch brothers have nothing on this guy.

relevant to this thread:

http://www.alternet.org/media/149197/are_right-wing_libertarian_internet_trolls_getting_paid_to_dumb_down_online_conversations/

This "concern" tactic is used by trolls in other Occupy groups. The intent is to load the forum with negative Occupy descriptors and incite emotional reaction. Ironhorse is just another anti-occupy lost soul.

Should I lock this thread?

If you lock the thread, does that prevent additional posts while leaving the thread intact?

You have no response. You don't even try to answer the overwhelming evidence I've used to rebut your baseless claims.

You can't even deal with the idea that someone, somewhere, would dare to disagree with you.

Instead you try to shut me up. Just like I knew you would.

Yes, I do oppose the Occupy protests. And so should you. They're an ongoing public relations disaster. They look like an unwashed mob. Their rhetoric is built on emotion, their tactics are mainly lawbreaking, confrontation and intimidation. Their ideas, when they can express them, border on a lunatic fringe.

You're the ones who should be condemning this rabble, not aiding and abetting it. I have no doubt there are many Occupiers who have legitimate grievances and legitimate solutions but you are absolutely being drowned out by this circus.

etu1972 wrote:This "concern" tactic is used by trolls in other Occupy groups. The intent is to load the forum with negative Occupy descriptors and incite emotional reaction. Ironhorse is just another anti-occupy lost soul.

I invite you to read the heading above. Just in case you missed it:

"This forum is for public discussion and storing info related to the protests and occupation in Jacksonville Florida. Feel free to discuss anything related to the corporate take over of America.'

Are there any qualifications or restrictions on that statement that I may have missed?

What do you consider 'negative Occupy descriptors'? I thought this was a public discussion forum, you know, with debate and disagreement and all that stuff. Instead of discussion, I get disparaged as a 'troll' which you all know is not close to the truth.

melittophily wrote:relevant to this thread:

http://www.alternet.org/media/149197/are_right-wing_libertarian_internet_trolls_getting_paid_to_dumb_down_online_conversations/

Truly pathetic. Liberals can never deal with the message so they always attack the messenger.

(Where do I go for MY paycheck?)