Occupy Wall Street

[palemale]

love it

pres obama .......

democratic senate ........

and the actions of wall st. are somehow a republican issue?

are you hearing voices??

Both the Democratic and Republican parties are captives of Wall Street and the corporations. What distinguishes the Democrats from the Republicans is that they are not yet complete fascists.

 

[Kulindahr]

Once the tea baggers and Republicans finish "starving the beast," and the government is completely out of money because the rich don't want to pay their taxes, how exactly do you suppose the "full force of the state" will be brought down upon the rioters?

And frankly, if the fucking capitalists are unwilling to fund the "full force of the state," why should the state defend them from rioters?

The wealthy will always fund the police, because in their hearts they believe the police work for them.

 

[JB3]

I'm thinking this is how the French Revolution started. History repeats itself. "Let them eat cake", it's class warfare you know.

Ludicrous comparison. Its insulting to the history of the French Revolution to even compare the two.

 

[zoltanspawn]

I haven't been following this very closely... what exactly are they protesting for?

eg: what can "Wall Street" do that would make them happy?

 

[palemale]

I haven't been following this very closely... what exactly are they protesting for?

eg: what can "Wall Street" do that would make them happy?

They are protesting a capitalist system that is completely rigged against the middle class, the working class and the poor, and rigged in favor of the rich and the corporations. They are protesting against a system that is destroying the hopes of an entire generation for a normal life with a modicum of prosperity. The students are protesting the fact that they come out of college with crushing debt and no prospect of meaningful work, they are protesting that the banks and financial institutions were bailed out when they made bad economic choices, but no one will bail out those crushed by student debts. They are protesting a thoroughly corrupt system, where the highest court in the land gives corporations "person hood" and even greater rights to corrupt our democratic system by buying politicians. They are protesting the demise of our democratic form of government at the hands of a right-wing, neofascist movement that has taken over the Republican Party, and a Democratic too corrupted and reliant on corporate money to effectively fight back.

I hope this clear things up for you.

“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

[JB3]

They are protesting a capitalist system that is completely rigged against the middle class, the working class and the poor, and rigged in favor of the rich and the corporations. They are protesting against a system that is destroying the hopes of an entire generation for a normal life with a modicum of prosperity. The students are protesting the fact that they come out of college with crushing debt and no prospect of meaningful work, they are protesting that the banks and financial institutions were bailed out when they made bad economic choices, but no one will bail out those crushed by student debts. They are protesting a thoroughly corrupt system, where the highest court in the land gives corporations "person hood" and even greater rights to corrupt our democratic system by buying politicians. They are protesting the demise of our democratic form of government at the hands of a right-wing, neofascist movement that has taken over the Republican Party, and a Democratic too corrupted and reliant on corporate money to effectively fight back.

I hope this clear things up for you.

“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

So they're throwing a temper tantrum because life is hard and they're too lazy to actually do the hard work to change the system. Got it.

 

[Kulindahr]

So they're throwing a temper tantrum because life is hard and they're too lazy to actually do the hard work to change the system. Got it.

That's not even close to what he said.

Though he's in error on one thing: it's a corporatist system. That means giant corporations and government intertwined, with government bending the system to favor those corporations.

With the number of people in the country who vote based on faith and not on reality, changing the system may require something more than going to the ballot box. Protests were in fact the instruments in the 60s that changed the system -- and if you think they're not hard work... try organizing an effective one.

 

[JB3]

That's not even close to what he said.

Though he's in error on one thing: it's a corporatist system. That means giant corporations and government intertwined, with government bending the system to favor those corporations.

With the number of people in the country who vote based on faith and not on reality, changing the system may require something more than going to the ballot box. Protests were in fact the instruments in the 60s that changed the system -- and if you think they're not hard work... try organizing an effective one.

So enlighten me and tell me the real, substantive solutions these people are proposing.

 

[Corny]

They have all the right reasons and they do the right thing. BUT they need to change their ways. I wish they would just all appear in a suit or well dressed so that the media will have a hard time to portray them as "crazies". While I do not care how you dress and style yourself - if you want to bring a message across and want to be taken seriously, sometimes you have to adapt a bit. Especially when playing with the media.

 

[EastMed]

They have all the right reasons and they do the right thing. BUT they need to change their ways. I wish they would just all appear in a suit or well dressed so that the media will have a hard time to portray them as "crazies". While I do not care how you dress and style yourself - if you want to bring a message across and want to be taken seriously, sometimes you have to adapt a bit. Especially when playing with the media.

That's a good point. Personally, I don't dress like that as I have to wear a suit most of the time for work.
But I'm tired of conforming. I don't want to conform anymore and accept the kind of world we live in.

 

[jackoroe]

Once the tea baggers and Republicans finish "starving the beast," and the government is completely out of money because the rich don't want to pay their taxes, how exactly do you suppose the "full force of the state" will be brought down upon the rioters?

And frankly, if the fucking capitalists are unwilling to fund the "full force of the state," why should the state defend them from rioters?

Well perhaps we'll soon see, won't we? Just remember, NYC isn't London. There won't be any playing around with the unwashed rabble when they decide to break bad.

 

[palemale]

Well perhaps we'll soon see, won't we? Just remember, NYC isn't London. There won't be any playing around with the unwashed rabble when they decide to break bad.

I never suggested the police in NYC wouldn't crack down. The police in this country have always been a tool for the rich and powerful and done their bidding, especially the NYPD.

Michael Moore pointed out, quite correctly, the other day the irony that not a single Wall Street criminal involved in bringing about our economic catastrophe was ever arrested, only they people who protested against them.

 

[jackoroe]

I never suggested the police in NYC wouldn't crack down. The police in this country have always been a tool for the rich and powerful and done their bidding, especially the NYPD.

Michael Moore pointed out, quite correctly, the other day the irony that not a single Wall Street criminal involved in bringing about our economic catastrophe was ever arrested, only they people who protested against them.

Well perhaps the bloated Mr. Moore should ask Obama why none have been prosecuted. He is, after all, ultimately responsible for ensuring that the laws of the US are appropriately enforced. Going to Wall Street and bemoaning this fact, is akin to showing up to a prison and complaining to the prisoners that they aren't being executed fast enough. It's pretty much pointless, like much of Michael Moore's life. It makes for wonderful theatrics and nothing more.

 

[palemale]

Well perhaps the bloated Mr. Moore should ask Obama why none have been prosecuted. He is, after all, ultimately responsible for ensuring that the laws of the US are appropriately enforced. Going to Wall Street and bemoaning this fact, is akin to showing up to a prison and complaining to the prisoners that they aren't being executed fast enough. It's pretty much pointless, like much of Michael Moore's life. It makes for wonderful theatrics and nothing more.

When a democratic system of government fails, as ours surely has, then people must take to the streets. As I said in another post, the Democratic Party has been compromised by corporate wealth, and will only get worse thanks to the stupidest Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott, i.e. Citizens United. They differ from the Republican Party in that they have not been taken over by a neo-fascist, theocratic lunatic fringe. It's a very sad state of affairs.

The Democrats also differ from the Republicans in that they at least have sane people running for the presidency.

 

[palemale]

well, as long as they've got a concrete mission statement and achievable goals.

I don't think they've gotten around to writing a mission statement yet.

 

[JayHawk]

Well perhaps the bloated Mr. Moore should ask Obama why none have been prosecuted. He is, after all, ultimately responsible for ensuring that the laws of the US are appropriately enforced. Going to Wall Street and bemoaning this fact, is akin to showing up to a prison and complaining to the prisoners that they aren't being executed fast enough. It's pretty much pointless, like much of Michael Moore's life. It makes for wonderful theatrics and nothing more.

The reason why nobody has been prosecuted is because they paid the legislature including members of the banking and finance committee (Dodd and Franks members) to write laws that allowed them to rape America. The politicians are the ones who should be in jail.

The protest were peaceful and not RIOTS. So therefore they were not in the wrong and should not be arrested for practicing there birth rite to peacefully assemble.

 

[jackoroe]

well, as long as they've got a concrete mission statement and achievable goals.

Their complaint is very simple. Life isn't fair. No shit, really?! I re-read the Constitution this morning. Didn't see any guarantees about life being fair in terms of outcomes. Didn't see any mention about a Department of Fairness or a Bureau of Do Overs.

I watched this young dullard bemoaning the fact that he just got a degree in sociology and can't find a job. Really? What a shock! And better yet, he borrowed $100,000 to get this worthless degree, that he actually is expected to pay back! Guess they don't teach contract law to folks majoring in sociology. Maybe it's too much to ask that people engage in some due diligence and actually research job prospects in their fields of study before they plunk down $100k that they don't have? Just a thought.

Somehow, expecting him to live up to the terms of this agreement is inherently unfair. So, he hates capitalism. He'll go far in life.

 

[jackoroe]

The reason why nobody has been prosecuted is because they paid the legislature including members of the banking and finance committee (Dodd and Franks members) to write laws that allowed them to rape America. The politicians are the ones who should be in jail.

The protest were peaceful and not RIOTS. So therefore they were not in the wrong and should not be arrested for practicing there birth rite to peacefully assemble.

So,there were no laws broken? Well, it makes sense that we don't prosecute people in that case.

A couple hundred got locked up for blocking up, or occupying, the Brooklyn bridge today. That isn't lawful assembly, that's creating a hazardous condition. Remember this isn't a "demonstration" this is an occupation, by their own words. That means, by it's very definition, that you preclude use or access to something because you have taken over and converted it to your own use. Just as the Nazi's occupied France, so these people intend to take over or occupy Wall Street and other places. I don't see a Constitutional right guaranteeing that you can engage in such behavior.

 

[Kulindahr]

Well perhaps the bloated Mr. Moore should ask Obama why none have been prosecuted. He is, after all, ultimately responsible for ensuring that the laws of the US are appropriately enforced. Going to Wall Street and bemoaning this fact, is akin to showing up to a prison and complaining to the prisoners that they aren't being executed fast enough. It's pretty much pointless, like much of Michael Moore's life. It makes for wonderful theatrics and nothing more.

Well, at least you acknowledge that most of Wall Street is criminal.

The problem is, and has been for a long time, that the government of the United States is also criminal, being in cahoots with the plutocrats to devise laws enabling the fleecing of voters. Republicans have historically been better at that than Democrats -- they've sponsored more transfers of unearned wealth than Bolsheviks ever dreamed of.

 

[Kulindahr]

When a democratic system of government fails, as ours surely has, then people must take to the streets. As I said in another post, the Democratic Party has been compromised by corporate wealth, and will only get worse thanks to the stupidest Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott, i.e. Citizens United. They differ from the Republican Party in that they have not been taken over by a neo-fascist, theocratic lunatic fringe. It's a very sad state of affairs.

The Democrats also differ from the Republicans in that they at least have sane people running for the presidency.

You'd rather the Court had decided that Congress could take free speech from any category of organizations, so long as it included all of them?

What the Court did was unchain the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Citizens Alliance for the Separation of Church and State, the Sierra Club, and a lot more. They gave advocacy groups a big victory of free speech. That they had to include for-profits entities in that is the fault of stupid law, lies used as precedent for more than a century, and stupid previous decisions.

Rather than wish they'd upheld the ability of government to shackle free speech by citizens, work to get a constitutional amendment.