Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: A story in the New York times shows OWS protesting Obama

Posted 10 years ago on Dec. 1, 2011, 9:01 a.m. EST by theCheat (85)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

but you know 100% of OWS will still vote for him.

115 Comments

115 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by Chinacat63 (5) 10 years ago

I visited your site because I was curious about the reason that OWS protested an Obama fundraiser. I then proceeded to read many comments about how the Democratic party is just as evil as the Republican party. I understand that this fundraiser was a $35K a plate type of affair (horror.) First: It is not a sin to be rich. It is only a sin to be a selfish and hateful rich person. Warren Buffett, President Obama, Bill Gates and many other rich people believe that they should be paying a portion of their incomes that is more equitable (or even higher) in relation to what Average Joe is paying, as well as closing all of the tax loopholes for corporations. They also advocate many policies that would benefit the average citizen and not benefit themselves in any way. (Do you have amnesia? Remember the sunny beginning of Obama's Presidency when he was pushing for single payer health care for everyone?) After hitting brick wall after brick wall and growing a lot more gray hair, he is still the same person. He has tirelessly pushed the agenda of the poor and middle class. I've read all of the crazy strategies about voting in the primary, then changing to an independent, then writing in a candidate. Who? These ideas are completely unfocused and nonsensical. In the meantime, the Republican party has redrawn voting district lines all across the country to favor their party, shortened early voting times, making rules that voters must show picture ID to vote (when 90 year old ladies who have voted at the same precinct for 70 of those years don't have photo ID. There are also a LOT of college students who will not be able to vote, due to some dumb change of address rule. All of these Draconian will result in disenfranchising the elderly, poor and college students. You need to work with the hand that has been dealt - complete unorganized anarchy is not the answer (or maybe it is, but please decide on a common goal. Put forth a common candidate and agenda.) And, by hating the rich people filling our liberal President's coffers, you are not helping anyone and you are coming off as ignorant as the people you are protesting against.

[-] 0 points by bemindful (23) 10 years ago

11 Reasons Why Occupy Wall Street Protesters Are Hypocrites If They Do Not Call For Barack Obama To Resign

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/11-reasons-why-occupy-wall-street-protesters-are-hypocrites-if-they-do-not-call-for-barack-obama-to-resign

If the Occupy Wall Street protesters truly believed in the things that they are proclaiming, then they would be calling for the immediate resignation of Barack Obama and his entire cabinet. The truth is that the Obama administration is responsible for most of the things that Occupy Wall Street is supposedly complaining about. If the Occupy Wall Street protesters were intellectually honest, we would see a flood of anti-Obama signs during these demonstrations. But instead we have barely heard a peep of criticism for Obama. In fact, the vast majority of the protesters seem very excited about sending Obama back to the White House in 2012. As will be clearly demonstrated in the rest of this article, this makes the Occupy Wall Street protesters tremendous hypocrites. If Occupy Wall Street wants to have any credibility whatsoever, it needs to call for Barack Obama to resign. Either Occupy Wall Street protesters will call for Barack Obama to be held accountable for his actions, or they are just a bunch of sheep. They cannot preach to us about how principled they are and yet turn a blind eye to everything that Barack Obama has been doing for the past 3 years.......

[-] 2 points by durkinme (2) 10 years ago

I agree that in today's world voting for either party, Republican or Democrat is an excercise in the status quo. And I get why many people are completely turned off about voting for anyone or anything. But please consider this: Unless our laws and policies in government change - ultimately nothing will happen and the rich will still rule and the 99% will still be serfs, subject to the whims of the 1%. Does our political system suck? YES. Is it corrupt? CERTAINLY. Is it beholden to special interests? ABSOLUTELY. Are the politicians in current office afraid to do anything that upsets their special interest contributers? YES. Are both many politicians and special interests greedy beyond anything imaginable? SURE. However --- unless we migrate from a protest movement, to a political movement, change will not happen. We - each one of us - must begin to work with all our might to get people elected to office on the local, state and national level that WILL HOLD OUR VALUES AND NEEDS sacrosanct! It doesn't matter if you lean left or right, republican or democrat, or independent. What matters is that we 1) register as many people as possible to vote, 2) EDUCATE ourselves and others on candidates - and support those who honor our values and will WORK to even out the income inequality that now exists, 3) Search our own souls, and look at others around us - who is able, ready and willing to dive in and become a candidate for office - who supports and believes in the 99%? I am talking about serious, hard, exhausting work. If we don't, and special interest puppets are elected - we will remain in the very same place we are now. PLEASE - lets put our feet, hands, minds, and hearts where our mouths are - WORK to get people in office who will truly revolutionize American government from the ground up!

[-] 2 points by Idaltu (662) 10 years ago

Of course! He is the only human running for president. Sort of makes sense.

[-] 2 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

Three cheers for the OWS protesters who got out last night and showed the nation that OWS is not an Obama/Democrat tool the way the tea party is a GOP tool.

People try to make a distinction between the OWS and the tea party. This is it. The OWS is an Independent populist movement for social and economic justice for middle class America.

The TP is a mindless robot of the Reich-wing of the Republican Party.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

OWS will still vote for Obama, I will place money on that because there has not been a single OWS supporter on this forum who has or ever will, vote republican.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

You are too linear and too partisan Republican to have any insights into the motivations of OWS activists.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

I am more familiar with OWS than you give me credit for. In the end, when you go to vote and there are only 2 choices, you will pull the lever for Obama because you just cannot open your minds to anything to the right of the left.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

That is not what I and millions of other Independent and third party voters did in 2008.

It is not what I am encouraging OWS sympathetic voters to do in 2012.

You are politically brain dead.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

Why the personal attack? I am very active in the political arena and I also understand human nature well. If you are face with a close election where the threat of a right wing candidate will win, the default will be to protect the left wing candidate.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

You understand nothing.

Americans who voted for Obama in 2008 and are today OWS supporters are OWS supporters because they feel betrayed by Obama. Lied to by Obama.

Your saying that Obama is left-wing shows your partisan myopia and dishonesty. Obama is not at all left-wing or even moderate. the only people who say such silly things are right-wingers trying to shove Obama and his few supporters even further to the right be demonizing them as "leftists" or "liberals". Its just a lot of right-wing bullying and thug Brown Shirt politics.

[-] 2 points by hotdog (29) 10 years ago

Left-wing? Right-wing? Obama is, was and always will be an establishment candidate. Obama is someone who has accomplished practically nothing on his own and been elevated by the party who recognized his appeal to the demographic. He was groomed. Forget the marketing. Forget the sales pitch. Obama received twice the financial support of McCain from Wall Street. He's a Wall Street guy all the way and his policies have proved it beyond a doubt. You need to find the candidate who is not part of the establishment. Here's a hint. It's not Obama, and it's not Romney. And don't look to the media for help. They are part of the establishment.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

Absolutely!

I have said for decades that no matter who I vote for I lose since none of these people really reflect or respect my social and economic justice values. This is why I plan to Write-In my choice for president. My candidate, Elizabeth Warren, won't win but her name will give the Democrats and Republicans a clear political statement of my values because Wall Street hates her and fears her. And the parties know how Wall Street feels about her.

The vote is the most important place that we get to express our political and social values. Where they cannot stop our political free speech.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

Hell, he lied to you while he was running, but that did not stop any of his support. Obama is as left wing as Pelosi or Reid or Teddy Kennedy. Your issue is you do not want to admit that a left winger such as Obama could have been so poor of a leader and clueless as well. Better to call his a covert republican than call him what he is, a failed democrat.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

You are delusional. And you cannot read for comprehension so it is useless attempting intelligent communication with you.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

What evidence do you have that draws the conclusion that Obama is a right-winger?

[-] -2 points by karenpoore (902) 10 years ago

Who is to say we are voting at all? To me voting would be condoning what we are fighting against! I say we occupy every voting poll when the time comes.

[-] 1 points by OWSWhat (66) 10 years ago

Yes I bet Texas would be ideal weather for me, it is snowing here now. Your comment on the violence in OWS, you are right and it seems like some of the young and misinformed kids are the ones that are doing it and not the actual adults. The news media outlets all paint a different picture of this movement and it is really unsure which one to believe. Years ago all news media outlets used to be on about the same page, but that no longer happens. Dan

[-] 0 points by karenpoore (902) 10 years ago

I use to work for a police department and I can tell you the reported stories that you heard from main stream media did not always reflect what the police report actually said ... Maybe we should occupy all main stream (brainwashing) media stations!

[-] 0 points by OWSWhat (66) 10 years ago

We need all need to get on the same page and not be divided. As long as our Country remains divided then the longer it will take to get it back on track again. There should not be a Rep and Dem party but rather just have "one" party, then there will be no more disagreements. Also we should be able to have a say in every move our Gov takes and not just let them spend our money any way they see fit. They all should lose their jobs and get some fresh new ideas in congress

[-] 1 points by CatLady2 (248) from New York, NY 10 years ago

I agree with you 110%.. Time to get out the brooms and clean house!

[-] 0 points by karenpoore (902) 10 years ago

For just the middle class???

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

OWS has focused on the middle-class so I have reluctantly adopted that limitation. Personally, I usually argue issues that most effect all of the poverty oppressed people of America.

Adopting the middle-class limitation, for me, has been very unsavory because I have long considered the term 'middle-class' to be a buzz phrase for 'white' among the two right-wing white dominated parties enabling them to simply ignore the poverty oppressed who they demonize as non-producers.

[-] 2 points by OWSWhat (66) 10 years ago

They should be protesting against the Obama Admin. Sure he did inherit a mess but in the three years he has been in office, the economy has become worse. I am an independent and Obama does not care about me or you. He is a politician and only really cares about getting another term. He has been in campaign mode since he was elected in 2008

[-] 1 points by BTKcongress (149) 10 years ago

it's the nature of the beast... you have to ask for your job every four years.

i like plato's idea of an appointed "philosopher king" who has wealth (not subject to the vagaries and influence of $), high IQ/wisdom, and only the interests of the country in mind with every decision. unfortunately, we have exactly the opposite in every office, regardless of party.

[-] 1 points by karenpoore (902) 10 years ago

Hi again, Don't you kind of think this mess as coming down the road for the last 20/30 years? I, personally, do not feel it matters who holds the puppet's seat. It's the 1% that does not care ...

[-] 1 points by OWSWhat (66) 10 years ago

Yes I do

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by Slammersworld (210) 10 years ago

He inherited the mess created by 2 years of democrat congressional control, under Bush43, that doubled the deficit to a cool trillion dollars and never stopped spending and regulating, creating an unfriendly business climate, and pitting groups of american's against each other.......if you go back and look at the trends in 2004-2007 you see a much different picture than the one that took shape after jan 2007-the current situation...

[-] 1 points by UncleKennyD (7) 10 years ago

How did the 1% get their power? Socializing education, creating social dependency and placing themselves in the role of "saviors" through charity and government. Then they enacted a manufacturing climate that eliminated small manufacturing potential and bought up any possible competition. They not only cemented their power, but became necessary economically. (Too big to fail). By the reduction of interest rates they further ensured a borrowing based economy that completely minimizes class mobility and the existence of distributed private wealth. Both party supported economic philosophies pave the path with seeming good intentions to these desirable outcomes for those who would want to ensure perpetual family wealth. Why aren't there tariffs on foreign manufactured goods? Inflation? What do you think corporate taxes will directly lead to? Hiring and price reductions? There is no common sense in the "fairness" argument, it solves nothing and is a juvenile philosophy as it addresses no causes, just immediate effects. Opportunity and competition are what allowed us to become a wealthy nation, the wealthiest ever known, not just in dollars either. The policies that skew the opportunity to the existing wealth are socialized education, hand-out programs and political complicity with manufacturing and economic actions that eliminate domestic opportunity to build in this country. Tariff foreign goods, make domestic manufacturing competitive, and allow small manufacturing to come back. This is a government responsibility. Don’t allow GM and Ford or their ilk to buy up any upstart competition and incorporate them into the “too big to fail” power monsters. This is actually a purpose of government in the free market. Make private education more accessible and grasp that public education is failing and no amount of money is the answer. We spend trillions on education and it gets worse every year. Instead of “no child left behind” it is ever child not wealthy enough for a private education left behind. Change the model or we will have a nobility class if we don’t already.

Don’t whine, solve problems. There is nothing brave about being dissatisfied, the bravery is in proposing change and working to implement it. There is nothing “just” about expecting someone else to provide for you and that is the ultimate platform for some people apparently. We owe one another opportunity, not guaranteed success. Consequences of your actions are yours and no one owes you immunity from them. Failing is part of attempting to succeed, sometimes multiple times, but the opportunity to try is all that anyone can claim they are entitled to, not the immunity of from failure or any right to subsist on of the efforts and successes of others.

[-] 1 points by mha (142) 10 years ago

We should support Elizabeth Warren. But i was sooooo convinced Barack would fight for reason and justice. It hurts a lot. It makes you stop to believe in real change.

[-] 1 points by hotdog (29) 10 years ago

"Journalism is one of the devices whereby industrial autocracy keeps its control over political democracy; it is the day-by-day, between-elections propaganda, whereby the minds of the people are kept in a state of acquiescence, so that when the crisis of an election comes, they go to the polls and cast their ballots for either one of the two candidates of their exploiters."--Upton Sinclair What people need to recognize is that journalists despite their own propaganda/marketing are far from virtuous. They are part of the problem. They are part of the elite. They are members of the establishment, enjoying privilege. As consequence they will fight tooth and nail to protect the status quo. If you want change, you have to figure out which candidate is not part of the establishment. That is the candidate whom the media will do their best to marginalize, demonize and generally portray as an extremist. And one really does not have to be very extreme or fringe at all to be portrayed as such by the media. They like to keep the public debate within very narrow bounds. Real change is threatening.

[-] 1 points by sampson (34) 10 years ago

100%? not true... Many OWS supporters will vote for Ron P A U L. He's preaching much of the same things as them.

[-] 1 points by thesystemisrigged (10) 10 years ago

Wow, out of the corner of my eye I thought the tragic censorship on this site had been lifted in favor of freedom of speech, but then I noticed you had to have spaces in P A U L. Oh well, I guess Irony lives on.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 10 years ago

If you vote for Obama, you are part of the problem; not the solution.

[-] 4 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

When you vote for Republicans and Democrats you are voting for the status quo.

Republicans and Democrats are the people who have caused America's problems. they are incapable of solving the problems that they have caused.

George Washington tried to warn us about party politics in his farewell speech as America's first president.

George Washington: "Let me now take a more comprehensive view, & warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally." http://home.ptd.net/~aahpat/aandc/gw.htm

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Unfortunately, not voting is also not an option.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

I am a strong believer in voting. Just not voting as the two dominance parties dictate.

I encourage all OWS supporters to register to vote strategically in their communities. Register in a major party for the primary to have the most impact the low turnout primary of candidates you particularly like or dislike.

Then change to Independent for the general election because it scares the two parties to have larger and larger numbers of Americans declaring themselves Independent of the two parties.

Finally, use the Write-In option aggressively and creatively for both the congress and the presidency.

Write-in is independent of the corruption and money. Its free.

Write-In is Independent of the ballot access subversion and limits put in place by the collusion of the Democrats and Republicans at the state level.

Write-In is how OWS can liberate American democracy from the two party hegemony.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I'm sorry. I cannot throw my vote away to a write in. If you want to liberate America from the two party hegemony then you have to have enough people that are running on the same platform with the same goals. It still has to start from the bottom. This takes time.

[-] 2 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

That is precisely the kind of defeatism that two dominance parties rely on to keep voters docile and voting the party line.

Write-In fails when used individually. It has never been used by a movement of political activists because too many people are, like you, brainwashed by the parties to think it will fail.

I believe that it can be a game changing dynamic if focused on low turnout primaries by an organized dissident group that reflects the interests of a large enough cross section of the American people. OWS provides that.

I am not willing to submit myself to the single-minded two party dictatorship when there are real and viable alternatives for creative Americans to liberate American democracy from the two party duopoly.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Brainwashed? No, I am old enough to actually see this stuff in action. Not all states utilize the popular vote it is decided by State law. In my area, Independent means a Republican that didn't get his/her way, the Tea Party or Libertarians. There is not an easy-peasy way out. You want a viable third party? Create one and that will take time.

I think it is lovely that the middle class is finally up in arms but, I do not have time at the moment to play around.

[-] 0 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

You mean like Joe Lieberman becoming an independent? Wait, that blows your BS out of the water because he is a democrat. Better wear a belt because your partisanship is showing.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Here is a thought: I didn't vote for Lieberman. I just stated: In my area. Nice try though.

[-] 1 points by pinker (586) 10 years ago

it's not defeatism. not voting or writing in a random name will leave you with a Republican president. you have four years to come up with a viable alternative to dem or Rep. until that happens, your symbolic gesture screws us over. yeah yeah they're all bought and paid for liars, but one side at least represents some of positions, such as pro-choice, etc. people who vote are not brainwashed, they are just not going to give up on some of the rights we've won in the past.

[-] 2 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

When Democrats start supporting the economic and social justice issues that they imply in their innuendo that they support I will vote for them. I gave up on that ever happening and became an Independent in 1996 rather than vote again for the Jim Crow Clinton administration.

I vote my social justice values. When the Democrats decide they want to WIN my vote all they have to do is respect my social justice values. I am not holding my breath.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Voting for one of two fascist parties is "throwing your vote away". Doing what you know is right, isnt.

Let the sheep contribute to the downfall.

Make a stand.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Ron Lawl is not taking a stand.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

So what is your stand?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

in regards to what? With which issue? I have got a list.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Voting. Because voting for one of two corrupted parties that have been screweing people for over 60 yrs, is not making a stand.

Voting for war mongering fascists is a throw away vote, unless you like war.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Until there is a viable independent candidate then I will have to cast my vote with the democrats. I don't want to. But, libertarians are not going to get my vote and neither will Republicans.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Way to lead the charge in a different direction. You know you can write people in right?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Yep. I know it.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Who the hell said anything about Republicans or Libertarians? Flordia is a purple state, that Im guessing you realize I live in, after living in NY the first 26 years of my life, off and on.

Im saying that inability to construct anything besides what the banks offer us is pathetic. Its not democracy. Its sheep that are too afraid to do anything on their own.

Half dont vote, and I honestly cant blame them. Its just too bad that those that do fall for the same tricks every freakin time.

Im not contributing to a murderous D/R duopoly anymore. I was a campaign manager for this lying POS Obama and Im done with him. And the entire party, because they are too fuckin scared to say anything.

Im doing my own thing, and then I can look my kids in the face and tell them I didnt contribute to this mess.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I am not happy with the Democrats. I work with the people that do the living and dying in this country. The people that have been thrown away unless someone can figure out how to bank on their misery.

The tricks are horrendous. Until there is a viable candidate, there is not one other option. We are OUT of time. Again, I think it is lovely that middle class has finely figured it out. It is quite unfortunate that it had to hit closer to home for them to get it.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

I just cant believe how many people are frustrated with whats going on, and REFUSE to do anything different. Claiming its a wasted vote, not worth it, things arent that bad, etc.

It is laughable at best, criminal at worst.

A vote is an endorsement. It is the strongest thing you can do, as an individual, to support a current individual.

Im not endorsing a war mongering, innocent civilian killing Democrat or Republican.

Why is it so fuckin hard to realize this? Im not trying to be mean, but hte apathy of the 99% is what lead to these crimes by the 1%

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I have already explained my reasoning for it. You should have read that first.

Why is it so fucking hard to take an idea follow it to the end result? Huh? I am not handing my vote to a Republican or a Libertarian. Take a look at Florida and tell me that you want to see that nationwide. I think the inability of people to see how their phenomenal ideas actually play out on the ground is a problem.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Vote for the war monger. I hope you dont have any family/friends in the military that die because you have to realize you helped it.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

What is that? Really?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

OK, fair enough,

[-] 0 points by MaryS (529) 10 years ago

What real and viable alternatives are there right this moment? I agree with Girlfriday. There are too many people here who aren't thinking beyond next week. It's not defeatism, it's common sense. You want to create an environment where a third party even has a chance to form and grow. I believe you have started to do that. Vote for the candidate that you feel is most progressive and and who does the least to stifle that environment. Then start doing what it takes to break the 2 party system.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

Absolutely.

I'm old enough to have been around during the Chicago Democratic convention. The left was so furious at the party that they stayed away from the polls. The result? Nixon and more years of bloody war. The other result" The seeds were planted for exactly what we're experiencing now.

Not voting today for the best possible option, even if it is not good enough by a long shot, is STILL ensuring that the worst possible option does win.

In the meantime, as has been suggested, begin the actual hard work of creating a third party. It may not feel as "righteous" and it certainly represents a temporary compromise, and for sure it doesn't get one's rocks off as a lone voice in the wilderness, but it is tho ONLY way to be effective in the long run. It ain't sexy, it just works better.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 10 years ago

what do you mean?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Exactly what I said. If you don't vote, you have still voted. People are counting on you (general you)-no they are going to spend an awful lot of time trying to get you to not vote so that their group of demons of wins. Not voting is not an option. The way that the system works means that your vote counts at the local/state level. This will impact presidential elections. You have to start from the ground up.

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 10 years ago

I think I understand, but I'm still a little confused. Are you saying that my none-vote counts as an actual vote, or are you saying that the people in politics would rather have me not vote? Sorry, lol. Just wondering.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I am saying both.

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 10 years ago

Weird, explain to me the first part again. The none-vote counting as a real vote?

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Ok, when people are driven to despair with the system then they stay away from the booths. There are those that attempt to demoralize others to keep them from voting. I'm not making any accusations, this is not the only forum. So, when you do not vote at all then you have just handed someone else that vote. You are no longer engaged "mentally" or physically and your non vote counts.

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 10 years ago

I didn't think you're making accusations. I just legitimately am trying to understand. Is it about a percentage thing? That when I don't vote, the people who do vote have a larger percentage of the voting count, so their vote counts more?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Yep. It's like they get to vote twice. Which is great if everything works out in your favor but is completely horrible when it does not.

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 10 years ago

Thanks!

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You're welcome.

[-] 0 points by MoRichardGates (68) 10 years ago

please tell us who to vote for old wise one.

Show us the great solution!

[-] 1 points by offmybrain (23) 10 years ago

I had high hopes for him as POTUS but history will show his presidency as a debacle

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Well, I am an Independent. I will vote for Obama. There are no other options.:D

[-] -1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

You are not independent if you only see Obama as an option.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Sorry, Ron Paul is not an option. No Republicans are options at this point. You have one sane person that is running. A third party will hand the WH to the Republicans. Not an option.,

[-] 0 points by guru401 (228) 10 years ago

Read Ron Lawl's statement on what the Federal Reserve did yesterday.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I have. Thank you.

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Ron Lawl is the only option. He will be on the ballot as independent if he does not win the Republican Primary and has the good sense to know that he wouldn't get 2 minutes of debate air time if he started on the Independent ticket.

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I'm sorry. He is not an option. I will not vote for him and I know very few people that will.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Many people do not understand our organic Constitution and how, via implied consent, we have long since given up our rights under and and subjected ourselves to the Corporate Version.

It's very simple.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I'm sorry, he is not an option and many of his followers have kind of destroyed it for him.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

The beautiful thing that you likely fail to understand is that We The People do not have to have anyone in the office of US President to restore our organic Constitution.

Check out Lawrence Lessig of Harvard School of Law.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

NO. I understand him fine. He just isn't an option.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Well, an Article V Convention will soon be a reality.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

And then what? Continue to destroy the country?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Reduce the size and limits of the Federal Government as originally intended. You're very cynical.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

There is a reason for that. It isn't like I haven't see attempts in action.

This makes it a joke. Coopt to see if you cannot get people to go against what they want but make it look bright, shiny and new. In reality, your just getting them to bend over a little further and appealing to tradition.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Sorry, I'm bored with this futile discussion. Thanks just the same. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You did not have any intention of actual discussion. Your loss.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

I don't need much of anything. I was merely asking if you owned land or other real property and assume you have never owned real property (certainly not outright paid for free and clear) based on many of your notions. No reply button on your post even running all three scripts on this page. I normally only run the two needed to interact.

So, you have no willingness to downsize federal government and allow those who can, self-govern as long as they aren't hurting anyone else?

Are you also opposed to states, even on down to the community level, The People level, having the power over education, to decide if their citizens want to participate in a forced government retirement plan or not, or even the control over their very neighbors of which you are sure many shall have to be institutionalized, perhaps even in community run (as opposed to big fed government run) institutions?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

What did I say?
here was a process that was called deinstitutionalization that started before Reagan but was accelerated under him. So, you had an influx into homeless people that were not able to function in society and so they wind up in jails and prisons, where they absolutely do not belong. Or they are placed where they have minimal care by people who make minimum wage in "for profit" facilities that call themselves non profit. You will have to go back to institutionalization for many people that cannot function in society. I said stop privatizing that which should not be privatized. Do not privatize prisons. Do not privatize nursing homes that are actually public. They will not care for these people because profit is more important. Do not privatize social security. Do not privatize education. None of this is strange. Twenty years does not erase memory. :/ And I clearly see a reply button with this post.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Such pinpoint focus on seemingly a few select areas.

The stuff about more prisons as well.

And that your posts have no "reply" link.

Are you a land owner? Do you outright own real property that is other than land?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You do not need to know what I own. You do not need to know what I do.

There was a process that was called deinstitutionalization that started before Reagan but was accelerated under him. So, you had an influx into homeless people that were not able to function in society and so they wind up in jails and prisons, where they absolutely do not belong. Or they are placed where they have minimal care by people who make minimum wage in "for profit" facilities that call themselves non profit. You will have to go back to institutionalization for many people that cannot function in society.

I said stop privatizing that which should not be privatized. Do not privatize prisons. Do not privatize nursing homes that are actually public. They will not care for these people because profit is more important. Do not privatize social security. Do not privatize education.

None of this is strange. Twenty years does not erase memory. :/ And I clearly see a reply button with this post.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Well, I have no problem with "lobbying". It's the people's right and RESPONSIBILITY to petition their representatives. I have a problem with bribery and legislation/representatives for sale. The rest of your plan sounds pretty bizarre.

Are you advocating for more institutions like prisons?

Are you a land owner? Do you outright own real property that is other than land?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

What is it that you think is bizarre?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Your last post has no reply button, so my reply is elsewhere.

"Well, so how do you propose to make that happen, GFriday?"

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

For SSC, lift the cap and don't touch it. Regulations by the federal government in health care, public option or better, and allowing smaller farms to prosper instead of being forced to buy equipment that keeps them enslaved to Big Agra and making sure that our food sources are prima donna by funding enough people to check. Stop privatizing stuff that shouldn't be privatized and stop sending millions of dollars to testing companies that don't pay taxes to scam the public on standardized tests. Pensions are to be left alone and if that means that you cannot gamble on it-tough. It is pretty simple. If this means that we have more section 8, so be it. Get our people of the street. If this means that you have to revert back to institutionalization so that you aren't paying out the wazoo to cover prisons costs and court costs for the people that cannot function in society, so be it. If that means that nursing homes have to come back under government care because the actual care is neglected due to profit, so be it. Pretty simple really.

Get rid of lobbyists. Get rid of corporate financing for elected officials.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

What is it you suggest and what is it you think "the people" want?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Regulations on the financial sector and on industries. Especially, in regards to food, environment, health care and education. Most people do not want Social Security to be privatized. They want a government that is for and by the people. This means that when we pay taxes they go back to our society. They want the politicians not to be purchased for industries. They don't want education to be reserved for the elite. They want to know that they can buy a house if possible and, if not, at least be able to pay rent and utilities. They do not want to have their pensions stolen from Corporations or the financial sector. They do not want to have the education system, the police force, and the firefighters privatized. They do not want their children to go and die in wars that serve to profit a few. Justice. Balanced and fair. Not, the major industries kick that whole regulation thang down to the smaller and up and coming businesses as we have seen and tax the millionaires, billionaires and those corporations that are not paying squat.

None of the above is libertarian.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 10 years ago

Well, so how do you propose to make that happen, GFriday?

[-] 1 points by coach1640280 (9) 10 years ago

Obama, say it. “A 30yr fed/bank ownership-theft cartel created this #10%owns80% economy & this endless recession.”

Obama, say it. “Corporate media theater is the primary diversionary tactic of the fed/bank ownership-theft cartel.”

Better still, last-man-standing Barack, take a 4 year deserved break, let offensive-team-captain Hillary carry the ball.

[-] 1 points by GordonGekko (8) 10 years ago

It's about time. Wall street is the result of what happens on independence avenue and pennsylvania avenue.

[-] 0 points by RockyJ (208) 10 years ago

Obama 2012, after that we'll have 4 years towards getting a Presidential candidate that REALLY represents the 99%!

[-] 0 points by thesystemisrigged (10) 10 years ago

OWS does not support Obama. Never has. We can not be co-opted or our message will dissolve.

-A letter from a Tea Party founder to OWS-


I don't expect you to believe me. I want you to read this, take it with a grain of salt, and do the research yourself. You may not believe me, but I want your movement to succeed. From a former tea partier to you, young new rebels, there's some advice to prevent what happened to our now broken movement from happening to you. I don't agree with everything your movement does, but I sympathize with your cause and agree on our common enemy. You guys are very intelligent and I trust that you will take this in the spirit it is intended.

I wish I could believe this Occupy Wall Street was still about (r)Evolution, but so far, all I am seeing is a painful rehash of how the corporate-funded government turned the pre-Presidential election tea party movement into the joke it is now. We were anarchists and ultra-libertarians, but above all we were peaceful. So, the media tried painting us as racists. But when that didn't work they tried to goad us into violence. When that failed, they killed our movement with money and false kindness from the theocratic arm of the Republican party. That killed our popular support.

I am sharing these observations, so you guys know what's going on and can prevent the media from succeeding in painting you as violent slacker hippies rebelling without a cause, or from having the movement be hijacked by a bunch of corporatists seeking to twist the movement's original intentions. If you think this can't happen, it happened to the Independence Party and the tea party movement. Don't let it happen to your movement as well.

Here's how they turned our movement into a bunch of pro-corporate Republican Party rebranding astroturf, and this is how I predict they are turning your movement into a bunch of pro-corporate Democratic party rebranding astroturf. I believe many of these things are already happening, so take note.

1- The media will initially and purposely avoid covering your dissenting movement to cause confusion about what your movement is about within mainstream audiences. It might feel like this is to enrage you and make you appear unreasonable. Perhaps you will feel even invisible.

2- While the obsfuscation is happening, stooges will infiltrate and give superficial support, focus and financial backing to the targetted movement. In the tea party movement's case, it was the religious Republicans and Koch Brothers. In this case, it's many unions that cozy up to the Democratic Party (the organizations as quasi-human entities, not the members themselves) and Ultra Rich liberals who pretend to care, but frankly do not serve liberators and freedom seekers but rather the interests of some union leaders and the Democratic Party. Democrat, Republican, these parties are all part of the same corporate ruling system. Case in point: http://www.debates.org/

3-The media will cover the movement only after this infiltration succeeds. Once the infiltration is completed the MSM will manufacture public media antipathy towards the movement by using selective focus on the movement's most repulsive elements or infiltrators on the corporate Conservative media side, while the corporate Liberal media will create a more sympathetic tragic hero image -- this is the flip side of the tea party, but same media manipulation tactics. I go into greater detail on this tactic: http://vaslittlecrow.com/blog/2011/09/08/how-the-media-and-ideological-groups-manipulate-your-beliefs/

4- Someone in the Democratic Party will feign sympathy for the movement and falsely "non-partisan" entities provide tons of funding and unwanted organization, just as was done with the tea party movement by Republicans. Once people assume that the pro-corporate government operatives are their friends, they will hijack the movement and the threat of your movement will be neutralized.

If this new Occupy Wall Street movement is to survive, here's what needs to be done.

1- Loudly denounce violence and disavow the violent rabblerousers of the movement. They do not help the cause.

2- Be image conscious. Present your best face and call out those who act like fools within the movement. People are more likely to pay attention to you in your Sunday dress and bringing homemade food, than when you are drinking a bottle of Snapple and chomping on Big Macs while you are looking like a slacker rich hipster/unwashed hippie stereotype.

3- Accept that you've already been infiltrated by the corporate-funded government, and work hard to say, and state what your movement is and is not about. "No, this isn't about unions or liberals, conservatives or bored spoiled brats. This is about 99% of our population being exploited and manipulated for the sake of profit." "No we will not resort to violence." "Yes, all we want is for for the end of government collusion with corporate entities that are illegitimately recognized as people." And, so forth...

4- Don't forget who you are as the illusions are thrown at you. Corporatists are masters of illusions. That's the most powerful weapon they have. That's how they sell products you don't need and convince you to justify accepting atrocities for the sake of products Don't fall for it. Otherwise, your cause will be lost. Be wary of large donations from special interest groups or non-profit corporations that were not involved this movement from the inception. Special interests groups are not your allies. Non-profit corporations are still corporations, and unfortunately, too many of them care more about donations than doing the right thing. Killing a movement with kindness is easy.

5- Remain independent and focused. If you can, pick a face to represent your movement. Rosa Parks wasn't just a random lady in a bus. http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/systems/agentsheets/New-Vista/bus-boycott/ -- She was chosen. You too can use the power of illusion against those who oppose you.

6- On the web, you can prevent a lot of hijacking simply by checking the small print, or going to the about pages of a group or individual. Non-profits and political action groups are legally obligated to disclose a lot of things, and you need to be aware of this. If the information is nowhere to be found, do a whois page. Image searches can also be helpful. Examine who is posing with whom. Company owner? Where is that company located? Did they have a convention/charity event?

7- If you hear people who you know are part of the machine saying stuff like, "Progressives need to be more like the tea party," don't accept it on face value. Always follow the money, study past statements and groups they claim to be part of. If such people are suddenly telling you to emulate organizations that they once consistently denounced as evil or racist, without any rhyme or reason, they are lying to you.

I wish your movement better luck than we had with the tea party movement before it got hijacked by the theocrats and corporatists. We used to be non-partisan too. We were the older version of you. But, I believe that as the media apparatchik and infiltrators start to twist your cause, you will understand the frustration us early adopter tea partiers felt and that we were not your enemy after all. A fascist oligarchy on the verge of winning is our common enemy. This should be your focus. Don't be dazzled by the illusion as we were. For the sake of our future, know who you are.

Thank you for reading. I would love to read your ideas on the subject. Correct me where I am wrong. Explain what is going right. This is ultimately your fight.


[-] 0 points by 99thpercentile (94) 10 years ago

Obama is virtually identical to GWB. To deny that is to ignore reality. People need to stop falling for these personality cults and wake up and actually look at what politicians are doing and saying. Look at who donates to Obama. It's the same big banks and wall street cronies that donate to all of the Republicans. There is no difference between the two parties. They are simply trying to divide us over issues like abortion, gay marriage, and class warfare in order to pass their bailouts and inflationary monetary policy. OWS is in danger of being co-opted by the establishment left just like the Tea Party was co-opted by the establishment right. Don't let OWS become controlled opposition. Look into the organizations that are trying to claim leadership in OWS. They are the very people that we are protesting against.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

As a lifelong social justice advocate and activist I found it impossible to vote for Obama in 2008 because he was clearly misrepresenting himself as a progressive when he was actually a right-wing pandering corporatist.

I will not vote for Obama in 2012 because he is even worse than my worst fears presumed.

In the primary I will change my Independent registration to Democrats to Write-In Elizabeth Warren for president.

Then I will change back to Independent for the general election and vote for a third party or Independent candidate who better reflects and respects my social justice, civil liberties and human rights Constitutional values.

Obama is evil. No less evil than any Republican. worse because he pretends to be something other than evil.

I no longer vote for Jim Crow Democrats and fascist Republicans.

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 10 years ago

I'll probably vote for Jill Stein, though it is true that there aren't really many electoral alternatives for us and it really is premature for this movement to even begin to think about electoral action. When it does, if it is going to be successful, it needs to focus lower down, especially on state legislatures and Congress. Local politics tends to be a dead end as municipalities lack sovereignty and if successful, progressives tend to get bogged down in the details of administration which basically takes them out of the loop in terms of being able to change anything.

[-] -1 points by WolfThom (90) 10 years ago

FTW is Pleased to Announce the Launching of its New Blog.

http://www.mikeruppert.blogspot.com/ Readers are invited to join in the online discussions of preparing for a post-Peak world.

15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America. Information Clearing House, Grafiken über Einkommens- und Vermögensverteilung in den USA

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25399.htm

http://www.pauljorion.com/blog/?p=11384

http://elboheme.blogspot.com/2010/05/die-wahren-ursachen-der-krise_12.html

LaRouche

http://www.larouchepac.com

[-] -1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 10 years ago

Yea, no, we should vote for that maniac Newt Gingrich.

[-] 1 points by theCheat (85) 10 years ago

I am not saying I support Newt, but what do you have against him? What about Mitt? or is it only because they are republican?

[-] 1 points by BTKcongress (149) 10 years ago

i am republican and have never seen a more pathetic group of candidates offered up. i am writing my neighbor in because i truly believe he would do a better job than anyone running. i just cannot vote for any of these pathetic candidates--they're all the lowest of the low.

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 10 years ago

Thank you for saving me the trouble of explaining.