Comments on: Occupy something Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:37:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: Renox Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:57:23 +0000 David Rohde obviously does not got a clue what he is talking about.
An uprising does not need a written mission statement: It is explicit in denouncing the current system and the entire political culture: lobbying, the two party political system, the merge of state and corporate powers. A deep dissatisfaction realising that neither the Dems or Reps have any solutions, they are just a smoke screen to give people of the illusion of choice.
Plutocracy hijacked democracy. Why would those who are in power give up their priviledge? “The land of opportunity” is like being a guarding dog who is well fed, groomed and excercised but ultimately must serve its master;just another brick in the wall. It can hardy be referred to as freedom when the perimeters have already been defined.
It is time to shed the old concepts of two party system. Get rid of the Federal Reserve, and the Federal taxes, establish Direct Democracy. Direct Democracy would, in fact, elliminate lobbying, corruption and return power to the people.

By: OneOfTheSheep Mon, 05 Dec 2011 09:25:29 +0000 @txgadfly,

You are babbling about how you wish things were, and not how they are. There are all kinds of differences between individual statutes, laws and regulations just as there many differences in associated penalties. Got it? The U.S. is NOT Somalia.

And quit the nonsense about the 1%. More than 80% is at the malls this Holiday Season, not in unemployment lines or bread lines.

When you speak that “This will end…as the French Monarchy ended in 1789, in a blood bath” you state your personal dreams of anarchy, not those of even 1% of Americans. Americans are NOT “oppressed” nor will there EVER be a military coup here.

But you’re obviously smokin’ some GOOD stuff… If you want to read history, try some American History. Read about the “bonus Army”, for example.

By: BajaArizona Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:57:34 +0000 Occupy Wall Street began as a fringe Utopian Anarchist spasm by teenagers. It managed to conduct the massive ambient electricity of discontent with the economy and political backlash against the Tea Party into a lightning bolt of publicity. Yet for all its raw power, lightning is by nature wild, brief, and unpredictable. The “movement” has already begun to splinter under the weight of the multitude of incompatible voices all speaking at once. A protest against unanimity is like a motorcycle gang I once knew who hung around with each other 24/7 and called themselves on their jackets, “The Loners”.

By: txgadfly Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:43:42 +0000 Capitalism is not anarchy. There must be regulation or capitalism cannot exist.

Making robbery at gunpoint illegal is “regulation”. Making fraud illegal is “regulation”. Making murder illegal is “regulation”. Got it? Regulation is law. Law is regulation. This is very simple, very clear. If we have no regulation then we have no law. Then get yourself a street gang and automatic weapons and go help yourself to whatever you want. That is not capitalism. It is Somalia.

There are a bunch of lying thieves who have seized control of our financial system and hired a bunch of “mouthpieces” to justify their system. Well, as the Bible says, by their fruits shall you know them. Increasing poverty. Decreasing employment. A disappearing “middle class” and the market they used to provide. Increasing wealth and income shares for the wealthiest 1%. Lies about who and what is “American”.

This will end. Given the repression of complaints by the wealthy, it looks like it will end just as the French Monarchy ended in 1789, in a blood bath. It is not up to the oppressed people to come up with a peaceful solution that does not involve the liquidation of an entire class of Americans. It is up to our “leaders”. If left to the people alone, you are not going to like what happens. If nothing else, we will have a military coup.

This current situation cannot continue. Nothing at all like it ever has in the history of humanity. Try reading some history.

By: dogstar Sun, 04 Dec 2011 15:36:59 +0000 @OneOfTheSheep,
Re: your comments to TheUSofA et al

“Never try to teach a pig to talk. It frustrates you and annoys the pig.” (I believe this is from Mark Twain, and it sure seems appropriate for much of the discourse here.)

By: GLK Sun, 04 Dec 2011 15:18:15 +0000 @BowMtnSpirit. Thanks for making my point. On and on you go, where are the specifics? Nobody knows. See you in the winter of your discontent.

By: Biscayne Sun, 04 Dec 2011 13:34:11 +0000 To OneOfTheSheep,
I did notice that all your arguments are derivatives of slogans, which is why I think of you as a typical “slogan thinker”. The main tell of such thinking is that it stops its argument exactly at the point where it risks undermining itself.

By: OneOfTheSheep Sun, 04 Dec 2011 07:07:35 +0000 @TheUSofA,

What reeks of ignorance is anyone who believes the nonsense you spout. Just as politicians SHOULD prioritize the dollars they shovel out, individuals that would have effect MUST prioritize their time.

He who is “interested” in everything will know little about anything and make NO difference, ever. I am confident the good people and parents in Kansas City can get done what needs to get done without my heightened awareness or commentary.

But you might like my comment here: ton/2011/12/04/the-taxpayers-burden/#com ment-709

You flatter me if you think my words “…reduce [OWS] to caricatures”. OWS was a caricature from beginning to the end. All I did was offer my personal opinions on it’s utter inanity. Let it rest in peace.

You don’t like the Democrats. You don’t like the Republicans, so I’m sure you hate the Tea Party. You don’t like Corporations. You don’t like anyone with more than you have (which is probably very little). If you don’t like Bill Clinton, you certainly won’t like Ronald Reagan. To the extent ordinary Americans reject what you’re trying to sell, you hate them too.

I can see why you’re frustrated and why you’re politically impotent to move any change YOU desire forward. You have no “worthy champion”. So, even though no one is home, I can empathize with your desire to breathe life back into the illusion of OWS.

I’ll wish you the best and just say no to the clap.

By: TheUSofA Sun, 04 Dec 2011 05:54:26 +0000 This is choice:

“If government regulation is the “answer”, why hasn’t it been more effective during the time Democrats held both White House and Congress?”

The answer is quite self-explanatory and to ask it reeks of ignorance. I suppose there are no such things as moneyed interests in politics? That too is all in our minds. It has nothing to do with Democrat or Republican. Both feed from the same trough. Bill Clinton is still loved on Wall Street to this day. Bring up Glass-Steagall to a devout Democrat and you’ll be met with silence. Of course Glass-Steagall was deregulation so for some they automatically approve, without any thought.

By: TheUSofA Sun, 04 Dec 2011 05:34:48 +0000 So you don’t read about financial crime because you’re not wealthy? I suppose there’s no point in concerning ourselves with something like the Kansas City child porn case if we have no children then.

“Is there waste? Is there corruption? Is there undue advantage taken? YES, YES, YES.”

But let’s focus on OWS instead and reduce them to caricatures? Bravo.

“Capitalism IS a society of winners and losers.”

This is quite the defense of capitalism. So capitalism means there are no rules? It means if you game the system that’s part of capitalism? Crony capitalism is all in our heads? Privatizing profits and socializing losses, all part of capitalism? I suppose competitive markets in capitalism are also a relative notion? Just like reducing the OWS movement to fit your view, you would reduce capitalism to one grand statement. Perhaps that’s why you choose not to read about the financial system and all of it’s ills.

But let’s go take on OWS instead. Bravo. Those smelly working people and veterans and students who were beaten and bludgeoned for practicing their first amendment rights. You have quite the priorities.

“You see no “double standard” in sports “stars” and rock “stars” making millions for doing something that interests (individually) a relatively small percentage of a fragmented population…”

Sports stars? Rock stars? In comparison to Corporations and CEOs that ship jobs abroad and game the system to avoid paying their fair share of taxes? Have their cake and eat it too? Really? I’m sensing a pattern.

As I said, if you’re going to clap, try using both hands.