The OWS movement is as dead a Disco. (election, elect, million)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's all the same movement that never quite goes away. It is all the same one. It happened in San Francisco back in the flower child days and it will happen again someday. Likely when the weather is warmer. People like that love a big party with no rules and plenty of drugs around. They will be back. I just can't figure out why none of them are smart enough to occupy somewhere fun like Hawaii? Maybe because they wouldn't have the bad weather excuse to quit for a while?
You're actually kinda right. The OWS movement was almost as big a failure as the GOP teabagger movement, which simply lead to a do-nothing teabagger Congress that resulted in America's credit rating being downgraded, teabaggers in Congress wanting to raise all our taxes while protecting their billionaire benefactors, and not to mention not one GOP presidential candidate has taken up the small government Tea Party mantra.
signed,
a centrist, moderate Democrat
That you attribute the failings of the Democrat-controlled government to less than a dozen members of the Tea Party through all of Congress shows you are anything but a centrist or a moderate.
i think the problem with the OWS movement is that they haven't been able to find a focus for their outrage.
for an example, rahm emanuel might be a good place to start:
Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage giant Short Freddie Mac stay made him at least $320,000 Chicago Tribune (hat tip Hal)
Before its portfolio of bad loans helped trigger the current housing crisis, mortgage giant Freddie Mac was the focus of a major accounting scandal that led to a management shake-up, huge fines and scalding condemnation of passive directors by a top federal regulator.
One of those allegedly asleep-at-the-switch board members was Chicago's Rahm Emanuel—now chief of staff to President Barack Obama—who made at least $320,000 for a 14-month stint at Freddie Mac that required little effort.
As gatekeeper to Obama, Emanuel now plays a critical role in addressing the nation's mortgage woes and fulfilling the administration's pledge to impose responsibility on the financial world.
Though just 49, Emanuel is a veteran Democratic strategist and fundraiser who served three terms in the U.S. House after helping elect Mayor Richard Daley and former President Bill Clinton. The Freddie Mac money was a small piece of the $16 million he made in a three-year interlude as an investment banker a decade ago.
government officials played fast and furious with the rules (insider trading legal for government officials, by the way) and gambled with the next generation's future.
or this bit of business:
How Rahm Emanuel Earned $16 Million November 2008 (hat tip Hal)
Barack Obama's chief of staff spent two years working as an investment banker in Chicago. Wassterstein Perella paid Rahm Emanuel $16.2 million and made him a managing director, despite the fact that Emanuel had never held a job outside of politics before. So what did he do to earn that kind of pay day? "He was a highly-paid deal-maker who enriched himself by using his government connections to enrich big business," Tim Carney writes. (Disclosure: blah, blah, blah, brother.)
From the Washington Examiner:
One of Emanuel’s two biggest deals never would have happened without government pressure. When telecom giant SBC bought fellow telecom company Ameritech, SBC executives intended to hold onto Ameritech’s home-security company SecurityLink.
But Bill Clinton’s Federal Communications Commission insisted that federal law required SBC to sell the security company. Clinton’s old right-hand man, Emanuel, happened to be working on behalf of a venture capital firm called GTCR Golder Rauner that wanted to buy SecurityLink from SBC. The government pressure helped Emanuel get his clients a good deal, as the Tribune tells the story:
“Under a regulatory deadline to divest itself of SecurityLink, SBC financed all but $100 million of GTCR’s $479 million purchase of the firm. Less than six months later, GTCR resold the company for $1 billion, earning a quick $500 million on its investment.”
you can knock the OWS movement all you want, but some of them at least instinctively understand that the next generation is going to have it harder than the previous generation due to the actions of a few highly placed individuals who are looting the country.
they do understand when you have crooks at the top, you are going to have huge UNPROSECUTED theft from the american people.
Last edited by floridasandy; 12-29-2011 at 02:05 AM..
Meanwhile, a University of Michigan study found that the wealth of members of Congress has TRIPLED in the past 25 years - while the average U.S. family has suffered a DROP in their net worth. During that time, the Median net worth of members of Congress rose from $280,000 to $725,000, while over that same 25 years the wealth of the average U.S. family slipped to $20,500 from $20,600.
This dramatically shows that the closer one is to the production of debt money, the more they profit. In this case politicians profit from both insider information in corrupt markets, and also from direct contributions from the purveyors of debt - today called campaign contributions, i.e. laundered bribes.
1. A potential candidate will not release his tax return. Obviously, something to hide.
2. The protestors broke no laws, no lawful order was dis-obeyed and got arrested. A clear violation of the 1st amendment, which means YOUR rights are under attack as well.
3. A candidate will not return bought and paid for dollars to wells fargo.
Each and every one of us should be mad as hell that politicians are bought and paid for and could careless about the people of this country.
But let us take a look at the ages, not a bunch of young hooligans....
1. A potential candidate will not release his tax return. Obviously, something to hide.
Your opinion....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty
2. The protestors broke no laws, no lawful order was dis-obeyed and got arrested. A clear violation of the 1st amendment, which means YOUR rights are under attack as well.
They were beating on the door....thats a violation....don't care how much don't care how little....they were beating on the door and disrupting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty
3. A candidate will not return bought and paid for dollars to wells fargo.
Each and every one of us should be mad as hell that politicians are bought and paid for and could careless about the people of this country.
Are you just as pissed at all those bundlers for obama? That did the EXACT same thing? Or are you over looking that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty
But let us take a look at the ages, not a bunch of young hooligans....
There is no law requiring them to release the returns BUT in best practice and in interest of the people it should be done, here is some history of that.
Those who cry out enough government, to much regulation are the same ones who use the "is there a law for that"......in fact there are some things that are just what should be done in the act of full disclosure. To not expect a potential candidate
to release their tax return is accepting less than the best for this nation. The people deserve to know everything! If you run for POTUS you have no privacy any longer. You want obama to cough up a bc, why not expect romney to disclose his tax return? Do people only see the red and blue?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
Your opinion....
They were beating on the door....thats a violation....don't care how much don't care how little....they were beating on the door and disrupting.
Are you just as pissed at all those bundlers for obama? That did the EXACT same thing? Or are you over looking that?
A valid message? Please show me where there is ANY law that says ANY possible candidate MUST show there tax returns?
There is no law requiring them to release the returns BUT in best practice and in interest of the people it should be done, here is some history of that.
Those who cry out enough government, to much regulation are the same ones who use the "is there a law for that"......in fact there are some things that are just what should be done in the act of full disclosure. To not expect a potential candidate
to release their tax return is accepting less than the best for this nation. The people deserve to know everything! If you run for POTUS you have no privacy any longer. You want obama to cough up a bc, why not expect romney to disclose his tax return? Do people only see the red and blue?
obama said no the BC (I could care less about the BC), he also had all his college files sealed? So what....
Are you pissed about that?
If you read the article, romney also said the later down the raod he may think about it.
He is not running for the potus, he is running to get the nomination to run for potus.....see the difference, why should he provide everything, when he may or may not get the nomination.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.