Pages

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Violence in Virginia...

Let's be clear here. There are no good guys here, only bad guys. While many would like to see the President take sides in all of this (as Terry McAuliffe  did today)... he did the right thing by condemning the entire event and everyone involved.

Certainly very few people would like to associate themselves with cause of the white supremacists, but that doesn't change the fact that they have the same first amendment right to free speech as anyone else. They have held rallies as long as most can remember, and they will continue to hold rallies into the future. We may not like it, but it is what it is.

Likewise, many are criticizing the self declared "anti-fascist" protesters who assembled with at least the appearance of causing conflict. But shouldn't it be possible to have these sorts of counter protests without the eruption of violence?

Lastly, no matter what anyone thinks of the idiocy of the entire situation, it doesn't justify driving your car into a group of people with what appears to be an obvious intent to do bodily harm. This would certainly qualify as a blatant act of violence and terror, and repercussions should be harsh if the evidence proves as such.

Bottom line: This is one of those situations where everyone is responsible for their own actions. You simply cannot choose to blame other people for your hatred and blame others for actions that come of this hate. Moreover, anyone using this event to attack Donald Trump is simply too involved in their own hatred of the President to see this larger point.

63 comments:

wphamilton said...

What, the people outside of the malls that got rammed into by a car are "bad guys"? Are you serious?

Roger Amick said...

Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke at Charlottesville rally: "We're gonna fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That's what we've believed in, that's why we voted for Donald Trump because he said he's gonna take our country back - and that's what we gotta do.”
Read more: http://nbcnews.to/2uQpwLt

Roger Amick said...

Let me make this clear. The president did not specifically condemn the white supremacist group. Yes both sides were guilty of violence and stuff like that but sir, the white supremacist started the whole thing and the president specifically did not mention them. He has been condemned from all sides not just Republicans not just Democrats even just Independents and just regular people.

The governor was right the president was wrong that simple. I don't know how many people said that he was non-presidential with that, especially since he immediately went to the economy and claimed he had everything to do with the recovery from the deepest recession since 1929. We all know better than that. The economy is improving yes it is has been improving since 2010. And beyond that if you read that so-called fake press he distorted many things as usual.

Roger Amick said...

The guy that drove the car into the crowd was a registered Republican. The young woman that was killed was born in 2085. And just as bad to Virginia state policeman were killed in a helicopter crash. The white supremacist were guilty of the starting this whole thing and again why did not the president of the United States of America condemn this Neo Nazi group

Roger Amick said...

Moreover, anyone using this event to attack Donald Trump is simply too involved in their own hatred of the
President to see this larger point.

You are wrong.

Unless you look. least a dozen Republicans in the Senate and in the House of Representatives, who came out and very specifically condemn the president for not condemning the white supremacist group it's not just haters. I don't understand why you go to that. That I don't understand Scott I don't understand.

Roger Amick said...

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1812795892065482&id=1340186812659728

Picture of the beautiful young woman that was killed by that not neo-Nazi Republican according to the President.

Loretta said...

Nothing but spam from the drunkard.

Roger Amick said...

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released the following statement today on the white supremacist attack in Charlottesville, Virginia:

“Our Founders fought a revolution for the idea that all men are created equal. The heirs of that revolution fought a Civil War to save our nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to that revolutionary proposition.

“Nothing less is at stake on the streets of Charlottesville, Virginia, where a violent attack has taken at least one American life and injured many others in a confrontation between our better angels and our worst demons.

“White supremacists and neo-Nazis are, by definition, opposed to American patriotism and the ideals that define us as a people and make our nation special.

“As we mourn the tragedy that has occurred in Charlottesville, American patriots of all colors and creeds must come together to defy those who raise the flag of hatred and bigotry.”

###

Permalink: https://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2017/8/statement-by-senator-john-mccain-on-white-supremacist-attack-in-charlottesville

Roger Amick said...

It's all you've got because you don't have a working brain shut the f****** you stupid b**** or go to hell the sooner the better the world will be better off without you.

Roger Amick said...

The Alt-right/neo-Nazi riot is absolutely inspired by Donald Trump! And now that the Alt-right has received the notoriety of having been identified as allied with white nationalism and neo-Nazism, it's time to push for the ousting of these outliers from the White House!

I dare you to watch Meet the Press tomorrow morning. An interview with a navy Admiral will blow your head off. If it isn't already gone. Only Trump haters.

Roger Amick said...

"Mr. President - we must call evil by its name," tweeted Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colorado. "These were white supremacists and this was domestic terrorism." Tweeted Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, another fellow Republican: "Very important for the nation to hear @potus describe events in #Charlottesville for what they are, a terror attack by #whitesupremacists."

Whether or not these demonstrations of happened in the past that is not an excuse for forgiving the president for not condemning the specific group that started this whole thing. He is being criticized from all directions because your hero Donald J Trump is a motherfuking disaster but you are unwilling to admit it for reasons I do not understand and never will. Your ability to be a rational analyst of events has disappeared. Probably too much rrb.

Loretta said...

Still nothing but spam from the drunkard.

Yawn.

Loretta said...

"It's all you've got because you don't have a working brain shut the f****** you stupid b**** or go to hell the sooner the better the world will be better off without you."

LOL.

The drunkard isn't drunk.

He's just another insignificant dried up, hate-filled OLD man.

Roger Amick said...

Trump's appearance had been previously scheduled to highlight his work for veterans and on the economy. The president mostly dealt with those topics during the event, which lasted just over 10 minutes. After a short statement on Charlottesville, he talked about the economy and greeted assembled veterans, before leaving without answering shouted questions from reporters.

Among the questions he ignored Saturday was, "Do you want the support of these white nationalists?" Another asked whether the violence should be considered terrorism.

Trump's unresponsiveness contrasted with his volubility in the past two days, when in three separate appearances before reporters he took numerous questions on subjects including North Korea. He did so with apparent enjoyment, compared to his evident discomfiture on Saturday.

Earlier in the day, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke had hailed the protests as "a turning point" that realized the promise of Trump's election. He subsequently criticized Trump's tweets, despite their failure to single out the white supremacists in Charlottesville.

The president should remember that "white Americans" put him in the White House, Duke wrote.

The Los Angeles Times.

I'm not hateful I'm scared both it f****** idiot will do to this country. I'm a proud American. My father and two uncles served in World War II. I lost an uncle Lynn amick I never met my uncle. He was fighting the Nazis. Donald Trump is endorsed by the Nazis and he is not going to specifically condemn them for reasons that make no sense to anybody with a half of working brain and unfortunately you don't have it even of 1/4 of it. I feel sorry for you do I hate you no.

I pity you. Hatred is safe for the real deserving Adolf Hitler Stalin and other people like that you support the president who will not even condemn American Nazis

Roger Amick said...

I am going back to sleep. My recovery is proceeding well. You wish that I would die is not going to happen sorry you stupid b****

Loretta said...

LOL.

I

Don't

Care

What

Happens

To

You

Drunkard

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard

Roger Amick said...

The driver was later identified by police as James Alex Fields Jr. of Ohio. Police say Fields, 20, has been charged with charged with second-degree murder, three counts of malicious wounding, and one count related to leaving the scene. A bond hearing is scheduled for Monday.

Horrible

Roger Amick said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Loretta said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Loretta said...

A northern carpetbagger.

Imagine that.

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard.

Imagine that.

rrb said...

Roger Amick said...
Let me make this clear. The president did not specifically condemn the white supremacist group. Yes both sides were guilty of violence and stuff like that but sir, the white supremacist started the whole thing and the president specifically did not mention them.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

first of all, the president's response was precise and well said. second, the white supremacists, while being assholes did possess the appropriate permit to exercise their first amendment right to peaceably assemble. trouble began when the bernie bro, ralph maddow fan, antifa crew showed up. the white supremacists "started it" only in the sense that they decided to organize and assemble. something that is well within their right, and something they do around the country all the fucking time.

one thing i have not seen one of these white supremacists do is open fire on a group of democrat legislators. now that i mention it, how is steve scalise doing these days? i haven't heard an update on him lately. i hope his recovery is proceeding nicely.

there is plenty of blame to go around on this whole thing, so being upset that the president did not single out one group above the others is a very ghoulish form of hackery, considering the loss of life and other personal injury.

you're an asshole, alky. a waste of a perfectly good liver.

Commonsense said...

The driver was later identified by police as James Alex Fields Jr. of Ohio.

I'm surprised nobody has hacked his social media accounts and publish his postings.

Surely they will find incontrovertible evidence of his white supremacist views and connections.

Or not.

Commonsense said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Commonsense said...

Rat made much same point I was going to make.

However, I will point out the gross negligence of the media to cover the Antifa's responsibility for the violences.

And the fecklessness of liberal politicians, never-Trumpers and the media for not condemning them as well.

Myballs seeing America become great again said...

We've seen years of BLM violence, riots just because milo and coulter were to give a speech, Trump supporters assaulted just for wearing a maga hat, a gop congressman nearly shot to death because he was a republican, and eight years of obama nig only refusing to condemn any of this violence from the left, but he actually had blm leaders to the Whitehouse.

So Roger the horse's ass can shove his sanctimonious lecturing right up his ass.

Trump correctly spoke out against violence from all sides. Just who does Roger think the protesters were fighting with? It takes two sides you stupidass.

rrb said...

Commonsense said...
Rat made much same point I was going to make.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

well, the situation is so straightforward, sane, rational people can really only arrive at one conclusion.

inebriated, mentally ill fuckwits otoh, come up with shit like "this never would've happened if hillary was president" and other insanity.

if only the baseball field shooting of the GOP would've received as much media coverage as this is going to get over the next several news cycles.

Roger Amick said...

Everything as expected, somethings never change, you never open your mind rrb. Life and your little isolated world's, cause you to believe everything the worst President in the history of United States Of America.

The evidence is irrefutable. But, you can not grasp reality.

I will and always, honor the donor. Your hate filled obsession with me and my liver transplant is indisputable that hate rules your pathetic life.

As to the rest of you, time will prove that the President is the biggest mistake in history.

Now my recovery continues with a few more hours of sleep. My lovely wife will be here today. You can see the two of us if you click on my identity. I'm down to 180lbs. And yes, she knows the real Roger Amick, a good and loving husband and man.

Loretta said...

"Now my recovery continues"

LOL

rrb said...

Everything as expected, somethings never change, you never open your mind rrb.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

statements like this convince me of your mental illness.

the president tells all sides to stop the hatred and i agree, while you insist only one side is to blame. and i'm the one with the closed mind.

the government of all should be partial to none, alky.

but being blinded by a burning seething hatred of trump, i can see why you cannot grasp this most fundamental concept.

and yes, go back to sleep. that is when you make your most positive contributions to this blog.

Loretta said...

He's nuts.

rrb said...

Loretta said...
"Now my recovery continues"

LOL
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i know, right?

he carries on like it's some sort of blessed ongoing saga and epic personal struggle, and we are all supposed to be in awe, when in reality it's a typical, garden variety tale of personal failure, self-inflicted wounds, and pure shit luck that he received a transplant he never really deserved.

LOL indeed.



Loretta said...

I know I'm on pins and needles with worry, LOL.

C.H. Truth said...

What, the people outside of the malls that got rammed into by a car are "bad guys"? Are you serious?

So your argument is that these counter protesters, who were appeared to be specifically there to cause conflict and violence and were (according to witnesses) throwing rocks at cars as they passed...

are suddenly not bad guys because some idiot redneck in a Dodge Charger ran them over?

I think I just figured it out WP....

You are conducting a social experiment to see exactly how stupid your argument would have to be for me to stop responding to you?

Roger Amick said...

Hayes: Why Won't Trump Denounce White Supremacists?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/hayes-why-wont-trump-denounce-white-supremacists/article/2009271

Trump is an unflinching critic of anything and everything he finds un-American. On Saturday, he flinched.

We know by now what it looks like when Donald Trump wants to condemn someone. Brit Hume is “a dope” and a “know-nothing.” Mika Brzezinski is “dumb as a rock” and “crazy.” Bill and Hillary Clinton were “the real predators.” Ted Cruz is a “wacko” and “weak.” Chuck Todd—“pathetic” and “very dishonest.” James Comey—“nutjob.” Intel leakers are “low-lifes” and Democrats are “phony hypocrites.” Republicans are “disloyal,” “naive” and “dishonest” while European leaders are “weak.” You get the idea.

Trump is quick to condemn—in specific and harsh terms—anyone he doesn’t like. He’s blunt, he’s direct, and he’s politically incorrect.
was striking on Saturday when Trump refused to denounce the white supremacists and neo-Nazis whose public rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, led to violence. The racists marched the streets hauling Nazi flags and torches, chanting, “you will not replace us” and “blood and soil.” They taunted counter-protesters and innocent passers-by.

And yet when their aggressive behavior triggered riots and violence in the streets of the quiet college town, the president declined to condemn them. What he offered instead was a cowardly, irresolute, passive statement criticizing the generic intolerance of unnamed groups.

"We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides,” the president said in a live statement. “On many sides."

If this generic, equivocal statement was an anomaly, it might be easier to dismiss. We’d hope it was an oversight and we’d wish Trump were more presidential. But we’ve seen this before.

On February 26, 2016, Trump took questions from the media. A reporter asked the emerging Republican frontrunner about an unsolicited endorsement he’d received from former Ku Klux Klan leader, David Duke. Duke had told listeners of his radio show to volunteer for Trump: "You're gonna meet people who are going to have the same kind of mind set that you have." He said: "Voting for these people, voting against Donald Trump at this point, is really treason to your heritage."

Trump wasn’t happy with the question. "I didn't even know he endorsed me. David Duke endorsed me? Alright," Trump shrugged. "I disavow it, okay?"

Roger Amick said...

Trump’s grudging disavowal drew criticism from a wide variety of politicians and civil rights groups, including the the Anti-Defamation League. Two days later, CNN’s Jake Tapper offered Trump a chance to strengthen his half-hearted disavowal. "Will you unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don't want his vote and that of other white supremacists in this election?"

Trump didn’t offer an unequivocal condemnation. He didn’t offer condemnation at all. Instead, he responded with a jumble of half-truths, misdirections and Trumpian tropes meant to avoid any such condemnation.

"Well, just so you understand, I don't know anything about David Duke," Trump said. "I don't even know anything about what you're talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know. I don't know—did he endorse me or what's going on? Because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about."

Of course Trump knew about David Duke—any casual news consumer over the past twenty years knows about David Duke. In 2000, Trump cited Duke as a reason for his reservations about joining the Reform Party, and seemed to know Duke’s history pretty well. ("Well, you've got David Duke just joined—a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean this is not exactly the people you want in your party.") More to the point, Trump had been asked about Duke two days earlier and he knew enough to offer a half-hearted disavowal.

Roger Amick said...

Tapper pressed. "I guess the question from the Anti-Defamation League is, even if you don't know about their endorsement, there are these groups and individuals endorsing you, would you just say, unequivocally, you condemn them and you don't want their support?"

"Well, I have to look at the group. I don't know what group you're talking about. You want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. Look, if you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them and certainly I would disavow if I thought there was something wrong," said Trump.

"The Ku Klux Klan?"

"You may have groups in there that are totally fine and it would be very unfair, so give me a list of the groups and I'll let you know."

"Okay, I'm just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here."

"Honestly, I don't know David Duke," Trump claimed to Tapper. "I don't know if I've ever met him—I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. I don't know anything about him."

This exchange wasn’t just a failure to denounce Duke and white supremacist groups; it was a refusal to do so. And Trump’s neo-Nazi footsie brought on even more criticism of the Republican frontrunner.

As always, Trump had an explanation. "I'm sitting in a house in Florida, with a very bad earpiece that they gave me, and you could hardly hear what he was saying," said Trump on NBC’s Today show the next day. "What I heard was 'various groups.' And I don't mind disavowing anybody, and I disavowed David Duke."

Tapper mentioned David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan twice each, white supremacists once. And Trump repeated the language from the questions in his answers. But, sure, Trump only heard “various groups.”

Why does Trump do this? Is he a racist? Merely sympathetic to the kind of racism embraced by the “alt-right”? Or is it simply his eagerness to criticize people who oppose him and praise—or at the very least, avoid criticizing—those who support him?

Despite—or perhaps because of—Trump’s weak disavowals in the past, white supremacists still think Trump is, at the very least, open to them. At the rally on Saturday afternoon, David Duke said: "We're going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump." After Trump's remarks, Duke encouraged him to "take a good look in the mirror & remember it was white Americans who put you in the presidency, not radical leftists.”

Other white supremacists are convinced that President Trump is more than just open to them. The white supremacist Daily Stormer ran a liveblog of the Charlottesville rally and they positively celebrated Trump’s refusal to denounce them: “No condemnation at all. . . . When asked to condemn, [Trump] just walked out of the room . . . God bless him.”

Roger Amick said...

President Trump built his reputation with tough talk and harsh condemnations people who earn his disapproval. That he refused to offer those things on Saturday is no accident.

It's no surprise, either.


----------------

I have said that our both sides of the political spectrum have condemned the president for his failure to just dis-connect himself with the white supremacist movement. The weekly standard is one of the most credible forces in United States conservative movement.

For reasons I cannot understand and I never will, you're decided to standby President Trump and whatever he says and blame the hatred of the president for the criticism of his work.

Both William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer have been harsh critics of you hero.

I am not a lightweight nor my demented you better start looking around something is wrong in your world my friend.

Roger Amick said...

Your refusal to respond to wp and Indy and any of the others around here don't agree with you, that has changed this thing from a really entertaining and thoughtful blog, not anymore my friend not anymore.

Hatred of Donald Trump is not the only reason for criticism of his inability to denounce the white supremacist protester.

It was unpresidential by any rational view.

wphamilton said...

Stupid? "There are ... only bad guys".

You know for a fact that the person killed was there to incite violence? That she and the dozen or so run down were throwing rocks? Because someone said ... therefore *Everyone* counter-protesting must be violent thugs looking for a physical confrontations, per you.

Talk about stupid arguments.

Commonsense said...

What's stupid is the denial of facts reported time and again by various news outlets.

As a few of the militiamen, some carrying rifles and two wearing President Trump's signature “Make American Great Again” hats, got into a grey Lexus SUV, counter-protesters circled and shouted at them to renounce the KKK and get out of town.

As their SUV pulled out, counter-protesters chased it down, throwing rocks bottles, and a shoe, attempting to smash its windows.

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard

Loretta said...

Spam by the drunkard

Loretta said...

So, nothing but spam from the drunkard and pastor James Boswell doesn't have any pedophilia to swoon over yet today.

wphamilton said...

"As their SUV pulled out, counter-protesters chased it down, throwing rocks bottles, and a shoe, attempting to smash its windows."

I'll deny made-up facts ... this was not the grey Dodge Challenger that ran people down. And you don't know that any of those victims were involved in that incident. Because someone harassed an SUV, all of the protesters must be violent thugs, per you.

Another stupid argument.

Commonsense said...

The report was from The Hill.

Not my favorite publication but they don't make up facts.

Commonsense said...

And here another set of stupid facts for you.

The "counter-protestors" did not have a parade permit. The white supremacist did after obtaining court order to force the city to give it to them.

The "counter-protesters" were there to expressly confront the white supremacists as many of them readily admitted.

No reasonable person would ever expect these confrontations to end peacefully and so they didn't

C.H. Truth said...

You know for a fact that the person killed was there to incite violence? That she and the dozen or so run down were throwing rocks? Because someone said ... therefore *Everyone* counter-protesting must be violent thugs looking for a physical confrontations, per you.

No more than you know for a fact that "any" of the White Supremacists were there to incite violence or that anyone other than the one idiot was there to run anyone over with a car.

But when we are judging the situation by the "groups" involved, then nobody there was wearing the white hats. I would actually think you would get this basic point... but I am drawing the conclusion that you are either not that bright, or willing go to great lengths of semantic nit-picking just to start a fight.

wphamilton said...

No more than you know for a fact that "any" of the White Supremacists were there to incite violence or that anyone other than the one idiot was there to run anyone over with a car.

Did I say they were?? Or is that another stupid argument in a social experiment?

How does that make all of the victims "bad guys", CH?

wphamilton said...

But when we are judging the situation by the "groups" involved,

There's your problem. You should not judge the situation, and especially not individuals involved in some way with "the situation", by "the groups involved".

The overwhelming probability is that most of the counter-protesters were there in peaceful protest against the overtly racist agenda of the white nationalists. That doesn't make them "bad guys" nor does rock throwing by some extremists among them make them "bad guys".

wphamilton said...

No reasonable person would ever expect these confrontations to end peacefully and so they didn't

Why not, such confrontations happen and end peacefully all the time. Almost all of the time. Yet somehow with white supremacists, and with their counterparts BLM, there is often violence. Why do you think that is, what do you suppose is the common element there?

C.H. Truth said...

Yet somehow with white supremacists, and with their counterparts BLM, there is often violence. Why do you think that is, what do you suppose is the common element there?

White Supremacists have been assembling since any of us can remember. The only violence I ever recall is when Elwood blues ran a bunch of Illinois Nazi's off a bridge during the Blues Brothers movie.

For the most part there really isn't violence... only some verbal exchanges or general disinterest.

So I would offer that the "common element" is probably not what you are implying.


Did you watch the video of the Challenger crash?

The Challenger crashed into the back of another vehicle... in the middle of the street.

The video showed a bunch of counter0protesters attempting to block traffic. It would appear that quite few were injured when the vehical the Challenger crashed into lunged forward and knocked a bunch of them down.

This "blocking of traffic" routine is a BLV staple protest move. While we can make some demand that blocking traffic is "peaceful" - I would argue pretty forcefully that if you get injured by a car when you are attempting to block traffic... that you hold some of that responsibility.

commie said...

The more evidence I see, the more I am convinced CH is a nazi supremacist sympathizer.....To him it appears blocking traffic should be dealt with by running them down with cars...Pretty pathetic....How the mighty have been brainwashed...

C.H. Truth said...

It doesn't matter if you are white supremacists, a member of black lives matters, part of the antifa, a member of PETA, or a member of the Militant Celiac group protesting the existence of gluten.


It is intellectually derelict to suggest that if your preferred matter of protest is to stand in the streets blocking traffic... that there is no risk of getting injured by a vehicle.

It is equally intellectually derelict to suggest that your behavior is completely innocent and acceptable, and that you are simply a "victim" if you get injured.

cowardly king obama said...

HHMMMMM.... guess this fits here

No white nationalists in Seattle today but there seams to be quite a bit of violence once again...

Strange that a group that includes ISIS flags, jumping on cars, breaking windows and attacking policemen isn't considered part of the problem. Guess this issue really does have one side, at least with Democrats and national news...

wphamilton said...

let's be clear, white supremacists are by the most violent of domestic extremist movements in the US accounting for 83% of extremist related murders and 52% of extremist shootouts with police, in the past 10 years. This characterization peaceful verbal exchanges is a blatant denial of reality.

Deliberately running over someone because they are "blocking traffic" in a group is a serious, violent crime. That's all that needs to be said for the victim "sharing responsibility" for it.

The common denominator CH, is racial hatred. It leads to violence, always has and does now. It's foolish to deny it.

Commonsense said...

Honest question WP: If the Antifa stayed a home or protest in another part of the city, do you really think there would have been a riot?

Caliphate4vr said...

If I recall correctly WP was an occupy fan. I'm not implying he supported sidewalk shitting

wphamilton said...

Not exactly an "occupy fan" but I wanted to do my OWN "occupy" here in Alpharetta because it sounded like fun. Occupy Starbucks was one idea. It just never came off - one guy can't really occupy and I couldn't interest any co-workers enough to go along.