Lunch with Rush: OWS Protestors

[Ted King]

One thing I'd bet is happening is that there is a HUGE amount of social networking going on that is going to persist past this event. That may be the most important facet of what's going on.

[J Marston]

1- Be annoying to their parents, or in the absence of their parents, "the Man", who is acting in loco parentis.
2- Hang out and be cool
3- Perhaps 'hook up' under those nice tarps.

This is just right-wing propaganda, an attempt to dismiss all anti-Wall St. protests as simply a chance to have sex: it could be an Orange Country screed about UCal c. 1964.

Re-read Chakravartin's post. The demonstrators have a difficult, diffuse goal; but just because you're unsympathetic doesn't mean that there isn't sincerity and dedication in the group.

[cbelt3]

JM-
This is my personal opinion, not 'right wing propaganda'.

I've found the 'demands' from the various protesters to be as widely varying as the number of protesters. I'll stand by my opinion.

Do I agree with some of their goals? Sure.
Do I think there are well meaning people spending a chunk of their time to make a statement ? Sure.
Do I celebrate the freedoms that these people are exercising ? Hell YES.

I find the diatribes about the protesters being 'rich brats' particularly silly. Of course they are. So were the protesters who occupied Tariq Square in Egypt. The peasants were too poor to take off a couple of weeks to go live in the square. It's only the more well off that has the funds to put their lives on hold and survive. Such is the fuel of change.

Heck... it took a bunch of wealthy, educated, slave-owning businessmen to start this country of ours.

[$tevie]

Ted King wrote:
[germ of truth but glib]
[quote=cbelt3]
So what DO they want ? It appears. like most protester sit-ins primarily occupied by young adults, that they are there to:
1- Be annoying to their parents, or in the absence of their parents, "the Man", who is acting in loco parentis.
2- Hang out and be cool
3- Perhaps 'hook up' under those nice tarps.

The rule was the same back when I was participating in environmental events of that sort in the 1970's. Never found a girl that would participate in option #3. And to my friends horror, my parents supported it, so #1 was out too.

[/germ of truth but glib]
I admit that there are always going to be some folks who show up to party, but they are not the impetus behind this movement and they are not the main participants either. I don't know about "environmental events" in the 70s, but I do know about the marches on Washington against the Vietnam War -- and we were quite serious about our reasons for being there even if, god forbid, we did not cast off our youthful exuberance during the events. These people are there 24/7, are they supposed to spend their days rocking back and forth in sackcloth and ashes to impress you?

I think to imply that people who are giving a voice to those who are without jobs and without money and without optimism are just there to get laid is the height of arrogance.

[$tevie]

cbelt3 wrote: I find the diatribes about the protesters being 'rich brats' particularly silly. Of course they are...It's only the more well off that has the funds to put their lives on hold and survive.

These people DON'T HAVE JOBS. They don't have to BE ANYWHERE during the day. Jesus, get a clue.

[Mac1337]

They probably pass right by HELP WANTED signs on their way to demonstration demanding jobs. They will leave behind nothing but trash. There is not one demand that can be met by any politician. Heck, they've got their entire team in power. What are they demonstrating for? Why don't they ask for a meeting with Obama in the White House?

[Acer]

$tevie wrote:


I think to imply that people who are giving a voice to those who are without jobs and without money and without optimism are just there to get laid is the height of arrogance.

Funny thing, you just reminded me that Rush called the OWS protestors arrogant, too.

[john dough]

Rush is a worthless POS that has contributed absolutely nothing good to this world. When he is no longer around, the world will be that much better of a place for all.

[August West]

$tevie wrote:
I think to imply that people who are giving a voice to those who are without jobs and without money and without optimism are just there to get laid is the height of arrogance.

(tu)

It's this sort of dismissive behavior that has contributed to the situation that our society is confronting.

LOOK A SQUIRREL !!!!!

[decay]

Rush really doesn't have a clue what the broad spectrum of Americans live like on a daily basis.

He mainly hears from his constituency & supporters.

He ignores his detractors and makes his living by whipping the Right side into a frenzy against the Left.

It does not behoove him to learn ANYTHING about the opposing side; his paycheck depends upon his ignorance and willingness to dehumanize and demonize them all.