Occupy Madison Finds its Voice

An eloquent articulation of what it is that makes people who have homes and families sleep on cardboard and under tents and tarps in the name of social justice and economic fairness.  We are the 99%!


Related Articles

10 thoughts on “Occupy Madison Finds its Voice

  1. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. Ben Franklin

    1. FAIL: “Widely attributed to Franklin on the Internet, sometimes without the second sentence. It is not found in any of his known writings, and the word “lunch” is not known to have appeared anywhere in English literature until the 1820s, decades after his death. The phrasing itself has a very modern tone and the second sentence especially might not even be as old as the internet. ”

      Facts: Teabaggers should avoid using them. They suck at it.

      So does it hurt to be as stupid as you are?

            1. If you had read the link provided by the know-it-all-know-nothing Phil, you would see it was a valid quote by several different people.
              Now, I patiently await your intelligent argument to the actual idea expressed in the quote. Let me have it with both barrels.

      1. Congratulations!!!! Now what part of the idea is false?

        Maybe you can dispute these Mencken quotes too.

        Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

        Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.

        Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. A democratic state may profess to venerate the name, and even pass laws making it officially sacred, but it simply cannot tolerate the thing. In order to keep any coherence in the governmental process, to prevent the wildest anarchy in thought and act, the government must put limits upon the free play of opinion. In part, it can reach that end by mere propaganda, by the bald force of its authority — that is, by making certain doctrines officially infamous. But in part it must resort to force, i.e., to law. One of the main purposes of laws in a democratic society is to put burdens upon intelligence and reduce it to impotence. Ostensibly, their aim is to penalize anti-social acts; actually their aim is to penalize heretical opinions. At least ninety-five Americans out of every 100 believe that this process is honest and even laudable; it is practically impossible to convince them that there is anything evil in it. In other words, they cannot grasp the concept of liberty. Always they condition it with the doctrine that the state, i.e., the majority, has a sort of right of eminent domain in acts, and even in ideas — that it is perfectly free, whenever it is so disposed, to forbid a man to say what he honestly believes. Whenever his notions show signs of becoming “dangerous,” ie, of being heard and attended to, it exercises that prerogative. And the overwhelming majority of citizens believe in supporting it in the outrage. Including especially the Liberals, who pretend — and often quite honestly believe — that they are hot for liberty. They never really are. Deep down in their hearts they know, as good democrats, that liberty would be fatal to democracy — that a government based upon shifting and irrational opinion must keep it within bounds or run a constant risk of disaster. They themselves, as a practical matter, advocate only certain narrow kinds of liberty — liberty, that is, for the persons they happen to favor. The rights of other persons do not seem to interest them. If a law were passed tomorrow taking away the property of a large group of presumably well-to-do persons — say, bondholders of the railroads — without compensation and without even colorable reason, they would not oppose it; they would be in favor of it. The liberty to have and hold property is not one they recognize. They believe only in the liberty to envy, hate and loot the man who has it.

        Democracy is the art of running the circus from the monkey cage.

        Democratic man, dreaming eternally of Utopias, is ever a prey to shibboleths.

        Democracy is the worship of jackals by jackasses.

        Democracy is only a dream: it should be put in the same category as Arcadia, Santa Claus, and Heaven.

        Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.

        I await your defense of majority rule that smashes the rights of the minority.

        1. I love it when the TeaOP try to quote Mencken. Mencken, who had a life-long distaste for democracy had nothing but contempt for conservatives like you. His coverage of the Scopes trial reveal his utter hatred of Christianity and the conservative values of the day (so many of which are re-appearing in the current crop of TeaOP “candidates”).

          But the TeaOP always seem to miss Mencken’s most important quote about THEM:

          “In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican.”

          1. I would love to be there when, in a sentient moment, you figure out the above quotes are about you and your tribe. LOL!!!

Comments are closed.