Obama: "Occupy Wall Street" reflects "broad-based frustration"

President Obama on Thursday called the "Occupy Wall Street" protests a reflection of a "broad-based frustration about how our financial system works" and pledged to continue fighting to protect American consumers.

The president, speaking at a press conference, said he had heard about and seen television reports on the recent protests on Wall Street, and noted that "I think it expresses the frustrations that the American people feel."

"We had the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression - huge collateral damage throughout the country, all across main street. And yet, you are still seeing some of the same folks who acted irresponsibly trying to crack down on abusive practices that got us in the situation in the first place," Mr. Obama told reporters. "I think people are frustrated.">> ^shagen454:

They are all bad. Democrap or Retardican. Its all the same shit bought by different... or the same, corporate greed. Obama has hardly even acknowledged Occupy and ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE. You voted for the change marketing strategy but you let corporate greed buy into even more Bushesque policy by believing that voting makes a difference. He doesnt want to publicize Occupy by even referring to it because he knows and the powers that be know that people are beginning to take note that it is all bullshit, its broken, its an illusion and it all fundamentally needs to be rebuilt... utilizing the constitution.
Instead of voting you should fucking protest a system that doesn't work on voting day!!!! Whether it is Romney, Paul or Obama its nearly the same shit. They strip you of liberties and steal from your coffers, deregulation for the corporate state, more police state, privatizing everything under the sun, raising the prices and gauging everyone who does not have a million dollars. Stop perpetuating the illusion.

Ron Paul's Free Market Fundamentalism is precisely what Occupy Wall Street stands against. Ron Paul is not the cure. He's part of the disease.

Remember, there were tens of thousands of participants in the USA alone. If there were that many Tea Bagger demonstrators in one place that long, someone was bound to get shot Cheney-style. I hardly think the message was "overshadowed" by bad behavior, but I suppose that is a matter of opinion.

>> ^quantumushroom:

When asked about Occupy Wall Street, he said it was unfair to dismiss the concerns that are being expressed by the protesters.
Occupooper "concerns" are overshadowed by their abhorrent behavior.
another taxcorat and obama-endorsed and soros-backed mob.

When asked about Occupy Wall Street, he said it was unfair to dismiss the concerns that are being expressed by the protesters.

Occupooper "concerns" are overshadowed by their abhorrent behavior.

another taxcorat and obama-endorsed and soros-backed mob.

>> ^marbles:

http://videosift.com/video/Ron-Paul-Defends-Occupy-Wall-Street
"When spontaneous movements occur in a country, the Johnny-come-latelies like to join and redirect the original intent of the Tea Party movement, and the original intent of the Occupiers. So for that reason, the political people get involved and they try to grab hold of the message. And I think that's been the case on both sides."


thats a concern of mine also.
when they cant ignore/ridicule you away they try to co-opt you.
hence what happened to the tea party.
OWS is a bit too unorganized to be so easily co-opted at the moment but that can change at any time and the fact they are so amorphous may have its strengths..it has its weaknesses too.

i dont want to see what happened to the tea party happen to OWS but there is a high possibility it will.
and then what?
that anger is not just going to go away.
we live in interesting times my friends.

http://videosift.com/video/Ron-Paul-Defends-Occupy-Wall-Street

"When spontaneous movements occur in a country, the Johnny-come-latelies like to join and redirect the original intent of the Tea Party movement, and the original intent of the Occupiers. So for that reason, the political people get involved and they try to grab hold of the message. And I think that's been the case on both sides."

Your video, Occupy Wall Street Defends Main Street, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Adam is great...and like Cenk I agree with him on many issues....but it's not hard to believe that Adam doesn't really understand what OWS is really about. He doesn't study this stuff...he is a casual observer of the news and uses that to spin off on rants and stories. What he know about OWS is the general information the news media feeds us which is OWS is about rich vs poor, bums and slackers wanting everything for nothing, etc...>> ^ghark:

It's not above Adam Carolla's head unfortunately, people like this know exactly what they are doing, trying to make the people who are robbing entrepreneuring you look awesome.

i am loathe to respond in bullet form,maybe because i find it the weakest and laziest form of debate in a text format,but let me address a glaring misconception you seem to have concerning the occupy movement.you seem to be under the impression that its driving force is against rich folk.

now lets put that aside for a second and i shall not deal with just how utterly inaccurate that statement is because what REALLY intrigues me is this: how did you formulate that opinion when so much information is already out there revealing a totally different animal?how did you derive this conclusion and by what information did you base it on?
now THAT is a far more interesting conversation.

Its driving force is against the powers that be. "They". They say money runs the government, and they are right. Money is at the root of all evil. Who controls all the money? The "1 percent", although it's really more the ".001" percent. So it is essentially against the rich and powerful, the income divide they have engineered, and the entrenched power structure they orchaestrate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is an ongoing series of demonstrations initiated by the Canadian activist group Adbusters which began September 17, 2011 in Zuccotti Park, located in New York City's Wall Street financial district. The protests are against social and economic inequality, high unemployment, greed, as well as corruption, and the undue influence of corporations—particularly that of the financial services sector—on government. The protesters' slogan We are the 99% refers to the growing difference in wealth in the U.S. between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of the population.

you also put forth that your main premise was that the students were warned that they would be removed,by force if need be.
maybe i am misunderstanding your thinking but it appears that if there is an announcement then any use of force is justified.
yet in your previous paragraph you stated you understood the necessity to disobey then turn around and become an apologetic for police force.
these two premises are in conflict.

I was merely countering the assertion that they were sprayed without warning, which was a lie. I do believe police have the right to use force, however, I think they could have handled that situation a little better. I do believe we should disobey authority when it runs contrary to what God has commanded, but then and only then.

then in the next paragraph you continue with a verbal denigration of the people of occupy using tried and true tactics of any powerful institution.you literally have just regurgitated state propaganda and i dont think for a second you even realized that fact.do you even know what a marxist,anarchist or socialist actually is? i ask that sincerely not as a slight towards you,because it doesnt appear that you do.

I am not on the side of the state, I am on the side of God. Governments tend towards corruption and unless they adhere to biblical principles they will fall into decay and injustice will be the normative state of the land. So I do not prefer the state at all, but neither do I favor removing it, at least until Jesus returns. It is, as the founders believed, a necessary evil.

Yes, I know what they represent, and their positions are often interchangable. They were out in force waving their communist flags, talking about income redistribution and private property rights, distributing their anti-capitalist propaganda. Here is a quick portrait:

http://www.lookingattheleft.com/2011/11/zuccotti-utopia-portraits-of-revolutionaries/comment-page-1/#comment-22376

They even had maoists:



again i find your premise in conflict.
on the one hand you agree and are aware of the corruption gnawing at our democracy and then turn around and dismiss those who are protesting that VERY corruption you just acknowledged as somehow being unworthy.
i even posted the playbook that powerful institutions use and you fell into lock step with that message.

then lastly you again use a perjorative to describe the occupy movement with obvious disdain and then chastise me for comparing occupy with the civil rights movement.
either you dont understand my point or didnt think it through.
i was not comparing them as being similar in intentions.i was comparing them to how the power of the people are the ONLY way to enact change.
and if you truly agree that this government is corrupt and has been purchased by corporations who use their immense wealth to further their own profit margin at the expense of the average american citizen then i do not understand why your premise is so diametrically opposed in thought and in reason.

your argument is a contradiction.

The fundemental disagreement is this. What I recognize is the corruption gnawing at all of mankind. Everyone is looking at this catastrophe called civilization and thinking "how can we rearrange this so a utopia emerges?" Some people think the inequitable distribution of resources is the source of eivl, and believe that if we just set up a system to share the resources equitably then all goodness will follow from that. Other people think that just having a system is the source of corruption and want to eliminate it altogether and live without any central authority. The issue is that these schemes are all predicated upon the assumption that human beings are generally good. The reality is, human beings are generally sinful and tend towards corruption and not goodness. It isn't the system, or lack thereof that is the problem, it is the human heart:

Jeremiah 17:9

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

If you wiped out everything and started with a blank slate, putting the population of the world into an instant utopia, it would only be a matter of time before the whole thing was rotten to the core. The problem isn't the system, it is us. The only solution to this problem is Jesus Christ. Humans are incapable of governing themselves equitably. The founders recognized this, which is why they instituted checks and balances into the constitution, to try to offset mans sinful nature. They knew no man could be trusted with power. In the same way, to switch systems we would simply just be trading one polished turd for another. When Jesus returns and sets up His kingdom, only then will there be peace upon this Earth.

one last thing and while i hope you know .i shall state openly here.
what i am about to ask i ask in all sincerity and humility.
where do you think jesus would be sitting on this issue?
would he be on capitol hill with the plutocrats and corporate lobbyists?
think about it.

What Jesus is interested in is our salvation. Neither the plutocrats or the protesters are doing anything to reach or to further His Kingdom. They both outside of His will and are following man-centered doctrines and philosophies which glorify themselves and give God no acknowledgement what-so-ever. Jesus wouldn't be happy with any of them.

Luke 11:28

But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

Luke 18:8

I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

>> ^enoch:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
Making a foray into politics?

so it appears and not a very impressive one.
@shinyblurry
i.

>> ^quantumushroom:

All too easy, Slapnuts.

Now deny it cause the stats don't come from SocialistWorker.org

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^quantumushroom:
Drug use, rapes, murders and random deaths are in every camp, all the attendant chaos one would expect when socialists, anarchists, code pink commies and feed-the-flames libmedia descend anywhere. These protestors are not even 1% of the 99%.

Citation needed, motherfucker.



Idiots put all their links in an image, so you can't click on them and read the reports for yourself... hmm, I wonder why?? Oh, it's because there were no reported murders in the links! And no reported rapes in the links! Lesser events? Yes, a few. Completely unrelated events? Why, yes, several!

Here, for your reading pleasure, are all the links the right-wing crypto-fascist zombie airheads can come up with to marginalize the "dirty hippies" on the lawn:

Links originally from Pundit Press:

From Oregon Live: Primarily about a man who showed up at Occupy Portland, dismissed it as "an eyesore" and criticized its "lack of cohesion", and was arrested within days for starting fires. Also includes a few other accounts of minor drug posession, disorderly conduct, a weapons charge, and arrests of people for charges unrelated to the Occupy camp. Occupy Portland had a problem from near the beginning with homeless people joining the camp, and there were no services from the city or state to help them.

From Denver Post: A man who made an impassioned speech in favor of the Occupy Fort Collins camp was arrested as a suspect in an ENTIRELY UNRELATED arson charge.

From Gawker: A military veteran died of a self-inflicted gunshot, and the city used it as an excuse to halt all camping.

From Fox News: A "rash" of reports that consists of 1 accusation of sexual abuse and 1 accusation of sexual assault in Zuccotti park, 1 accusation of sex with a minor in Dallas, and 1 alleged sexual assault in Cleveland. Fox inflates this to "nearly a half-dozen" reports. The article also includes a number of unsubstantiated rumors of destructive behavior by Occupy protestors in various locations around the country.

From Komo News: A man accused of indecent exposure (completely unrelated to the Occupy movement) is arrested when spotted taking part in an Occupy Seattle protest.

From Redstate: Blantaly right-wing opinion piece which includes a number of links purportedly supporting the premise that the Occupy movement is full of criminals. The very first link is about the police entrapment on the Brooklyn Bridge. One of the links is the above piece from Komo News about an unrelated exposure charge. And another is about how Iran supports the Occupy movement (fear the boogeyman!).

From Reuters: This article is about the man shot by Berkeley police in a computer lab at UC Berkeley. No ties to the Occupy movement at all. But the Occupy protest was nearby, so it must be related, right???

From ABC News: A man is arrested for firing an assault rifle at the White House. He "may have spent time with Occupy D.C. protesters."

From The Daily Cardinal: Link broken; defaults to University of Wisconsin's Daily Cardinal homepage.

From New York Post: Article is about theives preying on the lack of security at the Occupy camp. Apparently all that police overtime is really helping...

So! All these articles, and they amount to... a few isolated issues that don't nearly account for all the numbers posted, and a couple of them are for unrelated charges where the person might have been caught in or near an Occupy event.

My overall analysis: Aside from QM being full of shit as usual, it's time to let the camps go. They made a splash, but now they are just being used as fodder for the right wing lie-machines. There are just too many unrelated crazies that come to the camps and interfere with the message. It's time to Occupy the polls, and put the energy into publicly supported legislation.

I don't understand.
How can you be so conservative and yet so witty.
It doesn't make sense!>> ^quantumushroom:

This guy doesn't belong. For one thing, he's employable.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Jesse Ventura, Occupy, Ron Paul, New York, Wall Street' to 'Jesse Ventura, Ron Paul, New York, Occupy Wall Street' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^bobknight33:

Jon rips the RIGHT all the time and you just laugh and have a good time nodding you heads saying yes John yes you are right.
Now on this piece he does the same but to a socialist type movement that you are for and you get all pissed about it . How two-faced.


It's not the right, it's money hungry lunatics backed by corporations attempting to destroy the country (and many others) so a few can profit. Saying you are pro-gun, anti-choice and pro-christian does not make you right-wing when your intent is to siphon tens of millions of dollars in corporate donations and public money so you can afford a jet for your niece to get to preschool. Personally I'm sick of the clips ragging on GOP as well, it's just picking low hanging fruit. With few exceptions, the Dems are just as bad, and in some cases worse (Obama).

As an example, your president just flew to our country (Australia) to tell us we're going to be getting a bunch of troops permanently stationed in Darwin, he said that America is "a Pacific power and we are here to stay"

Our Prime Minister lapped it all up, so we'll apparently be getting two and a half thousand more permanent US troops soon. At a time when your school systems are crumbling, your $14 trillion + in debt and your plan of action is to spend millions on new military bases and personnel in a foreign country?

Really?

>> ^NetRunner:

To anyone who got in my face for implying that liberals are less susceptible to groupthink than conservatives, here's exactly what I was talking about, in spades.
First you have the obviously fractious nature of the movement itself that Jon's playing off of. That happens all too often in liberal political activism, just look at how divided and nasty liberals got over health care.
But the deeper problem is that this is what Jon did with it -- make disharmony and fractiousness look like some sort of giant, soul-rending hypocrisy. To have a liberal like Jon Stewart going out and trumpeting the idea that the Occupy movement is both disorganized and deeply hypocritical is the kind of thing only the left does to itself. You don't see anyone on the right going out and doing a hit job like this on the Tea Party, ever.
I'm especially mad that this is essentially all he had to say in response to the huge police action that went down at OWS just the other day -- great shame the movement got cut short by jackbooted thugs, but don't worry, it was meaningless and not going anywhere anyways.
I love you Jon, but for fuck's sake, can't you find some way to dial the self-destructive BS back a bit?


Even worse--just before this bit he declared that the Occupy Movement is over. I've been watching Jon's reporting on Occupy closely because I suspected he didn't support the movement. He's all for change--but this inconvenienced him and some of his rich friends. First the Rally to Restore Complacency--now this.

It's not over Jon. He's on my shit list now. He's been dismissive since day one. Colbert is a supporter--Jon is not.

Awesome, Thank you!

In reply to this comment by Boise_Lib:
*doublepromote