PDA

View Full Version : Occupy One Year Later



IMPress Polly
09-21-2012, 04:47 PM
Hi. I know the one-year anniversary of Occupy Wall Street isn't really quite the latest of the latest news at this point, but I didn't get the chance to visit earlier this week, so this is my first chance to comment on the subject here.

Many of you who knew me back on the old Political Forum may remember me as the principal voice of the Occupy movement there. I established the Occupy Movement social group there and maintained a steady stream of commentary on the movement, including my frequent participation therein, for some time. One hence will not be surprised to learn of my participation in Monday's one-year-anniversary commemoration in New York City, which was attended by roughly 1,500 people.

I don't pretend that this is a friendly audience. I know full well that pretty well everyone here but me hates the Occupy movement and everyone who has participated in it (yep, I saw the other thread), so I realize that I have an uphill ahead of me in persuading anyone in a conservative-minded place like this of such a movement's worth in the past, present, and future. Nonetheless I will try. Allow me to focus this into three main, and very common, questions:

1) What's Occupy About?

A very special friend of mind shared this article (http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op/sMa1jtWVMODj5iLRAfqL-dQ/view.m?id=15&gid=commentisfree%2F2012%2Fsep%2F16%2Foccupy-reasons-one-year-on&cat=commentisfree) on that very subject with me recently. It provides some personal commentary by the author, but also a couple notable commentaries from ordinary American Occupiers and supporters of the movement as to what the movement is all about and what participants are upset about. The commentaries quoted in the article are so profound that I think they're worth re-posting here. These are letters (and excerpts from letters, as applicable) written from ordinary Americans to bank executives:


The housing crash of 2008 was not an unfortunate accident, rather the fallout from careless gambling and calculated, short-term greed ... I don't expect you to do anything about it. I'd rather you just got out of the way so the rest of the country can start rebuilding. Take your business to Greece or Ireland. Oh wait, you already bankrupted them. I guess the US was just the next target.

Another:


Just wanted to give you a pat on the back for collecting over $4,000 from a friend of mine on a Chase credit card with a $500 limit (on which she charged a little bit less than $500 worth of merchandise). It was a great example of innovation in your industry!

These are dramatic concentrations of anger at a financial aristocracy that many, many people are convinced essentially governs, or is coming to govern, this country, and indeed the world more generally, in a plutocratic fashion. The purpose of the Occupy movement is to rid the world of said condition; to replace increasingly plutocratic conditions with conditions that make for the flourishing of a more authentic democracy.

2) What Has Occupy Accomplished?

This article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/occupy-wall-street-anniversary_n_1891946.html#slide=1533674) includes a slideshow that highlights seven issues the Occupy movement brought to the nation's attention that I think is worthy of our review on this auspicious occasion:

1. Corporate personhood

2. The Volcker rule

3. Political favoring of the rich

4. The need for a Robin Hood tax

5. Income inequality

6. The foreclosure crisis

7. Student loan debt

I'd say that bringing all those issues to the nation's attention in a grassroots way is an accomplishment in itself. The language of the Occupy movement (e.g. the 1%, the 99%) has even entered mainstream circulation. But we need to figure out how to translate this stuff and other stuff into concrete gains for the masses. So...

3) What Does the Future Hold for the Movement?

There are two great commentaries on this subject that I'd recommend to all lay observers. First off, the article I linked to under question two (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/occupy-wall-street-anniversary_n_1891946.html#slide=1533674) because, below the article itself and below the aforementioned slideshow, one will find a 27-minute video dialogue between various Occupy participants and supporters on that very subject. Lots of great questions are raised. A lot of the commentators stress the importance of localism and decentralization and the idea that Occupy is not today a singular, unified movement anymore, but simply an umbrella term for a host of spin-offs of the original movement, with the argument being that that's how things should be going forward. I, and some of the commentators there, disagree. If Occupy is to make a CONCRETE, rather than just a CULTURAL difference, it needs to become more a centralized, unified, and yes institutionalized movement that works not only outside the system through direct actions (like it currently does), but also within it (like it mostly does not). I've come to be of the opinion that this shouldn't be a matter of picking and choosing methods. Occupiers should embrace both of those options going forward if we are to rebuild this movement as a powerful movement that means and accomplishes anything going forward.

One of the best commentaries on this subject though comes from Zeesham Aleem, who came out with a great essay on the matter today (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zeeshan-aleem/occupy-s17-new-york_b_1902440.html). His essay takes you through Monday's anniversary events in NYC, then proceeds to offer some well-stated advice. While I strongly recommend reading over the entire article, as a preview, allow me to re-post some highlights that I found particularly notable:


The clusters regrouped near the Wall Street Bull around lunch time, during which people spoke through the human microphone about poverty, social stratification, debt, climate change, the need to protect the commons and a host of other issues that will never be approached during the election debates...


In the evening, most the protesters reconvened in Zuccotti Park, the site of the original occupation, for the "Popular Assembly," intended to be the first of a series of weekly meetings, and presenting itself as an alternative to indefinite occupation.


What was striking about the police charges at the nonviolent troublemakers was how forcefully they showed that concerns about public safety were not guiding their conduct. For instance, a teenager running back and forth across West Street, threatening to stay on the road even when the traffic light changed, was brought into custody by two cops who appeared to be training for the NFL. His entire face was covered in blood.

(more at link)

GrassrootsConservative
09-21-2012, 05:21 PM
:lame:

IGetItAlready
09-21-2012, 05:32 PM
Thanks for the update Polly but as far as defining the intent of the movement I think you're about a year late.
Even conservative minded people like myself were watching and listening last year to see where this movement was going and were stunned to see such an utter lack of any cohesive message. I'm sure some people knee jerked to hating on the group right out of the gate but as a proponent of free speech I truly wanted to hear the motives behind the gatherings.
I watched in disbelief as the Sacramento Occupy spokesman was asked and responded that their group had convened a committee who was working all that out and that they would have a response for the press the following day. That response never came.
I was equally stunned to see the treatment civil rights warrior and congressman John Lewis received from the group. I'm sure you've seen the video but I'll post it below for anyone who hasn't. Lewis took time out his busy schedule to address the group in Atlanta and while the highly agitated fool with the bullhorn preached "Everyone's voice matters equally" he used HIS own extra loud voice and encouraged the rest of the group to silence the congressman as well as all others who wanted to hear what he had to say.

Your list of Occupy "accomplishments" is confusing. You cite the Volcker Rule which as part of Dodd/Frank raises eyebrows right out of the gate for those of us who see the stifling regulations the legislation places on financial institutes as largely responsible for America's inability to shake off the effects of our current economic woes but Volcker also appears to stand in direct contradiction to the lending practices promoted by Freddie and Fannie that led to the housing crisis. It would seem it's okay to strong arm lenders into risky loans in order to put people who couldn't afford to pay them back into houses but other less risky investments by financial institutes are out of the question. (Likely because THOSE kinds of risks do not benefit the poor and minority Democrat voters as directly)
You also mention "The need for a Robin Hood tax" which in other words is nothing short of redistribution which we all know is a cornerstone of socialism. You may be surprised to learn that you can have your socialist utopia without destroying the greatest nation on earth by simply exercising your right to move to one of the many Euro-socialist shit holes already in existence. "Income inequality" would also fall into this category and if that's what you're about I might suggest France as things aren't so sunny these days in many of the other places where this type of mandated sameness has been tried. And don't blame me if things go south in France before you're packed...you better hurry.

You say you've seen the other thread on Occupy's first B-Day so I'm assuming you've seen the video clips of the movement's activities that are hard to distinguish from what's currently happening in the Middle East and North Africa. And yet you refer to Occupy as "grass roots"? Yet, I'm guessing you see the Tea Party as something evil and manufactured. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong in my assumption but if I am you are definitely the first Occupy supporter I've ever met who doesn't loathe the middle class movement against incessantly increased fed spending and punitive taxation that is the Tea Party.
To be perfectly honest, I have a hard time understanding how anyone who has paid any attention to the movement over the past year can see it as anything less than a destructive force hell bent on socialism, anarchy and destruction of the institutions that have made your own life as privileged as it is.

You all claim to hate corporate America yet you use products produced by a corporation with one of the highest profit margins on earth, MUCH higher than the evil oil companies, to plan your rallies and communicate with fellow occupiers. You claim to be a grass roots organization dedicated to a worthy cause while women are raped, landmarks are threatened with bombings and terror attacks and innocent people's private property and well being are destroyed and threatened by those who associate themselves with people like you.

Like I said Polly, thanks for the attempt at explaining what the movement is all about a year after the fact but in that year the acts of violence and destruction we've seen under your tent really speak for themselves.

Trinnity
09-21-2012, 07:48 PM
I think OWS was co-opted by anarchists and lost its cred by that, and the bad behavior. Polly, if they had been classy and well-spoken like you are, they would have done so much better.

Peter1469
09-21-2012, 07:59 PM
Hi. I know the one-year anniversary of Occupy Wall Street isn't really quite the latest of the latest news at this point, but I didn't get the chance to visit earlier this week, so this is my first chance to comment on the subject here.

Many of you who knew me back on the old Political Forum may remember me as the principal voice of the Occupy movement there. I established the Occupy Movement social group there and maintained a steady stream of commentary on the movement, including my frequent participation therein, for some time. One hence will not be surprised to learn of my participation in Monday's one-year-anniversary commemoration in New York City, which was attended by roughly 1,500 people.

I don't pretend that this is a friendly audience. I know full well that pretty well everyone here but me hates the Occupy movement and everyone who has participated in it (yep, I saw the other thread), so I realize that I have an uphill ahead of me in persuading anyone in a conservative-minded place like this of such a movement's worth in the past, present, and future. Nonetheless I will try. Allow me to focus this into three main, and very common, questions:

1) What's Occupy About?

A very special friend of mind shared this article (http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op/sMa1jtWVMODj5iLRAfqL-dQ/view.m?id=15&gid=commentisfree%2F2012%2Fsep%2F16%2Foccupy-reasons-one-year-on&cat=commentisfree) on that very subject with me recently. It provides some personal commentary by the author, but also a couple notable commentaries from ordinary American Occupiers and supporters of the movement as to what the movement is all about and what participants are upset about. The commentaries quoted in the article are so profound that I think they're worth re-posting here. These are letters (and excerpts from letters, as applicable) written from ordinary Americans to bank executives:



Another:



These are dramatic concentrations of anger at a financial aristocracy that many, many people are convinced essentially governs, or is coming to govern, this country, and indeed the world more generally, in a plutocratic fashion. The purpose of the Occupy movement is to rid the world of said condition; to replace increasingly plutocratic conditions with conditions that make for the flourishing of a more authentic democracy.

2) What Has Occupy Accomplished?

This article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/occupy-wall-street-anniversary_n_1891946.html#slide=1533674) includes a slideshow that highlights seven issues the Occupy movement brought to the nation's attention that I think is worthy of our review on this auspicious occasion:

1. Corporate personhood

2. The Volcker rule

3. Political favoring of the rich

4. The need for a Robin Hood tax

5. Income inequality

6. The foreclosure crisis

7. Student loan debt

I'd say that bringing all those issues to the nation's attention in a grassroots way is an accomplishment in itself. The language of the Occupy movement (e.g. the 1%, the 99%) has even entered mainstream circulation. But we need to figure out how to translate this stuff and other stuff into concrete gains for the masses. So...

3) What Does the Future Hold for the Movement?

There are two great commentaries on this subject that I'd recommend to all lay observers. First off, the article I linked to under question two (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/occupy-wall-street-anniversary_n_1891946.html#slide=1533674) because, below the article itself and below the aforementioned slideshow, one will find a 27-minute video dialogue between various Occupy participants and supporters on that very subject. Lots of great questions are raised. A lot of the commentators stress the importance of localism and decentralization and the idea that Occupy is not today a singular, unified movement anymore, but simply an umbrella term for a host of spin-offs of the original movement, with the argument being that that's how things should be going forward. I, and some of the commentators there, disagree. If Occupy is to make a CONCRETE, rather than just a CULTURAL difference, it needs to become more a centralized, unified, and yes institutionalized movement that works not only outside the system through direct actions (like it currently does), but also within it (like it mostly does not). I've come to be of the opinion that this shouldn't be a matter of picking and choosing methods. Occupiers should embrace both of those options going forward if we are to rebuild this movement as a powerful movement that means and accomplishes anything going forward.

One of the best commentaries on this subject though comes from Zeesham Aleem, who came out with a great essay on the matter today (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zeeshan-aleem/occupy-s17-new-york_b_1902440.html). His essay takes you through Monday's anniversary events in NYC, then proceeds to offer some well-stated advice. While I strongly recommend reading over the entire article, as a preview, allow me to re-post some highlights that I found particularly notable:

I have said on another board that OWS, as envisioned, has more in common with the Tea Party(ies) than either have with the two established political parties.

Goldie Locks
09-21-2012, 08:02 PM
Thanks for the update Polly but as far as defining the intent of the movement I think you're about a year late.
Even conservative minded people like myself were watching and listening last year to see where this movement was going and were stunned to see such an utter lack of any cohesive message. I'm sure some people knee jerked to hating on the group right out of the gate but as a proponent of free speech I truly wanted to hear the motives behind the gatherings.
I watched in disbelief as the Sacramento Occupy spokesman was asked and responded that their group had convened a committee who was working all that out and that they would have a response for the press the following day. That response never came.
I was equally stunned to see the treatment civil rights warrior and congressman John Lewis received from the group. I'm sure you've seen the video but I'll post it below for anyone who hasn't. Lewis took time out his busy schedule to address the group in Atlanta and while the highly agitated fool with the bullhorn preached "Everyone's voice matters equally" he used HIS own extra loud voice and encouraged the rest of the group to silence the congressman as well as all others who wanted to hear what he had to say.

Your list of Occupy "accomplishments" is confusing. You cite the Volcker Rule which as part of Dodd/Frank raises eyebrows right out of the gate for those of us who see the stifling regulations the legislation places on financial institutes as largely responsible for America's inability to shake off the effects of our current economic woes but Volcker also appears to stand in direct contradiction to the lending practices promoted by Freddie and Fannie that led to the housing crisis. It would seem it's okay to strong arm lenders into risky loans in order to put people who couldn't afford to pay them back into houses but other less risky investments by financial institutes are out of the question. (Likely because THOSE kinds of risks do not benefit the poor and minority Democrat voters as directly)
You also mention "The need for a Robin Hood tax" which in other words is nothing short of redistribution which we all know is a cornerstone of socialism. You may be surprised to learn that you can have your socialist utopia without destroying the greatest nation on earth by simply exercising your right to move to one of the many Euro-socialist shit holes already in existence. "Income inequality" would also fall into this category and if that's what you're about I might suggest France as things aren't so sunny these days in many of the other places where this type of mandated sameness has been tried. And don't blame me if things go south in France before you're packed...you better hurry.

You say you've seen the other thread on Occupy's first B-Day so I'm assuming you've seen the video clips of the movement's activities that are hard to distinguish from what's currently happening in the Middle East and North Africa. And yet you refer to Occupy as "grass roots"? Yet, I'm guessing you see the Tea Party as something evil and manufactured. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong in my assumption but if I am you are definitely the first Occupy supporter I've ever met who doesn't loathe the middle class movement against incessantly increased fed spending and punitive taxation that is the Tea Party.
To be perfectly honest, I have a hard time understanding how anyone who has paid any attention to the movement over the past year can see it as anything less than a destructive force hell bent on socialism, anarchy and destruction of the institutions that have made your own life as privileged as it is.

You all claim to hate corporate America yet you use products produced by a corporation with one of the highest profit margins on earth, MUCH higher than the evil oil companies, to plan your rallies and communicate with fellow occupiers. You claim to be a grass roots organization dedicated to a worthy cause while women are raped, landmarks are threatened with bombings and terror attacks and innocent people's private property and well being are destroyed and threatened by those who associate themselves with people like you.

Like I said Polly, thanks for the attempt at explaining what the movement is all about a year after the fact but in that year the acts of violence and destruction we've seen under your tent really speak for themselves.


This is just another awesome post from you!!! After this what can I say, but Yes....this is the answer!!!!

Captain Obvious
09-21-2012, 09:02 PM
I have said on another board that OWS, as envisioned, has more in common with the Tea Party(ies) than either have with the two established political parties.

I thought for a while it might turn into another political party arm of the democrats, but clearly that didn't happen.

The movement completely lacked focus, goals and objectives - which is why we're talking about them in past tense.

IMPress Polly
09-22-2012, 01:43 PM
IGetItAlready:

I certainly appreciate your willingness to engage with the OP! Let me try and respond to some of your points.


Thanks for the update Polly but as far as defining the intent of the movement I think you're about a year late.

If people are ill-informed on the movement's aims, it's certainly not been for a lack of effort on my part. I've been talking about the Occupy movement, its goals, strategies, and so forth, essentially since the movement started, and indeed did so quite diligently for a number of months on the old Political Forum.


Even conservative minded people like myself were watching and listening last year to see where this movement was going and were stunned to see such an utter lack of any cohesive message. I'm sure some people knee jerked to hating on the group right out of the gate but as a proponent of free speech I truly wanted to hear the motives behind the gatherings.

Glad to hear you were open-minded enough to consider the Occupy movement at a certain point!


I watched in disbelief as the Sacramento Occupy spokesman was asked and responded that their group had convened a committee who was working all that out and that they would have a response for the press the following day. That response never came.

Occupy has always been a very broad and decentralized movement and I can't speak for every participant or grouping thereof. That said, it did indeed take some time for most of the movement to translate the broad objective I highlighted in the OP into sets of specific demands. Being a decentralized movement, each encampment and offshoot came up with its own. A lot of these demand lists were very moderate. Others were quite radical. It all depended on the ideological composition of the particular grouping. That decentralized approach understandable yielded a lot of confusion concerning what our specific ideas were as an overall mass movement. That's one part of why I think it important for the movement to finally now embrace more centralization, particularly now that we cannot rely on permanent encampments anymore.


I was equally stunned to see the treatment civil rights warrior and congressman John Lewis received from the group. I'm sure you've seen the video but I'll post it below for anyone who hasn't. Lewis took time out his busy schedule to address the group in Atlanta and while the highly agitated fool with the bullhorn preached "Everyone's voice matters equally" he used HIS own extra loud voice and encouraged the rest of the group to silence the congressman as well as all others who wanted to hear what he had to say.

I cannot directly speak to the particular incident in question, having not been present when it happened, but I can say that Occupiers very broadly were quite conscious of attempts to co-opt the movement from the outside. (Probably a little too paranoid about it, if anything.) I'm not saying that that's necessarily what Mr. Lewis was doing, but given the movement's commitment to a highly egalitarian, formally leaderless approach, such a development, as you describe it, does not shock me.


Your list of Occupy "accomplishments" is confusing.

Sorry! Maybe my simply listing those things didn't provide enough clarity. If you visit the link I placed under point two, you'll find a slideshow that not only LISTS these issues, but also provides a description of them.


You may be surprised to learn that you can have your socialist utopia without destroying the greatest nation on earth by simply exercising your right to move to one of the many Euro-socialist shit holes already in existence...And don't blame me if things go south in France before you're packed...you better hurry.


See now this is a great example of what I like to call non-constructive conversation. Did you actually expect me to have a civil response to that?


You say you've seen the other thread on Occupy's first B-Day so I'm assuming you've seen the video clips of the movement's activities that are hard to distinguish from what's currently happening in the Middle East and North Africa. And yet you refer to Occupy as "grass roots"? Yet, I'm guessing you see the Tea Party as something evil and manufactured. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong in my assumption but if I am you are definitely the first Occupy supporter I've ever met who doesn't loathe the middle class movement against incessantly increased fed spending and punitive taxation that is the Tea Party.

Both the Occupy movement and the Tea Party movement are authentic populist movements. There are people in each that claim otherwise of the other movement, but I mean whatever. The fact that a movement may garner some media, political, or even more broadly commercial support does not mean that it is RUN BY the 1% or this or that segment thereof. Those are two different things.


You all claim to hate corporate America yet you use products produced by a corporation with one of the highest profit margins on earth, MUCH higher than the evil oil companies, to plan your rallies and communicate with fellow occupiers.

1) Got any evidence to support that claim?

2) Realize that even communists often shop at Wal-Mart, use Windows 7, etc. The fact that many Occupiers might use brand-name smart phones or may have put books published by Scholastic in our library simply reflects the reality that big money really does make the world go 'round at present. There's pretty much no getting around it. Maybe we are too controlled by the forces we're protesting. I wouldn't say that that's a main problem with our movement. I don't think it changes the nature of what it is Occupy as a movement seeks to change.


You claim to be a grass roots organization dedicated to a worthy cause while women are raped, landmarks are threatened with bombings and terror attacks and innocent people's private property and well being are destroyed and threatened by those who associate themselves with people like you.

You make it sound as if these things have been the rule rather than the exception.

I'm not trying to trivialize anything here. I know that rape is a serious matter, for instance. I've been raped. A lot of times. Not at any Occupy events though. By far the biggest concern amongst participants when it came to threats of violence were those from the police. That last articles I linked up to in the OP takes you through some remarkably typical examples of police behavior toward our movement. That was true not just on Monday, but much more generally and consistently. The police response to our simple acts of civil disobedience has been remarkably aggressive and violent.

There were, in fact, a handful of rapes that took place at Occupy encampments late last year and the responses from the encampments that were mustered were initially offensively timid, as if to sweep the incidents under the rug. The result of that offensiveness was the emergence of a robust women's movement within Occupy that succeeded in getting a number of safety measures accepted and endorsed by the assemblies in subsequent weeks. I was part of that women's movement. But I want to again stress that the far and away BIGGEST concern when it came to issues of violence at the encampments was the issue of police brutality.


Peter wrote:
I have said on another board that OWS, as envisioned, has more in common with the Tea Party(ies) than either have with the two established political parties.

I wish I could agree. I actually tried to organize joint actions with the Tea Party movement at a certain point. About one-third to half of the Occupiers were willing to support that as an idea. But I could find no support for united actions on the part of the Tea Party movement. But I would certainly still be interested in trying for that if the opportunity arose in the future. I'm not narrow-minded concerning who we can ally with when it comes to common causes.

IMPress Polly
09-22-2012, 01:44 PM
Trinnity wrote:
I think OWS was co-opted by anarchists and lost its cred by that, and the bad behavior. Polly, if they had been classy and well-spoken like you are, they would have done so much better.

I'm guessing you got this theory from that Citizens United B movie on Occupy that just came out. Right? :wink: (Original trailer below.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHcr_8Qgdos

(Btw, as a testament to this film's honesty, even just watching this trailer, I already know for a fact that not all of the scenes presented there as being from Occupy actually are. For instance, that picture with the guy shitting on the car has long been debunked. It was NOT something that happened at OWS, but well before OWS existed.)

No one force 'runs' Occupy.

Well it's not as if there's no truth to the idea that anarchists participated in Occupy and continue to. In fact, a fair number of the people who started the original Occupy Wall Street encampment in the first place were anarchists. But they're even less organized the the movement more broadly is and definitely have always been a minority of its membership. I agree that, when it comes to the most aggressive, occasionally instigating, components of Occupy, that would be the anarchists. They were also the most complacent about issues of violence that once in a while occurred within the encampments because they were against policing for ideological reasons. (That always struck me as amazing. You're more concerned about your ideological purity than you are about the real-world plight of real human beings?) But love 'em or hate 'em, they've always been inevitably a part of the movement. Anarchists typically have a rather communitarian ethic about them that feeds into support for movements like this. One of the notable differences between the Occupy movement on the one hand and the Tea Party movement on the other is the age composition of participants. Tea Partiers are and have always been mostly older people (people above the national median age), while Occupiers have always been mostly younger people (people below the national median age). In all honesty, it's not surprising to find less discipline, less organization, and also more creativity and liveliness in what principally are youth movements than in movements where half the participants are retired.* The inclusion of anarchists is in part an expression of that age difference, IMO. That's why I say that their inclusion was inevitable. And I'm not into slicing and dicing up the movement into "good quarters to keep" and "bad quarters to get rid of". Occupy needs more unity and centralization if anything, not less.

* And often even a lot of the (civil) troublemaking (disruption of business as usual) is welcome and important, IMO! Our movement isn't rich like the Tea Party movement. We don't have nigh unlimited material resources. We have to find other ways of getting people's attention. That often requires that one break social taboos.

Peter1469
09-22-2012, 02:22 PM
Peter wrote:
I have said on another board that OWS, as envisioned, has more in common with the Tea Party(ies) than either have with the two established political parties.

Polly wrote:



I wish I could agree. I actually tried to organize joint actions with the Tea Party movement at a certain point. About one-third to half of the Occupiers were willing to support that as an idea. But I could find no support for united actions on the part of the Tea Party movement. But I would certainly still be interested in trying for that if the opportunity arose in the future. I'm not narrow-minded concerning who we can ally with when it comes to common causes.

______________

True. The Tea Party(ies) have a hard time joining with OWS because there are so many freaks in the OWS movement. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/11/gross-obama-endorsed-occupy-seattle-protester-takes-crap-on-sidewalk-video/

But the movements, at their heart are against corporatocracy. That is in my mind the biggest danger to the further of the US.

IMPress Polly
09-22-2012, 02:55 PM
Captain Obvious wrote:
I thought for a while it might turn into another political party arm of the democrats, but clearly that didn't happen.

The movement completely lacked focus, goals and objectives - which is why we're talking about them in past tense.

Well talking about us in the past tense IMO is really a deliberate choice on your part, reflective of your will. i.e. You don't want Occupy to still exist, so you pretend that it doesn't.

Anyhow though, I actually kind of agree with your point on strategically uniting with the Democratic Party. Although last year I too was pretty naive and dogmatic about things like "being co-opted" and whatnot, in retrospect I think it probably would have been...and still would be...smarter than not to try and organize as, at least partially, part of the Democratic Party. We would already have lots of allies because the progressive movement within the Democratic Party already supports most of our causes. And it would give the movement more staying power, albeit at the cost of perhaps being a little more stale and less street-action-oriented.

Trinnity
09-22-2012, 03:07 PM
I'm guessing you got this theory from that Citizens United B movie on Occupy that just came out. Right? :wink: No. I never heard of it. That was my opinion.

Goldie Locks
09-22-2012, 03:23 PM
No. I never heard of it. That was my opinion.

Here's the thread on it.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/6240-New-Powerful-movie-Occupy-Unmasked

IGetItAlready
09-22-2012, 05:21 PM
Well, I did my best but I'm such a windy bastard I was not able to reply within the allotted number of characters so I'm splitting my response to you Polly into two posts.

Polly:

If people are ill-informed on the movement's aims, it's certainly not been for a lack of effort on my part. I've been talking about the Occupy movement, its goals, strategies, and so forth, essentially since the movement started, and indeed did so quite diligently for a number of months on the old Political Forum.
You clearly KNOW that people are "ill-informed" or you'd not have wasted your time attempting to clear up the confusion. You even imply as much in this statement:
Occupy has always been a very broad and decentralized movement and I can't speak for every participant or grouping thereof. That said, it did indeed take some time for most of the movement to translate the broad objective I highlighted in the OP into sets of specific demands. Being a decentralized movement, each encampment and offshoot came up with its own. A lot of these demand lists were very moderate. Others were quite radical. It all depended on the ideological composition of the particular grouping. That decentralized approach understandable yielded a lot of confusion concerning what our specific ideas were as an overall mass movement. That's one part of why I think it important for the movement to finally now embrace more centralization, particularly now that we cannot rely on permanent encampments anymore.
This statement seems to support my belief that there never has been a cohesive message. And while YOU may have worked diligently to get the word out in regard to YOUR interpretation of the movements goals and motives, I'm quite sure I'd remember a cutie such as yourself had I ever seen or heard your explanation. How can you claim to speak for such a loose collection of ideas ranging from what you consider moderate to the ultra radical anarchists that seek to define the movement in a way your common sense approach would seem to conflict with? Therein lies the entire problem with any attempt to define OWS and it hasn't changed much despite the late in coming more reasonable explanations of what the group is about.

Glad to hear you were open-minded enough to consider the Occupy movement at a certain point!
I've never "considered" the movement as something I might associate with as a whole. But I was curious and interested in hearing what you all had to say. Unfortunately the more I listened the less I understood the conflicting claims ranging from increased financial regulation to all out anarchy.

I cannot directly speak to the particular incident in question, having not been present when it happened, but I can say that Occupiers very broadly were quite conscious of attempts to co-opt the movement from the outside. (Probably a little too paranoid about it, if anything.) I'm not saying that that's necessarily what Mr. Lewis was doing, but given the movement's commitment to a highly egalitarian, formally leaderless approach, such a development, as you describe it, does not shock me.
My apologies. I stated before I'd include the clip and I neglected to do so. I will post it at the end of this response and you can see for yourself. But I will say that you couldn't possibly say what Congressman Lewis' intent was as his voice was silenced. You mention a commitment to egalitarianism but the clip illustrates quite clearly that some within the group DID in fact consider themselves "leaders" and their own opinions superior to those of others. Why wasn't everyone issued a bullhorn? Why was the desire of many in attendance to hear the congressman speak ignored and their requests rudely shouted down by the goon with the superior voice? The entire incident is a beautiful illustration of one of the many problems with TRUE Democracy aka anarchy.

Sorry! Maybe my simply listing those things didn't provide enough clarity. If you visit the link I placed under point two, you'll find a slideshow that not only LISTS these issues, but also provides a description of them.
With all due respect I don't need to refer to your source to be educated on the tenets of socialist doctrine. Wealth redistribution is most definitely among them and to be perfectly honest, with all the rhetoric coming from the left these days over "fairness" I'm somewhat stunned that stealing what others have earned in order to reward those who have earned less can be considered anything less than patently UNFAIR.

See now this is a great example of what I like to call non-constructive conversation. Did you actually expect me to have a civil response to that?
I'll give you that this was a bit of a lazy response on my part so let me explain.
This greatest of nations (whether you like it or not) was founded on a set of revolutionary principles which have served us well for over 236 years. They've made us the envy of the world for well over a century and a half now and our unprecedented success as a nation and a people is directly tied to these principles and the people that our unparalleled brand of freedom makes possible. Our founders were well aware of the detriment factions would pose to our republic and in response they intentionally designed our form of government to be slow in moving and difficult to simply overhaul.
The things you claim to support are not by any means new ideas. They've been tried and failed throughout history in many nations but with the exception of the mistakes of FDR, NEVER here. As a result we've beaten the odds in that the average lifespan of any form of government throughout human history, if memory serves, is somewhere in the neighborhood of 180-200 years.
Let's consider what FDR did in shredding many of our founding principles for a moment. One of the biggest issues facing the US currently is the imminent insolvency of SSI in all it's forms. This Euro-socialist import poses one of the biggest threats to our economy. It's virtually impossible to discuss American economics and the future of our economic stability without considering the fact that this program is unsustainable in it's current form. Therefore we find ourselves struggling with some of the same issues our European cousins can now point to as the reason for their own demise. Fortunately, so far, we've been able to avoid going completely over the entitlement cliff that has led the Greeks and Italians to name a couple to burning their nation to the ground upon their realizing that the money and handouts were all gone. Things like your "Robin Hood Tax", allowing government to regulate succes and redistribution in general will only push us further toward the grief they're now experiencing.
Honestly, I could spend the rest of the afternoon writing on this subject but I think you get my point. If not, by all means let me know and we can discuss Euro-socialist vs free market capitalist economics in much more detail if you like. (Obviously, I can be a hella windy guy if allowed but at least I recognize my faults. :wink20: )
At any rate, knee jerking to emotional, feel good responses to our economic woes present far bigger problems than the issues you'd like to address imo as well as that of prominent economists throughout history.

IGetItAlready
09-22-2012, 05:23 PM
Polly Continued:

Both the Occupy movement and the Tea Party movement are authentic populist movements. There are people in each that claim otherwise of the other movement, but I mean whatever. The fact that a movement may garner some media, political, or even more broadly commercial support does not mean that it is RUN BY the 1% or this or that segment thereof. Those are two different things.
I'd challenge you to go instance for instance with me in posting the ugly side of the Tea Party compared to the ugly side of the Occupy movement. To be perfectly honest, and I may be wrong, I can't think of a single instance in which there were arrests, destruction of private and or public property, personal assaults or the "police brutality" as you refer to it in ANY of the Tea Party rallies.
BTW, your reference to the "1%" is disappointing. That is some of the dumbest, mental midget food dumped on the American public and I'd like to believe you're smarter than that.

1) Got any evidence to support that claim?

2) Realize that even communists often shop at Wal-Mart, use Windows 7, etc. The fact that many Occupiers might use brand-name smart phones or may have put books published by Scholastic in our library simply reflects the reality that big money really does make the world go 'round at present. There's pretty much no getting around it. Maybe we are too controlled by the forces we're protesting. I wouldn't say that that's a main problem with our movement. I don't think it changes the nature of what it is Occupy as a movement seeks to change.
1) It took me all of .2 seconds to come up with thousands of links containing the profit margins of both the oil and gas exploration and production companies AND Apple. You can do your own searches but what I'm seeing shows big oil PMs ranging from around 6-9% and Apple from 25-39% depending on the source.
2)What it does do is point to an incredible level of hypocrisy within the movement.

You make it sound as if these things have been the rule rather than the exception.

I'm not trying to trivialize anything here. I know that rape is a serious matter, for instance. I've been raped. A lot of times. Not at any Occupy events though. By far the biggest concern amongst participants when it came to threats of violence were those from the police. That last articles I linked up to in the OP takes you through some remarkably typical examples of police behavior toward our movement. That was true not just on Monday, but much more generally and consistently. The police response to our simple acts of civil disobedience has been remarkably aggressive and violent.

There were, in fact, a handful of rapes that took place at Occupy encampments late last year and the responses from the encampments that were mustered were initially offensively timid, as if to sweep the incidents under the rug. The result of that offensiveness was the emergence of a robust women's movement within Occupy that succeeded in getting a number of safety measures accepted and endorsed by the assemblies in subsequent weeks. I was part of that women's movement. But I want to again stress that the far and away BIGGEST concern when it came to issues of violence at the encampments was the issue of police brutality.
And you make it sound as if police were forming lines Kent State style and assaulting peaceful protesters for kicks. You were handed the parks despite those parks being paid for by those your group takes issue with. You were handed extension after extension to hold that public ground in an inexplicable attempt to keep from being forced to confront you and physically move you out. I challenge you to find another group who has ever been handed public property to call their home for months on end despite their destroying that public property while using it as a home base from which to conduct operations including destroying private property. Many of the tax payers who pay for the upkeep of those parks found themselves unwelcome in even walking through THEIR parks.
And as to your own personal experiences, you have nothing but my deepest sympathy...and that's all I'm going to say about that.

I fully appreciate your dedication to the movement Polly but I feel you're attempting to rationalize the indefensible. While YOU may have YOUR motives all figured out, as you've already implied yourself, you don't speak for the movement at large. I wish you did as though I still disagree, I like your version of OWS and what they stand for far better than the reality that even the media who was so bent on supporting the movement can no longer defend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI
Sorry, nearly forgot your Lewis clip yet again. :)

Goldie Locks
09-22-2012, 05:39 PM
The "Occupy Wall Street" protesters have listed 13 proposed demands from their website.
Demand one: Restoration of the living wage.
Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system.
Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.
Demand four: Free college education.

(more at link)
http://nation.foxnews.com/occupy-wall-street/2011/10/04/read-demands-occupy-wall-street-and-try-not-laugh

IGetItAlready
09-22-2012, 05:59 PM
The "Occupy Wall Street" protesters have listed 13 proposed demands from their website.
Demand one: Restoration of the living wage.
Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system.
Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.
Demand four: Free college education.
In other words, free everything for everyone...sounds like a plan. :blowup:

Goldie Locks
09-22-2012, 06:07 PM
In other words, free everything for everyone...sounds like a plan. :blowup:


Yes, that is about the size of it.

Smartmouthwoman
09-22-2012, 06:42 PM
IMHO, the biggest problem the OWS movement had was not having a leader who could subsequently run for political office. Complaining is fine, but without an avenue to accomplish your group's mission... you might as well be throwing a 3-yr old's tantrum in Walmart. Nothing is going to come of it.

I attribute that lack of foresight to the fact very few OWSers have ever held a real job, much less managed a large project. Nobody had a clue what to do after the protests ended... so everybody just went home.

Tea Partiers, on the other hand, have been working since 2008 to elect candidates who share their vision. 2010 was the start and 2012 will be the pinnacle of their mission.

I'll always believe OWS might've lasted longer if they'd have started protesting in early spring instead of early fall. What dumbass was responsible for scheduling?

Taxcutter
09-22-2012, 09:59 PM
OWS is kaput. They really never were anything but an attempt to distract people from Obama's horrible record.

IMPress Polly
09-23-2012, 07:03 AM
The "Occupy Wall Street" protesters have listed 13 proposed demands from their website.
Demand one: Restoration of the living wage.
Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system.
Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.
Demand four: Free college education.I Thanked your post because I appreciated this contribution. However, I must point out that, IMO unfortunately, at this point the Occupy movement cannot be solely confined to Occupy Wall Street. OWS is a particular section of the movement, which is now much broader. It's a very decentralized movement with all kinds of spin-offs, each with their own ideas. So while OWS really does remain the most influential grouping of Occupiers, being the one that started it all, I would caution against too much generalizing.

The demands cited above are mostly typical of progressive Democrats (and by no means are all Democrats progressives), with the notable exception of demand 11, which just seem utopian and removed from present-day realities. The world just is not about to do away with debt as such. I would like to see the kind of world that demand 11 would allow for become a reality, but that's not something that's going to happen within our lifetimes. The demands IMO should be analogous to election platform planks that one could plausibly get elected on in a crisis situation. Most of the demands should be left as they are, but demand 11 should be drastically reduced to debt forgiveness for loans already in default and perhaps the abolition of interest, and demand 12 should be replaced with a call to nationalize the banking sector or the financial sector more broadly; a proposal to eliminate, not just reform, Wall Street. I also find it notable that almost nothing in the demands directly addresses American foreign policy and what it should be going forward. But that's pretty understandable. There's not really a consensus on foreign policy within the movement.

Just my personal opinions on this stuff.


Smartmoutwoman wrote:
I attribute that lack of foresight to the fact very few OWSers have ever held a real job, much less managed a large project. Nobody had a clue what to do after the protests ended... so everybody just went home.

...

Tea Partiers, on the other hand, have been working since 2008 to elect candidates who share their vision. 2010 was the start and 2012 will be the pinnacle of their mission.

Newt Gingrich is not a credible source of information on our movement. While there certainly were and are a lot of unemployed people, victims of the present economy, who have participated and continue to participate in the Occupy movement, a large majority are employed and participate in the movement on top of working a regular job. That has included yours truly from near the beginning. I have a career. My politics may differ from yours, but I'm a regular, hard-working person, as are Occupiers generally.


IMHO, the biggest problem the OWS movement had was not having a leader who could subsequently run for political office. Complaining is fine, but without an avenue to accomplish your group's mission... you might as well be throwing a 3-yr old's tantrum in Walmart. Nothing is going to come of it.

Not sure about equating democratic protest to "a 3-yr old's tantrum in Walmart", but more broadly I tend to agree with this sentiment these days. There is too much paranoia about "getting co-opted" within the Occupy scene generally. It prevents us from really doing anything effective within the existing system. If we are to make a real-world difference, we can't just one-sidedly, exclusively remain on the outside of the system. We need to be able to work effectively both outside and inside the system in order to effect actual change. That's not selling out. It's being realistic and practical. I'll go one step further even and suggest that the idea of becoming the equivalent of a sort of left wing "Tea Party movement for the Democrats" wherein we field and endorse candidates in Democratic Party primaries would be a good idea.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 07:18 AM
IMHO, the biggest problem the OWS movement had was not having a leader who could subsequently run for political office. Complaining is fine, but without an avenue to accomplish your group's mission... you might as well be throwing a 3-yr old's tantrum in Walmart. Nothing is going to come of it.

I attribute that lack of foresight to the fact very few OWSers have ever held a real job, much less managed a large project. Nobody had a clue what to do after the protests ended... so everybody just went home.

Tea Partiers, on the other hand, have been working since 2008 to elect candidates who share their vision. 2010 was the start and 2012 will be the pinnacle of their mission.

I'll always believe OWS might've lasted longer if they'd have started protesting in early spring instead of early fall. What dumbass was responsible for scheduling?

well let's not forget their policy of overwhelming the public with body fluids and corrupting everything they moved in on. I am trying to be open here to see if there is anything that i can come to terms with OWS on and...no. there isn't. I am not going to align myself with the scum of the earth so that they can live like leeches on the rest of us for their entire lives. Haven't we already seen what their grandfathers and fathers have done to this country? enough of this vermin.

patrickt
09-23-2012, 07:45 AM
ImpressPolly:
"1. Corporate personhood
A. A good step on doing away with free speech.
2. The Volcker rule
A. A good step on the road of the incompetent government running all businesses.
3. Political favoring of the rich
A. Ah, yes, the old class warfare meme. How about the government not favoring the rich, the poor, "their people", political victims, or anyone else. How about a radical idea like all people being equal under the law. That's equal in benefits and responsibilities.
4. The need for a Robin Hood tax
A. Isn't that just too precious for words. Can I be with the band of Merry Men who take Barack Obama's millions and George Soros' billions? It is nice to see that as with President Obama you have abandoned any pretense of fairness.
5. Income inequality
A. This I totally agree with and the best way to achieve this is to educate all Americans and encourage them to work. I realize both of those run against the liberal agenda but it would sure help with the Income Inequality. Consigning certain groups to a lifetime on the dole, a liberal goal, is an absolute guarantee of income inequality unless, of course, you just seize the assets of those who work and hand them out to deadbeats. Wait, that's the Robin Hood Law, isn't it?
6. The foreclosure crisis
A. My god, yes. How can we dare expect people to pay their debts. The government--Bush, Clinton, Carter, Frank, Dodd--all required banks to give mortgages to people who had no ability or intention of paying and the result was a series of crisis. How surprising?
7. Student loan debt"
A. Oh, right. They should pay their bills, either. How about the Consumer Credit Crisis? My cousin is counting on President Obama to pay off all her consumer debt and her house mortgage.

Sadly, while OWS garnered support from nitwits like President Obama, Rep. Pelosi, Rep. Lewis, Michael Moore, and almost everyone in Hollywood, they had no message. They were simply a bunch of self-indulgent fools. The anarchists didn't take over the movement they were an integral part of the movement. So were unions and other far left organizations.

Now, the OWS fools just become a part of the income inequality problem.

IMPress Polly
09-23-2012, 07:59 AM
Calypso Jones wrote:
well let's not forget their policy of overwhelming the public with body fluids and corrupting everything they moved in on. I am trying to be open here to see if there is anything that i can come to terms with OWS on and...no. there isn't. I am not going to align myself with the scum of the earth so that they can live like leeches on the rest of us for their entire lives. Haven't we already seen what their grandfathers and fathers have done to this country? enough of this vermin.

Thanks for that insightful contribution. I feel like I learned a lot.


Sadly, while OWS garnered support from nitwits like President Obama, Rep. Pelosi, Rep. Lewis, Michael Moore, and almost everyone in Hollywood...

The bolded items are bald-faced lies. I wish we had the support of the president! Reality though is that as recently as yesterday the president publicly denounced us by inference, mocking our language of the 1% and the 99%, continuing a series of similarly not-so-subtle Occupy denunciations he's been offering since at least last November. Just because some of our participants support his campaign doesn't mean that he returns their endorsement. And although some support for Occupy exists in Hollywood (which I'm not complaining about!), we most certainly are not supported by an overwhelming majority of that crowd.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 09:27 AM
Thanks for that insightful contribution. I feel like I learned a lot.



The bolded items are bald-faced lies. I wish we had the support of the president! Reality though is that as recently as yesterday the president publicly denounced us by inference, mocking our language of the 1% and the 99%, continuing a series of similarly not-so-subtle Occupy denunciations he's been offering since at least last November. Just because some of our participants support his campaign doesn't mean that he returns their endorsement. And although some support for Occupy exists in Hollywood (which I'm not complaining about!), we most certainly are not supported by an overwhelming majority of that crowd.


What do you consider support from the president, Money???


Obama said the most important thing he can do as president is express solidarity with the protesters and redouble his commitment to achieving what he described as a more egalitarian society.
“The most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on their side.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 09:29 AM
Ubama also embraced the term 1%/99%, if he has backtracked on that and on his support for OWS, maybe you should rethink your loyalty to this man.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 12:42 PM
Polly, I just now ran across the post and i have to tell you that you are very correct: the OWS movement is not dead. Not by a long shot. And, no matter how people on this thread want it to go away, it will remain and grow and morph into a strong united world-wide unit. One that will accomplish through the people's voice what the politician's voice has not, or will ever.

The yokels who insist that OWS is a politically motivated movement, with allegiance to any party, have no clue to what this is all about. As soon as they say such, they prove themselves unable to think beyond the TeaParty mindset: a politically-driven movement designed specifically to insert their candidates into our vastly corrupt system of government. These people continuously complain about our dirty congresspeople, our dirty president, our dirty leaders, etc. and yet they think that for some reason voting in new politicians is going to change the system. BREAKING NEWS: Pushing a clean kid into the mud is going to make him dirty, too.

Obama, surprisingly said something interesting the other day. I doubt that he meant it in this way, but he said something to the effect that Washington can't be changed from within. It has to be changed from without. And he's right. Change has to come from outside the political circus. OWS is not politically motivated. They're smart enough to work from without. For as "dirty, and lazy and destructive" as some seem to think they are, they are smart enough to know that there is no real power to be gained by simply sending your hand-picked candidate to office, just to watch him/her get sucked into the system. This is where the Tea Party fails. The sooner they realize this, the better.

OWS is a true grassroots movement that is not finished by any stretch. I continue to be amazed by those who yell and whine that the OWS is an uncoordinated, unpolished, disorganized bunch of bums who never had a job and want free everything. But as soon as the group coalesces and creates a leadership group with central offices, and official spokesmen, who will be the first to yell and scream about that? ...You got it... These people want to hate the OWS. They want it to go away, in spite of the fact that one of the few real chances that we the people have of regaining our power and, maybe for the first time in human history, take a few steps towards actually improving the lives of every person. Those who refuse to, or who can't, see the potential and imagine the change it might bring, well... i feel sorry for those who have just given up and are unwilling to think outside the political box. As long as you stay inside the box, the government has you right where they want you.

Attacking the OWS is just another example of people choosing to fight against their own best interests.

Stick with it, Polly. I'm with you on this one. And you are right, this is one sermon that most here just ain't gonna listen to. They've already made up their minds.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 01:21 PM
New Living Translation (http://nlt.scripturetext.com/matthew/7.htm) Matthew 7:20
Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions.

Mainecoons
09-23-2012, 01:32 PM
Nice rant Blad and as usual, not a shred of evidence to back it up.

If wishes were fishes you'd have your own fish farm. Now when we get down to reality, OWS's recent gatherings have had all the attendence of a Biden speech.

:rofl:

Smartmouthwoman
09-23-2012, 01:35 PM
Newt Gingrich is not a credible source of information on our movement. While there certainly were and are a lot of unemployed people, victims of the present economy, who have participated and continue to participate in the Occupy movement, a large majority are employed and participate in the movement on top of working a regular job. That has included yours truly from near the beginning. I have a career. My politics may differ from yours, but I'm a regular, hard-working person, as are Occupiers generally.

I have no idea what Newt Gingrich has to do with what I said, but nobody who has a real job is able to spend weeks protesting anything. If you mean sitting behind a computer monitor whining while claiming to be an OWSer, then you have a point. Otherwise, there's no way an 'active' protester can hold down a job.


Not sure about equating democratic protest to "a 3-yr old's tantrum in Walmart", but more broadly I tend to agree with this sentiment these days. There is too much paranoia about "getting co-opted" within the Occupy scene generally. It prevents us from really doing anything effective within the existing system. If we are to make a real-world difference, we can't just one-sidedly, exclusively remain on the outside of the system. We need to be able to work effectively both outside and inside the system in order to effect actual change. That's not selling out. It's being realistic and practical. I'll go one step further even and suggest that the idea of becoming the equivalent of a sort of left wing "Tea Party movement for the Democrats" wherein we field and endorse candidates in Democratic Party primaries would be a good idea.

Your 'democratic protest' had no teeth. Nothing to use as leverage to bring about the changes you want.

Therefore it was indeed as effective as a 3-yr old throwing a tantrum in Walmart. Then going home to continue following the rules of 'the man.'

No such thing as fighting the system from outside. You have to play with the cards you've been dealt... and that means having a candidate you can elect to bring about the changes you want.

There's no other way in this country.

Thank God.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 01:45 PM
These lowlifes that have been impressed into service for the brains behind the OWS are nothing but expendable fools. They'll die in the first big winter once they're without mamma's basement and fuel oil. The people behind ows, THE brains are no doubt part of the 1% with goals far more devious than these little moochers and licentious sexual perverts can even begin to imagine. And it's not gonna be good for the occupiers. They'll be exterminated as the vermin they are. Can't have these fools thinking they can go were they want, poop where they please, bring in lice and vermin. ain't happenin'.

Smartmouthwoman
09-23-2012, 02:33 PM
These lowlifes that have been impressed into service for the brains behind the OWS are nothing but expendable fools. They'll die in the first big winter once they're without mamma's basement and fuel oil. The people behind ows, THE brains are no doubt part of the 1% with goals far more devious than these little moochers and licentious sexual perverts can even begin to imagine. And it's not gonna be good for the occupiers. They'll be exterminated as the vermin they are. Can't have these fools thinking they can go were they want, poop where they please, bring in lice and vermin. ain't happenin'.


Well, it shouldn't take a brain surgeon to figure out they were being used as tools since they were the ones sleeping out in the cold. The only thing they didn't try was holding their breath til they turned blue. Guess they were smart enough to know nobody would stop 'em.

Hard to call 'em useful idiots... because nothing was accomplished. Therefore, they really weren't all that 'useful'. ;)

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 02:41 PM
Well, it shouldn't take a brain surgeon to figure out they were being used as tools since they were the ones sleeping out in the cold. The only thing they didn't try was holding their breath til they turned blue. Guess they were smart enough to know nobody would stop 'em.

Hard to call 'em useful idiots... because nothing was accomplished. Therefore, they really weren't all that 'useful'. ;)


What they accomplished is property destruction amounting to millions for cities, lice, rat infestation,scurvy, rape and murder.

IMPress Polly
09-23-2012, 02:41 PM
Goldie Locks wrote:
What do you consider support from the president, Money???


Obama said the most important thing he can do as president is express solidarity with the protesters and redouble his commitment to achieving what he described as a more egalitarian society.
“The most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on their side.





You neglected to provide a source (or context) for the quote.


Ubama also embraced the term 1%/99%, if he has backtracked on that and on his support for OWS, maybe you should rethink your loyalty to this man.

His name is spelled Obama. And if he has indeed embraced that rhetoric, it hasn't been since last November, when he originally denounced it. And like I said, I personally saw him do so again yesterday at a campaign rally that aired on C-SPAN.

Anyhow, I'm done with this thread. It's clearly not going anywhere, so this 'rat-infesting' 'murdering', 'rapist', "lowlife" "vermin" is taking her business elsewhere.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 04:49 PM
don't let the tent flap hit your dirndl wearing behind on the way out into the cold.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 04:50 PM
Imam Barrack Hussein Ibn Ubama. yeah. I think we got it

MMC
09-23-2012, 05:17 PM
You neglected to provide a source (or context) for the quote.



His name is spelled Obama. And if he has indeed embraced that rhetoric, it hasn't been since last November, when he originally denounced it. And like I said, I personally saw him do so again yesterday at a campaign rally that aired on C-SPAN.

Anyhow, I'm done with this thread. It's clearly not going anywhere, so this 'rat-infesting' 'murdering', 'rapist', "lowlife" "vermin" is taking her business elsewhere.


Aaaah Polly.....Myself, whens they come with the name calling. I would recommend that ya tells them don't Ring that Dinner bell late when calling ya. Otherwise it's their Azz! :wink:

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 05:22 PM
Aaaah Polly.....Myself, whens they come with the name calling. I would recommend that ya tells them don't Ring that Dinner bell late when calling ya. Otherwise it's their Azz! :wink:


I didn't call her any names...WTF??? She's just PO'd because she received no support. Where are all the libs and Marxist's to hold her up?

MMC
09-23-2012, 05:30 PM
I didn't call her any names...WTF??? She's just PO'd because she received no support. Where are all the libs and Marxist's to hold her up?

Now U knows.....I'm not talkin bout you gorgeous! :wink: Gangsta hugz! :grin:

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 05:33 PM
Now U knows.....I'm not talkin bout you gorgeous! :wink: Gangsta hugz! :grin:

Ok...gots ya...just sayin' cause it was my post she was quoting.

MMC
09-23-2012, 05:44 PM
Ok...gots ya...just sayin' cause it was my post she was quoting.


Yeah I know but the exasperation came in at the end from all the rest methinks. Plus I figured I give em a few lines to works with. :wink:

Smartmouthwoman
09-23-2012, 05:49 PM
If they had an OWS candidate on the presidential ballot for Nov 6th, they could say their movement was successful. Without one, it was just so much chest beating with no measurable results.

Reminds me of Michelle's No Fat Kid's Behind Left program. A lotta jaw-jacking, no final outcome.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:02 PM
I didn't call her any names...WTF??? She's just PO'd because she received no support. Where are all the libs and Marxist's to hold her up?
You must have missed it. I support her and the OWS movement 100%. Guess you enjoy being abused by your government, your MegaCorporations and the MegaBanks. No surprise. Most people are so numb to it, they don't even feel it anymore.

Mainecoons
09-23-2012, 06:06 PM
But. . .but. . . you LOVE that government. And they have locked up so many WS and Bankster crooks. . . haven't they? Pay no mind that they're printing $40 billion dollars per month and using it to buy the bad paper the banksters put out. We all know they are really for reform. :grin:

You're showing your confusion again, Blad. :rofl:

Smartmouthwoman
09-23-2012, 06:08 PM
You must have missed it. I support her and the OWS movement 100%. Guess you enjoy being abused by your government, your MegaCorporations and the MegaBanks. No surprise. Most people are so numb to it, they don't even feel it anymore.


Good. Maybe you can tell us what they accomplished?

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:09 PM
If they had an OWS candidate on the presidential ballot for Nov 6th, they could say their movement was successful. Without one, it was just so much chest beating with no measurable results.

Reminds me of Michelle's No Fat Kid's Behind Left program. A lotta jaw-jacking, no final outcome.So you think the OWS needs to endorse their own candidate? You people just don't get it, do you... Any candidate that works their way into the corrupt political system will be sucked up by the system or they will be spit out. A candidate is a waste of time, money and effort.

The definition of insanity is... you know... doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Ya keep voting another "hero" in and nothing changes. You vote another "hero" in and nothing changes. Ya see how this goes? Something else has to be done to force change. It won't happen politically. Ever. Why don't you OWS haters just stop hating for a minute or two and look at the realities of the situation in front of us.

Mainecoons
09-23-2012, 06:10 PM
Turned some public parks into pig stys, smoked a lot of dope, busted up some stuff, walked around with signs that showed how illiterate many of them are, basically wallowed in their own confusion and dirt.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:13 PM
Good. Maybe you can tell us what they accomplished?In one year? Seriously?? Well, i can tell you one thing. They got their name out, they got media coverage. Everyone's heard of them. You have, right? They've become a world-wide movement. In one year, without a central organization, i think that's not too shabby. What's ahead is more important.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:19 PM
Turned some public parks into pig stys, smoked a lot of dope, busted up some stuff, walked around with signs that showed how illiterate many of them are, basically wallowed in their own confusion and dirt.
Oh boy. You got me there. Everyone knows that they are all like that. Every other group has their fringe elements and their radicals. That's to be expected. But the OWS; well, they're all that way.

The last pro sporting event i was to there were 48,000 fans there. I saw drunks brawling in the bathroom, security hauled away at least 10 people that i saw, other drunks were pissing in the parking lot outside the stadium, so i guess it's safe to say that the 48,000 fans were all drunks urinating and fighting.

How about it. Ever been to an event?

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 06:21 PM
In one year? Seriously?? Well, i can tell you one thing. They got their name out, they got media coverage. Everyone's heard of them. You have, right? They've become a world-wide movement. In one year, without a central organization, i think that's not too shabby. What's ahead is more important.


So are they going to be running the country anytime soon??? What are their long term goals? What are their short term goals? What do they plan on doing to change the system exactly? Jobs, the economy, healthcare, education...etc.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 06:21 PM
Turned some public parks into pig stys, smoked a lot of dope, busted up some stuff, walked around with signs that showed how illiterate many of them are, basically wallowed in their own confusion and dirt.

Don't forget shitting on cop cars and in public places.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:24 PM
But. . .but. . . you LOVE that government. And they have locked up so many WS and Bankster crooks. . . haven't they? Pay no mind that they're printing $40 billion dollars per month and using it to buy the bad paper the banksters put out. We all know they are really for reform. :grin:

You're showing your confusion again, Blad. :rofl:
Whatever are you babbling about? Where is that coming from? Are you refuting something that i said or have you decided that you just had to say this; that it's been bottled up inside you and you couldn't hold it in anymore. Maybe you think i love our government. The fact is i just can't stand the stale conservative mindset, locked and loaded. It's the idea that if you're not a conservative, you must be a commie socialist marxist hippie drug user. Thank God i'm not an alcoholic.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:25 PM
Don't forget shitting on cop cars and in public places.We're talking about the OWS, not the Tea Partiers. :grin:

MMC
09-23-2012, 06:27 PM
Don't forget shitting on cop cars and in public places.

I knew this one guy who got arrested over some minor bullshit. So when the Cops threw him in Da Squad. He Shiznit all over himself and in the back of the squad. Since he had the runs it was all coming out so he decided to smear it round some.

They didnt even wants to pick him up and take him into the lockup? But you knows they did and I am sure he tried his best to get it on them too. :laugh:

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 06:28 PM
We're talking about the OWS, not the Tea Partiers. :grin:

Show me where someone from the Tea Party shit on a cop car, because I can show you one from OWS. Or maybe you're just full of it.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:30 PM
So are they going to be running the country anytime soon??? What are their long term goals? What are their short term goals? What do they plan on doing to change the system exactly? Jobs, the economy, healthcare, education...etc.Does it really matter to you what i say? You'll just ignore it and continue with your close-mindedness.

That you asked that first question in itself shows us all here that you just have no grasp. It's like you're still in kindergarten and need someone to explain everything to you. Do i want them to be running the country? No. Do you? I doubt it. Do they want to be running the country? If they do, it's a huge secret to everyone.

I think their goals were listed in the OP. You might want to re-read them. It's easier to do that than for me to copy and re-paste. Have at it.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 06:33 PM
Does it really matter to you what i say? You'll just ignore it and continue with your close-mindedness.

That you asked that first question in itself shows us all here that you just have no grasp. It's like you're still in kindergarten and need someone to explain everything to you. Do i want them to be running the country? No. Do you? I doubt it. Do they want to be running the country? If they do, it's a huge secret to everyone.

I think their goals were listed in the OP. You might want to re-read them. It's easier to do that than for me to copy and re-paste. Have at it.

You mean their demands that I posted?

Yeah, I've read them.

Try to keep up.

IGetItAlready
09-23-2012, 06:35 PM
In one year? Seriously?? Well, i can tell you one thing. They got their name out, they got media coverage. Everyone's heard of them. You have, right? They've become a world-wide movement. In one year, without a central organization, i think that's not too shabby. What's ahead is more important.

The radical muzzy killers in Egypt and Libya also did as much. Not to mention the Colorado psycho theater shooter and every other serial killer to have cursed the earth with his/her existence.
I could do something within the next hour that would accomplish the same for myself if I wanted to.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:39 PM
Show me where someone from the Tea Party shit on a cop car, because I can show you one from OWS. Or maybe you're just full of it.Well, as far as i know, your tea party crowd wasn't muscled around by the cops. They never engaged the cops. The Koch Bros. told them to leave the cops alone. And they were too busy ooing and ahhing over Sweet Sarah and Mighty Michele to even think about making a real statement. Do you really, really think that anything they have done will result in some kind of positive change within our corrupt government? And if you do, exactly what gives you that idea, what has happened so far to make you think that their effecting a change? Oops. Sorry; i used that word "thinking". My bad.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 06:42 PM
Well, as far as i know, your tea party crowd wasn't muscled around by the cops. They never engaged the cops. The Koch Bros. told them to leave the cops alone. And they were too busy ooing and ahhing over Sweet Sarah and Mighty Michele to even think about making a real statement. Do you really, really think that anything they have done will result in some kind of positive change within our corrupt government? And if you do, exactly what gives you that idea, what has happened so far to make you think that their effecting a change? Oops. Sorry; i used that word "thinking". My bad.


So you admit you're wrong about someone from the Tea Party shitting on a cop car.

What effective change is OWS gonna get us. Here's your chance...speak up...tell us everything they are going to do to change the system.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 06:43 PM
The radical muzzy killers in Egypt and Libya also did as much. Not to mention the Colorado psycho theater shooter and every other serial killer to have cursed the earth with his/her existence.
I could do something within the next hour that would accomplish the same for myself if I wanted to.Really? Are you really comparing a bunch of murderers to a movement dedicated a change in the immoral abuse of almost all people?? HaHaHa... you're jamming a square peg into a round hole, yep.

IGetItAlready
09-23-2012, 06:46 PM
Well, as far as i know, your tea party crowd wasn't muscled around by the cops. They never engaged the cops. The Koch Bros. told them to leave the cops alone. And they were too busy ooing and ahhing over Sweet Sarah and Mighty Michele to even think about making a real statement. Do you really, really think that anything they have done will result in some kind of positive change within our corrupt government? And if you do, exactly what gives you that idea, what has happened so far to make you think that their effecting a change? Oops. Sorry; i used that word "thinking". My bad.

There was no need for the cops to "muscle" the Tea Party...Says a lot if you care to listen. And I'm betting most average American conservatives had never heard of the Koch brothers before the leftist ilk got bored blaming Bush for everything and started pointing their fingers at them. But I can't prove that anymore than you can prove your ridiculous claim.
The statement was clear and concise from the start: Smaller government, reduced federal spending, and a return to founding principle.
Ever heard of the 2010 "Shellacking"?
Sheesh already...

IGetItAlready
09-23-2012, 06:47 PM
Really? Are you really comparing a bunch of murderers to a movement dedicated a change in the immoral abuse of almost all people?? HaHaHa... you're jamming a square peg into a round hole, yep.

I'm simply pointing out how pointless your claim is and apparently after looking at things a little differently, you would agree. :wink20:

MMC
09-23-2012, 06:48 PM
Well, as far as i know, your tea party crowd wasn't muscled around by the cops. They never engaged the cops. The Koch Bros. told them to leave the cops alone. And they were too busy ooing and ahhing over Sweet Sarah and Mighty Michele to even think about making a real statement. Do you really, really think that anything they have done will result in some kind of positive change within our corrupt government? And if you do, exactly what gives you that idea, what has happened so far to make you think that their effecting a change? Oops. Sorry; i used that word "thinking". My bad.


I think they already made some sort of Change in Government with the Mid-term Elections when they Got members into Congress and the Senate. Don't you?

Do you think them not supporting Bills that had excess Spending is considering making a Change? What about not voting straight up and down in the house when Boner wanted it?

IGetItAlready
09-23-2012, 06:49 PM
I truly wish Polly wouldn't have gotten so bent over people not buying her claims...
At least she attempted to make a coherent point.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 07:11 PM
Sure she made a coherent point. They were just wrong. You know. Satan takes a bit of truth and twists it for his own purposes. Ows is stupid and they're wrong and they'd kill in the name of their philosophy. mainly those people that don't go along with them. How fast do you think they'd get ugly once they find out that no one wants to support their free lifestyle or WE run outta money. I think they're serious. They'd eat us.

Smartmouthwoman
09-23-2012, 07:12 PM
So are they going to be running the country anytime soon??? What are their long term goals? What are their short term goals? What do they plan on doing to change the system exactly? Jobs, the economy, healthcare, education...etc.

That's what I'm saying!

A movement powered by hippie-farts and rainbows that went noplace because it had noplace to go.

Got their name out there... ROFLMAO

That and 4 bucks at Starbucks will get you a cup of coffee.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 07:21 PM
That's what I'm saying!

A movement powered by hippie-farts and rainbows that went noplace because it had noplace to go.

Got their name out there... ROFLMAO

That and 4 bucks at Starbucks will get you a cup of coffee.


They had no goals except to protest and half of them didn't even know WTH they were protesting for Gawd's sake.

Trinnity
09-23-2012, 07:31 PM
Well, as far as i know, your tea party crowd wasn't muscled around by the cops. They never engaged the cops. The Koch Bros. told them to leave the cops alone. That's so implausible, I'm not even gonna ask for a link. I can't see TP'ers getting mass directives from the Koch bros. on anything. Who thinks they all even know who the Koch bros are? That's a stretch.

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 07:57 PM
That's what I'm saying!

A movement powered by hippie-farts and rainbows that went noplace because it had noplace to go.

Got their name out there... ROFLMAO

That and 4 bucks at Starbucks will get you a cup of coffee.

and a bad one at that.

Smartmouthwoman
09-23-2012, 07:58 PM
They had no goals except to protest and half of them didn't even know WTH they were protesting for Gawd's sake.

Hell, nobody knew what they were protesting. I read an article during the height of the protests in NYC... pointing out that 99% of the people who work on Wall Street are just worker bees and not part of the giant machine. It showed a pic of WS clerks walking to work thru the unwashed crybabies in the park.

They didn't/don't have a clue what they're doing... except demanding free stuff. Like the list you posted earlier pointed out. Gimme, gimme, gimme.

bladimz
09-23-2012, 08:16 PM
There was no need for the cops to "muscle" the Tea Party...Says a lot if you care to listen. And I'm betting most average American conservatives had never heard of the Koch brothers before the leftist ilk got bored blaming Bush for everything and started pointing their fingers at them. But I can't prove that anymore than you can prove your ridiculous claim.
The statement was clear and concise from the start: Smaller government, reduced federal spending, and a return to founding principle.
Ever heard of the 2010 "Shellacking"?
Sheesh already...I was around for the Shellacking. And....? What change have they effected. Do we have a smaller government. Has our spending gone down? Have we returned to our founding principles? No, no and no. Never, never and never. All the TP is doing is switching one set of politicians out for a bunch of others. Have you followed up on these TP backed congressmen? I have. The majority have already accepted new cars courtesy of the Big Government, with a gas card to go along with it. They've all accepted the special health care plan available to all congressional personnel. Most haven't even been willing to make even the most basic sacrifices as a show of good faith. Switching out one set of politicians for another set of politicians. Do you know what politicians are? Would you trust most of them to watch your children? I wouldn't.

Goldie Locks
09-23-2012, 08:24 PM
I was around for the Shellacking. And....? What change have they effected. Do we have a smaller government. Has our spending gone down? Have we returned to our founding principles? No, no and no. Never, never and never. All the TP is doing is switching one set of politicians out for a bunch of others. Have you followed up on these TP backed congressmen? I have. The majority have already accepted new cars courtesy of the Big Government, with a gas card to go along with it. They've all accepted the special health care plan available to all congressional personnel. Most haven't even been willing to make even the most basic sacrifices as a show of good faith. Switching out one set of politicians for another set of politicians. Do you know what politicians are? Would you trust most of them to watch your children? I wouldn't.


So what is OWS gonna do for us??? You can complain all you want about the now politicians and the Tea Party not doing enough, but you can't articulate what OWS is going to do or how they will do it.

MMC
09-23-2012, 08:31 PM
I was around for the Shellacking. And....? What change have they effected. Do we have a smaller government. Has our spending gone down? Have we returned to our founding principles? No, no and no. Never, never and never. All the TP is doing is switching one set of politicians out for a bunch of others. Have you followed up on these TP backed congressmen? I have. The majority have already accepted new cars courtesy of the Big Government, with a gas card to go along with it. They've all accepted the special health care plan available to all congressional personnel. Most haven't even been willing to make even the most basic sacrifices as a show of good faith. Switching out one set of politicians for another set of politicians. Do you know what politicians are? Would you trust most of them to watch your children? I wouldn't.


Did you forget Rand Paul and Ron paul who share an Apt in Washington? Or that Rand Paul got rid of 30k of excess spending when he first took his Office. Cutting Staff that was not needed and any waste he saw? Course there were several others that were sharing offices and living out of their Offices too. 1 yr Congressmen.

Did you follow those up.....Blad?


How about those Vouchers for Obamacare that shouldnt be out yet. Did you follow which Democratic Politicans have them As well as What Leaders of Unions? Course some of those Hollywood peeps! :wink:

Calypso Jones
09-23-2012, 08:36 PM
Blad is 'not telling the truth'. He has no more checked up on those TP candidates than he has checked up on what the OWS stands for.

IGetItAlready
09-23-2012, 08:49 PM
I was around for the Shellacking. And....? What change have they effected.

Well you answered that question yourself didn't you Blad?


What's ahead is more important.

Don't think for a moment that the work started in 2010 is finished.

bladimz
09-24-2012, 01:12 AM
So what is OWS gonna do for us??? You can complain all you want about the now politicians and the Tea Party not doing enough, but you can't articulate what OWS is going to do or how they will do it.You've already read Polly's very excellent description of Occupy's plans and what their motives are, why should i repeat them? You've heard it all. And how they're going to do it is yet to be seen, and i would hardly be the one to guess how it would happen. As if any one person can foresee such things.

I do complain about politicians, and rightly so. Is there anyone here who hasn't? Who hasn't complained about wasteful spending, "pork", backroom deals, kick-backs, lack of transparency, etc. It's not a matter of doing enough, it's simply a matter of working for the american people instead of working for the government's benefactors, our good friends at Big Pharma, Big Oil, BoA, and the other financial institutions, etc. The list goes on; and you can bet that the government leaders, all of them, will continue to do the dance for them, all at our expense. Everytime a new loophole is created for the benefit of industry via tax code revisions, it inevitably minimizes tax liabilities for them, reducing revenues to government coffers. Revenues, if used properly, could be used to the benefit of the majority of Americans. Ergo the majority of Americans take second place, and suffer for it.

This is not about getting free stuff at all. It's about being taken advantage of by our government, and used as revenue machines in the form of taxes, and then forgotten. It's time to change that. For years, people have been calling for a revolution. The OWS can be that revolution. It can be that action that finally needs to happen. Look; Only the naive still believe that "new" congresspeople, replacing the "old" ones, will work for change. Maybe some will for a little while, but the majority will be bullied into going with the flow.

Don't you think it's about time that we find an alternative to the weak belief that voting will effect real change. Change that will actually benefit the people and not the pocketbooks of our friends in Washington and their Owners. If the alternative begins as the OWS movement, so be it. But don't dismiss out of hand, simply because there's a fringe element that has attached itself to the core like ticks to a dog. I try not to knock the TP, i only believe that the OWS offers a much better chance of true change, since it is not a politically-motivated movement.

bladimz
09-24-2012, 01:27 AM
Well you answered that question yourself didn't you Blad?



Don't think for a moment that the work started in 2010 is finished.Oh, stick a fork in it. Whatever work began in '12 is long done (and exactly what was that work, i wonder? Oh, you mean the road-blocking routine that the GOP so fondly used?). For instance, do you believe for one moment that Romney, if elected, will repeal the ACA in it's entirety? No, he won't because it'll make him look like a hypocrite in regard to his healthcare program in Mass.

No one will ever convince me that generally speaking, our government and the majority of it's legislators spend their days in DC working for the needs of the people. I've been around too long and and seen too much. One word comes to mind when i say that Washington works against the interest of the american people... War. That is the most obvious example.

bladimz
09-24-2012, 10:39 AM
Blad is 'not telling the truth'. He has no more checked up on those TP candidates than he has checked up on what the OWS stands for.Ironic. You are not telling the truth, when you say that i am not telling the truth.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/07/16/511807/tea-party-car-leases/

See, i'm not in the habit of just making things up.

IGetItAlready
09-24-2012, 11:09 AM
Oh, stick a fork in it. Whatever work began in '12 is long done (and exactly what was that work, i wonder? Oh, you mean the road-blocking routine that the GOP so fondly used?). For instance, do you believe for one moment that Romney, if elected, will repeal the ACA in it's entirety? No, he won't because it'll make him look like a hypocrite in regard to his healthcare program in Mass.

No one will ever convince me that generally speaking, our government and the majority of it's legislators spend their days in DC working for the needs of the people. I've been around too long and and seen too much. One word comes to mind when i say that Washington works against the interest of the american people... War. That is the most obvious example.

The work started in 2010 (not 2012) was dumping the Euro-socialist loving dead weight in congress. You know, the assholes who voted for federal control of the health of each and every American without first reading the bill. I'm no defender of politicians either which is EXACTLY why I'd like to see far fewer of them with far less influence on my life which are TP tenets.

As far as Romney and your perceived hypocrisy of his opposition to the ACA, you need to study some civics. It's all about WE THE PEOPLE son. And in that regard, short of overhauling our very form of government which is what Obama, his ilk and the OWS kids seem to promote, STATES RIGHTS is where it's at and Romney has stated as much on several occasions including last night on 60 Minutes.

Bane
09-25-2012, 08:57 AM
I never understood the OWS movement.

what they want is free stuff at other people's expense.

living wages (whether you work or not, free healthcare, etc). Those things DONOT exist. This movement was simply a temper tantrum formulated by those on the far left who felt they needed their own "tea party" group to offset what the Tea Party has done.

It failed miserably , b/c anybody with brains is not gonna support complete and total socialism if they can help it.

Goldie Locks
09-25-2012, 09:36 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsJPKMvWDmY


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SwKxUz7osM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50rpJ7EQWuI

Bane
09-25-2012, 11:21 AM
Those are some wacked out folks in this videos. Just completely wack.

Some of their arguments and reasons are so childish, my 10 year old could find better arguments. And that guy was right, it's like a Christmas wish list "I want this, I want that"......lol.

A nation of spoiled rotten brats. Children who never grew up. That is what these people are.

bladimz
09-25-2012, 12:11 PM
And then there's this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrW6BlDauew

This second one is very worthy of viewing as well; see if this lacks focus and message:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIpJJGiP26A&feature=related


Finding and posting videos in an attempt to back your stance is easy and fun to do. I did the same thing and i enjoyed. But the fact is, like it or not, the Occupy movement has just as much legitimacy as the TP. They have different motives and goals. It's as easy to characterize the TP members as a bunch of gun-totin', middle-aged, tax-hating bigots as it is to call Occupy members dirty lazy unemployed bums. It's just as easy to blow off Occupy as it was the TP...

bladimz
09-25-2012, 05:17 PM
See? No trash talk. No unintelligible mumbling. Clean, concise comments from clean protesters. Look in the crowd. They're not all kids, not all lazy college students without jobs. What you're seeing is a cross-section of the middle class, and what you're not seeing is all of those many other people who support OWS but cannot attend because of their jobs, etc.

Goldie Locks
09-25-2012, 05:26 PM
Great Blad...two people out of Thousands....LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Calypso Jones
09-25-2012, 05:28 PM
LoL. OwS people have jobs. LOL. Well i pray you are joking.

Calypso Jones
09-25-2012, 08:01 PM
Feel good story of the day. OWS-er sentenced to two years for carrying a weapon with 32 rounds cause he sez...it went with his look. And what a look it is.

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/25/wall-street-occupier-sentenced-to-two-years-in-jail-after-bringing-gun-to-protest-because-it-went-with-my-look/


http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/122111fellows5sh154926-300x450.jpg

Goldie Locks
09-25-2012, 08:12 PM
Feel good story of the day. OWS-er sentenced to two years for carrying a weapon with 32 rounds cause he sez...it went with his look. And what a look it is.

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/25/wall-street-occupier-sentenced-to-two-years-in-jail-after-bringing-gun-to-protest-because-it-went-with-my-look/


http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/122111fellows5sh154926-300x450.jpg




Wow...he is just lovely!!!!!!

See, he is protesting because he can't find a job, because who would hire someone who looked like this, except for a menial job???????

Captain Obvious
09-25-2012, 08:14 PM
That must be his holster on the side of his head.

Calypso Jones
09-25-2012, 08:17 PM
and. he's 32 years old.

Goldie Locks
09-25-2012, 08:56 PM
and. he's 32 years old.

You know...I see them everyday, with their tattoo's and piercings, pants hanging on the ground, weird hair color or cuts, dirty...you name it. Who in the world would hire a person like this to work in a business???

Peter1469
09-25-2012, 09:31 PM
That is key. They won't get hired in civilized society. And civilized society should not be obligated to care for them.

IGetItAlready
09-25-2012, 09:56 PM
Great Blad...two people out of Thousands....LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Right, and those who are "not just kids" are '60s and '70s Vietnam protesters reliving their glory days.
I can just imagine the stories the occupiers will tell THEIR grandkids...

"And then Billy, we threw our own poop at a police car."
"Why'd you do that grandpa?"
"Because the man wouldn't give us free stuff Billy. And then they turned around and voted all of our socialist loving representatives out of congress. I wish you could have been there Billy, we really showed them."

Goldie Locks
09-25-2012, 09:59 PM
That is key. They won't get hired in civilized society. And civilized society should not be obligated to care for them.

absolutely and they won't be hired and they wonder why they can't get ahead in this world.

Bane
09-26-2012, 06:15 AM
Feel good story of the day. OWS-er sentenced to two years for carrying a weapon with 32 rounds cause he sez...it went with his look. And what a look it is.

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/25/wall-street-occupier-sentenced-to-two-years-in-jail-after-bringing-gun-to-protest-because-it-went-with-my-look/


http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/122111fellows5sh154926-300x450.jpg



Perpetual adolescence. These are teenagers in adult bodies. They never grew up.

sad but true.

sparty
09-26-2012, 06:58 AM
Why are we enabling them?

bladimz
09-26-2012, 03:06 PM
LoL. OwS people have jobs. LOL. Well i pray you are joking.Poor CJones... If you see them on the street, a bunch won't have jobs. But depending on the time of day, many in the crowd are clocked out. See how that works? Why would you think that there are no working people who support OWS? Do you somehow think that everyone "thinks" the way you do? Or do you just know this for a fact.

You're prayers have not been answered. Back down on your knees.

Calypso Jones
09-26-2012, 03:10 PM
absolutely and they won't be hired and they wonder why they can't get ahead in this world.


I really don't think they wonder why they can't get ahead Goldie. They are always in that subculture. They never get out of it. Now i do think that they believe that they are kept down because they are just too. damn. smart. for the rest of us. It's a conspiracy you see. There is a class of people who have grown up with drama. And if it is not present then they manufacture it. They don't know this about themselves, it doesn't dawn on them. They are forever immature. And that is how they live and die.

These are drug users, mostly socially and most of them may go to court but never to jail and if they do go to jail it is only for a short period of time. THese are the people that call the law if they feel they've been shorted on a drug deal. They call the law for a dropped order at McDonalds. They are a bunch of aging kids who have higher opinions of themselves than they should.

bladimz
09-26-2012, 03:21 PM
Great Blad...two people out of Thousands....LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!How many vids do you need to see? 100's? 1000's? You insinuated that all of the OWS protesters are losers; people who only want free things (stupid concept, stupid reaction for the anti-OWS crowd). I gave you two vids here just as an example of what the OWS is really all about. You choose to ignore the clear message here and giggle about some kind of home-grown ratio you dreamed up.

Chuckleheads like you refuse to look past the trouble-making element. In fact, you guys obsess on it. It's like a shiny object to a chimp. Maybe not. Maybe it's just something else for you guys to hate.

Here's some people who have jobs, and support the OWS at the same time...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f4EepSY4bk

Oh, but what do they know. They're just economists.

bladimz
09-26-2012, 03:27 PM
I really don't think they wonder why they can't get ahead Goldie. They are always in that subculture. They never get out of it. Now i do think that they believe that they are kept down because they are just too. damn. smart. for the rest of us. It's a conspiracy you see. There is a class of people who have grown up with drama. And if it is not present then they manufacture it. They don't know this about themselves, it doesn't dawn on them. They are forever immature. And that is how they live and die.

These are drug users, mostly socially and most of them may go to court but never to jail and if they do go to jail it is only for a short period of time. THese are the people that call the law if they feel they've been shorted on a drug deal. They call the law for a dropped order at McDonalds. They are a bunch of aging kids who have higher opinions of themselves than they should.
What you took two paragraphs to say can be summed up in one sentence: You don't believe that there is any serious corrupt financial influence that business holds over your government, and you don't believe that this influence harms the vast majority of american people in any way.

Why don't you just say that. Is it because that would make you look naive?