EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- The Downwinders: Fracking Ourselves to Death in America
Popular content
Today's Top News
Don’t Mistake Occupy Wall Street for Team Obama
Occupation Up, Obama Down
NEW YORK—The mushrooming Occupy Wall Street protests, now on the verge of spreading to more than 1,000 cities and towns across the U.S. and beyond, may have come of age this week.
Protesters fill Washington Square during an "Occupy Wall Street" rally in New York October 8, 2011. Billionaire New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg accused anti-Wall Street protesters on Friday of trying to destroy jobs in the city. REUTERS/Jessica Rinaldi But the second most interesting number (apart from the anger-tracking figures updated at OccupyTogether.org) is 38 per cent — President Barack Obama’s approval rating, according to the latest Gallup survey.
Occupation up, Obama down. It’s an equation the White House is desperate to change, as the Democratic machine grapples with how best to harness the progressive populist uprising to generate electoral energy for November 2012.
The rolling fury that took hold of lower Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park three weeks ago remains audaciously leaderless. But it is also changing quickly, as new blood arrives to bolster the cause, in ways that are dismaying to Occupy Wall Street’s earliest adopters.
On Wednesday, it was the arrival of Big Labor that seized the headlines, as unionists marched in the thousands through Manhattan’s financial district. But in the encampment that night — and truly, the hardcore actually sleeping on these paving stones comprise 140 characters or less — fear of co-optation was rampant.
The Occupy Wall Street hardcore sees itself as bigger than partisan politics. And the disappointment with Obama — after what they view as a series of business-friendly surrenders on financial regulation, the environment, budgets and even health-care reform — borders on contempt.
But they don’t own Occupy Wall Street anymore. That was evident Thursday morning, when the encampment began to fill with even more arrivals. And some of the new faces showing up in Zuccotti seem more representative of the working-class angst gripping the country.
Take Sean Finnerty, for example, a 26-year-old Alaskan who came down on a break from his job in the oilfields. He was a bundle of energy Thursday, taking stock — and then taking charge.
“What the hell is this doing here?” asked Finnerty, pointing to an anti-Wall Street leaflet that reeked of anti-Semitism, replete with a hand-drawn swastika.
“This is sick. I’m taking it down. Anybody who thinks they can defend this can talk to me,” said Finnerty as he tore the hate-filled paper to shreds.
Finnerty told the Star he arrived the night before. But he admitted he got “the cold shoulder” from many of the young radicals in the square.
“I guess I don’t have the right tattoos or haircut for some of them,” he said. “But I don’t care. I’ll sleep beside them because the cause is right.
“This thing is still in its infancy. And they need working people like me for it to really take off.”
Finnerty pointed to two construction workers eating lunch on the curb — two of the more than 3,000 men working on the massive site next door, building new towers from the ashes of 9/11. Then Finnerty pointed to some of the previous night’s Occupy Wall Street revelers, still asleep in their bags.
“These guys start their jobs at 7 a.m. Do you really expect them to relate to a bunch of kids who sleep till noon?
“If this thing is serious, they need way more working-class people like me. That’s why I came. This protest is not a fashion statement. And it’s definitely not about getting Obama re-elected. We have to focus it or we’ll be co-opted.”
The powerful online component of the Occupy movement has been withering in its criticism of Team Obama’s ties to Wall Street. One widely traveled post Friday seized upon a passage in journalist Ron Suskind’s Confidence Men, in which the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance called on imprisoned insider trader Dennis Levine for guidance on how to act upon alleged malfeasance in high finance.
Levine’s advice: “You need to send out a slew of indictments, all at once, and on 3 p.m. on a sunny day, have Federal Marshalls perp-walk 300 Wall Street executives out of their office in handcuffs and out on the street, with lots of cameras rolling. Everyone else would say, ‘If that happened to me, my mother would be ashamed.’ ”
Others, such as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, suggest the rise of OWS in “numbers too big to ignore” presents “what amounts to a second chance” for Team Obama to harden its rhetoric with solid action.
“The Obama administration squandered a lot of potential goodwill early on by adopting banker-friendly policies that failed to deliver economic recovery even as bankers repaid the favour by turning on the president,” wrote Krugman.
“Now, however, Mr. Obama’s party has a chance for a do-over. . . . And if the protests goad some politicians into doing what they should have been doing all along, Occupy Wall Street will have been a smashing success.”
Yet it is far from clear if the still-amorphous movement — which plans a sister rally in Toronto next Saturday — will succumb to electoral machinations.
In a statement Friday, a new branch of the Occupy movement billing itself as the “Occupy Wall Street 99 Per Cent Working Group” released a statement saying: “We will not be co-opted by hierarchical organizations. No matter how wonderful their cause may be.”
In Washington, meanwhile, a splinter group took hold under the banner of Occupy State Department late Thursday, sleeping overnight to ensure that Friday’s final hearing on a controversial pipeline to double the flow of oilsands bitumen to the United States included an abundance of voices opposing Keystone XL.
The controversial $7 billion project would carry millions of barrels of oilsands crude a week through six U.S. states to refineries in Texas, The Canadian Press reports.
Team Obama, which is expected to decide on the pipeline in December, has repeatedly signaled in subtle and not-so-subtle ways it is ready to expand America’s consumption of Canadian oil.
If so, far from being Obama’s own personal Tea Party, the Occupy movement is likely to turn even harder against him when that call is made.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
119 Comments so far
Show AllIt wouldn't make any sense. He is doing exactly what is being protested. If he endorsed OWS "more" people would see exactly what he is.
Appears to me from my wanderings online around the different Occupies that the one thing, the one greatest thing, they have in common is the lack of partisanism. I haven't heard anyone on the mikes railing against the GOP. It seems these are the folks who get it, it's a corporate duopoly that has completely circumvented any sort of democracy we may have. Considering the kabuki theater that's been playing out on the reality TV shows, I mean, "The News", it says a lot that so many regular folk get it. The biggest threat to this movement right now is the democratic party, and it seems the young upstarts who got this thing going, and maybe maybe even "big Labor", gets this.
Obama is way too naive. Now he's tossing out a few bare bones (a jobs czar!?) in the hopes of getting support after he's spent three years trading things away right and left before negotiations even start. Most recent example, before the deficit committee meets once, he puts Social Security and Medicare on the table... A few months back, while so many people are reeling from being jobless and homeless or whose IRAs and pensions have vanished, he sent out a "Billion Dollar Campaign" solicitation. Maybe 'clueless' is a better word. The campaign promises all evaporated into thin air.
Nothing new under the sun, but we did have high hopes.
Obummer is Still pushing his free trade agreements -
Google right the heck now about "Obama, Medical Pot, " and get ready for a gigantic betrayal of 16 years worth of goodwill on behalf of a growing industry based on small businesess. What a bastard.
"Occupy" is the most hopeful development in American politics since the Nader/Green upsurge at the turn of the century. Don't let anyone tell you that public demonstrations are without effect and have no power of their own: they energize others and encourage the despondent and passive to get out of their chairs and do something.
Stop giving welfare to the rich--No more WALLfare for the STREET! All power to the people!
Of course as OWS gains in strength and significance every power-centre around the country will try to co-opt it. The question to consider is: CAN THEY? I'll say that they cannot, however hard they try. NOT A CHANCE IN HELL. And the reasons are not those that have been proffered so far: Such as that OWS is not a hierachical orgainisation. That it hasn't got a leadership concret and annointed by the followers available for co-optation.
The reason why co-optation would fail is because OWS is founded on a clear and unadulterable truism that ordinary people UNDERSTANDS. People don't need and don't look for interpretation from whatever kind of PRIESTHOOD, like those from the "Obama Team", the "progressives", etc. The truth is already self-evident. Nobody can distort a truth even if they try. Any group that tries to cash in will not be able to hijack the movement because they will be seen as just another in-take of new "converts" of the already established "true religion" of the OWS.
Do not be fearful of this "Obama Team" or that "progressive infiltrator" or whatever labour union who wish to join us. This OWS as a movement founded on self-evident truth is too big to be swallow by any one outside force. I have confidence that OWS will swallow all comers and gain strength from them.
Least to be feared are politicians from the Democrat Party. Words coming out of their mouths have been seen as trash by people already. So more words from them simply sounds like more lies, even if they starts mouthing the demands and convictions of the occupiers of Wall Street. Can they THEN co-opt OWS through their action? How can they?! Do you think Obama dare to start arresting the criminals from Wall Street? Do you think the Democrat con-artistes dare to go back and repair the damage they have done to medicare?
So let us not hurt ourselves by being paranoid about our enemies or adversaries. Be confident and ready to expose every single one of their tricks but also be confident that strategically we are now INVINCIBLE.
The Democrats are just the other wing of the Financial Aristocracy.
Obombers ratings are down , good, he is a NEW WORLD ORDER neocon in disguise ,
A constitutional lawyer would have repealed the Patriot Acts, and all Fusion Center warrant less surveillance, and allowed victims of false accusations and watch lists the rights to see evidence that was used against them in in a court of law with damages pending for harassment.
A constitutional lawyer would do everything is his power to protect the Constitution of America, not allow the treasonous politicians like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield to hide behind the State Secrets Acts and avoid prosecution for war crimes.
Look forward not back, how do we learn from our mistakes if we dont look back, how do achieve Justice if we dont use historical evidence of crimes . I mean , can you look forward and find evidence of a crime that has not happened yet.
The Obomber said he would end the occupations that have cost us 13 trillion dollars off the budget books, and while Bush Cheney's good pals and bud's , along with Obombers pals get sweet no bid middle man contracts ranging from 4 dollar coke per can to 400 dollars a gallon of gas for our military vehicles, and giving people of occupied country's 5000 for every person whos asks because he wants to start a business, we here at home are watching these treasonous bastards tell us we are the mob for protesting, we are domestic terrorists for identifying corruption and thievery by the FED and this government, we need to be watched , and stalked , and shut down.
I'm just getting started , but , lets save time , RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT,,,INFOWARS.COM FOR THE TRUTH.
Will any comrade here teach me how to get paragraphs into my message. The old way of leaving a line blank just don't do it anymore. Thank you.
nakli--To create paragraph breaks, type this pair (i.e. you need to use two) of HTML tags where you want the break, like this:
< br >< br >
You need to take out the spaces between the angle brackets "< and >" and "br" shown in the above example. Those spaces are included in the example just so it will display and give you the general idea.
< p >< p > should work also. (Again, without the spaces between the letter and enclosing brackets.)You can test or check if you're doing it correctly by using the "preview" feature. Hope this helps.Note: This is only necessary when posting comments to "News" articles.
Using the carriage return "enter" key, aka "leaving a line blank" still works in comments threads in the "Views" and "Further" columns.
Just an additional note: If you make some font bold or italic, please be sure to put in the end marker, or else the entire thread is changed.
Yeah, I found that out the hard way one time when I changed every comment after mine to bold italics. How embarrassing. (sheepish grin...)
Why the hell is CD publishing this absolute bullshit? This is the biggest piece of propaganda anti OWS shit that I've seen.
This author, manages half way through the article, to portray the original OWS as lazy anti-Semites, who wouldn't welcome a blue collar worker into their movement.
CD take this bullshit down. Good grief, there is finally a movement afoot, and CD publishes this kind of bullshit.
Did I say bullshit yet?
I would agree. This reeks of BS. All too easy to call those youngsters who reject the notion of pointless work for pointless profits as "lazy". How DARE they not find beauty and meaning in back breaking thankless 12 hour shifts in windowless factories. And where exactly did jumping as high as you could when the master cracked the whip get all of you blue collar folks? Don't worry I'll wait all night. I'll pass the time reading all these Financial Times of London articles which openly brag about how American workers are the most productive in the world and yet are so screwed over and complacent you could shoot one of them in the head and their co-workers will ask permission to run away. If this is "honest, hard work" I'll take the "lazy" people every chance I get!
Hey! Buddy-Comrade. This is just another one of those "Joe, Six-pack" idea that the McCain campaigners used in the last presidential election. He was the independent, hardworking, sub-contracting labouring man who had made good, and who was fighting to maintain the status guo. Now he metamorphoses into a hardworking unionised worker fighting for the Democratic Party in order to maintain the status quo. Guess what? The status quo has been upsetted and Humpty Dumpty (Mitch Potter) won't get back on the WALL. Wall Street that is. Actually, you know what? The WALL itself is crumbling and is threatening to bury Humpty Dumpty (Mitch Potter) under the pile of debris. :-D, :-D
I agree hue. I am not against publishing mainstream press reports, since it helps to see what the newspapers are saying in Toronto. But so much of this report is inaccurate or snide. Just one instance:
The Tar Sands rally in front of the State Dept was dubbed "a splinter group". It seems that the Toronto reporter knows nothing and was not there. Tar Sands did not splinter off from Occupy Wall Street. It was a continuation of an existing movement to block the Tar Sands, for which 1200 were arrested in August - September. It is neither a split off from OWS, nor in opposition to it. The goals are in harmony - corporate greed vs. public need. The Tar Sands rally heard from a Native American leader, a former brigadier general, an Olympic hockey star, a cowboy hatted rancher and others who see the Tar Sands and its pipeline as a disaster for the immediate region of the extraction and pipeline and a threat to the environment of the world.
Rose Berger from Sojourners, who had organized about 60 clergy from different religions to be arrested in August, asked for us to look to heaven (the sun & wind) for our energy needs. She said that if the pipeline is approved, there will be hell to pay, including things like Episcopalian bishops lying down in front of bulldozers.
The rancher's wife was close to tears as she recounted how alone she felt in opposition to the pipeline, and how this movement has given her hope.
The Tar Sands is yet another example of corporate irresponsibility and greed, abetted by the US Government. I have not seen this information reported on CD, but according to communications uncovered by a Freedom of Information request, it seems that the State Dept. outsourced the environmental impact studies to a group hand chosen by and with ties to the XL. Here is a story:
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/10/08/339696/tar-sands-pipeline-state-dept-outsourced-keystone-xl-impact-study-to-major-transcanada-contractor/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+climateprogress%2FlCrX+%28Climate+Progress%29
FOR THE CAUSE!
Prolific Playwright Larry Myers'
"Wall Street Square" done in MA
at Harvard/ Ptown/ Lowell
Ocean Grove NJ /
Manhattan
4 plays by Dr Myers
a mystic take on the takeover
poetic
prophetic
FOR THE CAuSE 4 20 bucks cash
signed numbered edition 1st edition
ksm publishing mail 20 bucks no checks to
rwm playwrights lab
ldmyers director
Suite 12A
19 Commerce Street
NYC 10014
the future is NOW! FIGHT!
all proceeds to wall street occupation
theSpiderman of playwriting gives us the truth!
There will be a lot of people driven work that has nothing to do with election politics, but a large chunk of it will. With the onset of the Occupy movement, maybe politics will be about issues and solutions rather than the usual cult of personality politics If that's the case, then neither party will coopt the movement and people can vote on candicate's records of action and stances on issues, as it should be.
This article focuses on the Occupy Movement and Team Obama. But does anyone seriously think choosing the Teapublicons as an alternative is wise, given their track record? It is disengenuous to limit this topic to Obama.
Newsfeed comments need html paragraph breaks inserted at the end of each paragraph ...
Cops in this country are about to find out real hard and real fast that 30 years of locking up pot smokers, people who blow .09 on a .08 limit B.A.C, non-violent folks driving with expired this and that, non-violent folks caught driving in parts of the city they don't live, non-violent folks who "look funny", non-violent muslims, protestors, poor people, homeless and desperate people, HAS NOT MADE YOU VERY POPULAR AND THERE ARE MANY, MANY PEOPLE WHO WILL NOT CRY IF YOUR FUNDING IS CUT AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK FOR NEW "CAREERS". We didn't cry for the whale harpooners, we don't cry for the seal clubbers, we don't weep for the lack of lumberjacks in our rain-forests, and we will not shed one damn tear for you and your mace, your billy club and your solitary confinement B.S. YOUR JOB IS NOT WORTH OUR LIBERTY!!!
.
Let's not get distracted. The target is not Obama. It's the crooks on Wall street and the well-being of the 99%.
barry is standing in front and is the frontman for wall street; therefore he deserves to be mentioned. Tony
Pointing out that Obama is part of the 1% is actually keeping focused. I don't buy what you insinuate, that Obama is somehow distinguishable from Wall Street, and the corporate sponsored oligarchs of whichever party.
test
This article correlates Obama's falling approval rating with the ongoing demonstrations. That might be a bit of wishful thinking. There's a solid number of Dem loyalist voters who will forget all of this on election day, if they paid attention at all. The Obama campaign already told progressives to fuck off. My guess is that Team Obama has a good sense about how the voting demographics works. Sorry to say it, but American voters may be too stupid to act in their own interest and vote third party in 2012.
The problem is there is no third party candidate and that is seriously creepy when they could win fairly easily with the right message and track record.
Obama works for Wall Street. If you are against Wall Street's control and behavior, you are against Obama. If you're against corporate take over of Washington, you cannot be for Obama. If you don't want to see our government systems sold off for pennies on the dollar for billionaires to turn into lucrative privatized money making businesses that systematically disenfranchise more and more people to glean profits, you can't be for Obama. If you don't know how people are suppose to function in a society where wealthy banks own homes, pretend to sell them, then invent a river of reasons to financially milk people dry only to throw them out into the streets, you can't be for Obama. Most importantly if you don't want to see a country that has nothing to rely on but for profit business to decide on how the country is run, you must not be for Obama.
Obama has given Wall street corruption and horridly abusive business practices his stamp of approval. He's one of them and has made the decision that being with them is what he wants and believes will serve him. This is not an opinion. He has to go and no one running is any good and that's not an accident. It is the design to put Obama back in which must not happen. Obama is more of the same Bush policies and he will hand over SS and Medicare in the Lame Duck, you can absolutely bet on it. It's why Goldman Sachs is still his best friend and he knows it and so do all of them on both sides of the isle who deliver for the elite so they can have the "lifestyle". We've been sold out and if Obama wins,, we've lost.
What is taking people's SS and Medicare all about. It's not just about taking the money, it is about hard control of people's lives. Let Appalachia's story tell you what this means. Please watch: Appalachia, A History of Planned Poverty. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b54t_bbmyXc&feature=channel_video_title
Where was the support at the time they were trying to regulate wall street and fix this.
The public was not in the streets. The banks spent millions watering down reform and the president asked for our help. Now one of the party's wants to undo the watered down regulation and without the support of OWS that's what will happen.
The President does not get to make laws, congress does.
.
TCW wrote:
Where was the support [for Obama] at the time they were trying to regulate wall street and fix this. The public was not in the streets. The banks spent millions watering down reform and the president asked for our help. Now one of the party's wants to undo the watered down regulation and without the support of OWS that's what will happen. The President does not get to make laws, congress does.
* * * * *
My Reply:
TCW,
So, are you still a believer, or are you just pretending?
The support was there, even among some of the first Tea Party sympathizers, before the Koch brothers and others finally achieve what became essentially complete control of the Tea Party astroturf message.
Dominated by Wall Street, Barack Obama and his administration, which after all included numerous Wall Street representatives (Tim Geitner, Larry Summers, etc) chosen by Obama, decided to postpone pursuing financial reform legislation until after passage of Obama's health insurance legislation.
Obama's health insurance legislation was, of course, first vetted by Barack Obama and health insurance lobbyists beforing actual drafting. Meanwhile, the Koch brothers' faction of the ruling elite re-directed Tea Party anger from opposition to Wall Street to opposition to "Obamacare".
For the most part when someone is elected to Congress or to the presidency they are free to improvise within a limited range of formal, conventionally acceptable roles in what amounts to Kubuki politics. At best assuming any other role leads to political marginalization. Politicians who do not represent corporate interest are not rewarded, and are often punished.
By the time the Obama adminstration got around to financial industry "reform", anger against Wall Street had been divided, re-directed, dissipated, demagogued, and discouraged.
Barack Obama and Congress, where both the Senate and House of Representatives were controlled by Democrats, simply could not pass truly significant legistion of any sort against (the wishes of their corporate benefactors and) Republican opposition.
The persistent belief that Barack Obama actually ever intended to do the things that he sometimes claimed he would do, along with amazement at Barack Obama's habit of "caving" before negotiations even got started, and the growing cynicism regarding Barack Obama and politics in Washington and around the country, were the real reasons that people did not take to the streets and occupy parks against Wall Street in support of Barack Obama's industry friendly financial "reform" legislation.
The protests that did occur were ignored, because they did not fit the script. The Obama adminstration maintained an attitude of contempt for anyone, vaguely anywhere, on the left side of the political spectrum; while pledging a commitment to bipartisanship.
The Obama administration, Democrats, Republicans, the Koch brothers, other wealthy political players, and Tea Party participants were all engaged in nothing more than loosely scripted Kubuki politics, amidst a failing proto-democracy that many of them were and still are actively trying to dismantle.
Large scale protests in the United States against Wall Street did not occur until after many months of protests around the world, including some in the United States, had provided enough inspiration for people, who were for the most part only recently coming to the realization that they are on their own, to take action against the power of people who are oppressing them.
Once again, as is so typical of Democrats TCW, you cast blame on others when Democrats share so much of the blame. This time its #OccupyWallStreet protesters who are the scapegoats.
Barack Obama and by far most Democrats and Republicans work for the people who control and oppress us.
Nevertheless, I expect that efforts to "undo the watered down regulation" will be met with yet more outrage from people all over the country, and demands to break up "too big to fail financial corporations" and tough legislation regulating the financial industry.
.
Hero-4-PEACE (in reply to PuffinThrush) wrote:
Clearly he's likely just " p r e t e n d i n g , "
… or otherwise -- ignorantly and arrogantly committed -- to his fact-less reason-less propagandizing pre-verifications, repressions and denials.
See my responses to him, under Oct 15 2011 - 11:22am ..
* * * * *
My Reply:
Hero-4-PEACE,
While I admit that I was incredulous when I first read TCW's comment, I believe that TCW is not pretending, but is sincere.
By the way I responded to you Oct 15 2011 - 11:22am post and added two items to your list.
We have to be clear. They all have to go. Throw them all out and start over. REGIME CHANGE. Are these people gonna change. Hell no, dinosaurs died rather than change, these people will die before they change. They have to be thrown out. Anything else is a waste of time.
This article is dis-information !!!
"Others, such as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, suggest the rise of OWS in “numbers too big to ignore” presents “what amounts to a second chance” for Team Obama to harden its rhetoric with solid action."
Only someone not paying attention will believe THIS. "second chance" my ^ss.
"Only someone not paying attention will believe THIS" Thanks for the comment, I hope you're right.
Paul Krugman's comment is sophomoric. A "do-over"? He discredits himself.
Obama is down to 38 percent? How nice is that. Unless someone of substance runs against him he will still get re-elected unless things get a lot worse. Which they may?
I agree with textynn.
“The Obama administration squandered a lot of potential goodwill early on by adopting banker-friendly policies that failed to deliver economic recovery even as bankers repaid the favour by turning on the president,” wrote Krugman.
----------
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/07/surrounding-the-bull/
Weekend Edition October 7-9, 2011 - Wall Street Talk
Surrounding the Bull - by LINH DINH
Hundreds of cops, some on horsebacks, are now protecting Wall Street 24 hours a day. At Bowling Green Park, they have also blocked access to the Merryll Lynch bull. To be warmed by the methane gas of a healthy market, no doubt, a group of New York’s Finest gathered near their sacred bovine’s digestive exit, just below its up-lashing tail.
“They’re all guarding the bull’s asshole,” I said to this middle aged black woman standing across the street.
“Yeah, they’re all guarding the bullshit!” She laughed.}
- - - - - - - - - - -
...peace...
Obama is part of the problem and the Tea Party isn't part of the solution. I think I'll join the protest in a few days. It will be there indefinitely until the dumb powers that be finally "get it". We, the public, are paying the freight for their misadventures!!
This is an awakening against the monstrosity of capitalism but only an awakening -- so far. I very much appreciate what these youth have begun and more importantly, their level of class consciousness. They are starting out ahead of many on the left. That said, what they need to learn is the vital difference between co-option and coalition. Without the latter, this is a blip on the road to destruction and nothing more. Many of us have been in this very struggle saying these very things for decades. We have organizations, insights and experience they need. Those who began this movement do not own it -- no one does -- it belongs to all of us and all of us need to be at the core and on the front lines. Only together: students, anarchists, labor unions, Reds, the disenfranchised and working people, as an organized grand coalition can we succeed. The other vital thing is that it needs to expand beyond the internet and facebook if it is to grow and include the vast majority of us.
All power to the People!
Join the movement- BANK TRANSFER DAY November 5th! Get your money out of the richest 1%'s hands. Pledge to move your money to a local credit union instead.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=281139538577206
This is about supporting the president no matter who he is. This movement is what should have happened when the banks started attacking Obama and the representatives that worked on regulation. Obama may be suffering from the naiveté that the bankers would do what they said when we bailed them out. "We will help to reform banking regulations to make sure this never happens again". And then spent tax payer money to lobby congress and attack the President when reform went on the table.
I love this movement and no it should not be owned by anyone but without the public the President is helpless in a country where the press is party owned.
I am suggesting that, we the people elected a President and then left him high and dry on the dance floor with no support.
The people who get their news from corporate media are being lied to but that is not everyone.
The "pulpit" only exist in the media eye. Where were the people when he was trying to pass health care. No support. Bank reform, no support. Nort did I suggest that we support presidents who are not working for the people. 60% of the people wanted public healthcare and yet there were no marches to get that done.
Only the blind beleive our system is working but balming a president that has done more than any in my lifetime, and with no support from the dems is not the answer either.
All of the problems currently in this country could be solved with public campaign finance which this president wanted and also got no support for the instant he stepped into office.
.
Excerpt from “The Cronyism Behind a Pipeline for Crude” by Bill McKibben, The New York Times, October 4, 2011:
But Barack Obama said he would “end the tyranny of oil”; he also said he was going to end back-room dealing. His decision about the Keystone pipeline project, which is expected by year’s end, seems like one last chance to show he actually meant it.
Article URL: www.commondreams.org/view/2011/10/04-16
- - - - -
Excerpt from “Why Environmentalists Should Occupy Wall Street” by Phil Aroneanu, by The Huffington Post, re-published by Common Dreams, October 4, 2011:
Will President Obama, who campaigned saying "I don't take a dime of their [lobbyist] money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House," be willing to push back against TransCanada, its Wall St. financiers, and the stranglehold these corporations have on our government, or will he be complicit in destroying our democracy, our land and our atmosphere?
Article URL: www.commondreams.org/view/2011/10/04-13
- - - - -
Excerpt from “Don’t Mistake Occupy Wall Street for Team Obama” by Mitch Potter, Toronto Star, re-published by Common Dreams, October 9, 2011:
In Washington, meanwhile, a splinter group took hold under the banner of Occupy State Department late Thursday, sleeping overnight to ensure that Friday’s final hearing on a controversial pipeline to double the flow of oilsands bitumen to the United States included an abundance of voices opposing Keystone XL.
The controversial $7 billion project would carry millions of barrels of oil sands crude a week through six U.S. states to refineries in Texas, The Canadian Press reports.
Team Obama, which is expected to decide on the pipeline in December, has repeatedly signaled in subtle and not-so-subtle ways it is ready to expand America’s consumption of Canadian oil.
* * * * *
My Comment:
Hero-4-PEACE,
Here are some additions to your list.
(11.) Obama’s pledge to “end the tyranny of oil”.
(12.) Obama’s pledge to end back-room dealing, "I don't take a
dime of their [lobbyist] money, and when I am president,
they won't find a job in my White House.
There are others that could be added too, of course,
.
TCW wrote:
All of the problems currently in this country could be solved with public campaign finance which this president wanted and also got no support for the instant he stepped into office.
- - - -
Excerpt from Transcript of Audio “Can Obama Campaign Reignite Small Donors' Passion” by Peter Overby, NPR, October 14, 2011:
STEVE INSKEEP: . . all of the presidential candidates must file quarterly fundraising reports tomorrow at the Federal Election Commission. The campaigns are busy trying to spin the numbers before they are disclosed, and President Obama's campaign announced yesterday that over the summer it raised more than $70 million. NPR's Peter Overby reports.
PETER OVERBY: The total includes $27 million for the Democratic National Committee, relatively easy money to get, thanks to a high contribution limit; and about 43 million from the Obama for America committee. It's a bit less than the spring quarter, also less than George W. Bush raised at this point in his reelection campaign. One big question is whether the Obama operation can reignite the passion of small donors. In 2004 [sic], Mr. Obama shattered records by raising $745 [sic] million. A significant chunk of it, although not most of it, came from legions of small givers [emphasis added]. This year's campaign manager, Jim Messina, said yesterday that 98 percent of the money last quarter came in contributions of $250 or less. But political scientist Robin Kolodny says a little skepticism is warranted.
ROBIN KOLODNY: Lots of them are less than $250. But they won't stay that way.
- -
Correction Oct. 14, 2011
We mistakenly said that candidate Obama had raised $745 million in 2004. It was actually in 2008.
- - - -
Excerpt from Transcript of Audio “Can Obama Campaign Reignite Small Donors' Passion” by Peter Overby, NPR, October 14, 2011:
OVERBY: But as the White House money race accelerates, there's a huge unknown: the new organizations called super-PACs. They can raise unlimited sums of money from individuals, unions and corporations; and there are super-PACs supporting all of the major candidates. They don't have to say how much they've got or where it came from until just before the primary balloting starts.
- - - -
"Romney among fundraising leaders" by Kim Dixon
and Patricia Zengerle, NewsDaily, October 14, 2011:
It means both men [Mitt Romney and Rick Perry] have strong war chests as they head into campaign battles in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, which could play a huge role in determining who wins the Republican nomination to oppose President Barack Obama's bid for re-election next year.
"Money is critical partly because it helps send voters a signal about which candidates are viable," said Costas Panagopoulos, director of a politics center at Fordham University. "One of the things that put Obama on the map in 2008 was his ability to raise formidable sums of money."
- - - -
"Romney among fundraising leaders" by Kim Dixon
and Patricia Zengerle, NewsDaily, October 14, 2011:
The 2012 U.S. election should be the priciest ever, with Obama expected to raise more than his record $750 [sic] million from 2008. And newly relaxed U.S. fundraising laws will add hundreds of millions of dollars from "Super Political Action Committees," officially deemed separate from campaigns, even when devoted to electing particular candidates.
"Let's say Barack Obama raises a billion dollars. Awesome. Let's say the Koch brothers decide to contribute their pocket change to a (competing) SuperPAC. Not so awesome anymore," said American Enterprise Institute scholar Norm Ornstein.
Ornstein was referring to the conservative David and Charles Koch, of conglomerate Koch Industries, who are thought to be planning to spend tens of millions of dollars to defeat Obama and elect Republicans in 2012.
* * * *
My Reply:
TCW,
Perhaps you have forgotten that there is already a system of public campaign finance for presidential campaigns ostensibly funded by that check off on your federal income tax return, and that Barack Obama choose not to participate in that system in 2008, so that he would not be limited in the amount of money he could raise. What's more most of the money raised by Barack Obama came from large donors, who would still have been disportionately more influencial than small donors, even if this fact about the demographic origins of Barack Obama's campaign donations were not true.
Furthermore, as the 2010 mid term elections clearly demonstrated, independent campaign expenditures during election campaigns have become much more important since the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United v. FEC decision, which permits corporations to make contributions to SuperPacs directly from the corporate treasury.
Corporations are still prohibited from directly contributing to a candidate's campaign, but corporations can collect money from individuals for the own PACs (Political Action Committees), can contribute money directly from the corporate treasury to SuperPACs, and so-called bundler's (usually wealthy and influencial people) serve to channel "individual" donations from a particular (corporate or other constituency) directly to candidates.
Not to mention the fact that Plurality Voting severely restricts the freedom of speech and freedom of political association of each individual voter in ways that favor candidates who are supported by wealthy benefactors.
The size of each candidate's campaign war chest and what is often call the "money primary", together with the restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of political association imposed upon voters by Plurality Voting, make up most of what is known as the "bandwagon effect."
Minimally, Plurality Voting must be replaced with Category Scale Power Voting and the U.S. Supreme Court Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United v. FEC decisions must be overturned.
.
TCW in part wrote:
. . . but without the public the President is helpless in a country where the press is party owned.
* * * * *
My Reply:
TCW,
The media including the press is largely for profit corporate owned, not party owned.
The U.S. President, the U.S. Congress, and both the Democratic Party and Repubican Party are essentially corporate owned as well.
OBAMA = BUSH, so you damn betcha' there aren't any supporters of Obama in the current protests. Obama is the problem, not the solution and we know it. I'm writing in Sanders and not voting for Obama no matter what!
.
In 2014 And Beyond!
Voting Against The Corporate Owned Establishment And For Positive Change
Posted Comment Opinions
Paranoid Pessimist wrote:
If as some say that means I have given permission for everything that has been done, I withdraw whatever permission they assume my vote means. I'm sorry. It was a mistake. I was suspicious but allowed myself to be fooled into buying into the presentation of what now is obviously false hope. Some who post on this site may never forgive me, but I'll keep replying anyway.
- - - - -
Gregsdiary (in reply to Paranoid Pessimist) wrote:
As progressives (or some other part of the fake-left), they will blindly vote for many more "lesser evils" to come with similar results--never knowing who is actually betraying them.
- - - - -
Gregsdiary (quoting an unknown source in reply to Paranoid Pessimist) wrote:
For me, the idea is to get it right the next time.
"If those who are protesting against Wall Street are to avoid a similar fate, they must begin by rejecting the “lesser evil” fraud and fight to develop an independent political movement of the working class in opposition to both parties of big business and the profit system they defend."
-Occupy Wall Street and the Democratic Party
- - - - -
PuffinThrush (in reply to Gregsdiary) in part wrote:
The "lesser of two evils" dilemma can easily be eliminated and the people empowered by replacing Plurality Voting with Category Scale Power Voting.
- - - - -
thepuffin wrote:
Don't be ridiculous. I believed enough to have hope and vote for O and wait to see what happened-- Despite his position on Afghanistan and wiretapping, I'm like, it's incremental improvement, we'll get there... I've got a feeling I'm going to be literally forced to eat those words, stuffed into my mouth with a velvet glove and kicked down my throat with a jackboot. The time to flee may have passed. But it is better to die on one's feet, eh?
- - - - -
Ephraim wrote:
The Democrats will never turn away from their corporate sponsors just to hitch a ride on this bandwagon. Unless it gets coopted, OWS should serve as a steamroller to crush the legitimacy of both corrupt wings of the Imperialistic Business Party, grinding the sorry legacies of Bush-Obama into historical dust.
- - - - -
conscience wrote:
If we are wise, we will be looking for candidates who aren't pre-bribed and pre-owned by corporations -- all of us moving our huge block of lbieral votes together! "Do over" is certainly a chilling reference re Obama -- who would give Obama yet another crack at dismantling Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid? We'll have enough of a struggle overcoming the damage he has already done!
.
In 2014 And Beyond!
Voting Against The Corporate Owned Establishment And For Positive Change
More Posted Comment Opinions
3645 wrote:
I'm one of those whom Obama's handpicked chief of staff called "f------- retard". I also live in Nebraska. If Obama gives the go-ahead to the Keystone Pipeline he won't have an approval rating of 38%, he'll be lucky if it's 18%. Am I the only one who thinks Cain will get the Republican nomination? Something tells me that Our Masters have decided it's worth losing the white supremacists if in return they can tear apart the African American vote.
- - - - -
Lashe wrote:
Democratic politicians are more or less as much part of the problems as their Republican friends. Both of them are responsible for getting us the people where we are today. Therefore let’s all hope that OWStreeters all over the country succeed in their goals before the 2012 elections because the potential for Democrats derailing and stealing the movement is immensely strong. . Already some Democratic politicians are pretending that they are in support of the movement, igjnoring the fact that the movement wants them out! Dems can also use their think tanks, some friendly labor chiefs, as well as print media and TV propaganda to use the people’s movement to their advantage before the election. One way to counter that is for more people to join and get educated by those already in the crowd. . Both parties are the problem, not the solution.
- - - - -
maritimus49 (in reply to Stone) wrote:
Your quote of that sentence is suggestive of what the corpo whores in the DNC have to grapple with. How WILL they deny the OWS protesters and the increasing numbers of their supporters with what they want but still get them to vote for Demos next year? They will need the Demo version of the evil Karl Rove to figure that out. No more lesser of two evils BS for me. I support an alternative party of socialist/green principles. As someone said the other day we have to turn End Times into Mend Times. The "System" as it stands now is exhausted and cannot be reformed.
- - - - -
politicscorner wrote:
There will be a lot of people driven work that has nothing to do with election politics, but a large chunk of it will. With the onset of the Occupy movement, maybe politics will be about issues and solutions rather than the usual cult of personality politics If that's the case, then neither party will coopt the movement and people can vote on candicate's records of action and stances on issues, as it should be. This article focuses on the Occupy Movement and Team Obama. But does anyone seriously think choosing the Teapublicons as an alternative is wise, given their track record? It is disengenuous to limit this topic to Obama.
- - - - -
Thoughts_Into_Action:
This article correlates Obama's falling approval rating with the ongoing demonstrations. That might be a bit of wishful thinking. There's a solid number of Dem loyalist voters who will forget all of this on election day, if they paid attention at all. The Obama campaign already told progressives to fuck off. My guess is that Team Obama has a good sense about how the voting demographics works. Sorry to say it, but American voters may be too stupid to act in their own interest and vote third party in 2012
- - - - -
textynn (in reply to Thoughts_Into_Action) wrote:
The problem is there is no third party candidate and that is seriously creepy when they could win fairly easily with the right message and track record.
- - - - -
PuffinThrush (in reply to TCW) in part wrote:
Not to mention the fact that Plurality Voting severely restricts the freedom of speech and freedom of political association of each individual voter in ways that favor candidates who are supported by wealthy benefactors.
The size of each candidate's campaign war chest and what is often call the "money primary", together with the restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of political association imposed upon voters by Plurality Voting, make up most of what is known as the "bandwagon effect."
Minimally, Plurality Voting must be replaced with Category Scale Power Voting and the U.S. Supreme Court Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United v. FEC decisions must be overturned.
- - - - -
robert1234 wrote:
OBAMA = BUSH, so you damn betcha' there aren't any supporters of Obama in the current protests. Obama is the problem, not the solution and we know it. I'm writing in Sanders and not voting for Obama no matter what!