"Why is that?"

Because you're just a hater who isn't interested in the answers. You want to side with the rich and police, good for you. What do you want from us? A cookie for sniffing the throne of the casino capitalists and their armed thugs who beat people up to defend their interests? Do you think your position takes some kind of courage or something? People risk their limbs to put pressure on the corporations while you sit and complain about those people. What do you gain out of your constant bitching about OWS? Do the big banks put food on your table or what? Do you get some kind of self-satisfaction with saying that 19 year old pregnant women get what's coming to them because they inconvenienced you in some way? I love how you rightwingers are so anti-state except when it comes to actual police repression and cracking skulls, then somehow you're the biggest fans of arbitrary police power.

Leif, do you actually think the banks and corporations should be reined in at all, or are you one of those rigthtists who actually believe this insanity that we're somehow "overregulated"?

Let's see what the "solutions" are of the complainers and OWS haters, since they're so "solution" focused.

"What is this "permanent democratic presence?" A replacement for the current broken system? Ok fine, what is this permanent democratic presence's purpose and goals and process to replace the broken system? Stand on a sidewalk (read: 'middle of a busy intersection') until people listen to you (while antagonizing police so they spray you with tear gas then claim police brutality)? Listen to what? That corporations are greedy? What do you propose to do about it? Create a permanent democratic presence? How? Stand on a sidewalk?"

Do you actually think before you speak? Am I really supposed to take these snide questions seriously? Do you actually know anything about what you're talking about? Do you know anything about the general assemblies that collectively make decisions? Do you know anything about the occupiers organization of healthcare and other needs for the people participating? You think this is just about standing on sidewalks eh? Why don't you do some research before you spout off nonsense in order to mock people who are investing a lot of effort in trying to make our lives a little fucking better, instead of being a cynical clown who does nothing but mock people and does nothing productive.

The permanent democratic presence is a botton-up system in which ordinary people can participate and make decisions about what goes in their lives, without delegating that power to the super-rich to do it for them. It's direct democracy. You might think it's silly, good thing none of the occupiers give a shit about what cynics like you believe. You're not proposing jack as a solution to our problems. You're just there to tell everybody else they're doing it wrong. Why don't you get involved and tell the occupiers who have sat through all sorts of weather and police raids and random pepper spray and bean bag guns and rubber bullets that you have a better idea, since you're so smart?

"There's true unadulterated justice for you.. Let's just all take what we want from whomever we want because we think we deserve it more than they do.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the proposed fix/replacement/process/goal is..."

Stop pretending you actually give a shit about the answers. You think it's "justice" for the richest to get even richer while the rest of us have our living standards decline. You think it's "justice" for corporrations to steal people's pension funds and invest them in casino bets. You think that the real thieves are ordinary people saying the income inequality will turn us into a banana republic and that the optimal marginal tax rate should not be at a record low, instead of the corporations who steal our public lands and profit off public money and tax loopholes while contributing nothing to the community who they were given a charter to enhance. You do realize that corporations exist for the purpose of public interest, right? That's what they're there for. Not just to grab the protections of legal personhood and the 14th amendment. They're actually expected to contribute to the civilization they get rich off of instead of just being a parasitical leech that takes, takes, and takes while giving nothing back.

It takes a real winner to think a little leveling of the playing field is this grave crime against poor oppressed corporations. You must feel good about yourself.

http://articles.philly.com/2011-11-04/news/30359911_1_drunken-driving-case-open-and-shut-case-testimony

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20111104/NEWS01/311040074/Attorney-says-woman-shot-by-constable-outside-Walmart-not-shoplifter

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/11/03/41176.htm

No matter how much police brutality exists, those "limited" government heroes will always defend the skull cracking. For the obvious reason that rightwing protest movements are never touched. I wish police would crack the skulls of the tea party terrorists for once.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yStiufMfIl0&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdxMjjTu44s&feature=player_embedded

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-police-involved-shootings-1023-20111022,0,2860489,full.story

and those are just the last 2 weeks

Why does Babak have zero points? I thought he had over 20K.

@ Putin

You have no clue what I do with my time, money, and passion, so lay off the personal attack. I have gained a fair bit of respect for Sicaruis in this thread and through my recent PM's with him (still don't agree with him, but I've gained respect for him), however you have yet again shown me you prefer contention for the sake of contention.

I've stated previously that I don't support any corporation (eg, GE, GM, Wells Fargo, etc.) sucking the government tit. I don't deny that there is corruption and greed, but this isn't limited to corporations, but is entrenched in every level of the government. More government is only going to worsen the problem.

You ask for my solution?

I am in favor of a power structure that is flipped from the current structure. Power should reside with the people, who entrust a portion of their power to a local governments who then entrust a small portion of their power to the state government who then entrusts a small portion of that power to the federal government. Local communities would then have the biggest say against corporations like Walmart coming into their town and ruining the small businesses that were the lifeblood of the town. Local communities know the issues that affect themselves whereas the federal government doesn't. In issues where multiple local communities are affected or multiple states, the state or federal government would be called upon to address the issue, but with limited temporary power to address that issue only because the local communities have banded together to temporarily empower the state or federal government. When the issue is addressed or the crisis is over, the local community retracts the power from the state or federal government as it was only a temporary loan to deal with the issue.

Corruption is easier to identify and weed out, response to issues is much quicker and much more tailored to local needs.

In once sense I think the civil war for the sake of preserving the Union was a terrible power shift from the states to the federal government. I think this was a mistake and should be reversed. This is why I champion less government. I am for reducing the power of the federal government and putting the fate of local communities back in their hands.

So when I advocate reducing the power of the federal government I am not seeking to create a void where greedy power seekers can run roughshod over anyone they want. I am seeking a shift in power.

I will condemn anyone who throws liquid at a cop, or attacks the cops with a stick, be it tea party or OWS.

I will condemn anyone who denys the use of public resources to further their protest agenda, be it tea party or OWS.

The right to assemble and the right to free speech are invaluable rights that should be defended and I will condemn any government or police officer who infringes on these rights, but I do not support the usurped (and not constitutionally granted) "supposed" right to deny the use of public resources.

I've been amongst the occupy wall street crowd in my city and tried to ask those leading it what the purpose of the "permanent democratic presence" and got the usual drivel about showing solidarity against the corporate pigs that ruin people's lives. Completely impotent and ineffective at "accomplishing" any "goals" to "reform" the "corrupt system".

I support the rule of law, because without the rule of law justice is meaningless. This is where Sicarius and I seem to disagree.

As far as supporting the rich...? Well I probably count as 'rich' in the eyes of the OWS crowd simply because I am an electrical engineer and will probably make six figures at some point in my life.

I support hard work, self advancement, and compassion for my fellow man. I condemn laziness, financial irresponsibility, and entitlement.
If you are rich and greedy, poor and lazy, financially irresponsible (rich or poor), or you feel you somehow deserve my money because I have it and you don't and that's just not fair, despite the fact that you haven't worked an honest hour in your life, then I have little sympathy for you.

If you are poor and hardworking, or rich and hardworking, if circumstances have blessed you or been rather harsh for you, yet you still value hard work, self-improvement, and are a compassionate and generous individual, then you have my utmost respect, irregardless of economic status.

My wife is a teacher at a local public school in an extremely low income neighborhood. There is a mom at this school who is president of the PTA. She has the worst attitude at the school when it comes to parents investing in their kids education. She blames every teacher her kids have had for her kids poor academics, has attempted to get multiple teachers fired (and has succeeded in one case), attempts to organize the other parents against the teachers and the school every chance she gets, and complains vehmently any time the school asks parents to contribute anything whining about how she is on welfare and can't afford it. However, she lives with her boyfriend (the kids father) who has a rather decent job making 80k a year and pays for everything for her and the kids. The kids are the best dressed in the school and are never lacking anything. Yet the parents have never gotten married so that she can get a welfare check (on top of everything the father makes). This is despicable to me that this mom has done no real work in her life, and rips on teachers making at best half of what her husband makes and tries to get them fired for "doing a bad job" when she refuses to put forth any effort herself.

Meanwhile, another family at the school just had their mobile home burn down, had to move their kids to another school, work 4 jobs between the two parents, the kids were filthy and poorly dressed, and they were the most generous kids in the school, sharing what little they had with their friends, and the parents were as supportive as they could be about their kids education. Sure the kids had problems and were low on their academics, but there wasn't a teacher in the school who didn't try to invest a little extra in these kids and encourage the parents. Probably not the case anymore since they are homeless now, but because of a some technicallity this family didn't even qualify for food stamps when they were at my wife's school. Because their house burned down, the family has had to pull the kids out of that school and send them to a different one because they no longer live in the district.

So individuals just like corporations can game the system and it's not limited to economic status. There are those at the bottom trying to game the system just as there are those at the top who are successfully gaming the system. There are those at the bottom who work hard but haven't yet been successful, and there are those at the top riding the wave of success because of their hard work.

I utterly reject the class divide between rich and poor because I don't see such a divide causing the problems. I see a divide between honest and dishonest, greedy and compassionate individuals. Those who are dishonest at the top have the most visible impact, while those at the bottom who are honest are the most impacted but this in no way makes all at the top evil and all who are poor somehow innocent and righteous.

Thus any organization, movement, or policy that operates under this premise I reject as starting from a false premise.

So don't talk to me about rich vs poor. Let's talk instead about greed vs compassion and justice.

"I will condemn anyone who throws liquid at a cop, or attacks the cops with a stick, be it tea party or OWS."

But its fine when they hit us with sticks? because we're "blocking sidewalks" etc

@ leif, if you have a question (for ows) then you must be prepared to help answer it. that is the whole point. everyone has to work together.

@Sic -- you aren't getting hit with sticks for "blocking the sidewalks" moron. You are getting hit with sticks for BREAKING THE LAW and defying a LEGAL ORDER by a police officer. If you want to *personally* believe in anarachy, go for it. Don't call the cops when you get attacked, mugged, robbed, etc. Don't complain when corporations steal your wealth...because you don't believe in a central authority to correct yor problems for you. But in the mean time, you DO live in a country of LAWS...and when people violate the law ***99%** of the people DO want laws enforced.

You do not live in the reality that 99% of us live in. You live in a fantasy world of your own creation that you actually think can come into existence if y ou stand in defiance of the law that 99% of us support. Your cause is lost before it begins.

As for "OWS"....NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY owes that so-called movement an answer. it does *NOT* speak for 99% of anything. It's primarily a bunch of spoiled, privileged, early-20's white males....hardly a representative demographic of the nation. The movement - despite press coverage - in *miniscule* in numbers compared to other movements in the past (both Tea party AND other "Liberal" movements). They don't have much public support from anyone, in truth. One of the reason is they have no issues, they have no leader. All they have is whining and complaining, but never any publicly expressed SOLUTIONS. therefore, nobody owes them any answers...and, in truth, there is nothing to answer them about.

Kids like you get swooped up into the emotional aspect of such things, the "historic" moment (sigh....makes your heart flutter to think about the possible change....)...without having the maturity to realize that the movement is a fraud.

Compare it to the Tea Party movement, which - whether you agree with the Tea Party or not - has generally been a well-organized while (ironically) being a bunch of loosely connected organizations. No central leadership, and yet strong voices have come forth and made fairly specific demands upon the government regarding tax policy and such.

In order to makes their demands known, Tea Party activists have had many, many public events, in which there is no violence, no confrontation with police, but instead an attempt to create change within the confines of the established, agreed upon legal system.

They did so...they brought in to office a great number of Freshman representatives that have *changed* the status quo in Washington DC. The Obama agenda was brought to a screeching halt by the Tea Party movement...when the major media said they were a joke before the last election results.

This idea that the only way to create change is to be bums in a park shouting and screaming between bong hits, turning a blind eye to sexual assualt and violence amidst your camp, if laughable at best....pathetic at worst.

There *may* have been a brief moment where OWS caught the eye of the nation. By now, it has become a joke. When the cops come through an sweep these camps away, the people watch it at home on their TV's and say "It's about time..." because all the average American sees is a bunch of spoiled rich white kids pretending to be radicals.

Ever ask yourself how a bunch of people proclaiming to be disenfranchised by the system are able to sleep in a park for 6, 8 weeks, and yet still have enough money to EAT, pay their expensive cell phone bills, buy the drugs they need to keep going?

Never been a point in my life where I had the financial freedom to be so irresponsible. And that is perhaps the biggest joke of the whole movement: The whiny bitches sleeping in the park should be hating *themselves*....and thus, by the audacity of their flagrant hypocrisy, nobody owns them JACK shit....because apparently these kids already have more than most of us.

Sounds like you've got Stockholm Syndrome, krellin.

No, I live in reality. By your interpretation, the few bullies in school would set school policy, because that is what the OWS movement is: Bullies. They are attempted to use obnoxiousness and violence at times (Oakland) to get what they want (ie. other people's wealth...i.e. GREED).

Clearly you did not read what i wrote. I am not an advocate of the Federal government as it currently functions. THAT is why I pointed out that there *IS* a viable political movement in this country that SUCCEEDED in replacing Washington insiders with a large number of Freshman candidates that put a stop to the Federal government's agenda.

I am all for change in the government. But when I back change, I like to know *exactly* what it is people want to change, and HOW they want to change it. As I have repeated in these threads over and over again, OWS has made NO specific demands.

Stockholmn syndrome? No...I'm just not *stupid* enough to blindly follow a bunch of rich white males pretending to be radicals who's major accomplishment to date seems to be to fill the press with stories of drug use, rape, various violent assualts, theft, a few deaths....but nowhere do I see a list of concise demands and specific actions for people to take. If YOU are stupid enough to think that is a legitimate movement, then I pity you.

As for me, I will stick to thing that resemble the functional, civil and EFFECTIVE Tea Party movement. I am NOT advocating Tea Party policy in this thread, by the way...I am simply saying that they have an EFFECTIVE way of promoting their specific agenda and did so successfully even in the face of *withering* attacks from the mainstream press. OWS is a joke...and a bad one at that.

Clearly the Federal Government can not continue on it's current path - but NOT supporting the fools in OWS doesn't make me a lapdog of the government. That is simply idiotic to suggest. Maybe you need to return to civics class and maybe even read the Constitution. The beauty of this country is that is can and does change without the need for violence when the people decide to make their voice heard in elections. The beauty of the Constitution is that is imposes a slow pace upon that change, such that the country does not blow too and fro with the winds of mob rule.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45374977/ns/us_news-life/#.Tsll92PNltM

Spin that one, fascists.

"I'm just not *stupid* enough to blindly follow a bunch of rich white males"

You're the same guy who whines about class warfare and ridicules black people for being drug addicts and criminals, right? You're the same guy who defends super-rich corporations and big tax cuts for the mega-wealthy right? Thought so. The idea that OWS is full of "rich white males" is par for the stupid course we have come to expect from Krellin. I guess he has front row seat from his couch in the living room.

This video doesn't know what the fuck a corporation, CEO bonus or a bailout means.

"a bunch of rich white males pretending to be radicals"

"Compare it to the Tea Party movement"

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/11/03/360433/romney-koch-tea-party/

All of the Tea Partiers I know have nothing but contempt for the Republican apparatchiks who are trying to steer the movement. Romney, in fact, is the *least* favorite of all the Republican candidates among the Tea Party crowd (except for the sizable minority of Mormons in the republican party in my county and elsewhere). The Tea Party is a rebellion against the Republican establishment, just like the OWS is (in part) a rebellion against the Democratic establishment.

The fact that the Kochtopus and Bain Capital partner Mitt Romney are throwing a tea party party/campaign rally doesn't mean a whole lot to tea partiers in general, many of whom will be sitting out the election if Romney is the nominee.

"Sounds like you've got Stockholm Syndrome, krellin. "

lol...yep.

@Sic -- The Tea party movement never claied to be radical. They never claimed to speak for 99% of the people. They gathered together with like-minded people and spoke for themselves. Then they found candidates that agreed with them and supported them through the PRIMARIES and then the election.

Tolstoy has it exactly right: The Tea Party by no means backs establishment, flip-flopping candidates like Romney. Romney's poll number jumped up to mid-20's in the beginning, and have never moved since. he only has the backing of party insiders who like his moderate views on a few topics, and believe he is electable. The Tea party candidates are most likely the ones that are moving from candidate to candidate in the polls, trying to figure out who stands for what so they can find a candidate to back that most closely meets their objectives.

Compare this to OWS....a bunch of people sleeping in tents bitching....but not offering solutions. A bunch of people storming through the streets of Oakland, CA. A bunch of people that can't even police themselves, but stand by as people use and abuse drugs in their midst; stand by and allow sexual assualts in their midst; there was a reported case of child sex-trafficing in one camp; there has been theft and assualt rampant...not reported by the mainstream media...but if you read local press, you will find these stories. THIS is the face of OWS to many. It is by no means a legitimate movement.

I will note that you consistently FAIL to ever direct me to any specific *SOLUTIONS* that are put forth by OWS. Just like our previous private discussions, you are swayed by emotional nonsense, without having anything to back it up. Oh sure...if you are a young person OWS is "cool"...it's our modern day revolution, blah blah blah...when in truth it is nothing. It has no identifiable objective. NONE.

As for Darwyn....Do you even know what the phrase means? if so....please define for us, and then please tell me how I represent. Again...perhaps you (as are many others) are too ignorant, too uneducated to read...but I have stated that 1. I do not agree with the Federal Government as it currently functions 2. Agree with the need for change...but will not *blindly* back some notion of change that is not specifically identified by those calling for said change, and 3. Pointed to an organization that has successfully workied within the confines of the Constitutional process to bring about change. I have also stated that change in the United States, per the Constitution, is *necessarily* a slow process -- but can bring about a bloodless revolution -- and is slow intentionally so that the nation does not turn on it's head overnight with the random winds of mob rule...such as you see in Egypt where we now have what? BLOOD in the streets...because Mobacracy is never very effective at creating a stable government, because where force is used to bring about change,you therefore need force to keep said change in place.

I pity you for being just another ignorant memeber of the mob, Darwyn, jumping on the insult band-wagon against me without even having the intellect to understand what you are supporting.

Ugh yeah. The tea party movement just wants to completely fuck poor people over, leaving thousands in abject poverty for the benefit of the rich, while clawing back against programs to assist the disadvantaged and elderly, and make moves to set back the civil rights movement, feminism, LGBT rights and just about any other minority you care to name. At least they never sunk so low as to claim that their aims were to help people other than themselves. *sarcasm*