The finger thing that signifies agreement with the Occupiers...

[trumad]

So I'm watching the "Occupy Everywhere: Michael Moore, Naomi Klein on Next Steps for the Movement Against Corporate Power" video on Democracy Now, and one of the panelist, Occupy Wall Street organizer Patrick Bruner, starts doing the finger thing every time he heard something he agreed with.

OK---I get the use of it when there is a large crowd and you want to see if there is agreement on a plan of action, etc.

But come on--- it's goofy as shit when you're simply having a conversation. mho

Here's the video: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/25/occupy_everywhere_michael_moore_naomi_klein

[nineteen50]

1. It seems less disturbing than clapping.

[graywarrior]

2. Agreed. I think it's kinda cool.

[Fire Walk With Me]

45. Exactly, less disturbing than clapping.

[Better Believe It]

72. That's right! Especially at mass meetings. Sure don't want people expressing emotions.

I've always enjoyed silent mass meetings void of laughing, clapping, cheering and other noisy carrying on.

Finger wiggles are much more inspiring and powerful expressions of power and militancy.

Maybe we can gather our forces to levitate the Pentagon .... quietly of course!

Is this the silly season?

[Robb]

3. It sort of reminds me of Bill Murray doing jazz hands.

But I understand why it's popular.

[nc4bo]

4. Universal sign language of the entire Occupy Movement!

Doesn't matter what others think, it what we do.

[MADem]

5. Is it sort of like a great auntie's wave? I flipped through the video and

couldn't really see what it was you were talking about.

I'm always interested in hearing about the latest fads (this sounds like one).

Is this a new riff on the Peace Sign, or something different?

[trumad]

6. The dude sitting next to Moore

Moore would say something profane and the dude would wiggle his fingers every time.

[Cid_B]

8. Around 2:00

in this video the sparkle fingers are covered.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/401092/october-31-2011/colbert-super-pac---occupy-wall-street-co-optportunity---stephen-on-location

[MADem]

9. That's....well, rather remarkable.

Sparkle fingers? Really? That's what they call them?

It does sort of fit the description....

[SidDithers]

18. I've also seen them called up-twinkles and down-twinkles...nt

Sid

[MADem]

26. Well, you learn something new every day! nt

[Vanje]

31. Is that what Glen Beck calls it?

nt

[sufrommich]

33. Don't know about Beck, but that's what Occupy Portland

calls it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaVvzTyMcls&feature=player_embedded#!

[bvar22]

41. Cool! Thanks for this post.

:uptwinkles:



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[freshwest]

79. Thanks for the clarification. Ugly comments on the youtube page, though.

[eShirl]

39. he probably says something like

little moonbats flapping wings

[Vanje]

56. Well then....

This Moon-Bat is Flapping!

[SidDithers]

68. Dunno. I don't watch Glen Beck...

That's what Occupy Portland calls 'em.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaVvzTyMcls

Sid

[lunatica]

14. It's not a 'latest fad'. It's been used for years in union meetings

I remember using it first more than 10 years ago. It's when someone lifts their hand palm out and wiggles their fingers like their typing rapidly in the air. When Michael Moore is speaking at the end you can see the OWS man next to him do it a few times. It's not very obvious, but it's there. It's a very simple gesture and it works. Once you see you you'll never miss it again.

[MADem]

17. Really? That's news to me. Which unions? nt

[lunatica]

21. Coalition of University Employees (CUE). Affiliated with The Teamsters Union

I work at UC Berkeley. We use it in union meetings.

http://www.cueunion.org/

We didn't invent the finger wag. It's been used, whether you like to believe it or not.

Sigh...

[MADem]

24. It's not a question of 'believing.' I have no reason to doubt you--it's just complete NEWS to me.

That's all.

Sigh....

[Warren Stupidity]

7. so you should take your objection to this goofy shit to the GA

of the occupation nearest you and have your heartfelt concerns addressed.

[coalition_unwilling]

10. BINGO! Thank you, Warren. The GA process empowers

people everywhere to have their voices heard (albeit perhaps not agreed with :)

[trumad]

11. Again....I get it in large groups

During Occupy gatherings. It is a way for the large group to signify agreement.

But come on.... sparkle fingers in a conversation?

[Warren Stupidity]

15. and again - take your objection to the people

and have it addressed, otherwise what exactly is your point here?

I personally think the development of a signalling mechanism like this is a great idea. Goofy or not, it allows messages to get through the media wall. How is that a bad thing?

[MADem]

16. Jesus--he has an OPINION. Can't he have one without getting "consensus" from a bunch of people?

What, you need permission now to have a POV?

That shit is lame. I think it's stupid to use in a conversation, as well. So shoot me.

[madinmaryland]

28. Opinions are like a**holes! Everyone has one. Not saying that the OP is one, though.

[Warren Stupidity]

38. I think it is a standard form of nonsense here to knock down

any unapproved form of political activity. The OP is terribly concerned about how 'those people' at Occupy Everywhere present themselves. Not concerned enough to take it up with 'those people' themselves, just concerned enough to engage in slamming them on DU. It is the 'Look At What Code Pink Did Now' meme, also expressed in the past as 'Why is Cindy Sheehan Doing THAT?!!!!??' I can't stand these posts. They bother the shit out of me. You don't need permission to have a point of view, but if you express your point of view by tossing feces at the good people actually out on the streets trying to effect real change, I'll be more than willing to follow up with my point of view about that.

[MADem]

40. I think it's what it is--a discussion about an affectation.

How many people on this forum are not part of that ninety nine percent, do you suppose? I suspect we don't have a lot of one percenters here. I would think that people who are a part of that crew have a "right" to comment about people who purport to speak on their behalf, and are claiming to represent them.

The sparkle fingers thing is strange. Different. An affectation.

I think it's not a horrible thing to wonder about. I think it's probably not a bad idea for the 99 percent--in whose name all this 'activity' is taking place--to know what the hell these people are doing and what they are meaning when they make hand gestures.

I think people can get hypersensitive about shit.

I think people who WANT to be politically active should be so, and not suggest that others should be "grateful" because they think camping in a tent is helpful.

I think people don't have to OWN the opinions of others, either.


Live and let live.

[Vanje]

57. Dont worry

No one is twinkling their fingers at you.

You are not in that conversation.
Its not your deal, clearly.

Maybe another time. I hope soon.

[apocalypsehow]

64. Timely edit. n/t.

[Vanje]

76. What edit did I make? I forgot.

Its usually tyop. (typo. I swear to God.....) My typing SUX!
Spelling - not so great first time around, either

Was it really interesting?

[MADem]

65. I'm not at all worried, but you are, apparently.

If it's just twinkling fingers, why are you so defensive?

I may not be one of the "cool kids," but am one of those 99 percenters, you know. And I've been alive longer than many, though certainly not all, of 'em.

Beware of being too insular or cliquish, lest you isolate yourselves from the very people you purport to defend. If there's no leadership, there's no hierarchy, and those who advocate in their own way are every bit as important as those who follow a group of twinklers.

Live and let live, now. Feel free to be amused by my codgerish ways, I have enough self-esteem to not feel threatened!

[Vanje]

69. I wonder what you are going on about.

Truley.

But this - I bet I'm older than you are.

[MADem]

73. You are responding rather snippishly to anyone who isn't in love with the twinkle fingers, that

is what I am going on about -- truly.

If you're older than me, good for you. Every day above ground is a victory.

[HappyMe]

83. That's exactly it.

If you don't agree with absolutely every damn thing they come out with, you get told 'your concern is noted'. Have a question, 'your concern is noted', 'you willfully don't get it, never will'. And yet, when they want food or money, there are no signs of snide answers. I think the 99% they speak of are simply the people that are there.

[MADem]

84. They need to understand that WE ARE THE 99 percent.

If they fail to represent us and our concerns, then they cannot expect our support. If they don't get our support, they'll fade or become fringe.

There needs to be a few decisions made, and for that, like it or not, one needs leaders. The first decision might well be: Is this a clique, or a movement? If it's a movement, some of the people purporting to speak for it would do well to work on inclusion strategies, rather than being dismissive of, or snide to, anyone who isn't one of the "cool kids."

They've met the enemy--some of them--and they are them!

[Warren Stupidity]

87. So OWS needs a leader because...

the OP can't be bothered to take the OP's Big Gripe about twinkle fingers to a GA where decisions are actually made and instead takes said gripe to DU, which has no connection at all with OWS, and obviously nothing is going to get done about it and that is why OWS needs a leader.

Got it. Excellent argument. I suggest you take this to a GA.

[MADem]

89. OWS can do what OWS wants. Do try reading what I write, it helps conversation.

The point I made is that I, and others, are part of the 99 percent. MOST of us 99 percenters are not camping out in parks as winter approaches. We have stressful lives, responsibilities, we are struggling to do more with less, and some of us find that method of protest both shopworn after a month or two, and frankly, lazy.

That does not mean we do not support the goals of economic parity and social justice themes. In fact, I've been a robust supporter of these issues well before many of the tent pitchers were even born.

If you want to pretend you are speaking for us, you would do well not to insult us. You should also not say stupid things like "I suggest you take it to the GA." See, the "GA" isn't the boss, either, and I have much better things to do with my time.

Is that too difficult to grasp?

All I can say is, keep coming on strong with that kind of attitude--you're doing the work of the one percent, and con brio, as well.

[Warren Stupidity]

91. I read this gem:

"There needs to be a few decisions made, and for that, like it or not, one needs leaders. The first decision might well be: Is this a clique, or a movement? If it's a movement, some of the people purporting to speak for it would do well to work on inclusion strategies, rather than being dismissive of, or snide to, anyone who isn't one of the "cool kids." "

in which you apparently have mistaken DU posters as "people purporting to speak for 'it'" where it is OWS.

Let me assure you I am only speaking for myself when I state that the OP's gripe is silly and bordering on obnoxious, and that it is just me that is dismissing your complaint about lack of leaders.

If you really feel unrepresented then by all means go and represent yourself as one among equals. If you just want to complain here about your lack of representation there, then expect some obnoxious old lefty like myself to suggest that your complaints here are misdirected.

[MADem]

92. Not "a" leader--like you averred.

Leaders. They don't seem to have any. If a bunch of idiots show up at a General Assembly, and vote that 30 of the popular kids need twenty some-odd grand from the kitty to go "observe" in Cairo, they're off to sunny Egypt to watch the shit hit the fan over there--and maybe do a quick side trip to the Pyramids.

If the people here at DU who are telling those of us who aren't Happy-Gladding everything OWS does have no authority to speak for the movement, they should shut up instead of shouting down--it's tiresome and it only serves to further isolate the effort.

If you speak for yourself, you're the exception to the rule. Everyone else loves the "we" word.

I find the "General Assembly" model affected and stupid, frankly. I find the whining about mean police and tents tiresome. Camping in a tent is not going to get a school lunch for a hungry kid, or a doctor's appointment for a woman without medical insurance or money. It doesn't put food on the shelves of the food pantry, or meals in the steam trays at the feeding centers.

Taunting the police is only going to make taxes go up, to pay the overtime. It will give the police a happy Xmas, and send their kids to college.

There comes a point where the shit just isn't helping. The novelty has worn off. It's the same stupid stuff again and again, on a different day.

It is a rare day when I read about an actual OWS demonstration anymore, where the object is a corporation, a politician, or some rich bastards (as opposed to 99 percenters working in shitty jobs at WALMART), and when I look at the pictures of the marches that have any clout, the signs are largely from UNIONS. Unions have leaders--and they know how to run a demo.

Isn't that something?

Whatever.

[trumad]

46. Come on...

I tried to temper it with understanding why it is used in a large group....and I have no objection to it in that capacity...

And to imply that I am "terribly" concerned is nothing more than you just making up shit.

I simply made an observation that it looks goofy as shit.

You don't like it--- well then fuck off.

[apocalypsehow]

60. "Hide Thread" is the second button to the right in the bottom lefthand corner of the OP.

:thumbsup:

[Warren Stupidity]

80. No really I prefer the "oppose thread" button.

[Generic Other]

95. Twinkle fingers!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaVvzTyMcls

[coalition_unwilling]

12. One of the purposes of the spirit wave (aka "jazz fingers") is that

it allows listeners to signal approval without talking over the person currently speaking. As such, I see it as an aide to productive conversation, not an impediment.

[lunatica]

13. All you are seeing is the stage, so it looks isolated like Dean's scream did

So of course it looks goofy. You aren't there to see just how many in the audience are doing it too.

It works. We've been doing it in our union meetings for years. It signals agreement without disrupting the speakers.

[redqueen]

86. IMO this kind of reaction to it *is* stupid.

Just as it was with respect to Dean's scream.

I wish this kind of nonsense wasn't considered important to so many people.

Superficiality is a huge ******* problem.

[SidDithers]

19. K&R...

Sid

[LWolf]

20. I'm not seeing it, but then I have a pretty short attention span for video. nt

[lunatica]

22. See reply #8

Also see reply #19 for a visual

[Vanje]

23. Well, Call your Congressman!!!!!!!!!!!

Right Fucking Now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Balbus]

25. That looks fucking stupid.

What an idiot.

[lunatica]

27. So does doing a thumbs up or down if you see it out of context

What you don't see in that static video is the people in the audience doing it too.

What you see there is the isolated action of one person out of context, a lot like the Dean Scream. Everyone in the room was screaming but the video and audio only picked up Dean's scream. And of course it looked and sounded "fucking stupid" and made Dean look like an "idiot".

[Balbus]

30. Well, to be fair, he did sound like an idiot when he screamed like that.

Still makes me chuckle, though, every time I hear it.

C'mon, give me a twinkle fingers on that - I know you agree.

[lunatica]

32. Sorry, but I disagree.

No twinkle fingers from me, but I will give you this

[Nictuku]

36. Actually, that was an isolated sound track

The lesson I took from the Dean Scream thing was the the media selects our candidates. Not us.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/politics/main596021.shtml

...What you might not know, because it doesn't play 30 times a day on the cable news channels, is what was happening in the rest of the room. You don't see the visual and you don't hear the audio. The television crews recording the event plug into an audio source picking up Dean's microphone, not the sound of the room. The cameras focus in to a tight shot of the candidate, not the rest of the room.

What you are not hearing is a room with thousands of people screaming and cheering.

What you are not seeing are hundreds upon hundreds of American flags waving.

What you are not hearing are members of the audience shouting out state names urging Dean to list more.

What you are not seeing is the way Dean's supporters were lifted out of their slump by the speech.

In a nutshell, you are not seeing that Dean's speech fit the tone of the room.

Not that the speech was a good idea; clearly it has created problems for Dean, but not because he's a loose cannon or a little off kilter. Dean is actually a rather straight-laced, staid person. The Iowa speech has become a problem because Dean's aides either failed to recognize or failed to convince their candidate that when he speaks to a roomful of people, he is not speaking to a roomful of people: he is speaking to a television camera.

[RufusTFirefly]

43. He couldn't hear himself. It was like singing with headphones on.

And yet..

"The scream scene was shown an estimated 633 times by cable and broadcast news networks in just four days following the incident, a number that does not include talk shows and local news broadcasts."

633 times.

633 times.

Could it be that Dean was taking aim at media consolidation and was actually perceived as a threat to giant media companies?

Nah. Couldn't be.

He was just a loose cannon who was too angry to be President.

Or so they told us. Again. And again. And again.

[Vanje]

29. Hell Yeah!

How it LOOKS to outsiders is real important..Jeez, I'd rather sit by quietly and watch democracy die a corrupt death, than align with people who do a weird finger gesture. Twinkle fingers? Izzat what its called? Wow! Wouldnt be caught dead twinkling my fingers, because some ass-whipe passer by might think it looks gay or something.

...and while we're on the subject of appearance , Jeez, do you think Michael Moore could cut his hair!
Also , he is overweight. WHATS WITH THAT?! Amy Goodman has'nt changed her hairstyle in , like, FOR EVAH!

(Fuck yes, its sarcasm!)

[MADem]

37. So, it's come down to this....an either-or scenario!!!

(Cue dramatic music...)

Twinkle fingers?

Or.....

The Death of Democracy!!!!!

YOU....MUST....CHOOOOOOOOOSE!!!!!!

Truth is, how things looks to "outsiders" is, in fact, important. If buzz words, insider chat, secret signs and hand gestures are to be the currency of the effort, it might be nice to clue in the people who are actually the working, life-living, baby-ass-wiping, granny feeding, snow shovelling, lawn raking assholes who MAKE UP THE 99 PERCENT in on these little "insider" tricks--so they have a clue as to what is being said in their name.

You don't get very far by insulting the people you purport to support, or getting angry because they aren't leaping aboard the sparkle fingers train like, golly gee, it's just the BEST THING EVER, and anyone who doesn't know about it, or looks askance, is just one of those evil assholes, bent on thwarting the fun.

And you catch more flies with honey.

Don't get mad at people who think it looks stupid, because it actually does look a bit stupid. It looks like first rehearsal of A CHORUS LINE for people who cannot dance. The "negative" sparkle fingers looks like an Italian granny gesturing to the grandkids to come and get some lousy candy. That's not a crime--as a society, we've gotten used to lots of crap that looks stupid at first blush, and even embraced it for a bright and shining moment. Who remembers white disco suits with sansabelt slacks? Gold medallions on hairy chests? For a time, those stupid looking things were the bee's knees. Right now, kids are running around with blue hair and you know they think their shit doesn't stink, that they're as cool as cool can be--years from now, they'll look at pics of themselves and CRINGE. You can't tell them that, though--they're "in the moment" and that's fine and dandy. We've pretty much all done that kind of thing--made a poor fashion choice based on popular styles of the day, or adapted a point of view that sounded good at the time but with the wisdom of years wasn't such a hot thought.

It's all part of living life and trying out new things. Nothing wrong with that. What's not working, though, is expecting everyone else to be "clued in" as well, or getting mad at them because they may not like what you like. There's no rule that says we all have to feel the same way. That lockstep crap is more of a rightwing thing.

[trumad]

48. Thanks for jumping in...

Here's what it means to me.

I look at occupy as leaderless with no one central message---which in my opinion makes it successful.

What---sparkle fingers is now something attached to Occupy?

Wow--- hey---check out the organizer using sparkle fingers--- Michael Moore says something amazing and we all need to sparkle finger?

God I hope that isn't the case.

Does it look silly as shit--- I think so. But hey if you don't---sparkle finger away.

[MADem]

53. I have for many years been a strong fan of social justice and

economic parity. I've thought that the pigs at the trough needed to be yanked up short, and that the congressional-corporate chumminess was an unholy alliance to the detriment of us shmucks who put the politicians in office. So I guess I liked the OWS themes before there was an OWS.

I never was a terribly compliant follower, though. I don't like being told how I should behave (particularly not now, in my out-of-uniform dotage), and I really don't go for any of that Emperor's New Clothes stuff, where if enough people say how wonderful something is, the force of the crowd is expected to drag me along. If something looks foolish to me, it's not something I'll buy--that said, I will still smile at the guy in the white disco suit with the sansabelt slacks and medallion--that, to me, is an amusing image! The twinkle fingers thing will probably get a laugh out of me, too if I come across a huge crowd going at it with extreme earnestness--not in a mean way, more in a "Isn't that goofy" way.

[Vanje]

62. "Behave " however you'd like

Its fine. Whatever.

Its just finger wiggling.

Leave others to behave as they will as well.


Its not that hard.

[MADem]

63. If you would read what I wrote without judgment, you would see that you've

iterated my precise view.

Live and let live. If you're amused, fine.

[Vanje]

70. Well,. Then cool.

?

[Vanje]

61. Well, you can Look at Occupy all you like

No ones twinkling their sparkle fingers at YOU.

Sorry.

[MADem]

66. So, what you're saying is that some 99 percenters are not worthy if they don't like the fingers?

Not terribly progressive, that. And I rather doubt you've been elected the arbiter of who can be twinkled at, and who is to be denied any twinkling. I'm sure if someone wanted to twinkle at that individual, they could do so without fear.

As I said upthread--you really need to be mindful of your comments. If you isolate yourself from the 99 percent--and by that I mean all of those people going about their lives who are not rich, and who are also not camping in urban locales--you risk isolating yourself from your stated goals. You become an echo chamber of self-appointed "cool kids" and the rest of us are just the 99 percent nerds.

There is no hierarchy, and no one's opinion is more valid than another. You don't have to own what others think, or try to change their minds to suit your views.

If you like your twinkle fingers, twinkle on. Don't let anyone tell you that you cannot, or you should not, but by the same token, if people want to be amused by it, what purpose does it serve to ruin their fun? If they don't care for it, fine--it's no skin off your nose...or your fingers, either.

[Vanje]

67. No

What a curious conclusion for you to draw.

[Vanje]

71. Whats the deal

You dont like the twinkle. Fine.
Who is twinkling at you?
No one here is.

[MADem]

75. Alas, I am not worthy, then!

:hi:

I'll live.

[Vanje]

55. Surprise!

I did not Imagine in my wildest dreams that MADem was a fan of the OWS movement.

Great to know. I congratulate you.

The only thing now, that may you may lack is an astute recognition of sarcasm.

[saras]

50. Yep. Everything looks stupid to the stupid, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

[trumad]

54. But what if the stupid is not stupid?

[Marnie]

34. Do you ever nod you head in agreement?

Or use you hands for exclamitory effect when you talk?

Seems you problem is your problem.

[RufusTFirefly]

35. Thank Dog we're focusing on the important stuff

I remember in 1988 there was a great deal of "controversy" about the way in which Presidential candidate Bruce Babbitt bobbed his head. It killed his campaign. And don't forget Al Gore's "sighs." I'm amazed at the shallowness of some debates. But these kinds of tempests are precisely what the MSM likes to brew in its teapots.

And, of course: The Dean Scream.
(Thanks for the reminder.)

[upi402]

42. The Dukakis tank helmet pic gave us King George the 1st

http://21stcenturyschizoidman.typepad.com/21st_century_schizoidman/2011/04/headgear-on-the-hustings-a-history.html

We are stuck on stupid here. Blame the media.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. What's really goofy is the obligatory flag pins and "God Bless America" that politicians are fond of

[EFerrari]

49. We have to occupy our inner uptight Republican uncle.

lol

[The Straight Story]

47. How about THIS:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_df4kVFj1mWM/S5EryN2i5lI/AAAAAAAAAZw/C-cnAcTgqrg/s400/Iraq+-+Purple+Finger+2010.jpg

[Balbus]

51. You see a comparison between him and some Michael Moore sycophant twinkling his fingers?

[The Straight Story]

52. Point is - a simple finger gesture can mean something to those involved

And marking them as silly seems silly ;)

[Vanje]

58. Be not disturbed.

No one is finger-gesturing to you.

It has nothing to do with you.
Sadly.

[ellisonz]

59. Oh snap.

:popcorn:

[MADem]

74. That's kind of funny, actually...

You know...snap...fingers....!!

[ellisonz]

77. I know right.

Kinda like looking at a cottage cheese ceiling.

You know it's there but you don't really know what its supposed to mean. The ambiguity is frightening. :scared:

[Warren DeMontague]

78. I need a miracle, bra

which doesn't mean I need a miracle bra.

[Zorra]

81. We often think some the customs of unique different cultures are goofy: Here are

some photos of a bizarre modern cultural phenomenon of mass spontaneous hysteria instilled deep into the subconscious of this unique, arguably primitive, culture by a council of snakecharmers known as marketers. These marketers are engaged and compensated by the Chiefs that own the culture, often commonly referred to as plutarchs, or the 1%, in order to mass hypnotize the culture into slavery, and giving tribute to the Chiefs. These photos are actual photos of mass induced hysteria that occurs on a holy day to this culture known as Black Friday. Collateral human sacrifice is rare, but has been known to occur.

From my cultural perspective, this phenomenon is the epitome of "goofy", but it is the custom, or possibly the religion, of this culture, and it is their choice:

[MADem]

85. That looks like any given shopping day in Tokyo, minus the diversity and gleeful expressions. NT

[Obamanaut]

82. I think that is preferable to seeing "just sayin'" typed after a statement.

[Bucky]

88. One of my students flipped me off today. I said, "thank you for 20% agreeing with me"

Only a few students got it. They will be getting As in my class now.

[MADem]

93. You give As because people agree with you politically? Or they know about an

obscure hand gesture?

:eyes:

That's just not right. That is, though, fodder for the wingnuts who love to make fun of, and rail against "liberal" teachers.

Kids aren't stupid--you'll get the "Suck up, move up" rep from 'em in no time--even if they are well fed One Percenters, wearing grubby clothes to fit in with their peers.

[Warren Stupidity]

94. The others were confused by the math error. nt.

[deaniac21]

90. The Ministry of Silly Walks is still funnier.