RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Occupy Wall Street

From your opening post, Pro, that "greed that has infected the world", from Wall Street, backs Obama.

Wall Street was the number one financial backer of Barack Obama's 2008 campaign.

That footage in your opening post was slickly edited in a Michael Moore style. It is clear propaganda and not "news coverage", or even the objective amateur footage of a bystander in the protests.
(i.e., it is shit, absolute garbage, worthless in terms of trying to find footage that gives an honest assessment of what actually happened there.)

You mock me for sourcing Fox News (even though I only post Fox links a small percentage of the time, and often even the Fox links I post are to Associated Press and other mainstream sources).
But this crap, along with your posting Keith Olbermann, and his rabid replacement, MSNBC's self identified socialist (on air, no less!) Chris O'Donnell, manifests how far-left you are, even as you call on the rest of us to be "objective" and set aside our politics.

As others have said, the police will have an internal investigation to determine whether there was any actual brutality on their part. You seem quick to label it that way, regardless of the evidence.

Nope, it's illegal to block protestors. It's our right, as free people, to protest the government, business, whatever. Forcefully stopping someone from walking down the sidewalk of Wall Street just because you're getting paid by Wall Street to do so does not make it legal.



Why? Why would the Police have to "take back the street"? Take it back from what? Who? That presumes anyone had "taken" anything. These people are walking and holding signs and chanting. What did they do wrong? Why is there suddenly a "limit" to how many free Americans can walk down a street at any given moment? Are they corralling people in the rest of NYC for the same reasons? What about Times Square? As you can see here on camera 1, there's more people out here at any one time than there ever COULD be marching on Wall Street.

So, that reasoning is bogus. And very scripted.



And there we are. I knew we would get the crux of this point. The "illegality of protesting".....without PAYING to do so. When the hell did Americans start having to "get permission from the city" to protest an injustice? What if the city just arbitrarily said, "No, we won't give you a permit"? Then, it's illegal for me and my friends to protest peacefully?

Insert Orwellian reference here. We are on the edge of a slippery slope. I would expect civil revolution in the next decade. Get ready.

I notice that often when some protest or event happens that O'Reilly doesn't report it the first day, and reports it a day, or several days, later. Because he makes an effort not to just repeat erroneous information, and confirm firsthand what the facts are.

I mention O'Reilly because he is probably the single most influential conservative source.

And as I said, in 2008 Wall Street was Obama's largest financial supporter. So if Murdoch exposed Wall Street, he would be damaging or even cutting off Obama's largest financial backer.

Wonder Boy, I am saying this in my inside voice. I am not yelling at you. I am not berating you. Just listen for one moment:

This isn't biased. We're not talking about Left or Right. This is about all of us, together. Please, PLEASE don't bring partisanship in here. I know you can see past it. I know you can. Look at the big picture. Come on, please!



...what? Go to YouTube! Look up the "Occupy Wall Street" videos! You will see so MANY different viewpoints that you will see nothing is being "edited". Certainly not by Michael fucking Moore.



....actual, amateur video footage isn't enough? I don't understand. Seriously. You've lost me.



David, I JUST posted, offering you an olive branch, okay? Our disagreements and whatever outside this thread don't matter to me while we're in here discussing this. Please, can't you find any ground to meet another American halfway on battle for our Rights?



I honestly ask you, twice, to just let it go and lets be friends in here. Look at the evidence. Go to YouTube and look all the protestor footage. Seriously, man. You cannot dismiss them all as frauds, or whatever. Why are you making this about Right vs Left? This is about us ALL. Can't you see that?

Now, for the third and final time, I reach my hand out to you in this thread and say: "Time-Out". Let's agree that we all need to come together to save our society from those above us. If that's Obama or if that's McCain. Or if that's both! Let's not allow phantom allegiances to "our teams" blind us to an actual, universal problem.

Please?

Melodrama.


When it's your guys in SEIU beating down a black Tea Party member, that's perfectly okay, and just getting in the faces of the "inbred white racist bigots" (who happened to be black) that you choose to despise and slander for no logical reason beyond your political biases.
Even at 9-plus-percent unemployment, and heading for a double dip with an astronomical 14.7 trillion in debt, you support Obama over any Republican (who you slander without evidence as racist bigots)

But one piddly protest on Wall Street that meets the slightest resistance, before the facts are even known, you brand as Armageddon at hand, and cheer Marxist revolution.

When you demonstrate the slightest neutrality, stop posting MSNBC, Olbermann, and other hard-left liberal sources, and stop demonizing Rupert Murdoch and Fox News in the same breath you call for non-partisanship, maybe then I'll believe you.

I honestly think you're blind to your own kneejerk tendency to blame the Right, to the point that you don't even realize that you just did it. Repeatedly.

Did it offend you? I'm sorry. Just stating an observation.




Oh dear. Come on David. Did you ignore my entire last post? Are you really incapable of just seeing the big picture, and joining your fellow Americans? How many times do I have to reach out a hand of peace to you, for you to just slap it away? Is there any hope of you coming down off the mountain and joining us? Should I hold out hope for you?

Okay WB, listen very closely. I've already said this a couple of times, so I guess you must have missed it. There are NO OTHER news agencies covering this.. At least there weren't last night. If you can find a FOX news clip that covers all of this, then PLEASE post it! I don't like Olberman any more than you do. Trust me on that one. But, they're the only ones reporting it! That is my sole reason for posting those videos. If you can find others, post them, please.



Okay, I won't mention Murdoch any more, if it bothers you that much. Let's just say the corporate fatcats like GE and...the Australian guy...don't seem to want to cover this story. I'm actually totally surprised MSNBC even touched it. Hell, CNN's more interested in the Michael Jackson Trial than they are in reporting the actual news.



No man, I'm blaming Big Business and Wall Street, and the Bankers. If they're Obama's twin brothers and have been sleeping with Hillary Clinton, I'd still hate them. I don't care if they're Republican, Democrat, Tea Party, Nazi, Socialist, Vulcan, whatever. If they oppose a just and fair tax hike on the top 2% of Wall Street bankers, then they are the problem. No matter their party.

Agreed?

Watch it, Pro. That's the "Job Creator" class you're talking about taxing.

Job Creator. Right. And that's why unemployment is at such an all-time low...

I'm talking about what you began this topic with, as the centerpiece of your argument for the evil Wall Street system (which backs Obama) and their eeeeeeviiiilllll brutal lackey police force.




Then it is your choice not to. Because it is obvious. It wasn't amateur footage in that opening post, and it was heavily laden with voice-over socialist propaganda and inserted music, clearly not just raw footage of the event.





As I said, you call for bipartisanship while demonizing Fox News and Rupert Murdoch.
If you read OBAMANOMICS by Tim Carney, he is critical of both Republicans and Democrats in Washington, that he describes as a "revolving door" where individuals of both parties serve in public-sector jobs as Senators, Congressmen, military officers, and other high-level departmental and cabinet positions, pushing through legislation that benefits certain corporations. And then when they leave office, they take very cushy high-paying corporate jobs in return for their favors, making even more money. Until a president of their party takes office again, at which point they go right back into an apppointed government position currying favors for the corporation they just left. And on and on.
Two examples are Rahm Emmanuel (who served in both the Clinton and Obama administrations, with a period making millions in the private sector in between), and Tim Geithner (a Goldman-Sachs executive, who oversaw TARP in the Bush administration, before being appointed treasury secretary under Obama). Carney identifies Goldman-Sachs and the most powerful Wall Street player in Washington, through multiple administrations, both Democrat and Republican.




According to Carney, McCain was a true reformer, who was successfully propagandized by the Obama campaign as a "just like Bush" stooge of Wall Street.

That said, both parties have their share of corporate cronies.

See, coming from you, that's all I wanted to hear. Thank you.

Holy shit, they found you Dave! I'm sorry I made you speak out! Get out of here!

Wonder Boy content User rex's personal obsession
7500+ posts 2 minutes 9 seconds ago Viewing a private message

We just haven't given them enough tax breaks.

"Let them eat cake..."

I'd frankly rather be on the balcony sipping champagne than shouting marxist slogans with the grubby leftists in the street below.


And by the way, the video is from and promotes this website;
http://www.thestruggle.org/
Which is a left-partisan website promoting social justice, a centerpiece of Obama rhetoric, and that of his administration. The same administration that the champagne drinkers financially supported and voted for.

Again:
as detailed by Tim Carney in the book I mentioned, corporations and wall street have benefitted from the Obama administration like no administration in history.
Corporate welfare fills their coffers, companies like GE and Pfizer.
And new Obama-legislated industry regulations impose a higher cost per unit for medium and small companies, a cost-per-unit that corporations can more easily absorb than their smaller competitors. Which benefits the largest companies and increases their market share by driving out competition. And all costs of this new regulation are passed on to the middle class and poor consumers. Thinner selection and higher prices.

And no doubt, the socialist hippies in the street below all voted for Obama.
Who are the dupes and fools who need to learn the truth?

The media is ignoring this because everyone is tired of hearing about unwashed hippies bitch. msnbc is covering it because dirty hippies are the only ones that still watch that station, the ones that have cable at least.

IMO, the hippies looked dirty and annoying. The people on the balcony looked like they escaped from a massengill box.

Of course, corporations have benefited from the Obama administration. He's their fucking puppet. He's bankrolled by GE and Goldman-Sachs. Maybe, we ought to get down there and tell that to those in desperate need of laying off the patchouli.

Most of our modern discourse over right versus left is nothing but a rehash of the Optimates versus Populares battles of the late Roman Republic. That fight wasn't really the patricians versus the plebians, it was a fight between two aristocratic factions in which on side proclaimed the need for reform (see, social justice) as a way to bolster their support. More or less read a book on that period of Roman history and swap the names of the parties and people like Marius, Sulla, Caesar, and Pompey with Democrat, Republican, Soros, Murdoch, Immelt, and Koch and it is the same damn story just without all the bloodshed (so far).

But, both sides agree on one thing: the middle class has got to go.

I haven't seen all the youtube footage (and quite frankly there's fucktons of it so cut me some slack there), but it's not as though amateur videography is immune to selective vision either. honestly, if you're videotaping a protest you're a participant in, how likely are you to capture (or at least upload) footage that's going to paint your protest movement in a negative light? you're a smart guy; let's be reasonable here. as I said, there will always be bias, and people will always spin things to their perspective even if they do so subconsciously. worldview is the lens through which we see everything.



you're saying that if I were to see that I'd be upset somehow? when it comes to any actual issues at the heart of this (publicly protesting much of anything is generally a waste of time), I'm not taking one side or the other on this, but it's nice to actually see some give-and-take. come on - there's people camped out outside somewhere you're trying to work (it may not be menial work but banking and stock trading and managing investments is work), talking shit about you and your co-workers and everything related to the profession you've devoted a chunk of your life to getting into and getting good at. I realize some of these guys are most likely at least partly responsible for a lot of people's financial woes right now, but if you value empathy and trying to put yourself in the other guy's shoes as much as you say you do, at least attempt to see where they're coming from. not everyone who handles (or makes!) large sums of money is a thief or a crook or filthy aristocrat bent on exploiting the working man. that's marxist bullshit of the highest order. you'd think people (the protesters, not you) showing up for something called 'days of rage' would be able to stomach some measure of opposition. what is it about lefties being thoroughly unable to countenance any sort of challenge to their assertions?

besides, if I were some douchey rich day trader with a bottle of dom to burn, I'd raise a glass to the hippies down on street level too. it'd be funny as shit. it'd be the same thing we do on here, but in real life, dude.



the french nobility had far less firepower at their disposal than the United States government. if it's all, as some of us are saying, another example of government being in bed with Big Corporations™, my money's probably going to be on the side that has riot cops and national guardsmen and fucking tanks and shit to bring to bear on this, not some disaffected humanities majors (irony!) who've never held anything more inherently dangerous than a pack of parliaments. I sincerely hope there are no incidents of greater violence as a result of these protests, but if the 'revolution' you're hinting at ever takes place, I can drive twenty minutes to kent state university and take you some pictures with my phone of the last place they tried that. you can't stick it to the man with a head full of lead, my friend.

LIVE stream from Occupy Wall Street

Occupy Los Angeles, Occupy Chicago, and Occupy Washington already started yesterday. 9k+ are expected tomorrow on Wall Street. More on the way to LA, Windy City, and DC. I love it.

"Bank of America is like a man who's been saved from a burning building and then kicks the fireman in the nuts." - Andy Borowitz

there are quite a few people in the comments section and elsewhere saying those folks were actually part of a wedding reception (I wasn't there so I don't know for sure), and not actual 'corporation people' mocking the protesters. so they could, in reality, be thinking "let's cut the cake!" rather than what you're attributing to them. hell, they don't have to be wall-streeters to laugh at the protesters - who isn't annoyed by preachy leftards? context is everything, and if you don't know for sure what you're looking at and it turns out to be something else entirely... just trying to look out for ya, buddy.

but what if it is just what the guy who posted the video (check out this guy's channel... pass the kool-aid?) says it is - rich people having a laugh at the hordes gathering in the street below them to complain about how miserable they are? man, that's fucking hilarious. just for a moment, distance yourself from the underlying debate and then look at this objectively. tell me you wouldn't do that if you had half the chance. hell, I'd find a guy who knew enough of the material that we could start riffing on 'em a la statler and waldorf.

I disagree, but I appreciate your consideration of the subject. And no, Phil, I wouldn't ever laugh at sincere misery. I honestly don't think you understand or accept what this is all about. But, again, I don't want to argue with you...

I'm honestly not trying to argue, pro, just lemme type this out before it slips my mind (long day; I fucking hate freshmen). you said sincere misery. there have already been a few people who have been seized upon as mascots of a sort, symbols of what the protesters have been feeling. several of them who've told their stories on (youtube) video (most prominently the "they took my parents' house!" crying kid, dunno if you've seen that one or not) have later had their stories debunked or even admitted they were full of shit.

and please don't mistake my horrendous sense of humor for an inability to identify with people in bad financial shape. hell, we're living with my wife's parents right now. my parents didn't have a lot of money when I was growing up, but my dad still threw himself into looking out for even needier people for over twenty years (to the tune of about twelve grand a year). I don't say that to take credit for anything he did, because I can't and wouldn't - sadly this apple fell pretty far from the tree and promptly rolled into a storm drain - but that's where I learned everything I know about poverty in America. I've seen it in a lot of other places too.

I know how hard a lot of people have it. I also know that a lot of the protesters we're discussing aren't those people. it's easy to complain about an unfair living wage when your parents are putting you through college and you only need your on-campus job for beer and pizza money. it's easy to make films about the exploitation of the common working man when those films are pulling down millions of dollars for you.

the people who are suffering the most in this economy are probably not at those protests, because they can't afford to be. the people who are suffering the most in this economy are too busy busting their asses to keep themselves and their families fed, clothed, and under a roof to have much time or energy to make the kind of noise these protesters are making. they don't want a handout. they don't want a revolution. they just want things to break their way, and they're gonna keep doing what they're doing until that happens. for at least an appreciable portion of the people 'occupying' wall street, these protests are as much about politics and ego as they are about justice or fairness.

Is that to say that all of the unemployed lower class are "imagining" their misery? Seriously?

No, it's to say that the degree-holding collge graduate hippies who are now career protestors and activists living off their parents... are.

It's also to say that many who are capable of getting an education and raising themselves out of poverty whould rather blame capitalism or "white privelege" or "racism", when the capitalist system actually allows millions just like them to achieve what any "priveleged" person has, through education and work.

I just re-read a Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel article that notes the contrast between the pursuit of higher education/financial success of black immigrants to the U.S. from the Caribbean and Africa, as compared to the low performance and unbroken poverty of U.S.-born black Americans.
Is it "racism"?
Or is it, more clearly, something different in the culture and ideology of those two black communities?
Both are black in America. One is succeeding.

My fear is that while they achieve success as new immigrants, their children will become immersed in the African American culture that will drag them down in a generation, to likewise become become high-school dropouts, gang members, involved disproportionately in crime, incarceration, and welfare use.

That will be the day.

pro tards unite!

Based on your posts subsequent to mine it appears I was right. This isn't about police brutality. It's about you trying to gin up support for the whole "eat the rich/class warfare/little Eichmanns" thing.

Yeah, I know. I actually held out years of hope for the guy. But, hell, notice that in this thread even David, the Wonder Man is actually being civil and mature. Rex doesn't understand things like that.



Put your crash-helmet back on, Brian. You're going to hurt yourself.



You can make whatever assumption you like, my friend. But, I take this to say you do not support their cause? And therefore, support the billionaire crooks?

Finally saw some coverage of this yesterday. The regular news still seems way more interested in Michael Jackson and that trial going on over in Italy though.

Of course they do. Their corporate masters instructed them to ignore the peasants...

10 Registered User(s).
Display Name: Status Title Last Activity Location
Pariah User The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts 10/01/11 12:42 PM Reading a post
Forum: Politics and Current Events
Thread: Occupy Wall Street

I reject their-and your-premise that financial success per se makes someone a “crook.”

In any event, as noted previously, it appears your opposition to police brutality is based on who the police might be beating. You support the cause, so you made it a point, in this case, to condemn the police. Am I right? I don’t recall you weighing in on, for example, this recent incident.

in all fairness, I was the first one to bring up the possibility of protesters getting wasted by the man™:



and we all know that one batshit insane hippie we honestly wouldn't miss.