I’m insensitive and proud

November 11, 2011

YES!!

Fame and recognition (of a sorts) at last. Your humble correspondent took two spots in the “The Most Insensitive Tweets in the Aftermath of the Occupy Oakland Shooting” at the SF Weekly. See for yourself:

(Click the image for the larger version. Slight language warning.)

I want to thank all the little people who made this possible, especially all the Occupiers who are trashing Oakland and wrecking local businesses — with sensitivity, I’m sure. Without you, I couldn’t have found my inner “insensitive” self.

Oh, and for the record, Mr. Scherstuhl, my tweets weren’t referring to the guy who got shot. The first was part of an argument with a Lefty supporter of the Occupy movement about Occupy Oakland’s trashing of the city; the second was in response to the “sensitive” behavior of the new Vandals toward the police and news crews dealing with the shooting.

I realize you have deadlines, but you might try following the conversation next time.

But thanks for the awards!

LINKS: My blog buddy on this great moment, plus with video of Occupy Denver’s attempted invasion of BlogCon 11. Too funny to miss.


Hypocrisy, thy name is #OccupyOakland

November 9, 2011

A scene from Frank Ogawa Plaza, Oakland, at the Occupy Oakland General Assembly:

Speaker: “Corporations are evil!”

Chanting masses of free thinking drones: “Corporations are evil!”

Speaker: “Banks are the enemy!”

Chanting masses of free-thinking drones: “Banks are the enemy!”

Speaker: “Cancel all student debt! Redistribute wealth now!”

Chanting masses of free-thinking drones: “Cancel all student debt! Redistribute wealth now!”

Speaker: “What do we want?”

Chanting masses of free-thinking drones: “Revolution!”

(Chanting masses of free-thinking drones show their approval with up-twinkles.)

Enter Occupier in Che shirt, unwashed. He takes the Speaker aside:

Occupier: “Dude! You know how much cash I have in my pack? Twenty grand! Want me to redistribute it?”

Speaker: “Are you nuts? You know how many crooks are out there? Stick it in the bank, where it will be safe.”

Occupier (Looks nervously at the crowd): “What about the 99%?”

Speaker: “Gimme a minute.”

He turns to the crowd, who eagerly await their next free-thinking chant-in-unison, and raises his bullhorn:

Speaker: “Down with the corporate fat cats”

Chanting masses of free-thinking drones: “Down with the corporate fat cats”

Speaker: “What do we want?”

Chanting masses of free-thinking drones: “Revolu…”

Speaker (cutting in): “A 3% CD with a 12-month term! Free checking! And No ATM fees!!”

Chanting masses of free-thinking drones (not missing a beat): “A 3% CD with a 12-month term! Free checking! And No ATM fees!!”

Speaker: “Are you with me?”

Fade to black, as the Speaker basks in the up-twinkles

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Occupy Oakland: never bring uptwinkles to a gunfight

November 4, 2011

I think Oakland has just met its next mayor, who knows how to handle rioters:

“We had people who attempted to break into our building,” the landmark Rotunda Building on Frank Ogawa Plaza outside City Hall, [Oakland developer Phil] Tagami said Thursday. He grabbed a shotgun that he usually keeps at home, went down to the ground floor and “discouraged them,” he said.

“I was standing there and they saw me there, and I lifted it – I didn’t point it – I just held it in my hands,” Tagami said. “And I just racked it, and they ran.

Clint would be proud:

Compare Tagami’s action to the pusillanimous whines of appeasement coming from Oakland’s elected “leaders:”

City Administrator Deanna Santana apologized to business owners for the “chaotic events” that enveloped the city. Mayor Jean Quan called the rioters “a small and isolated group.”

“It shouldn’t mar the overall impact of the demonstration and the fact that people in the 99 percent movement demonstrated peacefully and, for the most part, were productive and very peaceful,” Quan said.

Neville Chamberlain is alive and well in Oakland’s city hall.

Citizen Tagami, however, isn’t buying it:

Tagami disagreed, calling the Occupy Oakland encampment “basically concealment and cover for anarchists who are doing this to our city.”

“We’re very concerned that a group of people can be allowed to do this type of destruction to our town and to our image without any repercussions,” Tagami said. “They need to be held accountable.”

Exactly.

In all seriousness, this is what happens when muddleheaded governments break the social contract and fail to protect the rights of all people equally, as they are supposed to.  The right to have one’s livelihood and possessions secure from violence is as fundamental and natural to liberty under the rule of law as freedom of speech. When government officials such as Mayor Quan vacillate and refuse to do the job for which they were elected, it is left to citizens such as Frank Tagami to defend their rights themselves in a state of nature.

Again, no one is saying the Occupiers don’t have a right to protest — they most certainly do. But our very open, very tolerant society provides wide-open avenues for protest that don’t require the logic of violence that lies at the heart of the Occupy movement.

In contrast, witness the myriad, often huge rallies held by the Tea Party: all done within the law, everyone’s rights respected, and the movement’s point forcefully and effectively made through freedom of speech and association.

And not a broken window in sight.

Meanwhile, it’s time for the mayors of the various “Occupy” cities to do their duty by their residents and taxpayers and put an end to the camps, with their lawlessness and their squalor.

Enough is enough.

PS: Tagami for Mayor in 2014!

LINKS: More from Hot Air.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


The heart of the #Occupy movement is violence

November 3, 2011

The original Occupy movement

What was I saying about the “new Vandals?”

Conn Carroll of The Washington Examiner today presents video of Occupy Oakland “staff” trying to stop others from trashing a local Whole Foods store. But, as Carroll points out, the presence of Occupy Oakland “officials” tells us they had some idea trouble would break out, yet went ahead with the march, anyway, thus making them responsible.

Why? Because the central idea of Occupy is the seizure of control of another’s property. His final paragraph lays bare the violent logic at the core of the movement:

…When you assert control over something that someone else owns (Brookfield Properties, the taxpayers, etc), there is eventually going to be a physical confrontation when that owner tries to reassert control. That is what we are seeing in police/occupier clashes across the country.

And this is what President Obama, the Chairwoman of the Democratic Party, and sundry others, have aligned themselves with.

Again, this is no longer an issue of freedom of speech; no one is advocating that free political speech be repressed — as long as the rights of others are respected. But these people have crossed a line by trampling on the property rights of others (1) and threatening their livelihoods and even their safety. It is time for city mayors to do the jobs for which they are being paid and order the mobs to disperse — and to send in the police to enforce the order, if need be.

Footnote:
(1) And I don’t just mean who physically owns the ground; companies of all sizes have shareholders, and those shareholders, whether individual investors or big investment houses (who in turn serve individual investors) have a property interest in their shares in those businesses and in their future profits. Same with sole owners of small businesses, whether it’s a hot dog cart on a corner near Zuccotti Park or a crafts store in Oakland. When Occupy “does its thing,” it harms the very people it claims to be fighting for. What about their rights?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,521 other followers