For those who think that the Occupy Wall Street movment was grass roots out of nowhere.... - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

nation-x · 10-08-2011, 09:17 AM

I really don't understand this whole debate over whether or not OWS is grass roots or not. You can't have this type of thing go on without organization. The same thing occurred with the Tea Party. If you think that the Tea Party is a grass roots movement but OWS isn't then you are an idiot. They both had monied support and cooperative organization between many different groups.

Here is the central question... why is it that when one group protests something they don't agree with that they are hailed as legitimate but when another group does the same thing they are a mob and "ruckus rousers"?

We are all Americans... and whether or not you agree with one group or not... you should agree that all of the above mentioned groups have a RIGHT to express their frustration.

You show me a Marxist and I will show you an Ayn Rand fan... Show me a Christian and I will show you an Atheist. We are a large and diverse country and, whether or not you agree with someone else's view, each group has it's own legitimate claim.

From my perspective, I am tired of the dismissive nature of our national conversation. It exists purely for the purpose of division.

The Tea Party and conservative movement certainly has fringe elements... that doesn't mean that everything that the Tea Party or conservative movements represent is fringe.

OWS, labor, and all of these other liberal groups certainly have some fringe elements. That doesn't mean that everything they represent is fringe.

OWS largely represents the frustration of people who think that the government is controlled by monied interests and Wall Street represents a large part of that monied interest.

Their is actually, at it's base, a shared reason for existence for both the Tea Party movement (at it's beginning) and OWS. The only substantive difference is the proposed solution to that same problem.

In my view, the Tea Party is misguided because they think that the problem originates from the government. I say this is misguided because there is an entire industry dedicated to growing government and those are the very people who support their cause... and that industry isn't a political party. It is almost wholly supported by business interests. They write the great majority of legislation... they pump in the major money... they ARE the government.

Think about the groups behind each of these "grass roots" movements. Both sides have billionaire backers... however, the Tea Party is largely backed by corporate interests and lobbyists. The Tea Party Express, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks and a multitude of other organizations like them are all staffed by lobbyists and were founded with corporate money. Also, there is really nothing new about that movement other than the amount of money being invested in it. The message is the same and the purpose is the same all the way back to the early 1980s.

Liberal movements, for the most part, are rarely backed by corporations or lobbyists as primary players. They are typically backed, in large part, by labor unions or political groups. I don't see MSNBC organizing protest events... Fox News did. This is a simple example of the point.

The people that say there is no difference between the parties are partially correct. The constant common denominator is that Wall Street has an inordinate amount of influence over the government no matter who has been in control for the last 20+ years... ever since Don Regan was appointed as Treasury Secretary in 1981, Goldman Sachs has had large influence over the monetary policy of every administration. The list of Goldman Sachs executives who have been appointed to high level treasury and Fed positions is as long as your arm. The Obama administration is no different.

That is the basis of OWS.

VikingMan · 10-08-2011, 09:59 AM

Yes the Tea Party is another example of of a cause/group that was hijacked.

GregE · 10-08-2011, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill8

This #occupy shit sure is bringing the raving spittle-flecked preacher out of all teh fox commentators tho. They are just so righteously pissed off.

Seems they've hit a nerve, haven't they?

Bill8 · 10-08-2011, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

Letting them all just collapse would have collapsed wallstreet completely, meaning everyone would have lost way more money than they did in the end. It would have been much more expensive. At least thats my opinion.

So, tax money and socialism for the superrich in order to save 'everyone'. A little risk transfer. Dig in your pockets folks, we have to save "everyone", too big to fail, ya know.

Abandon the risk model of capitalism, take the money from 'everyone' to save the economy by saving the rich who created and owned the risky paper, and save 'everyone'.

So now 'everyone' is stuck with the rich folk's risky bills, but 'everyone' was saved.

Especially the bankers who took the risks on 'everyone's' behalf. They took the money, we took the risk. Now they keep taking the money - and we get endless recession.

I see what you did there.

Hence, #occupy.

Bill8 · 10-08-2011, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregE

Seems they've hit a nerve, haven't they?

Seems so. The pussy factor of the foxfags and the tea ladies hits a nerve.

Cuz, like I said, the possibility of revolution was teh one thing the teadrinkers had going for them - before they got sold.

BFT3K · 10-08-2011, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nation-x

I really don't understand this whole debate over whether or not OWS is grass roots or not. You can't have this type of thing go on without organization. The same thing occurred with the Tea Party. If you think that the Tea Party is a grass roots movement but OWS isn't then you are an idiot. They both had monied support and cooperative organization between many different groups.

Here is the central question... why is it that when one group protests something they don't agree with that they are hailed as legitimate but when another group does the same thing they are a mob and "ruckus rousers"?

We are all Americans... and whether or not you agree with one group or not... you should agree that all of the above mentioned groups have a RIGHT to express their frustration.

You show me a Marxist and I will show you an Ayn Rand fan... Show me a Christian and I will show you an Atheist. We are a large and diverse country and, whether or not you agree with someone else's view, each group has it's own legitimate claim.

From my perspective, I am tired of the dismissive nature of our national conversation. It exists purely for the purpose of division.

The Tea Party and conservative movement certainly has fringe elements... that doesn't mean that everything that the Tea Party or conservative movements represent is fringe.

OWS, labor, and all of these other liberal groups certainly have some fringe elements. That doesn't mean that everything they represent is fringe.

OWS largely represents the frustration of people who think that the government is controlled by monied interests and Wall Street represents a large part of that monied interest.

Their is actually, at it's base, a shared reason for existence for both the Tea Party movement (at it's beginning) and OWS. The only substantive difference is the proposed solution to that same problem.

In my view, the Tea Party is misguided because they think that the problem originates from the government. I say this is misguided because there is an entire industry dedicated to growing government and those are the very people who support their cause... and that industry isn't a political party. It is almost wholly supported by business interests. They write the great majority of legislation... they pump in the major money... they ARE the government.

Think about the groups behind each of these "grass roots" movements. Both sides have billionaire backers... however, the Tea Party is largely backed by corporate interests and lobbyists. The Tea Party Express, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks and a multitude of other organizations like them are all staffed by lobbyists and were founded with corporate money. Also, there is really nothing new about that movement other than the amount of money being invested in it. The message is the same and the purpose is the same all the way back to the early 1980s.

Liberal movements, for the most part, are rarely backed by corporations or lobbyists as primary players. They are typically backed, in large part, by labor unions or political groups. I don't see MSNBC organizing protest events... Fox News did. This is a simple example of the point.

The people that say there is no difference between the parties are partially correct. The constant common denominator is that Wall Street has an inordinate amount of influence over the government no matter who has been in control for the last 20+ years... ever since Don Regan was appointed as Treasury Secretary in 1981, Goldman Sachs has had large influence over the monetary policy of every administration. The list of Goldman Sachs executives who have been appointed to high level treasury and Fed positions is as long as your arm. The Obama administration is no different.

That is the basis of OWS.

Great post!

The Demon · 10-08-2011, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill8

This is what has been done to the american mind - we have embraced dumbness, and lost our ability to think, to reason

You have the balls to lecture Americans on their ability to think when you just blamed the tea party for a second recession? Wow, amazing. Your entire contribution to this thread consists of bitching about the republicans/tea party/fox news while calling others sheep when the only sheep here is you with your predictable Internet forum rant devoid of any logic or facts. Please just stop embarrassing yourself.

BFT3K · 10-08-2011, 06:00 PM

Internet Guy · 10-08-2011, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

You have the balls to lecture Americans on their ability to think when you just blamed the tea party for a second recession?

Where did he say that?

Bill8 · 10-09-2011, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

You have the balls to lecture Americans on their ability to think when you just blamed the tea party for a second recession? Wow, amazing. Your entire contribution to this thread consists of bitching about the republicans/tea party/fox news while calling others sheep when the only sheep here is you with your predictable Internet forum rant devoid of any logic or facts. Please just stop embarrassing yourself.

You held the country hostage, and by that lowered our credit rating, which was a contributing factor in the interlocking processes which triggered this current period which looks very much like the beginning of a 2nd recession.

I'm not the one who came up with the idea that this is the tea party recession - it's quite common. This 2nd recession is teh tea party recession.

I think of it as the tea ladies recession, because you tea people have been sold, your new owners took your balls, you are all pretty subservient now.

If you cant take the blame, maybe you shouldn't have held the country hostage with that phoney deficit crisis nonsense your fox masters told you to parrot.

The Demon · 10-09-2011, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill8

You held the country hostage, and by that lowered our credit rating, which was a contributing factor in the interlocking processes which triggered this current period which looks very much like the beginning of a 2nd recession.

Which, if true (more on that), becomes completely irrelevant when you ignore the monetary and fiscal mismanagement of Obama and the left, seeing as how they're the ones that put us in an even bigger hole. You're incredibly biased and therefore are unable to argue using facts. You blame one party for one mistake but refuse to blame the other party for the same, yet bigger mistake. You take no responsibility as a US citizen for your part in the crisis that's been going on since the 70s. I'm not sure when we got out of the first recession to begin a second one but you clearly haven't been paying attention since 2008. You're blaming the tea party for holding the country hostage and lowering the credit rating when it was the direct result of Obama's continued stimulus policies and helicopter Bernanke's free flow printing production. And finally, you allude to me being party of the tea party which tops off your ridiculous posts. I'm neither tea party nor republican but it gets sad when a grown man who pretends to be intelligent, calls everyone else dumb and then posts some of the dumbest stuff this forum has ever seen. BFT3K would be proud.

Quote:

I'm not the one who came up with the idea that this is the tea party recession - it's quite common. This 2nd recession is teh tea party recession.

So your argument is "it's true because everyone says it is"? That's really sad. And the only ones who are coming up with it are the idiotic left who try to deflate from their own runaway spending and retarded economic policies.

Quote:

I think of it as the tea ladies recession, because you tea people have been sold, your new owners took your balls, you are all pretty subservient now.

As opposed to you representing the typical internet forum user? Every conspiracy is true and everyone is a sheep towards idea 1, 2, or 3 while you yourself are a free thinker? Ever consider denial being party of your insecurity?

Quote:

If you cant take the blame, maybe you shouldn't have held the country hostage with that phoney deficit crisis nonsense your fox masters told you to parrot.

Maybe you shouldn't have been living under a rock the whole time and saw what was happening, like the rest of the "subservient" crowd, as opposed to making up your own reality and hoping it was true. Good job, sheep.

nation-x · 10-09-2011, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

You have the balls to lecture Americans on their ability to think when you just blamed the tea party for a second recession? Wow, amazing. Your entire contribution to this thread consists of bitching about the republicans/tea party/fox news while calling others sheep when the only sheep here is you with your predictable Internet forum rant devoid of any logic or facts. Please just stop embarrassing yourself.

Interesting... it is a well known fact that GFY conservative - The Demon - only accepts his own "facts" and those "facts" are not necessarily real facts.

The Demon · 10-09-2011, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nation-x

Interesting... it is a well known fact that GFY conservative - The Demon - only accepts his own "facts" and those "facts" are not necessarily real facts.

A "pot.kettle.black" statement wouldn't do you justice since you're known for the exact same thing, but without introducing any facts.

Caligari · 10-09-2011, 06:34 AM

Well said! It should be pointed out that OWS was largely brought together by Adbusters Magazine which has been doing popular culture jamming for years.
Being a proponent of democratic capitalism I don't agree with everything they do, but they can be pretty amusing-

Quote:

Originally Posted by nation-x

I really don't understand this whole debate over whether or not OWS is grass roots or not. You can't have this type of thing go on without organization. The same thing occurred with the Tea Party. If you think that the Tea Party is a grass roots movement but OWS isn't then you are an idiot. They both had monied support and cooperative organization between many different groups.

Here is the central question... why is it that when one group protests something they don't agree with that they are hailed as legitimate but when another group does the same thing they are a mob and "ruckus rousers"?

We are all Americans... and whether or not you agree with one group or not... you should agree that all of the above mentioned groups have a RIGHT to express their frustration.

You show me a Marxist and I will show you an Ayn Rand fan... Show me a Christian and I will show you an Atheist. We are a large and diverse country and, whether or not you agree with someone else's view, each group has it's own legitimate claim.

From my perspective, I am tired of the dismissive nature of our national conversation. It exists purely for the purpose of division.

The Tea Party and conservative movement certainly has fringe elements... that doesn't mean that everything that the Tea Party or conservative movements represent is fringe.

OWS, labor, and all of these other liberal groups certainly have some fringe elements. That doesn't mean that everything they represent is fringe.

OWS largely represents the frustration of people who think that the government is controlled by monied interests and Wall Street represents a large part of that monied interest.

Their is actually, at it's base, a shared reason for existence for both the Tea Party movement (at it's beginning) and OWS. The only substantive difference is the proposed solution to that same problem.

In my view, the Tea Party is misguided because they think that the problem originates from the government. I say this is misguided because there is an entire industry dedicated to growing government and those are the very people who support their cause... and that industry isn't a political party. It is almost wholly supported by business interests. They write the great majority of legislation... they pump in the major money... they ARE the government.

Think about the groups behind each of these "grass roots" movements. Both sides have billionaire backers... however, the Tea Party is largely backed by corporate interests and lobbyists. The Tea Party Express, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks and a multitude of other organizations like them are all staffed by lobbyists and were founded with corporate money. Also, there is really nothing new about that movement other than the amount of money being invested in it. The message is the same and the purpose is the same all the way back to the early 1980s.

Liberal movements, for the most part, are rarely backed by corporations or lobbyists as primary players. They are typically backed, in large part, by labor unions or political groups. I don't see MSNBC organizing protest events... Fox News did. This is a simple example of the point.

The people that say there is no difference between the parties are partially correct. The constant common denominator is that Wall Street has an inordinate amount of influence over the government no matter who has been in control for the last 20+ years... ever since Don Regan was appointed as Treasury Secretary in 1981, Goldman Sachs has had large influence over the monetary policy of every administration. The list of Goldman Sachs executives who have been appointed to high level treasury and Fed positions is as long as your arm. The Obama administration is no different.

That is the basis of OWS.

Bill8 · 10-09-2011, 11:24 PM

Krugmans post on #occupy was pretty good...

Quote:

Occupy Wall Street is starting to look like an important event that might even eventually be seen as a turning point.

What can we say about the protests? First things first: The protesters? indictment of Wall Street as a destructive force, economically and politically, is completely right.

A weary cynicism, a belief that justice will never get served, has taken over much of our political debate ? and, yes, I myself have sometimes succumbed. In the process, it has been easy to forget just how outrageous the story of our economic woes really is. So, in case you?ve forgotten, it was a play in three acts.

In the first act, bankers took advantage of deregulation to run wild (and pay themselves princely sums), inflating huge bubbles through reckless lending. In the second act, the bubbles burst ? but bankers were bailed out by taxpayers, with remarkably few strings attached, even as ordinary workers continued to suffer the consequences of the bankers? sins. And, in the third act, bankers showed their gratitude by turning on the people who had saved them, throwing their support ? and the wealth they still possessed thanks to the bailouts ? behind politicians who promised to keep their taxes low and dismantle the mild regulations erected in the aftermath of the crisis.

Given this history, how can you not applaud the protesters for finally taking a stand?

Confronting the Malefactors

If thats behind a paywall go to google news and type is Confronting The Malefactors.

Quote:

And there are real political opportunities here. Not, of course, for today?s Republicans, who instinctively side with those Theodore Roosevelt-dubbed ?malefactors of great wealth.? Mitt Romney, for example ? who, by the way, probably pays less of his income in taxes than many middle-class Americans ? was quick to condemn the protests as ?class warfare.?

But Democrats are being given what amounts to a second chance. The Obama administration squandered a lot of potential good will early on by adopting banker-friendly policies that failed to deliver economic recovery even as bankers repaid the favor by turning on the president. Now, however, Mr. Obama?s party has a chance for a do-over. All it has to do is take these protests as seriously as they deserve to be taken.

And if the protests goad some politicians into doing what they should have been doing all along, Occupy Wall Street will have been a smashing success.

"Class warfare", oh yeah, I bet that will go over gangbusters in the election season. You guys should TOTALLY go with it. Sell it.

10-08-2011, 09:17 AM	#51
nation-x Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 5,370	I really don't understand this whole debate over whether or not OWS is grass roots or not. You can't have this type of thing go on without organization. The same thing occurred with the Tea Party. If you think that the Tea Party is a grass roots movement but OWS isn't then you are an idiot. They both had monied support and cooperative organization between many different groups. Here is the central question... why is it that when one group protests something they don't agree with that they are hailed as legitimate but when another group does the same thing they are a mob and "ruckus rousers"? We are all Americans... and whether or not you agree with one group or not... you should agree that all of the above mentioned groups have a RIGHT to express their frustration. You show me a Marxist and I will show you an Ayn Rand fan... Show me a Christian and I will show you an Atheist. We are a large and diverse country and, whether or not you agree with someone else's view, each group has it's own legitimate claim. From my perspective, I am tired of the dismissive nature of our national conversation. It exists purely for the purpose of division. The Tea Party and conservative movement certainly has fringe elements... that doesn't mean that everything that the Tea Party or conservative movements represent is fringe. OWS, labor, and all of these other liberal groups certainly have some fringe elements. That doesn't mean that everything they represent is fringe. OWS largely represents the frustration of people who think that the government is controlled by monied interests and Wall Street represents a large part of that monied interest. Their is actually, at it's base, a shared reason for existence for both the Tea Party movement (at it's beginning) and OWS. The only substantive difference is the proposed solution to that same problem. In my view, the Tea Party is misguided because they think that the problem originates from the government. I say this is misguided because there is an entire industry dedicated to growing government and those are the very people who support their cause... and that industry isn't a political party. It is almost wholly supported by business interests. They write the great majority of legislation... they pump in the major money... they ARE the government. Think about the groups behind each of these "grass roots" movements. Both sides have billionaire backers... however, the Tea Party is largely backed by corporate interests and lobbyists. The Tea Party Express, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks and a multitude of other organizations like them are all staffed by lobbyists and were founded with corporate money. Also, there is really nothing new about that movement other than the amount of money being invested in it. The message is the same and the purpose is the same all the way back to the early 1980s. Liberal movements, for the most part, are rarely backed by corporations or lobbyists as primary players. They are typically backed, in large part, by labor unions or political groups. I don't see MSNBC organizing protest events... Fox News did. This is a simple example of the point. The people that say there is no difference between the parties are partially correct. The constant common denominator is that Wall Street has an inordinate amount of influence over the government no matter who has been in control for the last 20+ years... ever since Don Regan was appointed as Treasury Secretary in 1981, Goldman Sachs has had large influence over the monetary policy of every administration. The list of Goldman Sachs executives who have been appointed to high level treasury and Fed positions is as long as your arm. The Obama administration is no different. That is the basis of OWS.

10-08-2011, 09:59 AM	#52
VikingMan Exploiting human weakness Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: next to a salmon stream Posts: 6,529	Yes the Tea Party is another example of of a cause/group that was hijacked.

10-08-2011, 06:00 PM	#58
BFT3K Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Narnia Posts: 10,764