Who are the protesters behind Occupy Wall Street–and what do they want?

[bbarrick8383]

The same election where Gore won the popular vote and the SCOTUS chose the POTUS strictly along a party line vote 5-4 with Republicans in control of the SCOTUS.

If you don’t like government taking control then don’t vote for candidates that ignore the rules.

 

[CMatt25]

That’s easy. Join the tea party movement if you are truly against the corporatist agenda

The Tea Party is too conservative for most Americans. Polls have shown Tea Party favorability among the American people has dropped.

What I think some here are missing is the “Occupy” movement is not limited to the left. It has the potential to grow into the center as well. Even folks in the center are fed up with growing corporate influence in our elections and politics. And while I know it is not a popular concept here, many are also fed up with the vastly growing disparity of income taking place in the US. Where the rich get richer and the middle class and poor get poorer. And I also know it is not a popular concept here either. But many Americans as we wrestle with our budget, also support a tax increase on the very wealthiest of Amercans who have benefited the most from this economy.

 

[bellasbane]

Yes it is his acronym, and what indeed you are trying to do is smear conservatism as something out of the far right and racism.

I am not trying to smear conservatism. You are conflating my critique of the tactics being used by the Republican Party on this issue with a critique of conservatism in general.

You started the mockery - even if every shred of evidence I presented had no merit, the seriousness of the issue does not invite mockery - but the evidence does have merit and people should take it seriously.

 

[bellasbane]

The Tea Party is too conservative for most Americans. Polls have shown Tea Party favorability among the American people has dropped.

What I think some here are missing is the “Occupy” movement is not limited to the left. It has the potential to grow into the center as well. Even folks in the center are fed up with growing corporate influence in our elections and politics. And while I know it is not a popular concept here, many are also fed up with the vastly growing disparity of income taking place in the US. Where the rich get richer and the middle class and poor get poorer. And I also know it is not a popular concept here either. But many Americans as we wrestle with our budget, also support a tax increase on the very wealthiest of Amercans who have benefited the most from this economy.

Well said!

 

[He_Man]

The Tea Party is too conservative for most Americans. Polls have shown Tea Party favorability among the American people has dropped.

What I think some here are missing is the “Occupy” movement is not limited to the left. It has the potential to grow into the center as well. Even folks in the center are fed up with growing corporate influence in our elections and politics. And while I know it is not a popular concept here, many are also fed up with the vastly growing disparity of income taking place in the US. Where the rich get richer and the middle class and poor get poorer. And I also know it is not a popular concept here either. But many Americans as we wrestle with our budget, also support a tax increase on the very wealthiest of Amercans who have benefited the most from this economy.

You’re joking, right? So the Tea Party is too conservative for mass appeal, and yet you think the Occupy folks have a real chance and reaching the average moderate American? ave you seen them? Heard their vapid responses to basic quesyions? They carry placards decrying capitalism, but their issue is actually corporate influence and crony copitalism. And they march on wall Street, as though Wall Street cares. They should be in DC if they actually want to affect change. For many of them it appears to simply be a chance to make themselves feel important.

 

[louis91766]

Scott, perhaps we need more than 2 major parties.

I agree with that.
Except for Ron Paul, the Republicans are the party for a bigger war machine and more spending on the military. One thousand overseas US bases means billions of dollars wasted. And the Democrats are not far behind and of course they are weak in certain areas such as homosexual marriage and abortion. They both supported billions and billions of dollars for the bailout of wall street, when these blood suckers on wall street were giving themselves million dollar bonuses. People on wall street want capitalism, except for themselves when they want the federal government to bail them out.
And Hillary goes around telling Syria and other countries that people in those countries should have the right to protest, but I haven’t heard anything from her about pepper spraying American citizens who are opposed to the use of drones to kill people. I believe that the use of these drones to kill people is basically immoral and unethical. you have someone sitting in front of a computer screen, thousands of miles away, targetting people in a foreign country. And these people are absolutely helpless. there is no defense against the enemy drone. There is no way for them to fight back against the foreign aggressor who has targeted them in their country. This will only build up more hatred against the USA and will hurt the USA in the long run as Americans will be seen as cowards sitting behind computer screens thousands of miles away, killing people who have absolutely no defense against them.
The time has come for a third party which basically supports the foreign policy agenda of Ron Paul, but is more merciful at home to those who cannot find work and are having a difficult time making ends meet. And of course, we need a party which supports family values.

 

[bbarrick8383]

I agree with that.
Except for Ron Paul, the Republicans are the party for a bigger war machine and more spending on the military. One thousand overseas US bases means billions of dollars wasted. And the Democrats are not far behind and of course they are weak in certain areas such as homosexual marriage and abortion. They both supported billions and billions of dollars for the bailout of wall street, when these blood suckers on wall street were giving themselves million dollar bonuses. People on wall street want capitalism, except for themselves when they want the federal government to bail them out.
And Hillary goes around telling Syria and other countries that people in those countries should have the right to protest, but I haven’t heard anything from her about pepper spraying American citizens who are opposed to the use of drones to kill people. I believe that the use of these drones to kill people is basically immoral and unethical. you have someone sitting in front of a computer screen, thousands of miles away, targetting people in a foreign country. And these people are absolutely helpless. there is no defense against the enemy drone. There is no way for them to fight back against the foreign aggressor who has targeted them in their country. This will only build up more hatred against the USA and will hurt the USA in the long run as Americans will be seen as cowards sitting behind computer screens thousands of miles away, killing people who have absolutely no defense against them.
The time has come for a third party which basically supports the foreign policy agenda of Ron Paul, but is more merciful at home to those who cannot find work and are having a difficult time making ends meet. And of course, we need a party which supports family values.

So you would rather send a squad of soldiers in to kill these thugs? I would think that if you wanted to take out someone whose planning to kill you, you wouldn’t want them to have a defense to repel your attack.

I guess we should cut out snipers, bombs and missiles and just send our guys in hoping they can beat them in a fist fight.

 

[CMatt25]

You’re joking, right? So the Tea Party is too conservative for mass appeal, and yet you think the Occupy folks have a real chance and reaching the average moderate American?

No. Yes.

 

[Raskolnikov]

So you would rather send a squad of soldiers in to kill these thugs? I would think that if you wanted to take out someone whose planning to kill you, you wouldn’t want them to have a defense to repel your attack.

I guess we should cut out snipers, bombs and missiles and just send our guys in hoping they can beat them in a fist fight.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be sending them at all, especially when (if youa re referring to the Iraw and Afghanistan wars) it doesn’t workm all that well. I don’t know how so many people honestly believe that if we don’t spend so many hundreds of billions of dollars every year on the military the world will implode.

Seriously, your attitude is exactly like that of the most left-wing “nanny-statist.” If we just spend more, more more, then the world will be safer. You probably couldn’t even say what they’re spending the money on or why it’s necessary, just spend more. Why do wee need a dozen Cold War era nuclear subarines partolling the seas at all times now that the Cold War has been over for 20 years? Why do we need to keep manufacturing models of ships, tanks, and other vessels by the thousands that have proven remarkably unimpressive in modern warfare? Really, how does pouring money down the toilet make the world safer?

 

[bbarrick8383]

Perhaps we shouldn’t be sending them at all, especially when (if youa re referring to the Iraw and Afghanistan wars) it doesn’t workm all that well. I don’t know how so many people honestly believe that if we don’t spend so many hundreds of billions of dollars every year on the military the world will implode.

Seriously, your attitude is exactly like that of the most left-wing “nanny-statist.” If we just spend more, more more, then the world will be safer. You probably couldn’t even say what they’re spending the money on or why it’s necessary, just spend more. Why do wee need a dozen Cold War era nuclear subarines partolling the seas at all times now that the Cold War has been over for 20 years? Why do we need to keep manufacturing models of ships, tanks, and other vessels by the thousands that have proven remarkably unimpressive in modern warfare? Really, how does pouring money down the toilet make the world safer?

No I do not advocate any of that. I just don’t like hypocrites who don’t want to send troops to do the fighting but complain when the killing is done by these drones. I’d love to bring the troops home and put them down on the border instead. But we have to deal with the here and now.

 

[wayman]

The Wall Street protest is another way to shift the blame away from Obama just like how before that Bush was always blamed. Now that blaming bush has gotten old, the liberal media has created a new bad guy. It’s distraction and political smoke and mirrors. It’s all an act, that’s why there are actors involved.

 

[Pirate_Talker]

Perhaps we shouldn’t be sending them at all, especially when (if youa re referring to the Iraw and Afghanistan wars) it doesn’t workm all that well. I don’t know how so many people honestly believe that if we don’t spend so many hundreds of billions of dollars every year on the military the world will implode.

Seriously, your attitude is exactly like that of the most left-wing “nanny-statist.” If we just spend more, more more, then the world will be safer. You probably couldn’t even say what they’re spending the money on or why it’s necessary, just spend more. Why do wee need a dozen Cold War era nuclear subarines partolling the seas at all times now that the Cold War has been over for 20 years? Why do we need to keep manufacturing models of ships, tanks, and other vessels by the thousands that have proven remarkably unimpressive in modern warfare? Really, how does pouring money down the toilet make the world safer?

It certainly doesn’t make the world safer but it makes the manufacturers of these items happier and that’s what it’s all about. Cheney would know something about that.

 

[louis91766]

So you would rather send a squad of soldiers in to kill these thugs? I would think that if you wanted to take out someone whose planning to kill you, you wouldn’t want them to have a defense to repel your attack.

I guess we should cut out snipers, bombs and missiles and just send our guys in hoping they can beat them in a fist fight.

I advocate pulling out all troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, not continuing war there. And I advocate closing down most of the one thousand overseas bases abroad. Basically I support the foreign policy agenda of Ron Paul.
As far as drones are concerned, i believe that it is immoral and unethical to use them for reasons given above. Hillary tells Syria and other countries that they should allow peaceful protest, but she is silent when Americans who oppose the use of drones are pepper sprayed.

 

[Raskolnikov]

No I do not advocate any of that. I just don’t like hypocrites who don’t want to send troops to do the fighting but complain when the killing is done by these drones. I’d love to bring the troops home and put them down on the border instead. But we have to deal with the here and now.

Well, nobody should have to do the killing, neither drones nor troops, as it appears to have created more problems than it has solved. But I don’t see how criticism of the drones can be solely motivated by hypocrisy. Drones have a reputation for killing civilians in tremendous numbers. It seems every couple months 70 or 80 Pakistani or Afghan civilians are killed either as collateral damage or just from a badly aimed missile (that any wonders why some people hate us so much is beyond me). If someone were to say, “well, should we send 300,000 troops off to an adventurist war?” Answer: “God no!” “Ok, then we’ll just nuke them and kill a couple hundred thousand civilians?” Answer: “Not that either!” “Hypocrit!” This being a hyperbole for the supposed dilemma between troops and drones.

It goes far beyond drones of course. One could got through the list of military expenditures the same way as any other large bureaucratic strucuture and find huge sums of unnecsessary, unconstructive spending. More so in fact, as it has grown at a rate that exceeds all others. Why then is it given exceptional status by the same people who claim to be the most anti-spending?

 

[Gift_from_God]

The Tea Party is too conservative for most Americans. Polls have shown Tea Party favorability among the American people has dropped.

What I think some here are missing is the “Occupy” movement is not limited to the left. It has the potential to grow into the center as well. Even folks in the center are fed up with growing corporate influence in our elections and politics. And while I know it is not a popular concept here, many are also fed up with the vastly growing disparity of income taking place in the US. Where the rich get richer and the middle class and poor get poorer. And I also know it is not a popular concept here either. But many Americans as we wrestle with our budget, also support a tax increase on the very wealthiest of Amercans who have benefited the most from this economy.

Well said

 

[bbarrick8383]

I advocate pulling out all troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, not continuing war there. And I advocate closing down most of the one thousand overseas bases abroad. Basically I support the foreign policy agenda of Ron Paul.
As far as drones are concerned, i believe that it is immoral and unethical to use them for reasons given above. Hillary tells Syria and other countries that they should allow peaceful protest, but she is silent when Americans who oppose the use of drones are pepper sprayed.

Yea, I get the Ron Paul foreign policy as I have similar views.

I find your views on the use of drones rather odd…considering it’s a weapon of war and in relation to other weapons of war it actually can save lives.

 

[louis91766]

Yea, I get the Ron Paul foreign policy as I have similar views.

I find your views on the use of drones rather odd…considering it’s a weapon of war and in relation to other weapons of war it actually can save lives.

“It’s not the efficiency of predator drones that bothers me but the uncertainty of the identity of the actual targets and the collateral damage they cause. Predator drones are deadly [click here], but my concern is with whether their use is moral, especially when consideration is given to the political context involved. How many wedding parties are we going to take out because a drone saw group behavior that it had been programmed to hit? How often do we have sufficient information to know that we are actually targeting insurgents, not innocents? A recent report, “Over 700 killed in 44 drone strikes in 2009,” for example, has calculated that 140 innocents are being killed for every “insurgent”.”
Seeredator Drones: The Immoral Use of Autonomous Machines
opednews.com/articles/Predator-Drones-The-Immor-by-Jim-Fetzer-100316-892.html

 

[bbarrick8383]

It goes far beyond drones of course. One could got through the list of military expenditures the same way as any other large bureaucratic strucuture and find huge sums of unnecsessary, unconstructive spending. More so in fact, as it has grown at a rate that exceeds all others. Why then is it given exceptional status by the same people who claim to be the most anti-spending?

I’m all with you on cutting wasteful spending in the defense budget. In any part of the budget, but the military is constitutional. It should be a main focus of our central government, not my retirement. and any weapon they can develop that saves the lives of soldiers I’m all for it.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

I’m sorry, but I find it awfully hard to work up any sympathy for these kids. Have you read any of their “demands”?

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/7637/1317611501365.jpg

Oh, so she only gets $15.00 an hour. Boo-hoo, cry me a river. The last time I even approached $12.00 an hour was ten years ago, and I was happy to get that. What, did she think she was entitled to a $250,000.00 a year job straight out of college? She never heard of entry-level?

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/6402/1317609463971.jpg

What can I say? Maybe if she learned how to spell, she might actually find a job. Quick tip, sweetheart: “I before E except after C”.

Granted some of the complaints are legitimate, and I can certainly understand the anger and the bitterness, but Wall Street is not the enemy here: the politicians are. If Washington would get the hell out of the way and stop putting the squeeze on small business and the middle class, then the economy would start to grow, wages would rise, and there would be more employment.

Everybody is hurting right now. But as long as Obama stays in office, it’s not going to get any better. And he’s spreading his usual pack of baloney about how it’s the rich who are the problem. Guess what, kids? It wasn’t the rich who are passing things like Obamacare, making small employers refuse to hire any more people because they just simply cannot afford it. And that’s only one example.

For more examples, go here: wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/

She doesn’t look like she’s over 18.

 

[louis91766]

I’m all with you on cutting wasteful spending in the defense budget. In any part of the budget, but the military is constitutional. It should be a main focus of our central government, not my retirement. and any weapon they can develop that saves the lives of soldiers I’m all for it.

But if the weapon is immoral, then i would say that it should not be used.