00:00
00:00
Newgrounds Background Image Theme

Jmurr12 just joined the crew!

We need you on the team, too.

Support Newgrounds and get tons of perks for just $2.99!

Create a Free Account and then..

Become a Supporter!

Occupy wall street media black out

32,789 Views | 508 Replies

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-16 00:52:14


At 12/15/11 10:57 PM, orangebomb wrote:
Well, VenomKing you've already admitted it was a mistake for the OWS to block the port for the workers, and even though they did try to rectify their mistake, in the long term, that only alienated the workers from ever supporting the cause, especially since it would be hypocritical on their part to join in on the protests, since they are part of the corporate machine or whatever buzzword these guys like to use. Remember, it only takes one dumb move on their part to further isolate themselves farther and farther away from the people.

But wait, weren,t they with unions when they did this? Also I agree with the second part, as a movement it is imperative not to alienate the public. So far I don,t think they did for the most part even if part of the media successfully did make it seem like if they were lazy hippies.

Exactly, with their Starbucks and iPhones and corporate goods in their hands, they are feeding the same corporations that these guys are protesting against.

Exept not. They are fighting against banks and speculators and the corporations that produce nothing and will buy politicians so politicians represent these big companies and not the public.

It's one thing to be anti-corporate, that's fine and dandy, but it's quite another to be a hypocrite, and to sabatoge your own message. The OWS movement wants to have it both ways, and it doesn't work that way, especially when they have corporate goods that some working people, {y'know the 99% that they say their for.} couldn't afford.

Where your argument falls apart is... where right at the beginning, OWS is not anti-corporate. OWS has nothing against big corporations and getting rich.

HOWEVER, when a big corporation uses it's power to rig the system in their favor NOW there's a problem.

If they had true leadership, and not try to act like a fringe group populated by socialist wanna-bes, career protesters, and naive hippies, then they can have some legitmacy among the people. But as of now, they're simply nothing more than annoyances, simply wasting time bitching and moaning about change when they have no reasonable idea on a course of action other than what I just said.

There were so many people and they were so different, you simply cannot call them a fringe.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-16 15:14:32


At 12/16/11 12:52 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: But wait, weren,t they with unions when they did this? Also I agree with the second part, as a movement it is imperative not to alienate the public. So far I don,t think they did for the most part even if part of the media successfully did make it seem like if they were lazy hippies.

Havi g worked inshipping I can tell you that the stevadore and longshore worker unions will strike and the drop of hat, or when the hat doesn't drop. They need no reason whatsover. The Port of Oakland is notorious in the industry for striking. Shit, COGSA has a special clause just for strikes because this shit is pulled so often by them.

Exept not. They are fighting against banks and speculators and the corporations that produce nothing and will buy politicians so politicians represent these big companies and not the public.

Except not. If they were truly fighting the financial system they'd be blocking bancks, not ports. They are blocking ports where tangible goods (like Starbucks Coffee and iPhones) are imported. They're trying to stick it to "the corporations" not "the banks". You can try to warp their words to soften the stupidity of their actions all you want, but the noose OWS is hanging itself with is one of its own words.

Where your argument falls apart is... where right at the beginning, OWS is not anti-corporate. OWS has nothing against big corporations and getting rich.

The why are they trying to stick it to "the corporations"?

HOWEVER, when a big corporation uses it's power to rig the system in their favor NOW there's a problem.

If this was ruly the case, why is OWS indiscriminately attacking all corporations of all sorts?

There were so many people and they were so different, you simply cannot call them a fringe.

They are a fringe. They do not represent the 99% anymore. They did during the first few days of anger. Now they represent the very small % who have no job and no need for a job, plus a few unions. The rest of us rely on corporations and money to live. While we may be friendly to their base cause, we sure as hell don't agree with 99% of what the movement does or what it has become.

OWS needs a brain. Until then their % is going to shrink and shrink until they merely represent the 2% while misusing my 99% for their image.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-16 20:05:24


At 12/16/11 03:14 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Havi g worked inshipping I can tell you that the stevadore and longshore worker unions will strike and the drop of hat, or when the hat doesn't drop. They need no reason whatsover. The Port of Oakland is notorious in the industry for striking. Shit, COGSA has a special clause just for strikes because this shit is pulled so often by them.

Again, this is just shit taken right out of your ass, no thanks, provide evidence and come back.

Except not. If they were truly fighting the financial system they'd be blocking bancks, not ports.

That's what they have been doing most of the time, protesting banks and stuff. Pay attention.

They are blocking ports where tangible goods (like Starbucks Coffee and iPhones) are imported. They're trying to stick it to "the corporations" not "the banks". You can try to warp their words to soften the stupidity of their actions all you want, but the noose OWS is hanging itself with is one of its own words.
The why are they trying to stick it to "the corporations"?

They are talking to the corporations buying the government.

If this was ruly the case, why is OWS indiscriminately attacking all corporations of all sorts?

They are not.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-16 21:25:05


^ you don't have to live in poverty to be negatively influenced by government corruption. Here's some food for thought, they live with their parents because jobs are too scarce to find in a timely manner, and the jobs they can find aren't very secure, and really hug minimum wage. add this with how much rent costs and the probability that their parents need them to help pitch in and they are kind of stuck. I also refuse to buy from certain companies and Apple is included in those for their use of slave labour in Africa, but some times your morals weigh more than your wallet can handle so I'm not in a position to boycott everyone who does something morally questionable. I need to eat and put gas in my car damit. Yes there is also probably a good amount who wasted their money on useless degrees, my advice to them is if they got an art degree, get a job at McDonalds and sell your art on Ebay until you can live your super awesome dream of money women/men and fame. I however support what their base cause is and have a ticket in a skill trade. Can't really find a smarter investment when you didn't get the best grades in school. I'll have a better job than some of the people who did better than me.

You could argue that cutting the corporate tax rate would give them the hand up that they desperately need but that is useless without sufficient competition and demand. So they are only seeing one half of the issue, that's not a good thing but the Tea party is only seeing the other half and nothing else as well. One side blames the pimp, the other blames the guy who bought his whores. aaaand finally see pic.

Occupy wall street media black out


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-17 03:51:50


At 12/16/11 08:58 PM, Korriken wrote:
At 12/16/11 08:05 PM, VenomKing666 wrote:
The why are they trying to stick it to "the corporations"?
They are talking to the corporations buying the government.
Ok so you say they are protesting "corporations that buy influence and power in washington" and they say they represent the "99%".

well, in that case, they have no business buying apple products at all! now, before you go trying to bash me in the head, read this.

yeah, Google, Apple, and other hired one hell of a lobbyist to lobby congress for a tax holiday on offshore profits. Apparently, last time this happened, Apple used the saved money to buy back some of their stock, and not to create jobs. and yet, OWS supports them rabidly by buying up their products.

First of all, let me question your use of adjectives. "rabidly" While Occupy Wall Street does not boycott Apple but they do not "rabidly" support them either. While this piece of information is very regrettable. I do not thing it removes any waight from the OWS statement, as they have seen the main problem, and remember that the news you posted is fairly recent too. Remember that not all OWSers are apple hipsters with an art degree.

Starbucks though... not so bad (as far as I can tell) I can't find much on them, except for their rather extreme leftist agenda,

Extreme leftist agenda? Are you calling Starbucks communists now? You are ridiculous.

which reminds me why I refuse to buy their products (beyond them being way too overpriced). Of course, not many of the "99%" can afford a $5 cup of coffee, and have to settle for McDonalds coffee for $1 (which is just as good).

I'm sure all the OWS protesters religiously go to starbucks. /irony

You have no statistics to show if they go on starbucks more than any other place, and even if they do it doesnt change anything. You are desperately trying to grasp at straws and it is very amusing to me.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-17 10:46:36


The problem is the these corporations have stuff located very conveniently, and rather cheaply. Unless you're rich or very crafty, there's no way you're going to be able to make your own clothes, phone, computer, grow and harvest coffee, etc. For now, we kinda have to make due with what we've got unfortunately.


A vagina is really just a hat for a penis.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-17 12:26:17


At 12/16/11 09:25 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: aaaand finally see pic.

Way to completely miss the point while making yourself feel really smart with these pics...

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-17 12:31:55


At 12/16/11 08:05 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: That's what they have been doing most of the time, protesting banks and stuff. Pay attention.

I know they have blocked a few banks here and there. But if that was truly their goal, they'd do that exclusively, and they would do it better.

They are talking to the corporations buying the government.

Really? Cause Evergreen Shipping, and Starbucks, and Apple, and the Port of Oakland, and Hanjin, and Union Pacific bought the government at all... Oh wait...

They are not.

Yes they are. They merely want to eat the rich. If they had any target, they would be targetting that target, not just whatever was within wlaking distance of their shanty camp.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-17 13:33:49


At 12/17/11 12:26 PM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 12/16/11 09:25 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: aaaand finally see pic.
Way to completely miss the point while making yourself feel really smart with these pics...

I think his picture illustrates the point perfectly.

At 12/17/11 12:31 PM, Camarohusky wrote: I know they have blocked a few banks here and there. But if that was truly their goal, they'd do that exclusively, and they would do it better.

Now you are attempting to make me believe that OWS has another goal which is complete bullshit. Look, no movement is perfect, you seem to think that because they arent they are not fit to protest against the issue they are protesting, which is VALID and IMPORTANT, but it doesn't matter because THEY were the fucking ones to rise up and THEY DID bring the topic all over the news, they succeeded in that sense. If I listen to you we would have to wait for a perfect group of protesters before revolting. Which is plain silly.

Really? Cause Evergreen Shipping, and Starbucks, and Apple, and the Port of Oakland, and Hanjin, and Union Pacific bought the government at all... Oh wait...

Evergreen Shipping is partnered with evergreen.

Starbucks and Apple are not protested by OWS, you made it your previous argument you idiot.

As for the port of oakland it did not but they targeted 2 companies that were doing buisness with the port, one of them partly owned by Goldmann Sachs. And these guys are buying politicians like it's fucking candy, and recieving bailouts and etc.

The Hanjin story is one lady on top of a crane in fucking Korea. Sure she did it to show solidarity to the movement but you cannot say the actions of one are the actions of the movement. She probably had her own reasons to do so.

They are not.
Yes they are. They merely want to eat the rich. If they had any target, they would be targetting that target, not just whatever was within wlaking distance of their shanty camp.

They are targetting the right targets, at least they are doing their best and I have shown it to you.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-17 15:03:21


At 12/17/11 12:26 PM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 12/16/11 09:25 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: aaaand finally see pic.
Way to completely miss the point while making yourself feel really smart with these pics...

you don't know what missing the point is until you get this through your head:

what you think we are protesting

what we are really protesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_w elfare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capit alism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptocracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

why should i put any more effort into exerting this when all i'm going to get in response is "LOOK AT THOSE DIRTY HIPPIES"


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-18 00:29:58


At 12/17/11 03:03 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: why should i put any more effort into exerting this when all i'm going to get in response is "LOOK AT THOSE DIRTY HIPPIES"

Dude, I came to the conclusion CamaroHusky is either a troll or brain damaged, he will ignore the points you make that are good, counter the bad points with red herrings. And that's when he's not confused about the fact nobody goes trough a 30 pages long legal document about internet censorship to quote him the exact parts which censor it.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-29 15:28:08


Majority of the Occupy kids I've come across really have no idea what they're protesting about. I'm constantly bombarded by them whenever I walk to work, each time being told another cause they're fighting for. But don't get me wrong, I know that makes up the unintelligent portion of those protesting. There's the collect few out there actually playing this smart.

My beef with this is that the protesters are now just being incredibly selfish. I mean, they have a bunch of abled minds, they go on about how banks are unfair and unjust, what makes them think camping about in cities will actually do anything? They're more often than not, hassling commuters, blocking up public areas and becoming a general annoyance to the 3 "Occupy" sites I've passed. You might not think this is the case with yourselves, but it does seem like that the rest of us.

The banks and abled bodies who you're protesting against aren't giving into the camping about doing nothing side of things, why would you just keep on doing it? It comes across that you're really in this just for yourselves. It's no longer the case that you're shouting your cause, you're just annoying the people you're apparently fighting for with it.


[;];=]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-31 04:48:42


Are the protests still going on?


What a shame, Mister Jensen.

I never asked for this, Mister Denton.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2011-12-31 15:04:39


At 12/31/11 04:48 AM, igott wrote: Are the protests still going on?

From what I've seen and read, it seems like the protests are growing smaller and fading away, because I haven't heard on any serious protests or action on their part. Maybe it's the fact that most people are getting sick of whiny protestors who don't do anything to solve the problem about the banks or corporations or whatever they're going up against now.

As for me, I simply just don't care anymore. Hopefully, this mockery of the OWS will end soon within the new year, and we can move on from this, but there is always a chance that they could pick up right back from where they stopped, and put up their tents and do what they have done so far, bitch and moan about the banks and greed, continue to harrass the average Joe and make a nuisence for themselves ad nauseam.


Just stop worrying, and love the bomb.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-01 00:25:05


It seems to have receded into smaller localized groups. The Occupy group in my city has just started up, and we aren't actually going to be occupying stuff. We are now going practical and starting projects to feed and clothe all hungry and cold people regardless of class or status. We're also already planning through multiple mediums how to disseminate information, including a lot of local teach-ins at different venues across town. I've also seen a bunch of other little branches popping up recently. It's less about protesting now and more about educating and preparing for future protests.


A vagina is really just a hat for a penis.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-04 01:22:19


Seems OWS is not entirely dead: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/02/hu ndreds-of-occupy-protesters-make-a-show-
at-rose-parade/

They made a human float shaped like an octopus as a form of protest.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-04 06:47:05


At 1/4/12 01:22 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: Seems OWS is not entirely dead: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/02/hu ndreds-of-occupy-protesters-make-a-show-
at-rose-parade/

They made a human float shaped like an octopus as a form of protest.

Goddammit, the Rose Bowl is FOOTBALL, not HOCKEY. Get it right, OWS!


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-04 23:09:00


At 1/4/12 06:47 AM, Ravariel wrote:
At 1/4/12 01:22 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: Seems OWS is not entirely dead: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/02/hu ndreds-of-occupy-protesters-make-a-show-
at-rose-parade/

They made a human float shaped like an octopus as a form of protest.
Goddammit, the Rose Bowl is FOOTBALL, not HOCKEY. Get it right, OWS!

They probably don't know the difference, so they thought that they go do what they do best, troll the fans and the people who watch the Tournament of Roses parade into their sinking ship of a cause. Maybe they should've gotten their hands on Oregon's mirror helmets, so they can realize that what they're doing is not going to work, not as long as they are populated by the politically ignorant college students and drug fueled hippies that seem to be everywhere in any OWS protest.

What's next for OWS, protesting at the Super Bowl in Indianapolis? Then again, they don't like to bitch and moan when it gets cold outside.


Just stop worrying, and love the bomb.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-05 12:46:19


At 1/4/12 11:09 PM, orangebomb wrote:
They probably don't know the difference, so they thought that they go do what they do best, troll the fans and the people who watch the Tournament of Roses parade into their sinking ship of a cause. Maybe they should've gotten their hands on Oregon's mirror helmets, so they can realize that what they're doing is not going to work, not as long as they are populated by the politically ignorant college students and drug fueled hippies that seem to be everywhere in any OWS protest.

What's next for OWS, protesting at the Super Bowl in Indianapolis? Then again, they don't like to bitch and moan when it gets cold outside.

See, I knew someone would find a way to complain about what OWS did, because even if they did something completely fine (like they just did) some idiot in this thread would find a way to shit on them. HURR OWS HOBO HIPPY SOCIALISTS DERP or whatever jumbled unfounded mess you accuse them of.

You have to acknowledge their cause is right, at the very least. Now you could disagree with their methods, that's possible, even if it's very stupid because how would you have wanted them to do it? They occupied a park at a symbolic important place, and they got noticed even if the media tried so hard to ignore them.

Also I don't expect any rational response from you.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-05 23:47:19


At 1/5/12 12:46 PM, VenomKing666 wrote:
At 1/4/12 11:09 PM, orangebomb wrote:
See, I knew someone would find a way to complain about what OWS did, because even if they did something completely fine (like they just did) some idiot in this thread would find a way to shit on them. HURR OWS HOBO HIPPY SOCIALISTS DERP or whatever jumbled unfounded mess you accuse them of.

Okay, first off, it's called an opinion, it seems like you're only content, to go after Camaro, Korriken and me just because we have a different viewpoint on OWS. Second, what we've said isn't unfounded mess like you claim it is, it's our opinons based on facts, obversations and beliefs about this, just because you think it's shit, doesn't make it so. I think you're really twisting my words so you can talk about how the OWS is always good, and those who disagree are right wing jackasses.

Real mature on your part.

You have to acknowledge their cause is right, at the very least.

I never said that their cause isn't right, if fact I can understand their cause. What I'm trying to say is that they are doing this the wrong way, and not finding rational solutions to the things that they are protesting against. Don't know where you got that from, but I'll bet you don't even read my other posts fully, instead you simply white-wash certain parts of my argument and try to use it against me.

Now you could disagree with their methods, that's possible, even if it's very stupid because how would you have wanted them to do it? They occupied a park at a symbolic important place, and they got noticed even if the media tried so hard to ignore them.

What they did at the Rose Bowl was legal, I don't have a problem with that, but that doesn't mean that the way that they are doing it is going to entice the people to join their cause, hell, it's possible that they could piss off more people than they can recruit or even sympathsize with. Plus, most people and media go to Pasedena at that time to watch/cover a football game and a parade, not a protest that has no clear leadership and crytic floats.

Also I don't expect any rational response from you.

I don't know what rational means to you, but considering the fact that you're toting the OWS bandwagon, my assumpion would be that most everything and everyone in the OWS is on the level, and anyone that disagrees with your and the OWS statement is considered a conservative troll and a jackass. Something tells me that this is the pot calling the teakettle black here when it comes to a rational arguments, repeating themselves like a broken record.


Just stop worrying, and love the bomb.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-06 02:21:46


Why do you get called a liberal when you call the bail-outs anti free market?


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-06 12:46:42


At 1/6/12 02:21 AM, Iron-Hampster wrote: Why do you get called a liberal when you call the bail-outs anti free market?

thats probably a more apt example of hypocrisy than the pics on the previous page.

suggestions on better techniques are not an accusation of hypocrisy.

VESTRUM BARDUSIS MIHI EXTASUM

Heathenry; it's not for you

"calling atheism a belief is like calling a conviction belief"

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-07 23:17:20


At 1/5/12 11:47 PM, orangebomb wrote:
Okay, first off, it's called an opinion,

Calling OWS protesters a bunch of hippies is factually incorrect.

it seems like you're only content, to go after Camaro, Korriken and me just because we have a different viewpoint on OWS.

Because I believe your viewpoint is biased and incorrect, and no obviously if we had similar opinions I would not "go after" you guys.

Second, what we've said isn't unfounded mess like you claim it is, it's our opinons based on facts, obversations and beliefs about this,

Beliefs yes, observations, maybe, facts no.

just because you think it's shit, doesn't make it so.

And I never claimed it was the case, your opinion is incorrect because it is, not because I think it is. Ijust also happen to think it is, but there is no correlation.

I think you're really twisting my words so you can talk about how the OWS is always good, and those who disagree are right wing jackasses.

I am not saying that either, OWS is not a perfect movement, but none is, when the population in arab countries protest for freedom we say its a good thing and the media defends them, when american citizens do it they are jobless hobos or dumb teenagers with useless degrees, which is factually wrong.

Real mature on your part.

The strawman you are attacking is immature, I am not.

I never said that their cause isn't right,

Never implied you specifically did imply such a thing, sorry it was not worded properly on my part, this was directed to the thread in general.

if fact I can understand their cause. What I'm trying to say is that they are doing this the wrong way, and not finding rational solutions to the things that they are protesting against. Don't know where you got that from,

But that's the thing, everybody says they are doing it wrong but then they offer no better solution to the problem. THis is what I mean by saying the movement is not perfect, but what they did worked, they were acknowledged by the regular medias that deployed tremendous efforts to ignore them. They brought the issue to light, now winter arrived and they went under the radar, but movements like PACs were born and they are trying what they can inside a corrupt governmental system, the same they are protesting, and yes there are some weirdos who have no idea what the fuck they are doing among them but all movements have these.

but I'll bet you don't even read my other posts fully, instead you simply white-wash certain parts of my argument and try to use it against me.

I do not and it is not my intention to.

What they did at the Rose Bowl was legal, I don't have a problem with that, but that doesn't mean that the way that they are doing it is going to entice the people to join their cause,

It doesn't mean the opposite either, plus, they were applauded at the parade.

hell, it's possible that they could piss off more people than they can recruit or even sympathsize with.

It's possible, but not probable, why would it piss people off? And it may piss off some people but also entice some other people to join them, better than doing nothing.

Plus, most people and media go to Pasedena at that time to watch/cover a football game and a parade, not a protest that has no clear leadership and crytic floats.

They go where the media is to get coverage, as for them having no clear leadership, it is one of the values of the movement, to remain a movement of the population with no leader.

I don't know what rational means to you, but considering the fact that you're toting the OWS bandwagon, my assumpion would be that most everything and everyone in the OWS is on the level, and anyone that disagrees with your and the OWS statement is considered a conservative troll and a jackass. Something tells me that this is the pot calling the teakettle black here when it comes to a rational arguments, repeating themselves like a broken record.

Well to be honest you proved me slightly wrong there, your post was better than what I tought you would provide, I just see so many people in this thread just shitting on OWS and using baseless ad hominem attacks that it makes me angry. However your post contains no strong arguments, they are very weak and frail at best.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-08 12:56:42


At 1/7/12 09:05 PM, Nyaoku wrote: So how do you suppose we should prevent the enemies from destroying the country from within?

(I second this question)

what should they do instead?

(post ignored 20 more pages of the i''m right your wrong point by point)


apparently I'm clever enough to declare myself as a dumbass

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-08 22:41:45


At 1/8/12 12:56 PM, dontpanic01 wrote:
At 1/7/12 09:05 PM, Nyaoku wrote: So how do you suppose we should prevent the enemies from destroying the country from within?
(I second this question)

what should they do instead?

(post ignored 20 more pages of the i''m right your wrong point by point)

first and most important thing: understanding the difference between Democracy and Republic.

Second: Understanding how a free market works and what was done to sabotage it. (hint: central banking)

Third: NOT vote for the Democrats, OR the Republicans.

Fourth: get the Tea Party to do the above as well, merge the movements, and stop giving the media ammunition by cleaning up, looking respectable, NOT supporting authoritarianism of any kind, and suddenly become too dangerous for the media to want to draw attention to, yet too big to ignore.

and Fifth, abandon Eisenhower's American dream and realize just how unsustainable it is. This was not our cultural norm, it was artificial.

the likelihood of this happening looks low, but our generation is running out of time.


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-09 02:22:55


At 1/8/12 10:41 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote:
Third: NOT vote for the Democrats, OR the Republicans.

This part is complicated because you need to vote, if anything this is very important, corrupted politicians want you not to give a shit about politics.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-09 02:32:11


At 1/9/12 02:22 AM, VenomKing666 wrote:
This part is complicated because you need to vote, if anything this is very important, corrupted politicians want you not to give a shit about politics.

if it involves voting for one puppet, or the other, then its not going to make a difference anyway. you can try voting to make a difference instead of buying into the whole lesser of 2 evils thing.


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-09 03:29:20


I'm going to put it simply and bluntly... after weeks of observing Venomking's posts/responses, I can safely assume he's nothing more than an OWS dick-rider.

Response to Occupy wall street media black out 2012-01-09 16:20:06


At 1/9/12 03:29 AM, Psil0 wrote: I'm going to put it simply and bluntly... after weeks of observing Venomking's posts/responses, I can safely assume he's nothing more than an OWS dick-rider.

I'm going to put it simply and bluntly... after weeks of observing Psil0's posts/responses, I can safely assume he's nothing more than an OWS shit-hater.
(See I can make ad hominem attacks too.)