Spaceman Hobbes Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I think Obama should start using some version of a line that goes something like "Remember folks, it wasn't 'yes I can' it was 'yes we can.'I'm pretty sure our end of the bargain was to get out and vote for him and his friends. That's happened in 08. He blew all his political capital passing one social program, one that seems to piss everyone off, and hasn't done jack shit in regard to economic reform. That's the entire point behind the protest. Voters(in this case on the left, but the early tea party would quality as well IMO) feel that regardless of how they vote Wallstreet runs Washington. FLOW talked about how the protesters came across as uninformed and lacking real demands and solutions. Last time I checked our entire political system, ie representative democracy, is based on the idea that we vote for the person who best represents our interests, because most of us are uninformed and lack real solutions. Instead we have a system where two groups hold almost identical opinions who represent the interests of their biggest campaign contributors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atreides Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 More war, more debt, less privacy, more whistleblower prosecutions (Bradley Manning has been imprisoned for more than a year without trial now!), more assassinations, more Goldman Sachs execs in treasury, more crackdowns on medical cannabis. Can't wait!Yet it beats what the GOP would deliver. While I see the viewpoint that it doesn't help to vote for someone bad, I feel that it hurts worse to let the even worse candidate win. Obama>Perry, Cain, and maybe Romney depending on what Romney would actually do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Hobbes Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Yet it beats what the GOP would deliver. While I see the viewpoint that it doesn't help to vote for someone bad, I feel that it hurts worse to let the even worse candidate win. Obama>Perry, Cain, and maybe Romney depending on what Romney would actually do.Romney would sit on his thumbs for 4 years because if we got Gov. of Mass. Romney the GOP would march on the Whitehouse. I think I just decided to become an advocate of 1 term limits on the presidency... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 No shit. Obama is a liar and a failure. He promised to end the wars and they are still being fought. Nothing else matters. I thought he promised he would escalate in Afghanistan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Yet it beats what the GOP would deliver. I can tell you exactly what the GOP would deliver. Are you ready? More war, more debt, less privacy, more whistleblower prosecutions (Bradley Manning has been imprisoned for more than a year without trial now!), more assassinations, more Goldman Sachs execs in treasury, more crackdowns on medical cannabis. Can't wait! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Yes, because the end results of a Democrat occupying the White House are the same as when a Republican occupies the White House. *nods* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mor2 Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 .... even if true, so what?just pointing out the unfairness... or do we still blaming the rich and whining about losing faith in the government, hoping for some magical solutions? anyway, I'd like to point out the obvious, that there is no "state", rich or that working class mentioned before, there is lower,middle and upper class(which is like the poverty line are relative). the lower class that pays nothing and whines the most about what they should get for their money, the magical upper class and the middle class, that most of us belong to and that pays most of the direct taxation income of the country. now with life expectancy going up(which is not exactly true, since we are not as much healthier as we are able to extend our life with expansive medicine) we live longer and it cost more to the "state" than they predicated and taxed you for, so instead of living on money that was put aside for you, you living on the "state" expanse. (obviously we also have the lower class, that payed no taxes or lived on welfare and will continue todo so on the "state" expanse). so as long as there is no solution, we the middle class pay for it. same with your(I thin it was you) solution for health care, it's about the best healthcare we can tax the "state" to pay for it self and the lower class. Most who see the Estate Tax as some sort of panecea tend to forget the necessary second half of that particular government power to take from individuals.the power of the majority who wants more, to rob those who have more ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrackerNeil Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 No shit. Obama is a liar and a failure. He promised to end the wars and they are still being fought. Nothing else matters. Nothing? At all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just a peasant Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 We are doomed no matter what party is in power. We need to start all over again. Fresh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 FLOW talked about how the protesters came across as uninformed and lacking real demands and solutions. That doesn't affect their right to protest. But shouldn't it affect how I judge the content of what they're saying? Last time I checked our entire political system, ie representative democracy, is based on the idea that we vote for the person who best represents our interests, because most of us are uninformed and lack real solutions. I don't think that's quite correct. As voters, we don't have the time to be acquainted with the nuances of every piece of legislation, so we elect people to represent us. But at the same time, the system does contemplate that we becoming reasonably informed and so cast informated votes for our representatives. Obviously, no matter how well or ill-informed you are, your vote count equally. But if there are public protests, and we are being asked as other interested voters to pay attention to those protestors, then obviously, the logic and coherency of the message being presented is relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Yes, because the end results of a Democrat occupying the White House are the same as when a Republican occupies the White House. *nods* I agree with the sentiment behind this if not the particular philosophy. Like it or not, we are still a democratic republic, and the course our country takes politically is decided at the ballot box. We can be as cynical as we choose, but that is the reality. And certainly, Wall Street or any other boogeyman isn't going to just start doing things the way you want them just because you're camping out on their front lawn. Now, if the point really is that it is time to throw away the ballot box, and disregard the choices your fellow citizens make at the polls because you don't like those choices (which is what this all really boils down to in the end), then you are talking about violent overthrow of the democratic model, and replacement with something else. And I strongly suspect there will not be anything approaching 99% agreement on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atreides Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I can tell you exactly what the GOP would deliver. Are you ready? More war, more debt, less privacy, more whistleblower prosecutions (Bradley Manning has been imprisoned for more than a year without trial now!), more assassinations, more Goldman Sachs execs in treasury, more crackdowns on medical cannabis. Can't wait!More of that than the Democrats. Obama's only new war (Libya) is mostly over now, and never had troops on the ground. And he can't pull out of the existing wars, or else he'd be "soft on terrorism/security". He doesn't want to give his opponents that opening, and he probably wants to win as well. And you can add repugnant social legislation to if we get a Republican, particularly Perry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesome possum Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 As usual, Jon Stewart hits the nail on the head regarding the conservative response to Occupy Wall Street: "So, rage against duly elected government is patriotic -- quintessentially American -- whereas rage against multi-national shareholder-accountable corporations is anti-American. OK, gotcha," Stewart said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I'm telling you dude, you already came up with a solution. If Dimon/Blankfein/Pandit/etc all came down there and started buying pizza for these guys it would be handled.for the want of a pizza wall street was lost... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 More of that than the Democrats. Obama's only new war (Libya) is mostly over now, and never had troops on the ground. And he can't pull out of the existing wars, or else he'd be "soft on terrorism/security". He doesn't want to give his opponents that opening, and he probably wants to win as well. And you can add repugnant social legislation to if we get a Republican, particularly Perry. You forgot Yemen and Pakistan. Also, God forbid that the president do the right thing and look bad in front of the people who hate him with every fiber of their being. I can see why it's important for the president to save face instead of lives. Gag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Article in The Atlantic on how the 99%'ers are not representative. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/10/most-americans-arent-occupy-wall-streets-99-percent/246196/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Hobbes Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I don't think that's quite correct. As voters, we don't have the time to be acquainted with the nuances of every piece of legislation, so we elect people to represent us. But at the same time, the system does contemplate that we becoming reasonably informed and so cast informated votes for our representatives. Obviously, no matter how well or ill-informed you are, your vote count equally. But if there are public protests, and we are being asked as other interested voters to pay attention to those protestors, then obviously, the logic and coherency of the message being presented is relevant.Uninformed was the wrong word here and I apologize for that. What I'm trying to say is that the average voter couldn't write an economic plan that would point the country in the right direction. This is true of the OSWers, your average tea party voter, most of the members of this board, most certainly myself and it's probably true of you as well. The message isn't the asinine demands some protesters have posted on the internet, their message is that something is clearly wrong with out economy, and that needs to be addressed by our elected officials. And that's a message that can be embraced by Americans ranging from your out of work college graduate with too much debt to lawyers who find themselves on hard economic times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Exactly. He did. It was a staple of his campaign. You heard lots of lines like "Iraq distracted us from the real problem which was Afghanistan."and don't we have less than 10,000 troops in Iraq now? down from what, 150,000 when he took office? sounds like that one is more or less over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just a peasant Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 According to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, they are the 1% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Progressive Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Lol, disliked by both the rightwing and far-left .............. but I would hazard a guess that the overwhelming majority of the center-left is ok with Obama's performance so far. Sure we would like to see Dennis K. or Nancy Pelosi elected to the presidency ........... that won't happen but I still find it encouraging that a left-wing counterbalance to the teabaggers is forming in NY and elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.