DUmmies Discuss Taking Small Children To Violent Mob Protests

[GOBUCKS]

So a mob of screaming moonbats tried to break up a board of trustees meeting at a college in California, because they were pissed off about tuition.
They were so violent, police intervened and finally had to use pepper spray to break up the assault.

Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:07 AM
Liberal_in_LA (23,185 posts) 
images from yesterday's pepper spray incident at Santa Monica College
Cops pepper-spray 30 as Santa Monica students protest fees


http://photoblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/04/11013789-cops-pepper-spray-30-as-santa-monica-students-protest-fees9

   
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002516404
The significant point in the whole thing was that one of the moonbat babymommas brought a toddler, who was apparently affected by pepper spray.
Was it the fault of the DUmpmonkey for bringing a little child to a violent mob action? Noooooo!!

Should that little girl be taken away from that despicable DUmpmonkey mother? Without question.

Response to Liberal_in_LA (Original post)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:24 AM
mactime (85 posts)

2. Who brings a child to a protest?

That woman should be charged with child endangerment.

Response to mactime (Reply #2)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:29 AM
laundry_queen (2,239 posts)

3. Who the **** sprays a child with pepper spray?

Children have every right to be at a protest about tuition hikes. Jesus, who do you think will be paying those tuitions in a few years?

Would I take my child? No, because I realize there are asshole security guards like this at college campuses (because I go to a college that has one).

Response to laundry_queen (Reply #3)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:36 AM
mactime (85 posts)

5. yes, the child has every right to be there

but it shows a complete lack of foresight by the individual who brought the child.

 

Response to mactime (Reply #2)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:33 AM
Comrade Grumpy (446 posts) 

4. Are you kidding me?

If anyone should be charged with child endangerment, it should be the cops who pepper-sprayed nonviolent protestors exercising their rights in a democracy. And lots of people take their kids to demonstrations.

 


Hmmm...if you're like me, you're wondering what the stupidest person on all the internets thinks:

Response to mactime (Reply #2)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:38 AM
EFerrari (161,334 posts)

6. Protesters who are parents.

You mean your mother never took you to a protest?

Response to raouldukelives (Reply #8)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:52 PM
lisa caufield (7 posts) 
10. Beautiful..

Beautifully said. It should be sparking protest but instead people will leave their kids and elderly parents home for fears sake. That's what THEY want don't they??

And poor, stupid Beth is a great mother! Just like her own mother!

Response to mactime (Reply #7)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:51 PM
EFerrari (161,334 posts) 

9. I walked a picket line with my mother before I was ten

and both of my kids walked one with me when CWA went out. The oldest one was 7.

My kids now know firsthand that in this country, we have the right to peaceful protest and they, unlike yourself, would never blame citizens exercising their rights for police violence.

And now, as she has told us, almost bragging, both of poor, stupid Beth's kids are residents in the California state prison system.

Way to go, Beth!!

[GOBUCKS]

Sorry for the duplication, I was travelling and didn't see the earlier thread.

[Rebel]

Listen to those dumb f'n idiots chants. "Education should be free!". Question, lurking DUmbasses, how are all those lib professors supposed to eat if the shit it free?

[LC EFA]

Response to mactime (Reply #7)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:51 PM
EFerrari (161,334 posts)

9. I walked a picket line with my mother before I was ten

and both of my kids walked one with me when CWA went out. The oldest one was 7.

My kids now know firsthand that in this country, we have the right to peaceful protest and they, unlike yourself, would never blame citizens exercising their rights for police violence.

The trouble here, you ignorant twat, is that you have no ability to stage a "peaceful protest" if you were even aware of what one was.

Peaceful protests don't attract cameras and media attention.

One filthy hippie getting a justly deserved beating brings more attention than all the bongathongs and slackoffs that you could run, so you aim to have this happen by intentionally putting law enforcement in a position where they have to act for their own , your own and societies safety.

If it's your children - so much more intense the attention you receive so much the better  - and that right there is why you're nothing but a piece of shit.

[Tucker]

Response to mactime (Reply #2)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:38 AM
EFerrari (161,334 posts)

6. Protesters who are parents.

You mean your mother never took you to a protest?

And just what did all of those protests do to improve the lifestyle of Beth's Mother and her offspring's?

Both Beth and her Mother share a dilapidated house trailer, in need of repair. Setting on a piece of property that the county wants to condemn unless brought up to code.

[GOBUCKS]

And just what did all of those protests do to improve the lifestyle of Beth's Mother and her offspring's?

Both Beth and her Mother share a dilapidated house trailer, in need of repair. Setting on a piece of property that the county wants to condemn unless brought up to code.

Poor, stupid Beth would have ended up a loser whether she participated in protest mobs or not.

The most notable result is how her sons turned out.

She taught them to show contempt toward authority.

Both are are now convicted, imprisoned felons.

Now that's democrat parenting.

www.electstevedawes.com

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

“We won! We won! They pepper-sprayed us!”: Proof that the purpose of protests is to provoke a police response
Doesn’t matter what the protest is about. Doesn’t matter who is protesting or what they’re protesting against. All that matters, in modern political activism, is that you provoke a reaction from the police, which you can then spin as an over-reaction, and claim moral victory.

The goal of protests now is to achieve victimhood. Thus, when police arrest, tear-gas, beat, or otherwise try to control an unruly mob, the protesters are ecstatically happy, because that’s why they were protesting in the first place.

But of course you can’t admit this publicly; part of the script is to act injured or sad or angry when the police respond to your provocations. That’s an essential component of your victimhood posturing.

Unfortunately, yesterday a protester at Santa Monica College let the mask slip during a mini-riot at a trustees’ meeting. Over a hundred screaming demonstrators were trying to force their way into the already over-capacity meeting room, and the overwhelmed cops assigned to guard the door felt the only way to drive the rioters back was to pepper-spray them. As soon as this happened, one of the rioters yelled in glee,

“We won! We won! They pepper-sprayed us!”

Here’s the video, with the triumphant statement at 1:09:

[video at link]

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/04/04/we-won-we-won-they-pepper-sprayed-us-proof-that-the-purpose-of-protests-is-to-provoke-a-police-response/

[DumbAss Tanker]

Listen to those dumb f'n idiots chants. "Education should be free!". Question, lurking DUmbasses, how are all those lib professors supposed to eat if the shit is free?

Well, you know, that gets to Point Two of their program:  "Tax the rich!"