Police - to protect and serve

Pregnant Seattle protester miscarries after being kicked, pepper sprayed

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-22/wall_street/30427982_1_pepper-spray-pregnant-woman-police-hits

Just when one thought it couldn't get uglier, it does. What's next, firing live rounds in the crowd! I think the GOP should be all up in arms I mean a fetus has been killed!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Vulchor

Rhamlin:
I'm sorry ,while I truly feel for the people that are being harmed and I've been hearing a lot about assaults and rapes and theft that is being conducted by the protestors against their fellow protestors. I have no sympathy for them. I do not support them or their cause even though my tax dollars are. I firmly stand by the police to use what means they must . This may make me unpopular here but I am sick of looking at the shantytown camped outside one of our local banks.
That's just how I feel about it and I will not argue the point whether I am right or wrong.

Well when you have a stance, dont care if you are right or wrong, and have no sympathy on people even if they are unfairly treated by police-----I think its pretty easy to see if you are right or wrong.

Vulchor

fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.

Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.

Vulchor

fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.

Vulchor

wwestern:
Amos Umwhat:
Speaking of socialist countries, anyone read the "Patriotic Millionaires" news? These guys, millionaires, have the weird notion that the people who have the most money should pay the most taxes. To paraphrase one of them, The system isn't broken, it's working just fine for those who designed it. Socialism for the top One Percent. They can risk whatever they want, because the taxpayer HAS TO bail them out.

So, if you've been to the U.S., you've been to a socialist country, it's just that you have to be in the top 1% to benefit!
the middle class get screwed.

THATS THE BOTTOM LINE

james40

Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.

well considering Obama has publicly pledged his support for these protestors, it's pretty relevant.

laker1963

james40:
Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.
well considering Obama has publicly pledged his support for these protestors, it's pretty relevant.

He was talking about trying to politicize this discussion. It was not needed and seemed like a cheap shot, just for the sake of an opportunity offering itself. Are you suggesting people should be against others right to protest peacefully? Surely not.

james40

laker1963:
james40:
Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.
well considering Obama has publicly pledged his support for these protestors, it's pretty relevant.
He was talking about trying to politicize this discussion. It was not needed and seemed like a cheap shot, just for the sake of an opportunity offering itself. Are you suggesting people should be against others right to protest peacefully? Surely not.

I see your point. Protest all you want but if the cops tell you to do something, you should do it, which I said earlier.

jr_p951

I have alot of family that are either cops or works for the police force in some way. I do believe that alot of stories are "hyped-up" by the media. You always get the side of the protester or other "victim", but what caused the escalation of force? With that being said, we all know there are the few that take the escalation of force way too far. When that hits the media, it gives a black eye to the whole department.

Vulchor

Very true Jr P

wwestern

james40:
laker1963:
james40:
Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.
well considering Obama has publicly pledged his support for these protestors, it's pretty relevant.
He was talking about trying to politicize this discussion. It was not needed and seemed like a cheap shot, just for the sake of an opportunity offering itself. Are you suggesting people should be against others right to protest peacefully? Surely not.
I see your point. Protest all you want but if the cops tell you to do something, you should do it, which I said earlier.

Blindly doing what another tells you to do without a second thought is idiocy my friend.

james40

wwestern:
james40:
laker1963:
james40:
Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.
well considering Obama has publicly pledged his support for these protestors, it's pretty relevant.
He was talking about trying to politicize this discussion. It was not needed and seemed like a cheap shot, just for the sake of an opportunity offering itself. Are you suggesting people should be against others right to protest peacefully? Surely not.
I see your point. Protest all you want but if the cops tell you to do something, you should do it, which I said earlier.
Blindly doing what another tells you to do without a second thought is idiocy my friend.

so now I'm an idiot? Lol, talk about cheap shots.....

wwestern

james40:
wwestern:
james40:
laker1963:
james40:
Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.
well considering Obama has publicly pledged his support for these protestors, it's pretty relevant.
He was talking about trying to politicize this discussion. It was not needed and seemed like a cheap shot, just for the sake of an opportunity offering itself. Are you suggesting people should be against others right to protest peacefully? Surely not.
I see your point. Protest all you want but if the cops tell you to do something, you should do it, which I said earlier.
Blindly doing what another tells you to do without a second thought is idiocy my friend.
so now I'm an idiot? Lol, talk about cheap shots.....

Refered to an act as idiocy. Didn't call you anything. It's like the old adage "If ____________ told you to jump off a bridge would you?"

beatnic

phobicsquirrel:

There's a nice fellow!

It looks like these guys lined up for it. LOL.
If anyone thinks that these "peaceful protesters" are not trying to incite the authorities, I suggest they listen to the words of the "peaceful protesters". At least the 60's protesters had the war to rally around. These losers have nothing. Sad. Useful idiots.

fla-gypsy

Vulchor:
fla-gypsy:
Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.
Wow, thats irrelevant political jargon just said because it felt like the right thing huh????? Since yoiu brought it up though, arent you and the other "tea types" all for peoples individual rights??? But I guess this is only when you argree with the protest or what those rights are.

We learned that tactic well. Personally I don't care two cents what the occupiers do. They were given an opportunity to leave and refused and their leaders invited the Police to pepper spray them, they complied with the request. You can spin it any way you choose it will not make any difference to me or change my opinion of them.

skweekz

Amos Umwhat:
the protesters have a right to protest, in peace

I think it must be real nice to have that kinda time. Personally, I'm too busy working and raising a family to worry about some urban camping trip, bitching about the government while ordering Starbucks and Pizza Hut from an iPhone.

This pretty much sums up my feelings on the whole thing....

Hippiebrian

beatnic:
phobicsquirrel:

There's a nice fellow!
It looks like these guys lined up for it. LOL.

If anyone thinks that these "peaceful protesters" are not trying to incite the authorities, I suggest they listen to the words of the "peaceful protesters". At least the 60's protesters had the war to rally around. These losers have nothing. Sad. Useful idiots.

These "sad" "useful idiots" and "losers" have a lot to protest! They are graduating from college with 40 grand debt to pay back and being forced into Starbucks jobs (which don't allow them enough to pay their debts, pushing them further into debt) while these fat cats who got billion dollar "bailouts" are getting 30 and 40 million dollar bonuses! The top 1% pays a 15% tax rate (the current capitol gains tax rate) not counting the miriad of write-offs they get while I, as a true middle class citizen, pay a 35% tax rate with few if any tax write-offs. The government (Bush and Obama are equally guilty in this one) will bend over backwards to bail out multibillion dollar corporations who, to put it mildly, make major mistakes with their investments in order for them to continue to survive while some innocent family whose mother or father got laid off by one of the afore mentioned corporations loses their home and faces homelessness gets not one red cent. I don't mean unemployment. They paid into that, it's their money. I'm talking bailout money, money so they can thrive just like these corporations are thriving. Those under 35 years old are facing almost twice the unemployment rate of those of us over 35. How can you say these people have nothing to protest? Where have you been for the last 10 years or so?

Vulchor

Hippie....I would like you to come over for Thanksgiving dinner, cigars, and fine beverages on me. Reason, logic, and facts------and someone else here who sees it (nice to have one more person on board here for the few us who agree with you)

Direwolf

Right or wrong ideals..they still have the right to protest. One of the pillars we are built on is the right to call bullshit on things.

stephen_hannibal

As much Bull$hit that has gone on in this thread... I will say this.
No one forces you to borrow money for anything.
If you sign on the dotted line for your education that's your choice and your responsibility.
The problem is multifaceted with this one. Not only are the borrowers borrowing irresponsibly but the system is designed so that you pay for it for the rest of your life. (still speaking about education)

Personally irresponsibility does not warrant protest.

Vulchor

While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgrjuyn5e1k

stephen_hannibal

Vulchor:
While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.

Thats why I only spoke on the the cost to benefit of education.
As for the 1%... Well I don't need to bring someone else down so I can succeed.

And with that I'm out.

Amos Umwhat

stephen_hannibal:
Vulchor:
While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.
Thats why I only spoke on the the cost to benefit of education.
As for the 1%... Well I don't need to bring someone else down so I can succeed.

And with that I'm out.

I don't think anyones suggesting that we bring the 1% down so we can succeed, I think it's suggested that the 1% stop keeping the rest of us down so that they can succeed at our expense.

kuzi16

Hippiebrian:
These "sad" "useful idiots" and "losers" have a lot to protest! They are graduating from college with 40 grand debt to pay back and being forced into Starbucks jobs (which don't allow them enough to pay their debts, pushing them further into debt)

that is very true.
a good portion of them have degrees that are useless like "women's studies" or "philosophy" and my new favorite from a local college: "hip-hop culture" and they wonder why they cant find a "real" job. there are already a TON of social workers out there. good luck finding a job in that field. it is saturated.

so they end up at starbucks, or in the restaurant industry and they stand around at work, not working hard, and bitching about how they have a degree and this job is beneath them and they dont make enough money here. they feel that we should pay them more because they have a degree even though they do less than the mentally handicapped guy washing dishes. how do i know this? because this is what half of the staff i deal with on a daily basis does. the other half is not fresh out of school.

Hippiebrian:
while these fat cats who got billion dollar "bailouts" are getting 30 and 40 million dollar bonuses!

im pretty sure that everyone agrees that the bailouts were a huge debacle. they should piss people off.

Hippiebrian:
The top 1% pays a 15% tax rate (the current capitol gains tax rate) not counting the miriad of write-offs they get while I, as a true middle class citizen, pay a 35% tax rate with few if any tax write-offs.

it is interesting that you chose to leave out their income tax part. you are comparing apples t0 oranges here. yeah they have 15% capitol gains tax, but thats just investments. (and YOUR capitol gains tax rate (because you pay that also) is lower than theirsl) this is money that they have that has already been taxed once but they decided to make it work for them in CDs, Gold, etc... (and when that money that they are investing goes out it helps others by way of giving others jobs). that investment makes them a percentage and they get taxed on that again. that 15% is higher than the lower income people. it is a 15% rate if your total income (including capital gain income) places you in the twenty-five percent tax bracket or higher
it is a Zero percent rate if your total income (including capital gain income) places you in the ten or fifteen percent tax brackets.

the income tax rate they (the 1%) pay is 35% and if YOU are paying 35% then you are in the 1%. if you are like me (true middle class) you are paying somewhere between 15 and 25%
so as far as income tax percent goes, the rich are paying more.

if you look at the tax code in terms of dollars or percentages you will see that the top 25% pay the majority. if they have no income that year and only capitol gains, then they are not taxed for income, just capitol gains. i do not see the problem with that.

i cant speak of write-offs. i take all that i can. since i donate to several charitable causes and i have interest on my house i take advantage of that. since i own my own business i take advantage of that where i can. as soon as i have kids ill take advantage of that. i dont feel that i have little to none. but i may looking at that on too much of an individual basis.

Hippiebrian:
The government (Bush and Obama are equally guilty in this one) will bend over backwards to bail out multibillion dollar corporations who, to put it mildly, make major mistakes with their investments in order for them to continue to survive

couldnt agree more. a corporation that shoots themselves in the foot should have to deal with it without the taxpayers money. once they know they can be bailed out there are more inclined to make stupid decisions that will effect more people and more often. i mean at that point they know they will be "saved" and there is no risk anymore.
the sad fact remains that businesses fail and when they do, people lose out. the goal is to minimize that happening. the government bailing them out doesnt stop layoffs but it does encourage stupid decision making or decision making based off of "how to get more free money From the government" instead of "how to grow the business" or "how to create wealth"

Hippiebrian:
...while some innocent family whose mother or father got laid off by one of the afore mentioned corporations loses their home and faces homelessness gets not one red cent. I don't mean unemployment. They paid into that, it's their money. I'm talking bailout money, money so they can thrive just like these corporations are thriving.

it does suck that they dont have income. however it is not, nor should it be, the governments job to provide for these people. Just like it isnt the governments job to bail out businesses. those people dont have a right to money. they have a right to try and make it but not to have it. there is not a single "right" that exists that puts a burden on another person. rights do not force others to take action or to do anything. they never have they never will no matter what a government says. True Rights are not doled out by a government.

Hippiebrian:
Those under 35 years old are facing almost twice the unemployment rate of those of us over 35. How can you say these people have nothing to protest? Where have you been for the last 10 years or so?

ive been working for the last 10 years. (im 31) In fact, ive been working hard.
ive been advancing in my field and moving up in the world. i have no degree. every day that passes i am more and more convinced that a degree means nothing when it is useless in comparison to someone with a good ol' fashioned work ethic.
i never thought i would be able to say "kids these days" at the ripe old age of 31, but i seem to be part of a generation that feels entitled to everything. they are lazy and dont want to work for anything. they want to show up do nothing and get a check.
i have no proof that their laziness is the cause of the unemployment being double that of those 10 years older, but i can see it every day in the people that apply and sometime get in to where i work.

wwestern

beatnic:
phobicsquirrel:

There's a nice fellow!
It looks like these guys lined up for it. LOL.
If anyone thinks that these "peaceful protesters" are not trying to incite the authorities, I suggest they listen to the words of the "peaceful protesters". At least the 60's protesters had the war to rally around. These losers have nothing. Sad. Useful idiots.

Come one beat! I think these folks are morons too but I do support their rights to protest and also the right to due process.

beatnic

wwestern:
beatnic:
phobicsquirrel:

There's a nice fellow!
It looks like these guys lined up for it. LOL.
If anyone thinks that these "peaceful protesters" are not trying to incite the authorities, I suggest they listen to the words of the "peaceful protesters". At least the 60's protesters had the war to rally around. These losers have nothing. Sad. Useful idiots.
Come one beat! I think these folks are morons too but I do support their rights to protest and also the right to due process.

Protest? Why yes. blocking public access? Seeping on public ground? Inciting the police? No! I remember the sit-ins where the cops would come along and pick these folks up by their elbows and move them out of the way. They can't do that anymore. Look. Every person on the ground in this photo knew exactly what was going to happen. It was merely a photo op for them. Now they have stories to tell the grandchildren when they finally grow up. My big problem is that they don't have a common cause. They are demonstrating just to demonstrate on the orders of Cass Sunstein and George Soros. WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE STAND UP FOR ALL OF THEM AND HONESTLY CONVEY EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT? Like I said, useful idiots.

laker1963

Amos Umwhat:
stephen_hannibal:
Vulchor:
While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.
Thats why I only spoke on the the cost to benefit of education.
As for the 1%... Well I don't need to bring someone else down so I can succeed.

And with that I'm out.

I don't think anyones suggesting that we bring the 1% down so we can succeed, I think it's suggested that the 1% stop keeping the rest of us down so that they can succeed at our expense.

It all about your PERSPECTIVE, as is the case with most things. If you really want to understand something, you need to be able to see the situation through someone else's eyes. That's why logical, non partisan discussion (not flaming) can go a long way to at least let us see another perspective. Great response Amos.

beatnic

laker1963:
Amos Umwhat:
stephen_hannibal:
Vulchor:
While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.
Thats why I only spoke on the the cost to benefit of education.
As for the 1%... Well I don't need to bring someone else down so I can succeed.

And with that I'm out.

I don't think anyones suggesting that we bring the 1% down so we can succeed, I think it's suggested that the 1% stop keeping the rest of us down so that they can succeed at our expense.
It all about your PERSPECTIVE, as is the case with most things. If you really want to understand something, you need to be able to see the situation through someone else's eyes. That's why logical, non partisan discussion (not flaming) can go a long way to at least let us see another perspective. Great response Amos.

How about 2%? 5% 10%? I'm thinking they want to bring down 53%.
This is a bad argument. We can't go writing laws or making exceptions to help one group over another. Ludicrous. Our country was founded on the idea that all people abide by the same laws.
Now, did some of the 1% get their wealth from stealing from others? Most definitely. Take them down, not the ones who used wisdom and sweat to achieve. You can't legislate equality.

laker1963

beatnic:
laker1963:
Amos Umwhat:
stephen_hannibal:
Vulchor:
While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.
Thats why I only spoke on the the cost to benefit of education.
As for the 1%... Well I don't need to bring someone else down so I can succeed.

And with that I'm out.

I don't think anyones suggesting that we bring the 1% down so we can succeed, I think it's suggested that the 1% stop keeping the rest of us down so that they can succeed at our expense.
It all about your PERSPECTIVE, as is the case with most things. If you really want to understand something, you need to be able to see the situation through someone else's eyes. That's why logical, non partisan discussion (not flaming) can go a long way to at least let us see another perspective. Great response Amos.
How about 2%? 5% 10%? I'm thinking they want to bring down 53%.
This is a bad argument. We can't go writing laws or making exceptions to help one group over another. Ludicrous. Our country was founded on the idea that all people abide by the same laws.
Now, did some of the 1% get their wealth from stealing from others? Most definitely. Take them down, not the ones who used wisdom and sweat to achieve. You can't legislate equality.

Those laws have already been written. They are what are used to help the one percent stay where they are. (quite comfortably too). The word of the day for this discussion has to be PERSPECTIVE. What is flying around here more then anything is OPINIONS. Not the same thing at all.

beatnic

laker1963:
beatnic:
laker1963:
Amos Umwhat:
stephen_hannibal:
Vulchor:
While I agree Steve, the education issue and cost/time of loans is only a small portion of the entire issue. I think for the majority of protesters, the entire idea or realization of the 1% and how much influence they have in every aspect of life(as money talks)----this is the bigger issue.
Thats why I only spoke on the the cost to benefit of education.
As for the 1%... Well I don't need to bring someone else down so I can succeed.

And with that I'm out.

I don't think anyones suggesting that we bring the 1% down so we can succeed, I think it's suggested that the 1% stop keeping the rest of us down so that they can succeed at our expense.
It all about your PERSPECTIVE, as is the case with most things. If you really want to understand something, you need to be able to see the situation through someone else's eyes. That's why logical, non partisan discussion (not flaming) can go a long way to at least let us see another perspective. Great response Amos.
How about 2%? 5% 10%? I'm thinking they want to bring down 53%.
This is a bad argument. We can't go writing laws or making exceptions to help one group over another. Ludicrous. Our country was founded on the idea that all people abide by the same laws.
Now, did some of the 1% get their wealth from stealing from others? Most definitely. Take them down, not the ones who used wisdom and sweat to achieve. You can't legislate equality.
Those laws have already been written. They are what are used to help the one percent stay where they are. (quite comfortably too). The word of the day for this discussion has to be PERSPECTIVE. What is flying around here more then anything is OPINIONS. Not the same thing at all.

Change the laws