The Occupy Wall Street Movement is WORKING!!!

[Cowman]

Because they're Americans and they want to improve America.

That might be more a matter of opinion.

The want a better "America" based on what they think is better.

So instead of following established processes, they intend to try and get what they want without a democratic vote.

That's a better America ?

No thanks.

How is what they're doing considered not following established processes? Protesting is in the blood of America, and what it aims to accomplish is evoking opinion changes.

How do you look at the protests and see them as the protesters wanting to enact change without a democratic vote? They're trying to get voters and politicians to side with them. What they're not doing is trying to legislate, and it's absurd to think that.

 

[mudwhistle]

They're not nearly as good at getting someone else's money as Goldman Sachs.

"NEW YORK CITY—Jon Friesen, 27, tall and lanky with a long, dirty-blond ponytail, a purple scarf and an old green fleece, is sitting on concrete at the edge of Zuccotti Park leading a coordination meeting, a gathering that takes place every morning with representatives of each of Occupy Wall Street’s roughly 40 working groups.

“Our conversation is about what it means to be a movement and what it means to be an organization,” he says to the circle. A heated discussion follows, including a debate over whether the movement should make specific demands..."

OWS is also pretty clear on what they don't want.

"'I have no interest in participating in the traditional political process,' (Friesen) says. 'It’s bureaucratic. It’s vertical. It’s exclusive. It’s ruled by money. It’s cumbersome. This is cumbersome too, what we’re doing here, but the principles that I’m pushing and that many people are pushing to uphold here are in direct opposition to the existing structure.

"This is a counterpoint.

"This is an acknowledgement of all those things that we hate, or that I hate, which are closed and exclusive. It is about defying status and power, certification and legitimacy, institutional validation to participate."

A Master Class in Occupation | Common Dreams

Possibly you've said "Yes, Sir (and Ma'am)" too many times during your adult life to understand what freedom truly means.

Why don't the OWS just pack it up and move to Canada or England ? Everyone seems to say that the kind of system they want would be found there.

There would be no shame in moving. That is the great thing about mobility.

Just ask the libertarians in New Hampshire.

Why don't all the "small government" types move to Somalia?

The've got a pretty small "government" there. No income tax, no entitlement programs.

And you can have any weapons you want! Sounds like a Conservative paradise to me....


(note that this post is sarcastic, and only a response to your ridiculous post).

I've been there.

It's a great place for someone like you.

I figure you'd last about 30 seconds before they hacked you to pieces with machetes.

 

[JoeB131]

And the Gilded age led to the great depression....nope, we don't seem to learn anything from history.

I do tend to think of the OWS people as more like the Bonus Army than the hippees of the 60s though.

The historical paralells don't really match up.

For one thing, Hoover took action against the "Bonus Army". Or more precisely, Doug MacArthur and George Patton did. It was a simply horrible image against people who still had national sympathy. These, after all, were World War I veterans, many of whom had fought on the front lines.

I don't see Obama taking action against OWS. He seems to be doing everything to encourage them. I also don't see them being terribly sympathetic to a lot of people. "Boo-hoo, we can't get the jobs we were promised by going to college, and now we are stuck with these student loans." Given how many people with families and no jobs there are out there right now, or people like myself who are working harder for less than they were five years ago, not much sympathy for these people at all.

The reason why I draw the paralels to the Hippies is that most of them were protesting a war they didn't want to go to. They were just finding excuses. An insult to the WWII generation that fathered them, worked hard, gave them every privilage, and found themselves a bit annoyed they weren't putting up like men.

Same thing here. We gave you little punks every privilage, and here you are, defecating on our cars and our parks?

Time to pack out the camps, admit the party is over, and try to channel the energy into something useful. But I don't think they are that smart.

The Occutards are Barry's kids.
My father and uncle were in WWII, uncle B-17 flew bomber missions from England over Germany and Dad was a Captain Marines in the Pacific, brother did 3 tours in Nam.
NO ONE ever wants to go to war.
My father, Tinian, Guam, Saipan and Okinawa vet-his troop carrier was hit by kamikazee off loading his troops at Okinawa, was against the Viet Nam war. Many WWII vets opposed that war.
You have the Occutards pegged 100% correct - "I don't think they are that smart".

But you have the Viet Nam protestors confused with those that left for Canada and there were a bunch of them. Those SOBs didn't even have the courage to stand up for what they believed in and protest here.Most of the Nam protestors were either subject to the draft, waiting to go and many were Nam vets themselves.

My dad was at Normandy and the Bulge. Yes, no one wanted to go to war, but most WWII vets defined themselves by "what did you do in the war".

My point is that while there was a majority that agreed the war was a mistake by about 1968 or so. That's why LBJ had to step aside. But the tactics of the anti-war protestors alienated middle America. So Nixon could promise to end the war with a plan so secret even he didn't know what he was, while speaking for the "Silent Majority" who disdained the free-love, dope smoking, dirty unkempt hippies who were probably a small percentage of the anti-war movement.

And by 1972, four more years into the war, the Hippies hijacked the Democratic Party, and Nixon won 49 states.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Real Reasons to For Attending the "Occupy" protests

 

[mudwhistle]

I hear the OWS is saying they want to remain where they are till 2025.

Seems like the movement isn't moving. 3rd world tent cities all over America. What a great movement Obama has decided to support.


Do they actually think they will be allowed to stay where they are indefinitely?

 

[editec]

How many posts on this board are all about OWS?

OWS is working, kids, its most definitely working.

 

[JoeB131]

How many posts on this board are all about OWS?

OWS is working, kids, its most definitely working.

By that logic, Herman Cain will be the next President.

Oh, wait. Logic and Editec.. Those words shouldn't even be used in the same sentence.

 

[Gadawg73]

The Occutards had a hard time pitching the tents they were given a few weeks ago in Woodruff Park in Atlanta. They were new tents, about 20 pieces to them and the 'tards could not figure how to erect them. My sons at age 7 knew how. The ubran outdoorsmen that occupy the park on a full time basis helped many of them. It was cheap labor for the 'tards. 20 oz. Mad Dog is less than 3 bucks.

 

[Seawytch]

You can tell the OWS is working just by how desperately the RW tries to demonize it. It has changed the conversation and now more people are talking about income inequality. If that is the ONLY thing it accomplishes, it is a success, but with people talking about campaign finance reform as well now...the OWS isn't done yet!

 

[georgephillip]

"NEW YORK – The protest movement that began in Tunisia in January, subsequently spreading to Egypt, and then to Spain, has now become global, with the protests engulfing Wall Street and cities across America.

"Globalization and modern technology now enables social movements to transcend borders as rapidly as ideas can.

"And social protest has found fertile ground everywhere: a sense that the 'system' has failed, and the conviction that even in a democracy, the electoral process will not set things right – at least not without strong pressure from the street.

"In May, I went to the site of the Tunisian protests; in July, I talked to Spain’s indignados; from there, I went to meet the young Egyptian revolutionaries in Cairo’s Tahrir Square; and, a few weeks ago, I talked with Occupy Wall Street protesters in New York.

"There is a common theme, expressed by the OWS movement in a simple phrase: 'We are the 99%.'”

The Globalization of Protest - Joseph E. Stiglitz - Project Syndicate

Less than a year between Tunisia and Zuccotti Park.
Almost exactly one year before Election Day 2012.
Will your vote count for the 1% or 99%.
If you "choose" between Democrat OR Republican, it will count for the former.

 

[Katzndogz]

OWS is failing, the numbers at the sites are bolstered by the homeless of the locale and various thugs looking for a quick score of sex, drugs or something to steal. No one is talking about income inequality except for OWS and a few supporters as CNN and MSNBC. People really do not care about income inequality. They don't think about it. The very rich are as invisible as the destitute living on skid row. What OWS is trying to do is infuse envy with militancy. The majority of people are too invested in their own lives to be moved to protest and militancy by envy.

 

[Listening]

Because they're Americans and they want to improve America.

That might be more a matter of opinion.

The want a better "America" based on what they think is better.

So instead of following established processes, they intend to try and get what they want without a democratic vote.

That's a better America ?

No thanks.

How is what they're doing considered not following established processes? Protesting is in the blood of America, and what it aims to accomplish is evoking opinion changes.

How do you look at the protests and see them as the protesters wanting to enact change without a democratic vote? They're trying to get voters and politicians to side with them. What they're not doing is trying to legislate, and it's absurd to think that.

What they said the quote that was provided was that they were not interested in the traditional political process. I think that spells it out pretty clearly.

 

[Katzndogz]

It is OVER. OWS at Wall Street is over and the sites across the country are falling apart.

 

[georgephillip]

OWS is failing, the numbers at the sites are bolstered by the homeless of the locale and various thugs looking for a quick score of sex, drugs or something to steal. No one is talking about income inequality except for OWS and a few supporters as CNN and MSNBC. People really do not care about income inequality. They don't think about it. The very rich are as invisible as the destitute living on skid row. What OWS is trying to do is infuse envy with militancy. The majority of people are too invested in their own lives to be moved to protest and militancy by envy.

Billions of people around this planet care about income inequality.

Millions of Americans can't understand why their country has experienced seven million home foreclosures in recent years at the same time we have more homeless people than ever before.

Millions of Americans don't understand why we have underutilized resources like unemployed labor and empty buildings at the same time we have huge unmet needs like fighting poverty, promoting development and retrofitting the economy.

What's your answer, class envy?

The Globalization of Protest - Joseph E. Stiglitz - Project Syndicate

 

[Seawytch]

It is OVER. OWS at Wall Street is over and the sites across the country are falling apart.

Wishful thinking isn't reality. There will be a core group of people that stays through the winter in NY and then things will ramp up again in the spring. Other locations will wax and wane depending upon the weather, but the movement itself isn't going away.

 

[Katzndogz]

The "movement" now exists solely on sufferance. Eventually people will get tired of putting up with the nonsense.

“Every single night it’s the same thing. I mean, some guy was a victim of rape!” an officer snarls. “There comes a time when it’s over. This is a disaster. It’s all we’re doing, every two seconds, is locking somebody up every time. It’s done.

“It’s done,” he repeats. “Occupy Wall Street is no longer a protest.”

Scenes like this -- and far worse -- have been playing out since the Zuccotti Park “occupation” began on Sept. 17.

The parcel is now a sliver of madness, rife with sex attacks, robberies and vigilante justice.


Read more: New York Post reporter spends night with Occupy Wall Street protesters in Zuccotti Park - NYPOST.com

They are becoming little slivers of madness. A madness that what few interested protesters will be unable to deal with. Businesses in the affected areas are already being forced to close and fire their employees (a GOOD thing).

 

[georgephillip]

After buying The Post for $30 million in 1976, Rupert (1%) Murdoch was forced to sell the broadsheet in 1988 when he started Fox News.

"Because of the institution of federal regulations limiting media cross-ownership after Murdoch's purchase of WNYW-TV to launch the Fox Broadcasting Company, Murdoch was forced to sell the paper for US$37.6 million in 1988 to Peter S. Kalikow, a real-estate magnate with no news experience.[26]

"When Kalikow declared bankruptcy in 1993,[26] the paper was temporarily managed by Steven Hoffenberg,[26] a financier who later pleaded guilty to securities fraud;[27] and, for two weeks, by Abe Hirschfeld,[28] who made his fortune building parking garages. After a staff revolt against the Hoffenberg-Hirschfeld partnership... The Post was repurchased in 1993 by Murdoch's News Corporation.

"This came about after numerous political officials, including Democratic governor of New York Mario Cuomo, persuaded the Federal Communications Commission to grant Murdoch a permanent waiver from the cross-ownership rules that had forced him to sell the paper five years earlier.[30]

"Without that FCC ruling, the paper would have shut down."

Securities fraud, crony capitalism and Rupert Murdoch.
Sounds like the 1% to me.
Why would anyone swallow their shit?

New York Post - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Listening]

I'd say they have changed the conversation.

What I hear people talking about more is how we've managed to produce a generation of morons whose "stars" (the super stupid) have managed to concentrate in the OWS movement.

 

[Listening]

OWS is failing, the numbers at the sites are bolstered by the homeless of the locale and various thugs looking for a quick score of sex, drugs or something to steal. No one is talking about income inequality except for OWS and a few supporters as CNN and MSNBC. People really do not care about income inequality. They don't think about it. The very rich are as invisible as the destitute living on skid row. What OWS is trying to do is infuse envy with militancy. The majority of people are too invested in their own lives to be moved to protest and militancy by envy.

Billions of people around this planet care about income inequality.

Millions of Americans can't understand why their country has experienced seven million home foreclosures in recent years at the same time we have more homeless people than ever before.

Millions of Americans don't understand why we have underutilized resources like unemployed labor and empty buildings at the same time we have huge unmet needs like fighting poverty, promoting development and retrofitting the economy.

What's your answer, class envy?

The Globalization of Protest - Joseph E. Stiglitz - Project Syndicate

How about....

To much government intrusion.

We don't need President Obama's retrofits. The market is much smarter than he is.

Can you say Solyndra ?

 

[Dragon]

When I used to participate on US Politics On-Line, I made a prediction there that something like Occupy would emerge. I made this prediction before the Wisconsin protests started, based on my knowledge of the simmering insurgency from the left that existed on-line but was not visible yet to those who depended on the old media. I was not believed. I was right.

I will now make another prediction. This movement may change form, but it will not go away. We will see more and different activities from it over the next year, keeping the issues of money in politics and economic injustice in view. It will grow, and take forms that will become a permanent fixture in our political culture (as the occupation of public parks really can't). In doing so, it will create a structure of direct democracy that will eventually replace the representative plutocracy we have today -- although probably not very soon.

We face the same fork in the road we have faced in the past, when the greedy overreached and popular opposition. We as a nation must choose between reform and revolution. We have always chosen reform before. Will we do that again, or dig in our heels as you on the right would seem to prefer, until we have a revolution instead?