Those Occupy Wallstreet guys have got to be stopped! This is getting ridiculous!

>> ^Auger8:

Lobbying should be made illegal in my opinion. Money and politics shouldn't mix, it's worse than inbreeding. It just creates a corrupt, deformed, defect ridden system.
I've said this before on other sites but if they limited the salaries of politicians to no more than 20k a year with random audits of gifts and property to prevent bribes the world would be a better and more compassionate place to live in.


Completely agree

I completely agree with you there. We can only hope it happens sooner rather than later.


>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Auger8:
I'm sure the system can be fixed but as it is now it just seems like lobbying breeds corruption.
>> ^Boise_Lib:
@Auger8 @Sagemind
Lobbying is a good thing.
Many years ago I was a member of a successful, grassroots organization which hired a full time lobbyist to talk to state legislators.
Lobbying is not inherently evil.
What is needed is to enforce the existing laws against bribing public officials and re-enact the laws against immoral campaign contributions BRIBES.
Getting rid of Super-PAC's would be an excellent start.
I also really like the Canadian laws against paid political commercials.


It won't be easy--but it can be done.

>> ^Auger8:

I'm sure the system can be fixed but as it is now it just seems like lobbying breeds corruption.
>> ^Boise_Lib:
@Auger8 @Sagemind
Lobbying is a good thing.
Many years ago I was a member of a successful, grassroots organization which hired a full time lobbyist to talk to state legislators.
Lobbying is not inherently evil.
What is needed is to enforce the existing laws against bribing public officials and re-enact the laws against immoral campaign contributions BRIBES.
Getting rid of Super-PAC's would be an excellent start.
I also really like the Canadian laws against paid political commercials.



Sure, the big money lobbyists are the problem now--because they get away with bribery. Enforce the existing laws--re-enact the laws which were repealed (by lawmakers bought and paid for)--and nail shut the revolving door for congresspeople and staff who move to lobbying positions (Gingrich and Dodd).

But, If lobbying itself is gone how will you be able to talk to your representatives? By email?

The system--as it stands now--is a heaping pile of festering shit. Many people need to go to jail over it. But, that doesn't mean the good parts of the system (which have been captured by the Industrial/Military/Bank/Corporation complex) should be completely scrapped--just fixed.

It won't be easy--but it can be done.

I'm sure the system can be fixed but as it is now it just seems like lobbying breeds corruption.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

@Auger8 @Sagemind
Lobbying is a good thing.
Many years ago I was a member of a successful, grassroots organization which hired a full time lobbyist to talk to state legislators.
Lobbying is not inherently evil.
What is needed is to enforce the existing laws against bribing public officials and re-enact the laws against immoral campaign contributions BRIBES.
Getting rid of Super-PAC's would be an excellent start.
I also really like the Canadian laws against paid political commercials.

The reason I say 20,000 a year is for one that's what a lot of the average blue collar workers earn. And two it would eliminate people who only get into politics for the money.

>> ^Sagemind:

@Auger8
I agree that lobbying should be illegal!
But I think your salary cap is a bit low. I'm assuming by 20k, you mean $20,000.
That's low by any standards. You'd never attract anyone with any intelligence for that kind of paycheck. "The current salary (2011) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year." I can agree to a pay scale between 100-200k. And with a limit as to what expenses can be claimed on the office expense account (eg. nothing for personal use, caps on meal claims.)
I do as well, however, agree to the auditing. Any monies gained above and beyond that must be proven as legitimate while living expenses and assets must not exceed their incomes.

Oh hi Internet Generation.

You know, it doesn't seem especially surprising that when you can communicate so freely with strangers across the globe then freedom of speech and expression become pretty fucking important to you. Technology has changed us, its even changed how we protest. Occupy Wallstreet? More like Occupy Server with millions of connection requests.

I don't especially like the image Anon as made for themselves, but whether you identify as an Anon or not you probably still are in a sense. My name is Legion: for we are many.

@MilkmanDan

Urm, he never said he was actually there when people were beaten. He did say, which heavily implies, that he "saw" them beaten, but then again, I "saw a Marine screaming at the cops while at Occupy Wallstreet. (That implied I was at Occupy Wallstreet but of course I was not--he was at Occupy Wallstreet when I saw him. And I did see him, from my computer.)

I bring this up because people, especially in the heat of a Kill/Battle mindset, especially those that fought and most likely killed people (Some who are just defending their own nation and beliefs,) tend to say things without thought--like, "Hrm, I wonder if people will misunderstand what I say."

One thing that leads me to the conclusion that he mispoke, that he wasn't physically there when it happened, that he only took he/said she/said context, was that apparently, as he witnessed innocent people being beaten near to death, unlawfully if his words are true, he just shut his mouth like some coward and didn't lift a finger to help. Big stuff for a man now talking so much shit huh? Talking about how the cops are scared...

So either way, he is a lair or a coward--you take your pick Milkmandan...

Yes, the context is important. Yes, it is possible (even likely I hope) that the policemen seen in the video were doing nothing wrong. But he was asked near the end of the clip what got him all riled up, and he stated that he was pissed off to come home and witness people that weren't doing anything get yanked out of crowds and whacked with clubs / tazed / pepper sprayed etc. We've seen that happen in other clips as well, so I believe him when he says he saw it in person -- and I think that is sufficient justification for getting upset and loudly exercising one's right to free speech.

Even if the policemen that he was yelling at had done nothing wrong themselves, I am glad that he put some in-person heat on them. If they are good cops, they needn't take any offense to his tirade, but they should be disappointed with the actions of their fellow officers that so upset this man.

Watching this made me wish I'd been there so I could shake that man's hand, clap him on the back, and call him brother.

Already has...I should've never bought it. It was beyond my means.>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

@rottenseed
I hope your house gets foreclosed.

her mouth only needs to open for one thing...

edit: penis...in case you were wondering. It only needs to open for penis.>> ^BoneRemake:

>> ^rottenseed:
that girl in the bear costume is cute though

Just not too bright in moderately thought predominant conversations.

>> ^rottenseed:

that girl in the bear costume is cute though


Just not too bright in moderately thought predominant conversations.

>> ^ponceleon:

The interviewer is actually Opie from the Opie and Anthony radio on XM.


Indeed, and the sky is blue as well !

I don't get it...Democracy Now! went down to Occupy Wallstreet and found tons of very intelligent and well informed people. How is it so hard for everyone else?

>> ^snoozedoctor:

In the multitude of recent posts/blogs/discussions about eating the rich, one name is consistently absent of criticism, even prior to his death, Steve Jobs. Net worth over 6 billion dollars, doing no philanthropic work to speak of (as compared to the often vilified Bill Gates), and not one of the many billionaires pledging half of their estate to charities (check out "the giving pledge". Why not Jobs? "Cause dude, like, you know man, he made cool stuff."
Anyone that cannot see the benefit to society, the multitude of companies and people employed that simply augment and support apple products, from iphone covers, to sound docks, on, and on and on, well......if you can't see that, no wonder you don't understand and appreciate capitalism at it's best. True, I don't think money motivated Steve Jobs, I'm quite sure it didn't, but he wasn't keen on giving it away.
If you don't like your lot in life, do what I did, borrow money, do 8 years of post-grad training working 80 hour weeks, get a job, pay back your loans and have a lifestyle above the mean, get yourself on the Board of a charity and give 10% of your income to charities that you trust will distribute money to people that really need it. I didn't do all that work to give money to someone that wants to sit on their ass. I guess I'm what's wrong with this country, an ordinary dude that wants to get ahead.


Steve jobs: The richest income tax evader the world has ever seen. A 1$/year salary? So endearing.

I dont think I've ever agreed with you but I do agree with your remark that the repealing of the Glass-Steagall was a mistake.>> ^NetRunner:

Repealing Glass-Steagall got government out of the market, and was a huge mistake.
>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Repealing Glass-Steagall was a horrible mistake.
...
Get the government OUT of the market.