Who IS this guy?!

'Niceguy' Eddie

Political Talk Show Host and Internet Radio Personality. My show, In My Humble Opinion, (original, huh?) airs on Tuesdays at 10:PM and Saturdays at 8:PM, Eastern time on RainbowRadio.

Feel free to contact me at niceguy9418@usa.com. You can also friend me on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, and Tumblr, and support my Patreon. Also, if you don't mind the stench, you can find my unofficial "fan club" over HERE. ;)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Wow. Month's just about gone.

And I've posted just TWICE? WTF?

Sorry, guys. I just have no idea where the time went this month!  And what a month it's been too!  For three straight weeks now we've watched the Republican Party show just how divorced from reality they are as they keep talking about how imperative it is that they defeat that "Radical Socialist" Barack Obama, and yet have tried every trick in the book to make sure they don't nominate the one guy who would have a snowball's chance in hell of actually WINNING, because he's that dreaded word that all true Conservatives have been conditioned to break out in hives at the sound of: A MODERATE.

Don't get me wrong, Mitt Romney won't get MY vote or backing. But come on! Newt Gingrich?! One of the most despise politicians in American history?! Rick Santorum?! That fucking DOUCHEBAG?! Rick Perry...? Who's learned the hard way that the rest of America in not fucking TEXAS?! And after the revolving side show loonies - Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain, Donald Trump... Who the hell IS John Huntsman anyway?!

*shakes head*

But enough of that...  I'd like you to take a listen to the following clip. It was from ~1986 IIRC, and it's both hilarious and depressing in it's relevance. L & G, the late, great George Carlin:



And here's another one. Great clip in it's own right, but the PICTURES the user put over it elevate it to BRILLIANCE:



That's right, Rush. A BIG, BROWN DICK!

Oh, and, uh... If SOPA and PIPA had there way? YouTube could be shut down over these clips. Great country we're living in, huh?

Couple of other things that caught my eye...

A few posts back, William found it appropriate to mock my calls for comprehensive sex education as a way of reducing abortions. well, here's an article that, while fairly stunning, shows, once again, that I'm right and Conservatives generally suck.

And there something else that I'd meant to post before the holidays, but I lost the link.  It appears the Occupy movement isn't going away.  Well... The Tea Party took over the House and all they managed to accomplish was to derail the economy with an artificial debt crisis and put more people out of work an out of home just as things were finally starting to turn around. Well done, cockmunchers.  So I for one, would like to see what influence this new movement can have. Probably not as much - it lacks corporate sponsorship and media backing for one - but at least the article was BEGINNING to clarify the actual political agenda.  Because that's really what's lacking here. WHAT DO THE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH?

And there are a few things that I think would make some pretty powerful, populist and scary (to the status quo) talking points.  Two that I think REALLY should be at the top? 

1) Overturn the decision in Citizens United, via Constitutional Amendment, if needed.
2) Strip Corporation of their "personhood" status.

The whole "no more bailouts" thing... Meh, not so much. That's Tea Party talk, and mostly the area of people who let their anger get in the way of better judgement.  Bt ending corporate welfare via tax loopholes? No longer allowing corporation to write legislation?  Ending for-profit prisons?  Hey: There's some good political grist in this mill.  Don't get me wrong, I'm under no illusions that it will WORK.  But hey: You show me an OCCUPY Candidate? 

And S/He'll have my vote!

Anyway, I realize this isn't all that deep, but I figured I'd drop in and post, so you'd all know I was still alive anyway.

37 comments:

  1. " well, here's an article that, while fairly stunning, shows, once again, that I'm right and Conservatives generally suck."

    As I was reading through that article, I noticed that those practicing abstinence had no pregnancies. And, the 20% failure rate of those using condoms ... isn't that the expected failure rate of those things?

    So what your idea has is; teaching the kids that they can "do it" at a younger age as long as they pay more attention in sex-ed class. And then the expected failure rate of contraceptives is just about what is expected with the use of them as demonstrated through your article. Yeah ...conservatives are the ones that "suck". LOL

    Abstinence doesn't teach that you can't get pregnant. It teaches that you don't have to "do it" until you are ready and without all the 'pear pressure'.

    I liked this part of the article the best: " "This report underscores how much misperception, ambivalence and magical thinking put teens at risk for unintended pregnancy," ".

    Is that "misperception, ambivalence and magical thinking" coming from the class that is teaching them how to use the contraceptives properly? Or the class that teaches them the chances of getting pregnant?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Abstinence does not work...ask Bristol Palin.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Either does the other method. Ask any of those 5,000 kids who were in that study.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "And after the revolving side show loonies - Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain, Donald Trump... Who the hell IS John Huntsman anyway?!"

    Much better than the group who ran against Obama: cheater/liar Edwards, bitter/hateful Clinton, ect... So, does it matter? Liberals will denigrate him as they have all other candidates so far. Because pitting knowledge against knowledge, Obama loses. Pitting experience against experience Obama loses. Pitting character against character Obama loses. The ONLY hope for liberals (again) is for Obama to promise to pay voters if elected (again).
    Obama has the country in worse condition (now) than even Bush could have made it. And EVERY liberal will tell you Bush tried and (of course) they continue to blame Bush for every miss-step Obama makes. So, trying to win on his record would result in a defeat so bad that even Palin could beat him. And Palin couldn't beat her way out of a wet paper bag!
    So, you liberals need to sharpen (if possible) your skills of name-calling and lying about people you know nothing about if you want to have any chance of winning this next election. You liberals have already been kicked out of the congress and the senate because of your failed ideas. You don't think we are going to stop now, do you? This nation needs direction and leadership. Obama offers neither. Many of the republicans offer neither, also, but the advantage they have is the we have PROOF of the lack of direction and leadership that Obama brings to the table.
    Does anyone know if Gitmo is still open? Does anyone know if killing American citizens without trial in any country is allowed? What is the debt at now? I saw a neat tidbit, recently, that said the first 43 presidents (Washington through Bush) added a debt of $6.3 trillion. Obama (in only ONE term) has added another $6.5 trillion. There's his experience at work!
    I find it funny that liberals fear the 'secret government camps' that hold people in-definately without trial, yet celebrate when people from those 'secret government camps' kill American citizens ... without trial.

    ReplyDelete
  5. " It appears the Occupy movement isn't going away."

    No, not going away ... going to jail. The OWS protesters are some of the most violent ones this nation has seen since VietNam. They are criminals and should be treated like that. At least the Tea Party remained CIVIL (anyone got any videos of the Tea Party movement getting violent?). The OWS? They trash each city they park themselves at, they cause injury to innocent bystanders and themselves and then lie about how it happened. They harm the 99%'rs they are supposed to be promoting as they shut down small business's who are simply trying to make a living.
    Personally, I hope they continue to protest. That way the FBI and CIA will have a long list of people to put on their 'terrorist watch list'. Maybe send a couple of them to GITMO (it is still open, isn't it?). Because those OWS protesters are certainly terrorists, by every description of what a terrorist is.
    But, wait ... the liberals LOVE the OWS movement and it's participants. Why (you ask)? Well, the liberal is like a puppy (without the good puppy breath), they get into everything and destroys what it can, blames others for it and then expects to be patted on the head and said "good dog" to. Plus they expect everyone else to give to them everything they need to make their lives better.

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/28/10260959-hundreds-arrested-at-occupy-oakland-protesters-break-into-city-hall

    Keep up the good works, Occupy Movement. You are examples of a way of life that NOBODY in America wants except those who are like you. Your violence and treachery are shining examples of the way the liberal wants it to be like in America. Keep up the good works, your reward awaits you. Hope you're not planning on going to Heaven. Well, that was stupid of me to say, liberals probably don't even believe in Heaven. Their actions sure signify that.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. William -

    "I noticed that those practicing abstinence had no pregnancies."

    As usual you lose sight of the big picture: What % of those in ABSTINENCE ONLY Sex Ed Programs ACTUALLY PRACTICE abstinence? And those that DON'T? What information are THEY armed with? As for "the 20% failure rate of condoms/ isn't that the expected failure rate of those things?"

    How do I put this delicately? You're a virgin, aren't you?

    No, William, 20% is NOT the failure rate of Condoms WHEN USED PROPERLY. That's USER ERROR. If it was 20% I'd have at least 5 more kids than I actually DO right now. WHEN USED PROPERLY, condoms are well over 99.9% effective - which jives with my own experience during the roughly 10 Years where they were OUR only form of birth control.

    So, no. 20%? THAT'S a huge signal that MORE EDUCATION is needed.

    "So what your idea has is..."

    MY IDEA was laid out pretty clearly in the original post. That you want to resort to distorting it, then mocking that distortion and offering no alternatives, save for those that have been shown to have been disastrous? Shows me only two things:

    1) You got nothin'.
    2) You're Conservtaive. Congratulations.

    The rest of that post is drivel. Really. If you don't understand what you're reading, you should probably refrain from comenting.

    As for the Occupy folks vs. teh Teabaggers? Meh. Whatever. The Occupy movement is bound to be angrier, seeing as how they are ACTUALLY BEING SCREWED, and their politics have the benefit of being BASED IN REALITY. The tea Party was ASTROTURF. Professionals organizing the racist and the ignorant. People who wanted to stop a Gov't takeover of MEDICARE, and who were angry at Obama about taxes after he LOWERED THEM - TWICE really, if you count the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts. And in any case NEVER ONCE did Obama even PROPOSE raising taxes on anyone in the lower 98%. So, yeah, If you're that rich, that greedy or that stupid? I wouldn't expect you to be all that angry. Because regardless of how poorly you understand it, reality remains what it is, all around you.

    And I'll be honest: I could care less about the violence. If the 1% had more brains and less arrogance, they might realize that this type of stuff is EXACTLY what has motivated ACTUAL REVOLUTIONS in just about every other country that's ever had one, including ours. And if YOU think that the Country we've got NOW is the one that everyone wants? You either know very little about what everyone wants or you know very little about the country we actually HAVE.

    BTW... You could tally up the actual damage done by street crime for the last 20 years and it would be several orders of magnitude less that the damage caused by Enron alone. Or Bernie Madoff. Or the Mortgage meltdown. Like Carlin said: You're against all kinds of street crime, as long as it isn't Wall Street.

    And while I'm sure I do not believe in the same heaven as you do, I do know enough about yours to be able to remind you that God doesn't care how much money you have. If you think the Occupiers have treated their fellow man shabbily, consider the damage and harm that's been done by the top 1%, every year, for at least the thirty years that I have any decent memory of.

    Rich man through the eye of a needle, indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Well, that was stupid of me to say..." Finally, some self-awareness. Keep it up.

    BTW, William, how many OWS sites have you gone to, and talked to the people there? I've been to two, NYC and Great Barrington MA. In my experience, your blanket condemnation is full of shit. Oakland may be what you're referring to, and if so, I'll second what Eddie said. The Oakland police department has shown itself to be brutal, up to and including murderous, since the '60's. You reap what you sow.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "As usual you lose sight of the big picture: What % of those in ABSTINENCE ONLY Sex Ed Programs ACTUALLY PRACTICE abstinence?"

    Apparently MANY MORE than those practicing what YOU prefer they be taught! I'll bet they left that part of the scenario out of the article on purpose. It may have embarrassed you and others who feel abstinence doesn't keep young girls from becoming pregnant.


    "No, William, 20% is NOT the failure rate of Condoms WHEN USED PROPERLY."

    You are wrong. When they are used 'perfectly' the failure rate is 2%. When used 'typically' the failure rate is 15%. So, in your perfect little world, the kids will be taught how to use contraceptives until they are perfect little fuckers! You have a real tweaked sense of what is important to teach in SCHOOL.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods


    "So, no. 20%? THAT'S a huge signal that MORE EDUCATION is needed."

    I'm thinking you would prefer they skip out of History class in order to get more Sex-ed in, huh? Since History isn't important, but screwing each other is.
    Looks like my statement of your preferred teaching idea is correct: "So what your idea has is; teaching the kids that they can "do it" at a younger age as long as they pay more attention in sex-ed class". Thanks for supporting my belief about liberals ideals. YOUR education method is shown to be failure in our school system, yet you deem it necessary to provide even MORE of a failed program. Perhaps they should start teaching kids how to screw each other in pre-school? That would be a perfect scenario for the liberal, IMHO.


    "Rich man through the eye of a needle, indeed."

    How many rich people have YOU met in Heaven? Well, I guess neither YOU nor THEY are there. Good luck with that.


    "how many OWS sites have you gone to, and talked to the people there?"

    2. Oakland and Berkeley. Both were/are filled with dirty, violent thugs. ALL seeking others to provide monetary resolve for situations they put themselves in. In other words: they are good little liberals learning and hoping to be as good a liberal as you, one day.
    You know NOTHING of the Oakland police except what you learn from Mediamatters. I live here.

    ReplyDelete
  10. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/30/occupy-oakland-s-violent-turn-proves-the-movement-has-lost-its-way.html

    Not that any of you are interested. I was IN Oakland at that time. Rode BART with the protesters who were moving in. All I can say is; YES, a bunch of thugs who have NO direction are simply creating havoc because they can. Is this your idea of "rightful protest"?!?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "You know NOTHING of the Oakland police except what you learn from Mediamatters." If Media Matters has done a thread on the Oakland Police, I'm not aware of it. Link? Another ASSumption on your part. Pull your head out.


    I guess the Golden West has got all the 'thugs.' The folks at OWS NYC and GBMA were anything but. The ones I spoke to were well educated and politically aware. This fellow is typical of the people I met.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/165871/iraq-vets-journey-wall-street-ows

    ReplyDelete
  12. William,

    Your sex-ed posts grow increasingly ridiculous, but I'll dignify this latest comment with a response one last time, for old time's sake, and try break through this absurd dogma that keeping condoms out of schools will stop teenagers from having sex.

    1) Who said practicing abstinence doesn't prevent pregnancy? For the fuckteenth time, a COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM - AS I HAVE FUCKING LAID OUT IN PERFECT FUCKING CLARITY FOR ANYONE WILL THE ABILITY TO READ FUCKING ENGLISH - would include that information! (Fucking DUH!)

    2) Also for the fuckteenth time: Multiple National Studies have shown ABSTINENCE ONLY (ONLY!) (O-N-L-Y!!!) programs to be less effective, as States who employ them have a higher rate of teenaged pregnancy than states with COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMS.

    So: You're WRONG. It is no longer a matter of opinon. Your dogma - Sarah Palin's dogma, actually - is not only inefective, but HARMFUL. And it's been studied. I'D like to PREVENT teenaged pregnancies and REDUCE the numebr of abortions? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO?

    And BTW, sex-ed and history aren't mutually exclusive, doofus. They're both taught NOW. But if I HAD to make room for Sex Ed? YES. I would. And it would be WORTH IT. All that education doesn't count from much if you have to put your senior year and college aside to take care of a baby. Or have an abortion, which I am just as keen to prevent, seeing as how it would unecessary if the MAGICAL THINKERS such as yourself would just GET THE FUCK out of the way!

    I'm done with you on this. Have the last word. I'll let what I've already said - many times now - stand on it's own against your increasingly ridiculous distortions of it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Eddie, your complaint from #2 is unfounded. What part of the study YOU brought to THIS discussion mentions ANY abstinence programs?? If you want to continue whining about something that isn't even mentioned in YOUR article, you go right ahead (it is your site after-all). But, it makes you look silly. The article you brought to this discussion is ONLY about the results of your prized "COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMS". No where in that article did it mention that some (OR ANY) of those 5,000 girls were in ANY kind of abstinence programs.

    Maybe us "magical thinkers" aren't in the way. It is YOUR programs that are causing these pregnancies. YOUR ideals that little girls should be taught about sex in elementary school is causing many MORE pregnancies than any abstinence program is.

    I'm glad you're done with me. You just make yourself look sillier and sillier every time you promote your ideals that little girls should be taught how to have sex before they reach high school while whining about my ideals that abstinence is just as good method as any. Because you keep whining about how this article is the result of improper following of what YOU prefer little girls be taught in school, then whine that abstinence doesn't work because a couple girls get pregnant because they improperly followed the instructions. It is closed-minded people like you that is causing more trouble than correcting. And you're proud of it!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  14. "If Media Matters has done a thread on the Oakland Police, I'm not aware of it. Link? "

    Mediamatters.org

    But, I thought you already knew their address. Your writing style is exactly like the posters at that site: crude, incorrect, loud.


    "I guess the Golden West has got all the 'thugs.' "

    I guess so. Should I form my opinion on the OWS movement by what I see and experience happening from them or should I form it from what you tell me it is like?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Congratulations. You've finally gotten one thing about me right. Yes, I do know mmfa's address.
    However, you were wrong in (sigh) assuming that I'd gotten any information about the Oakland Police from them. As I posted above, I don't know if they covered any of the reporting of the events in Oakland. Do you? Ah, you made another assumption? That was the link I was asking for. Toddle off and see if you can find it.

    "Should I form my opinion on the OWS movement by what I see and experience happening from them or should I form it from what you tell me it is like?" It would be lovely, and refreshing, to see you form your opinions from the real world, William. However, given the way you've twisted and misconstrued the vast majority of arguments Eddie and I have made; given the fact that you cannot take responsibility for your own wrong headedness (while projecting that failure on to others), as evidenced by your lock-jawed grip on the false "self-claimed" meme (among others); given the fact that you spew hysterical hatred and false equivalencies at 'liberals' ad nauseam, I do doubt your judgement.

    You will note that while you made the blanket statement, "The OWS protesters are some of the most violent ones this nation has seen since VietNam." I responded with, "I've been to two, NYC and Great Barrington MA. IN MY EXPERIENCE, your blanket condemnation is full of shit." (emphasis added) I make no claim of sainthood for the OWS protesters, but I support their goals and agree with their analysis. For you to smear the entire movement because of your experience with some is as bad as the right's smearing of the entire anti-Vietnam War
    movement because of the extreme fringe, and the left's smearing of all G.I.'s from that war because of the undeniable atrocities committed by some soldiers and Marines.

    ASSUMPTION ALERT: I'm tempted to assume that you didn't follow the link, http://www.thenation.com/article/165871/iraq-vets-journey-wall-street-ows, but I'll resist it and just ask, did you?

    "Your writing style is exactly like the posters at that site: crude, incorrect, loud."

    Oh, there you go again, hurting my feelings. Luckily for my supply of Kleenex, I've kept this nugget of wisdom from J.R.R. Tolkein's introduction to THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING in my head since I first read it in 1965:

    "Some who have read the book, or at any rate reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd or contemptible; and I have no cause to complain, as I have a similar opinion of their works, or of the kinds of writing they evidently prefer."

    THE LORD OF THE RINGS, by the way, went on to become the second most read book of the 20th Century, having spotted number one the first 54 years (and then some.)

    ReplyDelete
  16. " but I support their goals and agree with their analysis."

    Which "goal" do they have that you are supporting, they have so many? What "analysis" have they given of any type? In my experience, they have no goal except to destroy private property and cause mayhem among peaceful inhabitants. And they have proven me correct in each city they park themselves in.


    "For you to smear the entire movement because of your experience with some is as bad as the right's smearing of the entire anti-Vietnam War"

    Ha ha. You're funny. That statement shows what a hypocrite you are. To prove it, I'll ask a simple question about another protest group who is commonly 'blanket smeared' by the left: How do you feel about the Tea Party Movement?


    "It would be lovely, and refreshing, to see you form your opinions from the real world, "

    Thank you for your permission to do as I already have done. I was IN Oakland during Saturday's riot. I was IN Oakland when the Iraq Vet was allegedly hit in the head with a police projectile. I HAVE formed my opinion based on the real world experiences and that opinion is that the OWS protesters are thugs out to destroy as much private property as possible before they are sent back to school. Now, it would be refreshing for you to do the same. What "real world" experience do you have with OWS? Or are you just spewing what you're told to spew? (I believe the later).


    "THE LORD OF THE RINGS, by the way, went on to become the second most read book of the 20th Century, "

    Again, you bring misinformation. Do you have proof of that claim that you are using for some weird purpose? A simple google search shows that book isn't as popular as you claim (I expect wrong information from liberals when they claim facts). I HAVE read the #1 book of the 20th Century. Apparently your use of that ranking system must mean you think the higher ranked a book is means it is a more credible book.
    http://www.squidoo.com/mostreadbooks

    ReplyDelete
  17. "But more fundamentally, if Occupy has taught me anything it is that we must live up to our own values."

    I do that, yet you condemn me for doing that. Hypocrite.


    "Is it really possible that everyone has a point except those who protest here?"

    An old lawyer saying is: don't ask a question you don't know the answer to. The answer to that question is an obvious YES. What "point" does the OWS have? My take on it is that their point is they can destroy as much property as they want and whenever they want. It's good we have vets supporting that ambitious expression of free speech.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "My take on it is that their point is they can destroy as much property as they want and whenever they want. It's good we have vets supporting that ambitious expression of free speech."
    Your take is, as usual, wrong. Their point is that the financial system has taken over the economy of this country, criminal behavior on the part of major Wall Street firms has been been granted impunity, and that this country can no more survive with a super-rich 1% and a struggling-to-survive 99% than it could survive, 'half-slave and half-free.'

    My take on the Tea Party movement is that they are misguided tools of Dick Armey and the Koch Brothers. I won't say that "Keep your government hands off my Medicare," is all that you need to know, but I do think it is telling.

    " Now, it would be refreshing for you to do the same. What "real world" experience do you have with OWS? Or are you just spewing what you're told to spew? (I believe the later)."

    I think you meant "latter," so that' what I'll respond to. You make it very clear (as if you hadn't many times before) that your beliefs are impervious to the real world. You're asking a question that I answered above, when I asked you if you'd had any first hand experience with OWS. Are you choosing to ignore that, has the dementia set in early, or are you just too engaged with your rage against me to believe that I actually was at the two Occupy sites I've referenced?



    I don't know that I've condemned you for living up to your values, unless you consider it "family values" to make smarmy references about teen-age boys.

    I'll have to do a google. I had a feeling I shouldn't be passing on information from a National Geographic promo DVD without double checking.

    Actually, my point about the two most popular (to be checked out) books of century was a somewhat ironic observation that both were books of mythology, each containing some valuable moral advice.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Yep, I was wrong not to double-check. It was fourth. Point to you. Unfortunate because my loquaciousness got in the way of Tolkein's paragraph, and you will always miss the forest for a weed if given the chance, as you've proved with this:

    "An old lawyer saying is: don't ask a question you don't know the answer to. The answer to that question is an obvious YES."

    The question was a rhetorical one, intended to make people think. Some, as you've shown, will resist thinking for themselves, and do the subdominant authoritarian genuflection to corporate and police power.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "My take on the Tea Party movement is that they are misguided tools of Dick Armey and the Koch Brothers"

    I believe OWS are misguided. No real focus and no real intent and no real purpose. Other than to destroy private property and cause as much public disruption as possible. When (if) they use the tactics used by the Tea Party maybe they'll garner enough respect to win an election or two and get their goals achieved. But I highly doubt they are even concerned about respect. OWS has become such an enigma that the protesters from the real aspect of the protests have started to change their names so they don't get equated with OWS. The real protesters want to be called '99 percent'. Goes to show you just how viable the OWS protests are.



    "I think you meant "latter," "

    Thanks for the spelling correction. Glad you are watching over all the posts so the spelling is correct.

    ReplyDelete
  21. If they'd been carrying signs saying, "We came unarmed, this time," the uniformed thugs would have been even worse.

    "Thanks for the spelling correction" You'll get my bill in the mail.

    "Goes to show you just how viable the OWS protests are."

    What goes to show how viable the protests are, is the fact that the conversation, and the campaigns, have already changed, and are beginning to deal with, or deny, the unsustainable economic injustice they've been protesting.

    ReplyDelete
  22. For purposes of clarification (since everyone always writes about them without really knowing what they are), "abstinence only" programs deal in shame and guilt, actively teach fear and even hatred of sex, and are filled with the same sort of gross misinformation as "William" has been spouting, here. Those behind them would be more appropriately prosecuted by the law than endorsed by it.

    Another matter: in the real world, the commitment of OWS to non-violence has caused no end of problems for the movement; no matter what level of violence local police dish out (and Oakland PD are particularly violent), they've lain down and taken it, which only encourages more of the same. A much more just approach would be to teach these thugs in uniform some basic math lessons. That might give the movement a black eye with the public, but it would offer some little degree of justice (it's the only way there will ever be any justice in such matters). Portraying OWS as violent, while they submit to one violent assault after another, is, of course, delusional, but it's fairly typical of the delusional world in which American conservatives live every day.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Classicliberal, you are totally wrong. The Oakland police have instigated NO violence against any protesters. Even the one where the vet was injured the protesters were already throwing bottles and rocks at police. Should I be under the assumption that your idea of a "good protest" would be for the protesters to walk up and down the street while they are slashing tires and breaking windows and smashing fences and vandalizing City Hall? Because that's what they were doing Saturday night.
    How exactly should the police react to violence BROUGHT by the protesters? Is your liberal view so tweaked that you think the police should LET them destroy private property and abuse public property and endanger human safety?
    The OWS movement has EARNED every ounce of disrespect they have achieved. I think they are proud of that and I think they look forward to doing it more. I hope the police aren't as easy on them next time. And I certainly hope the Judges start dishing out punishments equal to their violent crimes.

    And after your wildly inaccurate statements about the Oakland Police, I feel your statements about abstinence programs are just as off the mark. Perhaps you should climb out of the basement and actually walk OUTSIDE for 15-20 minutes a day. The sunshine will do you good. The musty basement air seems to have affected some of those brain cells that weren't damaged by other substances.

    ReplyDelete
  24. FACT: The Oakland police are notorious as one of the most corrupt and brutal PDs in the U.S., going all the way back to the 1940s. for their brutality, a problem that has plagued the department since the 1940s. Nearly a decade ago, they were successfully sued for their policy of violently attacking Iraq war protesters in the same way they've repeatedly attacked OWS demonstrators; as a consequence of that suit, they were required to take the radical step of actually abiding by their own policies with regard to crowd control.

    FACT: That's a practice they've violated on a routine basis ever since OWS appeared (that Iraq vet whose skull was fractured was hit by a tear-gas canister indiscriminately fired into a crowd, a violation of those rules).

    FACT: In this world of "new media," videos of unambiguous, nowhere-to-run-or-hide attacks by Oakland cops on unarmed OWS demonstrators are available all over YouTube. One fellow even managed to film himself being shot; he was merely walking around at an uneventful protest. Another, merely attempting to leave the protest zone, was attacked and shot 8 times with rubber bullets and bean-bag guns.

    Somehow--and gee, I can't imagine how--I just knew you actually had no idea what abstinence programs actually teach. Rather than concerning yourself with how much sunshine I get, perhaps you should engage in the revolutionary practice of actually trying to learn something about a subject before ranting about it in public and making a fool of yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "(that Iraq vet whose skull was fractured was hit by a tear-gas canister indiscriminately fired into a crowd, a violation of those rules)."

    That was never established as FACT. It has always been assumed. Either way it was AFTER the protesters attacked the police. What part of Oakland are you seeing all this violence in? Oh, you READ about it in the paper and the internet to get your news on the protests, here. That's very reassuring, knowing you have first-hand knowledge of what is happening. You should change your name to "typical-liberal".


    "as a consequence of that suit, they were required to take the radical step of actually abiding by their own policies with regard to crowd control."

    So, what you're saying by that statement is that they are following their policies since they've been sued and lost. Thank you for that.


    Your description of abstinence programs if even HALF as accurate as your play-by-play of the Oakland protests is weak ... at best. I think you better stay in the basement, it's better for all mankind.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "So, what you're saying by that statement is that they are following their policies since they've been sued and lost. Thank you for that."

    I think what Classic Liberal is saying (CL, please forgive the presumption) is that the Oakland Police Department has been ordered by the courts to follow their stated policies, not that they are actually doing so. But the fact that they've had to be ordered to abide by the law pretty much blows your cheerleading off the court.

    That whole 'basement' thing, used by both liberals and conservatives, is really lame.

    ReplyDelete
  27. You've got it, Conchaobhar; they had to be sued in order to be forced to adhere to their own policies. Oakland PD, as I said before, has an horrendous record, going back decades, of corruption, "excessive force," police behaving like organized crime, planting evidence, shooting people and even murdering them.

    Unless one is to assume that skull fracture was a figment of everyone's imagination, it's a fact, not some theory, that they shot that Olson fellow in the head in violation of their own rules. Further, when a group of people were trying to render some assistance to the wounded vet, one of Oakland's Finest thought it would be amusing to throw a grenade right in the middle of them--it's on tape for everyone to see (and, if it needs to be said, that, too, is NOT allowed).

    As for William's "attacked the police" bullshit, nowhere in the footage of that event is there a single frame of video to support the Oakland PD's after-the-fact claim that anyone threw anything at police, until police attacked the crowd (one fellow can be seen throwing a tear gas canister back at the cops). Olson, moments before he's hit, is just standing quietly by a barricade.

    ReplyDelete
  28. That's what I'm agreeing with, Conchaobhar. Classicliberal says it took a massive lawsuit and strict enforcement of policy resulting from that lawsuit to reign in the corrupt Oakland police force. BTW, yes I know about their history, I've been in this area for over 20 years now. However, since that time (results of lawsuit) the force has been under orders and under a microscope from their previous behavior.
    Having said that ... I agreed with CL that the OPD have been following their strict orders regarding confrontational actions. Which means they wait to be attacked before performing any actions as he thinks happened.

    As for Olsen, I'm not saying he didn't get hit in the head. I'm saying it is assumption that he was hit in the head with a tear-gas canister shot by the police. In an interview regarding that incident, there were a couple protesters interviewed and they admitted that there were rocks (large ones), bottles and other projectiles being thrown at the police AT THE TIME OF OLSEN'S INJURY. There is NO proof that he was hit with something from the cops.
    IMHO, they accepted blame to help ease any tensions that were brewing at that time. I think they said it could have been from them just to keep the protesters from becoming even MORE violent in the subsequent days. Although, I can admit that is just my opinion of what actually happened. It certainly could have happened any other way.
    So, YES, CL, the protesters have admitted attacking the cops first, before Olsen was hit. And they have attacked first in every other OWS event that has happened since. Again, the OPD is already under a microscope for their past actions. OWS members attacked first when the OWS protesters shut down the Oakland shipping yards and have attacked first in every other protest, including the most recent one where they broke into City Hall and committed thousands of dollars worth of damage. Also, the same protest where the OWS tried (unsuccessfully) to take control of private property and claim it as their own. Perhaps you heard about that protest? The OWS members were walking up and down the street slashing (privately owned) car and truck tires as they walked. Vandalized private business's and stormed a local YMCA causing more damage. Just how much damage do these thugs need to do before you admit they are uncontrollable violent thugs who should all be in jail and paying restitution for all the harm and damage they have CAUSED?


    The OWS has a link that claims to be a video of Olsen being injured. And if the video IS of Olsen being injured, then it is obvious that the projectile was not shot. And does not appear to even be tear gas or hit Olsen in the head. It appears to be shrapnel hitting Olsen because you can see the trail of the projectile as it is sent and explodes THEN Olsen falls to the ground.
    http://occupywallst.org/article/scott_olsen/

    and another video that OWS claims Olsen was injured during (surprisingly, it also has the same footage as the other).
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFogIKkiwHc

    ReplyDelete
  29. Meanwhile, in the real world, the cops have even publicly denied using tear gas, bean-bag guns, etc. in the incident. Across the board, they denied this. From the Oakland Tribune (28 Nov.):

    "The Oakland Tribune requested that each agency [involved in the incident] provide the number of officers on the scene, their roles, where they were stationed and if they used nonlethal weapons. Every agency responded to the request, and none said their officers used nonlethal force such as tear gas."

    It is, in other words, the position of every police agency involved in the incident that all those videos, showing them firing round after round (continuing long after Olsen was hit), are just figments of your imagination.

    During the cop attack, several demonstrators moved to help Olsen, as I said before--the police threw an apparently imaginary grenade in their midst, perhaps an effort to finish the job on Olsen:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHKYUJZghYo

    The cops had brought about the incident by their attack, earlier that day, on the camp at Ogawa Plaza, a totally unnecessary move, justified, in public, by "sanitary concerns." Initially reporting the raid had gone smoothly, the cop story escalated as the day progressed. They'd deployed tear-gas against the demonstrators; they later claimed it was the demonstrators who had set off tear-gas. They'd used flash-bangs; they later claimed the explosions were demonstrators throwing fire-crackers. They claimed demonstrators threw plates and kitchen utensils at them; no such thing is evident in any of the video of the incident, and there were no police injuries of any kind. This set off a series of encounters, throughout the day, culminating in the attack on the crowd in which Olsen was injured, but at which police only used weaponry in the imagination of everyone present, including that of all those cameras. Occupy Oakland has also compiled extensive photographic and video examples of cops concealing their name-tags and department affiliations, a direct violation of state law, and not only a crime, but prima facie evidence of further criminal intent. Only one has ever been disciplined for this.

    ReplyDelete
  30. "Meanwhile, in the real world ... "

    Yes, why don't you stay in the "real world" and address what I wrote? Do YOU see Olsen getting hit in the head by a "shot" tear gas cannister? I don't. I gave 2 videos provided by OWS. Neither showed him getting hit by a "shot" cannister. I see one coming in near him and exploding then he falls. It looks to me like he took shrapnel. You completely ignored everything I wrote, then stated that all the DIFFERENT police forces present used excess force. How does THAT support your stance that the Oakland police were the ones to do it? And your claim that he was "shot in the head"? Even YOUR video (same as mine) shows the projectile NOT hitting him.

    BTW, where did I say that the police did NOT use excess force? I said they were attacked and responded. You, on the other hand, said they shot him in the head and YOUR video does NOT support that. Do you have one that DOES support what YOU say is FACT? I brought my proof, now it's time for you to bring proof of you factual claims.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Classicliberal? Are you still searching for ANY kind of proof of your claims of fact? Please hurry, I hate to think you just ran away when asked for proof of what you say is real. Don't prove yourself to be a "classic liberal" when it comes to using facts to back up what you say IS fact.

    As a side note. Did you see the news story about the OWS protest that Oakland had last Friday? There were no arrests and no violent police. You know why? Because they protested peacefully. Just goes to show the police AREN'T the instigators that YOU claim they are.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Or it goes to show the police have finally wised up a bit, due to the negative publicity. What you, I or the police do today proves nothing about what we may or may not have done yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "Or it goes to show the police have finally wised up a bit"

    You don't really think that's a possibility, do you? Neither do I. There's even yet another group of people wanting to voice the 'economic concerns' issues who are trying to distance themselves from the OWS'rs. Sorry, but I'm not the only one who sees the OWS movement as a violent organization of people who merely want as much as they can get ... for themselves. If you (and others) wish to agree with them and their methods, that's your right. I won't.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Still nothing from classicliberal to support his factual claim that Olsen's skull was fractured by a tear gas canister that was shot into a crowd. Even after I provided footage of the incident, he refuses to come back and talk about these FACTS (as he calls them).

    This makes all your other statements questionable, too. If you lie about one, you'll lie about more. You're another proud member of MMFA, aren't you? I thought so.

    I'll be in Oakland tomorrow night for the next planned version of the OWS protests. It'll be interesting to see what you claim is FACT for this one.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Wow! You see all that violence the police brought to Oakland, last night? Not to mention the tactics used by OWS to stop ANY dissension of their ideals and methods. Those Oakland police are just so violent and unforgiving. All those injuries as protesters moved back to the plaza and police violently stopped them ... continually being the instigators in every OWS party.

    http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_19940158


    Hey, classicliberal, you paying attention to any of this? Nah, I didn't think you would have anything to say as you are shown to be a liar and misinformer and fearmongerer. Bring your proof, I look forward to you proving me wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I should have posted this here, instead of at the article I posted it on.
    Classicliberal, are you paying attention? Still waiting for any kind of proof of all those supposed facts you claim are true.
    Conchobhar, perhaps this is another example that the "police have finally wised up a bit, due to the negative publicity".



    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/berkeley-police-too-occupied-to-deal-with-brutal-beating-that-left-man-dead/

    OR:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/19/BAFU1N9T8J.DTL

    "The victim had called police on a nonemergency line after first seeing Dewitt, according to sources familiar with the case. But police were busy monitoring an Occupy Oakland march to UC Berkeley, and officers were dispatched only to high-priority calls."

    Another shining example of issues liberals proudly support while denying there is a danger from their actions.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Hey classicliberal, did you see the article about Scott Olsen's injury? Turns out I was right and you were wrong. He was NOT shot with a tear gas cannister as you so vehemently proclaimed.
    Isn't it amazing how liberals will hang onto any shred of what they believe is fact, so they can demonize right-wingers, even after it had been shown those facts have been shown to be NOT FACTS? My gut feeling is that you'll still deny facts and continue to proclaim that Olsen was hit by a tear-gas cannister.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/15/scott-olsen-lawyer_n_1349586.html

    ReplyDelete