But police were busy monitoring an Occupy Oakland march

[rufus]

Yes, it is class warfare. It has been class warfare for decades since the "trickle down" theory came about. It can't be more "class warfare" than "give us what we want, and eventually you MIGHT get something out of it." I notice that those against Occupy only call it class warfare when the under class fights back.

Underclass fighting back, that's a good one. I've got news for you. Hard work equals results, you should try it sometime. It works out a whole lot better than whining about having nothing and embarrassing yourselves. The only thing you guys are entitled to is the pursuit of happiness. Everything else you have to work for.

 

[Garg]

in before the lock :banana:

 

[Morpheus]

Underclass fighting back, that's a good one. I've got news for you. Hard work equals results, you should try it sometime. It works out a whole lot better than whining about having nothing and embarrassing yourselves. The only thing you guys are entitled to is the pursuit of happiness. Everything else you have to work for.

So you assume that people who still are interested in equality don't work hard? That is very interesting indeed. As for for entitled, I thought it was life, liberty and the pursuit for happiness. Now it is just happiness? Can I get life and liberty instead? I don't care for the happiness part.

As for 'having nothing' I have a great deal actually, more than most in the US, let alone the world. So I'm not arguing this as someone who hasn't worked hard and long to get where I am now. I'm arguing this as someone who is in the 'worked my *** off and now am well off' segment of the population. I may not agree with the 'Occupy' movements full platform or argument. But I don't disagree with all of it either. But I had to sit down and listen to their issues to know which I agree with and disagree with it. It was hard to get through a lot of the rhetoric, but at the same time it allowed me to make a more informed decision. Rather than just a knee jerk one.

M

 

[kenno]

I recently returned from the Bay Area
Anyone who believes that Occupy is "Fighting for Rights" has been miss led. Occupy has aligned itself with SDS and Weather Underground as well as SEIU
Occupy Oakland is Extremely Violent, thier goal is to Follow Saul Alinsy and Overwhelm The System and they are succeeding as witnessed by the murder of this 67 YO man.
If you don't believe me just Wiki the above groups history, there have been dozens murdered by these groups.

 

[kenno]

The purpose of Occupy is to Overwhelm The System and create Chaos so that the sheeple will accept The Savior as Dictator just as in post WW1 Germany.
Occupy Oakland is a training ground ,enabeled by that citys Leftist Mayor, New recruits identified at the other Occupy events as fitting various operational profiles are being cycled through the operation so that in 2 weeks the chaos can be spread across the nation to other citys controled by other Leftist Mayors.

 

[CharonPDX]

Underclass fighting back, that's a good one. I've got news for you. Hard work equals results, you should try it sometime. It works out a whole lot better than whining about having nothing and embarrassing yourselves. The only thing you guys are entitled to is the pursuit of happiness. Everything else you have to work for.

As Morpheus said, not everyone who complains about inequality is lazy. That's your stereotype. I know quite a few Occupy supporters that are quite well off, thankyouverymuch. I am by no means rich, and I have spent various parts of my life on the door of homelessness (including a foreclosure,) but I am, through my own hard work, making enough to support my family. But if those social safeguards hadn't been in place when I needed them, I would have never been able to dig myself back out. I know people who, 20 years after finishing college with a Master's degree, are still paying off student loans, and thanks to the destructive actions of major financial institutions, have nearly zero saved for retirement.

We just cashed out my son's college fund to put it into something stable/guaranteed for the last 18 months before he heads off. This is a fund that was started in 1996. The statement shows that over the last 16 years, there is exactly the same amount (to within 0.5%) in that has been put into it over the same period - and that's after a 5% increase in the past two months. We would have been in exactly the same situation if we had literally put the money under a mattress. I think that because we delayed the cash-out for one day, the market dropped putting us from +$200 to -$100. We'll be lucky if it is enough to pay for two years, and that's assuming he gets SOME scholarships.

And anyone who thinks that the purpose of Occupy is to enshrining Obama haven't paid any attention to it. Most Occupy-ers hate all politicians. Most Occupy-ers think Obama is a turncoat secret Conservative! (Which, if you look at his record, his fiscal record is more similar to that other Socialist, Ronald Reagan than to even Bill Clinton.)

 

[rufus]

I still don't understand your problem. You protest because of what, a fund you started in 1996 did not perform as you would have liked? At least it's still there. Gold would have been a much better investment. Don't be mad at the banks, they are not the problem. Blaming the "banksters" is as ludicrous as your description of Ronald Reagan.

 

[iomatic]

in before the lock :banana:

I must be going crazy. Where is the firearm, and politics of firearms in the article?

 

[JackFrost]

I must be going crazy. Where is the firearm, and politics of firearms in the article?

You REALLY REALLY have to read between the lines! I think its there somewhere? Buried!

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

Another example of the fact that the police are NOT required to respond to 911 calls nor to protect us from violence....

 

[Redcap]

Another example of the fact that the police are NOT required to respond to 911 calls nor to protect us from violence....

Damn straight. It is our job to protect ourselves and loved ones.

 

[rufus]

And that is gun related.

 

[MikeE]

I must be going crazy. Where is the firearm, and politics of firearms in the article?

Good question, so here are some other ones:

1. What are the tactics that a homeowner should use to deal with a trespasser who is not in the home?

Leading to the next question:

2. Why were the police late in responding?

Leading to:

3. Why were so many resources devoted to the Occupy protests? Did repeated, unprovoked militarized police 'lawfare' tactics turn a peaceful protest into a disruptive mess? Why did the politicians decide that this is where they wanted to focus their resources?

Leading to:

4. Should public resources be devoted to militarized protection of private bank buildings, or would the community benefit more by using scarce resources to treat mental health issues, and public health in general?

So that:

5. The victim and the perpetrator in cases like this would have less violent encounters?

 

[ZigZagZeke]

"I've been telling people for years he needs help, but they're just throwing people with mental illness onto the streets," she said before declining further comment.

The blame is being placed on the wrong people. The police wouldn't have responded in time to this in any city I can think of under normal conditions. You can thank Ronald Reagan for this. When he was governor of CA he declared everybody in the state mental hospitals well and sent them "home". Home usually meant a flophouse hotel on skid row paid for with a $300 per month general assistance check from Welfare or Social Security. We immediately saw an increase in psychotic crime, like the mother found in pieces in the bathtub, having been cut up with a chain saw by her formerly incarcerated son. Reagan's "solution" allowed him to close the state hospital system and save hundreds of millions of dollars. We're still paying for those "savings" to this day in crime and homelessness. Good work, Ron.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

that wasn't a Reagan thing, it was a court thing....courts decided that mentally ill people were being denied due process

 

[rufus]

Why ruin a good Reagan bash with facts? Kinda take the fun out of it.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

that wasn't a Reagan thing, it was a court thing....courts decided that mentally ill people were being denied due process

The courts had nothing to do with Reagan's original closures. I know, because I was working as a psychiatric technician in the California State Mental Hospital in those days. He closed the state hospitals and told the counties that the legislature would fund local care. Then after the legislature passed funding bills for the counties he vetoed them. The whole court thing came much later. But feel free to go on believing Lars' fairy tales.

 

[locobob]

Underclass fighting back, that's a good one. I've got news for you. Hard work equals results, you should try it sometime. It works out a whole lot better than whining about having nothing and embarrassing yourselves. The only thing you guys are entitled to is the pursuit of happiness. Everything else you have to work for.

Those Wall Street types must have worked really super extra hard then.... oh wait, no they didn't.... they gambled with other peoples money, trashed our economy and then used the tax payer bailout to pay themselves obscene bonuses. But hey that's just capitalism right? Let's not be angry at them, lets pick on those darn poor people who have the gall to protest the fleecing of America.

 

[rufus]

Those evil Wall Street types! Grrrrrrrr!

Socialism! Socialism! Rah! Rah! Rah!

 

[coyote223]

There are still Tea Party protests, should they stop? Hell, there are still KKK protests! (Although I'm sure we all agree THOSE should stop.)



No, this man died because he called a non-emergency line, and did not state it was an emergency, therefore the police treated it as not an emergency. Or this man died because he was incapable of defending himself. Or this man died because the assailant was mentally ill. Or this man died because someone killed him.

To put the blame on Occupy is disingenuous. Was the attacker someone that Occupy sent to kill the man? No? Then it's not Occupy's fault. Was it the Air Marshal Service's fault that 9/11 happened? No, it was the 19 hijacker's fault. It was Osama Bin Laden's fault. It was not the Air Marshal Service's fault. It was not Bush's fault. It was not United and American Airlines fault. It was not the air crew's fault. It was not the passengers' fault. This was not Occupy's fault.

As for anarchists, Portland has plenty of self-claimed anarchists. They are idiots. They protest for the sake of protest, for the sake of destroying property that isn't theirs, for the sake of anarchy. Occupy is not promoting anarchy. Yes, there are anarchists in the Occupy protests, just as there are anarchists at *ANY* protest in Portland, even Tea Party protests. Because that's what the anarchists do.

Only the tea party protests were legal and non-violent. They had the proper permits, and they didn't cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in vandalism damage left for the taxpayer to pay the tab. Sure there were some trouble makers that came down to yell obscenities at them and try to cause trouble, they were most likely Dems though.

Kind of makes you laugh that the tea party was shunned, but the occupiers were welcomed with opened arms.