BF2S Forums Who are Liberals, listen to Air American Radio

Spearhead wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

The day you see the light will be the day the world ends.

What a great response, no denial, just cliche's.

I don't want to waste anymore time than I already have (and half of the community, it seems like) trying to knock some sense into your head. 

You think being an activist isn't a job?  Get a grip with reality, my friend.  Without activists your rights as a citizen would probably be nothing but shit.  You think being an activist is standing around holding signs?  Being an activist is much, much more, Iowing.  Without activists we would still be back in the 18th century, 100 percent of women would be at home without a job caring for the family and blacks and other racial minorities would still be enslaved. 

There are other ways of fighting evil and oppression than by force.  And guess what?   You're just going to respond to this with some other BS enriched crap like you always do.  Or personal attacks.

If you can show me a professional activist, who supports their family by protesting shit, then I will show you a conressional lobbyist and someone who is "on the take". I wanna meet the guy that clocks into work for the daily grind of protesting. How much does a professional activist make anyway? What kinda training is required? Is there a 401k and medical insurance for a professional protesting company? Do ya get paid overtime??

So, you admit that you have to work a job *aswell* as protesting?

mpsmith wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

I don't want to waste anymore time than I already have (and half of the community, it seems like) trying to knock some sense into your head. 

You think being an activist isn't a job?  Get a grip with reality, my friend.  Without activists your rights as a citizen would probably be nothing but shit.  You think being an activist is standing around holding signs?  Being an activist is much, much more, Iowing.  Without activists we would still be back in the 18th century, 100 percent of women would be at home without a job caring for the family and blacks and other racial minorities would still be enslaved. 

There are other ways of fighting evil and oppression than by force.  And guess what?   You're just going to respond to this with some other BS enriched crap like you always do.  Or personal attacks.

If you can show me a professional activist, who supports their family by protesting shit, then I will show you a conressional lobbyist and someone who is "on the take". I wanna meet the guy that clocks into work for the daily grind of protesting. How much does a professional activist make anyway? What kinda training is required? Is there a 401k and medical insurance for a professional protesting company? Do ya get paid overtime??

Actually there are hundreds of organizations in the US who pay salaries and in many cases provide benefits. They obviously have to have some staff. Further, there's a lot of training, and it takes a lot of time- it's hard work. Whatever the case, here's a list of such groups.

http://www.politicalindex.com/sect10.htm

More specifically, here's some info from the NRA:
http://www.nrahq.org/careers/benefits.asp
They DO have a 401k.

In your face, bitch.

I will meet you half way on this one, it is a great response but I already admitted to lobbyist groups and the NAACP and NRA and AOPA,(of which I am a member ), unions etc............are all lobbyist groups. You PAY them to be a member.

I will bow to the fact that yes, these lobbyist groups have staffing needs, but you are thinking on a much bigger scale than I was. Still, I didn't clarify myself so I gotta give ya half credit.

Bubbalo wrote:

No, he's fully right.  By your logic I could prove that the US supported terrorists by asking you to provide with a statement in which it condemned it prior to 1776.  Selective logic doesn't work.

What the hell are you talking about????

Bubbalo wrote:

The fact that you said, basically, "give me an activist who gets paid other than one who works for someone".  It's a physical impossibility, same as finding a statement from the US condemning terrorism before 1776.

No, I said I excluded lobbyists and he used lobbyist as his examples of professional activists. I gave him half credit for his response because I didn't make myself clear enough.

Bubbalo wrote:

And lobbyist are seperate from activists how exactly?

Didn't say they were, I acknowledged lobbyists in my very first post. And all lobbyists do is BUY votes for a private cause. Which brings me back to my point about how funny it is that activists were the first things listed as far liberals having jobs

Bubbalo wrote:

So then you are wrong.  Essentially, what you said is "who makes money being an activist, other than poeple who make money being activists".  And they do alot more than alter elections.  They work on an international scale to pressure governments into environmentally and socially sound courses of action.  Greenpeaces actions in relation to whaling would be one example.

Yup, but you have to go back to the first post and the humor that I found that activist is the first thing you think of when you list liberal jobs. I also find no honor in buying and selling govt. officals for private agendas. All of the organizations that you call activists do just that. And that is not a job. that is legalized racketeering, and extortion.

I love the greenpeace example.....they use oil burning boats and cars to go out and protest the use of oil and oil drilling.

Last edited by lowing (2006-05-27 07:50:14)

kr@cker wrote:

As a whole, very few activists get paid to be an activist, this is an industry born of donations. More like a union, most union members don't get paid to be part of a union, but they still have paid representatives and staff. To call this a viable industry in the grand scheme of things is stretching it a bit. Most scout leaders are volunteers, but some of them get paid, a microscopic percentage of them get paid enough to call it a profession.


I love it when greenpeace fags protest "polluting SUV's" by setting fire to car lots and releasing more pollutants than the car ever would under normal operation.

well there is something we agree on I guess huh Kr@cker?

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

I love the greenpeace example.....they use oil burning boats and cars to go out and protest the use of oil and oil drilling.

Oh yes, because it's so damn easy to get nuclear-powered transport ships?

especially when greenpeace is there protesting nuclear power  lol

Bubbalo wrote:

*serious question alert*
When has greanpeace protested nuclear power ?
*we now return you to your regularly scheduled rhetoricl questions and sarcasm*

lol, right here


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4478946.stm

Spearhead wrote:

I don't think any of us were calling it an industry in the first place... but calling activists lazy people who don't work for there freedom (like Iowing stated, if I recall) is a complete lie.

Actually nowadays activist are mostly found protesting to remove someone's right to do something. Don't build here, don't develope this, don't cure that, don't drive over here, don't drill this, don't test that drug.
I'll come back and post the name of a genetic horticulturalist who has spent his lifetime developing strains of wheat, corn, etc. that can be grown in harsh drought ridden environments that groups like greenpeace have successfully lobbied to keep from being used b/c they are "man made and a violation of mother nature" I believe is how one put it. Oh the horror. I love how they keep us from drilling in ANWAR b/c the porcupine caribou population would be in danger, meanwhile, a couple hundred miles east in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, there is a much smaller operation, this is the main feed to the Alaskan pipeline, and the caribou population has quadrupled. Seems they have the benefit of constant monitoring paid for by the oil companies and the warmth of the pipeline actually encourages quadriped fornication.

Lowing, will you marry me?

lowing wrote:

lol, right here


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4478946.stm

Thanks.

I think that is illustrative of the key problem with Greenpeace:  their unwillingness to compromise on any issues.  Rather than saying that nuclear power is better than fossil fuels and encouraging the shift, they insist that anything less than perfection is unacceptable.  Having said that, given that many governments take a purely economic route, I think that if they were more moderate they would be less effective.

kr@cker wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

I don't think any of us were calling it an industry in the first place... but calling activists lazy people who don't work for there freedom (like Iowing stated, if I recall) is a complete lie.

Actually nowadays activist are mostly found protesting to remove someone's right to do something. Don't build here, don't develope this, don't cure that, don't drive over here, don't drill this, don't test that drug.
I'll come back and post the name of a genetic horticulturalist who has spent his lifetime developing strains of wheat, corn, etc. that can be grown in harsh drought ridden environments that groups like greenpeace have successfully lobbied to keep from being used b/c they are "man made and a violation of mother nature" I believe is how one put it. Oh the horror. I love how they keep us from drilling in ANWAR b/c the porcupine caribou population would be in danger, meanwhile, a couple hundred miles east in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, there is a much smaller operation, this is the main feed to the Alaskan pipeline, and the caribou population has quadrupled. Seems they have the benefit of constant monitoring paid for by the oil companies and the warmth of the pipeline actually encourages quadriped fornication.

Lowing, will you marry me?

Sure only if you can support us, while my current wife rips me a new ass, in divorce court.