Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Decentralized and United we stand, Divided We Fail

Posted 2 years ago on April 25, 2012, 6:21 p.m. EST by badweather (-3) from Rock Island, IL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I want to talk to my democrat friends who are in the fight to help Obama win in 2012. One person, even if he's the president, can't really change things in America. But I still believe the work you’re doing is important to do. I also want to talk to my friends in Occupy Wall Street, this involves everyone. We've been dealing with a lot of issues lately, particularly the question of whether the 99% spring is a co-opting of the movement, moveon.org, etc. which has pushed people to having that conversation so I think all this is relevant to the movement as well.

Regardless of the fact I no longer consider myself a democrat and that I think it is important to work outside the system, I am still proud of the fact that I was a significant part of Obama’s election in 2008. I was the head organizer of the Indianapolis ACORN office at that time, I found and trained all the initial people and together we built a GOTV operation that in the end employed almost 400 registrars and registered 24,500 new voters in Indianapolis. The last time Indiana went blue was 1967 and it’s only done that three times. So that isn’t something that I’m going to look back on and think; “What a waste of time...” Organizing is what it is and politics is the art of the possible. I do not think it was foolish. I did what I thought was the right thing. I would do it again because at the time, it seemed like the right choice and in fact I still believe it was.

I want you to know, that I hope Barack Obama wins if the alternative is Mitt Romney if for no other reason than the fact that Mitt will appoint terrible supreme court justices. I think I and many other people will prefer Obama’s pick for the highest court in the nation.

I look at the long haul. I’m willing to fight all your fights with you, I always vote for who I think will be best for the country, not just my own personal views.

On the issue of health care, I’m hopeful and grateful for the work that has been done by everyone but I know there is much more to do. I have serious health issues, reforming this system matters to me personally. I’m of the belief that “some disassembly may be required”, but that doesn’t mean I think we can’t save some parts of the world as we know it. We just have to sort through it all together and see what’s important to us.

So please don’t treat me like a dirty hippie pariah for saying that I’m not happy with Obama. I’m not an “herbal tea bagger”, I don’t think he’s evil, I’m just justifiably dismayed and righteously angry at the failure of so many of his campaign promises. The system seems to have absorbed him.

I’m just sick of being marginalized in my own country for having chosen the safer alternative recreational drugs over alcohol.

Read the rest: http://qcmississippimud.com/blogger/2012/04/24/decentralized-and-united-we-stand-divided-we-fail/

74 Comments

74 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Very good, thanks for the article. It addresses a serious issue. We can no longer afford the "war on drugs." It was not simply a bad idea in the first place, it was a sinister one.

[-] 2 points by badweather (-3) from Rock Island, IL 2 years ago

Thanks GypsyKing, I agree, it was on the wings of hate and fascism that prohibition came.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Yes, or in other words, Richard Nixon.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Thank you for the post. How many idiotic, viscious, and pointless wars does this county think it can afford to lose?

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

You make a good point about the supreme court justices. It does not get mentioned enough.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

we could stop dropping bombs today

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

This comment gives me deja vu.

If by "we" you mean the corporate oligarchy then you are exactly right. I by "we" you mean the people, then this is a futile mantra. You must have power before you can wield it.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

the president has that power

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

That is true if you believe we still have a functioning democracy, or actually it wouldn't really be true even if we had a functioning democracy, because in spite of the imperial presidency established by the Republican Party of the oligarchy, under The Constitution, Congress still has control over war powers.

None of that takes into account the fact that, like it or not, corporations have the power to elect whom they chose, simply by cutting off anyone who doesn't go along with them from the teet of private funding.

You see, the situation is rather complex at the moment, and these issues merely scratch the surface of that complexity.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

right

congress has the power to stop dropping bombs today

everyone in congress can vote their conscious

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

In fact, only a majority in congress is necessary. But as long as the Senate remains subject to filibuster and the house is majority republican, there isn't even a chance of that happening. And without a mandate by a manipulated and jingoistic majority population, the Democrats have no mandate to stop it, and are too afraid of being labelled "soft" on terrorism to do so even if they could (and currently can't).

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Thank you for that sobering and entirely factual assessment.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

"Sobering" perhaps. But NOTHING that suggests Democrats and Republicans are actual enemies rather than political puppets with a common puppetmaster is "entirely factual".

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Oh, my pet troll is back. How you doing, iron butt? I hope you're finally house trained.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Factual are not. If you're going to post cryptic hints at us being puppets, then come all the way out and speak clearly as to what you think we should be doing to avoid being 'puppets'. Otherwise, you are just a cryptic voice with nothing real to offer.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

What you should be doing? Try REGIME CHANGE...

The May 2012 Insurrection: Tactical Briefing #30:

http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters-blog/may-2012-insurrection.html

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Where to even start? OK, some excerpts from the page you directed me to.

"We block the Golden Gate Bridge; occupy a Manhattan-bound tunnel; seize the ports......We swarm Chicago and confront NATO....we burst out laughing at the lunacy of the eight most powerful political leaders on the planet thinking they can dictate the people’s business from behind closed doors and barbed wire fences. For one day, we take over the global mindspace with a whirlwind of #LAUGHRIOT jokes. (Like: Why did the G8 chickens cross to Camp David? / Cuz they’re on the other side. haha!) We laugh our heads off on every news broadcast in the world"

This is a blueprint for regime change? Take over the global mindspace with jokes. If you say so. But that doesn't even answer the most fundamental question that comes to mind. Whose replacing the regime? You. Mickey Mouse. Puff the Magic Dragon.

Your cryptic nature of not revealing things in a straightforward and intellectual manner with me leads me to be skeptical of the ideas you are promoting. And insinuating that I am a mere puppet being led around by my nose hairs doesn't help either. Do you see how that might be a bad thing if your intention is to gain my trust and support?

My username is JadedCitizen for a reason - because I am skeptical and cynical. I don't jump up and down and go whoo hooo when someone yells regime change like you apparently do. BTW, What the hell does egia say about you? That you like vowels more than consonants.

I know you probably mean well and have good intentions, but your way of introducing yourself and your ideas to people could use some etiquette. As strategies go, jumping into a conversation and suggesting to people they are weak-minded puppets is ...well, a little weak on the trust building side. Nah, actually, it is a lot weak.

Now, on the other hand, I am not ruling out that these things are bad ideas to implement. Although I am dubious of the whole laugh thing. The chances of these flash mobs succeeding in bringing about change is highly dependent on the number of people who engage themselves in the process. Which is why it is important you heed what I am telling you and take it to heart. Be more clear about who you are and what you are about if you want people to trust you and listen to you. Good luck.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Love your response here, JC. This guy poses as the most ardent backer of this movement, but his overbearing manner, dictitorial attitude, threats, and insults put him beyond the pale of this movements fundamental principles.

You ask me, he's a troll trying to stir division here - plain and simple.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

If your instincts say vowel lover is a troll, then mine concur with that conclusion. The only other possibility is that consonant hater is merely an everyday asshole. Either way, sucks for vowel lover.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

LOL!!!!

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

For below troll:

Speak when you're spoken to!

That will work out well for everybody because nobody wants your opinion.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Why descend into drivel when you have no intelligent response, GypsyKing? Why not just keep quiet until you do?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

republicans can vote their conscious

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

If they actually had one.

All evidence suggests they don't.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

You are right, if everyone in Congress had a conscience, they could vote with it.

I agree with your aims completely Matt, but we are in a very tangled web here. You might even call it a Gordian knot. It's going to take a lot of thinking and flexibility to untangle it - unless on Tuesday the masses get off their asses and slash it with a (figurative) sword!

[-] 2 points by shooz (17742) 2 years ago

Wow. Talk about double think.

Coming from a welfare State, that's also the most violent and under educated in the Nation.

I don't believe a word of it.

PS. There is NO Democrat party.

Do some research.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

When your vote comes down to other people that one may appoint, as opposed to what that one can/will do, then you know the country is fucked...

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Another person thinking we can solve this country's problems by not electing the other person's party. That's like saying "my car has been running rough since I took it into the Republican mechanic. I'd better take it into the Democratic mechanic", even though it was running rough the last time you got it back from them too.

We need to find a new mechanic!

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

Who thinks it will "solve" any problems to keep Obama in? Yes, your car ran rough under him, but the Republicans will crash and burn it with you inside.

Scalia.

Alito

Thomas.

Kennedy.

Roberts.

You really want more of them when Ginsburg retires?

What about the scores of district federal judges that are up for appointment? Right now 55% of them are self-described republican conservatives. You don't want that to change, or are you OK with what will become a 70% conservative, corporatist federal bench?

You want the kind of disastrous austerity that is putting Europe into a SECOND recession? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want a NEW war, this time with Iran? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want more Citizens United rulings? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want more anti-women rulings? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want the dismembering of the EPA? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want the gutting of the NLRB? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want the CDC to lose funding? How about NIH or the FDA? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want to see Food stamps slashed by 33% right now? You want to allow them to Privatize Social Security? Or destroy of Medicare and Medicaid? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want the destruction of the entire social safety net?That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

You want the Affordable Health Care act to vanish, without a replacement, leaving 50 million people without access to health insurance at all and no hope of getting any, to die or become bankrupt from illness?

Have you even SEEN the Ryan plan that everyone in his party is pushing? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

Do you want even MORE tax breaks for the wealthy? That's what the republicans, and the republicans alone, want.

Just because you are (absolutely legitimately) angry at this administration doesn't mean it is the same as what Romney would do, with what a republican congress would do. Look at the ENTIRE record of BOTH parties, not only the things you are angry about. Then tell me, in the absence of a viable, electable alternative, that you wouldn't do everything in your power to keep the proto-fascist republicans from gaining absolute power.

Electing Obama won't solve this country's major problems. But allowing the republicans in will make new ones: ones that will make today look like a golden age by comparison.

Real change will take TIME. Right now, millions upon millions of people are on their last legs, and can't afford for things to get even worse before that time comes. Lives, literally, depend of keeping the republican agenda from being implemented.

No one is saying, "stop activism". No one is saying the system is good and mustn't be fundamentally changed. But allowing the republicans to gain absolute power while in the long, long process to make that change means things will get a WHOLE LOT worse, and fast.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I don't want either of them being my president. Another Obama term would be like teetering on the edge of a really high cliff for another four years. Obama does not seem to worried if I fall off or not, and is basically leaving me alone, but Romney is a whole other story. I can picture the pseudo smile on that son of a bitch's face as he walks over and pushes me off!

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

Ideally, I don't want either of them myself. But as long as there is no viable, electable alternative, we have no choice but to make sure that greater evil (not by a little bit, but by several orders of magnitude) doesn't get in and consolidate power.

And while the finger is in the dyke, preventing a cataclysm, we work to change the nature of that choice for the future.

You analogy is a good one, I think. The one is not helping nearly enough, the other will absolutely kill us.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Thanks. Excellent reasons you listed. Especially the supreme court appointees. <shudder> If that does not shock someone out of their political anathema, nothing will.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

You and I are on exactly the same page here, epa1inter. This seems not only the best way to proceed, but the only way to proceed, as far as I can fathom it.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Wow, very well put. Nice "choice" we have, isn't it?

Still, given that this is the choice, I wish I could vote fifty times for Obama. The Republicans have become the perverted clowns from Hell. Their primary was like a nightmare, or like watching a third-rate horror movie and knowing it might become reality.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I wish I had paid more attention to politics earlier in life. Has there ever been anything as nutty as this recent book promotion tour masquerading as a presidential nomination process? Or have we really slipped into a horrific episode of the twilight zone? I'm just waiting for the the bizarre, twist ending to come our way. Any day now, I'm sure.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I really think that Republican field was reaching new lows even for America in the last fifty years. I'm not exaggerating when I say it was like an exibit in the reptile house.

I think we all feel that sense of uneasiness. When your country gets this bizarre (perfet word choice) everyone's on pins and needles.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

It's hard for me to tell when I'm just being overly jaded and cynical and when things really are that screwed up. To tell the truth, I think I would prefer it the first way. Blah people, Santorum. That is your excuse. Seriously. Arrrgghhhh!

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

And how are the elections going in the country where you live, GypsyKing? What are the major parties? Who are the leading candidates?

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

The same stooges of the .001% that are the leading cantidates everywhere.

[-] -2 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Is your strategy there to accept the failed system by supporting what you consider the lesser of two evils, just as you support the Democratic Party via your virtual persona and endless slanted postings here?

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

What is your strategy exactly? Just curious.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

REGIME CHANGE...

The May 2012 Insurrection: Tactical Briefing #30:

http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters-blog/may-2012-insurrection.html

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Well. I'm with you there. If we can do it we don't need EITHER of the current fucked-up parties!

By the way, if I remeber correctly, Mayday was my idea.

[-] -2 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Sure GypsyKing,

Mayday was your idea. And Al Gore invented the Internet...

LMFAO

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Fucking look it up. It was in October or early November on this forum. Thing about you is you think you know everything and you don't know shit.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Reply to moron below:

Yeah, idiot. Some of us knew that before we looked it up on wikipedia. That's why I suggested it. Talking to you is like trying to playing chess with a chimpanze. You are a loud-mothed, dictatorial fool, who has been banned from this forum a dozen times for very good reason. Nothing but stupidity and ego.

[-] 0 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Reply to poser GypsyKing below:

People are often banned from forums if they refuse to accept the forum groupthink consensus, and that's the case here. Like you, some if not all of the moderators of this forum are marching lock-step with Van Jones, MoveOn, the Bushbama re-election circus et al in attempting to co-opt the Occupy Movement via 99Spring into the Democratic Party and the corporate-controlled corrupt two-party false choice facade it is part of. Getting banned for calling out poser scum like you is a badge anyone should wear with pride.

[-] -2 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

You are truly a legend in your own mind, GypsyKing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workers%27_Day

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

A few questions:

How does that qualify as a viable strategy for right now?

How will that change any regime?

Why is that the only option for action?

Do you believe that nationwide revolution will occur and accomplish regime change before November elections in a nation in which the majority of its 300 million citizens describe themselves as conservatives?

What timeline do you realistically predict for regime change to take place? What indications are there that your timeline is based in reality? Polls? Surveys?

Who here said they were accepting the failed system simply because they believed it critical to vote as well as take to the streets? Why does one action preclude the other? How does that not qualify as a false choice fallacy?

[-] -3 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Clueless. Absolutely clueless...

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

[-] 1 points by egia (1) 0 minutes ago Are you Demopublican operatives tag-teaming us now? Great! That will help us expose the entire co-optation infestation here... ↥like ↧dislike permalink


I am not even close to Demopublican you snot nosed little bitch.

But, don't think for one minute that I support a bunch of little morons running around with your little sorry ass excuses to talk shit to people on this forum.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Great post! Keep it up! That will help us expose the entire co-optation infestation here...

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

[-] 1 points by egia (1) 9 minutes ago “Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.”--Robert Heinlein ↥like ↧dislike permalink

Yet, you seem to sing quite well. Although, you're just a pig and it is nothing more than a cheap circus act.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Are you Demopublican operatives tag-teaming us now? Great! That will help us expose the entire co-optation infestation here...

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

Reply to your post below.

In other words, you have no answers, only unfounded accusations about other members and unsupported declarations of what will create change.

No one here, (other than the occasional right wing troll) as far as I know, opposes regime change. We are all here to discuss how that is best accomplished, as well as the what we would like to see replace it. So that is not the issue.

I asked you very specific questions about what your plan is and how, in a specifically practical way, it would work. Your response was invective. All heat and no light. Hope to gain many supporters that way?

My questions remain, as is my continued openness to consider your answers. (Though at this point I don't expect any, and certainly not any with the least bit of coherence.)

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Declare you have no allegiance to either the Democratic or Republican party, and that you recognize they are the two sides of the same corrupt corporate coin, and that voting on false choices in rigged elections with predetermined outcomes is a waste of time and resources, and we can go from there...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21468) 2 years ago

Declare that you want this movement to include as many people as possible and stop trying to shrink it. I'm no Demopublican but I'm smart enough to understand why other people feel the way they do. This movement won't make any real change if it's not inclusive.

I've never met a person in my entire life that I agree with 100% on everything. Have you? You have to work WITH people who lean in your direction, not attack them.

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

Reply to your post below:

Sorry, this is not a quid pro quo. If you have a plan, by all means share it. If you truly believe what you have in mind will help, why hold it back for any reason?

You made unsupported declarations. I am asking you to support them, to show that you have a workable plan. If I feel that it is indeed workable, I will be happy to join you in implementing it to the best of my ability.

So far, though, you have said nothing to that effect. I await your wisdom.

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

[-] 0 points by egia (1) 0 minutes ago Great post! Keep it up! That will help us expose the entire co-optation infestation here... ↥like ↧dislike permalink


You work for a PR firm. Everyone knows it. And we are going to make sure that everyone that doesn't know now-will know in the future.

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

[-] 1 points by egia (1) 0 minutes ago Declare you have no allegiance to either the Democratic or Republican party, and that you recognize they are the two sides of the same corrupt corporate coin, and that voting on false choices in rigged elections with predetermined outcomes is a waste of time and resources, and we can go from there... ↥like ↧dislike permalink


Nobody owes you a fucking thing, Retard. Get over yourself.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21468) 2 years ago

Good grief. You are trying to control people and shrink the movement. We are supposed to be the 99% remember that?

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Declare you have no allegiance to either the Democratic or Republican party, and that you recognize they are the two sides of the same corrupt corporate coin, and that voting on false choices in rigged elections with predetermined outcomes is a waste of time and resources, and we can go from there...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21468) 2 years ago

Working WITH people would help in your goal to make America a better place, if you are sincere.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

I am happy to work WITH people who are NOT Demopublican operatives trying to either co-opt the Occupy Movement or kill it altogether. Declare you have no allegiance to either the Democratic or Republican party, and that you recognize they are the two sides of the same corrupt corporate coin, and that voting on false choices in rigged elections with predetermined outcomes is a waste of time and resources, and we can go from there...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21468) 2 years ago

Why don't you lead the charge then, egia? Get the American people to revolt.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

Let's just say I'm doing my part to make America and the world a better place.

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

Then enlighten me. Answer the questions.

[-] -1 points by egia (-103) 2 years ago

“Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.”--Robert Heinlein

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

All of these things that Romney may do still have to be Ok'ed by the same Congress that allowed many of our liberties to be legislated away. It's more important to change our more corrupted Congress than the President.

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

Agreed that Congress is critically important. But the Court appointments are are exclusively in the President's hands, and therefore that office is critical as well.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

The President doesn't have exclusive power. Every Supreme Court Justice has to be confirmed by Congress, the balance that is built into the Constitution.

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

The Congress cannot deny consent to a Supreme Court nomination unless there is compelling reason to. The last time it happened was Bork, in 1987. Disregarding his involvement in Nixon's "Bloody Monday", his judicial record alone revealed a deeply biased jurist, who did not decide on the law so much as decide for his friends. His ruling were utterly inconsistent, based on who the plaintiff was. Even Thomas, who was clearly exposed for lack of ethics during his hearings, was confirmed, during the next administration, because there were no compelling judicial reasons to reject him. HIs record as a jurist was decidedly conservative, but adhered to a specific view of the constitution with consistency. That does not rise to the level of cause for rejection. Advise and consent does not extend to political preference.

For all practical purposes - absent a proven dishonest judicial record - the president's appointment represents, a virtual, if not absolute, exclusive power.

And if you think about it, let's say Romney appoints someone who is subsequently rejected. He will simply appoint another of his ilk. And another and another. And he has already stated that he disapproves if the likes of Ginsburg and want another Scalia on the court. If he wins election, it may take more than one try, but he will get such a choice in without question.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago
[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

So are you comfortable with the like of Romney having a 4 out of 5 chance to get his first choice in? I'm not. How many second choices were rejected? Almost none. Do you think his second choice would be any better in case he needed to make one? I certainly don't.

Obama has many, many, MANY faults. But his court nominations have not been among them.

[Removed]

[Removed]