↓ Archives ↓

Posts Tagged → occupy wall street

Is it time for civil disobedience and ignoring kook judicial holdings?

Civil disobedience, non-resistance obstructionism, and peaceful protests against clearly unfair laws and violent government agents is time-honored in America.

Civil disobedience works because it appeals to the higher mind, it appeals to the best, highest conscience in Western Civilization.  You have to have an open mind to have civil disobedience work on your political views so that you vote for change from the status quo.

It won’t work in a Muslim country, where civil disobedience will just get you locked up and tortured, or summarily killed.

It did work for Ghandi in India because the 1940s British empire valued democracy and voting rights, and the public cry at home over images of British soldiers shooting peaceful protestors in Delhi’s public streets threatened to up-end political control at home.

Americans have successfully employed civil disobedience since the 1920s: Segregation laws, no voting rights for women, a lack of equal rights or opportunity across so many sectors of society… the causes were real and political changes were needed for America to live up to its promise.

And ain’t America an amazing place that it is designed to change and heal old wounds, to become a better place?

Because the original use of civil disobedience was so righteous, because so many of the laws being protested in the 1920s through the 1960s were so outrageously unjust, the behavior eventually took on a connotation of being above the law and always justified.  In fact, over time even violence became justified in the name of Marxist versions of “justice,” and pro-violence slogans like “No Justice, No Peace” evolved.

Today, violent, fake civil disobedience has been employed by the “Occupy Wall Street” thugs, and by the violent criminals in Ferguson, Missouri.  These events always start off as a routine, rote, formula civil disobedience act, and then they quickly devolve into destruction, arson, violence, beatings, attacks on bystanders….all in the name of some Marxist version of “justice.”

Inevitably, politically allied elected officials have begun to implement their jobs in a similar fashion.  No matter what the law says, they ignore it, and make a big public deal about subverting the law.  As if they are justified.  They actually take pride in failing to implement the law as they are supposed to.

Examples of elected officials ignoring and subverting the law are a county clerk of courts issuing same-sex marriage licenses, despite Pennsylvania law saying it is illegal.  Or Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane refusing to defend state laws, because she personally disagrees with them.  Or California banning state judges from belonging to the Boy Scouts.  Or the Obama administration willfully failing to implement immigration law.  Or Harrisburg City mayor Eric Papenfuse refusing to rescind city ordinances that are plainly illegal under state preemption law, because Papenfuse holds certain personal views about guns.

This lawlessness by the very people entrusted with safeguarding and implementing the law is dangerous.  These wayward officials stand on quicksand, because the basis of our republican form of democracy is the rule of law – equal application of the law, irrespective of what one personally believes.

If government officials begin ignoring laws they disagree with, and implementing law that was not voted into being by the consent of the voters, then the rule of law is over, it has ended.  The glue that holds America together is corroded, and the whole edifice can come down.

But let’s ask why only one side of the political debate does this.  We know they get away with this because the mainstream media protects them, but the MSM veil has been pierced by the Internet, so the flow of information is no longer completely bottled up by fellow travelers.

Put another way, why don’t other people, say people like American traditionalists, “conservatives,” engage in the same behavior?

Here is an example of what could be done: Last week a federal judge ruled that Arizona must issue drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.  Never mind that these people are in America ILLEGALLY, the claims they make for their applications could be and often are fraudulent, and the cost of these services is unfairly covered by taxpayers.

Why don’t the good officials of Arizona simply ignore that judge’s insane ruling?  That judge has no ability to actually make Arizona issue drivers licenses, and if I worked in Arizona government, or if I still worked in federal government and had something to do with allowing illegal immigrants in, I would simply ignore that judge’s crazy ruling, or the illegal commands of the occupant of the White House.

There, folks, how do you like the taste of that medicine now?

Think of the many kook, nakedly political judicial decisions that are handed down, contrary to law and policy.  Why reward these dictatorial jurists by following their dictates? Why not simply ignore them?  God knows, they are earning it.

Civil disobedience and official lawlessness is a game that everyone can play, and at some point the people who have been acting like adults will recognize they only stand to lose by following the rule of law while their opponents exploit their fidelity, and only by fighting fire with fire will they make it clear that everyone must follow and implement the law, no matter what their personal views are, or everyone loses.

Or, people can do it the old fashioned way, and work to get the law changed one vote at a time.

Top Fake-Out of 2011

Looking back, 2011 was a year full of fake-outs.  Political, sporting, and cultural fake-outs.

All of these failures to deliver left disillusioned people in their wakes.  Some, like the Jerry Sandusky\Penn State sex abuse scandal, left a lot of hurt and disillusioned people in its wake, not to mention the abused boys who welcomed the miserable company into their sad world.

The top political fake-out has to be the Occupy Wall Street “movement.”

OWS is not really a movement in the sense that lots and lots of citizens belong to it and it is representative of some larger but still-quiet change coursing its way through the body politic.  Heck, there might be a thousand people per state who actually participated in OWS-themed activities across America.  Maybe not even a thousand people per state.  Busing in professional activists and workers from across the country to protest sites is well documented.  So maybe it’s 500 people per state?

We are talking about at most twelve thousand people out of a nation of 350 million, and maybe only six thousand people.

But you’d never know it from the media reporting on it.  OWS and its clones in California, Ohio,  Harrisburg, PA, and elsewhere had maybe a handful of people at any site except the actual Wall Street site of Zuccotti Park and the ever-ready-to-protest San Francisco.  But the media treated these few people as though they were the harbingers of great change.  Their violence, filthy living conditions, rapes, drug use, vandalism, incoherent rants, circular discussions, and racism were routinely ignored in reports by mainstream media outlets (on the other hand, new news outlets are sprouting up right and left, like infowars.com, as POV videoed interviews of OWS kids are posted to YouTube and other sites).

But despite the actual sparse numbers of actual participants, the once-vaunted Columbia University is now actually teaching a course called…”Occupy Wall Street.”

That’s right.  Both an undergraduate and graduate level course on OWS will be taught at what was at one time one of the nation’s premier centers of higher education.  No one at Columbia is really sure what will be taught in these courses, but I am willing to bet that the filth, drugs, rapes, violence, vandalism, racism, incoherence, sedition, treason, and slovenly behavior at OWS sites will not be part of the syllabus.  Columbia University, like all other “Ivy League” schools, has now just dropped another notch in the estimation of middle class families looking for a good return on their investment in Little Jane and Johnny’s education.

But OWS will also live on as a “movement” to be studied, emulated, promoted.

Never mind that two years ago a pro-Second Amendment rally on the steps of Pennsylvania’s state capital that attracted 1,500 supporters from across the nation received zero mention in the local newspaper, the Patriot News, while mini protests of two to five people waving placards against the Iraq War (where have they been the past three years, one wonders) were routinely covered as though they actually represented some sizeable part of the population.

OWS does not represent many people in America.  Maybe five percent, or ten percent in a really bad economy like we have now.  But their friends in the mainstream media make sure that their voices and position in the news are amplified far beyond their actual numbers and importance to American political discourse and electoral outcomes.

OWS should be studied, as the biggest fake-out of 2011.  And maybe one of the biggest fake-outs in American history.

Chelsea Clinton: One of the 1%, Happily

Chelsea Clinton is daughter of impeached president Bill Clinton and his wife, current US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Chelsea has grown up exceptionally wealthy and connected to people in positions of power. She has never had a “job,” certainly not a professional job, not a career where she developed as a person, but she just got hired by NBC News.

Chelsea Clinton is going to be a top-level reporter and commentator for an international news program.

Chelsea is accomplishing something that 99.99% of college graduates her age can only dream of. Except that those people know that in order to land a job like that, they have to gradually prove themselves from job to job over time, over decades.

Chelsea is very much a member of “The 1%” as the Occupy ________ folks call hard working, successful Americans.

You can’t help but wonder how her achievement looks and is perceived by the people with whom she shares so many political views. She has it made. She has Easy Street. Her dad made a phone call and got her the job of a lifetime, and she didn’t have to work for it at all.

But you just know that once Chelsea is in there, reporting just the facts, of course, that she will stand as one with the Occupy _________ people. And they will give her a pass, because she is the right political party…so much for any principles in any of this situation, right?

And it is just one more example of how the politically correct in America choose to say one thing, but do another.

 

Does incoherence sell a message? Does it have a message?

Across the Internet are scores of POV (point-of-view, from the view of the recording person) interviews of Occupy __________________ protesters.

Having watched quite a few over the past four weeks, I am still waiting for not only a basic message to emerge but also a coherent message from any of the protestors.

Time after time, people of all ages passing out communist “Workers of the World Unite” pamphlets and holding signs promoting socialism and Che Guevera (a mass murderer) are asked the most elementary questions about their beliefs.

Not one of these interviews that I have witnessed has had a protestor express anything coherent. They struggle for words, and eventually fall back on the simplest of statements (“repeal the Bush tax cuts!”). But they sure are angry. They aren’t sure what it is that they are angry about, but by God, don’t ask them hard questions. They get angry at the questioners.

At least the rioting Greeks are angry about something concrete — losing their taxpayer-funded hand-outs. While we can debate whether the Greeks deserved such a lifestyle to begin with, they at least know what they are angry about.

If you want to enjoy some of the lazy, angry, yelling people, follow these links: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/26/peter_schiff_takes_on_occupy_wall_street_protesters.html

Well isn’t this reassuring?

The “Occupy ______________” folks have strong support from Iran’s government, the American Communist Party, and now the American Nazi Party.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/figures-nazi-party-throws-support-behind-occupy-wall-street-movement/

Curious why so many elected officials, including president Obama, are supportive of them. Not only is that support a policy non sequitor, but with friends like these, reputations usually begin to sour.

Yes, plenty of individual “protestors” have violently attacked police, Jews, and people dressed nicely (business?), but it’s the formal endorsements that say oh, so much.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/148795

How reassuring it is to know that these “protesters” are as wacked out as they appear.