The First Amendment to the Constitution not only gives us the freedoms of speech, religion and the press, which most people know and understand for the most part, it also gives us freedom to petition the government and to assemble. But with these freedoms come responsibility. With speech you can not slander and/or libel against people, talk show hosts not included apparently. With religion you can not perform human sacrifices. With press you can not accuse without rational reason, cable news shows hosts again not included. Now, with the freedom of petition our limitations are that some people are not allowed to be associated with others due to conflict of interests, but that apparently doesn't include lobbyists. And with freedom of assembly, the limitation is that is has to be done peacefully. Inciting a riot can actually be considered treasonous since it may be "levying war" against the state.
Most protests are of course exercising in the freedom of assembly, some are boycotts which are not. Most protests have a real reason and/or are started by real movements and rational causes. The Americans boycotting the British, writing letters of bitter disagreement, and of course having a "tea party" are prime examples of how protests should go. Unfortunately, our friends of the British crown did not get the message and therefore we had to fight. Mosts protesters are people who want drastic change. The word to describe these people are radicals and reactionaries. These kinds of protesters are good for the cause. They get people to think. Progressives on both sides of the spectrum are good. They usually have rational reasons and many can be considered heroes. The protesters who are not rational or who have no real reason to protest are not heroes but can be described as nuts.
The so-called Tea Party, which by the way is NOT the poster child for conservative values, is an outgrowth of the GOP that is the epitome of the anti-Obama crowd. What started out as a protest against big government in the form of high taxes and dictatorial tendencies by the Democratically controlled Congress at the time has now turned into a disgrace against the middle class by doing the same thing they were protesting against. On the other side, these Occupiers (The 99% Club, which are not the poster child for the DEMs) are the epitome of anti-big business and any conservative values. Both have real reasons to protest. Both are starting to do irrational things. The only difference is the Tea Party used peaceful demonstrations and the power of the vote to get things done. The Occupy Party is using violence. This is mainly due to the fact that Tea Partiers know what their cause is. Occupiers do not.
Whether Tea Party or Occupy (insert city) are the ones protesting, the same result usually happens; chaos. And if chaos is what happens then we have to ask, is it worth it? And in keeping with the original meaning of the title of this Paper, most protests are not about what they should be about. Both sides are a disgrace to the American people.
By the way, it's all Clinton's fault.
3 comments:
Are you trying to bait me? You are, aren't you?
First of all, the original reason for occupying had a point. We're sick of the rich getting richer, the middle class disappearing, Wall Street getting bailed out, etc, etc. A point, I'm willing to bet, 99 percent of the population agrees with. Unfortunately, the message has gotten lost. And why? Not Clinton...no no.
It's Hippies! Yes, Hippies!
I hate hippies! I mean, the way they always talk about 'protectin' the earth' and then drive around in cars that get poor gas mileage and wear those stupid bracelets - I hate 'em! I wanna kick 'em in the nuts! Hippies. They're everywhere. They wanna save the earth, but all they do is smoke pot and smell bad. I mean, they're not people, they're hippies. And a hippie and a terrorist are the same thing. They're hippies! And they don't have any money!
But seriously, to negate the fact that someone, somewhere is finally getting fed up with the way this country is going by pointing out the negatives that have inevitably surfaced (ie-there's one in every crowd) isn't solving anything. Matter of fact, it's counter-productive. Whether it's the Tea Party or the Occupiers, the fact remains that a majority of the population is saying, "We need to fix this". And that's a good thing.
Thomas Jefferson once said:
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."
I believe you have his picture on your wall of, well, whatever they are.
And of course the Tea Partyiers aren't out in tents, mingling with the hippies! They're all holed up in survialist camps! LOL!
The first revolution usually fails. That doesn't mean you give up. You keep fighting. Our country is broken. It needs to be fixed.
Our leaders have been warned.
Hugs! Not drugs. Drugs are bad because if you do drugs you're a hippie and hippies suck.
Bait you? No. Debate you? No. Rebate (for those 99%)? No. Get people to understand what the movements are about. Getting closer.
Anyway, the Clinton comment was to get some to ask, "why?". I looked at the past elections. And what I saw was that people were more united in the past. There were clear cut winners (with the exception of a few of course). But when we got to the 1992 election, we elected a president who onbly got 29% of the vote. Yes, only 29%. He got 43% of the popular vote. Only 58% of elligible voters went to the polls. This measns that 71% of the people didn't want him or cared enough to vote for him. yet, he gets in twice. The electoral votes were closer than we see on the surface because he only one a couple of states by a wide margin. Anyway, since his presidency we have seen polarization beyond normality. It has always been us versus them but it has gotten worse since his time in office. Sure GWB didn't get 50%of the popular vote, blah blah blah, but it was after Clinton. His presidency it the protege of a divided nation. And now it is coming to a head. maybe even a dangerous one.
Whether it's the Tea Party or the Occupiers, the fact remains that a majority of the population is saying, "We need to fix this". And that's a good thing.
Wouldn't and didn't disagree.
I went to a Tea Party rally in April of 2009. One of the first ones. Their ideas were great. There was no violence, even in Cincinnati! The only disruption was from the 10 people outside the demonstration that were calling us white racist and literally screaming other obscenities and words of hate. I agreed with what the Tea Party stood for, but now their actions are not following what some of their arguements were and other actions are going too far. I do not support them 100%. But they never got violent. The problems rose on the outside by the anti-Tea Partiers.
Anyway, again, violent protest in America, now-a-days will be unproductive. Look at Greece. Look at Egypt. I don't want that. I would rather we fight people at the polls.
By the way, 99% is an exaggeration. The numbers will reveal that it is closer to 89% that fall under what the left is claiming is under the income level. I will show that in the next Paper. Yes 89 is still high but not all them are angry. I will explain more next Paper. Don't argue yet!
And yes, Hippies are THE problem!!!!! Don't even get me started. Hmm...sounds like a Paper to me.
...by the way...hee hee...
The whole Hippie spiel....yeah...those were direct quotes from South Park! Eric Cartman to be exact...
Good to know you agree with the little Nazi! LOL!
Love you!
...still laughing out loud...
Post a Comment