Intolerance

TACOMA, Wash. - Rick Santorum said on Monday that the Occupy movement represents "true intolerance" after he was faced with a handful of angry protestors who shouted through his entire event, ultimately resulting in the arrest of three of them.

Is fighting oppression itolerance? Was Lincoln intolerant when he freed the slaves? Was MLK jr intolerant when he fought racial discrimination.

Santorum is way out of line.

He needs to go back up the rear-end he dripped out of. :eek:

I can't tolerate intolerant people.

I'm trying to understand the dynamic here ... Conservatives and the Tea Party types are intolerant, but Occupy, the folks who destroy Starbucks at Global Whatchamacallit Summit Riots, and those idiots who throw pies at famous/powerful/rich people are merely expressing their opinion? Am I getting this right?

wolf;795034 wrote:

I'm trying to understand the dynamic here ... Conservatives and the Tea Party types are intolerant, but Occupy, the folks who destroy Starbucks at Global Whatchamacallit Summit Riots, and those idiots who throw pies at famous/powerful/rich people are merely expressing their opinion? Am I getting this right?

:lol2:

wolf;795034 wrote:

I'm trying to understand the dynamic here ... Conservatives and the Tea Party types are intolerant, but Occupy, the folks who destroy Starbucks at Global Whatchamacallit Summit Riots, and those idiots who throw pies at famous/powerful/rich people are merely expressing their opinion? Am I getting this right?

So... Are you one of those Starbucks supporter crazies? Hmmmmmm? You and Merc new best friends forever now? :lol:

Besides my side is right and everyone else's is stupid.

I am still trying to get someone from the Occupy folks to tell me who from their movement is going to get elected to Congress in 2012.

I'm still trying to get members of Occupy to tell me who their two home state senators and representative are.

Oh, and Merc and I have been friends since the moment he opened his browser here ...

wolf;795068 wrote:

Oh, and Merc and I have been friends since the moment he opened his browser here ...

Best Valentines Day gift eva. Back at ya...

awwwwwwww

Your only flaw, as I see it, is that you live somewhere that is completely fookin' hot and humid 90% of the year. It rains the other 10%. ;)

wolf;795078 wrote:

awwwwwwww

Your only flaw, as I see it, is that you live somewhere that is completely fookin' hot and humid 90% of the year. It rains the other 10%. ;)

Yea, but it never snows either. So we put up with the hot or fall asleep under a tree.

TheMercenary;795080 wrote:

Yea, but it never snows either. So we put up with the hot or fall asleep under a tree.

Like Mexicans! :biggrinba

Right next to them. They usually get all the most shady spots.

Hey, don't knock Savannah!
Merc might be nearly opposite me politically speaking, but he's a true Southern Gent when it comes to offering hospitality.

I intend to visit him and his wife when my ship comes in.
I've been sold on Savannah since Bill Bryson recommended Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil.

wolf;795034 wrote:

I'm trying to understand the dynamic here ... Conservatives and the Tea Party types are intolerant, but Occupy, the folks who destroy Starbucks at Global Whatchamacallit Summit Riots, and those idiots who throw pies at famous/powerful/rich people are merely expressing their opinion? Am I getting this right?

Or maybe entire movements can't be generalized the way we would like them to be generalized?

Tea Party is seen as intolerant because of a select few people and actions. People call the tea party intolerant because they want the tea party to be intolerant, therefore they make inaccurate generalizations.

Occupy Wall Street is seen as intolerant because of a select few people and actions. People call the Occupy Wall Street intolerant because they want the Occupy Wall Street to be intolerant, therefore they make inaccurate generalizations.


I disagree with what the protestors did to Santorum. By 'exercising' their right to free speech, they took it other people's rights as well. They then justify it by claiming their political positions are superior to everyone's at the Santorum rally. Immature.

Sundae;795096 wrote:

Hey, don't knock Savannah!
Merc might be nearly opposite me politically speaking, but he's a true Southern Gent when it comes to offering hospitality.

I intend to visit him and his wife when my ship comes in.
I've been sold on Savannah since Bill Bryson recommended Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil.

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)

TheMercenary wrote:

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

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

TheMercenary;795058 wrote:

I am still trying to get someone from the Occupy folks to tell me who from their movement is going to get elected to Congress in 2012.

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.

SamIam;795231 wrote:

Meanwhile, Occupy does have a political PAC.

or do they? Cross-thread discussion perhaps, but who is this?

DISCLAIMER:

We will be creating a clear statement of non-political disclosure making it clear that Occupy Politics does not endorse or support any Political Organization, Group, or Candidate.

We do not endorse candidates.

All links and listings of organizations or groups is only to inform the movement and public of what is happening in relationship with the movement, not to endorse or support it. It is up to Local GA’s and individuals to decide if they want to support any individual organization, legislation, groups, candidates, or anything else. This website is only intended to give broad access to information so that individuals are better able to make decisions for themselves.

This has Not Been Approved by any Occupy Politics General Meeting.

Also OccupyPolitics.info is not directly affiliated with the Occupy Politics PAC. They were set up independently and serve different needs, although there are individuals who are involved in both organizations.

http://occupypolitics.info/we-do-not-endorse/

TheMercenary;795058 wrote:

I am still trying to get someone from the Occupy folks to tell me who from their movement is going to get elected to Congress in 2012.

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.

TheMercenary;795058 wrote:

I am still trying to get someone from the Occupy folks to tell me who from their movement is going to get elected to Congress in 2012.

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 -

Nathan Kleinman, a 29-year-old member of the Occupy Philadelphia movement, intends to run for congress in Pennsylvania’s 13th district against Democratic incumbent Allyson Schwartz.

“The petition gathering period starts today and lasts for three weeks, so I plan to file by then,” Kleinman told me over the phone today. “I’ll be running in the Democratic primary.”

Kleinman, who refers to himself as a human rights activist and organizer, served as an aide to Joe Sestak’s unsuccessful 2010 Senate campaign before becoming a legislative assistant to Pennsylvania State Representative Josh Shapiro.

More recently, he has been a member of the Occupy Philadelphia movement, participating in a number of associated working groups, including “Free University,” “Outreach Working Group,” “Process Working Group,” “Camp Liberty,” and “The Committee of Correspondence,” through which he became involved with InterOccupy.org, which he describes as “a central hub for communications” in the national Occupy movement.

Now, he plans to campaign for the House of Representatives, which would make him the first member of the Occupy movement to seek a seat in Congress.

You may be surprised to find out that he is running against Allyson Schwartz (D).

TACOMA, Wash. - Rick Santorum said on Monday that the Occupy movement represents "true intolerance" after he was faced with a handful of angry protestors who shouted through his entire event, ultimately resulting in the arrest of three of them.

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?

ZenGum;795334 wrote:

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.

wolf;795034 wrote:

I'm trying to understand the dynamic here ... Conservatives and the Tea Party types are intolerant, but Occupy, the folks who destroy Starbucks at Global Whatchamacallit Summit Riots, and those idiots who throw pies at famous/powerful/rich people are merely expressing their opinion? Am I getting this right?

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?

wolf;795068 wrote:

I'm still trying to get members of Occupy to tell me who their two home state senators and representative are.

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:

Santorum wrote:

They are taking faith and crushing it. Why? Why? When you marginalize faith in America, when you remove the pillar of God-given rights, then what’s left is the French Revolution. What’s left is the government that gives you right, what’s left are no unalienable rights, what’s left is a government that will tell you who you are, what you’ll do and when you’ll do it. What’s left in France became the guillotine. Ladies and gentlemen, we’re a long way from that, but if we do and follow the path of President Obama and his overt hostility to faith in America, then we are headed down that road.

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/2012/01/01/rick-santorum-would-invalidate-gay-marriages_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.

And he was not surprised "that the center of the Catholic Church abuse took place in very liberal, or perhaps the nation's most liberal area, Boston."

You know, 'cause those priests living in 'liberal' areas are more likely to rape little boys, since liberals have no values and stuff, and the priests are unduly influenced. :eyebrow:

And he hates science. Or he doesn't. Or he does. I don't know. He doesn't know.

In 2002, Santorum called intelligent design "a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes. "By 2005, though, he had adopted the Teach the Controversy approach. He told National Public Radio, "I'm not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom. What we should be teaching are the problems and holes ... in the theory of evolution." Later that year, Santorum resigned from the advisory board of the Christian-rights Thomas More Law Center after the Center's lawyers lost a case representing a school board that had required the teaching of intelligent design. Santorum, who had previously supported the school board's policy indicated he had not realized that certain members of the board had been motivated by religious beliefs. Santorum critics claimed he was backtracking from his earlier position because he was facing a tough reelection fight for 2006. When asked in November 2011 about his views on evolution, Santorum stated that he believes that evolution occurred on a tiny, micro level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum

When asked in November 2011 about his views on evolution, Santorum stated that he believes that evolution occurred on a tiny, micro level.

He's quite right... the genetic level

bwuahahahaha. that's awesome. how long was he your senator?

Now I have to admit, I agree with him that people doing the dirty with Fido is just wrong. Of course, if fido is somehow able to clearly and concisely articulate his consent and prove that he is over the age of 18 I guess I wouldn't be opposed to it anymore.

His views on bigamy and polygamy don't really interest me because I don't think the gummint should be involved in the arena of marriage anyway.

Except ho-mo-secshu-al. Cuz that's just wrong.

He was mine as well ... Thank goodness he is gone from here.
Extremists, from any party, should not be in power.

Rhianne;795017 wrote:

I can't tolerate intolerant people.

Ugh, I know what you mean. I can't stand them either. ;)

wolf;795068 wrote:

I'm still trying to get members of Occupy to tell me who their two home state senators and representative are.

:smack:

TheMercenary;795087 wrote:

Right next to them. They usually get all the most shady spots.

:sweat:

lookout123;795424 wrote:

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

There you go, dragging facts into the argument...

Lamplighter;795457 wrote:

He's quite right... the genetic level

Bwaaaa HAaaa Haaa!

classicman;795333 wrote:

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

:lol2: