Blogs Mar 4, 2011 at 12:55 pm

Comments

1
You're an idiot. 70,000 people waving guns would be a bloodbath.
2
I'm hoping this is intended to be tongue-in-cheek.
3
Yeah, this is a terrible idea.
4
Irresponsible post, Goldy, you're better than that.
5
What kind of might-makes-right bullshit is this?

I like to keep the accidental discharges restricted to my swimsuit area, thanks.
6
Get over it. You will never take America's guns. There are too many of them, and too many willing to die to defend their constitutional right to them.

Can we outlaw cars though? They kill way more people than guns, and it's fucking simple to get a licence to drive.

Someone cut off America's balls.
7
Wimps. I'm a bleeding heart liberal and I own guns. Lots of them. And the first teabagger that comes to my house looking for a handout after the collapse of this country is getting a bullet to the head. j/k

But sarcasm aside, in a way Goldy is right. Although I doubt any potential confrontation that would come of it would be very productive so...
8
He's right. The government has lost sight of the fact that it is supposed to be a government BY THE PEOPLE and FOR THE PEOPLE. But now, MONEY is king. It's time we restart revisiting history, especially the American Revolution.
9
@5 Worried about accidental discharge injuries? Carry an unloaded gun. No-one knows until you pull the trigger, but you weren't intending on doing that, were you?
10
You all need to step out of your Liberally Insulated Seattle Bubble for awhile and gain some real world perspective. Seriously, I'm starting to understand why "liberal" is a dirty word these days. Some of you really are incredibly naive or delusional.
11
When all this crap started to go down in Wisconsin, I called my mother and said "This is why we have the 2nd amendment."
But I know you're not serious.

12
The best gun is one wrested from the cold dead hands of an anti-capitalist anti-American Tea Bagger.
13
Ditto the above.

Or, in the immortal words of Pogo:

"We have met the enemy, and he is us."

I understand your sentiment here Goldy, but it smacks of emotional knee-jerking: adopting the tactics and attitudes of our ideological adversaries just makes us more like them, which I think they would prefer, if given a choice.

If we want to offer an alternative to right-wing jingoism to the large mass of "independent/undecideds" out there, then it has to be truly distinguishable, and I don't think this sort of thing does that.
14
Yeah, I see where you're going with this, but just like you don't punch your kid in the face to show him hitting is wrong, we couldn't say we would do this even to make a point. Setting an example, and all that. These irretrievable fuckwits are only in office because they got voted in on a better message than we had, and if lefties are as smart as all their advanced degrees say they are, they have to be able to find a way to use simplistic talking points as well as the repubs do...seriously, you're telling me the people who write for the Daily Show couldn't manage to do the ads for our candidates?

(gus, are talking speedos or trunks?)
15
Well, the teabaggers have been holding second amendment rallies at national parks, thanks to Obama decriminalizing carrying firearms in national parks. So why not give the right a taste of their own intimidating medicine?
16
Christ. Can't wait 'til this gets picked up by some right-wing blog as evidence of "jack-booted liberal thugs." Way to be.
17
Well, at least the "they don't fear us" part is interesting, because force is the language we haven't used against them, and they haven't responded well to anything we've tried so far. 70,000 peaceful protestors doesn't register with them the same way a few hundred teabaggers marching by the capitol with loaded weapons registers with us.
18
I am a fairly liberal guy, and I own several guns. Maybe it is time I got more ammo. I usually only keep about 50 rounds for the .357, and that doesn't sound like enough. Time to buy some union made bullets.
19
Ridiculous, stupid. Sarcasm?
Sure, it's not a call to violence, it's a call to appear to threaten violence, which easily spirals into violence. One of the appeals of liberalism is that it doesn't have to resort to the same kind of ridiculous tactics that the right does.
20
Of course we're not going to threaten them with force, because quite frankly we are better than that. Let me repeat: we are better than that. But in addition to beating them with a better message and better communication, we have to try and get past our fear of them. Because that fear legitimizes and empowers those who like to wave their guns around and yell about revolution and "taking the country back".
21
I've never much bought into the idea that I should have weapons to protect myself against criminals, but I'm starting to wonder if I should have them to protect myself against Republicans. Honestly, I think sometimes they're trying to get the civil war going again. Maybe we need to bring back the Black Panthers and the Weather Underground. Good times.
22
@5: The important (and correct) point here is that "might makes right" pretty much sums up the right-wing authoritarian mindset. These people don't respect ideas, reason, logic, or compassion. In their world, politics are won by shouting louder than the opponent, or simply by assassinating them.

If the authoritarian mindset continues to catch on in this country, there will be a yet another violent civil war, fought over essentially the same lines as the last one.
23
@20 - I don't want to be better than them; I want to win. The 2nd Amendment protects liberals, too, and I think it's time to remind the other side of that fact.

A moral victory is not the same as a victory victory.
24
"Maybe we need to bring back the Black Panthers and the Weather Underground. Good times."

Oh Jeezis that's rich! Written like a true naive sheltered white Seattle libtard who doesn't know jack shot about reality!

Newsflash! Blacks make up only about 12% of the USA and only about 8% of Seattle. GUESS WHAT! There are EVEN LESS white hippies in the USA than there are blacks. Also, revolutionary black panther types hate your white ass.

In short, your preposterous black/hippie revolution would be crushed to death in about 2 seconds.
25
@ 22: i agree 2-million percent. THE SOUTH HAS RISEN AGAIN!
26
No, you can't have a gun, Goldy. You'll shoot your eye out.
27
Canuck, your question @14 has inspired me to realize the perfect outfit to wear to Goldy's all-weaponized rally is actually a very special swimsuit. Thank you!
28
@13 & @20:
You are both right - we do need to be better than they are. And we are.

However, when you look at human history, it is clear that free ideas, democratic government, and civil rights are luxuries that need to be defended, sometimes with force. The very freedoms that allow us to be liberal were paid for by brave men and women willing to kill and to die for them. Inevitably there will come a time (hopefully not in my lifetime) when another payment is due.
29
I'm all for responsible gun ownership, but not the sort of gun worship that has people prancing about in public with their big metal dicks in the air.

Change those big metal dicks to big rubber dildos, however, and it's a party.
30
@29 - Perhaps big rubber dildos are what we should all bring to the capital. Now that would scare the repressed living shit out of the teabaggers!
31
@23/28 Well hey, look, I'm not saying don't be prepared to defend yourself. I'm not anti-gun, and I know more than a few liberal gun owners. And yes, at this point the trend could go either way. The militant teabagger faction could fizzle out or grow to dominate. My broader point @20 is that they are threatening us, and the more fear we show, the more they feel encouraged to keep threatening. They think that what they're doing is effective, that they have all us liberals running scared. We can prove them otherwise without waving guns and making threats right back at them, at least for now.
32
My philosophy comes down to this: countering their weapons with more weapons of our own is a primitive fear-response (the "fight" half of "fight or flight") that simply perpetuates a quite literal death-spiral of ever increasing violence; countering their weapons with no weapons at all, while certainly risky, is nevertheless the morally superior course of action.

Sure, they can shoot you, but that's just further proof of which side is more afraid...
33
"This is not a call to violence".

But you would certainly classify it as such if the exact same idiot statement was written by a teabagger.

By now I should be used to the double standards of the Stranger.
34
Fuck guns. We need rocket launchers.
35
Ha ha ha you wimpy white Seattle liberals arent even gonna do jack shit. Wimps. Bok bok bagock!

Look at me I'm Goldstein the stereotype of a "progressive" media-Jew! I am such a wimp that I call for threatening displays of potential violence, and then turn right around and claim that I'm not really calling for threatening displays of potential violence, because I am such a stereotypical "progressive" wimpy hypocrite.
36
I've been saying this for years. (Except that I'm pretty sure I'm serious; not so sure about Goldy.) An armed conflict in which one side has abjured arms is more commonly known as "unconditional surrender," which is a pretty good summation of the political state of this country when push comes to shove. And if you don't believe this is an armed conflict, just ask Gabrielle Giffords.
37
@33

If it were not for double standards, "progressives" wouldn't have any standards at all!
38
Alright goldy, come back.

Because right wingnuts are so well known for reacting rationally and in a principaled manner, there's no way they'd shriek commie army "they're coming right for us."
39
Double standards, or just a modest proposal?
40
If it ever gets to fighting in this country, I will be offering military training at the slog happy. I worked in a drill sergeant school for a year, I have the materials and voice ready to scream. Now drop and give me 25.

I would love to live in a world where guns are not ever needed, but until that time I will take heed of the words of Cyprus Hill:

"When the shit goes down, you better be ready."
41
actually if there is any state where a significant proportion of 70,000 liberal protesters would be likely carry guns and it also WOULDN'T be a bloodbath, its Wisconsin.

but i think a significant proportion of Goldy might be tongue and cheek, so no need to stoop to Teabagger level, right?

42
Oh god gus, that is TOO funny! He's got kind of a Sean Connery meets Borat vibe going on...you wouldn't have any accidental emissions in *that* get up...
43
@27: Oh my god! ZARDOZ!! That movie put me right off Sean Connery for quite some time, and I will never forgive the film makers for that!
44
@35,

You wouldn't dare say that to me if I were armed. So thanks for proving my thesis.
45
Modest proposal or not, I think what_now @16 is right that this is guaranteed to get picked up by the right-wing blogosphere and used to help demonize liberal protestors.
46
Goldy, I am starting to agree with you. I'm willing to stand up during a Huckabee rally with my gun screaming "Give me universal health care or give me death!!" And then shoot some rounds into the air.

The freaks on the right only respond to fear of violent retaliation. Scare the fucking shit out them !!!
47
@44 try me wimp.

Meet me at the bus stop at 3rd and Pine @ 10:30 pm tonight. Bring whatever weapons you can get your wimpy Jew claws on.
48
If you want to instill a little fear, instead of walking around waving guns, get 70,000 people on horseback dressed in Polish Winged Hussar attire.

That'd soil some drawers.
49
Walk softly and carry a big stick! Those may be good words to live by.
Just because we have the guns does not mean we have to fire them. Let the teabaggers take the first shot if they really feel that way. It is worth the sacrifice of one liberal life to not take the first shot!
50
41 years after Kent State, Libs are still trying to stick daisies in the barrels of rifles...hoping for a different result.

51
As much as I hope that this was bitingly sarcastic, I do agree that nothing would get gun control laws passed faster than an increase in liberals buying guns...
52
@47,

No, you meet me at the corner of Rainier & Cloverdale.
53
@47, how much are you getting paid to troll here? I need a job, especially if I am ever going to be able to legally arm my liberal ass, and I can think of far more demeaning things to do for money than pose as a right winger and make idiotic statements (under a different name, of course, I still need this one to say what I really think).
54
@51, boy, are you deluded.
55
It doesn't have to be a "bloodbath." Responsibly-armed, respectful protesters do stir fear in the hearts of tyrants. The Black Panthers did it with finesse (and copies of the Second Amendment firmly under their arms.)
56
LMAO @ naive white Seattle liberals who keep invoking the black panthers!
57
Would squirt guns suffice? It is winter in Wisconsin still, ain't it?
58
A better way than buying a new one is buying a good union made confiscated firearm from an SPD police auction.

Then, bonus points, you're helping out the city.

Reduce, reuse, reload.
59
I'm a fairly well-armed liberal, but I'm not a big fan of open carry because I consider it needlessly provocative. That said, a liberal pro-gun rally would be a nice change for once. I'd show up, maybe with my SLR-106.
60
I won't argue that armed conflict is the answer, but I do think that some of you ridiculous (that is: worthy of ridicule), arrogant hippies are deluding yourselves at your own peril if you think you're everโ€”EVERโ€”going to reason with a Tea-Bagger. Sure, sure, you can live convinced of your own moral and intellectual high-ground, and tout yourselves as reasonable here in cozy Slogland... but the fact of the matter is that you can't reason with idiots and the mentally ill, so your "high-ground" ends up being more like a "hill of beans". A little fire-with-fire is sometimes the most efficacious strategy.
62
@50:

That's not quite what I'm advocating; for one thing, there's no real evidence the right-wingers would positively respond to that sort of action anyway, unlike some nervous 20-somthing guardsman.

But I'm not saying we should lie down and roll over either. I'm saying we should stand up and face the gun-toting bastards face on - no weapons, but showing no fear of their weapons either.
63
@60:

Then, how does that make us any better, or any different for that matter, from those same "idiots and the mentally ill"? Taking the biblical route of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" just leaves everybody blind and toothless in the end.
64
Might Makes Right ..22 etc thanks..

A liberal gun rally would be Fucking Awesome! ..59

65
OMG, the Seattle liberal with no comprehension of humor or irony has raised his ugly head once again. Idiot blowhards like Limbaugh and Monson would have nothing to talk about if the "we take ourselves way to seriously" didn't go knee-jerk each and every time something like this is posted.

In fact, the fuzzy wuzzy liberal set has essentially CREATED right wing talk radio.
66
I would totally go to a Liberal gun rally!
67
"Power comes from the barrel of a gun."

Whether we like it or not, if you're going to get somewhere in the near future. Being able to defend against the Capitalist Goon Squads is a necessity.

Better to die on your feet, than to live on your knees.
68
I don't understand why this would be a problem for teabaggers. They've been going to protests and rallies for years armed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpnQAYlQ_…

And just today:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap…

They should be perfectly fine with liberals doing the same thing, shouldn't they?

70
@69: Well I suppose we should be grateful you can't find your caps lock key at least.....
71
@69

The Tea Party is Anti-American. The Founding Fathers were almost all elitists who hated the lower classes. America was built to have an elite upper class that held the power and elected to Senate. Only in the modern era are the "commoners" allowed to vote on Senators.

The Conservative history of America is a lie. Welcome to your nightmare.
72
@66 Sign me up too!

Is it really so rare for a union working, borderline socialist, seriously progressive, liberally minded individual to own one or more firearms in the US? Because there are clearly a few of us here, but a lot of responses have been to balk at the idea of owning guns.

PS: Goldy: Yes it is.
73
Right now the polls are in the protestors' favor. That would absolutely change if they showed up armed.

There is one thing that politicians pay attention to, and that's polls. Walker doesn't give a shit because he's not up in 2012, but already some Wisconsin republicans who are are showing signs of defecting. I'd hate to see something as idiotic as what you are suggesting turn the tide.
74
You're kidding, right?

The Republicans got voted into power ( D E M O C R A C Y). They're going to make a big, bigoted mess of Wisconsin. Next election cycle, (or in a vote-of-no-confidence election if they have California-type laws), the Democrats can vote the bigots out and clean up the mess.

Never pull a weapon that you are not prepared to fire.

Even if a show of force somehow worked in this situation, it would add to a civil-war mentality, and NO ONE WANTS A CIVIL WAR .
75
Um ... what about showing up armed with something that teabaggers, cons, religious fanatics DO hate (and most likely fear, too), i.e. symbols of sexual freedom. If they're waving guns (or just carryin'), whip out your dildoes, vibrators, blown-up condoms in multiple colours, padded restraints ... anything from your personal toy chest. If you don't already have toys, go out and buy some.

At least you won't be putting more money into the hands of gun manufacturers or doing something that you find repugnant to your own integrity and moral standards. And you'll have something you can actually use later on. [After properly disinfecting them from having been in the same airspace as those virulent sources of contamination!]
76
@69: You just fed a WiS troll.
STOP WASTING OXYGEN
77
Ah, come on Goldy, you know from the comments over at HA that half of us liberals are already armed.
78
@73, oh, Walker will be up in 2012. Next January is when he'll be able to be recalled.

@75, yes! Whip out the dildos and let's form a real Teabagger Party!
79
Obvious and very clumsy satire aside, I get that you hate the 2nd Amendment, Goldstein. Since you hate capitalism, personal economic freedom, fair taxation, any notion of personal responsibility and pretty much any other concept on which this nation was founded, this is hardly surprising.

Shy of unconstitutional abridgement of the right to bear arms, how do you think the 'problem' should be solved? Alter the 2nd through, I don't know, Constitutional means? Emigrate to the UK or Canada where gun laws are more restrictive? Anything? Beuller? Beuller? I mean, other than writing snarky half literate columns about how bad the idea of a gun owning populace is, what do want to do about it? Despite the clear impediment of being a liberal, you seem capable of thought sometimes. Occasionally. Once in a blue moon. Well okay, never, but you could try at least.

Cogent thought, it's what might help liberals if they only tried it.

71

Try reading something other than idiots like Chomsky for American history. You might learn something that could actually be supported by the real world for once.

Every man who signed the Declaration of Independence forfeit his property and his life if the revolution failed. If they were simply caught by the British any one of them would have been hung immediately, whether the revolution succeeded or not. It was hardly a bet anyone would take at even odds that the revolt of a small largely rural colony against the largest navy and most successful army in the world would succeed. Accordingly, the notion that the men who were behind the Declaration, Articles of Confederation and 1789 Constitution were out for personal gain is just stupid. It is moronic. It is the kind of lie people like you who hate their own country tell themselves all the time. Oddly, you even believe it. You must have been dropped on the head as a child. Often.

You hate America. Great. Bully for you. To do so implies ignorance and stupidity, but you exceed expectations in that regard. Bravissimo.
80
We all have a "fundamental right to travel" and I'd say nothing impedes that fundamental right more than a bunch of folks all strapped up and in your way. Next time the righties have an open carry rally we should sue them for infringing our right to travel.

As with most most things, Johnny Cash as pretty sage advice on the subject.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMMp_llzB…
81
@76 lulz.
82
I don't know that a surge in lefty gun ownership would help, but it might.

Naomi Klein describes how there's a pattern of typical endgame activity when the neoliberal nation-rapers truly have a country on the ropes. First, there's the barrage of radical austerity measures that dismantle governments capacity to regulate capital and mitigate misery. Then, as people are disoriented and reeling from the shock, the organizers, leaders, and left-intellectuals start to disappear and show up elsewhere mutilated and dead. People who think it can't happen here are fucking dreaming. Given the current trajectory, I give it a decade or two. What we can do now, short of joining a firing range, is to recognize that these bastards love to bully and that the time for playing nice is over.
83
How big a gun can you carry in your Euro-man purses ladies?
84
" left-intellectuals start to disappear and show up elsewhere mutilated and dead."

Paranoid much? One thing the far left and far right have in common.
85
In the next of your 3 times per week sessions with the psychologist, I'd ask that the dosage be increased. The current prescription clearly isn't working. Your paranoid delusions are getting the better of you.

Nevertheless, of course tyranny could happen here. Evil thrives, as they saying goes, anywhere good men do nothing. That's one of the primary reasons for loudly and consistently resisting the trend in Europe and the United States towards cradle to grave control over our lives by governments. Freedom can't exist in fascism, it's true. But it also can't exist when men aren't allowed to make choices and be responsible for the repercussions of those choices. Neither the radical right nor the radical left are good solutions for the majority of folks. Most of them want to keep the roads built, the cops on the street, the nation defended and so on. They'd rather the government stay out of their finances and their private lives. And they'd much rather not be held fiscally responsible for the poor choices of fellow citizens.

But as far as 'righties' or 'wingnuts' or whatever the catchphrase Huffington or MSNBC have sent out for the day is, Klein and her ilk are safe. They simply aren't important, or indeed sane, enough to treat that seriously.
86
Who says lefties can't be violent? Doesn't anyone remember the SLA? What about the Black Panthers? Violence isn't the sole realm of the far right.
87
I have to say I'm pretty disappointed in the majority of Slogger responses. Folks, America's gonna have guns! Lots of 'em! No reason to unilaterally disarm. And certainly no reason whatsoever not to show up at a protest bearing arms. It's our right. Fuck the teabaggers. And do go to the range and learn how to use your weapon safely.

And Seattleblues, welcome back! Were you being treated for a stroke? The first half of your post @79 was a completely unsupported ad hominem attack--well done! The second half was completely off topic and off the mark--congratulations! To argue that the Founding Fathers didn't represent a white male elite has to be a real challenge, but since you seem to like arguing against facts, I'm glad to see you take it up. (P.S. Just because they put their property and lives at risk didn't mean they weren't slave-owning elites. Just FYI, you know, a bit of logic. You imply that patriots can't be out for personal gain, then claim that our country is founded on capitalism and personal economic freedom, sorry, my head hurts a bit. There, the bourbon has made it all better.)

And where are the flag links when you need them? For @35 & @46. I don't think calling Goldy a "Jew" really advances the conversation. And if you're so fucking clever about the relationship between religion and guns, then why do you think Alan Gottlieb runs the Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org)? Maybe you'd like to run off your racist mouths in a room full of the Israel Defense Forces? I'd love to see that, fuckers.
88
Gee, remember that whole loughner thing? Ya know, where the liberals were blaming the Gifford shooting on republicans because of their gun-toting rhetoric. Oh, I guess not.
89
Goldy, you can't expect me to read your anti-gun posts and then want to keep a gun in my house, like, ever. I'll rely on the rule of law to protect me and my family, thank you.
90
Goldy, you need a hug and a few good nights' sleeps this weekend. Here is a virtual *hug* with the little asterisks and everything. I hope it helps. I'm sorry your country has so many problems and bad, bad people. Get some rest and you'll probably feel a little better in the morning.

(As for the gun thing, seriously, I think that a much more forceful and pushy but resolutely non-violent movement is the answer here, not guns. Yes, it's probably true that if progressives--or, let's call them "sane people"--escalated the protest battle with greater numbers and civil disobedience, some of them would get killed by your effing Teabaggers along the way. But things are bad, and at this point there's going to be people killed no matter what. The only thing you non-extremists have is moral authority. Own it as thoroughly as possible.)
91
I'm not sure an actual display of force is going to do anyone any good. I think Tim Kreider is the one with the right idea. We need to go to the mattresses with these fuckers, in a rhetorical sense, in the media, in Congress, in the white house, wherever. I really think that we need to fight just as dirty as they do, because Bush's presidency has made it pretty clear that it only takes eight years and a couple planes to knock this country back to the fifties. The typical Dem strategy of compromise simply cannot work against a political opponent whose electoral base ignores any lies or wrongdoing if their chosen horse simply votes against the gays (or whatever the demon-flavor-of-the-month is).
92
28

Freedom is not something you can buy, only rent.

EVERY generation has a payment due.

If we are wise and diligent (and maybe a little lucky...) the only payment required is a strong military that deters enemies.

If we are lazy and neglectful and don't pay the price the next generation gets a whopper of a bill. (see Pearl Harbor....)

There are actually very few things that the Federal Government has any business doing (educating your kids is not one of them. neither is providing you with health care or retirement income...) but mantaining a STRONG military is one of them.
93
@92: "If we are lazy and neglectful and don't pay the price the next generation gets a whopper of a bill. (see Pearl Harbor....)"
Clearly, you don't know Jack Diddly. But if you did, maybe he could tell you a bit about World War II history.
Also, "promote the general welfare" is right next to "provide for the common defense" in the Constitution.
94
Liberals don't need guns-
just continue to rely on your superior intellect and
numerous graduate degrees and
overweening moral superiority;
after all it has workeed soooo well for you
(and the country) so far...
95
74

Mrs Jarvie is right;

"Never pull a weapon that you are not prepared to fire".....

Who fired the first shot at Lexington? Does it matter?

The Right sees Activist Judges who over rule the express will of the people as Tyrants on par with George III.

It would take only the tiniest spark to ignite their patriotic ferver into a raging Bonfire of Liberty.

Death to Tyrants.

Power to the People.

Go ahead, Goldy, Make Our Days.

Do you feel lucky, Punk? Well; Do ya?.....
96
I thought it was a pretty good post.
97
If the liberal left armed, the Billionaires Tunnel wouldn't last out the week.
98
I'm a bit torn on this, but I do think it's too bad that the paranoid right wing (which believes there's a good chance sharia law and fascist communism(?!) sweep the nation with the help of liberals and muslims and Obama administration and democratic party) -- that these cultish nutjobs have like 10x the ammo and guns as liberal folks are likely to have.
If a solar storm, or economic collapse due to something else were to hit the fan in the next few years, watch out, they'll be coming after you, your friends, family, community in what they'll consider the end times. Remember, these folks believe they're the chosen ones, the REAL Americans, oh and by the way they believe in torture.
Unfortunately us liberals are for the most part defenseless against these psycho bullies if they go violent, and have been looked down on by them as pussies, pinkos for decades now

If we try to match the armed potential of the other side this country will be far more awash in guns and ammo than it already is, which will mean more gun deaths. On the other hand I don't know of many better options, other than coming up with a movement that merges the right, left and center against the real enemy to this country, the super rich corporate vultures who are fucking us, our children and our future.
99
@94

Conservatives don't need intelligence -
just continue to rely on your fear and
inability to think for yourself and
blind, self-righteous defense of the people who constantly play you for the idiots you are.
after all, it's worked sooooo well for the economy
(and the whole rest of the world) so far ....

Welcome to the global economy sucka.
Degrees make you competitive - for realz!
Too bad the irrelevant ones like you arm yourselves for attention.
100
While your argument for demonstration would be dramatic and, yes, cause the Right to look twice, your claim is based on the assumption that the only reason protests aren't working is because they do not fear you. Fear does not always inspire people to act in accordance to your desires, in fact, it often fuels them to do the opposite. Under your assumption, fear equals respect, but this is not the case. They are two different things. In order to argue your point of view more effectively, it would be in your best interests to stop the sarcasm and use facts based on...facts, not assumptions.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.