Occupy Wall Street

[Totenkopf]

Well, the French Revolution was pretty radical..... Still, radical change usually only seems to initially lead to anarchy and then you get the last line from Won't Get Fooled Again: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...... I think the problem is that many in the OWS movement are consumed with the tearing down party and haven't really thought through the aftermath yet (sort of like the complaint about "Bush's war" in Iraq....no planning for the post-victory/peace).

[90SK]

This is a valid point, there are many radicals who would see the current establishment torn down yet I feel like there is no aftermath scenario commonly accepted or supported by organizations or individuals (like the President) who would be key players in this type of scenario.

 

Though, it may be early to put out faith in this type of occurrence just because it isn't happening of its own accord already with such force. The occupy movement and tea party movement both I think show that there is a move to change and progress in America, perhaps the election will allow President Obama to harness this phenomenon like he did to win the 2008 election, or perhaps there will be a backlash and one of the challengers will be elected... though I find that a difficult scenario to believe.

[mimartin]

Moved to Kavar’s the discussion has gotten too serious and political for Atho. From here forward Kavar’s rules apply.

[Totenkopf]

Though, it may be early to put out faith in this type of occurrence just because it isn't happening of its own accord already with such force. The occupy movement and tea party movement both I think show that there is a move to change and progress in America, perhaps the election will allow President Obama to harness this phenomenon like he did to win the 2008 election, or perhaps there will be a backlash and one of the challengers will be elected... though I find that a difficult scenario to believe.

 

Predictably, though, they are going in completely divergent directions w/regards to a solution. The OWS crowd seems to seek greater govt involvement, while the TP people see big govt being an integral part of the problem (esp at the federal level). Frankly, I don't believe Obama's defeat is that unlikely. However, much can change over 11 months (a seeming eternity in politics). This time, though, unlike in 2008, BO isn't an empty vessel for people to fill with their "hopes", but rather a known quantity and complete with his own baggage. Even if he does win, it's likely to be a very close election unless things turn around significantly by Nov, 2012. Afterall, a year out from the elections of 1980 and 1992, it's unlikely many thought Reagan or Clinton would defeat sitting presidents.

[Tommycat]

In all honesty, I would love to see those in the government thrown out. Not just Dems, but Republicans as well. They've both gotten so far out of touch that it seems that a revolution is almost required at this point to do any change. Rid ourselves of the whole of the Federal government and start over.

[90SK]

I would be sad to see Barack Obama defeated by some upstart. He is an intelligent man who knows how to deal in moderation. I supported his 2008 candidacy with volunteering when I couldn't vote, and I intend to vote for him in the upcoming 2012 election. My hope is that the time between now and then will be filled with turbulence and debate, and ideally Obama will emerge as the calm in the center of the storm, with bipartisan tactics and a concerted effort to unify the two parties in their agenda moving forward he should have a fair chance at his second term.

 

 

But one of the big issues here is the slack from apathetic citizens, the distasteful elephant in the progressive room. THATS why I like occupiers and I suppose tea partiers too though like I said anything that isn't moving towards a unified government under a right and left working together will undoubtedly mimic Obamas first term.

 

edit: Obviously I don't think about the repercussions of a second Obama presidency on our next president in 2017, I would like to see Obama as our president through 2012 because I believe he is a strong believer in America and her future potential: this nation can be great in so many ways and perhaps we forget that she is still growing up and going through those awkward phases. Pardon my metaphors... but its kind of true, I think if we as a people play our cards right, of course referring in this case only to Americans (but applicable to other westerners and like minded folks), we may yet find ourselves on the right track as a nation.

[Dak Drexl]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/12/occupy-protestors-attempt-west-coast-port-blockades_n_1142978.html

 

These people are morons. Do they really think this is helping the 99?

[90SK]

It being a blanket movement, I can't help but think it really speaks for itself. Rallying those who AREN'T the power elite to show their support against the power elite, and I myself being against a power elite thus cannot say I do not support the occupy movement.

[Q]

But the occupiers are generally pro-Obama.

 

How is he not the power elite?

[90SK]

Because he works for us, and he's largely transparent compared to "them". We could denounce him as part of the power elite, but we would in doing so ignore the support he has lended through his candidacy to the cause of the people and the betterment of our Union.

 

The "selling point" for a second Obama presidency is the fact that he is competent and likable, and as the President of the United States he is also the figurehead at which he does (in my opinion) an admirable job.

 

I reserve unconditional respect for the commander-in-chief because I empathize with my leader. He is accountable for the actions of the nation.

 

Here:

 

This guy nails it pretty good, a lot of our problems as a nation are bogged down by bull****, public opinion on largely trivial social issues stopping up progress on fairly basic financial and legislative issues. This is why I am for the occupy movement and against the tea party (more or less): the tea party is kinda getting at a more upstart Bush-era-like (minus bush) routine of proposals while the occupy movement is basically staging attacks against the notion of unbalanced distribution of power and wealth. President Obama is in check, the system he represents is under the control of the people be definition and thus he works for us. He is doing his job for us, his job is to represent the people to make changes and enact legislation and representation of the country's best interests.

 

Then again:

 

I don't know how this election season will turn out, I'm sure there will be more drama and plenty of confusion and pitfalls, perhaps from all sides of the spectrum this time.

[Totenkopf]

Because he works for us, and he's largely transparent compared to "them". We could denounce him as part of the power elite, but we would in doing so ignore the support he has lended through his candidacy to the cause of the people and the betterment of our Union.

 

Actually, the govt is probably less transparent in the end than even the "corporate sector". In spite of FOIA requests and procedures, there is a lot the govt drags its feet on or worse. This president talks the talk, perhaps, but that's about it. BO is just one more of the power elite who will profit greatly from his stint in the WH.

 

The "selling point" for a second Obama presidency is the fact that he is competent and likable, and as the President of the United States he is also the figurehead at which he does (in my opinion) an admirable job.

 

Actually, that is a rather rosy view. His own ratings currently suggest that if the election had been held in Nov of 2011, he'd be out on his ass in January 2012. But, fact is, opinions (for and against) are subjective by nature and mercurial. If things turn around in a sufficently concrete way, he could still get relected next year. I'm hoping that he can join the likes of Carter in 2013 and maybe put his commnuity organizing talents to work helping HFH and like.

 

 

I reserve unconditional respect for the commander-in-chief because I empathize with my leader. He is accountable for the actions of the nation.

 

Wish I could say the same.

 

Here:

 

This guy nails it pretty good, a lot of our problems as a nation are bogged down by bull****, public opinion on largely trivial social issues stopping up progress on fairly basic financial and legislative issues. This is why I am for the occupy movement and against the tea party (more or less): the tea party is kinda getting at a more upstart Bush-era-like (minus bush) routine of proposals while the occupy movement is basically staging attacks against the notion of unbalanced distribution of power and wealth. President Obama is in check, the system he represents is under the control of the people be definition and thus he works for us. He is doing his job for us, his job is to represent the people to make changes and enact legislation and representation of the country's best interests.

 

Well, was initially reticent to view clip when I saw it was Ratigan, but wth, it was only about 5 min or so. There were a few glaring holes in his analysis. First, the presidency has also been bought (look at how much it costs to become the "leader of the free world") along with Congress. Two, Obama can make a direct appeal to the public, but the Constitution doesn't allow for a dictator. Three, his silly characterization of the republicans as "burning everything down" was laughable. To his credit, at least, he recognizes that the problem is still a bipartisan one (neither side proposing the kinds of measures truly needed to bring the deficit under control) and fueled by the problem of influence peddling and the international monetary system set up in the decades following WW2 (I'd say even longer than the 20 year +/- figure he mentions).

 

Then again:

 

I don't know how this election season will turn out, I'm sure there will be more drama and plenty of confusion and pitfalls, perhaps from all sides of the spectrum this time.

 

I don't doubt that it will be even dirtier and murkier than '08.

[Working Class Hero]

I reserve unconditional respect for the commander-in-chief because I empathize with my leader. He is accountable for the actions of the nation.

I'd hope that respect should be ever more conditional the more authority you grant someone, not less.

[Q]

^Well put.

[Q]

The OWS scenario reproduced in a lab.