Occupy Wall Street protests

[bmb777]

why dont these people go out and look for a job instead of essentially camping out for days or weeks?

some of them are idiots. I liked one of them who was a young woman complaining about repaying student loans and having to take out a car loan to buy a new car, and complaining about how much money it costs to go from living on college campus life, to real life. what I would say to her, stop complaining, welcome to adulthood.

and the ones who got arrested for walking on the brooklyn bridge who said they didnt know it was illegal to do so. umm traffic lanes, sidewalks....whats so hard to understand that?

[illinirazorback]

Wonder why nobody is talking about the fact that Obama has fueled this entire anarchist movement by playing up class warfare?

[IntenselyOrange]

These people were harmless. They didn't even know what they are protesting.

Unfortunately now Obama and his union thugs are supporting this movement and what do you know - we suddenly see the largely peaceful demonstrations turn violent. So predictable and so sad.

[pizzaman]

I'm happy that these people are protesting. I'm also happy that the tea party is protesting. Both groups have valid points IMO and I don't believe that the current president or the current congress will accomplish anything beneficial to the country without being pushed by these groups.

I'm sure I would not like many involved with these movements and idiots abound in both but as a group they are both expressing frustration with the current state of affairs and maybe those seeking office will pay attention.

I'm doing better since I gave up hope.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by pizzaman

I'm happy that these people are protesting. I'm also happy that the tea party is protesting. Both groups have valid points IMO and I don't believe that the current president or the current congress will accomplish anything beneficial to the country without being pushed by these groups.

I'm sure I would not like many involved with these movements and idiots abound in both but as a group they are both expressing frustration with the current state of affairs and maybe those seeking office will pay attention.

I'm doing better since I gave up hope.

Provided they remain within the law, I agree. Unfortunately, these protests are starting to turn.

[uiba99]

MSNBC: Tea Party crazy. Wall Street protests = good.
Fox News: Tea Party inspirational. Wall Street protests = anarchy.

I find it odd (but not surprising) that the Tea Party and the people who are occupying Wall Street have yet to recognize that they have been engaging in their protests for many reasons which appear to be congruent with one another. But God forbid they actually band together and work to take the idiots out of power.

The media accomplishes its goal again - pander to those who watch their programming and paint people who rail against the establishment as kooks. Nicely done.

And the rhetoric of class warfare exists on both sides, particularly during this election cycle. Anyone who denies that is blinded by their own partisanship.

[ill07]

[ILLbuschman]

Originally Posted by uiba99

MSNBC: Tea Party crazy. Wall Street protests = good.
Fox News: Tea Party inspirational. Wall Street protests = anarchy.

I find it odd (but not surprising) that the Tea Party and the people who are occupying Wall Street have yet to recognize that they have been engaging in their protests for many reasons which appear to be congruent with one another. But God forbid they actually band together and work to take the idiots out of power.

The media accomplishes its goal again - pander to those who watch their programming and paint people who rail against the establishment as kooks. Nicely done.

And the rhetoric of class warfare exists on both sides, particularly during this election cycle. Anyone who denies that is blinded by their own partisanship.

Great post. The peasants fight amongst themselves while the landlords sit back, laugh, and fill their pockets. Divide and conquer. This is an old story.

[Illest]

The parallels to the Tea Party are obvious. The Tea Party is infused with a vague sense of outrage directed at the powerful people running the government, the Occupy Wall Streeters are infused with a vague sense of outrage directed at the powerful people running corporations and the financial industry. Just as Tea Party members see the GOP as addicted to large government, the Occupy Wall Street crowd sees the Democratic Party as basically overrun by corporate influence. And each movement has a narrative that everyone out there is thinking the same things as them but just not saying it.

These kinds of movements are an inevitable byproduct of difficult times; when things aren't going well, people blame the people in positions of power and the faceless institutions with power in society. In some sense that's fair, though I don't think there's anyone anywhere with a magic wand that can make the aftermath of a financial crisis feel smooth and comfortable.

[ill07]

Anyone see this gem? I realize it's one person, but still reading this and some of the comments makes me a little queasy:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/propos...all-st-moveme/

[IlliniBob89]

Originally Posted by ill07

Anyone see this gem? I realize it's one person, but still reading this and some of the comments makes me a little queasy:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/propos...all-st-moveme/

I realize it's NOT the official list of demands, but WOW.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Anyone got a magic wand?

[ill07]

$20 an hour living wage, whether you're working or not!

[uiba99]

Some of those demands are reasonable/worth discussing but the others are....a little off, if you catch my drift.

But again, it sounds like one person proposed something and the media made it into a statement encompassing the entire movement. Sound familiar?

I can't stress this enough. I intensely dislike the mainstream media.

[illinois_hustle]

Originally Posted by uiba99

MSNBC: Tea Party crazy. Wall Street protests = good.
Fox News: Tea Party inspirational. Wall Street protests = anarchy.

...

And the rhetoric of class warfare exists on both sides, particularly during this election cycle. Anyone who denies that is blinded by their own partisanship.

VERY nicely done.

[illinirazorback]

Originally Posted by ILLbuschman

Great post. The peasants fight amongst themselves while the landlords sit back, laugh, and fill their pockets. Divide and conquer. This is an old story.

Old, and untrue.

I agree that there are parallels between this and the Tea Party, but the Tea Party advocates the removal of corrupt, overspending politicians via a system called elections. This group is advocating for, at best, complete redistribution of wealth or at worst, beheading of the rich. They are openly advocating for socialism bordering on anarchy. The Tea Party is advocating for a peaceful return to capitalism.

[Snowball]

As I've read, and believe is true, with the President and some Democrats expressing support for the Wall Street protestors, their hope is that this group will counter act the success that the Tea Party has had. My guess is that this will not occur so long as the economy remains in the tank. Today reported unemployment figures do not help matters for the President.

"Occupy Obama: Street Demos Can’t Shift Responsibility for the Economy"

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...obama-economy/

[ILLbuschman]

Originally Posted by illinirazorback

Old, and untrue.

I agree that there are parallels between this and the Tea Party, but the Tea Party advocates the removal of corrupt, overspending politicians via a system called elections. This group is advocating for, at best, complete redistribution of wealth or at worst, beheading of the rich. They are openly advocating for socialism bordering on anarchy. The Tea Party is advocating for a peaceful return to capitalism.

Socialism bordering on anarchy? That's rich, considering anarchy is the lack of any government and socialism is a heavily-regulated form of centralized government.

As for your 'old and untrue' comment, I'm not sure gov't spending has declined overall in the last 50 years. It is simply redistributed based on political interests. Economic elites tend to do very well, no matter what. It's not some anomaly that the wealthiest one )maybe five I can't remember) percent of Americans are the only group that has done well in the last three. I don't want to have a war with them, but it's pretty obvious that politicians of both stripes cater to their interests first.

And partisans continue with the same tired "it will change when my guys get in there" routine. I think history has demonstrated that it won't.

[Illest]

Originally Posted by Snowball

Their hope is that this group will counter act the success that the Tea Party has had.

In my view, the result of the Tea Party has primarily been to shift the balance of power in the Republican Party toward the people on its extreme and eliminate moderates. I hope we don't see something similar in the Democratic Party.

Some people bemoan the similarity of the two parties, and in some ways they're right, but the similarity of the two parties also means that, as much as the media manages to get people hyped up about how The Other Guys are radicals bent on destroying the country, the trajectory of policy is fairly stable and at any given time resembles a consensus path.

[illinirazorback]

Originally Posted by ILLbuschman

Socialism bordering on anarchy? That's rich, considering anarchy is the lack of any government and socialism is a heavily-regulated form of centralized government.

As for your 'old and untrue' comment, I'm not sure gov't spending has declined overall in the last 50 years. It is simply redistributed based on political interests. Economic elites tend to do very well, no matter what. It's not some anomaly that the wealthiest one )maybe five I can't remember) percent of Americans are the only group that has done well in the last three. I don't want to have a war with them, but it's pretty obvious that politicians of both stripes cater to their interests first.

And partisans continue with the same tired "it will change when my guys get in there" routine. I think history has demonstrated that it won't.

They want socialism, but will resort to anarchy in order to get it. Try to keep up.

You said that the peasants were fighting will the landlords laughed. Not sure how that's not untrue.

Your last part doesn't make any sense. You're talking about government redistribution, which is what the protesters want more of. Take from the rich, give to the poor. That's what government has done forever, and they want more of it. Socialism.

[danielb927]

Originally Posted by Illest

In my view, the result of the Tea Party has primarily been to shift the balance of power in the Republican Party toward the people on its extreme and eliminate moderates. I hope we don't see something similar in the Democratic Party.

Some people bemoan the similarity of the two parties, and in some ways they're right, but the similarity of the two parties also means that, as much as the media manages to get people hyped up about how The Other Guys are radicals bent on destroying the country, the trajectory of policy is fairly stable and at any given time resembles a consensus path.

Or maybe we do see that happen to the democrats and pave the way for a third party up the middle?

[illinirazorback]

Originally Posted by Illest

In my view, the result of the Tea Party has primarily been to shift the balance of power in the Republican Party toward the people on its extreme and eliminate moderates. I hope we don't see something similar in the Democratic Party.

Some people bemoan the similarity of the two parties, and in some ways they're right, but the similarity of the two parties also means that, as much as the media manages to get people hyped up about how The Other Guys are radicals bent on destroying the country, the trajectory of policy is fairly stable and at any given time resembles a consensus path.

What exactly is extreme about wanting a smaller government? You're looking at this from the left. The Republican party has been drifting left for years. So, is it a hard shift back to the right? Sure. Is it extreme? Not by a long shot. The Democratic party already has plenty of folks over on the far left. These protesters are anarchists. The Tea Party isn't that far right, no matter how hard people try to paint them that way.

[ILLbuschman]

Originally Posted by illinirazorback

They want socialism, but will resort to anarchy in order to get it. Try to keep up.

You said that the peasants were fighting will the landlords laughed. Not sure how that's not untrue.

Your last part doesn't make any sense. You're talking about government redistribution, which is what the protesters want more of. Take from the rich, give to the poor. That's what government has done forever, and they want more of it. Socialism.

"Socialism through Anarchy." That could be the title of your right wing hit piece on the radical left. And, obviously, the tea party has plenty of wack jobs, just like these protesters. The Tea Party is much bigger and larger, and has spread into more mainstream elements of society.

My last part does make sense - you just assume that all government redistribution takes the form of government handouts to poor people, which is woefully mistaken. Reagan, for example, redistributed a huge amount of money to defense contractors, DoD research contractors, ect. He did is under the guise of defense, but no one really believed Star Wars was going to come to anything.

Bush too. Dems usually redistribute the other way. In Obama's case, money for everyone!

My point was that government has always picked and chose how to dole out its money. From the very beginning. And, increasingly, they are doling it out in a way that behooves the super economic elite - in the form of publicly subsidized risk most recently.

If all government redistribution is socialism, then the U.S. has been socialist for quite some time.

[illinirazorback]

Originally Posted by ILLbuschman

"Socialism through Anarchy." That could be the title of your right wing hit piece on the radical left.

You haven't been paying much attention to this then, have you? I didn't say it, they did. Maybe not with the "elegance" of your slogan, but it's exactly what they are saying. Don't beat me up over it, they said it.

Originally Posted by ILLbuschman

If all government redistribution is socialism, then the U.S. has been socialist for quite some time.

Um, yeah. Welcome to the Tea Party.

[illinirazorback]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occu...with-reporter/

As the Occupy Wall Street protests surge in size and spread across the country, the Occupy Sacramento offshoot appears to be both confused, and angry when asked simple questions about their purpose.

About 300 protestors showed up in a downtown Sacramento park Thursday morning to kick off the Occupy Sacramento movement, and they did not take kindly to the the presence of a local CBS reporter. They also couldn‘t agree on why they’re there.

When the CBS reported asked the organizer of the movement what the 300 protestors were doing there, his response was “right now its kind of vague..as it stands right now that message team will reveal that tomorrow morning.”

Others listed a litany of random complaints, some with a tenuous connection to being “angry over corporate greed.”

Another protestor said into the camera, “I‘ve heard it’s anti-capitalist; I’m a socialist, I’m a Marxist communist.”

But the most vague response of the day went to a young woman who said, “I’m here to support people.”

[IlliniBob89]

Originally Posted by illinirazorback

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occu...with-reporter/

When the CBS reported asked the organizer of the movement what the 300 protestors were doing there, his response was “right now its kind of vague..as it stands right now that message team will reveal that tomorrow morning.”

http://www.cartoonstock.com/director...test_march.asp