Skip to main content

On Occupy Bill - please pay attention.

It is hard to write a response to Bill Maher's New Rule segment without first uttering the words "Fuck you." - with love of course as an occupier. Over the years I've found Bill Maher's  standup/show to be both a hit and a miss and I like him more often then naught.

From his New Rules

To be considered a real movement, it has to start moving asses off the streets, and into the voting booth.  (audience applause)
I can't tell you enough how important it is that we get people in the streets. There is a huge debate within Occupy right now over how we translate getting people off the streets and turning that into a means to effect change through voting or if our role is simply to educate people about issues and allow them to make their own choices.

I agree that we need to be in congressional offices every day knocking on doors. Part of how the TeaParty passed their agenda is that they had outside astroturf groups  fund teapartiers to be able to stay in Washington and bother the hell out of their reps. Demonstrating in the street can be quite powerful - as long as we have voices - like Bill Maher's championing and showing the world what we are doing. Our protest numbers are marginalized by the MSM and we have a media that is fixated on riot porn and the arrests.

Let's look at at December 5th - 9th where during that time several thousand activists participated in rain to knock on congressional doors. Occupy and SEIU staged a massive four day event called Take back the Capitol to get people more engaged in citizen lobbying. There were elements within Occupy that are against that but I think in the end we have to engage people and enfranchise them to effect change.  

Then not even a month later on J17Occupy joined SEIU again in Washington DC and marched on the Supreme Court, the lawn, the Senate , congressional offices, and the White House (where we posted hearts with message to the President) I'm sure you only heard about the smoke bomb that was thrown over the gate.

Occupy's motto is "The only solution is world revolution."  OK... but what about setting our sights a little lower, like taking back Wisconsin?

Frankly I'm not sure what Occupy could have done to make a difference in Wisconsin. Let's talk about the lack of support from our national organizations first before we start saying Occupy should have been more involved. Where was President Obama? Where was the DNC support? Competing with SuperPacs and AstroTurf organizations is hard and Occupy can only counter that money by getting people engaged. As far as I'm concerned we had many progressives who have been involved in Occupy participate in the Wisconsin recall elections. It was already a people powered recall election and the problem is that Occupiers tend to look like everyone. We may not have recalled Walker - but we took control away from their senate for a few months until the election. That is huge and all progressives should take pride in that.

....

Here's a thought.  Instead of organizing interstate hootenannies, maybe it's time for Occupy Wall Street to actually participate in the American political process.  (audience applause)  That means boring stuff, like canvassing neighborhoods, raising money, running candidates for office, manning phone banks, and making a baby with John Edwards.
Interstate hootenannies are the types of actions that build movements. Historically we can look at the  Million Man March or Gandhi's Salt March as proof that having people march does generate awareness. Albeit this is on a much smaller scale marches and protests gain momentum when people are exposed. How many times have you tried to dispel the stereotype that OWS are only anarchists, or hippies, or the homeless and made the connection that we represent all walks of life.

 I may be marching from Philly to NYC on that hooteannie to arrive back at Zucotti on the 4th of July. It is only ONE of hundreds of direct actions that will be happening.  You can look for events on occupy.com or the NYCGA website and find information quite easily.
....

And that's because the Tea Party took it to the next level.  They mobilized.  They put on a nice shirt and their best teeth... (audience laughter), and they got out there, and they drafted candidates, registered voters, and did all the stuff that when the left does it, it's called "using the methods of Saul Alinsky".

The Occupy movement could do the same thing for the Democrats.  In fact, we need Occupy to be our Tea Party.  An unwavering bloc that will force things to the left, as relentlessly as a new pair of jeans with a tight inseam.

A solid bloc of far-left intractable Democratic Congressmen, who Obama can point to and say, "You know, I'd love to renew your Bush-era tax cuts, but I have to deal with these crazy motherfuckers."  (wild audience applause)

Again - I wish we were able to match tea party money but that is not possible in a Citizens United world. The Tea Party was only able to succeed because of the level of funding they got. I have never seen a single tea party action ever in the entire time of the movement that has even come close to marching a single occupy event. Even our small protests generate people of a wide range of ages, cultures, religion, and economic background.

Please Bill

Stop looking at Occupy as an American movement but look at is as a world wide movement. Are you going ignore the demonstrations and the collapse of European austerity driven governments?

You're asking for an Occupy victory? I'm sure none of those people who voted in Europe's elections or the students who protested in Canada over tuition hikes ever attended an Occupy event or read about it.  

I wish Dem's or President Obama feared his base and would point at us and saying "I'm sorry but I'd have to deal with these crazy fuckers."  Most people in Occupy are leftists and I have no bones about saying that. Yet the Dem establishment does not take Occupy seriously. The panels and no offense to my friend Jesse on Occupy that I have attended have been superficial, hollow, and on a 9th grade discussion level.  The Panel on Cooperation - not Co-Option  at NetRoots Nation dealt with 93 minutes of Cooperation talk and - 2 minutes on the Co-Option when this is a huge discussion within the movement. We get lip service and when we do put forth solutions they are ignored or marginalized as extreme.

If I have to hear the phrase

"Middle Class"
one more time from a politicians mouth then  will scream. You talk about the 99% and building Middle class families. I'm sorry - you are just feeding people platitude and bullshit when you talk about the middle class because America is not a middle class nation. We are a working poor and poor nation that is sold the idea that we are a middle nation because people in power keep repeating that zombie lie. The entire time I have not heard the word poor mentioned more then 3 times in all these discussions on economic fairness.

So Bill

 You want us to engage with politics. Have you had George Martinez on your show to talk about his congressional campaign as the first occupy candidate? Have you talked on your panels about his pledge to take only small donations?

Have you heard about BumRushTheVote

that is trying to get occupiers engaged in voting registration, campaigns, and turning out voters to the polls? Oh I'm sorry - you hadn't. I'm sure google is hard to operate before you make sweeping statements.

I understand where you are coming from Bill. I've had my ups and downs with the movement and the debates that we are having. This is a young movement - not even a year old but the message about income inequality is very real. This is a continuation of the civil right movement and the problems we face in the 20th century with Republicans everywhere waging a war against us.

 Why don't you spend time highlighting all the people that Occupy has saved from evictions.? Every person that we have been able to keep in their homes is a victory for OWS. OWS does not just march - we protest in front of banks, we have sleep ins, we have sit ins, we have massive demonstrations, and we do all of these things with media people like you Bill - ignoring - or treating with disdain - or sarcasm - or only interviewing the most outrageously dressed person in the crowd - or waiting for someone to be arrested and ignoring the children, old people, and community while focusing on blood and violence.

I've hardly touched on a lot of what Occupy has accomplished but and that there are still people mobilizing and trying to take the movement to civic engagement.  The Republicans had 100 years to try and screw up this nation. Give me 50 million dollars and I'll show you how many people we can keep in the streets and influence our elections to get people in office. That's not gonna happen so we have to rely on each other and hope that voices like you Bill - will have an intelligent conversation and not start to sound like A Very Serious Person.  

So new rule Bill

Pay attention.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (179+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, kathny, Earwicker23, allenjo, jethrock, voracious, Rizzo, zett, Mentatmark, blueoldlady, wsexson, vacantlook, Dallasdoc, Haningchadus14, TracieLynn, Brooklyn Jim, Demeter Rising, slatsg, AoT, dance you monster, Horace Boothroyd III, jacey, tapestry, greenbell, turn blue, ninkasi23, sunny skies, Susan from 29, Lily O Lady, fiddler crabby, zerelda, tegrat, La Gitane, kishik, efraker, happymisanthropy, One Pissed Off Liberal, orestes1963, kjoftherock, Wek, JPax, run around, strandedlad, asterkitty, ActivistGuy, Cinnamon, Happy Days, eXtina, Oaktown Girl, BobTheHappyDinosaur, Alumbrados, historys mysteries, RebeccaG, Lady Libertine, Ice Blue, Dvalkure, gulfgal98, akmk, leonard145b, wu ming, Burned, 2thanks, blueoasis, triv33, jayden, RFK Lives, Anne was here, PhilJD, Publius2008, bronte17, ornerydad, gooderservice, John Kelly, Medium Head Boy, nota bene, lunachickie, hkorens, joanneleon, TheGreatLeapForward, artebella, sjburnman, emal, millwood, Fighting Bill, Little, uciguy30, Jeff Y, flitedocnm, burnt out, RageKage, blueoregon, OLinda, markthshark, Lisa Lockwood, DeadB0y, Tonedevil, tapu dali, Social and Economic Equality, poligirl, Brooke In Seattle, rexymeteorite, qofdisks, ctsteve, NMRed, UnaSpenser, JesseCW, Agathena, commonmass, liberal constructionist, shopkeeper, Miss Jones, rlharry, LinSea, wasatch, joanil, Brix, rmonroe, Wolf10, glorificus, SueM1121, pickandshovel, progressivevoice, TiaRachel, Skennet Boch, ManhattanMan, copymark, DavidHW, Free Jazz at High Noon, GayHillbilly, Take a Hard Left, Broke And Unemployed, dilutedviking, third Party please, banjolele, jcrit, antirove, Deleuzional, CT Hank, Shawn Russell, skayne, fumie, cacamp, AgavePup, Glen The Plumber, steelman, HighSticking, dewley notid, Sagebrush Bob, US Blues, miasmo, James Kroeger, humphrey, Just Bob, Angie in WA State, Floande, Stripe, Funkygal, splashy, Prinny Squad, disrael, Colorado is the Shiznit, JayRaye, MartyM, bfbenn, LWelsch, sb, pfiore8, Bob Friend, tle, The Walrus, Sylv, Anthony Page aka SecondComing, glitterscale, CA Nana, TexDem, chipmo, IamNotaKochsucker, priceman, legendmn
      •  Not going to happen, ever. (11+ / 0-)

        It makes me angry and sad and bitter but it's not going to happen.

        signed Been Marching In The Streets Since The Sixties

        •  Yeah, nobody ever heard of Martin Luther King Jr, (7+ / 0-)

          or the anti-war movement, the Arab spring, the Greek left and so on.

          Size matters. Enough demonstrators can enliven and inform a demoralized electorate.

          And besides, don't you thing that traditional electioneering has been pretty much vitiated by by deregulation of campaign financing?

          The frog jumped/ into the old pond/ plop! (Basho)

          by Wolf10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:19:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Really? How many OWS in Wash? How many T-morons? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ajwagner, mconvente

            A lot more of the forme than latter, but no one heard about it bc/ 1) little media coverage vs. ridiculous amounts for a couple thousand 'baggers, 2) money, money, money, the Koch's and TheArmyofDicks got it, OWS doesn't.  

            You forget that media ownership, control and service of, by and for the 1% is as much as Truth OWS tried to pt out as who owns WallStreet.  

            If OWS really wants to make a real, long term difference, not merely a symbolic created a 'slogan' that marketeers co-opted for the 1%s profits, then they have to use what they say they have (and do have, or at least had, to some extent): people.  But the only real power those people have that the system will respond to is votes.

            The rest is nothing but circuses, no matter the intentions it started with.

            •  Historically speaking you're just plain wrong; (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tonedevil, James Kroeger, sb, LWelsch

              there is a dynamic synergy between demonstrations, mass consciousness, electoral and political power. There are also alternative media, you know, like the one we're using now. You don't think OWS changed the national dialogue? Again, just plain wrong. If the economy continues to worsen and the right overwhelms us electorally with their money, there will be a lot more people joining the circus.

              The frog jumped/ into the old pond/ plop! (Basho)

              by Wolf10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:52:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Elmo changed the national dialogue. Big F'g deal. (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ajwagner, mconvente, Bob Friend, Wolf10

                And so far, he's had as much effect on the election or poltiics.  

                What, you think you discovered income inequality?  Or the Left?  Or oppression?  Or how capitalism concentrates economic power and thus political power in fewer and fewer hands, who then use the unemployed as a means to depress wages, like a 'Reserve Army' (to coin a term :) ). Etc., etc.

                All OWS did was be this times iteration of calling attention to a problem that has existed and been pointed out since before Marx systematized the critique.  IOW, it was this year's muppet.

                Want it to be something more?  Then do what the Progressives and New Deal Democrats and New Left did - and move from making noise to taking power.

                Anything else is circuses.

                the fact that so many wilfully refuse to see that is pretty depressing to folks who actually want to make real change.

                •  It is really difficult... (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  sb, Wolf10, RockyMtnLib, Tool

                  ...to understand your objections.  It's almost as if you fear something.  Like what?  The only people who have been seriously criticizing the OWS movement is the Republicans...and...people like you.  I just don't get it.

                  If you want a big turnout on election day, then you should get your butt out there on the streets when these protests are unfolding.  Millions of people standing together complaining about how their votes have been completely marginalized by the corporate elite have a stimulating impact on those who normally have only a casual interest in politics.  Turnout would skyrocket.

                  Millions of people protesting the corporate control of our democracy is what will finally give some Democratic politicians the balls to start speaking loudly in the halls of Congress for progressive legislation.  Millions of people in the streets are what will finally get progressive solutions (INCREASING government spending) discussed in the media and then taken more seriously in Congress.

                  For you to not see this is almost beyond belief.  Whether you want to hear it or not, the only way Obama is going to win and for the Dems to hold the Senate is if the Occupy movement blows up in a big way late this summer.  Of that I am 100% certain.

                  So what is it that explains your basic objection?  You are moved to the point of distraction by the fact that some of those showing up on protest day really love the drama of what they are doing, what with its 'circus' feeling and all?  That is what moves to you call for an end to street demonstrations?

                  That would be probably the most shallow of motivations I have ever heard of in politics in my lifetime.  If it's something more substantial than that, please let me know...

                  •  Uh. NO. The only way Obama's going to win... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    chrismorgan

                    ...is by VOTER TURNOUT.

                    March, sure. But if you don't combine that with a HUGE effort to register voters and get people to the polls, he won't. With respect, you're naivete is staggering.

                    •  Yet another example... (0+ / 0-)

                      What I want to know from you is how/why you think that your insults could possibly be effective in persuading me to try to help Obama get elected?

                      Maybe you're not naive, but you do seem to have some serious problems with logic:  

                      (A) "I want Obama to get re-elected"

                      (B) "I'm afraid that some of these progressives might not
                      feel motivated to help the cause"

                      (C) "I'll insult them because that should make them want to work their butts off for Obama after I've gotten them pissed off at me."

                      You guys seem to be real impressed with yourselves, with your analysis, with your political instincts, but how can you think you have anything to offer if you don't even know how to recruit depressed idealists to help in your cause in spite of the fact that they fear the same political enemy you do!!

                      If you can't win over people who are pretty close to being your political brothers and end up alienating them, instead, then what does that say about your grasp of the political scene?

                  •  U are trivializing OWSs legit grievances, making (0+ / 0-)

                    it a boutique 'movement'. My 'fear' is that people who understand nothing about how politics really work and political power is really affected and weilded will turn what could be a way for workers and the non-wealthy to take back their countries into 'Kony', complete with the psychotic nake guy.

                    Turning what could have been a means of empowering tens of millions of voters to register and vote for candidates who actually believe what OWS believes, and then stay politically active for the decades it would take to keep those pols honest ('cause we are talking abut fundemental change to the economic structure of the country, after all), into 'entertainment news' and 'human interest feel good' fluff is 'circuses'.  Think the Collesium: a morality play that distracted the masses from the real problems and solutions.

                    Millions of people march in favor of reporductive choice.  This year there are thousands of anti-choice bills becoming laws in state legislatures.

                    Its not an either/or, as the Civil Rights movement proved.  But the CRM was successful b/c it produced laws, e.g., the Voting rights act and the Civil Rights act, none of which would have happened without both MLK and LBJ. (and the million who marched with the former, and hundreds of pols who took the plunge with the latter).

              •  You're completely backwards. You're... (0+ / 0-)

                ....taking the absurd position that Democracy is irrelevant - that voting is irrelevant - and that somehow, a bunch of drum circles and guitar marching is going to GET REPUBLICANS OUT OF OFFICE.

                You want to talk about history, do you? Go look up Martin Luther King and and find out what he did in terms of getting people to the polls and organizing voters.

            •  When money buys votes (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sb

              and when that's not enough election fraud takes over and goes virtually unchallenged, not to mention the fact that the established parties have a virtual monopoly with regard to who gets ballot access, votes are not sufficient.

              "I wish I could tell you, in the midst of all of this, that President Obama was waging the kind of fight against these draconian Republican proposals that the American people would like to see. He is not." -- Senator Bernie Sanders

              by Sagebrush Bob on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:36:58 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Uh - King organized voters. He didn't just march. (0+ / 0-)
        •  Been voting and working within the system (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sb, MadRuth, The Walrus

          since the Sixties too haven't you? And look where THAT'S gotten us.

          "I wish I could tell you, in the midst of all of this, that President Obama was waging the kind of fight against these draconian Republican proposals that the American people would like to see. He is not." -- Senator Bernie Sanders

          by Sagebrush Bob on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:33:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Bingo (110+ / 0-)

        I love how it is OWS's fault that not enough Occupiers are not exactly "fired up" and though I somewhat agree with a bit of what Maher is saying I am honestly tired of watching the media compare Ows and the tea party without noticing how one is full of disenfranchised people who oppose the banks and the other is funded by the banks in order to disenfranchise people.

        If maybe Bill would bring some occupier on to explain our side the way he brings on Coulter and Issa and their crowd, he would hear this. I wonder where Bill could find some occupier like that?

        Facepalm/

        Regulate banks, not vaginas

        by MinistryOfTruth on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:38:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  He would want someone so obtuse that no one would (17+ / 0-)

          believe that person was sober and sane. There are critera to be met and entertainment to be produced. You are way to level-headed to meet Maher's criteria.

          However, whoever is producing the Occupy site needs to take a course in plain English and lose all the political-correctness B.S. On that point, Maher is correct.

          Bring those still in Afghanistan home NOW . . . It's long past time.

          by llbear on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:59:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Don't wait to be fired up. (6+ / 0-)

          Be deliberate.  The folks who will show up and see that their will is done politically every time, whether they feel like it or not, are the ones who are really going to change things.  All the others can be discouraged if enough pressure is applied.

          This is what I've been trying to tell people, really.  The first thing opponents of a movement like this will do, is make life hell for these dissenters, surround their movement with pain, misery, frustration, provocation, and whatever else.  They will blacken your name to everybody, make people despise you.

          To win, you have have the patience and stubborn determination to win past that, to take what punishment they have to give you, and keep on moving towards your goal.

          If you aren't more dedicated, rain and shine, than the other side, you won't win.  You will give up before they do, and they will take hold of political power and frustrate you further.  If 2000 hadn't taught me that lesson, 2006,2008, and 2010 have.  You do not let whether you feel like fighting back change whether you do, you do so every time.

          Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?

          by Stephen Daugherty on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:59:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I think Bill understands the difference, (16+ / 0-)

          and understands it quite well. Maher wants Occupy to be effective in the long term, and so do I. Occupy was effective last year in changes to the national conversation. That was important but it's not enough. We need new and different laws, and we need to elect the lawmakers who will vote for them. To accomplish that means forming alliances and the kinds of activism that Maher and others here describe.

          If Occupy is too disaffected to accomplish that, I hope another group will grow from Occupy to take on that kind of activism.

          The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

          by SoCalSal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:24:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  OWS needs to Occupy the voting booth. (17+ / 0-)

            If young people showed up and voted in the same numbers as old people, all the money in the world would not make a difference.  The methods that the GOP is using are targeted at old people.  The young are on smart phones and computers and are not watching the expensive media.  The problem is that they do not know how to use the system to make changes.  They need to nominate candidates and then get them elected. that is the only way their rage will make a difference.  They need to do what the Tea Party did, they captured the House through the voting booth.

            •  Yes! from one of the old people ;) n/t (7+ / 0-)

              The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

              by SoCalSal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:52:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  That's not what Occupy is for. That's what (12+ / 0-)

              the DSCC and DCCC and OFA are for.

              They're well-funded and ready to accept any volunteer time you want to go give them.

              Occupy is not the "Democratic Tea Party", no matter how badly people who have invested nothing in it want it to be.

              It's not about which small band of elite assholes runs the show.

              It's about taking control away from all small bands of elite assholes.

              "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

              by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:18:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  "taking control from all small ... elite assholes" (4+ / 0-)

                And how do you propose to do that? Ask them politely? Since violence is absolutely impossible to contemplate on here what is your strategy?

                Or do you just make pronouncements JesseCW?

                •  one tactic is to be the loudmouths bringing up (12+ / 0-)

                  shit that the monied powers that be in both parties stop us all from bringing up.

                  Would the narrative have changed from deficits to income disparity without Occupy taking radical action?

                  Instead of crucifying the movement for "not occupying the voting booth" or "not being perfectly nonviolent" or "not having efficient meetings" or whatever egregious sin this nascent movement of hundreds of thousands of strangers who just started working together has committed...

                  NURTURE THE FUCKING THING!

                  See it as an adjunct venue where there are radical voices willing to take riskier measures to get a message out. Don't try to co-opt it or claim it should be for the Dems or that it should be anything. Look to its strengths and figure out how to support them and use them when there is common ground.

                  •  Use them....I think they would push back against (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    SoCalSal, gramofsam1

                    that statement fairly hard.  I don't want to USE THEM, I want them to get what they want, equity, fairness, jobs....and they are not going to do that sitting in tents.  The media is bored, their 15 minutes is over.  

                    •  I want thier message to take over the Dems, as (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      joynow, glorificus

                      every other effective political movement has taken over parts of one or the other political parties during the last 230+ years.  How do you think the Progressives gave thier name to an era?  Just 'yelling loudly'?

                      They identified those who wnated what they wanted, both voters and candidates and then got the former to elect the latter.  Rinse and repeat.

                      •  Could you please explain to me... (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        sb, dilutedviking, The Walrus, RockyMtnLib

                        ...both for yourself and for those who agree with you, why you all (including Bill Maher) have assumed that those who are protesting in these demonstrations are not also voting and making phone calls, etc.?

                        You sincerely believe that they are only interested in 'yelling loudly', don't you?

                        Where in the hell do you get off making such an insulting assumption about the people who are turning out for these demonstrations?  Do you actually hope to persuade these people to help get BHO elected through your insults?

                        •  Do you see a single OWS the org taking a stand on (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          glorificus

                          a candidate or party?  Or even them all ending with 'and vote'?

                          Of course I expect a lot of individual members to be activists.  But that means bupkiss for OWS as a entity.  

                          That's fine if you want OWS to be Woodstock.  

                          But if you want it to be a Movement, then its got to act as a one.  That means having a couple of high profile spokesfolks.  It means explicitly supporting pols who support it.  It even means abandoning the 'consensus decision making' b/s.  I'm sorry but the only way to get unanimity is to so water everything down it becomes pablum.

                          And if it wants to have a political impact, its got to be a political Movement, which means candidates, alliances, taking sides in election, in short all the messy stuff about 'politics' that OWS 'spokesfolks' spent last year claiming they didn't want to do.

                          Understand now?

                        •  Sounds as if it's time for drawing lines... (0+ / 0-)

                          in the sand.

                          Bill "23 Million Dollar Baby" Maher and those here that would agree with him, will never understand the biggest of all pictures.

                          That would be "No, we're not going to play with you because it always winds up the same way. No."

                          If occupy does nothing more than to begin the questioning of why the electoral process is a sham with very serious consequences for the disenfranchised, then they've done their job.

                    •  The Media Trusts aren't "bored". They're (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      sb, dilutedviking, The Walrus, RockyMtnLib

                      just not going to support people who seek to destroy them.

                      Once they got that Occupy was as much about busting them up as any other corporations with too much power, the worm turned.

                      See Also: Dean.

                      "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                      by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:29:47 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Crucifying? egregious sin? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Susan G in MN, Radiowalla

                    How about evaluations from people who share the goal of Occupy in eliminating income inequality. It's a conversation of differing opinions.

                    The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

                    by SoCalSal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:25:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Very few people who are not part of Occupy (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      sb, dilutedviking

                      share the goal of eliminating income inequality.

                      It's certainly not part of the Demoratic Party Platform.

                      "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                      by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:30:52 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  By stalling the engine of commerce. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  sb, dilutedviking

                  Dents in their bottom line are all that matter to them.

                  We have to get in there way, and we have to make them suffer.

                  It's how India was freed.  It's how Mubarak was toppled.

                  It works.

                  "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                  by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:28:41 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Contemporary U.S. life is neither like (0+ / 0-)

                    Ghandhi's India nor Mubarak's Egypt.

                    Different tactics need to be devised, or you can go with the one that works here, elect better quality people.

                    I do not want crowds massacred by the army. That doesn't need to happen.

                    Educate and register, and get a standardized non-Diebold voting machine process in place.

              •  Not sitting in tents, they won't. They need to (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                chuckvw, mconvente

                channel their energy into something that makes a difference.  They captured the fickle media for 15 minutes which meant something and now they and their agenda has been replaced with face eating monsters.  

                •  Giving up their goals and serving your (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  sb, dilutedviking, RockyMtnLib, Annalize5

                  goals instead certainly won't do it.

                  Their goal is not the election of more Democrats.  That's the goal of this site and it's owner - that's fine.  

                  But it's not what they're about.

                  You can't say they're fools for taking a very very long shot at achieving their own goals instead of abandoning every they value and adopting your values.

                  They just aim higher than you can see.

                  "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                  by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:32:32 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  whatever does this mean: (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gramofsam1
                It's about taking control away from all small bands of elite assholes.
                Which "small bands of elite assholes" are you referring to and however do you perceive Occupy can possibly accomplish that.

                The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

                by SoCalSal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:49:59 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  When a dipshit like Bill Maher can quash (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  sb, The Walrus

                  the voices of a million people with a million dollars, we have a fucking problem.

                  Some may be content to beg the Bill Mahers of America for a few more table scraps.  

                  Others are aiming to create a system which gives him neither unearned rewards nor unearned influence.

                  "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                  by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:33:48 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Your comment illustrates exactly why (0+ / 0-)

                OWS is failing and will continue to fail. Walking away from the voting booth can never be a successful strategy.  

                It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

                by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:16:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Why that is a dead end (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sb

              Because the voting booth is rigged. Even if a candidate committed to an Occupy-type program was nominated, that candidate would be sabotaged by the D.C. Democrats.

              Occupy is right to be in the streets.

          •  I so agree, SoCalSal. (12+ / 0-)

            Street protest can be very effective, as we saw with the Viet Nam War and Civil rights.  But the thing that differentiates those movements from Occupy, is that they were both VERY focused in purpose and intent.  

            The message of both was singular, and I emphasize this,  the SOLUTION WAS INHERENT in the message.  Get out of Viet Nam now.  Legislate civil rights for all now.

            As you said, Occupy was effective in calling attention to the 99% and the meme of economic inequality, but there is no inherent solution in that message.  It has broadcast the problem with no focus on any solution.

            And I agree, If Occupy cannot focus itself, then I would like to see another movement than can grow out of it.  Imagine a group, dedicated to street protest, without partisan alliance---in other words using the tactics and principles of Occupy--- that simply focused on repealing Citizens United.  "Get Money out of politics, repeal Citizens United."  Again, the solution is inherent in the message.  People can nod to that, agree with it, back it, push it.

            Frankly, although I gave money to occupy in the beginning, I can't now, because I really have no idea what they propose to do about it now that they've stated the problem.

            •  Street protests/Vietnam (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Floande, sb

              Precisely because street protests were effective during the Vietnam era the ever-more corporate owned media made a point ever since to not show street protests or marches in Washington, etc.

              Occupy began to get attention because the cops were violent, and it took off from there. What they were doing seemed "new" and for awhile the media paid attention. But it has pulled back and will continue to do so. The corporate media will never support anti-1% efforts -- at least not unless and until they are soooo large they are literally not ignorable. But we're a long way from there.

              Meanwhile,  you are "imagining a group" that would use OWS tactics but with one message. Well, where can we sign up? Why is it up to OWS to bring your vision to life?

              •  There are in fact, (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                SoCalSal, Unduna, sb

                many other groups who do quite well at focusing their attention on one issue at a time, under a larger umbrella vision, and whether they use OWS tactics or not is irrelevant. You can sign up for them today.  Color of Change would be a suggestion I'd throw out.  They've had some brilliant successes.

                This thread however, is about Occupy.  It is not a credible argument to answer to the issues and questions people have with Occupy, by asking "why is it up to OWS to bring your vision to life?" when that was never the discussion at hand.

                •  Why isn't a credible argument? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Tonedevil, sb

                  You feel compelled to criticize OWS, which is always easy to do. It's always easy to tell other people what THEY should be doing. This thread is about Occupy and my response to Bill Maher is that if Bill thinks something should be done, then he should go do it. And YOU should go do it. Otherwise you're just talking.

                  If you or Bill can describe how you or he successfully accomplished ANYTHING political your advice would have more weight. Maybe you have -- let's hear about it.

                  Coz I'll tell you what, when the NY OWS marched across the Brooklyn Bridge and the batman messages flashed on that building I got chills. Transitory, yes. But chills. What have  you, and all these naysayers done to give people chills?

                  •  First of all, (6+ / 0-)

                    I don't feel "compelled to criticize OWS.  I consider my comments here part of a conversation I chose to enter into, just like you did.  

                    Second of all, you have critique and criticism confused.  You have criticism and feed back confused. You seem to think Occupy is a perfectly functioning group that need not consider the opinions of others, even those most likely to be on your side.

                    And Viola, your chills marching across the Brooklyn Bridge to the batman messages flashed on buildings does not equal a "political accomplishment."  And if that's how you define a political accomplishment, than hell, I could keep you here all night listing mine.  

                    I don't sell short that feeling you had, I've had it many times, and put myself out there to feel it many times.  And it's great. But it's a beginning, not a game plan. And it can disappear as fast as it came.

                    I don't want that to happen to Occupy.  But I'm done trying to explain that to you. Your fingers are in your ears.

              •  Street protests were effective (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Tonedevil, sb

                during the Vietnam war in terms of impacting the national dialogue.  They were effective in giving us a voice to push back against the war and the draft.  
                I wish they had stopped the war.  But they didn't.

                •  It is true (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VClib, sb, The Walrus

                  that the street energy against the Viet Nam War, took a long time to come to fruition.  Roughly 7 years.  And in the time  between when the protests began, and when they finally hit their target, the war waged on, and many died in vain.  On both sides.

                  But I believe you cannot find a more salient reason for the end of the Viet Nam war then the loud, singular and focused dissatisfaction of the American public.  On the streets.

                  There was no more reason to withdraw and admit defeat---and it was a defeat---in 1975 than there was in 1970.  The difference was that the American people finally said no, loudly and emphatically.  

                  So I will disagree.  The street protests, Americans' singular and powerful expression, DID STOP THAT WAR.  Finally.

                   

                  •  I'd love to believe that- (0+ / 0-)

                    it'd be nice to think that all of that effort was the prime reason for ending the war.  And I do agree that the pressure was a factor.
                    But I think that it finally became clear that a military victory just was not gonna happen.  If they had thought they could win on the ground, they would've stayed until that happened.

                    •  Oh gram, (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      gramofsam1

                      you and I agree on SO MUCH, that this is just for the sake of discussion between you and I.  I know how much we generally agree, by reading your comments.

                      Fact is, imo, we could have managed a "military victory," from the get go, if we'd decided the goal was worthy, and could have convinced the American public of such. I mean really, the US and all its power against little old North Viet Nam?  

                      And I understand that China and the USSR were an issue at that point.  I understand that all these huge powers were more than content to stage a war that none of them would put their real and total cajones behind, but rather be content to play pissy chess with each other.

                      You know, that's really exactly what Goldwater ran on, use our power to its zenith and end it, if we're going to be in it.  No fan of Goldwater, but he was no fool. He saw the cowardly way we held back our power, and let our boys fight with less than we had, because we really couldn't sell Americans or our allies on going all out for the cause.  

                      So, as it turned out, Americans watched as we tried to cut  off the tail a cowardly inch at a time, over almost a decade.  Just like in Iraq.  Just like in Afghanistan.

                      We can disagree over this. It's ok. But gram, I have never seen any evidence that we had more evidence we couldn't win in 1975 than we did in 1970, unless we were wiling to stand behind this war with the full power we had.

                       

                      •  You're right of course (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        StellaRay, sb

                        and I know what you're saying about not going all in.  I know some vets who are still bitter about that, and with good reason.  I think it just took so damn long for that damn war to end that it was hard to feel that the protests had the effect we wanted.  
                        I think we agree more than we disagree.

                        •  I KNOW (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          gramofsam1

                          we agree more than we disagree.  As I said, so often I've read your comments nodding my head and thinking we'd have a fine time over a cup of coffee.  :)

                          Yes, it took a looooooooooong time for our street protests to gather momentum and hit home.  But they did. Yes, in the end, they did.  

                          It has been JUST AS LONG, in Afghanistan, and almost as long in Iraq.  And the only reason, IMO, that we haven't been able to generate the rage against those wars, is the absence of the draft.  That's a huge conversation all on its own.

                          The issue of Occupy is so complex.  On one hand, yes, there is power on the streets.  On the other hand, it takes a long time.  If we compare that to what the Tea Party accomplished in just two years, by going the legislative route---well, hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

                          And I know, I know, they had big backers, lots of money and lots of power behind them.  But I also know they did not achieve what they did without a lot of unsexy work.  Republicans don't question the system as much as they work it.

                          Let me be clear, the Tea party is an anathema to everything I believe in.  That's why it so hurts that they have somehow harnessed more power than Occupy has come close to.  

                          I don't blame Occupy.  Like I've said, that movement will last or die on its merits. It's up to all of us in the end.  And I don't know the answers.

                          With that, gram, I'll sign off and wish you sweet dreams of better times to come.  It's all so exhausting.  I'm going to tuck myself in too, with a good book, and hopes tomorrow will be, somehow, better.  

                •  What stopped the war was politics. Accepting ever (0+ / 0-)

                  y pol who saw the millions of votes the Anti-War Movement represented and moved to embrace it expecting, and usually getting, its electoral support in return.  Many of those pols even supported the war originally.  The Movement nonetheless celebrated every conversion.

                  Does that quid pro quo make you uneasy?  Does it offend your sense of 'purity'?  If so, and if OWS takes that route, it is doomed to irrelevancy and failure.

                  BTW, even that was not enough to actually end US invovlement in VN.  That took Watergate.  But it was The Movement's alliance with the Democratic Party that put the pols in Congress to both stop the war and take out Nixon.

          •  The last thing Bill wants is for Time Warner (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            run around, sb, Tool

            to have anti-trust laws applied firmly and fairly to it.

            His economic interests are not only not our interests, but they are directly and concetely opposed to our interests.

            "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

            by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:15:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Is there an office he can contact to schedule (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Radiowalla

          some official representative of OWS to appear?

          Romney - his fingernails have never been anything but manicured.

          by Pescadero Bill on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:01:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Golly Gosh Gee. I wonder which (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Tonedevil

          "some occupier" you might be talking about.

          "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

          by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:13:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  He did. They sucked. Neither funny nor inspiring (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          IARXPHD, Radiowalla

          But that's what OWS said they wanted, what with not wanting any spokespeople or others to 'rise above'.

          As I said last year, at some pt they had to decide if they wanted to be a real movement and use the tools they actually had (votes) to make real change, or just play at it.  So far, it looks like the latter.

          Tho I still hope they prove me wrong.

          BTW, stop claiming 'victory' b/c you 'raised consciousness'.  That was the first step, not the last.

          Stop thinking the quality or truth of your argument makes a frakking difference.  It doesn't.  Only power does.  And power means choosing a frakking side and elelcting it.  If Ds screw you, then return the favr next election.  Otherwise you're just playing.

          •  Typical millenials. Too damn many trophies for (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Radiowalla

            showing up. They think making noise and having people pay attention to them is an end in itself. The thought that someone is going to have to directly confront the 1% in a venue with some real influence is a foreign concept to them.

            WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

            by IARXPHD on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:54:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  That's pretty much what Bill did with his (10+ / 0-)

      "new rules" about Occupy -- intellectual jerking off.  

      He's a multi-millionaire and doesn't have to worry about paying for healthcare insurance, paying his mortgage, his retirement, nothing.

      Heck, he even had a spare million dollars to donate to Obama's super pac.

      He's so out of touch that yes, he is exhibiting an intellectual jerking off.

      And he wants to start smaller with Wisconsin?  He contributed how much?  He visited Wisconsin how many times and walked and marched and protested with the residents of Wisconsin?

      And did you ever see his plate of food he likes to show off on his show?  He points to Medicare and Social Security being the problem.

      Again, intellectual jerking off for laughs and to grow his millions.

    •  The Occupy camp grounds are getting a little (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ChemBob, manyamile, mconvente, Radiowalla

      stale in the public's eye.

      I overheard two tourists talking in the small town where I live and one was telling the other where he worked, and the other said, "isn't that where they're doing that Occupy Wall Street protest?" And the other guy answered, "Yeah, it's a real mess, garbage everywhere. It's a disgrace." All I could think was bad messaging for OWS.

      Maybe some kind of organizational tents of a particular color showing up in strategic locations with a deliberate message for that particular occasion. Staying and disrupting for no more then 24 hours then packed up and moved on. A hit-and-run protest tactic that actually appears coordinated, colorful, and somewhat respectful for the people living in the areas.

      I seemed to be getting close to that sort of organization, but then winter came along and, well, sunshine patriots and all that made it seem less serious then I was hoping for.

      Romney - his fingernails have never been anything but manicured.

      by Pescadero Bill on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:22:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  2 things (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sb

        1. "Maybe some kind of organizational tent..." -- see what you're doing? You are mulling over ideas for activism inspired by OWS actions, with the notion of improving results. That's easier to do when you have something to compare against, ain't it? OWS deserves huge credit for trying so many things, succeeding at some, failing at others, but either way inspiring more ideas.

        2. You have the idea -- why not act on it? Why should "they" and not "you"?

      •  Bill - I think the camping phase is over (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sb

        What the mayors and chiefs of police have now learned is that the legal basis for removing campers is strongest the first night they try and occupy a public place without the required permits. If Occupy groups try and camp, without first obtaining, and complying with, all the necessary permits they will be rousted and likely arrested the first night they try to occupy.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:48:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  is this a serious diary? (32+ / 0-)

    i think you might be a bit misguided - maher was right on in his assessment of occupy.

    you would be well served to step back and try and see the big picture.

    In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

    by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:22:28 AM PDT

    •  Bingo (9+ / 0-)

      That is the occupiers biggest weakness...they can't see the big picture.  They can only see themselves in the moment.

      That's why the entire movement is doomed to fail in my opinion.  

      Did they really want to change the system?  Or did they just bond together out of anger and frustration without really knowing where to take it from there?

      •  You have no clue what you're talking about (46+ / 0-)

        In fact most occupiers have a much better idea of the big picture than most here at DKos.  For example, I don't have to explain to most of them how things like stop and frisk are related to the drug war is related to the prison industrial complex is related to wall street.  Most people don't want to look at the connections that are there.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:45:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ok (9+ / 0-)

          I don't have a clue as to what I am talking about.  

          Whatever.

          This is the problem with the OWS movement.  They cannot stand to be criticized, and when flaws are pointed out they get really defensive.

          Tell me again, how many Tea Party candidates got elected nationwide versus OWS candidates?

          Thanks.  

          •  if success is measured by results (15+ / 0-)

            then the problem is definitely with ows. their structure inherently prevents them from getting results, so i'm not really sure if they could ever be as effective as the tea party faction.

            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

            by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:03:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wow (7+ / 0-)
              their structure inherently prevents them from getting results, so i'm not really sure if they could ever be as effective as the tea party faction.
              I'd be the first to admit I have some frustrations with OWS's efficiency.  I'd even concede that a process of democracy, giving everyone a chance to have their input, is less efficient  (I'd argue with you on the term "effective") than a movement of puppets sent to do the bidding of Koch puppetmasters.  But the latter does not strike me as a goal to be sought.
            •  If success is measured by funding (9+ / 0-)

              and knowing who controls the purse strings, then yeah, we all know exactly what the problem is here.

              Hint: it ain't OWS...
               

              It is time to #Occupy Media.

              by lunachickie on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:11:10 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  There is no Tea Party. The thing that's called (0+ / 0-)

              that is just a Koch Brothers front.  The pols who claim the title are just paid liers like Walker.

              Occupy should not try to be Tea Party Left.  Their message imo is best left general, as they've made it.  Until we all see extreme inequality and the system that produces it as the enemy, single-pointed goals won't get us much.

              Maher imo was wrong in his criticism.  But at least he's basically supportive and is hoping for ows' success.  Defensively sliming him, as some are doing here, is not the way to win.

              And as to voting, of course we've all got to vote.  Did we notice in WI that if young folks had voted Walker would be gone?  Who's hurting whom here?  Was it principles that kept folks away from the polls?

          •  There were no OWS candidates to be elected. (16+ / 0-)

            OWS did not exist until a year after the 2010 election.  Chronology is important.

          •  So success is only measure by how many candidates (14+ / 0-)

            you elect?

            That sounds like the opposite of big picture to me.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:07:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  electing your representatives (7+ / 0-)

              is a clear measurement of success. that is how change is accomplished.

              i'm happy to listen if you have other metrics of success, but occupy hasn't really accomplished anything other than creating a conversation about income inequality a year ago. they've done very little since then other than tarnish their own brand by embracing black bloc tactics.

              In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

              by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:12:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Stopping people from being evicted (16+ / 0-)

                for one.

                Also getting people to move a massive amount of money out of banks, including various large organizations and churches.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:51:39 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  yawn. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  glorificus, Lestatdelc, mconvente

                  helping families avoid foreclosure is good, but doing it on a case by case basis is short sighted and prone to failure.

                  working together to elect officials to form policy to avoid those foreclosures is a more attractive goal though.

                  In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                  by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:45:33 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Because the people who are getting kicked out (4+ / 0-)

                    now are totally going to be helped by someone we elect in November.  Nice logic there.  Not to mention that the more we do that the less likely others are to get foreclosed on.  It creates pressure on banks to not foreclose.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:50:44 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  yeah, the banks have totally stopped (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Lestatdelc, mconvente

                      foreclosing on people. keep up the good work!

                      (rolls eyes)

                      In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                      by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:59:45 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  And voting did what exactly? (5+ / 0-)

                        When was it that voting Obama in by a landslide stopped eviction?  I must have missed that.

                        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                        by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:09:22 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  well, a program that stopped hundreds of (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Lestatdelc

                          thousands of foreclosures (HAMP) and helped thousands of homeowners refinance their mortgages doesn't count apparently.

                          i know that doesn't compare to the dozens of houses occupy has defended from foreclosure but what do employed tax paying non-professional protester types know anyway.

                          carry on with all of your success!

                          In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                          by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:17:14 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  What fraction of the HAMP money (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT, rcnewton, skayne, sb

                            actually went out?

                            How many homes did that save, as oppose to the cramdown deal Barney Frank negotiated and Obama killed?

                            "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                            by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:22:31 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i agree with you about the cramdown (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            that was the preferable solution and would have done far more than HAMP. i like barney too - he'll be missed in congress next year.

                            but even this administrations half-ass wall street pleasing solution was exponentially more effective at slowing down foreclosures than anything occupy could dream of acccomplishing.

                            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                            by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:57:54 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i want to say a couple things (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dilutedviking, SwedishJewfish, sb

                            First, while I was technically talking about future elections I do agree that the administration has helped people. Lots of people. This is why I voted for obama and want him to win the election. Eomney would be brutal to a lot of people. And by that I mean that elections are important and do make a difference.

                            Second, I'm not saying we should ignore elections, I'm saying that there are people who need help right now and they aren't getting it. That's where OWS comes in and that is why I support those actions and see them as a good way forward.

                            No one is really talking about the fact that foreclosures are at an all time high and still going on. By building a support network for those who are left out of the foreclosure relief process we can both help those people and mobilize them politically.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:46:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  so you concede that elections do deliver results (0+ / 0-)

                            i disagree with you that occupy mobilizes them politically though. they don't have a coherent message or a candidate to drive them to.

                            it's sad. they turned off so many people with the antics in ny and oakland that the movement no longer stands for helping anyone: it stands for what the general population remember "Fuck The Police".

                            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                            by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:30:38 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I've never said that elections don't deliver (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dilutedviking, sb

                            results.  There's a reason I vote and it isn't because it's fun.  Although if you get drunk first voting is way fun.

                            In regards to NYC and Oakland, There's a reason they are focusing on the police.  The police in both places are seriously fucked up.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:57:59 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  what focus on the police? (0+ / 0-)

                            a series of investigations and reports and "paid administrative leave" and slaps on the wrist? it's business as usual, trust me.

                            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                            by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 07:02:17 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So then you admit that there are serious problems (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sb

                            with the police that aren't being solved?

                            I realize for a lot of people this doesn't matter at all but there is a huge chunk of the population that is constantly terrorized by the police.  I'm not about to just let that go.

                            And by they I mean the people involved in Occupy, not the city.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:35:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  there are problems in every organization. (0+ / 0-)

                            but blaming the cops for enforcing the law isn't going to resonate with joe public.

                            like you said, the vast majority of the population isn't "terrorized" by the police because, well, they're not breaking the law.

                            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                            by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:09:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm not blaming the cops for enforcing the law (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AgavePup, sb, dilutedviking

                            The problem with the police is that they are above the law.  

                            I'd bet you've never had a really negative experience with the police.  Like when you call the cops because you've been assaulted and then get arrested.  That happens.  I've seen it happen.  I imagine you don't live in a city with racist corrupt cops.  It isn't just a matter of individual officers, it's a culture f protecting the bad apples.

                            Okay, I do blame the cops for enforcing unjust laws.  The drug war in all it's glorious racism for one.  But, you know, just following orders so it's all okay, right?

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:13:29 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I urge you to read up on HAMP (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            skayne

                            Seriously, you do not have good information about this program.


                            "Justice is a commodity"

                            by joanneleon on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:34:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I didnt realize it was hippie bashing time (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AgavePup, sb, dilutedviking

                            And for the record I am in fact gainfully employed and I do pay taxes. Take your fucking conservative attack politics elsewhere.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:51:31 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  We refinanced thru the...HARP...program (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            glorificus, AoT, gramofsam1, sb

                            & it likely saved our house.  Not only that, but was fast easy (3 pieces of paper, 3 phone calls, 1 meeting to sign papers).  I'm grateful.

                            Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

                            by Smoh on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:10:53 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  HAMP has been a massive failure (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            skayne, sb, dilutedviking, emal

                            The monies set aside for it are largely still unspent.  Many, many applicants were gamed and ended up losing their homes while they were in the middle of the HAMP program.  The banks and servicers gamed it.

                            It is a massive, massive failure.  It has now been modified.  Maybe it will be better now. But this program has been in place for more than three f'ing years and people have been hurting all that time and who the hell did anything about it? They suffered in silence. They lost their homes.  They were not helped.  At least now they know that somebody does care and somebody will help them.  Not TPTB, but people like you and me.  People are saying hell no, and getting out there and doing something about it.

                            In some cases, local law enforcement saw that things were wrong and are refusing to carry out the evictions. Not many, but some.  A crowd of people on a lawn protecting the person being evicted sends a loud message and makes people in the area stop and think.  If nobody was doing this, the home would just be quietly vacated and taken away.  Which is exactly what the criminal banks want to happen.  No fuss, no muss.  Well no, there is going to be a fuss until things are set right.


                            "Justice is a commodity"

                            by joanneleon on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:33:27 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  yet it still did more than Occupy (0+ / 0-)

                            in terms of quantity and scale. funny how that works.

                            seeing crowd of people yelling on the lawn makes me think i should move to a new neighborhood, to be honest.

                            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                            by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:45:04 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  well since you wouldn't help your neighbor, we did (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sb, dilutedviking
                  •  Ever heard of multi-tasking? n/t (0+ / 0-)

                    "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

                    by tardis10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:12:21 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  While we wait (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sb, dilutedviking

                    for the things that have been promised by politicians, leaders, lawyers, task forces, it's a great thing for people to help out individual families.  

                    The very act of protesting foreclosures one by one raises awareness and sends a message to the banks, the politicians, the courts, the neighbors... that it is a huge problem and something must be done.  Not only does it help families in despair, it sends out a very big message, not through the television or the WH or Capitol switchboard, but right out there on the street.  It is something that people will pay attention to because it hits close to home.

                    Plus, it shows that when (if you are the person losing your home) that people care.  

                    It shows the powers that be that we are not just going to sit and wait while they slow walk the process and let the statutes of limitation run out.  It ramps up the energy.  It shows that we are not just going to sit there in our isolated corners and take it. We're going to do something about it because they sure as hell aren't.

                    It also shows a lack of faith in the system and this is a well founded lack of faith indeed.  Just look at the HAMP program and what a failure it has been.


                    "Justice is a commodity"

                    by joanneleon on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:28:45 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  That's reacting, not acting (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton, gramofsam1

                  That does nothing to change the system, just respond to it.

              •  No. It's not. Electing people who promise (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                skayne, sb

                change results in betrayal, not change.

                "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:21:38 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  This is why I hate OWS (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton

                  They aren't promoting democratic revolution and they aren't promoting violent revolution.  That's the only kinds there are.  They are organizing people to do nothing.  

                  It's closer to a rave than a political movement.

                  •  So, um, somehow non-violent revolution (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sb

                    doesn't exist now?

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:27:30 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  non-violent revolution is democratic by definition (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rcnewton

                      You change the system through electoral means or through violent means.  There are no other options.

                      I'm not saying you have to support the Democrats.  I personally voted for Nader in 2000 and learned my lesson.  

                      IMHO drastic change via democratic means is too much to hope for.  Drastic change via violent means is something I can't support.  My goals are to live in a corporatist society where global warming and evolution are real, the earth isn't 6000 years old, gays and women are equal citizens and hate crimes are illegal.  

                      We'll eventually have a revolution.  If it's a move to a theocracy where churches provide public services so long as you pray first or if it's a move to a socialist society, there's no telling.

                      Society isn't ready for revolution so making the best of what we've got seems like the best way to go.
                       

                      Praxis: Bold as Love

                      by VelvetElvis on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:57:53 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Not how many (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sb

              Not how many representatives get elected via successful consciousness-raising that OWS engages in, although that's a factor in terms of voting blocks, but how effectively any OWS supported elected representatives get the word out about economic injustice and how it hurts a large majority of us.

              "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

              by paz3 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:16:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  The only alternative is violent revolution (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton

              You can change your government democratically you can do it with guns.  There are no other options.

              Anything else is just making a lot of noise for no particular reason.

              •  So then everyone who thinks it can't be changed (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sb

                democratically should go out with a gun?

                This is what we call a false dilemma.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:29:29 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  no, it's what we call a tautology (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton

                  You've got violent revolution and you've got non-violent revolution, (a^~a).   It's binary.  There are no other options.  

                  So, yes, those who think it can't be changed should get a gun.  I agree with that part.  

                  I don't think it can' t be changed, however.  

                  Work inside the established political system to get change, work to overthrow it, or shut up and quit complaining.

                  Ever read this?

                  http://www.marxists.org/...

                  I was a member of a Trotskyist org for many years so I have some idea how this stuff works.

                  Praxis: Bold as Love

                  by VelvetElvis on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:47:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So Gandhi never happened? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sb

                    There's no such thing as a non-violent revolution?

                    Are you seriously basing your view of revolution on trots?  That's a bunch of nonsense and you should know it.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:52:19 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  not on Trots alone, no (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      sb, rcnewton

                      but I am definitely a Marxist of some color

                      Gandhi's situation was unique.  He was fighting against an imperial power during a time when there was massive social change due to industrialization, etc.  The US is not an occupied colonial state so any model based overthrowing colonialism is irrelevant.  Likewise, the violent revolutions in Algiers and other African colonel states are not relevant.

                      Praxis: Bold as Love

                      by VelvetElvis on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:12:30 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  None. Not one. Zip. Zilch. Nada. (5+ / 0-)
            Tell me again, how many Tea Party candidates got elected nationwide versus OWS candidates?
            And to even pose that questions speaks volumes on how much you don't know about Occupy:  Pretty much everything.
          •  When flaws are pointed out... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dilutedviking

            Hmm, they get defensive. How dare they? Especially because you, of course, have it all figured out, not only intellectually, but out there in the street. You've got the program,  you have the answers and you're busily recruiting volunteers and putting together actions which we are all going to hear about because the media will pay attention to YOU because you are so clearly gifted and 100% right.

            I am agog, on pins and needles, waiting for you to save us all!

        •  occupy has a very limited worldview. (4+ / 0-)

          regardless of how you may spin it. the reality based community has a better grip on these things, however you want to slice it.

          step back from occupy, look at the big picture, and try again.

          In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

          by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:01:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Which big picture is that? (22+ / 0-)

            The one where everyone swears up and down that elections are the only way to change things?  The one where all of these things are not connected?  I think you need to take a step back and look at the big picture.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:07:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  so what is occupy's plan to change things? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Aquarius40, johnny wurster

              other than sit around and sing kumbaya, break store windows, tell the police to go fuck themselves and hope that things get better?

              In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

              by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:13:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Occupy movement has totally raised awareness (15+ / 0-)

                of the issues of income inequality, human rights vs corporate rights, and is operating on multiple levels--local, state, national, and world.

                Stop bashing and start helping.

                •  i disagree. (4+ / 0-)

                  that is not the impression of the general public or mainstream media.

                  they have marginalized themselves by refusing to work to actually improve the system.

                  In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                  by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:27:13 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  What is awareness without... (10+ / 0-)

                  ...the political choices that need to be made?

                  People need focal points for that awareness.

                  People need something to rally behind.

                  Information isn't enough, meaningful courses of action must be offered.

                  Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?

                  by Stephen Daugherty on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:02:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  How do you know they're not being (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    emal, efraker

                    offered? Because you don't hear about it on teevee??

                    Is that your idea of The Big Picture?

                    It is time to #Occupy Media.

                    by lunachickie on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:13:07 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I think Stephen (5+ / 0-)

                      is correct about the big picture.  I agree that the media has a hard on for Occupy.  But what scares me more, is the possibility that above all, they're just disinterested.  And I fear America is growing disinterested.

                      It is not true that Occupy wasn't covered as it built energy last year.  It was covered A LOT.  It was new, it was intriguing, and it was INCREDIBLY effective at getting out one message: Income inequality, fairness for the 99%  No one can take that away from Occupy.

                      But since then, there has been no attempt to prioritize the messages and the solution.  You can't keep people energized with a long list of problems, but you can depress and immobolize them with the same.

                      People need singularity of purpose, and a message where the solution is inherent.  ie:  Get money out of politics.  End Citizens United.

                      •  Like so many, you're big on what "they" should do (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        akmk, emal, lunachickie

                        What are YOU doing?

                        Fine, get money out of politics. End citizen's united. What are YOU doing to accomplish either of those? Gee the media has lost interest in occupy - all their fault. Guess its all over now. They were supposed to fix everything -- you weren't supposed to have to. Damn them!

                        •  You know what Viola, (8+ / 0-)

                          I don't have to state my activist credentials to participate in this discussion.  Fact is I've done plenty for what I believe in, but I don't have to justify my opinion by giving you a list.  I'll do you the same courtesy and not demand your "papers"
                          either.

                          I have read both threads on this here today, and here's what I see.  

                          I see people, like me, who would LOVE to get behind Occupy as we did in the beginning.  I see people like me who cheered Occupy on and donated money to them, but are now confused, frustrated and discouraged as to what their message and solutions are.  You can be mad about that, or you can listen and consider.  

                          I see people like you, who defend Occupy via all the reasons it's been tough and unfair---and that it has. Who say the problem is the media, lack of funds, the right wing conspiracy of power etc, ad infinitum.  What I don't see or have YET TO READ HERE, is ONE Occupy voice that has responded with the idea, hey we might have a problem that needs to be fixed.

                          The forces allied against Occupy are not new to Occupy. Do you think the media was friendly to the civil rights movement in the beginning, or the get out of Viet Nam movement?  Because believe me, they weren't, and there was a whole lot less media, and less outlet for voice then there is today.

                          I grow very weary of responses like yours.  "They were supposed to fix everything---you weren't suposed to have to.  Damn them!" Bullshit, and not what I said at all. You insult the very people whose support you need.

                          If Occupy in general is as resistant to change and suggestion as those representing the movement here today, then I don't have a lot of hope for them.

                          •  I grow weary of responses like yours (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            run around, emal, lunachickie

                            I grow weary of criticisms like yours. Once again, OWS hasn't lived up to YOUR expectations so you will list all the ways they have failed you and will be offended when someone calls you on it.

                            I'm not in OWS in that sense. So you are not talking "to me". I don't speak for them. Certainly Dkos has OWS folks and sympathisers but if you want OWS to listen to YOU, you need to talk to OWS, not simply insult them from afar.

                            I haven't engaged in specific defenses such as you mentioned -- the media, the money -- etc. (Not because I don't agree with those, those have been issues.) What I have been saying is that people like you seem to think OWS should change to satisfy you and I think OWS has a perfect right to say "pound sand".

                            You supported them in the beginning but now you're confused. They don't have a clear message! Screw their GA's and consensus building and their struggles over what should happen next. Do what I say!!! Be something different than you are! Coz you were cool for awhile but now you're not cool. A lot of us talk a good game about being in for the long haul but OWS needs to do what I want NOW! Because the fate of the world is in their hands and there is nothing I can do!!!

                            One of their biggest messages is that we have to stop waiting for leaders to save us. We have to stop waiting for OWS to save us. Instead we all need to be thinking of what things WE CAN DO to save us. Which I am doing BTW. I have stuff in the works, building off previous work which I will unveil soon. I just get tired of people expecting other people to do the heavy lifting and then criticizing them into the bargain.

                          •  I can't continue this discussion (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rcnewton, Unduna, gramofsam1, mconvente

                            with you Viola.  You have put words in my mouth one too many times.  You have made assumptions about me one too many times, and insulted me with your unfounded knowledge. You have demanded I give you PROOF my comments should be considered, one too many times.  And I can see that won't change, and to continue would bore both of us.

                          •  Oh, that wasn't boring at all (0+ / 0-)

                            unless it's boring to be making a correct call:

                            If you want OWS to listen to YOU, you need to talk to OWS, not simply insult them from afar.
                            Can someone send Bill Maher this memo, please? He's so provocative yet he seems to have forgotten a Credibility 101 lesson.
                             

                            It is time to #Occupy Media.

                            by lunachickie on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 08:05:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And that's the problem. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            WB Reeves

                            Apparently venturing any opinion on OWS that is not laudatory is considered an insult.  Bill Maher handled it with his usual voice, and I don't agree with his every word.

                            I understand the feelings, having just been very active in the Wisconsin recall, and after the loss, seen criticism coming from Democrats from afar, as to how the recall was run.  This is the fate of those who didn't come out on top, no matter how hard they fought. But I think the discussion is important, and one lives through that, and learns from that.  

                            I totally agree Maher is guilty of not having more from the movement on his show to have this discussion directly. But OWS has a responsibility to answer for itself as well. I'm active in many political causes, which I choose on the basis of believing in the message AND seeing clear action steps to the solution.

                            It's not my responsibility to make OWS hear me, it's up to OWS to message in a way that draws people in. That's not happening for me right now. Did in the beginning, but I'm not seeing an evolution to focusing the message and the solution.

                •  raising awareness isn't changing things (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton, Unduna

                  Changing things requires praxis.

                  •  Recced for "praxis". The number of people who (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    rcnewton

                    actually know the meaning or critical actions of the word are too few and far between... god luvya.

                    "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                    by Unduna on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 07:52:01 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yeah, you know what's required for Praxis? (0+ / 0-)

                      A comprehensive theory.  I don't see a comprehensive theory from the people supporting the "just vote" point of view.

                      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                      by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:39:12 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  And OWS has a comprehensive theory? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        rcnewton

                        Yes there's a theory to the "just vote" mantra.  It's called classical liberalism.

                        Praxis: Bold as Love

                        by VelvetElvis on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:19:05 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  No, that's not what's required for praxis. nt (0+ / 0-)

                        "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                        by Unduna on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:17:39 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Praxis = Theory + Action (0+ / 0-)

                          Therefore Praxis requires a theory.

                          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                          by AoT on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 08:01:40 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  No. No no no no no. Not. Nyet. (0+ / 0-)

                            Praxis is the opposite of theory.

                            The last fucking thing in the world that praxis requires is some fucking pre-thought-up theory.

                            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                            by Unduna on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 10:27:01 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What praxis are you talking about? (0+ / 0-)

                            Every version of praxis I've heard of involves the combination of theory and action.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 11:42:18 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Do a google search. (0+ / 0-)

                            It's got nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with theory.
                            It is the dead freaking opposite of theory.

                            You do not need theory to learn to walk or talk or type.

                            What you need is the ability to deploy an action consistently and to correct that action quickly, accurately and repeatedly as necessary.

                            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                            by Unduna on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 12:10:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  From Wikipedia (0+ / 0-)

                            here

                            Praxis is the process by which a theory, lesson, or skill is enacted, practiced, embodied, or realised.
                            That seems to have theory right there.  And political praxis always has a theory in my opinion.  It is the manifestation and enactment of a theory.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 12:19:43 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Praxis is (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            learning by consistent application and the ability to self-correct - auto self-correction being the critical element.

                            Anything else is a derivative and/or bastardization.

                            Most basically, praxis is auto-application most decidedly without or despite theoretical application.

                            Your misinformation, and Wikipedia's, is a result of Corporate America, and to some extent "higher" education, bastardizing the term for it's own self-conscious and metacog purposes.

                            Therein lies a twist so rank it almost isn't funny.

                            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                            by Unduna on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 12:47:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Let me explain my understanding of praxis (0+ / 0-)

                            which I think is closer to yours than it seems.  

                            Praxis is action informed by theory, which then informs the theory which you started with.

                            Your misinformation, and Wikipedia's, is a result of Corporate America, and to some extent "higher" education, bastardizing the term for it's own self-conscious and metacog purposes.
                            You really shouldn't just tell someone to google something if you want them to get a real idea of what you're talking about.  When you google something it gives you results that are tailored to you, when I google something it gives me results that are tailored to me.  I bet when you google 'praxis' you get a good number of results that agree with your definition, but I don't because I haven't visited the sites you have.  It's very insidious.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 01:07:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This is something I actually know a little too (0+ / 0-)

                            much about and really, I don't want to discuss it with you anymore.

                            And no, motor planning and self-correction have fuck all jack shit to do with theory.

                            Praxis does not require theory.  The end.

                            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                            by Unduna on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:41:38 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh - and as far as OWS - it is (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            planning and then recognizing and processing information that will lead to accurate and timely self-correction so that you can continue to deploy the movement efficiently and effectively.

                            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                            by Unduna on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:45:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  (your pinky hits the 'a' instead of the 's' when (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            typing - you feel it, you recognize and process that information so quickly that you simply correct without thinking about it - that's praxis, and it is praxis that brought you there and it is praxis that will keep you there, 'there' being able to type efficiently and effectively.  And no theory has jack shit fuck all to do with that.)

                            "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

                            by Unduna on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:54:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  I recc'd this because (0+ / 0-)

                  it's important to give the Occupy movement the credit its due. However, changing the world is tall order and if the movement is incapable of dealing with criticism with anything other than reflexive hostility and sneers, it hasn't got much of a future.

              •  What a load of crap. (0+ / 0-)

                break store windows, tell police to go fuck themselves

              •  What is their plan? (0+ / 0-)

                What is yours? I mean besides yapping -- what is yours? Let's hear your plan, and specifically what YOU are doing to make it concrete and to get those measurable results you're so fond of.

            •  AoT, I believe I understand where you are coming (6+ / 0-)

              from, however I myself at times do get tired of the sensitivity shown to any critical commentary regarding OWS.

              My personal actions on the political front aren't beholden to the activities of OWS though it will be exciting to see how they respond to this election cycle.

              As for rcnewton, be reminded that this individual is the same who believed that Anne Sorock was just fine and dandy.

              Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

              by Morgan Sandlin on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:22:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  i know, it's shocking that i would know (0+ / 0-)

                and approve of someone who has different political leanings than mine.

                how awful is that? lol. nothing says closed minded like only associating with like minded folks. step out of the echo chamber, and rejoin us in the real world, please.

                In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:44:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I can understand about the sensitivity thing (9+ / 0-)

                and it is a problem.  It's just that these things are so absurd some times.  I mean, this is a movement that is based around the idea that the rich and famous shouldn't have the outsized power over us that they do and then someone who is rich and famous comes along and tells us what we have to do.  And in fact says nothing new at all.  It grates on the nerves.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:47:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  But isn't part of the point supposed to be that... (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  on the cusp, rcnewton, Smoh, gramofsam1

                  we all get an opinion?

                  OWS will fail if it does not look to include individuals outside of the hardcore protester.

                  I myself went from being initially very impressed to finally saying "Not my cup of tea" due to the actions, and in some cases inaction, of OWS and if they are to succeed they need to engage people like myself.

                  It will be seriously intruiging to see where Occupy goes...but if it stays where it is it will lose a great opportunity and be of little or no consequence in the months and  years to come. Something I will regret.

                  Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

                  by Morgan Sandlin on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:54:24 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  We do all get an opinion (6+ / 0-)

                    But as it stands the rich have actual influence as opposed to what the rest of us get.  So you'll excuse me if I don't give a crap when Bill pipes up and tells me voting is the only thing that matters.  This opinion is expressed in comment section of virtually every single diary about OWS.

                    OWS will fail if it does not look to include individuals outside of the hardcore protester.
                    And that's happening.  You don't see it in the media of course, or fleetingly if you do.  People are going out and organizing on a broad base and tying together these issues.

                    Really, you work on what you think is most important.  OWS doesn't need to be everything to everyone.  As long as you're working on making this country better then go for it.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:06:29 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  The point is (9+ / 0-)

                    we won't know if it is happening because Compromised Media isn't going to tell us about it.

                    Real grass-roots doesn't need Mainstream Media kissing its ass. It won't happen because Mainstream Media is in bed with the One Percent.

                    I'm with the diarist here. When Bill Maher stops giving people like Ann Coulter a mic and starts guesting people like George Martinez, then he can lecture his concern all he wants. Until then, where OWS is concerned, he's a hypocrite pushing a double-standard.

                    It is time to #Occupy Media.

                    by lunachickie on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:17:39 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Understood (8+ / 0-)

                  and I cannot stand Bill Maher anyways-he's sexist and condescending. But it's not just the "rich and powerful" who get that kind of reaction.

                  I gave up on my local Occupy because it was taken over by the anarchist faction, and got to the point where someone was sexually assaulted (not by an occupier, but within the camp) and they tried to pressure her not to go to the police. I tried to speak out about it, and got accused of pushing right wing memes. I learned to be very careful with anything that could be construed as a criticism of the movement, because people would just get defensive and accuse me of being anti-OWS. The dialogue was always very contentious. Eventually I just threw up my hands and decided it wasn't worth trying anymore.

                  I'm just saying, an open and honest conversation about Occupy is important and very much needed. I appreciate that you are willing, but many within OWS are not.

                  "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"- MLK

                  by SwedishJewfish on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:06:58 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  There is deffinitely a problem (5+ / 0-)

                    with reactionary responses to criticism.  I do end up that way some times, mainly when we have to go over the same arguments over and over again.  Really I should know to just not bother discussing the voting thing with some people, because it doesn't get anyone anywhere.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:13:17 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Seriously? (0+ / 0-)
                As for rcnewton, be reminded that this individual is the same who believed that Anne Sorock was just fine and dandy.
                Is that snark?
            •  How will the needed change occur (6+ / 0-)

              without changes to laws and budget allocation? And how will the laws and budgets be changed without lawmakers who will vote in the changes?

              Occupy successfully changed some of the national conversation last year. Then what?

              The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

              by SoCalSal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:41:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Some of them definitely can occur (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Lady Libertine, Viola

                without those things.  The foreclosure defenses that have been taking place are a good example of that.  But there's already a ton of people working on electoral strategies, people who are here on DKos.  Why is it that people who agree with OWS and already work on elections can't translate that energy without OWS coming out and declaring their support for this candidate or that?   In fact, there are people who are a part of OWS who are working on elections.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:56:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Why is it... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT

                  "Why is it that people who agree with OWS and already work on elections can't translate that energy without OWS coming out and declaring their support for this candidate or that?"

                  That's what I keep wondering!

                  I wrote on the other Maher thread that people act like there's a finite number of potential activists in America and they are all in OWS. There's plenty of very unhappy people out there, some of whom would be willing to do something if what is proposed appeals to them. Instead people focus on OWS because it is the only large scale movement we've seen in years that got noticed and had any impact. (Wisconsin has been the other.) Well, people who joined, and more critically, those who have remained active in OWS are doing what they want to do. There's no law that says people who have other ideas can't start their own movement.

                •  Ok, you can be satisfied with preventing (6+ / 0-)

                  foreclosures one at a time, affecting a few homeowners, or work to affect laws and regulations that will help millions of homeowners. Maybe that's the answer -- that Occupy will be most effective as local organizations.

                  I liked the OWS 99% statements about income inequality from the beginning, and the enthusiasm, the passion. By now I'd like to see that energy more focused on specific issues. And the issues have to be clear before the organization can focus on candidates.

                  From what I gather, some in the Occupy movement don't want to support President Obama or the Democratic Party. Again, if the clear issue is to improve economic equality then electing Obama and Democrats become the clear preference. 'Cause that sure won't improve if Romney and more Teapublicans are elected. If Occupiers don't understand that difference and prefer "disaffectedness" to effectiveness, then the movement will not survive.

                  The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

                  by SoCalSal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:11:18 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So you'll be the one to tell the person who's (0+ / 0-)

                    home is being foreclosed tomorrow that we couldn't be bothered to help because we had to go convince people to vote?

                    I liked the OWS 99% statements about income inequality from the beginning
                    OWS was never just about income inequality, ever.  The press portrayed it as being just about that because it was the least disruptive ay they could portray it.
                    By now I'd like to see that energy more focused on specific issues. And the issues have to be clear before the organization can focus on candidates.
                    The problem is that it isn't just a matter of a few individual issues.  It's a problem of a broad spectrum of issues that are all interrelated, and you can just release some statement that will address that.
                    If Occupiers don't understand that difference and prefer "disaffectedness" to effectiveness, then the movement will not survive.
                    If fighting a rear guard battle against the worst abuses of the rich is what you want to focus on then supporting Dems is the way to go.  If you want to focus on the deeper problems that we have, the one that virtually no politician talks about, then endorsing Dems doesn't help at all.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:08:45 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  AoT, the local foreclosure prevention was (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      AoT

                      great, obviously. Note: I didn't say otherwise. I merely pointed out scale.

                      You are right, that Occupy wasn't only about income inequality. Eliminating class inequality might be a more appropriate phrase.

                      If Occupy can solve the problems of this near-dysfunctional system of government, I'll cheer loudly. The entire world will be grateful. So far, I'm not seeing that possibility but there's always hope.

                      The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

                      by SoCalSal on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 12:29:52 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly, SoCalSal (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gramofsam1, rcnewton

                OWS does  not, by design, get the support from the lawmakers who could make changes because OWS does not actually say that they would support the lawmaker if they did a particular thing, or say they will not vote for that lawmaker if they do NOT do a thing.  They might appeal to our better nature, but not are  force for Congress to reckon with.

            •  Elections are not the only way to change things. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton, Unduna

              The alternative is guns.

              There are no other alternatives.  You can change your government at the ballot box or you can change it by force.

              Democratic revolutions aren't nearly as much work and are much less bloody.

              •  Tell that to the labor movement (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AgavePup

                You know, the one that went on strike for an eight hour day.  Tell them that guns are the only way other than voting.

                Ignorant bullshit.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:43:32 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Back when orgaized labor was allowed to have balls (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton

                  It was the threat of violence that made unions the most effective.

                  There has been no real union movement in the US since Taft-Hartley.

                  I'm more red than black but I do have an IWW card.

                  Praxis: Bold as Love

                  by VelvetElvis on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:29:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Strikes were the most powerful tool labor (0+ / 0-)

                    had or has.

                    I agree about labor being neutered, but they are responsible for that.  They are the ones who have stopped being radical.

                    I also have an IWW card.  But I'm more black than red.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:58:58 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Elections by themselves won't (0+ / 0-)

              bring the necessary changes but neither will abstaining from them as a matter of dogma.

          •  LMAO on this one: (3+ / 0-)
            the reality based community has a better grip on these things
            thanks.  I need that laugh.
          •  30 years of doing it your way has resulted (6+ / 0-)

            in a Democratic Party in 2012 five degrees to the right of the Republican Party in 1982 on most issues.

            "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

            by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:23:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Occupy has nothing in common with mainstrem Americ (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rcnewton

            a.

            I've been working to get conservative Democrats (they are the majority in the south) to the polls since I was a kid.  There are not radicals.  They are Christian, often pro-life, pro capitalism and pro national security.  They are the democratic base.

            Occupy has no plan to reach out to mainstream America, no plan to expand their movement beyond what it already is.  

            There are two reasons for this.

            1) They would have to actually agree on some goals.

            2) It's hard.  Educating voters is a lot harder than sitting in a drum circle.

            •  You couldn't handle occupying anyways. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dilutedviking, AgavePup, Brooklyn Jim

              Camping in the downtown in a major city in October is not easy. Occupy was much, much more than "sitting in a drum circle". It was difficult and took endurance.

              "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

              by Broke And Unemployed on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 07:19:27 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  looks like nobody else is doing it anymore either (0+ / 0-)

                it's unsustainable. it's a temper tantrum. and it certainly doesn't effect real change in government policies.

                In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 07:46:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Neither did all the effort... (5+ / 0-)

                  ...put into electing Obama. The government is still on a police state trajectory, still engaged in expanding imperial military actions abroad, still fiddling while global warming burns and still geared to protecting the interests of the Big Banks and corporations rather than the 99%.

                  •  start with your neighbors (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    rcnewton

                    You know those people who send you annoying right wing email forwards?  They are the ones you have the greatest opportunity to persuade.  

                    The way to make a difference is to change the minds of conservatives one at a time, not preaching to the choir.

                    Praxis: Bold as Love

                    by VelvetElvis on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:23:37 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  A temper tantrum? (5+ / 0-)

                  You guys couldn't do an Occupy-style camp-out. It's harder than you think. Occupy left their camps because they were brutally repressed by cops, not for lack of endurance.

                  Does spamming comments on blog sites about how much you and your group hate Occupy change anything? Is it helping re-elect Obama? Or is it just dividing and ruining this online community?

                  "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

                  by Broke And Unemployed on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:32:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  you're right. (0+ / 0-)

                    when i go camping, i prefer to be far far away from people. you know, real camping. without starbucks, medical tents or libraries or police officers.

                    In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                    by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:42:17 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I also like to stay far away from cops. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      dilutedviking

                      They can't be trusted.

                      "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

                      by Broke And Unemployed on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 06:12:47 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Those who commit crimes (0+ / 0-)

                        Rarely trust cops. Everyone else has no problem with them.

                        In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                        by rcnewton on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 06:35:09 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yep, the working poor are all criminals. (0+ / 0-)

                          Millions of people don't trust the cops, whole neighborhoods, whole areas where the cops aren't trusted. We don't call them in emergencies. It's messed up that your group thinks that everyone who has a problem with an increasingly militarized and out-of-touch police force is out "committ[ing] crimes".

                          If you'll excuse me, I have liquor stores to rob and meth to sell. Or at least, that's what your group thinks.

                          "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

                          by Broke And Unemployed on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:53:16 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  i will reiterate my point. (0+ / 0-)

                            if you are a legitimate victim and aren't hiding anything, then you have nothing to fear from the police. I'm a minority, and have never had any issue with police.

                            if you're trying to manipulate them, or provoke them, or are engaging in illegal activity, they'll arrest you. that's their job.

                            it's too bad you see this as class warfare - it's really just the divide between those of us who adhere to the law and those who don't.

                            In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                            by rcnewton on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 09:18:46 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

        •  Americans don't have a clue as to what OWS (8+ / 0-)

          is talking about. And that is the fault of OWS, not the fault of Americans.

          Romney - 2012 - He's A Trooper!

          by kitebro on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:11:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Is that my fault or the media?i (21+ / 0-)

            I've done my damnedest to articulate a message, and though I can't speak for everyone in OWS and don't claim to, beyond this site is anyone else reaching out to people like me within OWS? Other than Ed Schultz and a few others, no. Whatever faults OWS has in messaging are multiplied by a media that refuses to deliver the messages we do give them, like ending the war and taxing the rich.

            Now, I'm certainly not blaming America for not better understanding OWS, but to dismiss the media's role in refusing to report messages that don't jive with the profit interests of corporations that own media outlets? Americans dont understand evolution either, is that Darwin's fault or a media that puts Darwin on a fair and balanced plane with The Flintstones

            Regulate banks, not vaginas

            by MinistryOfTruth on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:20:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Jesse, there are a lot of people (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton, FG, johnny wurster, mconvente

              in this country who  don't like OWS, don't respect it.  Average Americans who just see you as a bunch of misguided hippies.

              They are a part of the 99% too.

              And they DO know about OWS. The media has done some stories on them maybe not as many as you'd like. But the idea is out there.  It's not that Americans don't understand OWS, they just don't agree on it by and large.

              •  agreed, wholeheartedly. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mconvente

                i agree with their mission, but their execution is fatally flawed.

                In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress. -John Adams

                by rcnewton on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:29:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  That's because they're not informed enough. (0+ / 0-)
                Jesse, there are a lot of people in this country who  don't like OWS, don't respect it.
                •  Honestly (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton, Lestatdelc, AgavePup

                  As someone who completely agrees with the stand OWS has taken on inequality, still, the first thing I think about regarding these protests is that it must be nice to have all that time on your hands. Most of the 99% isn't sympathetic to Occupy because, while they're all camping out, we have to go to work.

                  "Maybe: it's a vicious little word that could slay me"--Sara Bareilles

                  by ChurchofBruce on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:23:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I hope you don't mind if I say: Bullshit. (5+ / 0-)
                    the first thing I think about regarding these protests is that it must be nice to have all that time on your hands
                    Nice?  Nice?  Nice?  Unemployed, can't find a job.  You think that's nice?

                    And the tens of thousands of people of all ages who do have a job, such as it is, who attended Occupy movements, what say you there?

                    I say you have no effing clue what you're talking about.  

                    How about if I were to say:  It must be nice to have all that time on your hands to comment at this blog.  

                    Does that make you worthless, too?

                    •  That's kind of the point (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rcnewton

                      Unless actions by OWS can be transitioned into things that effect our ELECTED representation, which people who work can get fully behind, you are on a fool's errand, no matter how righteous the motive.

                      cheers,

                      Mitch Gore

                      Want to end too big to fail banks? Then move your money and they will no longer be too big.

                      by Lestatdelc on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:24:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Sweet fucking christ. You do fucking (5+ / 0-)

                    understand that a hell of a lot of them CAN'T FIND FUCKING JOBS?!??!?!?!!?

                    What the FUCK?!?!

                    "How nice it must be to have no fucking income"?!!?

                    This is the most obnoxious and privileged fucking comment I've had the misfortune to run across in the entire discussion of the issue on this site over the last 18 months.

                    What the fuck happened to you>?  You didn't used to be this person.

                    "For example, I would support the wholesale annihiliation of an entire country...men, women, children, cats, dogs, whatever... if it is done to directly prevent the exact same from happening here." TooFolkGR

                    by JesseCW on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:29:51 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That part of it (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rcnewton

                      I do understand.

                      How much of Occupy is genuinely unemployed?

                      I have a friend who went down to the one in Boston last year, a college kid who's a complete lefty who would fit right in at OWS, seemingly. He was disillusioned. He found lots of people his age, but found way too many from BU and BC who are getting their educations paid by Daddy and, unlike my friend, didn't have to work to pay tuition, and couldn't understand why he did. We go to a state school; everybody works and if you lose your job you probably have to drop out of school.

                      Can't  find a job? Yes, I do understand that. It's the "hell of a lot of them" part that I need to be convinced about. That wasn't my friend's experience. It wasn't mine, either, but he was down there more than I was.

                      "Maybe: it's a vicious little word that could slay me"--Sara Bareilles

                      by ChurchofBruce on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:06:55 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  At our encampment we had a woman who slept on the (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Brooklyn Jim

                    sidewalk in the freezing rain, harassed by cops nightly, received dozens of tickets despite it being perfectly legal and constitutionally protected, and got up at 5am in the dark to bicycle a dozen miles to work every fricken day and come back at the end of work and do it over again.  

                    And for her I say, FUCK YOU.

              •  The Media has pushed bullshit about OWS (9+ / 0-)

                because they want America to think they're a bunch of misguided hippies.

                I fail to see what the fuck is so hard to understand about that.  

                It is time to #Occupy Media.

                by lunachickie on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:19:10 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  My only suggestion is dropping the "Occupy" brand (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton, Smoh, Lestatdelc, skayne

                  because it doesn't say anything about the purpose of the actions, just the action itself (which is itself limiting).

                  The media, right, and Democratic Party loyalists will still find ways to smear those protesting in a way that doesn't fit neatly within the two-party frame, but the goal is not to win those people over, but to most effectively reach the American public despite hostility from those in power and their supporter. The goal also shouldn't be to make sure a protest tactic+brand lives on indefinitely, but rather we continue to fight and build support.

                  Again, I like to point out what is happening in Montreal as a good example that it is possible, though of course easier in Montreal, to build or continue a grassroots movement without doing so under the banner and existing structure of "Occupy".

            •  You are right about the media. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton, gramofsam1

              So what next?

              Romney - 2012 - He's A Trooper!

              by kitebro on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:46:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Jesse, you're a part of the media now to some (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton

              extent. Most people have heard about OWS. They just don't like what they see or hear about it. 'We want world revolution' is the message coming from Occupy and I doubt there is more than 1% support for it in the country overall. I understand that OWS has a variety of views but only the most loud voices are heard.

              •  'We want world revolution' (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FG

                is not what the few people representing Occupy have been saying when they are invited to speak on the MSM. Great change is needed, not simply different or more Democrats. That isn't some radical 60's-era revolution-speak, it's the truth.

                Of course, being an open protest movement, not a political party, what individuals in a city's local Occupy groups on any given day might say they want to see happen is going to vary. But those varying opinions are shared during meetings and then a consensus is approached or reach that represents the group better.

                •  I'm not saying it's the majority (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton

                  opinion of the movement. But as the movement became smaller the more radical elements became more prevalent. And since consensus opinions of Occupy are not disseminated, the most loud (and usually the most radical) opinions get out.

                •  Oh? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rcnewton
                  Great change is needed, not simply different or more Democrats.
                  Good luck with that, sounds like meaningless crap.
                  That isn't some radical 60's-era revolution-speak, it's the truth
                  No, it is meaningless rhetoric that sounds like crap.

                  cheers,

                  Mitch Gore

                  Want to end too big to fail banks? Then move your money and they will no longer be too big.

                  by Lestatdelc on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:27:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Going by your uid (0+ / 0-)

                    you are an old timer here. So what is your solution?

                    I have followed you down the thread and you have been REALLY taking the piss out of OWS.

                    So, you have been here crashing the gates for nigh on ten years. You are really good at criticizing. What is YOUR answer?

                    It is easy to carp and snipe. You are informed, and experienced, and you obviously despise Occupy.

                    So...

                    What should we DO?

          •  It's due to a number of reasons (11+ / 0-)

            partially that Americans don't want to hear about the complex nature of our problems, more so because the media refuses to talk about the complex nature of our problems.  Even here there are plenty of people who want to go on pretending everything is single issue even though most of us know better.

            I will admit however that OWS does need to work out a better strategy for communicating to people who might be sympathetic.  But if your suggestion is to form a top down organization then it's going to fail.  I don't know if you noticed but that's been happening for years.  There are plenty of organizations talking about these things, they just get ignored and derided because they aren't "serious."

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:32:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  This is not true: (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton, AoT, tardis10, Smoh, gramofsam1

              "But if your suggestion is to form a top down organization then it's going to fail.  I don't know if you noticed but that's been happening for years.  There are plenty of organizations talking about these things, they just get ignored and derided because they aren't "serious."

              There are many organizations based on more traditional models that have been very effective.  The Çolor of Change, for instance, has taken on singular issues, responded with focus and strength and succeeded brilliantly.  Have they changed the world in a one blow, no.  But they've made a difference.

              Yes, there are great examples of successful movements that haven't been top down, as well.  Look at the almost over night movement that sprung into action against Susan G Komen, or the movement that took Rush down 50 pegs.

              All my examples had something going for them that IMO,
              Occupy has failed to achieve yet.  If you're looking for "a better strategy for communicating to people who might be sympathetic," then the movement must discipline itself to what every other organization, top down model or otherwise, must--- a singular statement of message in which the solution is inherently understood.

              You don't protest with a brochure full of outrage.  You protest with one strong message, and an equally strong action towards solution.

              •  Single issue advocacy isn't going to solve (0+ / 0-)

                our problems, it's bigger than that now.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:53:15 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  If it's ever bigger than communicating (6+ / 0-)

                  the problem AND the solution, then we're in trouble nothing can solve.  

                  Sit a hundred citizens in a room. Assume they're vaguely sympathetic to Occupy's basic message, but not active in the cause.  List the problems for them.  All 100 of them, just for starters. And be sure to elaborately graph how all these problems inner relate until they're a vicious circle of all tail, and no head.

                  I can guarantee you those citizens chins will be drooping to their chests by the end, either because they're depressed rather than energized, or because they're asleep.

                  Take the same group of people, present one strong singular message, with a solution in mind, action steps set out, and I guarantee you'll have yourself at least a few new believers.

                  Communicating a message and arousing a reaction hasn't changed much since, well, since forever, I would guess.  But I do know, having spent my career as part of the communications industry, that there are no excuses that will work to avoid the reality that people do not respond to an endless list of problems.

                  "Single issue advocacy" can also be called strong and focused advocacy.  Nevertheless, adopting priorities does not doom the movement to being single issue.  It can start with one big issue, like Citizens United, or even two or three big issues, and with success, grow into subset issues.  This is exactly what the Tea Party has done.

                  But what won't work is getting people to keep marching over what a crappy world it is, with further steps or solutions either not evident, or too splintered to gain traction.

                  •  Sit 100 people in a room... (0+ / 0-)

                    If you have done this, I applaud you. You should write a diary telling us how it went and how many more times you're going to do it. Inspire us!

                    If you haven't done this, why not put a program together and take it to the closest OWS group you can find? If you don't want to do that, (or OWS doesn't want to) why not do it yourself? If you don't want to do that, why not enlist some others to do it instead? If you don't want to do that, why should anyone else?

                  •  I agree with most of what you say (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    StellaRay, SwedishJewfish

                    The current tactic is to engage with others doing single issue advocacy advocacy and then talk to them about the broader issued and problems. You are 100% right about sitting people down and lecturing them. That's the worst way to do it. It has to be presented in a way that has some bearing on their personal experience.

                    I want to add, and please don't take this as a personal slight, that there is a deep distrust of "communication" as a field, and in many ways rightly so. Too often "you need to stay on message" actually means that you need to avoid telling hard truthes because people might disagree with you.

                    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:26:51 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  This: (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      AoT, gramofsam1, SwedishJewfish, mconvente

                      "please don't take this as a personal slight, that there is a deep distrust of "communication" as a field, and in many ways rightly so."

                      I don't take it personally at all AoT.  I interpret your statement here as a symptom of distrust for established ideas, or the establishment in general.  Believe it or not, this is not a new, or un-experienced idea to this old rebel gal.

                      But some things are just true, and remain.  While others don't.  It's my position that focus of mission, singularity of message, and accessibility to solutions is not a fad, or an "establishment meme" but rather a truth based on human capacity that has proved itself over and over again.  

                      And I might add to this, the ability to adapt is another nonnegotiable.  This last one is huge, painful, and difficult, but most necessary.

                      "You need to stay on message" will never be regarded as avoiding the "hard truths" if the message is simple and clear.  To give a successful example:  

                      Civil rights for all.  Repeal DADT.

                      I'd like to share an interesting story with you, about the power of brevity and focus.  Hemingway was once asked in a writing class to write a short story.  In six words.  Here's what he wrote:

                      "Baby shoes for sale. Never worn."

                      A whole epic tragic story told in 6 words, easily understood, evocative to the extreme.  Forgive me my dusty old artifacts, AoT, but living a long time teaches you some things.

                      I hope that with all the young and fabulous energy that is OWS, it will not fall prey to one of the worst "isms" in this country. Ageism. I do hope that Occupy does not put their finger in their ears when it comes to feed back from those older, and sometimes, wiser.

                      •  For the record (3+ / 0-)

                        While I am likely younger than you at 35 I'm no spring chicken. I think this is why I get so frustrated and combative in these sorts of diaries is because I've seen this all before. I've seen it way too often. Protesters get into the news for some reason or another get into the news and then everyone starts screaming about how they need to just do GOTV and everything will be solved. And they do it and then we all end up with a slightly better version of what we had. I'm just not buying that anymore.

                        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                        by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:17:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  To each our own path, and all that. (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          gramofsam1, AoT, SwedishJewfish

                          But somewhere a long the line, you, and I, and all those who want the same end results are going to have to agree on the process and priorities.   That may or may not include Occupy, as the ability to stay relevant and inspiring is up to Occupy.

                          I have repeatedly stated on this site that I believe this country is in a political civil war.  And I don't think that is hyperbole.  Last time we looked, a civil war meant a war within a country.  Now it's a war within a country without the relief of calling it that, and acting on it in the same way.  We are no longer so conveniently divided as we once were, north vs. south, and we no longer can fight it in the same way.

                          And I will note, that Lincoln's number one priority, in a sea of problems, was holding this country together.  His number one priority was that the United States of America would not dissolve over its disagreements.  This is what he went to war over.  

                          And when you go to war, if you want to win, you better be able to corral the troops under a message that resonates. This is not in any way the sole responsibility of Occupy. And Occupy is not our last great hope.  Until it proves to be so.

                          •  While I am often tempted to see this as (0+ / 0-)

                            a situation where a civil war is likely or already started I think that is a result of the fact that the media and the political system are both skewed to give the right wing far more prominence than they actually have.  The "militia" members have a tiny support base once they start perpetrating violence outside the realm of anti-abortion terrorism, and a single issue like abortion is not something on which a civil war will happen.  

                            Not to mention the fact that all of these idiot right wingers have no clue how to actually fight a war or a revolution.  All they're good for is low level terrorism, which is not going to ignite a civil war or it would have already.  The right wing is too ideologically blinded to know what would really start a revolution, it definitely isn't a few people with guns trying to "stand their ground" against the government. They tried it under Clinton and all it got them was shot by the feds.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:46:58 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh, AoT, (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gramofsam1, rcnewton

                            can't tell you how many ways I think you're missing the boat.

                            You tell me "these idiot right wingers have no clue how to actually fight a war or a revolution."  And I'm going to tell you, that they're traveling down that path quite nicely, thank you, by controlling the house of the United State's congress. You don't get this? Really?

                            I have enjoyed our conversations, AoT, and look forward to more of them.  But for right now, I'm not cheered by your desire to "swagger" in some sort of left wing bubble.

                            The left wing has no business doing any kind of swaggering at all right now.  And the lack of humility to note the successes of our enemy is not helpful, and will not lead to learning what we need to learn.

                            I'll leave you to your right bashing.  As for me, I'm more concerned about how we should counter that.  And, as is relevant to this thread, how Occupy is countering that.

                •  we cant fix (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  StellaRay, tardis10, Smoh, emal

                  any of the other (numerous) vital problems until we get this one fixed. The rest will follow. I dont see it as a "single issue" on a buffet spread of important issues, pick & choose. It is THE issue.... it hobbles anyone trying to bring about progress on any of the other issues.

                  If Occupy or a new movement could focus like a laser on the Money Out of Politics "issue" there'd be a huge groundswell of support. There was in fact, back in Oct/Nov, then.... well, a lot of long stories there, but the fracturing that followed  (some of it natural, some of it deliberate, in my opinion) is what tanked it. But, the heart & soul of it is still going strong. I think it will evolve.

                  Buy the ticket, take the ride. ~HST

                  by Lady Libertine on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:14:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  They don't have a "clue" what OWS is talking about (8+ / 0-)

            in the same way they don't have a clue about climate change, pollution, income inequality, the war on workers, etc.
            In other words, they have a clue, but don't see an answer that doesn't have too many unknowns for comfort, too much change, too much inconvenience, so instead of working towards any answer at all, they revert back to not "understanding" just to be able to go on day to day.

            It's lazy but not unexpected.

            Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

            by Burned on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:38:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Plus, not everyone has fast internet access, (4+ / 0-)

              or even computers to access the Internet.

              In a lot of rural areas, diverse media coverage via TV and radio is very limited.

              It's not surprising that every person living is this country is not as informed as one would hope they would be.

              I haven't seen the statistics on this, but how many community radio stations only air right wing crap talk?

              Heck, even in Philadelphia, last I looked, all is right wing radio with the exception of someone who used to be a republican and is now an Independent.

              •  This is true (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gooderservice

                But there is also a whole lot just staring even these people in the face that gets ignored because there aren't easy answers or solutions that don't rock the boat too much. And it's been my opinion for some time that Right Wing radio just gives some people a way out of having to take care of the big stuff in a big way.

                Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

                by Burned on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:33:15 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't know that I agree with you about (0+ / 0-)
                  a whole lot just staring even these people in the face that gets ignored
                  I don't think they ever have an opposing point of view to ever give them something to think about, let alone relate to.

                  Granted X percent, maybe 20 percent of this country are bigots, racists, you name it.  That's a given.  Maybe that percentage is even higher.  

                  But I think there are maybe another 10 to 20 percent that if factual information were available to them, I think some, not all, would begin to think for themselves.  At least I hope they would.

        •  And exactly how many people here are not (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, rcnewton, gramofsam1

          aware of the connections you mentioned?  I think it is the general public to whom you are referring, not Kossacks.

          My concern about OWS is that the strategies have now been fully developed to marginalize the movement.  Very disconcerting multilevel/multi-agency strategies.  I wish I new how OWS could be rehabilitated in view of the new highly coordinated opposition, but I don't.

          I think a reinvention of some kind is required.  Maybe that judgement is premature, but the spring reawakening of OWS is just about to run into summer.

          Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Carl Sagan

          by sjburnman on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:14:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  This is the problem: (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rcnewton, gramofsam1, Cat Whisperer

          "In fact most occupiers have a much better idea of the big picture than most here at DKos.  For example, I don't have to explain to most of them how things like stop and frisk are related to the drug war is related to the prison industrial complex is related to wall street.  Most people don't want to look at the connections that are there."

          So you know all this, but how are you translating it into message/solution that Americans can understand and get behind?  What I see in many occupiers is great passion for the problems, and listing those, and knowing how they all relate can sure keep you busy forever.

          But it ain't going to grow the movement beyond what it is today.  To do that focus is imperative.  That means not just stating the problem, or worse yet, stating a hundred problems, but disciplining the energy to MESSAGE-SOLUTION.

          That means choosing priorities, one priority, one singular message is best.  And the solution should be inherent in the message.

          ie---"Get money out of politics. End Citizens United."  A million people on the Washington Mall holding signs that all said this would have an unbelievable impact, need not be partisan, can employ Occupy tactics well.  Whether you agree with that as the focus is not the point, just an example, one I'd love to see.  

        •  That has what to do with electorial politics? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rcnewton
    •  The Tea Party (7+ / 0-)

      has people in Congress under their banner. I haven't heard of anyone on the ballot this year running as an OWS candidate. And I don't know what OWS wants. Most people don't. A "movement" with no agenda or leader isn't moving a damned thing. And I pains me to point that out, since it once looked like a force to be reckoned with.

      Romney - 2012 - He's A Trooper!

      by kitebro on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:09:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If you don't know what OWS "wants" (12+ / 0-)

        that is no one's fault but your own. Although I understand it is a talking point pushed by Fox News that "no one knows what OWS wants".

        •  I read political blogs. (4+ / 0-)

          I am aware of what OWS wants. So what? America isn't getting the message. They see people camping out on sidewalks. If a method is failing, it's time for a new strategy. If the Tea Party had settled on demonstration and not much else, they wouldn't have picked up as much support. I know they were created by and promoted by Fox "News". But it still took effort to get candidates lined up and elected to Congress. I have seen no such effort from OWS. But since the media is completely ignoring them until there is a violent incident, I guess the effort could be underway under the radar.

          Romney - 2012 - He's A Trooper!

          by kitebro on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:59:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Now people are doing foreclosure defense (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            efraker, julifolo, Viola, dilutedviking

            It's a growing tactic across the country.  And it's been successful.

            And there are lots of efforts underway that aren't visible.  One or more of them will catch on.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:19:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  One Calif area did a study, foreclosures80% faulty (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AoT, dilutedviking

              or somesuch. Local politicians passed a "stop foreclosures" statment.

              I don't think they had juristiction to stop. But I think there are some Sherrif depts who won't cooperate with the banks to enforce a foreclosure.

              "You haven't proved you own this house. You haven't proved you followed your own rules" is effective, with a lot of local people standing in solidarity.
               

              Giving birth (giving life) should be a gift not an obligation or women and poor people are 2nd class by definition

              by julifolo on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:27:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  I was responding to a member (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Viola

            who claimed he/she had no idea "what OWS wants". If someone on this site honestly doesn't know, it's because they aren't paying attention. The only other possibility is preferentially watching propaganda by choice.

            •  It isn't about people on this site. (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rcnewton, Unduna, Lestatdelc, gramofsam1

              It should be about winning over the American public. It isn't happening. Last year it was a novel idea. Now it comes off as more of the same. I honestly want it to work. I want America to be fed up with the 1% taking everything this country has and leaving the dregs to us. But the sheeple aren't tuning in. It's hard to fight the people who own the media.

              Romney - 2012 - He's A Trooper!

              by kitebro on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:54:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rcnewton
          If you don't know what OWS "wants" that is no one's fault but your own.
          So it's the general public's own fault because it isn't making a huge effort to try and figure out OWS message and not the other way around.

          (rolls eyes)

          On the most fundamental level regarding the dynamics of communication, the stupidity of that statement is amazing.

          cheers,

          Mitch Gore

          Want to end too big to fail banks? Then move your money and they will no longer be too big.

          by Lestatdelc on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:36:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  And you've attended Occupy events how often (2+ / 0-)

      as compared to the diarist?

    •  What assessment? What big picture? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kayebee, paulsmith8

      He's become a cheerleader for the Democratic Party since the last election. He constantly defends the party, particularly the president, often against arguments from the left (who he rarely has a guest on to represent).

      So, his advice to OWS follows that same trend: You're no good unless you become a bunch of volunteers to help get Democrats elected.

      You can't make people fed up with both parties, the entire political system, abandon their beliefs to fall in line with one of the political parties they are angry with.

      The Tea Party and OWS cannot be compared for the reasons so many others have mentioned (see the other Bill Maher diary).

      I'm hoping "Occupy" as a brand dies soon, partly because of this nonsense. I'd prefer seeing a brand-less grassroots movement (whose brand doesn't forever tie them to a specific protest tactic), more focused on specific goals, similar to what is happening in Montreal right now. I think overall what is happening there is at least or even more powerful than Occupy, though it's gotten far less attention. Of course, Montreal is an environment more favorable to these sorts of widely supported massive protests than you'll find in most/all U.S. cities.

      •  Good luck changing laws and policy (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rcnewton, Unduna

        without any elected representation being in power. But that requires working within a political party and getting people elected.

        Kinda Bill's point.

        cheers,

        Mitch Gore

        Want to end too big to fail banks? Then move your money and they will no longer be too big.

        by Lestatdelc on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:40:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Your group was quick to hijack this diary. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dilutedviking

      You guys got the first two comments. Great job.

      "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

      by Broke And Unemployed on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 07:14:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  new rule (47+ / 0-)

    when right-wingers come on your show you don't be polite to them and let them say any kind of crazy thing because you think balance is good and you want to maintain your "credibility".

    When Issa is on your show you call him a crook instead of making chit-chat. You do your homework.

  •  I think the real problem with OWS is (15+ / 0-)

    they dont have a clear, focused message.

    Is it stopping foreclosures? Advocating for a financial transactions tax? Reimplementing Glass-Steagall? Ending the war in Afghanistan? To be effective, I think they need to pick one specific goal, and work towards that, through the political process.

    It's easy for conservatives, their message is simple: less government, less spending. But that's no excuse for the left. Simply being on the side of the 99% isnt really specific enough.

    •  Does the Tea Party have a clear message? No. (31+ / 0-)

      They are against everything. Even Obama's proposed tax cuts, deficit reduction plans, and spending cuts.

      If they were truly all about taxes and government spending they should LOVE Obama.

      The fact is they have only proposed policies to take away liberties of Americans. Abortion. English as an official language. Racial profiling (Arizona, etc). Banning Sharia Law. Protesting Mosques. An assault on collective bargaining. They are birthers. They are white supremacists. They are conspiracy theory, black helicopter, FEMA camp, Alex Jones and Glenn Beck freaks.

      Does the Tea Party have a clear message?  Hell No.

      Just because Larry Kudlow and Rick Santelli claim they are all about Government spending and lower taxes. We know that's bullshit and that's a smokescreen.

      Love will save you from the cold light of boring reality... But it won't save me -- SWANS

      by jethrock on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:45:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I dont really disagree (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        doroma, sebastianguy99, the fan man

        But less spending is the overarching theme of the Tea party movement, whether they really care about the issue or not.

        OWS doesnt really have something similar, imo.

        •  Bailing out the banks without bailing out (19+ / 0-)

          the American people seems like a pretty clear message to me.

          Taking care of the people who created our current economic problems without holding anyone accountable is pretty clear too.

          But beyond that workers rights, income inequality, civil rights, housing, jobs, environmental concerns, clean renewable energy, access to education... all these things are also part of the message and part of the solution.

          Van Jones knows this. Most occupiers I've seen know this.

          It's the Morning Joe's and David Gregory's of the world that don't get it.

          Remember... even Frank Luntz said he was afraid of the Occupy movement because it WAS resonating with the American people.

          Love will save you from the cold light of boring reality... But it won't save me -- SWANS

          by jethrock on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:10:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, Frank Luntz said that six months ago (0+ / 0-)

            I dont know that OWS has really strengthened in the time since then.

            Again dont disagree with this:

            But beyond that workers rights, income inequality, civil rights, housing, jobs, environmental concerns, clean renewable energy, access to education... all these things are also part of the message and part of the solution.

            But they need to pick one of these issues, come with a specific solution and work to achieve that solution. It doesnt mean they only have to be about one of those issues forever. They can build on their successes. But they need to have some substantive successes or the movement is going to continue to fade.

            •  Then it would be a single issue movement (14+ / 0-)

              which is not the point of occupy.  The point is that all these things are intertwined.  You can't just pick one and think that making that one slightly better is going to change things.  There's deeper systemic problems, that's what Occupy focuses on.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:02:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  But they arent accomplishing anything (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FG

                on any of those issues, nor are they really changing the system.

                It's a bit like saying you are tri-athlete, but you cant swim, bike or run very well. Focus on getting better in each of these things, individually if you have to, and then you can have success as a tri-athlete.

                •  as a tri-athlete... (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jethrock, AoT, Tool, tardis10

                  No, you don't focus on one at a time. You focus on all of them concurrently. And yes, you are a tri-athlete even if you can't "swim, bike, or run very well". Everybody and everything starts somewhere.

                  "Any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange ... including a public option" President Obama, 7.18.09

                  by efraker on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:23:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well, I guess I should have said successful (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    FG

                    tri-athlete. I suppose OWS is a movement, it's not a successful one right now, imo.

                    If you want to focus on EVERYTHING, then fine, but they need to articulate a coherent message on how to fix those systemic problems. If not, then I dont think there is anything wrong in starting smaller, focusing on one issue/one solution and trying to build on that success.

                    •  Then what is "success"? (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      jethrock, efraker, Burned

                      Don't even start training if you don't have proof you have potential to win the gold medal in the finals?

                      •  Well, yeah (0+ / 0-)

                        I dont think OWS has really defined what success is.

                        Like it or not, I doubt most people could point to many or any substantive successes that have come from OWS.

                        With the tea party, you can point to successes. They basically control the House of Representatives.  

                        If you dont have the drive and focus to win a race, I'm not sure you are going to be a good athlete. If OWS doesnt have the focus to make substantive change, I dont think that's a very good political movement.  

                        •  Stopping foreclosures, which hasn't been (4+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          jethrock, julifolo, Smoh, dilutedviking

                          a large number of them yet, but it's growing, not shrinking.

                          And getting people to move their money out of banks, as well as pressuring municipalities and other organizations to do the same.

                          Those are two substantive successes.  And the foreclosure defenses are going to be what gets occupy back in the news big time.  I'd expect it to show up whenever it will hurt Obama the most, because that's how the media works.  The right wing will start pushing the story about people blocking foreclosures and try to get him to denounce people breaking the law.  If they think they can't make an issue of it during the election, or if they think it will backfire then they'll hold on to it until after the election.

                          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                          by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:18:15 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I wouldn't say Occupy (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Smoh, gramofsam1

                            can claim total credit for move your money---the wealthy establishment pundit Arianna Huffington gave more print to this cause then any other major outlet I know.  And if Move your money is an OWS success, then the movements PR department ain't working.  I'm willing to lay you a sizable bet that a poll of Americans asked what OWS is about will not answer:  Move your Money.  Or for that matter, foreclosure defense.  

                            Which is not to say these efforts are not positive and good.  The questions is how much stronger could they be.  And that isn't going to happen until the movement focuses its energy, its tactics and its message.

                          •  OWS has horrible PR, and always has (0+ / 0-)

                            I can't tell you how often I saw people here yelling about how we wouldn't amount to anything if we weren't engaging the unions, even though we were in the process of doing just that.  People are focused much more on doing whatever they think should be done rather than telling people they are doing it.  It's definitely not perfect, but the fact of the matter is that people are sick of the media and self promotion and not needing to talk about what your doing is easier than having to organize actions and popularizing those actions.

                            In regards to move your money specifically, for at least a month I told everyone who asked me what they could do to help even if they couldn't contribute money or time that they should get their money out of banks.  And tell other to do the same.  OWS can't claim all the credit, but what we can claim is the credit for inspiring people to believe that they could make a difference through concerted individual action.

                            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:54:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  Just Google "how occupy changed the conversation" (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Dvalkure, Tool, burnt out, dilutedviking

                  I already did it for you here. And you'll see how much even the MSM disagrees with you.

                  That's a pretty big accomplishment.

                  But they arent accomplishing anything on any of those issues, nor are they really changing the system.
                  OWS is new. It's young. And it's just got started.

                  Love will save you from the cold light of boring reality... But it won't save me -- SWANS

                  by jethrock on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:29:04 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I dont disagree (0+ / 0-)

                    But most of the articles there are from four or five months ago. Changing the conversation is significant, but it seems to that that has faded.

                    You are right, it's young and new, and I think this conversation is about what the movement should do going forward to stay relevant.

          •  Our message is not taken seriously because (15+ / 0-)

            it is not in the interest of the companies that own the media outlets. Bill Maher is a comedian, not a spokesman. He works for HBO, not us.

            During the health care debate any discussion of single payer was either outright forbidden or disregarded in the spirit of "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good". So there was no serious discussion of single payer. Likewise there was no serious discussion of letting the banks take any losses due to their bad decision making and no discussion of serious bank reform.

            We on the left are left out of the conversation on policy but we are expected to support the Democratic Party without question. Those who run the party will not even do us the courtesy of pretending to listen to us. Yet they expect our votes and our money.

            So we must find a way to get our message into the greater discussion and stop relying on media personalities to do it for us. And that means hitting the streets. And engaging in civil disobedience. Not waiting for someone to invite us on their show so we can be screamed at by the likes of Coulter and O'Reilly.

            Unless you are a part of Occupy keep you opinions of what Occupy should do to yourself Bill Maher. You may be funny but you are not a deep thinker about politics.  

      •  Clear message or not (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AgentOfProgress, doroma, jj32, Aquarius40

        The Tea Party was way more effective at translating their movement into actual votes.

        So far, Occupy has done nothing remotely close.

        How many candidates running for office actually embrace Occupy?  

        •  That's because it NEVER was a grassroots movement. (15+ / 0-)

          The Tea Party was backed financially and created by big money Republican operatives from the start.

          Dick Armey, The Kochs, Jennie Thomas (Clarence Thomas' wife), etc.

          It was NEVER EVER a bottom up movement.

          They took advantage of the extremism of the Sarah Palin wing nut side of the Republican party that was evident in 2008 before Obama was elected. And played on the fears of the fact that Obama had just been sworn into office. Remember Glenn Beck's "Obama is racist who hates white people" comment? That was at the very beginning.  Santelli's Tea Party screed was at the beginning.

          Occupy is strictly a bottom up movement.

          Love will save you from the cold light of boring reality... But it won't save me -- SWANS

          by jethrock on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:25:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Doesn't matter (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jj32, doroma, Aquarius40, kayebee

            if it's a grassroots movement or not.  That is pointless to debate when you are getting your ass kicked in elections nationwide.

            What matters is how effective they are.

            And to that, I know it upsets people here to hear it, but the truth is the Tea Party was way more effective than OWS could ever be.

            That's the bottom line.

            Bitching about who funds them is totally irrelevant.  That's like saying you lost the race because the next runner had better shoes than you did.

            Yes, he DID have better shoes, and left you in the dust.

            Quit crying about technical details and instead, learn from your opponent.  

            •  OWS isn't why we lost elections in 2010. (15+ / 0-)

              Hell, it didn't even exist.

              The only election (not plural) that OWS could have possibly had any effect on as of yet was Wisconsin. The fact is that recall election may not have even happened without the help of Occupy.  

              And it's not OWS that needed to up their game and get a "clear message"

              It was the DNC, The Democratic Governor's association who abandoned the election and gave up before the fight.

              They didn't put any resources into until they received criticism from the activists.  And even then it was minimal.

              If you want to school anyone on getting their shit together and getting a clear focused message. You should start with the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, and OFA and The Democratic Party Leadership.

              Tim Kaine was fucking horrible in 2010. Debbie hasn't been a lot better yet.

              Love will save you from the cold light of boring reality... But it won't save me -- SWANS

              by jethrock on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:46:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's not the point (4+ / 0-)

                The point is, work to be part of the victories in 2012 and 2014.

                •  And you go back to (5+ / 0-)

                  Its the elections stupid...and voting...
                  The election system is rigged and broken...and coopted and yes corrupted hugely by money....the best government that money can buy!

                  The political system is broken  as long as money can buy your candidates, politicians, legislation, and corporate friendly policies ...its not going to change. Campain funding needs to change to get money out of politics period. ...but thats not going to happen as both parties rely on it for their survival....and corporations know it and are using this mutual love and reliance of money and power for their  survival too...currently its a self sustaining and ruinous situation...

                  The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

                  by emal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:51:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It is about elections and votes (0+ / 0-)

                    That you don't get that is THE problem. Otherwise OWS is nothing but a circle jerk and will not change laws, policies, etc.

                    cheers,

                    Mitch Gore

                    Want to end too big to fail banks? Then move your money and they will no longer be too big.

                    by Lestatdelc on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:43:40 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Oh I get the problem (0+ / 0-)

                      Just fine.....big money has corrupted and coopted the ability to fund campaigns and elections for politicians. Both Viable national parties realize this...and so dont the candidates.

                      Until you even the playing field and get money out of politics ...nothing will change.

                      You cant be a viable national candidate without big money backing you...its the primary cause and root of the problem we face now. Just ask The Koch Brothers...exhibit A Wisconsin. ...of course the Kochs dont think its a problem, they love the current system because they can buy politicians. You have various millionaires and billionaires basically picking the choices we the masses get to vote for....
                      And then they call it democracy...its a sham and mockery if you think otherwise...big money and corporations own our political choices.

                      Heads one group of wealthy individuals wins or tails another group of wealthy individual wins..those are our choices...aint democracy grand!

                      The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

                      by emal on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 06:58:37 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Steal the Shoes! n/t (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Rey Mota, AoT, joanneleon, Smoh, dilutedviking

              "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

              by tardis10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:49:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  The Tea Party has two cable news networks (8+ / 0-)

              breathlessly reporting on the every move of the Tea party movement as cheerleaders. OWS is seen as an enemy to public order by the news media and is denounced everywhere and ignored by the Democratic Party. Tea Parties do not play nice with Republicans and have proved that they will destroy the careers of respected Republican leaders in primaries.

              The Republicans fear the Tea Party. The Democrats laugh at OWS. After all who else are OWS suppose to vote for other than Obama, right? So OWS lacks leverage until OWS decides that Democrats are wrong to ignore the OWS movement.

            •  Oh and money doesn't buy votes??? (5+ / 0-)

              The Tea Party was funded by the far right and has bought any number of elections. It was never grass roots.

               Occupy is not funded and nevertheless has managed to change the narrative - 99% vs 1% despite heavy media opposition. It is nuts to compare the two. We have to back the candidates we want despite not having the billions backing the tea party. Occupy can't do that. We have to.

                   I know some people in Occupy and they are ardent progressives but not billionaires. When Occupy was in the park in NYC I met bankers who called them lazy hippies who refused to work. BS.

              The whole argument comparing the Tea Party to OWS is like comparing the Koch brothers resources and intentions to turn the country backwards to a widespread group of students and liberals who are fighting for the remnants of the New Deal.

              You don't get to keep democracy unless you fight for it.

              by artebella on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:03:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It's not Occupy's fault Democrats lose. Wtf? (8+ / 0-)

              Occupy was not formed, never ever promised, to be a vehicle to help get Democrats elected. So, if Democrats win or lose, you cannot seriously claim Occupy protests had a role in either happening.

              This is even more ridiculous than blaming people who voted for the Green Party in 2000 for George W Bush getting elected (though he actually didn't win) instead of the party itself, Al Gore, and their campaign strategy.

          •  Top-down repackaging of failed ideas (7+ / 0-)

            Did the TP attract new voters? Or was the TP just different branding for people who wanted to deny that Bush/Cheney were their fault, but still wanted to scream at blacks and gays and hippies?

        •  The Tea Party was converted into votes (9+ / 0-)

          for republicans by the people who funded it from the beginning.  There's no secret how that happened, the same way the GOP always wins elections, with shit tons of money.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:27:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  VOTES. MEAN. SHIT. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, efraker, wu ming, skayne

          We got lots of votes in 2008 for everyone on the 'good side'.  Things haven't exactly gone swimmingly since.

          •  And yet things have gone swimmingly (0+ / 0-)

            for the Tea Partiers who got lots of votes for their side. They are in control of the legislative process.

            If we'd had just a couple more reliable votes in Congress (instead of the alleged supermajority that never existed in any real sense), things might have gone swimmingly for us.

            In the end it's all about legislative power.  And we never quite got there.  But we shouldn't stop trying.

      •  Besides money (13+ / 0-)

        the Tea Party's main motivator is fear.  Fear of the other, fear of the poor, fear of minorities.  Exploitation of fear and hatred is what makes them tick; it fires up their passion and they fight hard.

        We on the other hand don't have that factor.  This has long been the handicap for populist movements, and why organized religion and fascism flourish.

        Unfortunately for us, the masses usually don't realize what the minority of us are saying until it is too late.

        "Mediocrity cannot know excellence." -- Sherlock Holmes

        by La Gitane on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:49:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Does the Tea Party have a clear message? (0+ / 0-)

        Yes. Less government, less tax, less regulation.

        cheers,

        Mitch Gore

        Want to end too big to fail banks? Then move your money and they will no longer be too big.

        by Lestatdelc on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:41:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Because I'm curious by nature. (10+ / 0-)

      What one single issue would you like to see Occupy focus on?
      (wondering if DK could pick just one???)

      "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

      by tardis10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:45:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd like to see focus on the how the "game" is (7+ / 0-)

        rigged against everyone who isn't in the 1%.

        WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

        by IARXPHD on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:47:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  "Obama" (4+ / 0-)

        that would be my guess. As in "re-electing the President will make all the other items that could be listed a possibility."

        •  Hmmm, yes, but "electing" is not enough (14+ / 0-)

          The unions helped get him elected, remember CardCheck?  Gone.
          The Democratic base helped get him elected with boots and donations, what did we get, no pulic option and an impotent DNC, we gave away a midterm and several special elections.

          If we are going to focus on the President, the rest of the executive branch and the DNC, WE need to coopt them, not the other way around.

          They work for us.

          Instead we have answered the RW's demands, to defund ACORN, to kill social security, to propose austerity I could go on and on.

          Yes, we must keep the Democrats in power at EVERY level of government, but we got to make them sweat, we got to make sure they are always looking over their back knowing we are there (hence they will not fall back on corporations and their lackey lobbyists).

          Now let me state, I do not participate in OWS, I respect them, but like many others, I want results, ad campaigns, making the DC press nervous.

          A nice example is when PCCC would run targeted ads against congressmen in DC and their hometowns.

          Taking a hammer to DC common wisdom narratives is always effective.

      •  Personally, I dont have preference (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tardis10, doroma, Tool, Aquarius40

        But they need to focus on something specific. Otherwise, I dont know how you accomplish anything or grow the movement.

        •  And just to be clear, they dont need to support (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          greenbell

          Obama or Dems. That seems like the defensive reaction from Occupiers when you criticize them on lack of specificity. "Oh, well, you just want us to support Obama." Fine, dont support Obama.

          But support a specific solution/step to a current problem.

        •  It's not "them". It's "us". (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          artebella, dilutedviking
        •  OWS must focus on taking over the Democratic Party (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tardis10, dilutedviking, skayne

          and drive the corporate DLC types out leaving a party that supports everyone who works, or is poor, or loves the environment, or believes in civil rights over the needs of the finance industry.

          We need to stop using language about the middle class and instaed defend the working class. The middle class is what we aspire to for our kids. The working class is where we are now. Everything that our government has done for the past 32 years have included benefits to the finance industry and the moneyed class. Even heath care reform had major benefits for the finance industry (insurance business).

          We need to question capitalism and regulate it to the benefit of everyone. But as long as the DLC types run the party we will get nothing done.

          The Tea Party movement got its start when Pat Robertson's people took over the Iowa Republican Party. And they worked in the trenches for years until their opportunity came.

          We too must work in trenches and get over our fear of primarying bad Democrats. And we must fill the party leadership positions until we run the party.

          •  Why do you need OWS to do this? (0+ / 0-)

            You have a list of ideas that make sense. Why don't you go forward and see what you can do and who you can get to work with you besides people at OWS? They've said they want to do other things - that means all the rest of us have to stop? We can't do a thing unless OWS is with us?

            •  You are right and I have been doing this (0+ / 0-)

              for more than 20 years. I have been elected to leadership positions at the county and township level. I seek like minded people to do as I have done. But be warned many old time party leaders are burrowed it very deeply. They like the way things are are do not want any change.

              Local party politics is in many ways like belonging to a country club. There is a lot of socializing and fundraisers where you hangout with friends and enjoy a meal and listen to rousing speeches from people who want your help who tell you how wonderful you are. This is quite intoxicating and once you are accepted as an insider you do not want to be an outsider again.

              OWS represents a way to bust up these cozy relationships that have caused inertia in the Democratic Party for decades. And that is why we need them.

              •  You raise an important point (0+ / 0-)

                Yes, party activists become entrenched and start to enjoy their power and influence and lose focus on what they're actually supposed to be doing. This is clear at all levels. It's also a common problem -- non-profits get this way -- union leaders get this way -- probably OWS will get this way in time. Komen wants to "cure" cancer, but not "prevent" it -- if it is prevented, what happens to them? March of Dimes is what, 80 years old or something? 50 years old? And on and on...

                Anyway, there does need to be a way to bust up these cozy relationships, and OWS could be that tool, but if they don't want to be, there it is. The problem is busting up the cozy relationships; the solution may have to involve people other than OWS.

                •  Yes I agree with you there. (0+ / 0-)

                  We have all become in way comfortable in the system and it is going to take so radical self examination that will hopefully lead to radical action to defend those who are suffering. It is very eay to see everything wrong with our opponents but we need to examine ourselves as well. Have we worked hard enough? Raised money and raised consciousness? And demanded fair play and social justice?

                  And you are right also in that it must expand beyond OWS. We need to get as big as the Civil Rights movement of the 60s, or bigger. And we must challenge ourselves as Democrats and liberals Have we done enough?

        •  Personally, I don't want (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dilutedviking, emal, Tool

          OWS to focus on just one issue.  A few, really serious issues have bubbled to the surface with OWS and I think those are the important ones.

          My understanding is that first and foremost, economic and social justice are the core focus of OWS.  

          From these core things (again, my understanding from involvement and observation) come the major things that OWS has been protesting about:

          Banks aka organized financial crime
          Bank regulations (lack of) and complicity of regulators
          Income inequality
          Foreclosure fraud
          Campaign finance
          Wars / Imperialism
          Police brutality and unequal justice
          Prison privatization
          Police state / Surveillance / Warrantless wiretapping
          Education costs, student debt
          Corporate welfare
          Social safety net
          Corruption / bought government / ineffective elections
          Unions / organized labor

          I want them to focus on all of those things because here most of them are closely intertwined and all of those things are ruining our country.  Nobody else is addressing those issues.  Neither party is truly addressing them.  Many of the organizations that once were grassroots organizations are now hacks, co-opted, just part of one party or the other.  Very few organizations are really representing the people, or it is questionable and hard to tell if they are.  MoveOn is a good example of that.  


          "Justice is a commodity"

          by joanneleon on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:22:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Campaign finanace reform! (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tardis10, joanneleon, dilutedviking

        The political system is broken by private money that can influence it and is now exacerbated by citizens united decision. The best government money can buy.

        The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

        by emal on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:25:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I really feel like (13+ / 0-)

      Quoting Elizabeth Warren and say you can't divorce the issues because they are all interconnected.

    •  yes, and (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40, StellaRay, Smoh

      Exactly.  What does Occupy want and how do they propose to achieve it?

      forget camping.  Prohibit partying.  be serious with a coherent message.  Help the police arrest vandals.  get the media involved from the inside.  marches and mass protests work when there is a simple, clear, important message like we had years ago to stop the Vietnam Nam war.

      •  And you did such a great job of stopping the war (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        efraker, StellaRay

        Who exactly did you elect to do that?  Nixon, ha.

        The war stopped because we won.  We proved that we were willing to destroy countries that dared try to be communist.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:17:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Aot - I can only assume that you (0+ / 0-)

          are under the age of 30 because you know NOTHING ABOUT how the US got out of Vietnam.

          The war didn't stop because "we won."   The US lost, massive protests back home caused congressional funding both Repub. and Dem. to dry up and eventually the losses, both political and physical, became too great.

          Through statements like yours, I can see why OWS is going nowhere.

          •  I know quite well what happened during the (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Medium Head Boy

            Vietnam war.   And again, what politician was it that anti-war protesters elected that ended the war?

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:43:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Recced you by mistake when I meant to reply. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lestatdelc, gramofsam1

          But Aquarius said the jist of what I wanted to say.  Your comment do not suggest you know "darn well" what happened with the Viet Nam War.

          And I'll answer to your reply to Aquarius while I'm here.
          The war began under Kennedy, continued through LBJ, and ended with Nixon.  The fact that Nixon was in office when it ended is irrelevant to why it ended.  Total straw man.

          •  So then what politician that the anti-war (0+ / 0-)

            protesters elected was responsible for ending the war?

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:31:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Marches and mass protests USED TO WORK (0+ / 0-)

        Now the media ignores them.

        However annoyed you might be at OWS at least they are trying to find new ways to approach problems instead of endlessly recycling old ways that no longer work.

        Marches are one-day events and they don't have long lasting results. They make participants feel like they're doing something useful but that's it.

        I'm all for groups picking one goal and working it relentlessly. I disagree that one-day marches are the answer. But fuck me! If you feel strongly, go for it!

        As I'm saying over and over, why do you (and so many here) need OWS to carry out your ideas?

    •  Is this message clear enough 4 you? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AoT, emal, AgavePup

      MESSAGE: Our system needs an overhaul and we don't want to get fucked over anymore.

    •  Yep. We know what OWS is against, but what is (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lestatdelc

      it FOR and how does it plan to achieve that goal.

      Presenting a clear vision of those two items is just not too much to fucking ask for from any movement, it just isn't.

      OWS has got to get with it, here, or they will completely lose the American public - if they haven't already.

      "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

      by Unduna on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:56:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bill Maher doesn't get it . . . (28+ / 0-)

    And apparently some Kossacks don't either!

    The reason this stuff is invisible to the general public is because of the media's unwillingness to pay attention to anything that doesn't bring the country (and the world) to a halt.

    Working through the inside is needed, but working from the outside is too!

    "There's an old country saying: The water won't clear up until you get the hogs out of the creek." - Sen. Byron Dorgan

    by Earwicker23 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:31:27 AM PDT

    •  That is partly (12+ / 0-)

      the point I was trying to make. Thank you. Yes this is a serious diary.

    •  Stop blaming the media. Make the media (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Unduna, doroma, justmy2

      pay attention to you rather than using it as an excuse for lack of widespread support.

    •  OWS doesn't have a clear message. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      justmy2

      There is some clarity in what they are against, but there is little to no clarity on what OWS stands for and how it intends to achieve it.

      That is not the media's fault (and it has even been the media's number one complaint in trying to cover the movement).

      "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

      by Unduna on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:00:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  the media's number one complaint (0+ / 0-)

        Hmm, I guess we need to do what the media wants because they've shown how fair and balanced they are.

        People who think they can get the media on our side are the unrealistic, delusional ones. The media is the tool of the 1%. They will cross over in a serious way only when they have no choice. We are a long way from there.

        •  In the end, it's not about the media, it's about (0+ / 0-)

          OWS having a clear intention and plan for implementing that intention.

          "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

          by Unduna on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:51:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's about OWS having a clear intention... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            skayne

            No, that is what it is about to YOU.

            It's about a million different things to them. You may think it would be better if it was about having a clear intention and implementing it, and you might be right, but that's you talking, not them.

            Personally I see their greatest value in inspiring creative action in others. A multitude of creative actions, and scholarly actions, and civil disobedience actions, and contacting the gov actions, and doing things like OCCUPY the SEC. People using their various kinds of expertise to effect change from a million directions. We all seem to want a "mass movement" but what if the "mass movement" isn't millions marching on the same day, but rather millions of cumulative actions happening everywhere all the time? Different actions but all going in the same general direction? Actions that people CAN do, in their daily lives, perhaps quietly, without risking their jobs (if they have them), their insurance, their retirements, etc.

            But that's just me.

            •  It is cleary not just me looking for inspired (0+ / 0-)

              creative action through clear intent, the thread is full of people saying what I am saying.

              If you think that by being insulting and contemptuous that you are inspiring creative action from me and the thousands like me who are looking for more from this movement then you are seriously misguided and are giving a very poor representation for your goals for OWS.

              You want millions? Represent better, much better.

              Fail.

              "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder, a secret order." Carl Jung

              by Unduna on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 07:40:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  "thousands like me looking for more..." (0+ / 0-)

                I don't have any goals for OWS -- I am not an active member and I don't speak for them. I simply said what I think their ultimate value is -- which is that they can inspire creative action in others. Just my opinion -- you can certainly disagree.

                And I am saying that what folks like you are doing is projecting onto OWS what you want; what you think rather than accepting what it is and isn't.

                You can expend time and energy trying to change OWS or you can spend time and energy seeking an outlet that speaks to you. Yes, several people on this thread have expressed their dissatisfaction with OWS -- why don't you all get together and see what you can create?

                For years so many of us have been searching for "the answer". Our country has been rotting; our systems are broken. We have tried everything that's been done before only things that used to work don't seem to now. Everything has changed.

                Then OWS, for a brief shining moment, seemed like the answer. It grew spontaneously; it was "in the streets"; it got media attention, even positive media attention, and it changed discourse in a significant way.

                Now that has stopped. The "easy" part is over. The constellation of groups are trying to decide what to do now and, also, are doing a lot of things under the radar. But they don't seem like "the answer" anymore.

                So many think the can become "the answer" again if only they do A. B. C. or D. And A.B.C. or D. is always some kind of traditional conventional wisdom assertion that amounts to: "they need to do something that is antithetical to what/who they are". They need to stop being consensus builders, they need to start having a single message, they need "leaders", they need trained spokespeople, they need to become Democrats, they, they, they!

                OWS isn't "the answer" -- the are/were the beginning, the glimmer, the seed, of "the answer". What they recognize is that we are on our own. Old saviors will not save us -- our political leaders are part of the problem -- all we have is each other and against us are ranged very rich and very powerful and very entrenched interests. We have the potential for vast numbers which is our only possible counterweight to the plutocracy. But OWS will not speak to those vast numbers -- its appeal is to a certain kind of person looking for certain kinds of things. Instead there needs to be group after group after group pulling disparate people towards the same place. Use OWS for an example; learn from what it has done and then spawn your own.

  •  I would rec you ten times (24+ / 0-)

    for this phrase alone - "You talk about the 99% and building Middle class families. I'm sorry - you are just feeding people platitude and bullshit when you talk about the middle class because America is not a middle class nation. We are a working poor and poor nation that is sold the idea that we are a middle nation because people in power keep repeating that zombie lie."

    I am not at NN (wish I was) but this comment is spot on.  And also your comments re tea party super pac funding vs occupy funding.  Is it even possible that Bill Maher doesn't realize that this is THE issue?

    You should be on one of those panels.  Thanks for this REAL post.  Would be great if you could get a guest spot on one of the radio shows at NN to talk about this some more!!  : )

    •  Yes, it would. (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dallasdoc, tardis10, AoT, Tool, gulfgal98, kathny
      Would be great if you could get a guest spot on one of the radio shows at NN to talk about this some more!!

      Daniel Ellsberg, “It was always a bad year to get out of Vietnam.”

      by allenjo on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:44:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Isn't Ministry of Truth there? (n/t) (0+ / 0-)
        •  Yes I got a chance (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kathny

          to meet MB and watched MoT on the radio. I've gone up to the Kos booth a bunch and it's been one of the highlights of this convention. I don't have a problem having this debate. Frankly i am being very civil to Bill Maher and i dont think occupy is hyper sensitive about criticism - I do think they tend to be overly pc in an attempt to foster exclusivity. I'm more militant but lean towards working with unions and other groups to facilitate Ows message.  I'm at a keynote right now at NN a d trying to read every comment.

  •  Only if they can use Occupy for thier political (10+ / 0-)

    advantage unfortunately, will the Dem establishment take it seriously. Sadly true and very short sighted of them.

    I remember the saying, "Which way did they go? I must hasten to find them for I am their leader."

    Most people in Occupy are leftists and I have no bones about saying that. Yet the Dem establishment does not take Occupy seriously

    Daniel Ellsberg, “It was always a bad year to get out of Vietnam.”

    by allenjo on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:33:32 AM PDT

  •  Well I recc'd both your diary (16+ / 0-)

    and Bruinkids...I think you both make valid points, and this is an important discussion.

    Still not sure which side I fall on though, to be honest. I don't agree with Bill that OWS should become the left wing version of the Tea Party or get co-opted by party politics-but I have been frustrated by OWS for many reasons-in particular the lack of message control and the anarchist stuff.

    I think there is a happy medium somewhere, and I hope we are able to find it.

    "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"- MLK

    by SwedishJewfish on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:41:22 AM PDT

  •  Consider an analogy...when did the 60's (6+ / 0-)

    protests start to get some mainstream traction. Gene McCarthy's push, protesters moved a little more in the mainstream direction and their voices started to be heard. The initial voice needs to gather allies.

    WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

    by IARXPHD on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:42:17 AM PDT

  •  If OWS does not translate to votes it does nothing (8+ / 0-)

    How can you not see that?

  •  We need both. (7+ / 0-)

    We need a public presence, moving towards getting people out on the streets and showing the dissidents among the populace that there ARE others that agree that we're getting screwed in this class war.

    On the other hand, we NEED to translate this into better Liberals.  I am tired, absolutely tired, of so called Liberals that have no idea how to negotiate (Hi, Mr. President!), who are too ready to sell out their ideals to get and stay elected, who want to be "very serious politicians"(tm) rather than being, well, very effective ones.

    I would pay good money to see an old fashioned Filibuster the next time the GOP tries to push through something and the Dems roll over because "Bipartisanship" means "Dems do what the GOP wants."

    The Tea Party was started by the Koch brothers because they saw the 99% and OWS thing coming -- the plutocrats have expected it for decades now.  Much like starting a smaller fire to keep a forest fire at bay, the Tea Party was designed to leech any Republican support away from OWS before it got started.  Then it got out of hand, but hey, playing with fire and all that.

    Bill Maher is absolutely right in the fact that we need to get these people in the voting booth and even better, in local and national office.  We need people who are true and unashamed liberals to get into office, to add a counter offensive to the absolutely frothing nutjobs that the Tea Party has been forcing upon the Republicans -- and through the Republicans, the nation.

    •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

      but how many here on this blog were against primarying from the left...many of the democratic candidates?..including the current president?

      That said I do agree that primarying democratic candidates from the left is a good idea and needs to continue in hopes of changing the narrative at some point.... But once again big money usually gets involved in those elections too and is very influential...

      The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

      by emal on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 07:41:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bill's right (10+ / 0-)

    For most people, Occupy has become a joke--dirty hippies and homeless people camping in city parks.  There is a lot of support for the movement's ideas, but the tactics need to change.

    I left my heart in NAZ.

    by Scott in NAZ on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:48:38 AM PDT

  •  OWS ≠ the tea party (16+ / 0-)

    It takes a complete misunderstanding of American party politics, the tea party, citizen's united, OWS, and well just about everything else, to say what he said.  

    1. The Tea Party is not grass routes
    2. The Tea Party's interests converge with the very wealthy.
    3. The very wealthy fund them.
    4. OWS is not partisan.
    5. Which candidates coincide with OWS on enough issues that they are supposed to get people to vote for them ?

    OK, maybe Bernie Sanders. Maybe a few others.

    6. OWS will never be well funded, nor should it, since it is bottom up.

    7. The two party system has failed.  

    •  Still (4+ / 0-)

      The Tea Party got lots of people elected nationwide and kicked the shit out of the democrats in 2010.  

      You can harp all you want that the Tea Party isn't a grass roots organization, but they were 1000 times more effective than any Occupy movement has or will be in the future.

    •  The two-party system may well have failed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40

      There is much to criticize about the two-party system. And that is all it will ever be, verbal criticism. Not until a Constitutional Convention comes along and writes The Constitution v2.0. So long we we have the current document, there will always be exactly two (2) viable political parties.

      In the intervening 50 years before that happens, people alive now might consider it is in their self-interest to drive one of the two American parties to sane and effective platforms.

  •  Logged in just to rec and tip you. (18+ / 0-)

    You told it like it is, especially how no one mentions the truth about how poor we are in this country.

    There are a lot of people I wish would just shut up with their advice on how Occupy is supposed to do everything.  Every movement that has come organically from the needs of people has been messy with fits and starts along the way - and has taken years, decades even, to create enough of a change in awareness of enough people to change legislation.

  •  Great diary.Both for the sentiments (9+ / 0-)

    and analysis,but also because of the energy it engenders.
    Heat and light.
    Thanks.

    "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

    by tardis10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:23:32 PM PDT

  •  Bill Maher is 100% right (9+ / 0-)

    The very fact that there is an internal debate over what to do within Occupy IS the problem. The time for debate is long since past. You don't NEED to still be "building the movement" with stupid shit like guitaring from Philly to NYC. You already HAVE the movement, even though it's clearly starting to fall apart now.

    DO SOMETHING PRODUCTIVE WITH IT.

    Here, I already figured it out for you. It can be summed up in two bullet points:
    • Get people into the voting booth. Don't let them "decide" if they want to go to the voting booth. GET THEM TO FUCKING VOTE FOR OCCUPY CANDIDATES.
    • Get people to run for STATE AND LOCAL OFFICES. Some Tea Party group released a video a while ago explains not only WHY they should focus on the small elections, but HOW it benefits them by having Tea Party loons in place when it comes time to select political appointees and such.

    Those are the two things Occupy needs to do. Everything else you guys are doing now is an unproductive waste of time. We aren't in Egypt. Let the Egyptian portion do their own thing. YOU focus 95% of your efforts on America and we might actually see some actual improvement and positive changes to this country.

    My style is impetuous.
    My defense is impregnable.
    YOU'RE NOT ALEXANDER!

    by samfish on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:27:45 PM PDT

    •  So from outside OWS,... (8+ / 0-)

      ...you want to tell the movement what to do.

      Those are the two things Occupy needs to do. Everything else you guys are doing now is an unproductive waste of time. We aren't in Egypt. Let the Egyptian portion do their own thing. YOU focus 95% of your efforts on America and we might actually see some actual improvement and positive changes to this country.
      That's going to go over well.

      If you want to shape OWS, be a part of it.  It doesn't cost anything.  If you're disinclined, then concentrate on your own efforts at some actual improvement and positive changes to this country.

      •  You assume (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Aquarius40, BoxNDox, gramofsam1

        that I'm not already engaged in various ways. I've donated money and food to OWS in the past. Its the best I can do since I don't have time to do other things.

        I'm also regularly involved in politics. Sometimes I attend city meetings and I've canvassed and phone banked in almost every election since 2004.
        The only reason I'm not getting involved by running for committee person or something similar is because I will be moving to Canada sometime in early 2013.

        So don't you deign to tell me I'm "outside the movement". I engage in the best ways I can. Furthermore, my adding my voice to the chorus of others telling it to become directly engaged politically IS attempting to shape the movement.

        My style is impetuous.
        My defense is impregnable.
        YOU'RE NOT ALEXANDER!

        by samfish on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:16:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  OWS is NOT a movement. It's a bunch of (0+ / 0-)

        disparate people ambling around claiming that they don't get any attention and that's the reason no is taking them seriously.

        OWS is not a movement; it's a happening.

        •  Then why ask it to get focused on votes? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, tardis10, Viola

          If there's nothing cohesive there, if there's no substance to what those disparate people are doing, then asking OWS to steer its efforts to the ballot box is no more likely to be effective than asking Kmart shoppers to do so, and probably less so -- at least those others have the unity of purpose to be shopping for cheap junk.  Why pursue the Occupiers if they're so disparate?  Why not just run along and concentrate on more focused demographics?

          If you're paying attention to OWS at all, then it's not the disparate "happening" you claim, and maybe you should be paying closer attention and demanding less.

  •  Tea Party Doesn't Just HAVE Astroturf it IS A-Turf (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Susan from 29, tardis10, Cinnamon, puakev, emal

    It was created by lobbyists and donors, it never has been any kind of party or movement, the groups that are "outside" it are the little gatherings of older white voters at their events.

    Personally I don't think Occupy can grow into a nation changing movement, for many reasons. But that doesn't matter, it doesn't own the patent on movements either. Nothing stopping variants or entirely new kinds of movements, and it will probably take many if some kind of democracy is eventually to be established here.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:28:46 PM PDT

  •  It's a shame that Bill didn't take that one (11+ / 0-)

    million dollars that he gave to a super pac and put it toward helping Occupy achieve some of the goals he outlined.  

    After all, the Koch brothers won't.  And he is too smart and too aware of how politics works to be able to deny the importance of funding.

    "I cannot live without books" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1815

    by Susan Grigsby on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:31:28 PM PDT

    •  What goals are you referring to? Specifically? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Susan from 29, BoxNDox, gramofsam1

      Why would it take $1M for those goals to be achieved?  How do those goals get translated in real life?

      Here's an idea: OWS starts at the bottom of the political cycle (i.e. school boards, council people, dog catcher, etc.) and works their way up to get the funding, to get their goals activated.

      •  That is exactly how the moral majority aka (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skayne, gramofsam1

        the current religious right started.  They trained their members to run in local school district elections as those were rarely contested.  Once they got in, as stealth candidates, they changed the curriculum.  It has taken some thirty+ years, but they did it and today we are facing the consequences.  In addition, they ran candidates in local and state elections as well as supporting Presidential candidates.

        But they did not do it without any funding or organization.  They could not have made it work without a national organization that provided the training and the tools.  That takes money.

        "I cannot live without books" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1815

        by Susan Grigsby on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:01:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then why has no one on the left already done (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          efraker, Viola, skayne

          that?  I mean, it's not like there hasn't been time.  Why is it up to OWS to do it?  That's the question.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:26:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Beats me. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            "I cannot live without books" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1815

            by Susan Grigsby on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:41:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Why is it up to OWS? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            That's what I keep asking!

            To some degree I think a lot of people are looking to OWS because it's there. It's visible (to a degree) and it has shown a lot of promise. What else is there to look at? Well, there was Wisconsin. I maintain that, even with Scott chumpy winning, it was worth doing the recalls. They've had him on the run all year and they've retaken the congress. The actions have counted.

            But at any rate, aside from these groups we're back to the same old groups that have been around for a long time and mean well and have occasional successes and lots of defeats and aren't especially inspirational.

            Whereas OWS was inspirational. But those moments are transitory. Now we're back to the grind. And the realization the OWS simply isn't the vehicle for electoral change. Which means others have to engage in that work. And, attracting others gets harder all the time because the electoral game has been disappointing over and over and over.

            Many people keep basically saying "too bad you've been disappointed. Suck it up!" and I think that just isn't a compelling message. You really have to acknowledge the justice of peoples' feelings before you can change them. Telling them not to feel what they feel is counter productive.

            •  In some ways OWS is like the opposite of Obama (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Viola

              or perhaps the flip side of the same coin.  Everyone wanted it to be everything to everyone and they wanted to show up and tell everyone that they needed to do this or this and then everything would be better.  Whereas with Obama everyone worked their asses off and got him elected and thought he had the answers and would fix everything.

              Many people keep basically saying "too bad you've been disappointed. Suck it up!" and I think that just isn't a compelling message. You really have to acknowledge the justice of peoples' feelings before you can change them. Telling them not to feel what they feel is counter productive.
              The problem is that that isn't what we're telling people.  We're telling people that if they want something to happen then they need to go out and make it happen.  OWS didn't happen because people kept saying that people should occupy wall street, it happened because some of us decided that we'd actually go and do it.  OWS can't go and do things for people, at best it can show solidarity and get some press for something that people are already doing.  I'm sorrry that we can't do everything that needs to be done, but we're tapped out in terms of energy and time as it is.  I don't have time to apologize to people for not taking on their pet project, as important as it may be.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:01:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  AoT: just to be clear (0+ / 0-)

                When I said "people saying...suck it up!" I was referring to all the folks that have been saying it's all about elections, for years. I have been in countless diaries (or read them) when the circle would start: we can only affect change if we elect more/better dems -- we did and they let us down -- but, but, but, shut up and elect More! --

                I understand fully that keeping dems in power at this time is better than letting the pubs have control. But it's purely defensive -- I don't think many of us have much faith in any of our elected figures -- we're just calculating that somewhere between the monied powers that call the shots and what vestiges of principles and beliefs our Dems can retain, they will try to do the right thing occasionally and will try to staunch the worst excesses of the right. There is nothing inspiring about that, but we'll take what we can get for now. We just have stop thinking it is THE answer.

                I fully agree with you: "we're telling people that if they want something to happen, they need to go out and make it happen."

                I understand that some people believe that the way out of the circle of elected Dems letting us down is to seed the party with more progressive dems starting at the bottom and working our way up. This is certainly a valid idea.  We knew this before OWS and OWS hasn't changed this. I just don't think OWS is going to be the primary actors in that effort and it is a waste of time to expect them to be.

                Finally, I agree that OWS can't do everything and shouldn't be blamed for what it can't do, or what it/they does not choose to do.

      •  Why don't you start organizing that? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        efraker

        It sounds like a good idea!  People should be doing just that.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:25:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Maher doesn't seem to understand that there is a (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, blueoldlady, Tool

    HUGE difference between OWS and TP, which is, as you point out, astroturf support and direct monied support of their candidates. The TP is a tool of the monied interests.
    OWS must stay visible and vocal. If we can figure out a more effective way to do that than direct action, I'm all for it.
    I think Bill does understand this, it just doesn't play well with the narrative he's putting forth at the moment.

    •  Actually, that huge difference is his point (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40, doroma, gramofsam1, tegrat

      Tea Party: Organized around GOTV model. Has elected dozens of national office holders under their banner.

      OWS: Organized around street protests. Has elected exactly nobody.

      Bill Maher knows the two groups are different. His advice is to stop being different in the single most important regard.

      •  Tea Party + Organized by political operatives (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tegrat

        solely as a means to GOTV and move the conversation to the right, using shitloads of money and a captive media.  Of course, it's whining if any mentions that it might be a bit harder to organize without those things.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:24:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I appreciate his point, don't get me wrong (0+ / 0-)

        Tea Party has done nothing but echo the most extreme aspects of right wing lunacy, while OWS has injected a whole new conversation regarding inequality into the spotlight. This is so-called transformational change that should result in a more vigorous and engaged electorate with a more accurate world view, and one would hope, vote accordingly.

  •  My advice is stop blaming the funding sources of (11+ / 0-)

    ...the other side. It really does sound like an excuse. No amount 1% money can keep me from hitting the street, or canvassing, of voting, or doing whatever I can to win. The 99% outnumber the 1%.

    What frustrates me is that OWS has the right message and has been successful in changing the dialogue, but doesn't seem to know what to do with it's victories.

    This really does sound joke-worthy:

    ..."to facilitate a visioning process designed to allow all voices to be heard while allowing repeat visions to organically rise to the top"...
    Seriously, a "visioning process"? Come join our visioning process? How exactly does this process help the unemployed, or people underwater with mortgage or student loan debt?

    OWS should not need a visioning process to know that a large part of what needs to happen is to remove 1%-friendly politicians from office. Starting with the most immediate threat, the Republicans. Then on to the Dems that still may not have gotten the message.

    "There is nothing more dreadful than the habit of doubt. Doubt separates people. It is a poison that disintegrates friendships and breaks up pleasant relations. It is a thorn that irritates and hurts; it is a sword that kills.".. Buddha

    by sebastianguy99 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 12:56:57 PM PDT

  •  If most mainstream Dem politicians (0+ / 0-)

    do not see any advantage in seeking your endorsement, or approval I would say that perhaps the OWS "movement's" message or goal is not effective, if you have one at all. Nobody seems to fear the wrath of OWS, not even likely fellow travelers.

    The MAJORITY of the 99% that OWS claims to represent, do not agree that OWS represents them.

    My opinion (only me) is this:  OWS is not really focused on Occupying "Wall Street", (or better yet voting booths). It does seek to engage with or challenge power, but in the least effective ways possible (but in perhaps more personally satisfying ways to the participants a la Tea Party Fanatics).

    People do not have to go down to the village square to seek common truth, and they don't. So people are not looking there for effective change either. People who VOTE get to change things, people who rally/occupy get to continue to have something to complain about. One politician could (but they dont), go to a rally of 10,000 OWS folks and another can go to a group of 750 Independent voters with a specific agenda item, guess who will be more effective? Guess who will get more real votes?

    I also feel there may be an old fashioned revolution or uprising soon, given the overly shat punchbowls of our governing and financial systems (or is that SYSTEM?). But it wont be T-baggers or OWS leading the charge, those two groups will still be at their respective headquarters making rules for others and witty chants and slogans for themselves....

  •  "I like him more often then naught." (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT

    My favorite new spoonerism

    and/or appropriately feint praise for Maher.

    It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

    by Murphoney on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:02:13 PM PDT

  •  His basic mistake (7+ / 0-)

    is to assume a close parallel in the social relations between the Tea Party and the Rubes on one hand, and OWS and the Dems on the other.  The Tea Party says what the Rubes always wanted to, but were afraid to.  The Dems want no part of what the social base of OWS wants, and Dems like Mumbles Menino and jean Quan in fact the leaders in unleashing nationwide violent police repression of OWS on the most pettifogging pretexts.    The Rubes WANT TO Be the TeaParty.  The Dems hate everything OWS stands for.  It's not a good analogy.

    The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges. ~ Anatole France

    by ActivistGuy on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:08:00 PM PDT

  •  Let it be pointed out... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lady Libertine, Tool, skayne, emal

    ....that we have a President who actively did a lot to dismantle the Occupy Movement.  

  •  Well, it's not like... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doroma, puakev, kathny, gramofsam1, Tool

    there haven't been comments made here poo-pooing the idea of "occupying the voting booth".

    I remember that taking back the Capitol.  Loved it.  I think MoT was calling it "Occupy Congress".  So... any tangible results because of it?  Did a single legislator that had been siding with the 1% come to the side of the 99% as a result?

  •  part of the problem (0+ / 0-)

    Is that occupy has no guiding creed.  I know an anarchist, a paulite, a progressive, and a romney voter who all think they personify occupy.  They can't all be right if occupy is to achieve anything.

    For those of you who prefer Bartlett to Obama, re-watch the West Wing. For those who prefer Clinton, re-watch old news videos.

    by Ptolemy on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:27:57 PM PDT

  •  How about Occupy MSM: CNN and Fox News (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT

    I saw a site for OccupyFoxNews but no good details. If you want more attention from the news you have to make then newsmakers the news. If the cameras won't come to you, go to where the cameras are.

    Back in the 60s people got hurt in marches and protests and in Tienanmen Square peeps got run over by tanks. It's not enough to stand somewhere and make noise. Change is violent and that has historically meant committing violence or, preferably, making them act violent. It was the murder of a couple of white people that got the nation motivated over the Selma marches despite the deaths of blacks before that. So, don't give them what they expect an what others will dismiss. Instead of wearing hemp and scruffy beards, go clean shaven and wearing suits, or at least nice slacks and clean button-down shirts, preferably white so blood will show up better (and definitely not brown shirts, that reminds people of the Nazi SA) and wear ties (clip-ons for safety). Don't worry, it's not perfidy and we're not in a state of war. If some of you OWSers refuse to be poseurs or dress up as "sell-outs" or some such BS (don't you want to win?), then at least get some of your supporters who do sometimes dress up like that and convince them to sacrifice themselves for you instead.

    If you're serious about change, put your body where your beliefs are.

    -We need Healthcare Reform... but i'm selfish, I Need Healthcare reform-

    by JPax on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:29:08 PM PDT

  •  Excellent diary (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, sunny skies, Tool, tardis10, kathny, emal

    I wish I could recommend this more than once.  

    People who fail to get OWS which only began nine months ago must think that we can change the world in just a few short months.  We are up against a system that is so corrupt from the inside out and is fueled by huge amounts of money.  The Occupy movement accomplished a major victory by reshaping the public conversation away from deficit reduction and toward inequality.  That is a very big shift considering that Occupy got very little MSM coverage and what it did was mostly negative.

    "Growing up is for those who don't have the guts not to. Grow wise, grow loving, grow compassionate, but why grow up?" - Fiddlegirl

    by gulfgal98 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:34:41 PM PDT

  •  You claim (0+ / 0-)
    Yet the Dem establishment does not take Occupy seriously
    Maher is right.  The reason Occupy is not taken seriously is that it is uninvolved in the political process.

    "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

    by Whimsical on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:51:14 PM PDT

  •  Way to go, Tool (9+ / 0-)

    and thanks for the info about the march from Philly to NYC.

    I can't do the march myself, but I would like to perhaps be there for the send off or meet you along the way with some refreshments, and maybe even meet up with the group in NYC.

    Do you know the route yet?  You might be coming right near me.

    One last thing, Maher is part of the 1%.  He does some good things and I generally like to watch him. But sometimes he's way off, and often when he is way off, he's downright offensive.

    I just learned today that he bought minority share in the Mets baseball team.  They were selling minority shares for 20 million bucks.  He won't say whether he paid the whole 20 million or if he had partners.   The only other celebrity minority shareholder is a hedge fund magnate.  And while members of the 1% are sometimes on our side, I don't think Maher gets out among the everyday 99% people too often.  With respect to OWS, he sounds just like the other elites telling people from OWS to take bath or get a job.  


    "Justice is a commodity"

    by joanneleon on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:52:18 PM PDT

  •  He's right about one thing: (6+ / 0-)

    For the OWS movement, in the end, to have any meaning, it has to translate its moral power into real world political power.  Otherwise it's just emotional venting.

    It's not enough to go and say we need change, we need to actually create it in reality, and our system forces that to go through Congress, the White House, and our courts, and the various state and local governments.

    Make no mistake, I think the OWS was a marvelous first step.  We really got the nation's attention, changed the political drumbeat out there.  But it's only a first step, and acquiring and maintaining political power is the necessary next few steps if we want to restore the right balance between the 1% and the 99%.

    Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?

    by Stephen Daugherty on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 01:52:37 PM PDT

    •  OWS is not just a protest movement (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      julifolo, JayRaye

      It has effected actual real world change.  Stopping evictions for one.  Getting people to move their money out of banks.

      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

      by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:17:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Prison-Industrial Complex (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Unduna, AoT, JayRaye

        I found out about a local attempt at a jail expansion because the local occupy facebook put out an alert. Apparently, the plan is at least staled.

        We have police problems locally. I really think pushback on the out of control "justice" system has breakout potential. Mass action is the way polititians are pushed to make good on their promises.

        Giving birth (giving life) should be a gift not an obligation or women and poor people are 2nd class by definition

        by julifolo on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:07:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Look, that's just getting people... (0+ / 0-)

        ...to react for a little while.  But when the movement fades, then what?  if we want things to go further, to sustain themselves, then we must have sympathetic people in charge!

        I don't know why this is not more obvious.  We shouldn't be positioning ourselves as merely petitioners making appeals to those in power, we should be trying to take over what we can in terms of political power, so there are both more people in power willing to listen to us (because they are us, and share our assumptions), and so we can bypass the uncertainties of trying to get everything done at a remove.

        In other words, if you want a job done right, do it yourself.

        Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?

        by Stephen Daugherty on Mon Jun 11, 2012 at 05:01:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tool, tardis10, emal
    Why don't you spend time highlighting all the people that Occupy has saved from evictions.?
    Ya, instead of lecturing us?

    Thank you, Tool--you summed this up nicely.

    It is time to #Occupy Media.

    by lunachickie on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:06:54 PM PDT

  •  What Bill Maher forgets (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    UnaSpenser, Tool, tardis10, jhecht, emal

    is the Teabaggers are funded by right wing billionaires (cough, the Koch Brothers, cough) and peddled by a national fake news outlet (Faux).

    The left has nothing like that, which is one reason why we're going to get destroyed by Citizens United this fall.

    "Load up on guns, bring your friends. It's fun to lose and to pretend" - Kurt Cobain

    by Jeff Y on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 02:40:00 PM PDT

  •  Occupy the Green Party... n/t (0+ / 0-)

    there is never time to do it right, but always time to do it over -6.88/-4.31

    by DeadB0y on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:02:59 PM PDT

  •  I dunno, to me (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, Jeff Y, tardis10, skayne, emal

    it was a bad comparison.

    OWS is nothing like the tea party in any way. How can Maher even compare the two? The tea party is a 1% funded astroturf effort, and OWS is bottom up, leaderless, and, compared to the tea party, lacking in resources.

    Mr. Maher, how could you forget that not only did the TP have the full force and backing of the RW corporate community, they also had the backing of the resident republican "horse organ" Faux noise, which touted them for about 2 years. Of course they grew in popularity, Bill! They had an entire News outlet's covering every single event!! Now, admittedly, there was some coverage of ows events all over the country, but I would posit that it was 1) not as much as coverage as the TP events got, and 2) not as positive coverage as the TP got, especially from Faux and the ConservativeNewsNetwork (CNN). Bill missed this entirely in his analysis, imo. Its not just that the tea party just got out and knocked on more doors, that is complete and total bullshit. They had the funding and the noise machine behind them, driving their message home for fucking 2 years before they had ANY fucking success in congress. The comparison is complete and utter bullshit, Bill. Sorry!

    Yes, it is bread we fight for - but we fight for roses, too! Sick of the endless battles, namecalling and hostility? Join Courtesy Kos -- A group dedicated to respect and civility.

    by rexymeteorite on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:03:49 PM PDT

  •  Vote or go home. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Wildthumb, mconvente

    All the whining in the world isn't going to help, if those that protect the 1% and screw the 99% aren't voted out of office.

    Bill is correct.  Like it or not.

    " With religion you can't get just a little pregnant"

    by EarTo44 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:05:58 PM PDT

    •  Yeah, tell it to the unions (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      efraker, Rizzo

      The ones who had the majority of the country against them and still managed to fight the company they worked for and win.  They didn't get to vote much of the time.

      And tell it to all the people the right wing is disenfranchising.

      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

      by AoT on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:24:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  OWS doesn't take criticism very well. (0+ / 0-)

    We need a real audit of the Federal Reserve, not the “partial” one done by the GAO. This is step one in building a case for more transparency of the FED (which is prerequisite to implementing effective financial-sector regulation) and should be the #1 demand from OWS. OWS has what I call the “Sarah Palin problem”. They don’t know anything (or not nearly enough).

  •  I'm hit or miss on Maher's "editorials," (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wyvern, gramofsam1

    but I agree with him on this one.

    This nation rewards organization and constant, dogged commitment.

    Get into the system and change it.

    Yes, inevitably any group could get co-opted over time, just
    as the PRI did over the decades in Mexico, which began with a Zapatista orientation and ended up with business as usual.
    (I'm vastly oversimplifying.) There's always a new beginning and a potentially successful progressive presence.

    I was seeing what Adam had seen on the morning of his creation - the miracle, moment by moment, of naked existence. --The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley

    by Wildthumb on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 03:30:26 PM PDT

  •  Maher is afraid for Obama's chances... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lady Libertine, skayne, emal

    and suddenly he sees it important to get OWS to hustle up some votes for Obama. This is an attempt at co-optation. The OWS I know in New Orleans will never fall for this. Historically, political forces have always attempted to co-opt grass roots movements. The really successful movements, as in the labor movement, resisted. OWS will resist as well.

  •  At least... (0+ / 0-)

    ..Maher has forced you OWS champions to do a little navel gazing.

    OWS is no longer the 6th year college student who refuses to apply for a major because that would compromise the whole aloof coolness of being a romantic outsider.

    I'll bottom line this for you:

    If Romney beats Obama because all you OWS participants were too busy singing Dylan songs at Burning Man, I'm going to come here & mock the hell out of you.

    When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in excess body fat and carrying a misspelled sign.

    by wyvern on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 04:42:57 PM PDT

    •  So Obama might lose because Occupy doesn't vote... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skayne

      for him? I know the knives will come out looking for scapegoats after his loss. Everyone will be blamed, but Obama for selling out his principles, if he ever had any to begin with. Go f yourself.

  •  Oh, for crying out loud, do BOTH: vote AND occupy (3+ / 0-)

    the streets!

    Is that too much to ask?

  •  Maher is right (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itsbenj, mconvente
  •  You guys sound kind of weak. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Unduna
    Frankly I'm not sure what Occupy could have done to make a difference in Wisconsin. Let's talk about the lack of support from our national organizations first before we start saying Occupy should have been more involved.
    I mean, if you can't make a difference without Washington stepping in, what's the point?

    "The disturbing footage depicts piglets being drop kicked and swung by their hind legs. Sows are seen being kicked and shoved as they resist leaving their piglets."

    by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:22:27 PM PDT

    •  A great many Occupy folks don't see the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pfiore8

      answers in the electoral process. that's what folks like daily kossers just can't seem to accept...not to mention Maher.

    •  you totally miss the point: how would you know (3+ / 0-)

      whether Occupy was there or not? Occupy is heavily criticized when we fly our banner at other people's efforts. We are often asked not to. To provide bodies, but not tout ourselves.

      In Wisconsin, Occupy members may have helped get out the vote, etc. But that effort wasn't enough. Walker spent 8x the money of Barrett because he had massive financial backing and the major voices in his party supporting him whole hog.

      THe DNC almost didn't send any support at all. They had to be shamed into it.

      It is completely bogus to lay the blame for Walker's win on Occupy. Its pitiful.

      •  But, you see what you're saying, right? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fiddlingnero, gramofsam1

        That you can't make a difference without the infrastructure of the democratic party.

        And, if that's the case, Maher is right.

        You should be trying to take over the Dem party rather than going off on your own and not having much effect on anything.

        "The disturbing footage depicts piglets being drop kicked and swung by their hind legs. Sows are seen being kicked and shoved as they resist leaving their piglets."

        by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:52:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I read her comment differently (0+ / 0-)

          And come away with a different take than you do.

          Why is it that the current Democratic Party did not get behind and send money to help elect the Deomcrat and offset the money Walker had amassed?

          Their inaction speaks volumes...and it allowed the big money that controls/runs the current Democratic infrastructure to stay in power...how do you take it over when they have oodles of money and entrenched infrastructure and right leaning philosophy holding the keys and controlling the money as to what candidates and causes they are willing to dole it out to. Who is the current democratic party beholden too? What big money industry is fueling it?
          They are threatened by the true grassroot and left leaning base of the party and movement whereas the rightwing has endorsed and coopted its base.

          The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

          by emal on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 08:09:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  However, I also think you're underestimating... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gramofsam1

        ...the amount of money you can raise on the web if you got organized.

        Look at the Paulites.

        "The disturbing footage depicts piglets being drop kicked and swung by their hind legs. Sows are seen being kicked and shoved as they resist leaving their piglets."

        by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:54:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Maher is right and proof is in the reaction (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mconvente, Kalex

    He hit a nerve. The reality is Occupy has fizzled. One big poorly organized sleep in. The Tea Party got it right in it's strategy. Occupy had no strategy just obnoxious tactics and that can only get your so far before blowback occurs and your defined by it rather than your message.

  •  I like Bill but he's no George Carlin. eom (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    scorpiorising, blueoldlady

    The frog jumped/ into the old pond/ plop! (Basho)

    by Wolf10 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:29:36 PM PDT

  •  my only problem with Maher's critique (5+ / 0-)

    is not really how he characterizes OWS but rather how he over-credits the "tea party" as having been a grassroots political movement, rather than just a bunch of particularly conservative Republicans funded by billionaires with actually very little in the way of grassroots support. and I think he only over-credits them with this because he wants to believe that an equivalent lefty group could succeed with such methods. unfortunately the key missing part (finding from billionaires, which tends to make a lot of difference) ruins part of his take on this.

    I don't think Maher has any problem with OWS efforts to prevent foreclosures at the local level, and the point of his rant wasn't to chastise OWS in the first place, it was more of a plea for there to actually exist in this country an effective political left wing. we don't have one. at all. he wants OWS to form that left wing! that isn't some cheap insult, it's a damn game plan. and it makes total and complete sense to me.

    other than that, his analysis of how Dems sh!t on their base while the Repubs mobilize theirs to maximize their achievements is 100% completely and totally right. and it will unfortunately continue to be right. OWS took to the streets and got beaten, pepper-sprayed, jailed, and slandered en masse. and they retained decent poll #s throughout most of it. they will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever get those billions of dollars from any investor. but if, Lizard forbid, we get a Romney 2012 presidency, we better have a LOT of those OWS folks ready to go and run for House seats in 2014. it won't be Obama's party any more by then, and it's limited how far OWS could take any such power grab with him and his folks in power, because they look down on this kind of stuff and don't care to help them succeed.

    Think of me what you will, I've got a little space to fill. - Tom Petty

    by itsbenj on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:37:41 PM PDT

  •  I usually love Maher. Here's where he is wrong. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    UnaSpenser, skayne, run around

    The Occupy movement and it's supporters such as myself voted OVERWHELMINGLY for 'hope and change' in 2008. That got us so-called pragmatism in the face of an outright assault on a) the 'American dream' and b) the social contract that has existed between government and its citizens since the 1940s. 8.2% unemoyment. Unprecedented (and UNABATED) gap between the wealthiest and the poorest. How many "Democrats" even EXIST that steadfastly support the party platform? How many of these career political whores are worth voting for at the end of the day?

    •  Stop it. (0+ / 0-)

      You voted overwhelmingly for Edwards, Kucinich and Gravel and settled for the conventional guy because it was between him and Crazy John.

      "The disturbing footage depicts piglets being drop kicked and swung by their hind legs. Sows are seen being kicked and shoved as they resist leaving their piglets."

      by Bush Bites on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 05:56:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  We already have... (8+ / 0-)

    ...an organization devoted to registering voters, GOTV and winning elections.

    It is called the "Democratic Party".

    Occupy is valuable because they raise consciousness, and force people to ask and answer difficult questions.

    IMHO, the new meme, "99% vs. 1%" just by itself is a significant accomplishment. Occupy showed us a new way of looking at politics and economics.

    Wailing that Occupy didn't win any elections is like complaining that Muhammad Ali didn't score any touchdowns.

  •  I see both sides (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SwedishJewfish, mconvente, emal

    And understand where you are coming from.  Where was Bill when it was time for the police to kick your teeth in?  It is important to get people in the streets...yes yes yes.  I want some candidates from you guys though.  It is the next step.

  •  Show me the praxis in occupy (0+ / 0-)

    then we can talk

  •  Foreclosure blockages all over the country (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoldlady

    Essentially occupy foreclosed housing and invite eviction and arrest - all over the country. Make video interviews of families and seniors whom we are protecting  from homelessness and distribute far and wide. This is being done now in Spain and Greece.

    Student strikes, now being joined by unions and others, are scaring the shite out of 1%ers in Canada.

    The tent occcupation thing was good - for last year - and the mic check thing is played. (The latter only worked for a little while in Lord of the Flies. Then Piggy broke his glasses.) We have to keep the 1% guessing. Change up. OWS includes a lot of tech savvie folks, attorneys and former Wall Street people. Sue! Sue! Sue! Bad mortgages. Healthcare bankruptcies, for profit school scams...

    Maher is right about some of this, but he is also a bit of a patronizing asshole who desperately wants to roll with the grownups. And the whole "just grow up and eat the dogfood" thrust of his argument is straight out of the Village hymnal.

    "I don't try to describe the future. I try to prevent it." - Ray Bradbury

    by chuckvw on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 06:56:43 PM PDT

  •  The problem with OWS (0+ / 0-)

    is they aren't macho enough for the media to get a tingly feeling in their legs over.  

    It is simple.  Its fun and easy to pick on the people who are equated to hippies.  But hypocritical ignorant masses of people who can't spell.  Well they are serious because they don't fight the cops... since they aren't being pepper sprayed and beaten but still.

  •  I'm sorry, saving people from eviction (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mconvente, snapples

    is nice, but the perception is that most of what OWS wants is just idealism without any nuts and bolts.  No legislation has been put forth, no budget, no nothing.  I mean, you just want people to be spiritually awoken and they're not responding.  They respond to direct action.

  •  Conclusion I draw from this discussion: (0+ / 0-)

    diaries about fundamental, polemical subjects that take as point of departure provocateur statements (a la Bill Maher) are mostly condemned to have a negative result if the thread is prolonged.
    The mostly unproductive and intolerant shouting and venting here is a bad sign. Just what our common opponents would like to see.

  •  I had not heard of (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mconvente, gramofsam1

    BumRush the Vote either, and I've been mostly hanging out on here for some time. I'm glad there's a movement to get folks to use the one piece of power the Kochs haven't been able to steal (yet), the vote.

    I think Maher was responding to the CW that there's an "enthusiasm gap" in Democratic voters, especially amongst the young, which spells trouble for Obama in November. I saw much the same on Twitter today, when right-wing trolls were pointing out the "tepid response" Obama got to his recorded message to Netroots Nation, along with some who considered Markos and NN "sellouts" for "shilling for Obama".

    I'm with Howard Dean and Van Jones -- we can hold Obama accountable, but we also have to vote for him because the alternative is unthinkable. Romney would be a pawn of the extremists in his own party, just as much as Bush II was a pawn of his own extremist factions like Cheney and Rumsfeld and Bolton.

    Mitt Romney: the Etch-A-Sketch candidate in the era of YouTube

    by Cali Scribe on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 08:53:27 PM PDT

  •  OWS did call attention in a big way (0+ / 0-)

    and it worked because everybody related and we were ALL OWS, but  the error , I believe was , honest cold hard reality..trying to go on 24/7 is just not possible, not here, not now..it's like a battery with a drain on it ,  just lost its charge until OWS didn't look like us anymore and no longer made a unified sound ...fewer fewer people, even sympathizers could no longer relate.
    the worst blow came when it was perceived that OWS was preventing everyday people from going to work... to WORK.
    that was the appearance, and that is where OWS lost  a lot of empathy.   and i apologize for having to say this, but OWS soon appeared  something like a chronic hacking cough that would not go away in varous locales.
    THAT was the problem.

    TIMING is everything . also FOCUS. when you have the pulse of the nation ,people rise up, but  a unique combination of events needs to occur. either it is spontaneous, in response to something large and singular,  which cannot be planned, or rather the planning occurs simultaneously, or else everything needs to be planned shrewdly and perceptively...
    it isn't about OWS, it is about people ...OWS only worked when it  channeled the true voice of people. in order for it to not just be another rheuming, clamoring  movement, ..you have to get real and understand how many causes and movements are clamoring for each individuals attention.. come together, how DO we come together, how do you rise above the din?...i know people put their hearts and soul into it, but there's no entitlement there. the birth of OWS was then, this is now.
    please don't get me wrong. OWS did a very great thing, it was wondrous to behold, but it ran out its battery... which actually is the NORMAL course of events..it is damn hard to sustain.  
    People use the Vietnam protests as an example..let me tell you, even that had kind of a sour end...there were 'revolutionaries' who did not know how to revive themselves.. they got bitter and angry and then more bitter and more angry til they quit making sensem they became bitter angry people and no one was radical enough for them. I understand why. but the point is they lost their effectiveness. We need to be smart and not go over that edge..this is a long long haul, and we need to figure out how best to use our voices and how best to focus our actions, and still put bread on the table .
    i WANT  people to find a way to transcend the deadly election year malaise....right now though, i have no idea what OWS is  or how it relates to the real issues we are facing...i don't know how to fix that. but I do think  some of Maher's  advice had merit .

  •  is Occupy organizing? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gramofsam1

    When I worked for both civil rights and the anti-war movements our main focus was on organizing in communities around the country. We had teach-ins at schools, we set up coffee houses outside many military bases, we went out to the churches every sunday and we worked hard every day to take our message across the country.

    Is "Occupy" solely basing its organizing efforts on social media and press releases?

    America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

    by cacamp on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 09:49:18 PM PDT

  •  Doesn't tale long reading some comments above (2+ / 0-)

    To see that Occupy's time is not yet fully upon us. If the highly engaged people here cannot grasp what OWS is about, then continued incubation and foundation building is the proper course of action.

    "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

    by US Blues on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 10:37:58 PM PDT

  •  One difference that I'm seeing is... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mconvente, gramofsam1

    that the Tea Party has dominated the Republican Party and used it to its advantage whereas the Occupy movement doesn't seem to want to associate at all with the Democratic Party for fear of the movement being co-opted.  Most of the occupier activists I talk to are not party loyalists at all.  Many of them even refuse to vote.

    Show me a sane man and I will cure him for you ~ C.G. Jung

    by JClarkPDX on Sat Jun 09, 2012 at 11:30:42 PM PDT

  •  In This Instance..... (0+ / 0-)

    I gotta agree w/ Maher.  Saving foreclosed homes on a case by case basis, is nice & really humane.  However, it doesn't really move the needle.

    Congress is where the power is.  We need to elect our own people & get them in there.  

    Mobilize, translate that into political action......then we've got a movement w/ some muscle.

  •  Maher can be clueless on things, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dilutedviking

    especially women where he has been outright sexist.

    But when it comes to religion, that man is a champion. He nails it.

    But yeah, on everything else? It's a coin toss.

  •  Get Jesse on Maher's show immediately. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    emal

    Seriously...time to make Bill put his mouth where his money is, so to speak. I don't think this is either/or for either side in this particular argument.

    I think Maher is right in that OWS can start building its own voting block, but mocking the very thing that gave OWS national visibility as a rallying point for the disenfranchised, the street protests, misses the whole point. Sorry Bill, but without those tents and those marches, the scattered disenfranchised would have been invisible and silent, as usual.

    Our own Ministry of Truth would be a super guest for Maher, and should be on that panel regularly, as should other liberals who are not afraid to correct the facts when the robo-conservatives start mouthing their insipid half-truth talking points.

  •  i agree with bill on this if you want a voice you (0+ / 0-)

    to vote. but you are so angry with the president you have not listen to his message his is on yur side everything he's he's fighting for is for youbeing blocked by the gop by not votinging nothing is not getting done. he's one man he needs the tools & the working  working partying party 2 assist him. he has no vote . think your anger at him his misdirected. i want to win i refuse to give this presidency to mitt romney to screw this country ministry of truth is a great spokes person for your the cause.

  •  It seems counterproductive. (0+ / 0-)

    Daily Kos mission is to elect Democrats. Yet the site is coddling a movement full of people who don't vote and do not support Democrats. I'm not saying it applies to everyone in OWS, but the vocal minority aren't doing you any favors. It was a fun experiment, but I think it's time for everyone to serious the fuck up. We're 5 months away from a Presidential election.

  •  Sorry, I'm with Maher on this, and have been for.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla, Glinda

    ...a long time.

    Movements are done in STAGES. History teaches us this. A movement has to have a PROGRESSION.

    Occupy changed the narrative. Great. Well done.

    But now is the time to translate that into GETTING BUTTS IN VOTING BOOTHS for November. Including busing folks from low-income areas to the polls, registering obviously, and knocking on doors in an organized, polite manner.

    Complaining about Obama not being in Wisconsin is absurd - it's OBVIOUS why he wasn't there; it would have been damaging to his re-election to be tied too closely to WI, when it was obvious that Walker was going to win weeks ago (some may have thought Barrett had a chance, I wasn't one of them - a good effort, but not enough).

    Occupy right now is STAGNANT, which has given the right wing enough time to RE-DEFINE them - and enough time for people like Maher to recognize that the movement is "Stagnant".

    The narrative has changed, great - but if Occupy doesn't move on to the next stage, the narrative will be reversed (and it's already started).

    Marching is fine. But STOP SITTING - that part of it is OVER. March - but in COMBINATION with that, START USING ANY MOMENTUM THAT'S LEFT TO REGISTER VOTERS AND GET THEM TO THE POLLS.

    Maher is EXACTLY RIGHT.

    Sometimes the truth hurts, I realize that - and I'm with Occupy's central idea - but as often happens with our side, we're getting too scattered. Occupy, for example, is not about fucking ORGANIC FOOD. GUITARS are not going to change ANYTHING.

    VOTING WILL.

    With Citizens United, the ONLY thing that will win this election will be TURNOUT, TURNOUT, TURNOUT, and if Occupy doesn't move whatever reputation it has left to push that into a reality with organized effort, it's going to turn into a joke - I'm as liberal as it gets, but DRUM CIRCLES are not helping the image of Occupy. You know what will? VOTING REGISTRATION BOOTHS.

    •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

      There are days when I think that Occupy [fill in the blank] seems more like a Rovean joke than a legitimate populist movement looking for real and substantive change.

      I should point out that I deeply loathe the financial industry and want to see real regulation and reform.  I've actually worked with those assholes and seen the financial devastation that they've caused.

      Deaf ears and old long-debunked New Left tactics with no real tactical, let alone strategic, accomplishments are the sad outcome here.

      "Americans, while occasionally willing to be serfs, have always been obstinate about being peasantry."

      by Glinda on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 10:33:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  HEY, HERE'S AN IDEA, GUYS: STOP BITCHING AND (0+ / 0-)

    GET OUT AND REGISTER VOTERS, KNOCK ON DOORS AND BUS PEOPLE TO THE POLLING PLACES ON ELECTION DAY INSTEAD OF SITTING IN FRONT OF YOUR COMPUTERS ALL DAY AND ARGUING WITH EACH OTHER.

    WITH RESPECT: GET OFF YOUR ASS AND REGISTER VOTERS IN YOUR AREA.

    WHAT YOU'RE ALL DOING RIGHT NOW IS EXACTLY WHAT REPUBLICANS WANT YOU TO BE DOING.

    STOP BITCHING - THERE'S ONE THING THAT WILL WIN IN NOVEMBER - TURNOUT.

    PERIOD.

    •  Dividing our side (0+ / 0-)

      and using ALL CAPS exclusionary language really helps.

      Did Obama win in 2008 by excluding "dirty freaking hippies" and other people who weren't "pure" Democrats, or did he win by including as many people as possible?

      "Get off your ass" and "Stop Bitching" really won't help get more people to volunteer for Obama.

      "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

      by Broke And Unemployed on Sun Jun 10, 2012 at 08:01:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Great diary, Tool. It was awesome to meet you, too (0+ / 0-)

    Sometimes Maher pisses me the ruck off even though watching his show is like a tradition.

    You outline the reasons why very well. I could add my diary i wrote about this as well as it is still relevant. I, like you, appreciate some of the things maher has said and done oever the years, but Maher needs to STFU here and read as well as pay attention.

    Don't Lecture OWS on Electoral Politics It Failed the 99%

    ‎"Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin - Thank you! I'm now going to Netroots Nation!

    by priceman on Mon Jun 11, 2012 at 01:05:42 PM PDT

Alumbrados, Angie in WA State, buffalo soldier, Sylv, nota bene, copymark, glitterscale, miasmo, saraswati, emal, TheGreatLeapForward, wu ming, GayHillbilly, Earwicker23, xynz, RFK Lives, Bob Friend, bronte17, TracieLynn, nyceve, Agathena, ornerydad, ctsteve, splashy, NMRed, scorpiorising, ManhattanMan, Dallasdoc, Miss Jones, DeadB0y, The Walrus, rlharry, RebeccaG, Oaktown Girl, zett, kpelligra, jcrit, Black Max, vacantlook, sawgrass727, sb, julifolo, Skennet Boch, joanneleon, humphrey, historys mysteries, marina, tle, qofdisks, disrael, Tonedevil, run around, Brooke In Seattle, Burned, SBandini, Savvy813, Lisa Lockwood, peacestpete, mightymouse, kathny, kishik, third Party please, Medium Head Boy, Kingsmeg, ActivistGuy, Dvalkure, kestrel9000, AoT, The Wizard, fiddler crabby, play jurist, blueoasis, triv33, gpoutney, gooderservice, Sagebrush Bob, James Kroeger, CA Nana, rsie, Stripe, blueoregon, markthshark, Little, tegrat, One Pissed Off Liberal, timewarp, pfiore8, Haningchadus14, ninkasi23, bfbenn, Brix, US Blues, theChild, CT Hank, uciguy30, leonard145b, LWelsch, rmonroe, hkorens, ScottyUrb, poligirl, dewley notid, Wek, pickandshovel, Jeff Y, Al Fondy, JPax, priceman, legendmn, bluemoonfever, LinSea, The Dead Man, banjolele, h bridges, shopkeeper, JesseCW, RageKage, UnaSpenser, Just Bob, BigVegan, commonmass, Renie57, Broke And Unemployed, flitedocnm, one love, Susan Grigsby, jethrock, kjoftherock, sunny skies, gulfgal98, Lady Libertine, Funkygal, Publius2008, Betty Pinson, ericlewis0, eclecta, Colorado is the Shiznit, allenjo, La Gitane, asterkitty, trumpeter, AgavePup, Cinnamon, Wolf10, SueM1121, tardis10, Prinny Squad, whoknu, rexymeteorite, PhilJD, MinistryOfTruth, Mentatmark, jacey, efraker, orestes1963, dance you monster, joanil, 2thanks, congenitalefty, Horace Boothroyd III, ursofakingwetoded, chipmo, MartyM, Rizzo, burnt out, OllieGarkey, lunachickie, skayne, Earth Bear, JustinBinFL, Glen The Plumber, catchy, Kayjay, John Kelly, Kurt Sperry, BobTheHappyDinosaur, Shawn Russell, SwedishJewfish, Lily O Lady, argomd, Social and Economic Equality, Brooklyn Jim, JayRaye, glorificus, Thornrose, the max that roared, IamNotaKochsucker, Demeter Rising, sjburnman

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site