Occupy Malheur vs. Occupy Wall St

Photo: Jeff Sorn - Oregon D.O.T

Photo: Cacophony

VS.

Photo: David Shankbone

 

Photo: David Shankbone

I decided to wait a bit until things calmed down or resolved themselves but consider this now: In one case the public space is occupied by a dozen or so protesters, in the other, hundreds in multiple locations.  Ask yourself, which had the greatest impact on the public in the public space? Is it a matter of numbers? If there were more protesters at the Malheur Wildlife refuge, say... hundreds, would their protest have been more legitimate? Or is it a matter of the protesters acting on their constitutional right to arm themselves? Is one group's grievances valid and the other's not?

Reading the great multitude of liberal commenters advocating that the government should just go in and gun them down, I thought to myself...

Funny how the liberal perspective has shifted so far in so few years...

Reminded me of an essay contest in Frontpage Magazine...

Inside every liberal is a Totalitarian screaming to get out.

As naked power-lust is a rather ugly motive, the Progressive rationalizes his desire to rule as a concern for human welfare, seeing himself as a great humanitarian, far superior morally to the lesser beings who pursue merely “materialist” ends such as their own prosperity and who frequently object to his program for achieving Utopia... 

  But despite what the Progressive believes about himself, the desire to compel others to obey his orders is what drives him forward.  To satisfy this desire, there is ultimately no limit to what actions he will take, for he respects none of the restrictions on government officials intended to guarantee individual freedom that have been developed and set forth in written or unwritten constitutions.

You can read the essay in its entirety at the above link if you wish.