« | »

MSNBC Cheers ‘Occupy Brooklyn’ Squatters

From an elated MSNBC:

Brooklyn home ‘liberated’ by ‘Occupy’ protesters; cops hang back

By Miranda Leitsinger
December 7, 2011

The operation to occupy a vacant foreclosed home in Brooklyn on behalf of a homeless family from New York City appears to be a success. The front door of the two-story house on Vermont Street apparently was unlocked when the marchers arrived.

Notice that MSNBC calls this "a success."

Alfredo Carrasquillo, the father of the homeless family, thanked the marchers for at least temporarily providing them with a home.

According to the New York Post, Mr. Carrasquillo "works as an organizer with VOCAL-NY, one of the community groups involved in the march."

So how is this different from when the Nazis would ‘appropriate’ houses from the evil Jews, and give them to loyal party members?

“I appreciate every single one of you,” he said. “This is just the beginning; there’s still a lot more work that needs to be done. But I hope that all of you will be here as that work continues.”

He then re-entered the home with his wife, Natasha, and two kids. Members of the media were not allowed inside.

Notice that Occupiers did not even try to return the people who were foreclosed on to their house. The people who paid a least a little money to live there.

By the way, according to other reports, the happy couple is not married. They are also said to have been ‘homeless’ for more than ten years. And yet they somehow managed to have two children, ages 9 and five.

But these are the Occupiers’ idea of the hardworking and responsible poor.

Police who escorted the marchers through Brooklyn stopped when the marchers arrived at the home and remained a distance away as the celebration of the “liberation” of the foreclosed home began.

Remember when we had the rule of law, even in New York City?

A brass band played, people danced and food was passed around as the cleanup crew got down to business.

Stop the Third World, we want to get off!

One of them, Jordan McCarthy, 22, from New Hampshire, walked by carrying two brooms.

"I’m really excited, really glad that I am able to help this family and that we’re fighting for equal housing rights," said McCarthy, who has been a member of the sanitation crew at the Occupy Wall Street protest…

And the sanitation crew at Occupy Wall Street did a great job.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, December 7th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

5 Responses to “MSNBC Cheers ‘Occupy Brooklyn’ Squatters”

  1. untrainable says:

    I’d be interested to hear what the neighbors have to say about this. Why pay your mortgage when a group of unkempt hippy wanna-be political activists can protest you right into a two story home… FOR FREE!!!?? Where are the police? What does the bank have to say about it?

    The other thing that strikes me a bit odd is that our illustrious president made his political bones as a community organizer, yet “Mr. Carrasquillo” works as an organizer with VOCAL-NY, one of the community groups involved in the march.” So being a community organizer hasn’t been as profitable for Squatty as it has been for Obie. At least until he got the idea to steal a house. Maybe he should have gone to Country Wide to get his house. I hear they give sweet deals to community organizers. Especially communists. How long until this guy is recruited by Obama to become the next “Fair Housing Czar”? He demonstrates every requirement Obama wants in his political allies. He’s a criminal.

  2. mr_bill says:

    I’m really excited, really glad that I am able to help this family and that we’re fighting for equal housing rights,’ said McCarthy

    Somebody please tell me that “equal housing rights” doesn’t mean that some gaggle of criminals activists can’t just steal a house from somebody who actually owns it. If it was bank-owned, the customers and shareholders just got ripped off. If it was owned by a private citizen, they just got hosed.

    In ten years, this “couple” couldn’t get off the street, they just had to break into a house and live in somebody else’s home?! I’ll bet that if I renounced everything I owned, gave away all my money, quit my job and started on the street with absolutely nothnig but the clothes on my back, I could have a decent place to live within 6 months, without stealing from anybody or begging on the street. What the (*&%% is wrong with these people?

  3. Mithrandir says:

    The continued crumbling of society. Party members are rewarded, non-party members must be 100% within the confines of the 10 million federal / state / local laws on the books.

    Once again, the union police are called off by democrat operatives, to protect other voting blocs: blacks, poor, occupy activists.

    Just like in Wisconsin, almost ZERO arrests were made despite harassing Republican politicians, violating laws, blocking streets, damaging marble surfaces, organizing without a permit etc. And the democrat courts will of course barely even wrist-slap them either.

    This is why I am 100% for JURY NULLIFICATION. Since this is already a lawless society, why not get on a jury and swing things your way once you get the chance? But people who hate government avoid duty like the plague, and people who love it, beg to be put on to be ‘yes men’ for the state. (sigh)—sometimes conservatives are so stupid, if they had the liberal mentality that “everything is political!” they would find more ways to fight back.

  4. Anonymoose says:

    And will he pay the taxes on this residence? The utility bills? Or just stay until it’s used up and move on? What victory is this aside from just a gimme—homeless for ten years ergo I earned a house? It’s just another in a long list of wrong is rights I’ve seen in this world, and I think the liberals believe their “Holy War” on people who have too much and earn too much will never end. To them it’s always the 1960’s and always the fight for equality and then when one day there’s nothing left to take they’ll still cry foul.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      When we were children, most of us learned that to blame others for our own shortcomings or mistakes was wrong and with the help of our parents and mature, thinking adults, learned that the best way to avoid blame is to act responsibly, think before you act and anticipate that which could go wrong.

      Liberals have been taught to avoid all such trappings and actually believe that their shortcomings are the fault of someone or something else. It’s pretty much a religious passion. The problem is that there is no way to dismiss it except through language, which also has been pretzel’ed by using code words and words that foment emotion rather than thought. Thus, it becomes easy to criticize an entity or person who’s rich for not caring even if they donate more than half of their earnings to charity.

      To “the poor” who will always be there and always have been, “the rich” are the enemy. Why? Because they are a stark reminder of their own lost potential, inability to take fair advantage, produce, their desire to wallow about in self-pity. Now, to be perfectly fair, there is one thing that is patently UN-fair about humanity. Some of us are born smart, some are not. But, I’ll further submit that people of average intelligence and even some not-very-bright types have done well in spite of their shortcomings. Michael Moore comes immediately to mind as does Barbara Streisand. I guess this is why it’s doubly frustrating when someone like Tom Hanks, who seems every bit intelligent, buys into AGW and that Wall Street is inherently evil.

      But we’re going to have those types and have had those types all throughout history. Man is by nature, hypocritical. The ones who do well are aware of it and try to avoid it while knowing they cannot avoid it entirely. There’s bound to be some contradiction. But the left has turned it into an art form.

      But for “the poor” if you gave them everything; A house, a pool, limos, maid service, food, etc etc, it would never be enough. Look at the Obama’s. They HATE living in the white house. They spend money like it’s theirs and yet…they are miserable. So in this context, poor means something different. Poor in character. They have none and DC is replete with the poor. In all income brackets. The financially poor think they are unhappy because they have no money. Yet they eat better than I do. I don’t get subsidized food, I pay for it with the money I’ve earned. I’m not obese. Many “poor” people are. Go figure that out. Many of them drive nicer vehicles than I have, live in nicer homes than I do..yet they claim they are “poor”. Well, I’d have to agree because poor is a state of mind in that respect. You dismissed the notion of enriching yourself through education and hard work, saying that’s “being a slave to whitey” and you got many of your elected officials to agree.

      So, being poor….heck….I’ve seen poor. You ain’t it. At least not financially. Ethically, morally, logically, intellectually, emotionally and so many other ways, you are poor. But there’s not any government program that can raise you up out of that pit. That’s because it’s self-dug and it’s warm and cozy in there. In fact, you’re proud of it. And the best part is, you have everyone believing it’s not your fault. Nope. Wasn’t you who decided to have three children while still in high school, which forced you to quit and you couldn’t do anything else “because of the kids” you had. But, doesn’t seem to stop you from hooking tricks on the side and drinking and smoking what money you get from the gummint. But it’s not your fault, no. It’s so-sigh-ya-teee. They did it to you by taking away your choices, right?

      In all of humankind’s history, the poor have always been there and usually it’s because they embrace the word “can’t”. With a complicit government, for whatever reason, they will be there, in perpetuatum, as long as there are handouts and free stuff to be had. Thank you Lyndon Baines Johnson. He created more democrat voters with the stroke of a pen than any human being could’ve imagined.

      The rest of us were taught about choices. That when you were young was the time to learn about bad choices because the older you got, the more permanent those choices become. Drugs, alcohol, sex, lawbreaking, are all about personal choice. I am here because I chose not to take drugs, steal, have sex with anyone or everyone, and I drank sparingly and though not always carefully, with an eye to the consequences. Hangovers suck. DUI’s suck worse. Killing someone because of drunkenness is unforgivable.

      Choices. Maybe it’s the parents in the poor community that teach their kids how to make the poor choices. It’s perhaps the only perpetual motion machine in the universe.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »