Forum Post: Protesters willing to give Obama a pass for everthing he has been doing over the past 3 years
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 5, 2011, 12:15 a.m. EST by wilsondog
(8)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
If the Occupy Wall Street protesters truly believed in the things that they are proclaiming, they would be squatting on Pennsylvania Avenue instead of Wall Street and calling for the immediate resignation of Barack Obama and his entire cabinet.
If the OWSers were intellectually honest, there would be a sea of anti-Obama signs among the protesters. While there are some people on this site who seem to be putting down the Kool-aid, and are finally vetting Obama and are realizing how much damage he has done, most are happy to ignore the facts. Most are still are fixated on Bush while giving Obama a pass even though he has done more damage in three years than Bush did in eight. To give Obama another four years is to put ideology before common sense and the recognition of basic economics.
Occupy Wall Street says that they are angry that the big Wall Street banks "have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give executives exorbitant bonuses." One only needs to look to Obama’s buddy and ex treasury secretary, Jon Corzine, for the latest example of a 12.1 million golden parachute to go to the CEO despite bankrupting the company.
Quote by Obama while introducing Corzine in 2009: "I want you to know I'm proud to stand with a man who wakes up every day thinking about your future and the future of Jersey" -- Barack Obama, 7/16/09
If Barack Obama and John McCain had not aggressively pushed for the Wall Street bailouts back in 2008, they never would have happened. After Obama took office, he rammed through even more bailouts. The reality is that you could easily call Barack Obama "the king of the Wall Street bailouts". Many OWSers are protesting capitalism, but bailing out Wall Street was not capitalism- capitalism would have allowed the banks to fail.
Occupy Wall Street says that they are angry that the big Wall Street banks "have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them."
Yet they ignore the fact that 3 of the top 7 donors to Obama's campaign in 2008 were the very Wall Street banks that the Occupy Wall Street movement is protesting.
Once again, Barack Obama will be taking in huge amounts of money from the wealthy and from big Wall Street banks for his run in 2012.
Occupy Wall Street says that it is deeply concerned about the rampant corruption in our financial system. The Federal Reserve is the very heart and soul of our financial system, and yet there has been very little real criticism of the Fed by Occupy Wall Street protesters.
If Occupy Wall Street truly wanted to do something about our financial system they would be calling for the Federal Reserve to be shut down. But their hero, Barack Obama, actually nominated Ben Bernanke for a second term as Federal Reserve Chairman and Obama continues to support him 100 percent even after a horrible track record of failures that is legendary.
Occupy Wall Street is angry because the wealthy are not paying their "fair share" of taxes.
Well, it is undeniable that many big corporations (such as Obama's other good friend over at GE, Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of GE & Obama's "jobs czar,) quite often get away with paying no taxes at all.
Barack Obama and the Democrats controlled the White House and all of Congress for two whole years. So why didn't they "fix" the tax code while they had the chance? And why is it that only GOP candidates are putting forth bold plans to do so?
Either Occupy Wall Street protesters will call for Barack Obama to be held accountable for his actions, or they are just a bunch of sheep. They cannot preach to us about how principled they are and yet turn a blind eye to everything that Barack Obama has been doing for the past 3 years.
I don't see how any OWS protester could vote for Obama in 2012 without being a total hypocrite.
This is what the masses seem unable to grasp:
If we replace our current leaders with human beings, they will sell out just as far as the current bunch. Our leaders weren't born sold out. Wall Street executives weren't born evil. They were born human. With a natural instinct to gather and store for survival. A natural instinct to care for family and community.
When modern society was formed, we began to sell out our natural instincts. Survival turned into survival with a little more elbow room. Then survival with a little more elbow room and a nice view. Then survival with a little more elbow room, a nice view, and something pretty to hang around our neck.
Fast forward a few thousand years. With the industrial revolution came mechanized transportation, air conditioning, and television.
We had become somewhat spoiled. Somewhat motivated. Still relatively down to Earth. Still modest enough to appreciate one another, care for one another, and work towards a common goal.
Along the way, the potential for increased personal wealth became more and more intoxicating. Now, just about everyone wants to be rich. They want it so badly, they are willing to sell out basic morality to attain it. They WILL sell out basic morality if given the opportunity.
How can I be so sure? That's easy. Human nature plus years of corrupt influence plus opportunity.
Mother Nature did not plan for modern society. She did not plan on such corrupt influence. She never intended for any of us to seek or attain extreme personal wealth. We simply can not process the concept without being corrupted by it. Without compromising basic morality.
Extreme wealth is the single greatest corrupt influence of modern society. With every 'zero' on the paycheck, our basic instincts to care for family and community are compromised.
Those of you who still aren't convinced, consider this:
If God himself gave you the power to end poverty, bring about world peace, and take a bonus of $100,000,000 for yourself, would you do it?
If God himself gave you the power to end poverty, bring about world peace, OR take a bonus of $100,000,000 for yourself, which would you choose?
Not only is the greatest concentration of wealth in world history the single greatest underlying cause of economic instability. The very concept of extreme personal wealth is the most corrupt influence in the history of mankind.
I speak the ugly truth.
There will be no reform on Wall Street.
There will be no recovery for the vast majority.
There will be no government "of the people" and "for the people".
Not one of us will live to see it.
I would definitely be up for an Occupy Obama protest, at his re-election headquarters perhaps. Unfortunately, my local group is too busy cozying up to MoveOn. :(
Just present the facts:
Top 20 recipients of Wall Street Funds: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U
Historically, which party receives more from Wall Street? http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U
But this is Monopoly. He gets free parking. He is the messiah after all.
We can't do it all! Help the cause! You go to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and camp out! We got yer back, don't worry.
Oh and don't worry so much about Obama. It'll either be him or Mitt Romney, and Romney is his brother from another mother. Those 2 dudes are like peas in a pod, so unless you have melanin-a-phobia, it's 2 sides of the same coin.
I don't think its fair for us to ask for Obama's resigniation when it is not all his fault. If we are going to ask for resignations it should be for all of the congress who were involved in deceiving the public no matter which party they are aligned with.