At least in North America, the lefty MSM is no longer covering the Occupoopers, mainly because they are making the left look stupid, gross, and disgusting. Without the media adulation, outside support will dry up, and when that happens, what is the point of continuing to freeze outdoors in squalor?
Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 5, 2011
Self-described “social liberal” Richard Klagsbrun (Eye on a Crazy Planet) joins Michael Coren to discuss the Occupy movement.
A curious article appeared in the L.A. Times this week. The true symbol of the occupests which pocked our national landscape this autumn may very well be the hazmat suit. As it happens, our next to become adults generation is not only emotionally vacuous, intellectually stunted, more than a little messy, but we who raised them could have done much better in the area of potty training as well…
…For those of you who have not caught on to what the L.A. Times is clearly attempting to gloss over here, hazmat suits are not worn by people merely picking up a little harmless trash. These suits are worn by people who wish to avoid the sickness involved with cleaning up some of the nastier bio hazards. In short, there must have been a hell of a lot of human waste in the down town L.A. park. Compare the coverage of the Tea Parties to what is going on with the occupests. Also compare the police blotters, and the aftermath. Zero arrests at the Tea Party Rallies, all rallies purchased permits from the local municipalities and left their protests in cleaner condition than when they started. The occupests on the other hand, thousands of arrests, squatting on public, and in some instances private property, and left behind tons of trash, human waste and had to have people in protective suits clean up after them. The Tea Partiers were denigrated as hate mongering racist thugs on the verge of violent behavior. The occupests were covered as being representative of 99% of all Americans and the mainstream of American thought.
Read the rest here.
Cruel and unusual PUNishment…
A group of Occupy Wall Street protesters said they were left hungry in custody as police officers devoured their delivery of pizza pies.
The demonstrators’ say they were detained on Thursday at the 7th Precinct on the Lower East Side for blocking traffic near City Hall, so they asked officers to allow them to place an order for pizza.
The police agreed, recommending they call Mini Munchies in the East Village and even gave them a menu, reports the New York Post.
The group placed a $30 order through the AIDS charity for which they had been protesting – but when the food arrived, the demonstrators never got so much as a slice.
The protesters – who were taking a break from Occupy to demonstrate for more AIDS research money – are now accusing the police of stealing the pizza and want their dough back.
‘Any way you slice it, was an honest mistake,’ NYPD spokesman Paul Browne told The Post.
#Occupy identifying itself with Robin Hood?
Before its demise, while walking through the muddy turf at the grimy Occupy Toronto compound not so long ago, amid the accosting cacophony of signage one could spot the inevitable placard calling for a “Robin Hood” tax. The call for a special tax on the upper strata of income earners is a routine feature of demonstrations by anti-Capitalist, anti-Globalization activists, and the the notion of it betrays their misconception of economics and history. The premise behind a Robin Hood tax runs completely opposite of everything the outlaws of Sherwood Forest represented.
Steal from the rich and give to the poor was the mission statement that enshrined the Merry Men and their leader as heroes in popular culture. But who were the rich in the medieval Europe? It was the nobility, who were also the government. And what was the source of the wealth accumulated by the aristocracy at the time of the Plantagenet kings? It was taxes that the government forcibly extracted from the poor. Robin Hood retook the money that the government took away to be spent on items that fulfilled their own agenda, and returned it to the people, who could use it to feed and serve the needs of the private citizenry.
So who is it now that wants to stop the government’s ability to force you to give them money, for which they account rather poorly and regularly squander? It’s not the defunct Occupy Movement, or the tax-hungry New Democratic Party who want to hand more money to the government and use that as a conduit to claim more of it for themselves. It’s not the civil service unions, who want to raise taxes so that more of them can remain secure at the expense of the rest of the public.
Today’s Robin Hoods are fiscal conservatives who, like their legendary predecessor, want to keep money out of the hands of inept bureaucracies and restore it to the hands of the people who worked for it in the first place and let us choose how to use it for ourselves.