Wall Street Protests

[Big Sarge]

I'm waiting for it to start.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

And Obama doesn't seem to care that much, either. He doesn't seem to be making an effort to even rally his own party - not really.

So, I am returning the favor.

Sam, I lay that on the doorstep of Obama's not being a capitalist. He was brought up by a Communist single mother, and mentored by other communists, like the Churchillian Bill Ayers -- Ward Churchillian, that is. The past three years have pounded home even into his resistant skull that Americans do not want or trust a socialist of either the communist or the fascist description (there is next to no fundamental difference, as students of these religions will tell you) running America's affairs. Even foreign heads of state are regarding Obama as something of a nonentity and are treating him as such.

There haven't been very many things Obama has said or done that didn't either offend me, or seem to me unwise and ill founded. I never listen to the man's speeches with any attention -- none of his ideas work, so I'm not going to attend to them. I chiefly attend to the man and his party in the polling booth -- to vote against the lot of them.

I never boycott elections. But if those who are bitterly hostile to about every worthwhile thought ever thought do so, then you've left the field to me, to the likes of me, and to those who go too far beyond me to be liked by me. But where are you then? Out in Dicksville-Urinant.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Meanwhile, what Heinlein said: TANSTAAFL.

[Lamplighter]

Meanwhile, what Heinlein said:

“When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout."

[gvidas]

The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy

Why this massive mobilisation against these not-yet-fully-articulated, unarmed, inchoate people? After all, protesters against the war in Iraq, Tea Party rallies and others have all proceeded without this coordinated crackdown. Is it really the camping? As I write, two hundred young people, with sleeping bags, suitcases and even folding chairs, are still camping out all night and day outside of NBC on public sidewalks – under the benevolent eye of an NYPD cop – awaiting Saturday Night Live tickets, so surely the camping is not the issue. I was still deeply puzzled as to why OWS, this hapless, hopeful band, would call out a violent federal response.
...
The answer is straightforward: in recent years, members of Congress have started entering the system as members of the middle class (or upper middle class) – but they are leaving DC privy to vast personal wealth, as we see from the "scandal" of presidential contender Newt Gingrich's having been paid $1.8m for a few hours' "consulting" to special interests. The inflated fees to lawmakers who turn lobbyists are common knowledge, but the notion that congressmen and women are legislating their own companies' profits is less widely known – and if the books were to be opened, they would surely reveal corruption on a Wall Street spectrum. Indeed, we do already know that congresspeople are massively profiting from trading on non-public information they have on companies about which they are legislating – a form of insider trading that sent Martha Stewart to jail.

[classicman]

^^Like^^

[TheMercenary]

Hell you could find more contradictory quotes in Heinlein than you can in the modern day Bible.

[Undertoad]

"Unparallelled police brutality" it is to laugh. I have a video of Syrian protesters getting shot in the face that dumb Naomi Wolf needs to see.

[TheMercenary]

Next up LA!

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/11...Occupy-LA-camp

[gvidas]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

"Unparallelled police brutality" it is to laugh. I have a video of Syrian protesters getting shot in the face that dumb Naomi Wolf needs to see.

The thrust of the article was that, in contemporary American politics, there has not been an example of a protest movement consistently met with batons, pepper spray, and the wanton destruction of property. In that, she argued that the harsher police and, demonstrably, federal response to the movement is that it begins to threaten the financial interests of our elected officials.

Certainly, the police treatment of OWS has been butterflies and daises in comparison to Syria. But, Syria is a "republic under an authoritarian regime"; we are a "Constitution-based federal republic [with a] strong democratic tradition."

I would expect that the methods of control be different. But the difference does not mean we are not in a society of control.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Next up LA!

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/11...Occupy-LA-camp

What's your problem with American citizens exercising their rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech? LA is pretty far from Georgia last time I checked. Plus, the LA group has been very peaceful. From your link:

But given the congenial southern California climate and largely sympathetic politicians, Los Angeles' protesters have had few incentives to leave, and have given officials few official reasons – like crime or sanitation problems – to act. Indeed, the camp itself has largely steered clear of the kinds of small-time crimes, drug overdoses, and even shootings that have tainted other camps, and which have given other mayors public backing to close down the camps and tear down tents.

It wasn't clear why Villaraigosa chose this moment to act. At the Friday press conference, the mayor and Police Chief Charlie Beck wouldn't say how far police would go to clear protesters – or whether tear gas and rubber bullets would be used.

"The goal is to do this as peacefully as possible," Chief Beck said.

But some Occupy protesters have already indicated that they will resist eviction from the City Hall park.

"Elected leaders should be more concerned about enforcing regulations on banks than enforcing park rules," spokesman Jacob Hay tells the Los Angeles Times. "They should be busy creating jobs, not creating conflict with peaceful protesters."

You just don't want people walking around and freely expressing a point of view that does not agree with your own. Well, you can always move somewhere that does not allow freedom of speech - many places you could choose from.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

"Unparallelled police brutality" it is to laugh. I have a video of Syrian protesters getting shot in the face...

What Gvidas said. What is it about this movement that has sprung up lately among conservatives to hold the US and the Third World to the same bar? "At least we are not as bad as Syria" is a cop out. We are not in some competition with countries run by dictators and/or governments where the military has seized power away from the people.

This is not about "only" wounding people instead of killing them. This is about the rights given the American people by our constitution. Apparently you think its fine to restrict these freedoms whenever you don't agree with what some group is saying. Yet, whether you agree with the ideas of a given group or not should NEVER be the most important question. Ultimately, it is the right to free speech that we should be monitoring here. Whatever happened to the attitude, "I disagree with what you say, but I'll give my life for your right to say it"?

What's next? The US is better than Sri Lanka during its horrible civil war some years back? Better than Cambodia in the days of the "Killing Fields? Better than Argentina when It was "disappearing" people by pushing them out of airplanes at 15,000 ft? I have seen this "better than THAT atrocity" mindset on other boards besides this one. This outlook baffles me. And nobody would have dreamed of making such crazy comparisons a while ago.

Oh, so they've been hanging black people and civil rights workers? At least the US is better than Hitler's Germany since we don't put African Americans in concentration camps.

Just what kind of behaviors and to what degree of integrity do people in the US aspire to now, anyway?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

What's your problem with American citizens exercising their rights to freedom of assembly.....

Does not equal freedom to occupy....

You just don't want people walking around and freely expressing a point of view that does not agree with your own. Well, you can always move somewhere that does not allow freedom of speech - many places you could choose from.

That would be an assumption on your part. I have no problem with people expressing a point of view that differs from mine, and you should have no problem with me doing the same. I won't be going anywhere. My service to my country is well documented.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by SamIam

What's your problem with American citizens exercising their rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech?

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Does not equal freedom to occupy....

Freedom to assemble, unless it's in a place.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Freedom to assemble, unless it's in a place.

Not the same as occupy. Nice try.

[Cyber Wolf]

Originally Posted by SamIam

If I'm understanding this guy's quote correctly, he's saying the elected leaders responsible for 'creating conflict with peaceful protesters' are the ones who should be focused on enforcing regulations on banks. If I'm understanding his city's situation correctly, it's City Hall calling the shots regarding the protesters. Now I'm curious, what can city hall do to enforce regulations on banks? I thought that was a federal level thing and it's not the feds rousting the protesters.