LOL !!! - Found This Through #OWS Twitter... They Ask That We Share It...

[WillyT]

Link: http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/10/23/chart-tea-pa... /

[NYC_SKP]

1. See also:

..

[WillyT]

2. Also Good... Thank You !!!

[Beartracks]

4. Yep: "rallies" vs "protests" n/t

[Tippy]

3. KICK

[Jamastiene]

5. K&R

So true.

[RKP5637]

6. K&R !!! n/t

[Fire Walk With Me]

7. K&R!

[PuffedMica]

8. K&R

[kestrel91316]

9. Truer words were never twittered.

[ZombieHorde]

10. Are we really striving for inclusion when we won't include the Tea Party?

Either we are inclusive or we are exclusive. We should either welcome the Tea Party, or we should quit calling ourselves inclusive, in my opinion.

[cui bono]

11. I agree.

Here's what I posted in another thread making fun of the Tea Party people:

at this time, with OWS going strong, I think we should stop making fun of "teabaggers". I have used that term a lot in the past, I even got a temp ban at another forum for using it, but I really believe that now is the time to put that aside and bring as many people into the OWS movement that we can. We'll never get them in if we keep making fun of them.

Now is the time to find our commonality and use that against the 1% and to change the system. Once we have the system we need without money corrupting our entire political process then fine, we argue about our differences. But for now we have a common enemy and if we continue to fight amongst ourselves we are playing the game exactly how TPTB want us to play it, by putting all our energy into each other and not uniting against them.

I feel the same about the infighting at DU. I am guilty as well, but I am trying to answer those who I disagree and even who I think are being dismissive and even insulting with an attempt to find a solution rather than just prove they are wrong and I am right.

We have a chance of a lifetime with the OWS movement and I think that is much more important than having a laugh at someone's expense that may compromise real change in this country.

(sorry for the rant and for sounding however I sound, coming off however I'm coming off, I'm really struggling with all of this myself right now and I think it's really important, especially uniting the left to stand behind this movement and get the Dem party to go along with it if we really want Obama to do the right thing)

[2pooped2pop]

32. If the tea party showed up, they would not be turned away

No one would stop them from joining. The occupiers are way about love and forgiveness, unity and working together. They will accept all. The teabaggers are part of the 99%, they are just too stupid to know it. I can't stand the baggers and now use the phrase "teabagger stupid" for unbelievably ignorant actions or remarks, but if I were at camp and the teabaggers came to join, they would be accepted even by me.

[cui bono]

37. Do you thikn they would bother to show up if they had read your post? n/t

[2pooped2pop]

39. because I call them what they named themselves and make fun

of them? Somehow I don't think my post is going to shy them away.lol Nor am I asking them to show up or join us. I think they should not be allowed to be let in the cool group. They chose their group, now let them keep their little racist asses together.

But, when in camp.......... I will abide by camp rules.

[cui bono]

41. They don't cal themselves stupid as you did. And I used to use Teabaggers as well

but we all know now that they know what it means they don't like it and that it is devisive.

So you can rationalize it or you can be a better human being and actually take the steps to try to include all the 99%ers in the movement.

We NEED to stop being us vs. them and be one huge us against the 1%. It's simply NOT going to work otherwise.

[2pooped2pop]

42. They are too stupid to know they are too stupid. n/t

[cui bono]

45. It's time for you to mature a bit. Please don't do what you are doing.

If you care about the movement, please keep your immature comments to yourself.

[2pooped2pop]

47. Look,

teabagger types are just the kind of folk who throw those bombs into the OWS camp. THey made their own fucking racist bastard name and reputation for themselves. After running into a few, I have come to realize that their racism and hatred runs deep, and you are not likely to change that part of them. You cannot reason with them. So after all they have done, yes I still hold hate for them. Forgive me if I can't just brush it off and go forward. I also have hate for all the Bush cartel and those that have helped to destroy America (the world, actually) And it's not going to just magically go away so we can look forward. I'm sure there are many of us who don't forgive, don't forget.
However, anyone joining OWS sincerely, will be accepted by me. Forgiving...that would have to come on an individual level. I will not be voicing any concerns while in camp other than those involving OWS. I will not jeopardize the movement because I take longer to let go. But really, I think if you look up teabagger and stupid, you'll find a lot of it on this board, so please quit trying to make it a big issue.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lark]

86. problem with this logic

Teapartiers in many cases were stooges paid by the Koch brothers and Rick Scott to hold rallies against Obama and HCR, so including them in the 99% is a stretch. They are just paid reps of the 1%. Notice one HCR went thru, attendance at the TP rallies dropped to nothing.

[Turn CO Blue]

12. I am with you now. Didn't feel this way 2-3 weeks ago, but I have

changed my mind. The people who went to the original Tea protests were justifiably angry about the bank bailouts...then the rallies somehow morphed into being more about healthcare. The spark that was there originally - that is the same thing as what OWS is running on...
Only people making more than $398K a year are in the 1% - so by definition, the people at the rallies were/are the 99%.


edited to add: in fact, I posted a discussion a few weeks ago how I was irritated that the Ron Paulites were posting on Facebook how they wanted to co-opt the movement...now, of course, I see that any Paulites willing to camp in the cold and wet to stand up to the 1% deserve my admiration. And who knows, mind-changing conversations with fellow Occupiers may and will ensue.

[BobbyBoring]

57. Actually

They started out with HCR egged on by Rick Santelli. W started the bail outs and they was not a peep out of them.

[Lex]

15. No one has to tolerate the bigots.

Period.

[ZombieHorde]

18. Then shouldn't we call ourselves exclusive instead inclusive? nt

[stlsaxman]

27. This sign is not "excluding" anyone- simply pointing out the factual differences.

Should Tea Party member choose to join us- they are free to do so.

Granted the sign isn't "reaching out" but all the while #OWS has welcomed anyone.

[ZombieHorde]

66. I think the sign is excluding the Tea Party. If that sign was saying mean things about you,

would you feel included? Of course you wouldn't.

[redqueen]

68. What "mean things" is the sign saying? (nt)

[ZombieHorde]

85. Really?

You don't think being called racist and anti-poor is insulting?

[redqueen]

88. Those are observations, not insults.

Studies and surveys have shown it to be true about the majority of tea party members, few as they are. Furthermore, as circumstantial evidence, isn't it odd to you that none of their 'issues' were such a big deal for them until a black man became our president?

If you need more evidence, why not try the SPLC's Hatewatch blog? http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/07/14/tea-party-nati... /

As for anti-poor, does their desire to get rid of food stamps not mean anything to you? They think Obama's policies favor the poor over the rich and the middle class. What does that convey? They seem to think that if poor people have any comforts (air conditioning, a computer, a television) that they aren't really poor. Does that not sound anti-poor to you?

I'm not saying they all believe these things. But tell me how many hateful, greedy views a group would have to promote before you'd stop considering yourself part of the group?

[ZombieHorde]

90. That article is about Tea Party Nation, not the Tea Party as a whole.

I'm not saying they all believe these things. But tell me how many hateful, greedy views a group would have to promote before you'd stop considering yourself part of the group?

Ask a Christian or a Muslim.

[cui bono]

38. bigot

big·ot   
noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
Origin:
1590–1600; < Middle French (Old French: derogatory name applied by the French to the Normans), perhaps < Old English bī God by God


Adopting their bigoted attitude will derail the movement. Better to stop the ridicule and work to enlighten them and get them on board with the 99%.

[jonthebru]

23. I would bet...

that there are some sympathizers who also showed up at tea bagger events. If they choose not to become part of #OWS then that is their choice. I feel that the right will try to usurp the movement somehow. They have already sent in provocateurs to try to create a riot and a severe police response. At 99%, you are by definition not exclusive. Pretty much all or most tea baggers are in the 99%, its just that they are brainwashed.

[ZombieHorde]

67. 'At 99%, you are by definition not exclusive.'

We should assume labels define reality.

[pangaia]

31. Tea Party

I would say the" Tea Party" - which has nothing to do with tea and is not a party-- except maybe in the sense of a backyard get together - IS welcome.. if they act like informed adults... or wish to BECOME informed adults. Everything they do is really against themselves. Whereas what OWS is looking for HELPS them..

[ZombieHorde]

69. I doubt insulting them will help conform to our way of thinking.

Do you think insulting them will help them to conform to your desires?

[madokie]

34. Has there been any effort to exclude the tea party?

I've not ran into anything stating that to be true, from a credible source that is.

[ZombieHorde]

70. The sign in the OP is exclusive, and many here cheer it.

The same sign claims to be inclusive.

[Pacifist Patriot]

35. Yes actually.

Striving for inclusion is a great phrase because it acknowledges a goal that could never realistically be reached. The Unitarian Universalists have been struggling with this for decades. Striving for inclusivity does not mean having to embrace values you find contrary to human dignity or include people who do not identify with your principles (and thus probably would not feel comfortable, nor want to be in your group anyway).

It means you respect the inherent worth and dignity of every human being and that means allowing others to possess different opinions and proceed down different paths. I would whole-heartedly welcome a former Tea Party member who now self-identified with the economic justice goals of OWS, but I cannot fathom why someone who still espouses Tea Party ideals would even want to be associated with OWS.

[HughBeaumont]

44. They want to be "included"? Then renounce Reaganomics.

Their economic scorch-and-sort "vision" is almost the polar opposite of the #occupy, Liberal and Democratic movements.

So they want me to take them seriously? Renounce Reaganomics for the wholesale joke that it is.

Somehow, I think I'll be the Pope before that ever happens.

[krispos42]

49. The stuff we advocate for will help Tea Partiers...

...DESPITE their insistence that it won't, and that they don't want it.

[redqueen]

53. That is silly. They don't want to be included.

If they'd realize they're being played by the corporations that fund them, then they might realize their error and decide to join the OWS movement.

But that simply will not happen. The members of the tea party are mostly rich, white, bigoted, and they want this country to become a theocracy. Their goals are fundamentally different, so it is simply to talk about 'including' them.

[BobbyBoring]

59. Not true

White? Yes! Bigoted? Absolutely, Rich? Hardly. The backers are, but the average T P er is a blue collar working stiff at best.

[redqueen]

64. "Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.ht...
Obviously the more educated ones aren't the ones holding up signs. However, just because those are the most visible supporters does not make mean they're representative of the majority.

I've seen more surveys that reflect this but the most often referenced one does not explicitly mention income. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-...

[2pooped2pop]

92. I'll bet a whole lot of baggers lied about their income and

education.

[LanternWaste]

56. I imagine that quite often, the word 'inclusion' implies both parameters and limits

I imagine that quite often, the word 'inclusion' implies both parameters and limits depending on situation and context.

Although I do realize that the literalism used by some fundamentalist churches to force a meaning has been gaining traction...

[woo me with science]

61. Thank you. - Posting again this call to unity.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

They have used the two parties to divide us for decades, and they will keep trying to drive wedges.

We need to be 99 percent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[socialist_n_TN]

71. Yep that's a good point about "inclusive"......

And that's the problem with both total inclusiveness AND "consensus" decision making. By those standards, you'd have the very people who got us into this mess (or their toadies-same difference) having a say in any plans to fix what's wrong and a veto power over ANY realistic plans to REMEDY the systemic abuses that OWS outlined in the first week of the movement.

Consensus is good for airing out gripes because EVERYBODY gets a say. It's not so good at fixing the problems because a dedicated minority with an agenda can block any actions that remedy the abuses. The same goes for "inclusiveness". It's great as an agitational tool and even has some truth to it, in the sense that anything that benefits the 99% will benefit ALL of the 99% even the ones that are AGAINST it and FOR the 1%, but as an organizational tool it's bereft of usefulness. If you're so "inclusive" that you allow the apologists for the 1% a say in your plans, how will you ever get anything doe about that long list of abuses?

I believe that the focus should be on remedies for those abuses rather than being "inclusive" of everybody and building a "consensus". What's wrong with a majority with a minority right to be heard? Not good enough anymore?

[geardaddy]

76. +1000

[Fantastic Anarchist]

83. How do we include them when they are diametrically opposed to everything the OSW movement is for?

I mean we are inclusive, but doesn't mean we have to admit Nazis or the KKK.

[defendandprotect]

13. K/R ---

[moondust]

14. K/R

[pasto76]

16. "weaponized tear gas" huh

seriously. over the top dramatic rhetoric like this makes people like me care less about your efforts.

its fucking tear gas. not some special secret, get the OWS people, "weapon". leave the drama to the right.

[MedicalAdmin]

24. Actually it was weaponized.

The description isn't about the tear gas but rather the delivery system. If it was shot out of a gun designed to deliver long distances, then it was "weaponized."

[av8rdave]

50. Have you every experienced tear gas?

I can tell you from experience, it's more than just an annoyance. I have no problem with the term "weaponized" being attached to it.

It is, in fact, a weapon.

[Initech]

17. Win!!!

[NRaleighLiberal]

19. Great! Just tweeted the link.....n/t ..and K&R!

[orbitalman]

20. K & R

[willhe]

21. K&R

1000 times

[raouldukelives]

22. K&R

[PatrynXX]

25. hell need to make that into a clingy window sticker on the car

probably get my windows bashed in.

[Chemisse]

26. That's awesome.

[xchrom]

28. recommend

[WCGreen]

29. Big K&R...

[MrMickeysMom]

30. Think of the names, then the movement...

Crazy, isn't it?

Yet, this is exactly what is going on. Message to the Koch Brothers.... You can't astroturf further, especially after November 5th when Anon exposes your foot soldiers, Fox News.

K&R

[2pooped2pop]

43. I saw the anon post

but other than take down their internet site what were they planning to expose? Maybe I missed something or didn't understand it.

[MrMickeysMom]

91. Nah... I didn't know anymore than you did...

I was just caught up in what they could expose... wishful thinking...

[malaise]

33. Magnificent

I'm lovin' it!!!


REC

[krispos42]

36. K&R n/t

[myrna minx]

40. Excellent. K&R n/t

[HughBeaumont]

46. The police differences are the most telling.

They turn a blind eye to just about everything The Gathering of the (Kl)Eagles, Town hall disruptors or the TeaHadists have pulled off for years.

Liberal demonstrators, no matter how small or large in numbers, can look forward to beatings, macings and arrests for the most meaningless of infractions.

This doesn't just hold true for normal protest - it's true for Presidential events as well.

Bush's Coronation 2005: along the parade route - rows and rows and rows of State Troopers, 3-5 rows deep, shoulder to shoulder, all in Kevlar, all armed to the teeth. Sidewalk police - full riot gear, 3 foot batons, shields. Mounted police. Security Checkpoints were well-staffed and flowing smoothly . . . I got in the parade route in a whopping 20 minutes. All for less than half of what came to Obama's event four years later.

Oh, and speaking of Obama's Inauguration . . . A patrolman every, what, 15 feet? No shoulder to shoulder rows. Didn't see the tons of riot cops. Sharpshooters here and there. Meh. Checkpoint security was grossly understaffed - took 8 hours just to even get in the parade route in 8 degree weather. For thousands upon thousands of people per street, they had four very slow moving bottlenecks. It's like they were doing everything in their power to discourage people.

Obama presidential speaking events, post 2009 - "Patriots" show up brandishing sidearms and rifles.

Now think about it. You can say "but they wasn't along his path" all you like. What would happen if you were spotted in the open half a mile away from where Bewsh was gonna speak with a sidearm or a rifle, and you were liberal?? What would happen?

Think you'd receive that same blind eye?

You'd be in prison, and you KNOW it.

So don't anyone tell me they "protect and serve" us equally. It's bullshite.

[Bryn]

48. Kick

[obietiger]

51. K&R

Great sign!

[redqueen]

52. That's a decent snapshot of the differences. K&R (nt)

[DeSwiss]

55. K&R!!! - n/t

[felix_numinous]

58. The 99% includes the tea baggers

and our struggle will benefit them despite their bigotry, and despite the fact that they don't even know they are a part of us.

The 99% are everyone but extremely rich corrupt people--it can't get any simpler than that.

[DebJ]

60. Reminds me of diff in 2004 between Bush and Kerry rallies:

Bush took away bottles of water from people who had been waiting in line in 95 degree heat for hours.
Kerry camp gave away free bottles of water to people all day long as they waited for his arrival.

[avaistheone1]

62. k&r

[lucca18]

63. Wow....so true!

[sweetapogee]

65. instead of using twitter

#OWS should take this information about providing free health care and food and issue either a press release or purchase a full page ad in the NYT. That benefit alone should shame the 1% more than anything I can think of.

[1776Forever]

72. Gotta love it:) OWS was working on a blueprint for the future last night! Can't wait to see it!

[Zorra]

73. kick

[highplainsdem]

74. K&R!

[BlancheSplanchnik]

75. Awesome Awesome Awesome!

Love It!

[Greybnk48]

77. It's on FaceBook too. I just shared it about an hour ago. LOL. n/t

[KansDem]

78. K&R!!!

Sums up the contrast rather nicely!

[Beavker]

79. Liked on FB

Now my sadly kool-aid soaked right leaning friends will be forced to argue these points with little to actually back them up...as usual.

[dreamnightwind]

80. Though this is a great graphic, it is partisan

I agree with the graphic for the most part, but it's not how people like us react to it that really matters.

It's what I call an "me good, you bad" story. We really do have to get past that, now more than ever.

The first phase of needed reforms quite possibly involves amending the constitution to remove private money from the political process. To that end, we need to educate the non-rich right wingers that we are fighting for their interests as well as ours.

They have a very different view of the OWS movement, and partisan graphics like this will alienate them rather than recruit them. They think Soros, MS-NBC, and to some extent, Obama, are all behind OWS. So they would take issue with the info in the chart, and it would just polarize them against OWS.

We need to bring in as much of the 99% as possible to do this. It doesn't mean bringing in their values. If we limit the first phase of reform to a massive push to remove private money from elections, we can incorporate people from the right in this effort (and it's a heavy lift, we will need all the help we can get in this fight) since their interests are aligned with ours at least this far along the road.

After that, we'll have the political mechanisms restored to where we can use electoral politics to elect reps and enact legislation that is about the people of this country, not the 1% at the top. That will be more the time to fight for progressive policies.

We'll never remove the money from politics without help from the non-wealthy right wingers. Let's do everything we can to bring them into this fight at our side.

[October]

81. I disagree with you. I think the graphic is factual, as are others posted within the thread. /nt

[sweetapogee]

93. #OWS

they are offering the protesters free food and health care. What is not to like?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

82. Fucking love it! n/t

[RedCloud]

84. Compare and contrast at its finest hour!

[GigiMommy]

87. K&R n/t

[calimary]

89. LOVE THIS!!!