You are welcome to my place anytime you want to come! would love to have you.

What PH said.

Oh, and Andrew Breitbarts little rant at the Occupy protesters out front of the CPAC conference was not only staged, but hilarious.
Their chants were far better (Occupy 1 - Breitbart 0)

Ooh! And once you're in Savannah, Sundae, it's only a piddly little 1,171 miles to Austin!

Well, its a movement - not a political party, so why should they necessarily put up someone for Congress? There are a few candidates out there seeking to affiliate themselves with Occupy. Whether these people will become serious contenders remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, Occupy does have a political PAC.

As long as there is freedom in HOW members of an organization are allowed to express themselves, there will always be members who make asses of themselves (and thus, reflect badly on the organization). That's sort of a given.

If the entire organization (or majority) echoes this bad behavior or adopts it, then it's reasonable to assign such attitude to the organization as a whole.

Otherwise, no.

I do think that shouting down someone trying to speak is rude and not at all tolerant. Wait, who said Occupy was supposed to be tolerant? Anyway, it's JUST as rude to mock, deride and ridicule a group that doesn't fit your neatly defined idea of "how it should be".

In my opinion, of course.

or do they? Cross-thread discussion perhaps, but who is this?
http://occupypolitics.info/we-do-not-endorse/

Elizabeth Warren, for one. What do you mean by "from their movement"? Warren may not have been out camping with them, but she is one of the politicians whose ideology is most closely aligned with theirs.

The easy answer is - They haven't decided yet.
Seems you have something in common with them after all.

So far they have created a group called "Occupy the Congress" which was set up to collect funds for candidates who support the Occupy protesters and the 99%ers.
Link here if you care to donate.

As far as candidates from within Occupy -
You may be surprised to find out that he is running against Allyson Schwartz (D).

Intolerance? Maybe, a bit.

Rude, certainly.

A strategic error, too. What could they possibly say that would do more harm to Santorum's chances of election than the things Santorum would have said himself if allowed to speak uninterrupted?

But people are voting for this man. There are obviously plenty of fruitloops absolutely lapping up his hatred and bile and twisted sense of morals.

Are you equating shouting and throwing glitter with codifying the descrimination of a class of American Citizen and revoking a woman's right to determine what's best for her own body?

Wasn't it a tea partier who said "keep the government out of my social security". There are uninformed people everywhere.

Out of curiosity, do you have specific examples of Santorum's hatred and bile?

Here's some hate:

Here's some bile:

Last month Santorum blamed same-sex marriage for plummeting rates of marriage across the nation. In November, at an event sponsored by the Christian group the FAMiLY LEADER in Des Moines, Santorum said gay marriage could doom the U.S. "Unless we protect it with the institution of marriage, our country will fail," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1178450.html

One of the most famous examples is probably the "Man on dog" interview he gave back when he was still a Senator.

In that interview, he says that he has no problem with homosexuals, but that he opposes their acting out on their urges. He says that he thinks that consenting adults do not have a right to privacy in their sex lives and that the government has a right to legislate what sex acts they can perform with one another. He says all this in a very loving way without any bile.


"And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution..."

and later:

"And that's sort of where we are in today's world, unfortunately. The idea is that the state doesn't have rights to limit individuals' wants and passions. I disagree with that."

Then there's the Santorum statement that babies that are a result of rape are a "gift".

Oh, and comparing gay marriage to bestiality.

And! blaming radical feminism for families where both parents work 'when they probably don't really have to'.

Santorum has pledged to repeal all federal funding for contraception and allow the states to outlaw birth control, insisting that “it’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be." You know, like, have 8 kids...:eyebrow:

And then...the right to privacy is a made up right that the Supreme Court came up with and should be eliminated.