Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Obama was on Reddit today

Posted 2 years ago on Aug. 29, 2012, 6 p.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic (5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

It was confirmed to be him.

Here are some questions and answers followed by my criticism of his rhetoric.

Q - Is Internet Freedom an issue you'd push to add to the Democratic Party's 2012 platform?

A - Obama - Internet freedom is something I know you all care passionately about; I do too. We will fight hard to make sure that the internet remains the open forum for everybody - from those who are expressing an idea to those to want to start a business. And although there will be occasional disagreements on the details of various legislative proposals, I won't stray from that principle - and it will be reflected in the platform.

TM (my response) - Obama saying he wants to respect internet privacy and internet freedom... While he is currently the sitting president as the NSA tracks and stores 1.7 billion electronic messages a day from American citizens.... due to legislation like the Patriot Act and the FISA bills which he voted for in the senate and has extended under his presidency. (these were Bush/neocon policies)

Q - Are you considering increasing funds to the space program?

A - Obama - Making sure we stay at the forefront of space exploration is a big priority for my administration. The passing of Neil Armstrong this week is a reminder of the inspiration and wonder that our space program has provided in the past; the curiosity probe on mars is a reminder of what remains to be discovered. The key is to make sure that we invest in cutting edge research that can take us to the next level - so even as we continue work with the international space station, we are focused on a potential mission to a asteroid as a prelude to a manned Mars flight.

TM - Obama completely dodged this question with talking points. Huge NASA budget cuts have taken place under this administration. And Obama did not answer yes or no to this question nor did he mention specific numbers. Also you can still "invest in cutting edge research" while cutting the NASA budget. This is a prime example of question dodging seen so often by politricks.

Q - What was the most difficult decision that you had to make during this term?

A - Obama - The decision to surge our forces in afghanistan. Any time you send our brave men and women into battle, you know that not everyone will come home safely, and that necessarily weighs heavily on you. The decision did help us blunt the taliban's momentum, and is allowing us to transition to afghan lead - so we will have recovered that surge at the end of this month, and will end the war at the end of 2014. But knowing of the heroes that have fallen is something you never forget.

TM - the correct decision is to GTFO Afghanistan within the year you took office. Afghanistan was part of the Bush/neocon agenda just like it was in the 1980's under Reagan and again and again.

Q - What are you going to do to end the corrupting influence of money in politics during your second term?

A - Obama - Money has always been a factor in politics, but we are seeing something new in the no-holds barred flow of seven and eight figure checks, most undisclosed, into super-PACs; they fundamentally threaten to overwhelm the political process over the long run and drown out the voices of ordinary citizens. We need to start with passing the Disclose Act that is already written and been sponsored in Congress - to at least force disclosure of who is giving to who. We should also pass legislation prohibiting the bundling of campaign contributions from lobbyists. Over the longer term, I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United (assuming the Supreme Court doesn't revisit it). Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of the super-PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change.

TM - It is a low down dirty shame to not see the riddance of money in politics as THE top priority. There is a bigger threat to our nation's sovereignty than Al Qaeda and Iran's alleged WMD's... and it's called Contribution Based Politics. Also Obama has super pacs in his favor as well as accepts money from Wall Street Banks and Corporations, as do all leading politricks, hence the low down dirty shame. Disclosure of who is donating money is not enough. We need to end these practices that flood the government with corruption. Not long term. This term. Congress needs to get on that as well as the president.

Q - President Obama - How can we help to increase the standard of debate in this country so that it's not simple soundbytes and broad generalizations of complicated problems?

No Answer... I liked this question though.

Read more questions and answers here - http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/z1c9z/i_am_barack_obama_president_of_the_united_states/

Any criticism I have for the president equally goes to congress and the previous administrations. As the topics mentioned are the faults of many corrupt politicians financed by the bankers and corporations.

129 Comments

129 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by kaiserw (211) 2 years ago

<Obama> "My administration feels very strongly that American kittens are cute, and take it from me, maintaining competitive American kitten cuteness is a top priority in my administration!" YEAYAYAYAYYAAY!

<off mic> "Sir the drone is in position, they're with their family having a picnic in a park. You said you wanted to push the button."
<Obama>"Oh.. Yes, indeed. and they're eating TERROR TACOS!"

mashes button with a grimace

"Gotcha!"

<crowd> USA, USA, USA!!! YAYAYAY!

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Anti dem partisan politics.?

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

no

the republicans have made no indication that they don't support wars of aggression

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

republicans DO support wars of aggressions. Recent history shows that Dems only start military actions to protect civilians from brutal dictators, (bosnia, Libya) Right?

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

I don't know what happened in Bosnia (I was asleep)

Libya looked more to a strategic war supported by foreigners

Libya was looking towards nationalization of resources

and giving out no interest loans

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I think Libya was suckin up to the west pretty nicely in the last 5 years. But I don't really care. The people got disgusted, rose up like the rest of north Africa we were asked to help and did, now the people are choosing their own govt. Nothing like repub wars of aggression.

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

Libya was a nation with the high standard of living

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Yes, the propaganda machine against Qadaffi was huge.

Interest free loans for housing. $50,000 wedding gift for house deposit. 80% literacy. Free medical, dental, education. Built the largest irrigation scheme in the world. That's how wealth should be divided in any country.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I don't think so. Maybe Khadafi's clan. But not the majority. I really don't know. Nor do I really care much. Sorry. I'm glad the people got rid of their dictator I'm glad we helped as they asked. I hope everything works out.

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

2 points by Builder (1781) 3 minutes ago

Yes, the propaganda machine against Qadaffi was huge.

Interest free loans for housing. $50,000 wedding gift for house deposit. 80% literacy. Free medical, dental, education. Built the largest irrigation scheme in the world. That's how wealth should be divided in any country.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Oh yeah khadafi was great! I don't know anything about these items. I guess we can't all agree on everything. Some people support khadafi, I don't. Sorry. Do you?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Never supported him. Just never believed the propaganda directed at him.

He was brutally murdered. His major city bombed, despite no resistance forces shooting back, and him not being there. There's no court in the world that would have freed him, but he didn't even get to state his case.

That is how the globalists are operating these days. With impunity. Just keep up with the soundbytes, and ignore the resistance.

This is the type of world we are against here, is it not?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I don't know what you're talkin about! But you are a passionate defender for Khadafi. From what you're saying he did nothing wrong and we (the globalists?) with Europe and Arab League and UN were the aggressors.

I HAVE heard that we (Europe) wanted to get our hands on their oil and other resources. Which of course is not new or desirable.

I don't really any evidence. If what you suggest and what I've heard is true I think OWS would be against it if they were able to consense on a statement, and of course I would too.

Good luck to you and all your good work on Khadafis Justice.

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

it's NATO military aggression that concerns me

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I agree with you. I would like to see all war end.

"all we are saying is give peace a chance"

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Just NATO military aggression?. Y'know there is other military aggression also. Is that ok with you?

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

one of the ways I'm a Nationalist

I am responsible for the aggression of my country

but all military aggression is wrong

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Not to mention fleecing the bugger before assassinating him.

Goldman Sachs lost 98% of Gaddafi's $1.3bn investment

As compensation Goldman Sachs offered to turn Gaddafi into one of its top investors, the Wall Street Journal reports

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/may/31/goldman-sachs-libya-investment

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

That's pretty much when Qadaffi decided to tell them to go jump, and he was gonna privatise his country's banking system.

That's when the globalists agreed that he had to take a dive. Can't have a wealthy nation not in their ponzi scheme. Not with all that oil and clean water at stake.

[-] 3 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 2 years ago

Wow.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Kinda different to what's bandied around about the man, isn't it?

So easy to demonise anyone, when you own the press so thoroughly, and the public has the attention span of a couple of hours only.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6638) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Exactly right.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Obama and NATO rose up. The people ran away scared. Without US and NATO bombs there was not a revolution.

Why were so many civilians killed and cities destroyed in the name of saving civilians?

A lot of the rebels committed the same type of crimes Gaddafi did.

I stand by dennis kucinich in regards to Libya.

"It is time to review the curious role of NATO and the future of U.S. interventionism.

A negotiated settlement in Libya was deliberately avoided for months while NATO, in violation of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions 1970 and 1973, illegally pursued regime change. NATO chose sides, intervened in a civil war and morphed into the air force for the rebels, who could not have succeeded but for NATO's attacks.

NATO acted with impunity. The NATO command recklessly bombed civilians in the name of saving civilians. "

-Dennis Kucinich

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-dennis-kucinich/libya-and-beyond-how-did_b_934101.html

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

and then they send in a second drone to kill anyone that tries to help the injured and dying.

This is also called a war crime.

It's actually a fact that they do this - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/us-drones-strikes-target-rescuers-pakistan

And yeah top people in the UN think its a war crime - http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/06/21/un-expert-labels-cia-tactic-exposed-by-bureau-a-war-crime/

And then the president makes jokes about it... "I got 2 words for you.... predator drones..." ... and then all his supporters laugh and say they support peace.

It's like when Bush said Operartion Iraqi Freedom... or when his supporters said that the war in Iraq was for peace and freedom....

[-] 4 points by kaiserw (211) 2 years ago

That's exactly right. Apparently the leaders of government no longer need to follow the Geneva conventions or laws of war. How antiquated. That's just for other people.

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

One day, justice may be served, I hope there will be popcorn.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

A little partisan?
I thought the drone joke happened 3 years ago, not AFTER your accusations of alleged war crimes?

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Tell me which part is not fact?

The war crimes happened 3 years ago too. Hence his predator drone joke. He was using them then too.

Also I do not support Obama or Romney or the GOP. Which part is partisan? If you want I can link all my anti-Romney posts like I do to Factsrfun when he says I only focus on Obama. None of you guys post comments on my anti-Romney posts... you just call me a republican on my anti-Obama posts. Which I find quite hilarious and don't mind because you give endless bumps to my posts.

Also if you want me to be less "partisan" I could include that Obama voted for funding of the war in Iraq while he was a senator. Or that republicans like when Obama drone strikes countries and fund the bombs with their votes in congress.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Do what you like. I'm content just pointing out the partisan anti dem politics, and how it is really useless. OWS was formed with all this as a foundation.

I'm told we should be avoiding all this politics and focusing on creating the new system.

Do you have any interest in that? or just the anti dem partisan politics?

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

partisan anti dem politics

those is republican

they don't have a platform . just an anti

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Ok!

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Do you? Do I need to pull up all your posts that do not do anything that you're talking about? Your posts that say "vote for Obama" and "Obama supports OWS"

My new system is a proposal of staying away from wars which create so many problems and are a huge 1% tactic that abuses the 99% by sending poor teens off to fight oil wars. As wells a system away from prioritizing bombing nations over building our own

A system that doesn't spy on it's entire American populace. A system where people know the difference between a war crime and a true act of peace.

A system where people know the difference between a real progressive and a corporate warmonger.

And I don't care if you think I'm anti-Obama. I openly state that. I also openly oppose all warmongers like Romney and the GOP. I don't push the status quo. That's what you do.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

I don't think it is fair to characterize the President as a warmonger

? WTF

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

Sure, but why give OWS the mandate that moveon.org already has and already fulfills?

OWS is unique in that it is the only anarchic protest of vigor in the country, the only one not to make demands, not to discuss issues with politicians, not to have a leader, etc... The only one to attack the system as a whole, instead of favoring a particular party.

By the way, what I'm expressing here is not an opinion, it's a fact. OWS is not engaged in politics in the same way that moveon.org is. OWS is clear on this.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28265) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

To get a better idea of what this OWS forum is - read about it in the rules and in the forum declaration page. The info does not get real heavey but take note of the references to Direct Democracy. Then think about what that means.

[-] -1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

I've been with Occupy since it began.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Yep. Like gut fauna & more usefully :

per ardua ad astra ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28265) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

But U say U R new to this Forum - so read about the Forum - From the Forum - before U decide that U know what this Forum is all about.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

I didn't know the definition of warmonger was in relation to the republican party. I thought it simply depended on whether one waged war or not. Would it be correct to say that Obama is a warmonger in comparison to peaceful buddhist monks. The democrats might be the lesser evil, but that does not make them saints. They are still warmongers and servants of the 1%, albeit perhaps less so than the republicans.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

Is it fair to state the President advocates war?

Yes, I think it is. A large percentage of American taxes are directly spent on the American war machine. DARPA is being provided large sums of money to create military robots of various sorts. Not just defense robots, but attack robots as well. US is fighting various wars around the world. Drones are being tested more and more. The list goes on...

I certainly would not say he advocates peace.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

US is the country participating in the most wars at the moment, as per usual. To say that the president of such a country advocates peace is simply ridiculous. Don't be delusional. America is at war all around the globe.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Warmongers are like Dick Cheney. They fabricate evidence to convince the people that they must invade a sovereign nation, because, for some obscure reason to do with wearing towels on your head, WE MUST SAVE THEM.

[-] 1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

I think Obama's party does much the same only with more tact and talent than Bush and friends.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Less input from the UN for sure.

No input from congress.

[-] 0 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

I'll tell you, he's investing a lot in the creation of robots for warfare. A DARPA sponsored group released the beta version of the first vegetarian robot a few months ago. This machine eats jungle plants to reload its batteries. It can thus autonomously trek a jungle for quite a long time.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Hmmm, I have a chimp that does the same thing.

He will last for over thirty-five years. No maintenance.

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

How many countries do you have to bomb before you're called a warmonger?

Is 6 not enough?

How many countries do you have to put sanctions on and threaten by saying a military option is on the table.... over alleged WMDs... before you're considered a warmonger?

There is NO excuse to still be in Afghanistan. There is no excuse to still be using hired privatized mercenaries like Black Water to the tune of hundred million dollar contracts again and again. The troops left Iraq... but private mercenaries and big oil stayed.

[-] 2 points by flip (6863) 2 years ago

i agree with you - and so does anybody who is not brainwashed. that doesn't mean i won't vote for obama because the other two are completely nuts! obama was forced out of iraq by their government - and how many troops are still there? guarding an embassy how large.? there are 40,000 troops in the area - where and why? the list of criimes is too long for me at the moment. those who say he is a huge disappointment but they will still vote for him have a functioning brain. those who blindly push the dems have no credibility - none for the fake zen man or vq

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

This is just more extremist anti dem partisan political lies.

A war monger must be "SELLING" war. Repubs believe war is the best economic policy. That is what makes their actions war mongering. They push a fear mongering policy to keep the endless war on terror going.

6 countries is irrelevant. Pres Obama has reduced our military killings from 1 million_ to thousands. He has stopped using fear mongering, endless war on terror rhetoric as an economic policy.

I may be against the afghan war (that Bush started and Obama is ending), and the drone bombings, but Pres Obama is NOT a war monger, he has made made real progress, and he is vastly better than Bush, Romney, and any repub you can throw at him.!

You are clearly just spewing anti dem partisan political lies!

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

lol you think bombing 6 countries is irrelevant?

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?

Since when is bombing 6 countries irrelevant? Since when is using private mercenaries acceptable? If Bush was still doing this you'd be shitting your pants with anger.

Bush started the war in Afghanistan. Gotcha. Fuck Bush. Bush was a warmonger and is still a war criminal. Put the man on trial and put him in prison. We agree on that 100%. But WHY ARE WE STILL IN AFGHANISTAN ? Why is it not over right now. Why is this commander in chief still using mercenaries like Black Water?

Why do you attack people who speak out against the wars?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

This is just more unreasonable, inaccurate, extremist anti dem partisan politics.

Pres Obama has made real progress reducing the killings by the US military. He has made real progress in changing the posture, tone, atmosphere in order to reduce the fear mongering roots of laws violating our civil rights, and continued military action.

I am against the afghan war, the drone bombings, the anti civil rights laws!

I protest against these things and agitate for Pres Obama to stop. But I disagree this makes him a war monger. This is where we disagree. Calling him that and equating him with the real war monger/criminals is what makes your rants..........

Anti dem partisan politics.

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Warmonger definition -

noun - A person who advocates, endorses, or tries to precipitate war.

The definition fits. It's an accurate term. Your opinion does not change the facts I've listed in previous comments that fulfill the definition of warmonger.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Pres Obama does not fit the definition you offered. And the definition is inadequate. Because the republican party believes that war is the best economic policy so they do not simply try to precipitate war they perpetrated phony fear to create the atmosphere forwar and civil rights violations.

Pres Obama has begun the long slow process to undo all that. And he has NOT precipitated war he has resisted the right wing war mongers!

So there!

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Bombed 6 countries and surrounds another with warships. This is present day. 5 countries bombed in the last 12 months... 3 and a half year after taking office... which has been more than long enough to end all of this.

There is no excuse to still be in Afghanistan.

Keep making excuses Obama campaign guy.

What about the drone strikes?

Why is his administration still using Black water like groups and hired mercenaries?

What about Libya? That was an entirely new war in Africa

So yeah he falls directly under the category of warmonger.

Are you going to answer these questions of just dodge them with more excuses?

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

the BBC still likes to talk about al quida

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We should all listen.

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

I don't believe much of it

these terrorist are an excuse for violent government actions

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

And so they should. This is one issue that should be on the table until it is sorted out properly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/24/mi6-libya-rebels-rendition-al-qaida

British intelligence believes the capture and rendition of two top Libyan rebel commanders, carried out with the involvement of MI6, strengthened al-Qaida and helped groups attacking British forces in Iraq, secret documents reveal.

The papers, discovered in the British ambassador's abandoned residence in Tripoli, raise new and damaging questions over Britain's role in the seizure and torture of key opponents of Muammar Gaddafi's regime.

Britain is already facing legal actions over its involvement in the plot to seize Abdul Hakim Belhaj, leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) who is now the military commander in Tripoli, and his deputy, Sami al-Saadi. Both men say they were tortured and jailed after being handed over to Gaddafi.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

LOL excuses excuses.

Read here then too about Obama's administration and Black Water or whatever current name they use to try and dodge attention - http://www.salon.com/2010/10/01/obama_blackwater_again/

So you're saying war is okay under Obama because "republicans" ???

War crimes are still happening. Innocent civilians are still dying. There is no excuse to still be in Afghanistan.

Libya was similar to a rehash of failed Reagan policies in the 80's plus NATO bomb support. Killing as many civilians as they did in the name of saving civilians is counter productive. I agree with Dennis Kucinich about Libya. Google search "Dennis Kucinich Libya" if you want to know what that all means.

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

lol so you "don't believe the President had anything to do with it" ??

The excuses you guys come up with sometimes.

Anytime something bad happens under this administration so many are quick to say "oh but he had to do it" or "he had no choice"

Come on ZenDog... You're not that guy.

[-] 2 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

To reply to your post below, ZenDog essentially works in tandem with VQkag2, shooz, and DKAtoday. They are not attacking the system as a whole like OWS, but are instead focused on attacking the republicans by advocating for the democrat party. I have no idea why they are here. They belong with a political group such as moveon.org.

Their support of the democrat party diminishes the power of the attack OWS should be having against it, and, in a sense, legitimizes the current political system as a whole, as in, - If the democrats can be a success, then it means the system permits success.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

As is often the case, you did not in any form respond to what I said in your response, (posted below).

Indeed your response read like propaganda.

I'm going to give you a clue now. OK?

OWS is a political movement, it was never otherwise..

[-] -1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

OWS is not a political movement in the same sense that moveon.org is. If you don't understand that yet, I really don't know what to say.

First and foremost, OWS is aimed at Wall Street, not at Washington DC. It uses anarchy in the same style as its cousin that emanates from Vancouver, Sea Shepherd. The ultimate goal of OWS is to work for the 99%. It's the idea that WE DO NOT need politicians that WE can build a better world for ourselves through grassroots change and through activism like protesting. If you do not think this is possible, if you think that WE DO need politicians, then you are not in the spirit of OWS and you have misunderstood what it's all about.

When people spend their days talking about the republicans vs the democrats, they have lost touch with what OWS is all about. A true OWS protester should be busy building the better world without even looking at politicians because he knows that he does not believe in them, and, that he does not need them. He has complete faith in this idea.

I understand where you are coming from, but your whole approach is one of moveon.org, not one of OWS. Perhaps one day you will understand and you will stop infecting this protest with partisan politics.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

If you supported OWS you would attack the system as a whole, instead of doing like moveon and solely attacking the republicans. You might say you support OWS, you might even think you support OWS, but your tactic is a moveon.org tactic and it actually weakens OWS.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (28265) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

cut off the head

And Cauterize the Stump.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

What's actually amazing is how hung up some people are on moveon.org.

It's like listening to a Glenn Beck program.

So for you it's a good thing that ACORN was destroyed by FLAKESnews?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

What's really disturbing, from the perspective of a man from another country, is that you guys feel the need to ascribe personas to eachother, based on some cockhead or bitch on the tv. Where did you lose your individuality, people?

[-] 0 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

moveon.org as its usefulness, and I wholeheartedly agree that the election will be between the republicans and the democrats and that things will most likely be much better if the democrats win. I would personally vote for a hard left wing third party since I feel the democrats are essentially right wing, but I absolutely understand those who wish to vote for the democrats. In the short term, it makes the most sense strategically. On the long term, the best strategy is to help lift up hard left third parties to mix things up.

The problem is the work moveon.org is doing contradicts the work OWS is doing. OWS must remain out of politics if it wants to keep its usefulness and if it wants to be strong. As soon as you bring OWS into politics, then it becomes another moveon.org and we already have one of those. Anarchy is the best way to protest. We must keep the fight against the system as a whole. When people bash the republicans and push the democrats on this site I understand their motives, but they must realize it hurts Occupy as it legitimizes the system. Really, Obama was the President when OWS began. We are supposed to be protesting against him and the others in office who help the 1%, we are not supposed to be advertizing for that party! Not on this site.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by derrickhamilton (-56) 2 years ago

Would you happen to work for Obama's party?

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Why is he bringing up Lewinski in his comment below?

He says you're trying to distract... I think he's distracting.

He tries to discredit the obvious crimes under this administration by bringing up other topics and people who are not the current commander in chief going on 3 and half years.

Just look my comment which is downvoted for calling him out for the standard "but Obama had to do it" excuse.

He "had to sign for indefinite detention" they say. He had to! He just had too! He had 2! They made him do it. They made him authorize the drones strikes! He had no choice! HE WROTE A NOTE!!!

lol

[-] -3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Fuck McCain. Yeah McCain is a warmonger. He wanted to stay in Iraq like the rest of the repubs. What the fuck does that have to do with the current actions of this commander in chief? How is that an excuse for war crimes under this administration?

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

So you want a system that doesn't include all the problems we have all acknowledged exist in this broken, corrupt system?

Wow you are brilliant. Why didn't we think of that?. I guess our work is done. We can go back to the anti dem partisan politics that we prefer.

I would like you to show the link where I tell someone to vote for Pres Obama. I don't think it matters but yeah I would love to see you do that.

[-] 4 points by trashyharry (1493) from Waterville, NY 2 years ago

Politicians like Obama are nothing more grand than Bellhops for the Corporations.The only question I would ask Obama is Are You Maintaining A Do Not Kill List For The 1% And Can You Please Put My Name On It If So?

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

I always get pissed when the man starts talking

[-] 2 points by throaway (57) 2 years ago

I followed that yesterday and all he answered were the softballs...Can't wait to get a hold of his BEER recipe. The CHOOMER IN CHIEF ignored at least 50 questions about the WAR ON DRUGS.

[-] -3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Yeah I saw the beer question. I did not share that one because it was bullshit.

I would have loved to see him answer a real question on the wars.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20516) 2 years ago

How old are you Trevor? In your twenties, right? And, one of our best posters. Just making a point here.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Thank you for the kind words.

I am 25.

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

Q - President Obama - How can we help to increase the standard of debate in this country so that it's not simple soundbytes and broad generalizations of complicated problems?

complications is every politicians favorite excuse for not fixing thing

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

the legislative process needs to produce clear and precise laws

congress passes law that is unreadable

NSA tracks and stores 1.7 billion electronic messages a day from American citizens...

it is never necessary to delete content for data space

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

they also pass laws that are unconstitutional.... Indefinite detention... illegal wiretapping

Example: Legislation that allows the NSA to spy on every American Citizen that uses electronic messaging like emails, texts, and phone calls. 1.7 billion a day!

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

I've been under a microscope since I resign from my job n the Navy in 2002

personally that doesn't bother me

..

though I was pissed my fictional works were taken from my car and never returned

.

911 made government actions a lot more secrete

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

yeah like when they secretly redefine words to get away with illegal shit.

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

Sounds like another typical rich slimeball being slimy as usual

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

it was pretty funny to read his "answers" to the questions. Specifically in regards to internet freedom.

It's really sick how these politricks can just say shit and people will believe them without checking voting records and facts.

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

Sick indeed. I dont think most people understand the level of corruption going on right now. Its just media talking points.

I am not looking forward to having to see commercials of mitt and obama lying their asses off for the next 2 months!!

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

How many times will you howl into the wild about the same old problems.

We know! The system is broken! Both parties are bought off by the 1% plutocrats. Corruption everywhere.

We all agree here at OWS. That is why we formed, and march.

What about the new system? All this tired old partisanship is a waste of time! We all agree already! It's the work on the recreated new system that we need to focus on.

Nothing on the new system? Just politics, and partisanship.?

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

Will you do me a favor. Stop responding to me. You are giving me a fuckin headache already and i havent been on here for more than a day.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I think it is all the anti dem partisan politics that is getting to you.

Maybe if you focused on the positive work of creating the new system. It is much more fullfilling. because this anti dem partisan politics is like slamming you head against the wall. I mean we all already know about these horrible corrupt problems. That's why we were formed.

Right?

[-] 1 points by n0anch0r (9) 2 years ago

You know what -- I think that what Obama is doing right now is very similar to what he did in the last election -- he is appealing to our generation through social media and well although I do not subscribe to the current system and don't intend on voting for either puppet -- i believe that the gesture in that direction is good - if you noticed, he is now in OUR playing field. Like every politician, the choice of which questions to answer was his. Why not have something like we have here where questions get voted up or down and the questions with the most votes - he agrees to answer otherwise the social media platform will not let him on.. how's that for general assembly?

[-] 4 points by n0anch0r (9) 2 years ago

i DETEST that he picks which questions get answered. There needs to be a way that the control of WHICH questions get answered be shifted back to the people.

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

That's a good idea. He should also have to answer the lowest, the median, and the highest voted. This could help rule out bias voting as well.

I'd like to include the lowest category because I've seen facts on this forum downvoted because his supporters on this forum say it "serves republicans"

And i'd include the median in case someone creates a bunch of accounts to upvote their stuff.

99 questions total. How many questions would you allow? I'd say a day of answering questions is an acceptable test request.

This would be nice to see happen for congress and all candidates.

[-] 2 points by n0anch0r (9) 2 years ago

That's an awesome bet -- i think that's the direction it'll head. The thing is, a group with much tech know how like anonymous would have to make something like this happen and ensure that the questions picked are in fact the ones answered. Because I can tell you off the bat from some of the replies i read about there were DEFINITELY obamalamarama inside people moderating the conversations on there. I'm sure he had a team of people doing things for him on the thread -- in a sense moderating the discussion.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6638) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

That's a good idea.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Anti dem, partisan politics?

How many times will you howl into the wild about the same old problems.

We know! The system is broken! Both parties are bought off by the 1% plutocrats. Corruption everywhere.

We all agree here at OWS. That is why we formed, and march.

What about the new system? All this tired old partisanship is a waste of time! We all agree already! It's the work on the recreated new system that we need to focus on.

Nothing on the new system? Just politics, and partisanship.?

[-] 2 points by kaiserw (211) 2 years ago

I don't think it's partisan. I think we all agree it wouldn't be at all different if Mittens were in there, just differently styled oratory. Obama just happens to be the guy in there now. Just as I protested the starting of the Iraq war. Obama just happens to be the patsy in the seat now. It's just ridiculous to hear them answer questions. It's all vapid non-substantive drivel.

I've questioned personally whether the CIA is perhaps really in charge now. I don't know.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

No we don't really know. But what we do know is that the system is broken, both parties are controlled by the 1%, and corruption persists.

So why would we waste time screaching to the choir with all this anti dem partisan politics.

I thought the focus was supposed to be on recreating a new system. Has ANYTHING been done on that.

c'mon let's get to work! The 99% are depending on us.

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

Seems how Bush Sr was CIA, I'd say they have been in control for quite some time.

Prob why they needed to hire a prfessional actor (Reagan) to sway the public along.

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

I will HOWL about the same problems until they END

That is what protesting is.

Should the civil rights movement have given up after one day?

[-] 1 points by kaiserw (211) 2 years ago

Hey, how do you imbed pictures in a post?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

I think that ability got taken away when electron spammed the board repeatedly with image posts.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6638) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

I think the ability has been restored. bensdad posts images almost daily.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Yeah, I just saw how Richard does it. Thanks.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

So no effort to create the new system? Just anti dem partisan politics?

[-] 2 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago
[-] 4 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Thanks

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

I think the post is correct that until the people come to a moral awakening that they arent going to support this bullshit anymore, its still their fault.

[-] 2 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

U R Right !! We need Howard Beal !!

"I'm as mad as hell" speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn-Op7Q

All kiddin' aside, this is OUR government, and WE are the reason we're in such sorry shape.

From - http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx

The root of the message conveyed by Thomas Paine is the same; government of the people, by the people and for the people. These are high expectations that we’ve never met but we still strive to achieve to the best of our abilities. Unfortunately, over the passage of time our government has slowly reduced its citizens to little more than just slaves. We like to blame the politicians, big business, the President, anyone and anything else except ourselves for the horrendous state that our country is in. We the people are the real blame for our countries problems. Not the current or past administrations. Not big business or the bankers. They are just symptoms of a much deeper root cause. We are the rotten root of the problem. For 233 years, we let our government do whatever it pleased. For 233 years we ran our government like an absentee owner. If you don't have health care, a job, hope, money, a home, a good education, etc…, don't blame it on the government. We the people are the blame. The buck doesn't stop with the president. It stops with the people. If you are hated around the world, afraid to travel abroad, in fear of terrorism, mad because the banks are getting bailed out with your money and you can't get a loan, if your life savings and retirement have been wiped out or stolen, upset because we're dying in wars that have no end and make no sense, upset because the government failed miserably at responding to help your city after a hurricane, flood or any natural disaster, upset because your country is turning into a police state, upset because gas and food prices keep rising while your pay is falling, upset because your government is trying to tax you for any purpose it can think of, upset because your government is trying to chip away at your rights for any purpose it can think of, upset because millions of barrels of oil are ruining your coasts, upset because your standard of living is declining, upset because your children are not getting a proper education, upset because your country and your government are for sale... just calm down. It's easy to find the dirty rotten scoundrel that is responsible for this mess. Just look in the mirror. We the people are the blame – “We the people” sat by and let it happen without doing one single thing about it. That's what happens when you don't show up to work for 233 years. We can no longer afford to be absent or passive citizens. The stakes are too high this late in the game. We have 233 years of work piled up and waiting. It is our responsibility to deal with it. A mess has never dealt with itself. Our government didn't create itself and it can’t fix itself. Can you imagine someone giving themselves a triple heart bypass and major brain surgery all at once? Forget about it! Your responsibility as a citizen doesn't end with voting and criticizing the government.

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

Our idea of participation is trolling to the polls once every four years.

Corporations are involved on a weekly basis. hence they are winning.

We dont have money. But we have numbers.

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We must encourage constant involvement by as many people as possible.

We must recreate the system, from the ground up, horizontally, with real direct democracy!

Maybe some kind of test case is in order. Small willing town with some software package that allows all townsfolk to vote on all issues, instead of city council.?

[-] 2 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

Exactly. Corps don't even care who wins the election because they buy BOTH sides. They do it because they can ......... and because we allow it. We are still asleep and it looks like we may not wake up in time. Our fault for letting things get so far out of hand. It can be fixed, but not without our intervention. It can't and won't fix itself.

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

Societies usually don't wake up in time, i think.

Its why we try to snap the 99% out of their funk as often as possible.

[-] 0 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

The typical stages of society as history teaches:

  1. From bondage to spiritual faith
  2. From spiritual faith to great courage
  3. From great courage to liberty
  4. From liberty to abundance
  5. From abundance to selfishness
  6. From selfishness to complacency
  7. From complacency to apathy
  8. From apathy to moral decay
  9. From moral decay to dependence
  10. From dependence to bondage
[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Thats a very interesting list. Mind if I send it out to a few bloggers I know?

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

Not at all. I found it somewhere on the internet and saved it.

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

Way to ignore the howl part, you troll.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Screeching to the choir (or Howling) about the same thing to a community that was formed for these reasons and agrees is a waste of time. Repetitive much?

I thought you had an interest in replacing this corrupt system, not just howling anti dem partisan politics.

But I've been wrong before (as you well know) so I guess I'm mistaken.

commence with the anti dem partisan politics.