Left/Right should ALL read this!

[8537]

The common refrain from the OWS airheads is that those greedy corporations and those rich fuckers are sitting on their massive wealth. Implicit in that "complaint" is the notion (which some of the OWS jerkoffs at least have enough sense not to verbalize): "we" should be able to take "it" away from "them" for the common good.

NO, they are sitting on YOUR massive wealth. It was your money, Liability. They took it courtesy of government transfer - and both government and corporations convinced you to carry their water for them.

 

[Sherry]

Avatar, you're the unbending fucking moron. It's your warped belief that the right is pure as the driven snow and the left is hell bent on overthrowing shit that is the fucking problem.

That's why I'm telling you to shut the fuck up, retard. You're not helping the situation with that shit at all.

Who the heck ever claimed the right is pure as the snow?

Help with the situation? THERE ARE PEOPLE ADVOCATING REVOLUTION AND VIOLENCE. How the heck are we supposed to fix the situation if we can't be honest about what these people stand for?

I know you don't like it. I don't like it. The idea that people want to overthrow our civilization bothers me to no end. But it's the truth. You can either accept it and oppose the people doing it. Or you can lie to yourself and others and pretend they are completely harmless all the way to the point they execute you.

Nobody knows what 'they' stand for! There are WAY to many scared and pissed off people for there even to BE some sort of consensus in political demands.

Most are simply standing in the street crying "unfair", with little in the way of specific policy being promoted.

From that perspective, is it very wise for any politician to be throwing their support towards such a loose band of people??

 

[Avatar4321]

Nobody knows what 'they' stand for! There are WAY to many scared and pissed off people for there even to BE some sort of consensus in political demands.

Most are simply standing in the street crying "unfair", with little in the way of specific policy being promoted.

I know there are alot of scared and pissed off people. The problem is these radical elements, the ones who organized the events, and the ones who have since joint, ie as the American Nazis have today, have no problem using these people who scared and pissed off in order to overthrow the Republic.

And once they suceed in that, they will immediately purge the ranks. Which unfortunately means alot of those same people who supported them wont be allowed to live. Which is why it's so vital to expose these people out. They exist and as long as we are ignorant of them or deny their existance, we can be manipulated by them.

 

[Avatar4321]

From that perspective, is it very wise for any politician to be throwing their support towards such a loose band of people??

No one ever accused our current crop of politicians of being wise.

 

[AVG-JOE]

One cannot "hinder" a "conversation" with a group of inarticulate sheep.

The fact remains, however pure their intent and however valid their basic (though ill-defined) complaint may be, the OWS protestors are unable and/or unwilling to articulate a rational proposal for a solution.

And they absolutely wouldn't even TRY to articulate their proposal for a "solution" to the extent that it flows naturally from their major premise. For they know in advance that such a proposed "solution" would be rejected flatly and forever.

Most aren't running for office, they're just letting their representatives know they don't feel accurately represented. Nothing un-American 'bout that!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What exactly is the middle ground between living by our Constitution and revolution to overthrow it?

The common ground is agreement as to ‘living by our Constitution,’ as both left and right perceive the other as engaged in a ‘revolution to overthrow it.’

 

[Synthaholic]

*snip*

There is going to be a fusillade of attempts from many different corners to force these demonstrations into the liberal-conservative blue-red narrative.

This will be an effort to transform OWS from a populist and wholly non-partisan protest against bailouts, theft, insider trading, self-dealing, regulatory capture and the market-perverting effect of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks into something a little more familiar and less threatening, i.e. a captive "liberal" uprising that the right will use to whip up support and the Democrats will try to turn into electoral energy for 2012.


Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.


On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that “I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests.”(I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).


We've similarly heard about MoveOn.org jumping into the demonstrations and attempting, seemingly, to assume leadership roles in the movement.


All of this is the flip side of the coin that has people like Breitbart trying to frame OWS as a socialist uprising and a liberal media conspiracy. The aim here is to redraw the protests along familiar battle lines.


The Rush Limbaughs of the world are very comfortable with a narrative that has Noam Chomsky, MoveOn and Barack Obama on one side, and the Tea Party and Republican leaders on the other. The rest of the traditional media won't mind that narrative either, if it can get enough "facts" to back it up. They know how to do that story and most of our political media is based upon that Crossfire paradigm of left-vs-right commentary shows and NFL Today-style team-vs-team campaign reporting.


What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.


Take, for instance, the matter of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks, which people like me and Barry Ritholz have focused on as something that could be a key issue for OWS. These gigantic institutions have put millions of ordinary people out of their homes thanks to a massive fraud scheme for which they were not punished, owing to their enormous influence with government and their capture of the regulators.


This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power -- but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast.


Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.


The banks know this. They know they have no "natural" constituency among voters, which is why they spend such fantastic amounts of energy courting the mainstream press and such huge sums lobbying politicians on both sides of the aisle.


The only way the Goldmans and Citis and Bank of Americas can survive is if they can suck up popular political support indirectly, either by latching onto such vague right-populist concepts as "limited government" and "free-market capitalism" (ironic, because none of them would survive ten minutes without the federal government's bailouts and other protections) or, alternatively, by presenting themselves as society's bulwark against communism, lefty extremism, Noam Chomsky, etc.


All of which is a roundabout way of saying one thing: beware of provocateurs on both sides of the aisle. This movement is going to attract many Breitbarts, of both the left and right variety. They're going to try to identify fake leaders, draw phony battle lines, and then herd everybody back into the same left-right cage matches of old. Whenever that happens, we just have to remember not to fall for the trap. When someone says this or that person speaks for OWS, don't believe it. This thing is bigger than one or two or a few people, and it isn't part of the same old story.

Pardon me for being skeptical, but in reference to the above highlighted in red, why in the world would anyone believe that the left genuinely held such a perception...all they have done for the past three years is demean every aspect of the TPM and the issues they were protesting against, and consistently referred to them as nothing but a bunch of racists whose only motivation was not wanting to see a black man as president.

Because it was almost immediately co-oped by FOXNEWS, Glenn Beck, and Dick Armey's Freedomworks.

FOX was sponsoring Tea Party rallies within weeks of Obama's inauguration, and changed the focus away from breaking up 'Too Big To Fail'.

Beck went personal, claiming Obama hated White People.

Dick Armey - DICK ARMEY! - former GOP House Leader, totally immersed in the system, making huge money as a lobbyist, started Freedomworks. Now, what the hell motivation would he have to dismantle the system that he was getting rich from? None. But he had plenty of motivation to turn it into an anti-Obama movement.

 

[Synthaholic]

How about REALLY taking the money out of politics and make all elections publicly funded and only publicly funded?

*Yes, I realize that in 2008 Obama flip-flopped on this issue.

Dylan Ratigan's been talking about this very thing alot.

Dylan Ratigan | Free America

LOL, I saw where Ratigan is WORKING with the OWS then coming back and impersonating a NON-BIASED reporter.
who listens to that fake reporter.?

Of course he's working with them - they share the same goals. Anyone who has watched Ratigan since he started on MSNBC knows that his big issues are Too Big To Fail, Capital requirements, and Wall Street reform. No secrets there.

And he's not a reporter, he's an advocate. He left reporting when he left CNBC.

 

[AVG-JOE]

We need to not only demand better. We need to be better.

If we expect to keep our nation strong we have to be good. If we want to recieve the blessings of economic strength we need to be honest, humble, live within our means, and be charitable.

This nation isnt doing any of those things nowadays.

So the movers and shakers (as well as the rest of us) need to re-examine our fascination with short term profits and overall greed, in favor of honesty, transparency and charity?

​

You closet liberal, you!

If you mean classical liiberal, then i might agree. If you mean this progressive bullcrap that is nothing but corruption, lies, and arrogance, then I completely disagree.

I'm betting that you know me well enough to know that I would never call you a liberal if I didn't mean 'classic'.

The middle class is almost pinched enough to give up their dogmatic obsession with seeing their wallets in either their left pocket or their right pocket. OWS and TEA have a lot more in common than in opposition.

 

[Stephanie]

*snip*

There is going to be a fusillade of attempts from many different corners to force these demonstrations into the liberal-conservative blue-red narrative.

This will be an effort to transform OWS from a populist and wholly non-partisan protest against bailouts, theft, insider trading, self-dealing, regulatory capture and the market-perverting effect of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks into something a little more familiar and less threatening, i.e. a captive "liberal" uprising that the right will use to whip up support and the Democrats will try to turn into electoral energy for 2012.


Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.


On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that “I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests.”(I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).


We've similarly heard about MoveOn.org jumping into the demonstrations and attempting, seemingly, to assume leadership roles in the movement.


All of this is the flip side of the coin that has people like Breitbart trying to frame OWS as a socialist uprising and a liberal media conspiracy. The aim here is to redraw the protests along familiar battle lines.


The Rush Limbaughs of the world are very comfortable with a narrative that has Noam Chomsky, MoveOn and Barack Obama on one side, and the Tea Party and Republican leaders on the other. The rest of the traditional media won't mind that narrative either, if it can get enough "facts" to back it up. They know how to do that story and most of our political media is based upon that Crossfire paradigm of left-vs-right commentary shows and NFL Today-style team-vs-team campaign reporting.


What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.


Take, for instance, the matter of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks, which people like me and Barry Ritholz have focused on as something that could be a key issue for OWS. These gigantic institutions have put millions of ordinary people out of their homes thanks to a massive fraud scheme for which they were not punished, owing to their enormous influence with government and their capture of the regulators.


This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power -- but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast.


Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.


The banks know this. They know they have no "natural" constituency among voters, which is why they spend such fantastic amounts of energy courting the mainstream press and such huge sums lobbying politicians on both sides of the aisle.


The only way the Goldmans and Citis and Bank of Americas can survive is if they can suck up popular political support indirectly, either by latching onto such vague right-populist concepts as "limited government" and "free-market capitalism" (ironic, because none of them would survive ten minutes without the federal government's bailouts and other protections) or, alternatively, by presenting themselves as society's bulwark against communism, lefty extremism, Noam Chomsky, etc.


All of which is a roundabout way of saying one thing: beware of provocateurs on both sides of the aisle. This movement is going to attract many Breitbarts, of both the left and right variety. They're going to try to identify fake leaders, draw phony battle lines, and then herd everybody back into the same left-right cage matches of old. Whenever that happens, we just have to remember not to fall for the trap. When someone says this or that person speaks for OWS, don't believe it. This thing is bigger than one or two or a few people, and it isn't part of the same old story.

Pardon me for being skeptical, but in reference to the above highlighted in red, why in the world would anyone believe that the left genuinely held such a perception...all they have done for the past three years is demean every aspect of the TPM and the issues they were protesting against, and consistently referred to them as nothing but a bunch of racists whose only motivation was not wanting to see a black man as president.

Because it was almost immediately co-oped by FOXNEWS, Glenn Beck, and Dick Armey's Freedomworks.

FOX was sponsoring Tea Party rallies within weeks of Obama's inauguration, and changed the focus away from breaking up 'Too Big To Fail'.

Beck went personal, claiming Obama hated White People.

Dick Armey - DICK ARMEY! - former GOP House Leader, totally immersed in the system, making huge money as a lobbyist, started Freedomworks. Now, what the hell motivation would he have to dismantle the system that he was getting rich from? None. But he had plenty of motivation to turn it into an anti-Obama movement.

LOL, and you got all the PROOF of this right.?
We've been posting proof after proof who is BEHIND this fake movement, and you all POO POO it. so I don't take anything you say as THE TRUTH.

 

[AVG-JOE]

There is NOTHING with this fake movement (occupiers) I want to associate with.

I don't take kindly to Marxist, Commies and NAZIS.

thanks but NO thanks.

Just 'cause you're invited, doesn't mean you HAVE to go. This is still America, after all.

 

[Avatar4321]

There is NOTHING with this fake movement (occupiers) I want to associate with.

I don't take kindly to Marxist, Commies and NAZIS.

thanks but NO thanks.

Just 'cause you're invited, doesn't mean you HAVE to go. This is still America, after all.

And it always will be, but what will Americans be like and what type of government will we have? that is the question.

 

[Sherry]

*snip*

There is going to be a fusillade of attempts from many different corners to force these demonstrations into the liberal-conservative blue-red narrative.

This will be an effort to transform OWS from a populist and wholly non-partisan protest against bailouts, theft, insider trading, self-dealing, regulatory capture and the market-perverting effect of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks into something a little more familiar and less threatening, i.e. a captive "liberal" uprising that the right will use to whip up support and the Democrats will try to turn into electoral energy for 2012.


Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.


On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that “I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests.”(I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).


We've similarly heard about MoveOn.org jumping into the demonstrations and attempting, seemingly, to assume leadership roles in the movement.


All of this is the flip side of the coin that has people like Breitbart trying to frame OWS as a socialist uprising and a liberal media conspiracy. The aim here is to redraw the protests along familiar battle lines.


The Rush Limbaughs of the world are very comfortable with a narrative that has Noam Chomsky, MoveOn and Barack Obama on one side, and the Tea Party and Republican leaders on the other. The rest of the traditional media won't mind that narrative either, if it can get enough "facts" to back it up. They know how to do that story and most of our political media is based upon that Crossfire paradigm of left-vs-right commentary shows and NFL Today-style team-vs-team campaign reporting.


What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.


Take, for instance, the matter of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks, which people like me and Barry Ritholz have focused on as something that could be a key issue for OWS. These gigantic institutions have put millions of ordinary people out of their homes thanks to a massive fraud scheme for which they were not punished, owing to their enormous influence with government and their capture of the regulators.


This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power -- but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast.


Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.


The banks know this. They know they have no "natural" constituency among voters, which is why they spend such fantastic amounts of energy courting the mainstream press and such huge sums lobbying politicians on both sides of the aisle.


The only way the Goldmans and Citis and Bank of Americas can survive is if they can suck up popular political support indirectly, either by latching onto such vague right-populist concepts as "limited government" and "free-market capitalism" (ironic, because none of them would survive ten minutes without the federal government's bailouts and other protections) or, alternatively, by presenting themselves as society's bulwark against communism, lefty extremism, Noam Chomsky, etc.


All of which is a roundabout way of saying one thing: beware of provocateurs on both sides of the aisle. This movement is going to attract many Breitbarts, of both the left and right variety. They're going to try to identify fake leaders, draw phony battle lines, and then herd everybody back into the same left-right cage matches of old. Whenever that happens, we just have to remember not to fall for the trap. When someone says this or that person speaks for OWS, don't believe it. This thing is bigger than one or two or a few people, and it isn't part of the same old story.

Pardon me for being skeptical, but in reference to the above highlighted in red, why in the world would anyone believe that the left genuinely held such a perception...all they have done for the past three years is demean every aspect of the TPM and the issues they were protesting against, and consistently referred to them as nothing but a bunch of racists whose only motivation was not wanting to see a black man as president.

Because it was almost immediately co-oped by FOXNEWS, Glenn Beck, and Dick Armey's Freedomworks.

FOX was sponsoring Tea Party rallies within weeks of Obama's inauguration, and changed the focus away from breaking up 'Too Big To Fail'.

Beck went personal, claiming Obama hated White People.

Dick Armey - DICK ARMEY! - former GOP House Leader, totally immersed in the system, making huge money as a lobbyist, started Freedomworks. Now, what the hell motivation would he have to dismantle the system that he was getting rich from? None. But he had plenty of motivation to turn it into an anti-Obama movement.

First of all, the left was against the TPM from the VERY start. Furthermore, the TPM has not been taken over by the GOP, or been some mouthpiece for them...in fact they've often been a thorn in the side of the Republicans. While they may have had more in common with some of their conservative values, the TPM made it pointedly clear that they were no longer satisfied with the status quo. Even so, at no time did the left say anything about the TMP having ANY valid points, or offer any support on the issues they were protesting against. Again, rather they mocked them and their positions, the same ones that they now claim to have in common, at every possible opportunity. Now that it would suit the left's agenda, they suddenly want to buddy up and work for a common cause. Once bitten, twice shy.

 

[WillowTree]

How about REALLY taking the money out of politics and make all elections publicly funded and only publicly funded?

*Yes, I realize that in 2008 Obama flip-flopped on this issue.

Nope! Not fair. Know why? Because only 50% of contribute to Public Funding the other 50% don't do squat except want MORE. MORE MORE>

 

[Stephanie]

It seems the LEFT is now trying to Occupy the Tea Party.

must be because they were a success and this OCCUPYING bull is turning out to look like a joke.

Remember how they ALL told us the Tea Party was INSIGNIFICANT...

 

[WillowTree]

Get over it Synthia.. The Tea Party was demonized by the left wing assholes and their media. The Tea Party has nothing to do with the shitters marching around now demanding more more more more. Get over it.

 

[The T]

Left/Right should ALL read this!

Err...uhm...NO.

 

[Synthaholic]

Pardon me for being skeptical, but in reference to the above highlighted in red, why in the world would anyone believe that the left genuinely held such a perception...all they have done for the past three years is demean every aspect of the TPM and the issues they were protesting against, and consistently referred to them as nothing but a bunch of racists whose only motivation was not wanting to see a black man as president.

Because it was almost immediately co-oped by FOXNEWS, Glenn Beck, and Dick Armey's Freedomworks.

FOX was sponsoring Tea Party rallies within weeks of Obama's inauguration, and changed the focus away from breaking up 'Too Big To Fail'.

Beck went personal, claiming Obama hated White People.

Dick Armey - DICK ARMEY! - former GOP House Leader, totally immersed in the system, making huge money as a lobbyist, started Freedomworks. Now, what the hell motivation would he have to dismantle the system that he was getting rich from? None. But he had plenty of motivation to turn it into an anti-Obama movement.

LOL, and you got all the PROOF of this right.?
We've been posting proof after proof who is BEHIND this fake movement, and you all POO POO it. so I don't take anything you say as THE TRUTH.

What do you need proof about?

That Dick Armey started and runs Freedomworks? That's easily proven.

That Beck called the presiden a racist who hates White people? Want the link to the video?

That FOXNEWS sponsored and backed Tea Party rallies? Really? You need a link to that, too?

Now, where is this proof you are talking about? Who is behind the #OWS? Legitimate sources only, please - no Breitbart bullshit.

 

[Cuyo]

What exactly is the middle ground between living by our Constitution and revolution to overthrow it?

Shut up, retard.

Seriously, sometimes there's just nothing more to say.

 

[WillowTree]

It seems the LEFT is now trying to Occupy the Tea Party.

must be because they were a success and this OCCUPYING bull is turning out to look like a joke.

Remember how they ALL told us the Tea Party was INSIGNIFICANT...

terrorists, tea baggers, extremists, bla bla bla bla deee da.. yep I remember it well.. oh and racists too.. don't ever forget that one.