You may have heard about the 50,000 protesters/rioters in London this past week. The were agitating against the government's suggestion that the dole they were taking be reduced.
Many were arrested.
Inasmuch as we haven't heard from Harry since shortly before the "demonstrations," I must conclude he has been incarcerated for anarchy, sedition, and insurrection. Or maybe a spelling infraction.
One can only hope the Queen's justice is merciful and that only one stroke is necessary. . .
Yeah, I join you gjuys in hoping harry's in jail. I can just picture him throwing fire bombs and rocks at the cops, demanding more welfare when the govt is broke. It's been going downhill over there again ever since Margaret Thatcher set things right.
On 3/28/2011 1:49 PM HeyBub spake thus:
50,000? That's undiluted Fox News horseshit, undoubtedly your trusted source for this sort of news.Try closer to *500,000*.
Why quibble? They're only off by (literally) an order of magnitude ...
Oh come on, don't wish bad things on Harry. Just because you may have a different view on things is no reason to want to see someone harmed. We need Liberals and those with opposing ideas. Life would be very boring without my Liberal Commiecrat Marxist Socialist freak friends to argue with. Darn, if I completely avoided Liberal Democrats, I would never get to talk to any funny, interesting and bizarre women. ^_^
TDD
Being the eternal capitalist, I will have the
FREE HARRY
T shirts on my web site as soon as they get back from the printer.
Maybe, just maybe, she'll have a soft spot for anyone named Harry.
wrote
OK, since they are free, I'll wear one. Doubt anyone would pay for them though.
The way Harry flails around, I bet $5 that it takes them half an hour to hit him enough times to make him stop squirming.
Steve
Heart surgery pending?
You are apparently correct. I was operating from memory on a concept unrelated to the actual number of anarchists involved.
I regret the error.
Thanks for the update. I wondered where all the Wisconsin protesters went.
Nothing more upset than a government worker scorned.
I'll take a "keep harry" in XL.
I haven't seen 500,000 reported anywhere. The highest I've seen was
250,000, and that was the number O'Reilly used on Fox. Doh! So much for the alleged undiluted Fox News horseship. They really impressed me with their carrying on, firebombing, wrecking cars, smashing windows. Looks like the typical rable rousers that show up at G7 meetings.
Damn, now I am stuck with a garage full of "FREE HARRY" T shirts.
Or, as I said, Wisconsin union rallies.
Or at the Tea Party rallies:
<"In Fort Lauderdale, Fla., however, counterprotesters from ANSWER - an antiwar, pro-immigration reform group - also took to the streets, with one blaring, "Amnesty, yes. Racists, no," from a bullhorn. When two Tea Party activists entered their protest zone, a fight erupted as Tea Party and ANSWER protesters kicked and punched one another and spilled into the middle of a busy intersection. [Note: The link is a YouTube video of the altercation provided by a Tea Party supporter. The fight includes profanity.]"
Don't you *ever* get tired of distorting facts and trying to paint Republicans as saints and Democrats as the Devil incarnate? As the story above clearly illustrates, it takes two to tango and neither side is either all at fault or all blameless. You're getting so fast and loose with your facts that you're damaging the credible parts of your arguments. The report and video make clear it was Tea Party people who went looking for trouble and found it by crossing over into the area set aside for the counterprotest.
-- Bobby G.
Did I say ANYTHING here about Democrats or Republicans? I doubt there were ten Democrats OR Republicans in the London protests.
Don't you *ever* get tired of finding fault where there is none?
LOL. I thought maybe I had missed something too.
Gosh, Bub, scroll up and read your own post. You were talking about Wisconsin - clearly not the UK and clearly a battle between Dems and Repubs as you have previously noted. Perhaps you didn't write:
"Or, as I said, Wisconsin union rallies" (referring to "typical rabble rousers")
and I've got my quoting wrong but it really does sound like something you'd write. I'll never get tired of pointing out your errors and it seems you'll assist me by continuing to make them like this one, forgetting what you wrote in the very message your comment appears in.
Wisconsin is not the UK, right? Dems and Repubs are battling in Wisconsin, true? You've claimed time and time again that Democrats are unionists, true? Your comment was meant to imply that unionists (hence Dems) are rabble rousers, true? So what's your beef? Are you going to claim "that's what I said but it's not what I meant?" like one interview subject once said when his comments appeared in an article I wrote, quoted word for word?
Do you really have enough chutzpah to claim you haven't consistently painted Dems as evil and Republicans as saints? Say the word and I'll barf back at least a dozen quotes from your past messages that pretty much prove my contention about your treatment of Dems and Repubs. Even my dead grandmother knows that's your schtick. Seems pretty lame for you to attempt to deny it. Lame, but not surprising. Just disappointing. I thought you were much smarter than this. Much, much smarter.
My shtick is to make sure people know that there are bad actors on both sides of the aisle as well as refuting insane claims like the poor like being poor. I suppose that means we're gonna clash. Everyone knows you often write outlandish things just to get a reaction. Seems odd to be pissed at getting precisely the reaction you were looking for. Mighty odd.
-- Bobby G.
I was referring to the anarchists and seditionists in the Wisconsin rallies, not a political party. To my knowledge, no one at the Wisconsin protests claimed to be a Democrat. SOME Democrats did leave the state, but, as they were absent, they couldn't have been participants in the protests.
I've heard that complaint before: "The facts may be wrong, but the narrative is correct."
No, I stand by what I wrote, not what you read. I said "union" not Democrats. You read "Democrat" not union. With that type of comprehension, you could have just as easily called me a racist because the Wisconsin demonstrators were uniformly white people.
No, that is my overall claim. I'll eagerly admit there are exceptions on the margins. For example, Richard Nixon. He got us out of the Viet Nam war and opened relations with Red China. Regrettably, he did try to impose wage and price controls and for that he will be (rightly) forever vilified.
Again, you try to set up a straw man so you can complain. What on earth makes you think I'd deny your observation? I do NOT deny that Republicans are a force for (my version of) good, while most supporters of the Democratic Party are not.
Once again you project. Let me be clear. I never said the poor LIKE being poor - that's an invention on your part. I said the poor, in most cases, CHOOSE being poor.
I do not write outlandish things simply to get a reaction - again your projection. To the degree that my musings seem outlandish, their purpose is to provoke long-dormant critical thinking.
And I do not get pissed at anyone's reaction. Once more you rush in with conclusions having no traction.
In sum, it seems as if you find more fault with my (supposed) motives than with the statements themselves.
Recently a psychologist analyzed some reactions to criticisms of our president. To his supporters, President Obama is almost perfect and any dispute with his policies cannot, per se, be valid. Therefore those who find fault with the president's policies must have a hidden motive - that stated deficiencies in his actions must be proxies for a cloaked agenda. What could that agenda be?
Ah ha! the president's adversaries must be racists!
It's all so clear when simple logic is applied.
Poor cognition is not the problem, in fact it's the reverse. HeyBub is probably one of several posters here who have a near genius IQ level based on the quality of their writing and the breadth of knowledge it represents. That's why I get agitated. It's like someone with incredible artistic talent covering walls with stick-figure graffiti. I won't respond to his "Not me!" denial because anyone with access to Googlegroups can find plenty of examples of HeyBub's attitude towards Democrats and unions. There's no need to reiterate what's already known and preserved on Google.
"He could win Democratic nomination - if he was also a gay, black, transgendered, union member."
Yep, a real lover of Democrats and unions, our HeyBub . . . (-:
-- Bobby G.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.