greazzer |
04-17-2014 11:10 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTI
(Post 3317481)
If this is indeed a serious question, the I believe it has something to do with the Tea Party claiming it to be their cause first. You speak of "Occupy Wall Street" as an organization with a national office, press relations department or media reps . . . things that the Tea Party has, but OWS doesn't. OWS also doesn't have close ties with any national media outlets. Lots of differences if you look closely.
|
It was a serious question and it has real meaning if you take the time to think about it. And, my premise appears to be correct. The OWS crowd had financial backing whereas Mr. Bundy appears to be cowboy - rancher. See Occupy Wall Street - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not sure how the TeaParty got involved in your calculations or response other than certain members of that organization voiced support for the Bundy family. Those TP members were immediately labled as domestic terrorist by certain news media outlets, which is incredibly odd.
When I jumped into this thread, I commented about how those who work but stand up and disagree with the government are really attacked by that same government and most of the media but those who have their hand out and disagree with the government are somehow embraced.
Is Mr. Bundy that much of a bandido? 100-200 armed BLM security forces pointing their M-16s at this old guy? Really? There is truely a double standard in our media, and I have to suspect it's driven from the top down, starting at 1600 Penn. Ave.
|