President Obama embrace OWS movement as it spreads.

[cpwill]

Top Down, Bottom Up.....

good Lord. He was right. :neutral:

Barack Obama, US president, offered more support for protesters against the global financial system after a a weekend of demonstrations in cities around the world, but called on them not to “demonise” those who worked on Wall Street.
On Sunday, Mr Obama honoured Martin Luther King at a dedication to a new memorial on National Mall in Washington. Referring to protests that have spread from Wall Street to London, Rome and elsewhere, Mr Obama said: “Dr King would want us to challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonising those who work there.” Mr Obama had previously said the protests “express the frustration” of ordinary Americans with the financial sector....

 

[Josie]

Weird, because he is part of the problem...

 

[Risky Thicket]

Weird, because he is part of the problem...

He was purchased by the same people who purchase Republicans and Democrats in Congress. When he leaves office his successor will be purchased by Big Bidness just as everyone else in Washington is.

Vote the Bastards Out! (most of you won't)

 

[atrasicarius]

He was purchased by the same people who purchase Republicans and Democrats in Congress. When he leaves office his successor will be purchased by Big Bidness just as everyone else in Washington is.

Vote the Bastards Out! (most of you won't)

Who do you replace them with, though? All there is is more bastards.

 

[Paschendale]

That's odd... a lot of the OWS folks aren't terribly satisfied with Obama. Of course, the right wing would be massively worse...

 

[coolwalker]

Of course he does and the fools in the street don't even realize he's the one that gave Wall Street the billions. It's him they should be protesting, and they're too dumb to remember they voted for him.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

It's him they should be protesting

Uh, they are...

 

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

The OWS/99% crowd are not cheerleaders for Obama. Basically they see Obama as less loathsome than the GOP which is advocating keeping taxes low on the corporate weasels and wealthy under the misguided notion that they will use the extra cash to create jobs.

 

[Free For All]

Uh, they are...

Their protesting the 1%, the fat cats on wall street.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Their protesting the 1%, the fat cats on wall street.

They're protesting the government being funded by the 1% as well, which includes Obama...

 

[Samhain]

Here's an export of the mailing list for Occupy DC. Nice to see Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi and MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan working with organizers to help define their message.

Obviously they are professions and would only report objective stories even though they are involved in the protest itself.

OWS ORGANIZING EMAILS

 

[Antiderivative]

This is great news. We finally need a politician who will challenge the status quo and the excessive greed of Wall St.

I really hope Obama runs in 2012. He will enact true progressive change, unlike that schmuck we now have in office.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Why is the right wing scared of a mainly liberal/progressive protest/movement?
Who mainly want corporate money out of politics?

 

[Paschendale]

Here's an export of the mailing list for Occupy DC. Nice to see Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi and MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan working with organizers to help define their message.

Obviously they are professions and would only report objective stories even though they are involved in the protest itself.

OWS ORGANIZING EMAILS

That's odd, I just read a bunch of those messages and not a single one had anything to do with protesters outside of New York City. I understand if the "DC406" was confusing, but that's not what it meant. Also, these messages came from a whole lot of different people, and are procedural, to organize events, rather than a discussion of the message. Also, the 25 and 28 total e-mails that make reference to Taibbi and Ratigan, respectively, talk of them coming and speaking once, and writing some articles. No leadership, no misleading writing.

I didn't read all 3000 or so e-mails, but it really doesn't seem like you read any of them...

But answer me these questions, because your argument is incredibly weak. Is every person who speaks at these demonstrations is leading them? And every person who writes about them is trying to control things and mislead people? This argument really only exists in partisan terms, that paints a political ideology poorly, regardless of facts.

 

[Deuce]

Of course he does and the fools in the street don't even realize he's the one that gave Wall Street the billions. It's him they should be protesting, and they're too dumb to remember they voted for him.

They can't do both?

Also, you're not allowed to criticize someone you voted for? So, you loved everything Bush did, then.

 

[Samhain]

That's odd, I just read a bunch of those messages and not a single one had anything to do with protesters outside of New York City. I understand if the "DC406" was confusing, but that's not what it meant. Also, these messages came from a whole lot of different people, and are procedural, to organize events, rather than a discussion of the message. Also, the 25 and 28 total e-mails that make reference to Taibbi and Ratigan, respectively, talk of them coming and speaking once, and writing some articles. No leadership, no misleading writing.

I didn't read all 3000 or so e-mails, but it really doesn't seem like you read any of them...

But answer me these questions, because your argument is incredibly weak. Is every person who speaks at these demonstrations is leading them? And every person who writes about them is trying to control things and mislead people? This argument really only exists in partisan terms, that paints a political ideology poorly, regardless of facts.

I disagree with the notion that there shouldn't be demands. I think there should be a few simple ones. It's not a MSM conspiracy when the press wonders what the movement wants or who is leading it. I think there are a lot of people in the press and even on Wall Street who are ready to support the movement wholeheartedly, if it could articulate some specifics.If OWS could identify a few basic problems -- over-concentration of capital, regulatory capture, overweening influence of money on politics, excess financialization of the economy, tax unfairness, etc -- and propose some first-step solutions to all of those things (break up the banks, force bailout recipients to give up lobbying, end the carried interest and capital gains exemptions as Michael points out, etc), you'd have more allies, you'd be educating the public about a subject that it has a tough time getting real information about through normal media, and it would prevent the other side of the debate from being able to define the movement in their own (inevitably unflattering) terms.

The only thing preventing millions of people from going out onto the streets on their own is that they don't understand how Wall Street works or what it does. That to me is why the movement needs to be specific. It has a responsibility to explain these problems to the general public and to show that solutions do exist and that they're attainable. People I think need more than just the knowledge that they can protest -- they need to believe that they can fix things and that someone out there has the answers. And a lot of the people on this email list do have the answers and could provide that leadership that is so desperately needed.

Why would an objective journalist make this statement?