Yup. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/06-LschF82o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Some of you guys obviously feel the same way my dad and Tricky Dick did back in the 70's... Progress lol
Even Republicans agree: OWS has changed the discussion! Treasury Secretary Who Led Deregulation Says Occupy Wall Street Has Highlighted Important Issues Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin is not considered an adversary of Big Finance, in either Washington or Wall Street. While he was in charge of the Treasury Department, he spearheaded the push for deregulating the financial sector, and he soon after took a job at Citigroup — which came into being thanks to deregulation — earning at least $15 million a year. Yet in an interview with Reuters’ Chrystia Freeland, even Rubin admitted that Occupy Wall Street has highlighted important issues for the country to be concerned about: Robert Rubin isn’t the only unlikely person to concede the importance of addressing income inequality in the wake of Occupy Wall Street. Even Ayn Rand fan Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is now seriously addressing income inequality.
Very interesting read and something that more people should do. I found this part particularly interesting. [rquoter]Tea party members said before the meeting that they didn't know what to expect, and that most of what they know about the Occupy Wall Street movement and its offshoots were from confrontations with police in New York and Oakland, Calif. Some said they were confused about the purpose of the Occupy movement because it has no leader and no consistent list of goals promoted by every Occupy group.[/rquoter] It shows first off how little a lot of people know about OWS movement and how much perceptions are just shaped by mainstream media. This was something that TEA Party frequently complained about. Also its ironic that the TEA Partiers are criticizing OWS for being a leaderless movement when many TEA Partiers have said that about their own movement and even cited that as a strength of that movement. It is still good advice though from the TEA Party that OWS needs to get people elected.
The perception of OWS is that are rioting vandals. This is due to their rap sheet, not the media. The media has tried to downplay the wave of crimes coming from OWS. The Tea Party was not treated the same. They have no rap sheet and they have existed for 2-3 years. The Tea Party pay for their events, clean up after themselves, get along with the police, and don't interfere with other citizens' lives. Why do you say it was a criticism? I didn't read it that way
What percentage of the movement is rioting vandals? There have been several incidences of violence involving the Tea Party and those who identify with them, such as the stomping of a woman by Rand Paul supporters. Many of those have been discussed here on CF.net. IN terms of paying for their events OWS has raised a lot of money that it uses to cover its expenses. Also while I can't say this for certain at other Occupy events but I saw first hand people at Occupy Minnesota cleaning up after themselves and others. "Confused by" is generally considered a criticism.
Anyway I think this is a good sign for Tea Party and the Occupy movement to try to find common ground. While agreement on everything is not going to happen if both movements can ally on a few key issues, such as corruption, the role of the Fed and etc.. we could get some real change.
100%. It's a requirement for supporting OWS, plus you have to either rape someone or defecate in public to enter any of their occupation sights. Haven't you learned anything about the movement yet?
eyeball test? 50% tea party: .00001% show me this tea party rap sheet over the past 2-3 year that contains 'several incidences of violence'. I don't see how that's possible since the number of Tea Partiers arrested is somewhere around 30 I think. OWS is tens of thousands in 2 months and thats with local government being way too lenient. What does that matter? The Tea Party doesn't make other non-Tea-Partiers foot the bill. OWS does. That was the point. Also, OWS has raised a ton of money, but it's all gonna have to go to legal fees. Of course they don't. Why do you think they are having to be booted out so their locales can be cleaned (again that cleaning bill goes to the tax payer and not OWS)? Rly? agree to disagree (sounds like a boring debate).
Can we stop with the idiotic comparison of tea party events to OWS? OWS are in a spot 24/7 for more than 2 months. The tea party get their guns out and march for a few hours, or go yell at a town hall some representative is having. To think the amount of garbage would be in anyway comparable is idiotic. One group stays in a locale for months, I don't think the other group has even stayed overnight. It's silly to even discuss it.
Or better yet Maybe discuss the issues OWS brings to the discussion instead of who's ****ting where or who’s ****ing whom. It really is mind blowing how afraid and just plain spooked the critics of OWS are. It's quite amusing. What are they afraid of? Why, instead of talking about income disparity or corporate hijacking of the democratic process, they would rather post stupid and out of context utubes? But really…I think we know why
You have every right to administer your own "eyeball" statistical analysis, but you are actually suggesting that one out of every two OWS mainstays is a criminal. You can hate on the movement all you want, but when you pull numbers out of your ass, it deserves exposing. I am not trying to convince you. I have learned not to waste my time on you. Clearly, you have your own bulletproof eyeball test which needs no verification. I am illustrating to the quiet, read only D&D observer who is actually trying to figure things out for themselves that you actually think that literally HALF of the movement is criminals who are destroying everything in their path just for the hell of it, simply because their ideas threaten your platforms and erodes at your precious status quo.
The thing is, as a result of OWS, people ARE talking about income disparity and corporate hijacking of the democratic process. Maybe some media outlets (Fox, right wing talk radio and websites) are doing their best to distract from it, but, as many have noted, OWS, whatever flaws it may be guilty of, has already changed the course of the conversation.
If you look at the Tea Party and OWS, the common ground is Populism. The disconnect is that the Tea Party people have been convinced the Elite are some liberal eggheads trying to tax good Americans into paying for bad Americans, though their Jesus might tell them to do exactly that. And, the OWS people think the Elite are the shadowy corporate/political alliance of PAC money that use a conservative social message as a red herring to elect a political slate that will enact their desired economic and regulatory policy. But the feeling that the common guy is getting screwed is growing. If the Tea Party can be convinced (over the screaming Tokyo Rose loud speakers of FAUX) that it's not the downtrodden or their civil servants that are doing it to them but the real, real big money and power, you might just have yourself a populist uprising. If not 2012, maybe 2014 and 2016 instead of a "no new taxes' purity pledge for Republicans, you might have a "no PAC money" pledge for any candidate. The Populist uprising will have eveyone asking about any candidate or issue commercial, "who paid for this?" and "what is their agenda" and for those organizations with the benign names but redacted donor lists, they will know, something's afoot here. I don't take this at face value, I don't believe it.
