All this talk of Mitt Romney (whose primary win in New Hampshire tomorrow and then in South Carolina and then in Florida will secure his nomination for president) and his previous work at the investment firm Bain Capital has made me think of a metaphor…
Mitt Romney = Bane.
The toughest match the Dark Knight has ever had to face.
Barack Obama = the Dark Knight
Once thought of as a hero, now thought to be a monster, he must return to fight for his ideals.
Commissioner Gordon = The Tea Party
Traditionalist called by a sense of duty to engage in a battle to preserve what is radically decaying before his eyes.
Catwoman = Occupy Wall Street
An otherwise uninvolved player, motivated by and attracted to chaos whose sense of entitlement brings her/them to class warfare and a life of law breaking they feel is morally justified cuz rich people have stuff and they don’t. She’s angry because she’s ignorant – mainly in her misunderstanding of economics, thinking of it as a pie with a finite amount of slices.
How does it all end?…
Take it either way:
Romney/Bane succeeds in doing what other more experienced contenders previously failed at and breaks the people’s hero?
Or
Obama/Batman gets broken by a strong challenger but ultimately wins in the end?
A Facebook friend posted this same video on his wall and this Ian gentleman sparked the following exchange:
Ian:
The people have a right to occupy. The cops should have never been there in the 1st place.
Richard:
Yes Ian, it DOES piss me off that these bags of filth wasted the time of the local police force by accomplishing nothing but being a bunch of dicks to their community. I only regret they weren’t pepper sprayed too.
Ian: “The people have no right to occupy. The cops should have never been there in the 1st place because the protestors should have followed the law like everyone else instead of acting like entitled above-it-all douchebags that wasted everyones time” — Fixed that for Ian
Richard:
Iknowright? Reality is the best story to tell. especially in cases of Police brutality where it is especially important not to cry wolf. plenty of real injustices are made by actual corrupt and careless cops. lying to invent such scenarios may make you feel like an oppressed superhero or whatever, but it hurts the community and country. — wait.. hurting the country and community in service to one owns selfish desires is basically the Occupy mission statement, so nvm i guess.
Ian:
Obviously we’re hurting the country and community by speaking out against what we feel is wrong. Bu, hey, if you find that corporate person hood and letting the banks get away with the illegality of their actions then by all means, continue to be a part of the reason why this country is utter shit.
Ian:
Fuck this thread. This dude is an ass and, like everyone else against the movement, is too apathetic to give a shit about what’s going on. He’s also an obvious troll. So fuck this shit, nigga. I’m out
I didn’t reply between those last 2 points out of respect to the mutual friend but after the “screw you guys im goin home” post, I went ahead and let the hammer down:
Richard:
1) no one said “speaking out” hurts anyone. scroll up, read what was actually said and then try not to make things up (only cuz it destroys your point when you need to do that).
2) “speaking out” against something does not necessitate annoying your neighbors and breaking the law, which is what I referenced.
3) Instead of thinking youre entitled to ruin everyones day by speaking out against “what you feel is wrong” – do less “feeling”, pretend to be a mature adult and do more “thinking”. then speak out against what you think is wrong and explain why. under that strategy you wont need to rely on animalistic tactics like cult gatherings, property destruction and illegal sit-ins that distract from any point you were attempting to convey.
4) Whats wrong with corporate personhood? why shouldnt corporations have free speech rights, for example? theyre just a collection of people so why would you remove rights when people group together to provide a product or service?
5) Who said anything about letting any banks get away with any illegality (besides you)? Why is your response to illegality to also engage in illegality? you dont fight fire with fire to solve something. you fight it with water. expose the illegal behavior that you have evidence of and take the banks down instead of playing bongos all day in a public park whydontyou.
6) Demonizing everyone as “part of the problem” just because they dont share your endorsement of illegal activity to get the point across is stupid.
Except – oddly enough – this dude turned out not to be the major douche it appeared and he came back, apologized for the attack, explaining that he thought he was just dismissing a troll and we carried on just fine after that. I always number my responses that go long like this so everyone can keep track of what they’re responding to and – god love him – this guy was one of the very few to actually follow the lead and post a numbered reply as well.
Ian:
1) I don’t recall making anything up.
2) The more people who hear us, the better. If the protests go unnoticed then there’s no reason to have them in the 1st place.
3&4) you’re splitting hairs, I feel corporate person hood is wrong because I’ve thought about what it has made possible for corporations to do and it’s royally fucked. Take Wal-Mart for example, because of corporate person hood they are able to continue to receive goods from China which are produced by slave labor. It means they are legally protected to endorse immorally wrong actions.
5) The banks aren’t committing any illegal actions, what they are doing is taking all the money that is put into them, loaning it out, then having the federal reserve give them what they are missing, then the reserve has the U.S mint print off more, then the government taxes the shit out of all of us in order to pay it back.
6) I’m not demonizing everyone who doesn’t share my views. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and if they don’t agree with then that’s their business, I’m just passionate about it and I can’t see how anyone else is fine with what’s going on in our fucked up country
The reason most people wont reply to a numbered response with their own numbered response is because they want to dodge certain things they cant answer or argue, so it’s really heartening to see someone have the courage of their convictions to respond to every point like this guy did.
Richard:
1) The thing you made up was “Obviously we’re hurting the country and community by speaking out against what we feel is wrong.” — no one made any such claim. You made it up in what is known as a “straw man fallacy”.
2) That response only shows a lack of imagination, civility and respect for property rights and the well being of your community. I repeat: “speaking out” against something does not necessitate annoying your neighbors and breaking the law, which is what I referenced.
3) What is splitting hairs about encouraging law abiding protest? I repeat the substance of my (since it wasn’t responded to) #3: under that strategy [of organized critical thinking] you wont need to rely on animalistic tactics like cult gatherings, property destruction and illegal sit-ins that distract from any point you were attempting to convey.
4) Walmart could continue those trade practices with or without corporate personhood.
5) I’m not pointing this out to play “gotcha”, but rather because its important that if you’re going to be a messenger for a cause that you not say opposite things like this in such a short amount of time. You said “..if you find that corporate person hood and letting the banks get away with the illegality of their actions then by all mean..” and now you say “The banks aren’t committing any illegal actions”. Earlier you said it was important for people to hear your message but if that message contradicts itself then… whats the point?
6) You were demonizing everyone who didn’t agree with you in the comment previous to my 6 point list, but since then I think you clarified/revised the position so chop it from the list.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ian:
1) I thought you had inferred that the protests were only causing harm.
2) The intention isn’t to wake the neighbors, it’s to acquire the attention of law makers and political figures so they know we’re pissed off. If I had it my way, we’d have another Woodstock scenario.
3) You had said “stop feeling and do more thinking” which is splitting hairs. We feel it’s wrong is saying we think it’s wrong. I just chose to use “feel” rather than “think”
4) wal-mart shouldn’t be allowed to continue those practices at all because it’s wrong. That may be a personal opinion however, I feel it’s a damn good one. Endorsing child labor is wrong, I don’t care who you are.
5) It’s a technicality. They aren’t doing anything illegally by loaning money they don’t have and acquiring further debt, but I think that should be illegal and so do millions of others in our country.
6) It’s been chopped like my firewood
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard:
1) I may have. Instead of checking, I’ll just clarify: I was referring to “protests” but not “every protest within the Occupy movement”. in the link i posted that applauds the pepper spraying, i acknowledge that lots of protests are peaceful and non-disruptive and that I’m only referring to the ones throwing feces, destroying property and breaking the law and refusing to move when ordered by law enforcement
2) Intentions aside – the results are what matter and i don’t see any benefit in letting law makers know you’re pissed off unless there is a purpose (like rallying behind a specific demand or political candidate or philosophy)
3) Clarified. Accepted.
4) I’m just saying that its unrelated to corporate personhood.
5) Things you think SHOULD BE illegal vs what actually IS illegal isn’t a technicality but I understand your point at least.
-Unless you know what results letting law makers know you’re pissed will bring about, id say all points have been settled with clarity (which is all i ever seek, really: clarity. not agreement).
This Occupy protesting nonsense is dragging on and accomplishing nothing positive. Shocking… The wests Tahrir moment, it aint. Some are under the false impression that rich people are somehow getting richer in this bad economy despite the number of taxpayers with more than $1 million of income declining from from 400,000 back in 2007 to just 235,000 in 2009. Others are just annoyed that the world isn’t perfect in their estimation so they’re out bitching about anything and everything and feeling super noble about it. Sometimes though, the whole “breaking the law and being a dick about your protests over nothing” thing has consequences and that only makes irresponsible people more outraged that they’re not getting what they want. Tragic.
The only positive thing that’s come out of the Occupy protests has been the silly Amazon product reviews of the pepper spray used in the Davis-spraying. Aside from that it’s just more cause for whining and outrage. Did you know that forcing people to move who refuse to move from property they don’t own is a “military threat”? Oh ya dude. Totally:
“How Could This Happen in America?” Why Police Are Treating Americans Like Military Threats Why is the armed might of the state, (necessary in waging war against foreign enemies) being applied to domestic policing of local communities and peaceful protests?
“Is this still my country?” That’s been a question from day one, asked by Americans of widely diverging views in response to government crackdowns on protest. Objecting to military violence against protesting citizens may be inherently American. The urge to crack down can look inherently American too.
Don’t people usually die in “military violence”? And yet no one has died in the law enforcement tactics used against these fleabaggers while 7 have died within the Occupy dumps. Lets see.. which is worse? Getting sprayed with something that hurts your eyes in response to your refusal to leave a blockade that has no purpose or meaning? Or dying for participating in a protest that has no purpose or meaning?
I double-dog Dare you to think of something more stupid than this caption^
Police haven’t been shitting on any of the protestors. But the protestors have been shitting on the police.
Police haven’t killed any of the protestors. But the protestors have been killing themselves.
Police haven’t been breaking any of the protestors things to express their political opinions. But the protestors have been costing thousands of dollars in damage to public and private property.
Police haven’t stabbed any of the protestors. But the protestors have been knife attacking themselves.
Police haven’t jerked off in front of any 16 year old girls in the protests but… okay – i’ll give them a pass on this one.
I don’t understand what the argument against it is. When you tell someone to move and you have the legal authority to do so, wtf are you supposed to do? “Hey, those people are not legally allowed to be occupying that space. it’s not theres, we don’t want them there and they need to leave” – “but… they said no” – “Oh, okay. end of story then. I guess we tried!”. wtf? I don’t think so. They’re lucky all they got was a shot of pepper. Morons.
Although, I’ve also never made a secret of the fact that I don’t understand the Occupy protest as a movement either, and it’s not for lack of investigation. It’s an unorganized collection of whining about nothing specific and has no plan of action other than being annoying as a way to get what they want.
When it first started the most common line I saw was that it was against “Corporate Greed” but no specifics were given on what anyone wanted to do about it. Who exactly is breaking the law or doing something immoral? If the former – why are you not revealing their name to any of the thousands of trial attorneys whose mouths are watering this very second at the thought of taking a Wall Street corrupto-crat down and if it’s the latter then why are you not revealing their names either so people know what it is you’re protesting against and can maybe have some sympathy for your smelly disease riddled public park destroying illegal bongo sessions.
UPDATE: this was posted before the following video surfaced that – SURPRISE – tells you more of what you should have already realized if you weren’t a hippie anti-authority romanticizing fruitcake:
Dayum… This blog post by comic book legend Frank Miller pretty much nails it. Which means of course that his body of work, long respected by the masses will now suddenly become lame, uninspired, hacky, and a list of other bullshit history-revising adjectives that hippies use to smear people and their livlihood once they find out that they don’t agree with them politically on something – even one issue.
Everybody’s been too damn polite about this nonsense:
The “Occupy” movement, whether displaying itself on Wall Street or in the streets of Oakland (which has, with unspeakable cowardice, embraced it) is anything but an exercise of our blessed First Amendment. “Occupy” is nothing but a pack of louts, thieves, and rapists, an unruly mob, fed by Woodstock-era nostalgia and putrid false righteousness. These clowns can do nothing but harm America.
“Occupy” is nothing short of a clumsy, poorly-expressed attempt at anarchy, to the extent that the “movement” – HAH! Some “movement”, except if the word “bowel” is attached – is anything more than an ugly fashion statement by a bunch of iPhone, iPad wielding spoiled brats who should stop getting in the way of working people and find jobs for themselves.
This is no popular uprising. This is garbage. And goodness knows they’re spewing their garbage – both politically and physically – every which way they can find.
Wake up, pond scum. America is at war against a ruthless enemy.
Maybe, between bouts of self-pity and all the other tasty tidbits of narcissism you’ve been served up in your sheltered, comfy little worlds, you’ve heard terms like al-Qaeda and Islamicism.
And this enemy of mine — not of yours, apparently – must be getting a dark chuckle, if not an outright horselaugh – out of your vain, childish, self-destructive spectacle.
In the name of decency, go home to your parents, you losers. Go back to your mommas’ basements and play with your Lords Of Warcraft.
Or better yet, enlist for the real thing. Maybe our military could whip some of you into shape
They might not let you babies keep your iPhones, though. Try to soldier on.
Schmucks.
FM
The problem of course is that the few Occupiers (and most of its supporters) who are not pond scum criminals still aren’t bright enough to not get offended at someone like Miller calling out the pond scum criminals. The facts bear Miller out: there are rapes and crime and mass disorganization in the Occupy protests. Just because you support it’s Anarchists for Big Government brand of philosophy doesn’t mean the movement isn’t infested with vermin that is perfectly legitimate to call out.
As one of the commenters notes:
Only 14% of the 1% are actually financial institutions on Wall Street. The majority of the 1% are lawyers and doctors.
Do you know where the largest collection of lawyers in the U.S. is?
Washington DC
Do you know what the richest area in the US is?
Washington DC
I could get behind a movemnet if it truly was protesting the actual causes of this “income inequality” they speak about, but the fact is they should be protesting Washington DC, but then that would make Obama look bad now wouldn’t it?
The politician who has recived more money from Wall Street than any other politician?
Barack Obama
Look up the ties between General Electric, the largest corporation on the planet (besides the US Government) and Barack Obama.
G.E. paid no federal income taxes last year, why?
If these Occupy morons had any semblance of intelligence, they would be protesting Washington DC and Barack Obama, but they don’t beause they are simple tools of the DNC and their reelection strategy.
Seriously, 30 minutes on google and anyone can look this up, they should use their $400 iPhones to do so.
PR Daily agrees the Occupy movement is a PR disaster:
Dorothy Crenshaw, CEO and creative director of Crenshaw Communications, praised OWS’s canny cultivation of the media and public sympathy. Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s evacuation of Zuccotti Park seems to have strengthened the movement, she suggests. But she sees risks in the protesters’ tactics of shutting down streets and subway stations.
She adds: “If they start to disrupt the commute or work schedule of so-called ‘regular people’—part of that huge 99 percent who are just trying to get through the workday and earn a living—I think they risk losing the very group that should be most sympathetic.”
The movement’s PR efforts drew derision from Fraser P. Seitel, managing partner of Emerald Partners and author of The Practice of Public Relations. OWS, he says, has “botched an opportunity to capture public opinion and achieve something. Americans, by every measure, distrust the politicians who run Washington and lead major institutions. So public opinion was ripe for the plucking.”
However, the movement blew it by having no overriding purpose, stated goals, or visible leadership, he says, and it is increasingly perceived as a bunch of publicity-hungry complainers intent on disrupting others who are making a living.
“Occupy Wall Street is right about one thing,” he says. “The whole world is watching. And it’s generally repulsed by what it’s seen.”
Via Hot Air: The French reinvented the calendar. These people have reinvented jazz hands, I guess. It’s as harmless as can be, but since all protests are ultimately an appeal to undecided voters, I can only imagine what the average blue-collar American will make of it. Who knows? Maybe hippie finger wiggles are just what the zeitgeist requires right now to catalyze the unemployed.
Do women temporarily get stupider when they have a baby? My wife thought so about her two births; so did my two daughters who have had children, and they tell me that all the other mothers they know think so, too. Now, as science marches on, it appears that it really is true. Jessica Henry and Barbara Sherwin have an article in the forthcoming issue of Behavioral Neuroscience reporting that women in late pregnancy and soon after birth had significantly lower scores than a control group on a variety of cognitive tasks, and conclude that changes in the levels of cortisol and estradiol may be involved.
“It’s nature’s way of hosing down the mind,” a family friend explained it to my wife when she was caring for her three-week-old and complaining that she had lost her brains. And when you think about it, what better way to help a new mother cope with the infinite demands of an infant on her life?
Is it motherhood that makes some of these protestors think that annoying people on the street without a defined purpose is “changing the world”? What are the rest of these peoples excuses then?
Everybody’s been too damn polite about this nonsense:
