Originally Posted By TP2000 Interesting how the numbers on these protests wax and wane, but never seem to get above a few hundred in any one city beyond Wall Street. And now it appears some cities have given up on their "occupy" thing. If you go home for days at a time, or just abandon the thing entirely, it's not really occupying anything, is it? A quick check of the big city West Coast papers this morning had the Seattle Times reporting "a few dozen" occupiers in Westlake Park on Wednesday morning. The Seattle occupy group held a big vote on Tuesday evening to send a propsal on protest regulations to the mayor, and the vote was 108 to 17. That gives you a total of 125 Occupy protesters at their "general assembly" meeting and vote on Tuesday evening. The Portland Oregonian has an interesting angle; there's a group of people camped out in a downtown park for the past few days, and they are supported at least philosophically by Portland's very liberal mayor and politics. But this Sunday is the Portland Marathon and the marathon has a filed permit to use the park as it's organizational area and race headquarters for 10,000 runners. But the campers say they aren't moving, the Marathon offices are getting swamped with calls from people wanting their money back if the race is cancelled, and the Occupy group is refusing to budge. That one will get interesting this weekend. Hilariously, several Occupy groups said the Marathon organization and runners would be on their side. The Portland Marathon is controlled by old, wealthy families based out of the exclusive and private Multnomah Athletic Club (MAC). I was never a member, but I have friends that are and used to go to some social events at the MAC when I lived in Portland, and it was very hoity-toity, lilly white WASPy, and filled with Portland's wealthiest movers and shakers. The MAC spent a majority of the 20th century keeping out Jews or anyone of color, after they begrudgingly started letting Catholics join in the 1920's. How on earth the Occupy group thinks the MAC people are of the same mindset is beyond me, and it's obvious the Occupy group in Portland doesn't know their local history well. I really hate it when people don't know their local culture, but that's another topic. Salem, Oregon has 15 people camped out on the front lawn of the Oregon capital. 15. I can't find a single mention of any Occupy coverage in the LA Times or OC Register for the past several days. There does not appear to be any sort of organized Occupy presence in Los Angeles or Orange Counties right now. It appears they all went home days ago. Surely there's something going on with Occupy today, but the Times and Register have nothing on it for the past few days. The San Diego Union Tribune is reporting today there are still a half dozen tents and a couple dozen residents of the Occupy encampment in front of City Hall. The Occupy folks there had no statement to give to the media when questioned on Wednesday. The Occupy movement really seems to have lost out on an opportunity to get some sort of message out there, beyond the "We are the 99%". Sure these types of things always attract the Profesional Protesters, who show up at any event in any decade to chant slogans about whatever is trendy at the time. But there also seems to be a lot of young people legitimately passionate about something here, and willing to camp out for days on end. It's just a shame there's not a more stable and organized system of releasing statements or concepts to the media covering this movement. Their numbers are very small, even when you add up the dozens or few hundred folks in the few dozen cities participating. But they got the medias attention in a big way... and then they blew it with their inability to form a coherent sentence for the nightly news. Very, very odd. And winter is coming too. It will get colder and wetter in those tents.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 The Tea Party wasn't out every day in a row, and look at the press and influence they got. Same with anti-war protesters in the 60's, which also started small. This thing could piddle out, or it could get more focused and organized. Stay tuned.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<-Says the guy whose wife works and he stays home and takes care of the kids. Are you really this disconnected?>> That is a sexist, bullshit comment. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Originally Posted By TP2000 I don't think the Tea Party ever claimed they were going to "Occupy" anything though. They mainly set up weekend afternoon rallies that last 90 minutes and then they go home to the suburbs. The "Occupy" tagline these folks have given themselves seems a bit silly in all the cities beyond Wall Street. In all of these liberal West Coast cities there appear to be a core group of a couple dozen overnight campers, and then the numbers swell to 100 or 200 in the afternoon and evening when they have their "general assemblies", and then the two dozen guys in tents are left behind overnight. It's really an intriguing concept, and I can't say that some of their thoughts aren't attractive. But they really need to get a message to deliver consistently. It's a rag-tag group, and they seem to have tamped down the virulent anti-semitic wing of the Occupy group who were railing against the "Jewish bankers" to the nightly news hostess shoving a microphone in their face. Yikes! They were smart to stop letting that faction get in front of the cameras. But they still need to improve dramatically on their message development and delivery. As it stands now, there's not much of a message there, and I'm afraid their 15 Minutes is coming to an end this week. In this age where protesters have iPhones and laptops and Facebook for instant mass communication, there's no good excuse for it. They need to get organized and start speaking coherently about why they are there ASAP, or they need to go home and let the workers from the Parks Department get in there and clean up and repair the parks they are damaging.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Well it is a ragtag group, and widely diverse between rebels without a clue to highly articulate people and everything in between. The original core used the word "occupy" and it stuck, even if it often doesn't (or won't) fit. And some are silly, but no sillier than people in tri-corner hats insisting that Obama represents "tyranny." Let's hope they get more focused. The Wisconsin protests from last winter show a little better how to do it.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "<<-Says the guy whose wife works and he stays home and takes care of the kids. Are you really this disconnected?>> That is a sexist, bullshit comment. You should be ashamed of yourself." Hardly.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder And here's why- here's his comment again: "My thoughts are that the losers who don't want to work for a living and don't want to better themselves, and want their living handed to them without toil or effort, should go home and rethink things, then get a job and make something of themselves. Revolution. Oh brother." Where the hell does he get off saying something like this? When was the last time he had a job, lost it, then couldn't find another one because all the jobs he could do are going overseas, the company folds, or the job is simply eliminated? Answer: never. If it's so freaking easy to go out and "get a job and make something of themselves", then why aren't more people doing it? Why isn't he doing it? He has no idea whatsover what many of these people are going through, yet he came on and passed judgment on all the unemployed "losers". THAT'S what's shameful.
Originally Posted By Labuda "More than half of those people haven't been eligible to vote for very long. But I think part of their point is that there's no one to vote for. I feel their pain." Good point. I chatted with one young man protesting today down there, and if I had to guess, I'd card him were I a bartender. There were a few adults that appear my age (late 30s) or older, but a lot of the folks I saw were just kids.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "That is a sexist, bullshit comment. You should be ashamed of yourself." Not really. You apparently don't work, according to the other poster, so where would you get off telling people to just get a job?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Like it or not, vbdad, the "why's" of both of those questions ARE being asked by the Occupy people... and rightly so.< think you misread my statement- I was trying to sayjust as onelook sinto why 47% don't pay federal tax- one must also look at each individual case of the top 1% -- not all are the enemy/ cr5ooks etc as they are lumped together and I am glad people are asking, but I can tell you the message is getting lost in this protest- and not just because of the media- the groups are doing a piss poor job of communicating as well-
Originally Posted By vbdad55 "I said there were, and you're missing the point(s). The main points are these: 1). There ARE crooks but they're not being held accountable, and there's nothing to keep them from doing it again; 2). There are honest people but they could easily pay the tax rates they did in the 90's and be just fine, thank you. If they don't provide that extra revenue, it's either going to come from the middle class or the debt increases." no, I've go the points and have no argument with them, my argument is people starting to march on people's homes etc.-- and while they lump that top group together- who amongst this group is doing the research to ensure the anger is being expressed againat people who might actually deserve it, vs. those who got there the honest way and yes could pay more taxes but should not be lumped together with the crooks- as they are being today.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 The group walked by luxury apartment buildings on the upper east side. That's it. No torches, no pitchforks. And they're not saying all millionaires are crooks either. Maybe you saw a sound bite where someone did, I don't know. But that's not what they're saying. They're saying some are crooks who have not been prosecuted, and all should at least contribute what they did in the 90's, since they easily could.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>I can tell you the message is getting lost in this protest<< "Lost?" Or pummeled into incoherency by the noise machine's reporting?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <The group walked by luxury apartment buildings on the upper east side. That's it. No torches, no pitchforks.< all it takes is one over the top loon - and with a group that size guaranteed there are few there
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 ^^^ I agree. If you want to protest on Wall Street or outside the banks that's fine. But not at people's homes where their families live.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<The group walked by luxury apartment buildings on the upper east side. That's it. No torches, no pitchforks.< <all it takes is one over the top loon - and with a group that size guaranteed there are few there> You could say the same thing about the tea party or any group. You can't discredit these people because of a lone loon that MIGHT join them one day (but so far hasn't). Plus, they had permission to march there, which means police presence. And all those buildings have their own security. And you know what they chanted? "Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself." Seriously. That's carved into the facades of one of the buildings they passed, and they took it up as a chant. Ooooooh, scary!
Originally Posted By vbdad55 "You could say the same thing about the tea party or any group. You can't discredit these people because of a lone loon that MIGHT join them one day (but so far hasn't). " I do discredit the tea party for exactly the same kind of behavior. What I find odd is that some who hate the tea party for how they act- are fine with this. I'm fine with neither. and call me cautious, but I'd rather not empower nuts to do something - or wait until it happens to say I told you so- by then it's too late.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 if a large mob who you know has issues with you was picketing your home with your family- I doubt you'd be as cavalier. As a former school board member who has had damage done to his home by the same'peaceful protestor' types- because they disagreed with decisions- sorry I have no tolerance for that crap.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<"You could say the same thing about the tea party or any group. You can't discredit these people because of a lone loon that MIGHT join them one day (but so far hasn't).>> " <I do discredit the tea party for exactly the same kind of behavior. What I find odd is that some who hate the tea party for how they act- are fine with this. I'm fine with neither.> Funny. I'm fine with both as long as they keep it peaceful, respectful (no Hitler signs, thanks) and within the bounds of that old "freedom of assembly to address grievances" thang. <and call me cautious, but I'd rather not empower nuts to do something - or wait until it happens to say I told you so- by then it's too late.> So what would you do? Ban peaceable assembly? That worries me more. <if a large mob who you know has issues with you was picketing your home with your family- I doubt you'd be as cavalier.> I'm really not sure where you're getting your information from. It wasn't a mob. It was a peaceful march down the street. Anyone in an apartment house was protected by police, building security and 30 or 40 vertical floors. <As a former school board member who has had damage done to his home by the same'peaceful protestor' types- because they disagreed with decisions- sorry I have no tolerance for that crap.> If they've done damage, they're not peaceful, are they? Any damage done by the march in question? No? Didn't think so.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <So what would you do? Ban peaceable assembly? That worries me more. < when it moves from a public venue ( Wall Street) to a private residential street I would surely be more concerned many residential areas in urban locations have laws already on the books limiting numbers...the police use it to control gang activity etc.. I would enforce it if it was already in existence. there's common sense to me that no good can come from amassing large numbers of disgruntled people in a residential setting..
