Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Demand That Obama Resign

Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 9, 2011, 6:01 p.m. EST by GarciaLorca (53)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

OWS should make it plain that the Democratic Party is the enemy, and that we resist its attempts to "jump in front of the parade." The best way to do this is to demand that Obama resign immediately.

129 Comments

129 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 12 years ago

Yes, he should resign. He's going to lose the next election.

[-] 3 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 12 years ago

He IS going to lose the next election.

If the Democrats had any brains and any balls, they would ask Obama (nicely) to resign and present another candidate, a real "man of the hour", a true statesman like Dennis Kucinich, for example. What do you guys think?

[-] 2 points by gmoneygross (205) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Maybe Obama should have delivered on his word, and that was to create jobs. He hasn't implemented a SINGLE policy that supports businesses to create jobs.

[-] 1 points by ithinkergoiam (201) 12 years ago

Dope!

You have no clue what your talking about dude...

He has supported a multitude of proposals to create jobs AND to keep the jobs right here in the USA...

You people are truely pathetic...

[-] 1 points by chrstne7 (21) 12 years ago

name one which was not just a band aid.

[-] 1 points by gmoneygross (205) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Name one, without Googling it?

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Here I think that the demand for Obama's resignation should not necessarily be accompanied by another electoral campaign. The demand for resignation should be used as a way to distance this movement from the Democratic Party. I have very serious reservations about devoting more energy to another campaign. Other avenues of activity--like working within civil society and alongside organized labor--should be the focus. Not electoral politics.

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 12 years ago

I agree we want to distance ourselves from the democrats, but we don't want to scare off every politician from supporting it. I still would demand that he resign for being the face of the democratic party's corruption.

[-] 1 points by chrstne7 (21) 12 years ago

yes couldnt agree more with sudoname

[-] 1 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 12 years ago

If the Movement continues to gather momentum nationally, it could eventually become a Force stronger than the Democratic Party itself. And if this were to happen, I think the Dem Party would implode and OWS could form a new party which might include in its ranks good people like Kucinich.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the WHOLE SYSTEM is so rotten to the core that it needs A COMPLETE OVERHAUL, allowing us to start from scratch. Thomas Jefferson, the 3rd President, knew this, he claimed that such an overhaul would be necessary every twenty (20) years in order to adapt to changing times.

[-] 2 points by CACie (3) 12 years ago

I am insulted by many of these comments. I am a lifelong Democrat (and union member) because I feel this particular party embraces my philosophy on social issues the best out of any other party. This is America and I have the right to choose. Every political party has it's faults and assets. I am 58 years old and have actively participated in the Civil Rights Movement/La Raza Unida/Women's Movement/CHOICE/LGBT Movement/Underground Batter Shelter Movement/Labor Movement....and have even gone to jail for my beliefs. The Occupy Movement is an oppurtunity to find common ground and UNITE to win!!!!! A basic respect for the differences in people is a must. 99% includes people of all races, religions, political parties, ages...The disabled, the working, the unemployed, the homeless...men, women, children. Your isolation and anti-comments on certain segments of the 99% is divisive....not uniting. And certainly not appreciated.

[-] 1 points by taxbax (159) 12 years ago

politics should not rule on social issues. (eg the government should not be able to say who CAN get married just like they shouldnt be able to say who CANT get married).

[-] 1 points by oceanweed (521) 12 years ago

end bush tax cuts , rebuild America bridges and roads , invest in middle class not banking class thats the occupy wall street message.

[-] 1 points by ithinkergoiam (201) 12 years ago

I am taking the liberty to quote an esteemed thinker named Eugenius...

He elucidates with incredible truth and power....

Eugenius1 points 1 hour ago

There is a difference! Pick one!

One of the main pillars of Conservative wisdom is that both parties are the same. Nothing they say is further from the truth. It is an insidious lie intended to demoralize progressives, and discourage them from voting. Do not fall for this canard, because if both parties are the same, there is no hope for change, and no reason to vote. The truth is that there is a difference. A stark difference!

One party works for the rich, the other party works for all Americans. One party takes money from the needy to feed the greedy, and the other party takes money from the greedy to feed the needy. One party has plans and policies to create jobs, and the other party has a long list of lame excuses for not doing anything. Liberals want to change things. Conservatives want things to stay the same. There is a difference.

One party supports the Occupation of Wall Street, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to destroy Unions, and the other party wants to support them. One party wants to tax the rich, and the other party wants to tax the poor. One party wants to provide health care for all, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to regulate Wall Street, and the other party doesn’t. One Party wants to end the wars; the other party wants them to go on forever. There is a difference.

One party is Myopic, and the other party is Far Sighted. One party wants to feed the poor, and the other party wants to tax the poor. One party wants to help the Middle Class, and the other party is at war with the Middle Class. One party wants to fire Teachers, and the other party wants to hire them. One party wants to create more jobs in America, and the other party wants to create more jobs in Asia. There is a difference.

One party wants to protect pensions, and the other party wants to loot them. One party has a heart, and the other party has Ann Coulter. One party wants to rebuild America, and the other party doesn’t. One party protects the right bear Arms, and the other party protects the right of freedom of assembly. One party believes that the only role for the Government is to provide for the common defense, and the other party believes that the Government should also promote the general Welfare. There is a difference, and anybody that tells you there is no difference between the parties is simply not conversant with reality.

In addition, anyone that blames the Democrats for the current state of affairs has no understanding of who controls the Government. One Party has the Presidency, and the other party has the Majority in the House, controls the Senate, has a majority on the Supreme Court, and is responsible for current economic policy.

So, if you’re angry, and you want to start a real fight, I submit that we should start a real fight with the Conservatives! America has a Two Party System. One party is clearly on your side, the other party thinks you’re Un-American. At some point in time you’re going to have to pick one.

[-] 1 points by Dani53 (5) 12 years ago

Yeah, ask Obama to resign and lose half your support. Your movement will become whiter than the Tea Party. Seriously. Smart Occupy Wall Street.

[-] 1 points by chrstne7 (21) 12 years ago

Obama needs to resign,and color has nothing to do with it.

[-] 1 points by Dani53 (5) 12 years ago

Spoken by someone who must nit be of color if you don't understand the dynamics of color for African Americans. Unemployment is bad for you, but it's twice as bad for us. Color has a lot to do amongst people of color when we have our first african american president that we like and think is actually trying to help. Who'd you like up there Mitt "Corporations are People Too, My Friend" Romney. Know who's on your side and who'd leave in droves if you asked Obama to leave. Get rid of Obama so we'd have someone else we trust even less. Yup, smart.

[-] 1 points by chrstne7 (21) 12 years ago

Obama lied, and lied again just this past thursday when he said the banks did not do anything illegal, since when is fraud not illegal. He is in the pocket of Goldmnan SAc thanks to their 400k donation. Obama had his chance now he needs to step aside and give someone with a back bone a chance. once again color has nothing to do with or the unemployment rate for blacks would not be over 20%, and by the way Obama is a white man.

[-] 1 points by alwayzabull (228) 12 years ago

Obama will win re-election. Just like George Bush did in 2004. Sad but true. He is a smooth-talking snake. Nobody from the Republican side of the aisle can beat him. Plus, the ruling elite own the polls. Assume the position, America!

[-] 1 points by ThereIsNoEye (2) 12 years ago

Obama is a more likable version of Bush. He needs to be gotten rid of but he won't resign and nobody will impeach him...just like nobody impeached Bush Jr.

The main thing is to stop pretending that he's on your side or the lesser of two evils or any of that other mind control drivel.

[-] 1 points by chrstne7 (21) 12 years ago

exactly

[-] 1 points by FreeFromPoliticalLabels (11) 12 years ago

You are an idiot if you think people cant see the repuke a mile away.

[-] 1 points by NorthWind (9) from Hoboken, NJ 12 years ago

So many TEA Partiers are working class, because they are not well educated in economics and the Constitution. They are easily educated, because they do not have to be "re-educated." They are taught the wrong things in a way that leads them against their own self interest. This has been written about many times. The causistry of the so-called free market think tanks lead the way in TEA Party propaganda . . among these are the CATO Institute, The Heritage Foundation, Town Hall (see their Internet site), parts of George Mason University and Hillsdale College in Michigan, many funded by the Koch Brothers and similar billionaires. There is another false university in California I cannot remember its name. Carlyle? When the TEA Party fades out the Koch Brothers will find another marketing program for their agenda.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 12 years ago

Garcia, the Democratic Party is not the enemy. It is only one head of the two-headed snake.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 12 years ago

Gee, isn't that what they did in Egypt?? If the country is going to hell in a handbasket, do not the people have the right to tell its leader to step down?

[-] 1 points by ProvidenceRhodeIsland (40) 12 years ago

Prefer that Obama ask Timothy Geithner to resign. Tim Geithner is sock-puppet for the Larry Summers-Robert Rubin-Greenspan faction, the very same people who stopped Brooksley Born from regulating derivatives.

[-] 1 points by CACie (3) 12 years ago

I am insulted by many of these comments. I am a lifelong Democrat (and union member) because I feel this particular party embraces my philosophy on social issues the best out of any other party. This is America and I have the right to choose. Every political party has it's faults and assets. I am 58 years old and have actively participated in the Civil Rights Movement/La Raza Unida/Women's Movement/CHOICE/LGBT Movement/Underground Batter Shelter Movement/Labor Movement....and have even gone to jail for my beliefs. The Occupy Movement is an oppurtunity to find common ground and UNITE to win!!!!! A basic respect for the differences in people is a must. 99% includes people of all races, religions, political parties, ages...The disabled, the working, the unemployed, the homeless...men, women, children. Your isolation and anti-comments on certain segments of the 99% is divisive....not uniting. And certainly not appreciated.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

What's your argument? Democratic Party unity and party loyalty in the face of the facts?

[-] 1 points by Wafts (53) 12 years ago

Not sure this is what was meant, but this is what it made me think of... This movement may be the 99% now. But when you start kicking out whole groups of people, you are no longer the 99%. since MOST people in this country affiliate themselves with one party or another, if you tell everyone who has joined a party to get lost, you will be a very small percentage indeed.

[-] 1 points by mikea (4) 12 years ago

This is silly. Firstly, it's a distraction from the message of economic reform, and its another idea that makes OWS sound like a bunch of shiftless teenagers. If Obama resigns who will implement the economic reform? The republican party? The tooth fairy? Is the point of this protest that Wall Street themselves will just do the right thing, ask Uncle Sam to be investigated, and make bigger payments to the treasury en masse? You all should really focus on actionable, specific goals. And whatever anyone thinks about top Dem. leaders attempting to co-opt the movement, their mentioning of the movement lends it legitimacy in the eyes of the press and the American mainstream political consciousness, which is to say: Political Capital.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Complete idiocy. The Democratic Party is attempting to use the OWS movement to win reelection, not to adopt its goals. For all of your condescension and knowingness, you reveal yourself to be a politically unseasoned and conformist cretin, whose horizon of thinking ends at the back cover of Time Magazine.

[-] 1 points by mikea (4) 12 years ago

Ah, the ad hominem, the first and last resort of political bullies everywhere. Good luck with your proposal, Spanish artist dude.

[-] 1 points by mikea (4) 12 years ago

Oh wait, calling someone a cretin isn't an ad hominem attack, its just name calling, the first resort of regular bullies everywhere.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Good luck voting Democrat and chiding critics of the two party system. OWS sure needs more people like you.

[-] 1 points by partOfTheSolution7 (51) from Chapel Hill, NC 12 years ago

Obama has done a great job, considering the circumstances. He passed the start of a needed health care overhaul and put through a lot of legislation that prevented a much deeper recession. Of course, most of his accomplishments were in his first two years, when the republicans did not control the house. The democratic party has some skin in the old game, but they can be convinced to change. They are not the enemy.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Nonsense. The health care bill is a giveaway to private insurance companies--it was negotiated in secrecy, completely at odds with the spirit of the universal health care movement. The result? Americans will be forced to buy an overpriced, terrible product. The bill does nothing to reduce the cost of health care. It doesn't have a public option, which is the minimum for having the rational health care system that every human being deserves.

[-] 1 points by partOfTheSolution7 (51) from Chapel Hill, NC 12 years ago

I agree it's not perfect; and I would have preferred a public option. But it is a step in the right direction.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

It's actually not a step in the right direction, because it has effectively closed the debate on health care reform, and strengthened private health insurance companies in the process. So actually, it is worse than nothing in that respect.

[-] 1 points by marsdefIAnCe (365) 12 years ago

How about demanding that Bush is put on trial for torture simultaneously with Obama for violating the War Powers Act in his peace bomb campaign to support the al-Qaeda rebels in Libya?

In the spirit of treating both parties like the scum that they are.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Seems reasonable.

[-] 1 points by GadgetMaster (3) from Melbourne, FL 12 years ago

How Many of you Butt holes Got off you Asses and Voted Democratic last time so the Tea Party would not be in Office

[-] 1 points by GadgetMaster (3) from Melbourne, FL 12 years ago

Obamas tring to do His Bet

[-] 1 points by GadgetMaster (3) from Melbourne, FL 12 years ago

The Enemy is not The Dems it is the Tea Party the 1%ers

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

How do you explain the fact that many of the Tea Party are working class? If the left cannot stand on elemental, basic principles, it will leave certain dejected elements of the working class, middle class and poor to join up with populist right wing causes. The left throws in its lot with the pro-corporate, pro-banker Democratic Party at its own risk.

[-] 1 points by captaindoody (339) from Elizabethville, PA 12 years ago

Dude. Hes a fellow traveler. SHUT UP! Stay on message.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 12 years ago

True, we but should make all of Government & Business resign, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:

http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures

Join

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/

if you want to support a Presidential Candidate Committee at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.

[-] 1 points by applebag (13) 12 years ago

Absolutely not. If there was a democratic primary challenger it would almost guarantee the republicans would win, possibly one of the teabaggers.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

You are falling right into the hands of the Democratic Party, whose reelection strategy is to make its dejected followers even more fearful of the Republicans than they are disappointed with the Democrats. A year from now, perhaps two, you will wake up to find a Democratic President signing a bill dismantling Social Security as we know it. Wake up now instead.

[-] 1 points by applebag (13) 12 years ago

I think you're confusing idealism and reality. I do wish Obama and the dems were more progressive but otherwise they won't get elected and could have some teabag wacko running things instead. I'm thinking of when Ralph Nader ran it likely caused Dubya to win which led to the disaster that we're still cleaning up.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

I think you aren't conceptualizing the problem correctly. In many ways, Obama has been worse than Bush--materially, in terms of certain civil liberties, but more importantly because his election has resulted in mass confusion on the left and among progressives. What I am advocating here is a strong position of irreconcilability with the Democratic Party. The Democrats, far from just being "weak," are actively leading the charge against the working class and poor.

[-] 1 points by dontbestupid (3) 12 years ago

You're on the wrong site. You meant to post on:

http://www.teapartypatriots.org/

or

http://theteaparty.net/

or

http://www.teaparty.org/

You might also be interested in:

http://www.gop.com/GoodBet/

or

http://nraila.org/

or

http://crossroadsgps.org/

You should be looking at movements/web sties for conservatives, libertarians and republicans. Coincidentally, the same political ideologies which the banks and corporations that the movement is protesting against typically align themselves with.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Clearly you, as with all blind party loyalists, would rather see the Democrats win at any cost than think for yourself--even if that means ignoring the undeniable collusion between the Democrats and Wall Street which has so harmed working class and poor people the world over. Thank you at least for your honesty.

[-] 1 points by captaindoody (339) from Elizabethville, PA 12 years ago

But the democratic party is not our enemy. They want to steal from Peter (who earned the money) and give to Paul (who is a dirtbag) just like we do.

[-] 1 points by patriot4change (818) 12 years ago

After Solyndra... maybe he'll be impeached?

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

no. that is an awful idea. this has nothing to do with Obama. he has no control, his hands are tied by the men who control the world. the central banks. you cant blame one man for centuries of a failed system. www.radiokazoo.net/OPV

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

We can blame him for giving into corruption. Although that may have resulted in assassination, as with what happened to Kennedy.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

then you need to look no further than your own mirror. for we all have been seduced by the false illusions of material wealth and corruption. even the wealthy of our country are controlled.

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

I don't need a car, I don't need brand name clothing, I don't support our current economic structure and think it's a pity the state it has put society in. Inevitable, but I'm not a part of it, I'm the part of the population that sees the corruption and doesn't take part in it.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

so am i. i dont even have a cell phone. i even wear generic clothing. this is my plan.

http://www.radiokazoo.net/OPV/

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

I liked it. You should email it to OWS

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

it has been. it began its viral inception last night. but i need help getting it out there. the more people that repost the better. tell the world. power to the people.

[-] 1 points by schnitzlefritz (225) 12 years ago

Obama received record contributions during the 2008 election cycle from the very institutions that OWS is protesting. He is already raking in similar contributions for 2012. Obama voted for the Walll Street Bailouts and lobbied congress to release the second installment of TARP. He is one of the 1% and is supported by them.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

not even close. he is just a puppet. just because he had contributions doenst make him the 1%. the people that control the corporations who donated to him and the last 5 or more presidents. the bush admin has been doing business with the bin laden family for over 20 years and we elected father and son. mostly all of our presidents we have had are controlled by 1%. they are not part of them they just cant touch them. there is nothing our president can do. and just because he voted one way or the other all that means is that is what the people who are really pulling the strings have paid to push through congress. THE PRESIDENT HAS NO POWER. wake up. it is an illusion so people like you blame everything else but what is really going on. that is why they have been able to maintain control for the last 100yrs. how can you blame Obama for anything? they just stuck him in office most likely to crash the system under his presidency. that is why they elected a black man. what better than to make people hate black people more than to crash the economic world while the first african american is in office. Im not an Obama supporter but that is because i dont support the system which means any of them. they are all paid off.

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

They put a black man in office so that it would dissuade people from questioning him or protesting against him. So that they could pull the race card.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

i didnt say that. dont put words in my mouth. our vote means nothing. absolutely nothing and hasnt for almost 100 years. we never voted bush into office, we voted for gore and he won the election but they swore in bush. they put Obama in office because they knew the country would accept a possibility for extreme change. which is what Obama the person wants. but he cant tell us that because he is being controlled by the 1% and has no real say so. then when the world economy crashes next year and America goes down just like history has told us time and time again its a repeating trend with any form of monetary system. an utter failure from the start., i.e. Rome, Babylon, etc. everyone will hate and blame Obama for the last 100years which doesnt help that he is black because alot of americans are ignorant and predudice this will just create a split, dividing the nation keeping us at war and hating eachother. we are the sheep, Obama included.

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

You didn't say that, I did.

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

And oh, Obama knows what's going on. Doesn't change the fact he can't do much about it even if he wants to. But he's not as much of a sheep as you think.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Your grotesque race baiting should have no place in this discussion. African-Americans have been hurt the most by this economy and Obama's policies.

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 12 years ago

I'm not racist, I'm just stating the obvious. They elected a black man for the first time in a time like this when the financial crisis is nearing it's peak, and the 1% are having it better than ever. They needed a scapegoat, a very reliable scapegoat. So they added color to the equation. Obama is still a puppet granted, just a more effective puppet because he is black.

[-] 1 points by schnitzlefritz (225) 12 years ago

Sorry, you're entitled to your own opinion, but not facts. The Obama makes in over $380,000.year (in fact his 2009 tax return listed his AGI as $5.5 million) which puts him in the top 1%. He received record donations from Wall Street and pushed for the bailouts. He's part of the problem, bot the solution.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

yes those are facts for sure. but so are mine. no opinions. the 1% make thrillions of dollars. they piss on Obamas salary. and thats a fact. even if he made 10million a year that is still pennies comparatively. your just making my point with your useless facts. wall st is not the issue. it is one of the issues steming from the main 1 issue around the world. these are all mere bi-products of a controlled dictatorship. that doenst put him in the top 1% top 10% more accurately. the 1% only consists of one specific elite group of the men who control the world. Oprah isnt even in the 1%. and she made like 140 million or something insane like that last year. you are thinking to small. dig deeper. dont stop at hating the people who are produced by this failed system. do you know where all your tax dollars go? i do. every penny goes into the pockets of international bankers that OWN the federal reserve. which is their own private corporation in which they print money. The federal reserve itself is not only Unconstitutioal it is downright illegal. and those are the real facts. stop blaming the powerless and get on board to the real cause. www.radiokazoo.net/OPV

[-] 1 points by schnitzlefritz (225) 12 years ago

Kind of a long winded way of saying that you still support Obama, even though he is part of the problem.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

lol omg. im done. i support nobody but the people of this world. I despise the system and all politics and banks. www.radiokazoo.net/OPV

[-] 1 points by schnitzlefritz (225) 12 years ago

Then why did you dispute the simple facts in my reply? You could have said "Yes, but..." but you chose to say they were wrong, which they are not.

[-] 1 points by beyondmoney22 (233) 12 years ago

my first line of that was, "yes those are facts for sure"

[-] 1 points by schnitzlefritz (225) 12 years ago

Actually, your first reply was "not even close." to my point that Obama was supported by the so called enemy with record contributions.

In any case, it's irrelevant at this point.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

ultimately, you are not in a position and nobody is to brainstorm up mere demands. demands are stupid and infantile. complaints and then problem defintions and then detailed problem solutions are great. that requires time and homework to generate, not bong hits and then a brainstormed imagine yourself as emperor of the world Scrawl. this kind of thing does not help the movement, it just gives the powers that be ammo against us and prevents meaningful conversations which have depth or open source research and problem solving because you and everyone else imagines we can just skip all the steps and churn out "demands." Listen to the other people in the movement who are wisely saying NO to demands lists. I have demands, they are to the movement itself- thats where the real game is.

"Would you rather have war in this land? Do not confront me work with me...Civil unrest could very well lead to civil war... This list will prevent civil war.... Infantile, we are all infants in conciseness, which explains your poor choice of words.... You should be telling me how to make the list better not how it will never work."

? gawdoftruth (Santa Barbara, CA) 1 points 0 seconds ago

no, you need to drop making lists of demands. period. until you do open source research and science centered problem solving with other people, you have nothing to say worth repeating. your brain storming in ignorance. it sounds really really awesome to you- but for many people your tone def. Making demands is itself a sign of infantilism. period. Take responsibility and start working the problems in a deep and real way. I should not have to run through this further with you. This is a ludicrous sense of direction, it is not helping the movement and its not useful or meaningful for long term strategy in fact all it is is a giant set of red rings to give the pundits a clear target.

I don't want war. how i stop the war is to work the problems in a deep way and address the war. Not make demands. I'm an adult, not a seven year old, not a hostage taker, not a terrorist. I don't make demands, i communicate evolutionary truths. If ten thousand people follow my example we can have an evolution. If you run around like a bunch of punk alpha dominant azzholes, i promise you, all of your demands will lead to nothing but scorn and alienation.

but i can expect that we will find good solid means to that end instead of self sabotaging means to that end. Change your communication strategy. These are main political issues which you find to be critical. Now ask people to join you in reasearching them and working on these problems open source. You think you have the end product. instead you have a starting point. remove the "demands" from "demands" and replace with "these are the issues i want to discuss which seem critical to me." There you go. Thats the real process. "Demands " is itself what big Bruddah wants precisely because that makes us the ones holding wall street hostage. Domestic terrorism even when called non violent is still in essence domestic terrorism. Terrorists issue demands. Evolutionary patriots form think tanks.

[-] 1 points by kekeluvsyou2 (12) from Cahokia, IL 12 years ago

It's the republicans who don't give a rats ass about your broke ass.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

The Republicans and Democrats essentially work together. It's the American duopoly. One party could not work without the other: that's the way business is run in Washington, D.C.

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

the dems aren't helping all that much, either, but i see your point. Would be unproductive to focus on Obama.

[-] 1 points by kekeluvsyou2 (12) from Cahokia, IL 12 years ago

Naw, if it's one thing I have a problem with the Democrats, its I think they don't have the balls (Obama included) to stand up to the Republicans. They're trying to be all civilized with the type of people who would sell their grandmother if she was worth something.

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

well, i'm a dem, and i'm prepared to be uncivilized to them. I think we're learning. OBama is reformable. Boehner is not, and I dunno, Scalia just needs to go - the supreme court just makes everything so dirty.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

The two party system is a farce. They are both owned by the corporations. Wake up OWS people!

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

Dude, no need to shout. I'm on your side - mostly. But you get 99% of the people together, you gotta get a little bit realistic, we're not going to agree on everything.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Of course :) I'm just against asking the same people who work for these corporations to fix the system. That's like the roadrunner asking the coyote for help!

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 12 years ago
[-] 1 points by Skylar11 (14) from St Louis, MO 12 years ago

For what reason?

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

For what reason what? It is clear that Obama, Biden and Pelosi are now attempting to domesticate the OWS movement. That will be the end of any true possibility of change.

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

not entirely. If Obama seriously undertaks a major tax on the rich, I think the movement will have been pretty effective already. And if we can pressure congress so that he can redefine the argument about populist issues, hell yeah, we would own Obama.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Did he close the tax loopholes when he had both the house and senate for 2 years? He doesn't want to. He just says what people want to hear. Third world country politicians do this all the time. Words and actions are two different things. Don't be fooled by his rhetoric. Look at his actions. And his campaign contributors.

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

I'm no apologist for Obama, but calling for his resignation would probably steal the thunder of the inequity situation, which is why i'm here, at least.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

I agree. Calling for his resignation is not practical and takes away focus from the main issue.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

What I am responding to here is the attempt by the Democratic Party leadership to domesticate OWS and turn it into some sort of left-wing of their party. That is a huge danger, in my view. Some sort of strong statement making OWS irreconcilable with the Democratic Party should be considered. The above demand was the most direct way of formulating this, as I see it.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

I can see them trying to hijack OWS too. The unions are already trying it. I have been posting about that danger as well. However, we can make that clear by saying that we do not support either parties. Going strongly against one might inadvertently lead us towards the other. Also people might use that to delegitimize the OWS movement. It just seems too far fetched a goal to be taken seriously at this stage when OWS is still growing.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

I think you are making a huge mistake by conflating the Democrats with the labor movement. The labor movement is far less homogenous--there are in fact very radical, progressive unions that could indeed be a huge base of support and strength for OWS.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

In theory. However they support Obama. They are extremely political. At least the AFL-CIO that just offered their support. Moveon.org is also a Democratic party supporter. The problem with getting co opted by them is it will lead to to OWS becoming just another democratic party tool. Just like the tea party got hijacked by th republican party.

[-] 1 points by TomPaine (44) from Fort Collins, CO 12 years ago

If the usual suspects on the left astroturf OWS, it's over, baby.

[-] 1 points by kekeluvsyou2 (12) from Cahokia, IL 12 years ago

That's the problem tho. He's gonna have a uphill battle because doesn't matter what he does Congress (majority Rep) will shoot him down.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

There is no way this "jobs bill" will pass through congress, and Obama knows this. It is pure demagoguery. Obama continued the pro-corporate, pro-wall street policies all throughout 2009 and 2010, the only time he had a chance to pass any progressive policies. It is clear he is doing the bankers' bidding. The current rhetoric is just that--rhetoric designed to fool people like yourself.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

He is probably counting on the jobs bill to not pass so he can blame the republicans for the high unemployment and get some votes.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

I think that is exactly the strategy. It is very calculated.

[-] 1 points by kekeluvsyou2 (12) from Cahokia, IL 12 years ago

First off he's a politician. So I don't care how bipartisan he seems or charismatic he comes off as; I still won't believe everything he says.

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

and impeaching Obama is NOT political demagoguery? I'd just rather keep it about the class inequity.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

I didn't say impeach. I said that a central demand of the OWS should be Obama's resignation. I agree with you that a long and drawn-out campaign to get articles of impeachment passed through Congress would indeed be a waste of time. I am talking about the public position of the OWS movement.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

Why would we rally around some out of touch Teabagger like you???

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

How do you figure this? It would be a shame if Obama enthusiasts and Democratic Party loyalists, who have supported the most retrograde policies hurting poor and working class people, should control this movement.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

Alright, maybe I'm wrong? Who do you suggest replace him?? Also, what policies do you think hurt the poor??

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Do you not know about the bank bailouts? Where did the million dollar bonuses come from? It's all tax payers money.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

I think you both ignored my question as to who should replace him.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

I don't know who should replace him. We are not trying to pick the next president here. Are you saying he is the least undesirable?

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Which policies? No-strings-attached loans and grants to banks; advisors who are former Goldman Sachs bankers and/or lobbyists; appointing a deficit committee that is sure to gut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Escalation of war; a Justice Department that refuses to investigate and prosecute bankers for widespread fraud and criminal activity; pro-pollution environmental policies. The list goes on, my friend.

As I mentioned above: focusing on electoral politics is very problematic, because the institutional barriers are so high. The elections are mostly a drain on energy. We should instead focus on changing the intellectual situation through advocacy in civil society; and we should redouble our outreach to labor.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Maybe direct democracy like Switzerland has?

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

I believe the Swiss only have it at a local level. While I'm not opposed to this, it seems the problems we're having are at a national level.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Will it not work at the national level? Of course we also need a check for mob rule in the form of majority rule.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

Probably not. Rule by referendum is what led to the financial problems in California. Also, there are a lot of constitutional obstacles to direct democracy. The framers knew about direct democracy ideas and opposed it. I'm not saying that automatically makes it wrong but you'd have to find a way to work within the constitution. Perhaps by electing representatives who sign a pledge that all their votes are bound to a majority vote??

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Yes something like that. With the present system, these idiots can cause a lot of harm in the 4 years they are there. Recalling them is not easy. We need a method to keep them in check on a shorter time frame basis.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

The problem is that my direct democracy candidate idea doesn't really fit within the protest. Think about it.. Candidates can already run on a platform of direct democracy. If the people wanted it, they would get elected. But another twist I thought of with direct democracy candidates would be to maintain the Right to petition by allowing lobbyists to pay voters on a per-vote basis. Right now, we receive nothing but ads and propaganda paid for by these lobbyists. At least then, we could be the corrupt money grubbing whores.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 12 years ago

Votes are bought all the time in third world countries :) That doesn't work either. Whoever spends more ends up winning.

[-] 1 points by Skylar11 (14) from St Louis, MO 12 years ago

Put the pipe down and walk away man, you got some bad stuff.

[-] 2 points by lolwut101 (35) 12 years ago

Uh, are you not paying attention? These Democrats have latched on to the protests saying they support them when, in fact, the protests are directed against people exactly like them.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

You call this an argument?

[-] 0 points by GadgetMaster (3) from Melbourne, FL 12 years ago

Do You all Really want to Go Back to The Bush Doctrine ... NO Regulation on Business or the Enviorment (Gulf Oil Spil, Wall Street Collapss) You have to Support the Democrats they are our best Chance Unless By Some Miricle A Third Party COULD WIN BUT come on

[-] 1 points by Idaltu (662) 12 years ago

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.

John Quincy Adams

[-] 1 points by Idaltu (662) 12 years ago

By the time we get to the campaigns there will be plenty of people jumping in. I have been a democrat all my life, but I will say this ....I will vote for anyone who has no ties to Wall Street, is independent and has a clear history of her or his life. I will not vote for Obama..the democrats and republicans differ only in the name...that's it.

[-] 1 points by GarciaLorca (53) 12 years ago

Do you have any evidence that Obama has regulated business or moved the country's foreign policy away from the so-called "Bush Doctrine"? Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan and begun another one in Libya, without even Congressional authorization.