RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Owner59 -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 8:34:53 PM)

Corporations are people too. [:D]




FirmhandKY -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 8:37:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Epytropos

The sooner you quit trying to force everything into a dem/rep dichotomy the sooner the world will begin to make sense.

[sm=biggrin.gif][sm=biggrin.gif]

The dichotomy is bankster/victim.

After that and then do the different parties come in, according to who`s work`n for who.

We know where the con`s symathys lay and we know where the dem`s sympathys are.

One party is with wallstreet and the banksters and one is with the little guy who`s been hurt most,the victims.

Why are you cons for instance, so against Elizabeth Warren?

See? There,is the dichotomy......bankster and bankster supporter,....... against banker victim and bankster-victim sympathizers.


Despite 'ban,' fat-cat lobbyists bankroll Obama

Extract:

Wealthy revolving-door banker Peter Orszag epitomizes everything Obama ran against. Orszag was Obama's budget director until the 2010 elections at which point he cashed out to bailed-out megabank Citigroup. A Citi executive touted Orszag's "key ... government experience" and "his expertise in economic policy." In other words, Orzag has monetized his public service and sold it to Citi, which, like all big banks, counts on favorable government policy for its profits.

Apparently feeling fairly plush after nine months at a Wall Street salary, Orszag cut a $35,800 check last month to the Obama Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee that divides its funds between the official Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee. To sum up: Orszag gained inside knowledge and connections on the taxpayer dime, put them to work for a big bank, then used his salary from this bailed-out bank to give the maximum contribution to the man who hired him in the White House.

Orszag's tale may be the most unseemly, but revolving-door influence peddlers are common at Obama fundraisers. Kathy Brown is Verizon's senior vice president for "public policy development and corporate responsibility." The telecom giant's website says she is "responsible for federal, state and international public policy development and international government relations for Verizon." Like Orszag, Brown's a revolver, having leveraged her time at Bill Clinton's Federal Communications Commission (which regulates Verizon) into a K Street lobbying job before taking over Verizon's lobby shop. Brown has given $17,900 to the Obama Victory Fund.

Rasky Baerlein is a lobbying firm based on both K Street and Boston's Beacon Hill. Chairman Lawrence Rasky and President Joseph Baerlein both gave big to Obama last quarter, with more than $35,000 to the Obama Victory Fund between them. Their firm's federal lobbying clients include drug maker Eli Lilly, wind-power company First Wind (which has received at least $115 million in stimulus grants), and a handful of health care companies.

David Wimsatt is CEO of Bold Concepts, a firm that pledges to assist "small businesses participating in Federal Government programs." The firm's website touts its "carefully nurtured" relationships with federal agencies ranging from the Pentagon to the National Zoo. Part of that "nurtur[ing]," presumably, is CEO Wimsatt's $30,000 to the Obama Victory Fund last quarter.

All of these men and women -- and dozens more like them on Obama's donor rolls -- are lobbyists, as the word is commonly understood. They are paid to influence government policy, either on behalf of their clients or on behalf of their employers.

So how do they skate around Obama's "ban"? They are not currently registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and so they don't meet the Obama campaign's definition of "lobbyist." Of course, Obama's self-imposed fundraising rules are far stricter than other campaigns -- Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, for instance, are happy accepting money from registered or unregistered lobbyists. But allowing money from Orszag, Rasky and Baerlein while prohibiting gifts from, say, the lobbyist for the Boys & Girls Club of the Chattahoochee Valley, suggests cynical posturing rather than actual concern for clean politics.

Under federal law, anyone who spends at least 20 percent of his or her time on "lobbying activities" is supposed to register. There is almost no enforcement of this registration requirement, as proving a violation would require knowing how an unregistered individual spends all his time. The biggest effect of Obama's restrictions on lobbyists, regarding giving and serving on boards, has been mass deregistration of lobbyists.

Firm




errantgeek -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 8:38:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

No, you don't have to go on, I think that sums it up nicely.

So here's an idea. Protest the legal fiction that corporations are "persons" with any of the rights attendant thereto.

If corporations want to influence legislation, let them have to convince the electorate to call their Congressmen because what they're asking for is good for the country, instead of cutting the People out of the loop by sending suits down to Washington with bags full of money.


Well, those two things are right up there on top of the occupiers' common list of grievances. Ask any occupier who can coherently state their position and grievances, and those two things will be right on top of the list. The problem is the occupy movement is being "too" populist -- by not electing leaders or spokespeople, and not creating a single unified message, they're not communicating themselves terribly well. Worse yet, they're preventing anyone from stepping up to do that job, in favor of their general assemblies and creating statements and messages by direct democracy. That's nicely idealistic, but hardly realistic by any strain of the imagination.

Worse yet, by not maturing the movement or even retarding its maturation, they're allowing others outside the movement to step in and speak for them, and inviting criticism from detractors for it.




Owner59 -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 8:44:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Epytropos

The sooner you quit trying to force everything into a dem/rep dichotomy the sooner the world will begin to make sense.

[sm=biggrin.gif][sm=biggrin.gif]

The dichotomy is bankster/victim.

After that and then do the different parties come in, according to who`s work`n for who.

We know where the con`s symathys lay and we know where the dem`s sympathys are.

One party is with wallstreet and the banksters and one is with the little guy who`s been hurt most,the victims.

Why are you cons for instance, so against Elizabeth Warren?

See? There,is the dichotomy......bankster and bankster supporter,....... against banker victim and bankster-victim sympathizers.


Despite 'ban,' fat-cat lobbyists bankroll Obama

Extract:

Wealthy revolving-door banker Peter Orszag epitomizes everything Obama ran against. Orszag was Obama's budget director until the 2010 elections at which point he cashed out to bailed-out megabank Citigroup. A Citi executive touted Orszag's "key ... government experience" and "his expertise in economic policy." In other words, Orzag has monetized his public service and sold it to Citi, which, like all big banks, counts on favorable government policy for its profits.

Apparently feeling fairly plush after nine months at a Wall Street salary, Orszag cut a $35,800 check last month to the Obama Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee that divides its funds between the official Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee. To sum up: Orszag gained inside knowledge and connections on the taxpayer dime, put them to work for a big bank, then used his salary from this bailed-out bank to give the maximum contribution to the man who hired him in the White House.

Orszag's tale may be the most unseemly, but revolving-door influence peddlers are common at Obama fundraisers. Kathy Brown is Verizon's senior vice president for "public policy development and corporate responsibility." The telecom giant's website says she is "responsible for federal, state and international public policy development and international government relations for Verizon." Like Orszag, Brown's a revolver, having leveraged her time at Bill Clinton's Federal Communications Commission (which regulates Verizon) into a K Street lobbying job before taking over Verizon's lobby shop. Brown has given $17,900 to the Obama Victory Fund.

Rasky Baerlein is a lobbying firm based on both K Street and Boston's Beacon Hill. Chairman Lawrence Rasky and President Joseph Baerlein both gave big to Obama last quarter, with more than $35,000 to the Obama Victory Fund between them. Their firm's federal lobbying clients include drug maker Eli Lilly, wind-power company First Wind (which has received at least $115 million in stimulus grants), and a handful of health care companies.

David Wimsatt is CEO of Bold Concepts, a firm that pledges to assist "small businesses participating in Federal Government programs." The firm's website touts its "carefully nurtured" relationships with federal agencies ranging from the Pentagon to the National Zoo. Part of that "nurtur[ing]," presumably, is CEO Wimsatt's $30,000 to the Obama Victory Fund last quarter.

All of these men and women -- and dozens more like them on Obama's donor rolls -- are lobbyists, as the word is commonly understood. They are paid to influence government policy, either on behalf of their clients or on behalf of their employers.

So how do they skate around Obama's "ban"? They are not currently registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and so they don't meet the Obama campaign's definition of "lobbyist." Of course, Obama's self-imposed fundraising rules are far stricter than other campaigns -- Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, for instance, are happy accepting money from registered or unregistered lobbyists. But allowing money from Orszag, Rasky and Baerlein while prohibiting gifts from, say, the lobbyist for the Boys & Girls Club of the Chattahoochee Valley, suggests cynical posturing rather than actual concern for clean politics.

Under federal law, anyone who spends at least 20 percent of his or her time on "lobbying activities" is supposed to register. There is almost no enforcement of this registration requirement, as proving a violation would require knowing how an unregistered individual spends all his time. The biggest effect of Obama's restrictions on lobbyists, regarding giving and serving on boards, has been mass deregistration of lobbyists.

Firm



Are you going to provide the secret decoder ring so that we can figure out why that`s relevant?




FirmhandKY -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 8:51:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

One party is with wallstreet and the banksters and one is with the little guy who`s been hurt most,the victims.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Are you going to provide the secret decoder ring so that we can figure out why that`s relevant?


fat-cat lobbyists bankroll Obama

You really can't figure it out, Owner?

Firm




Kirata -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 9:01:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: errantgeek

creating statements and messages by direct democracy. That's nicely idealistic, but hardly realistic by any strain of the imagination.

By any strain indeed, but I'll quibble with calling them "idealistic." Human imperfection is a given. When a group imagines itself to be sufficiently wise and enlightened enough for direct democracy, that isn't "idealism". It's hubris.

K.






erieangel -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 10:33:53 PM)

Firm, OWS is also against those revolving doors. 

Obama vowed when he went into office that no lobbyists would work in his administration.  He lied. 

See, I voted for the man and I am still able to voice my discontent. 




FatDomDaddy -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 10:38:59 PM)

FR....

Lets get this thread back on track...

The fact is, where the cities where these protesters are meeting the most resistance are controlled by (American) liberal philosophies and
and in most cases elected Democrats, and easily, the law making bodies (city assemblies, city council ect) have been ruled by Democrats
since the 1930s. Now the left may not like it but that is it.

The left poster here say its not about party politics... OK...

Now is your time to prove it.

Remember now... The Tea Party Movement has been extremely critical of Republicans and have supported non traditional candidates against
established GOP stalwarts... Rubio/Crist is an good example.

Oakland, California is a liberal bastion. Mayor Quan replaced Moonbeams Brown for allah's sake! I see a lot of posters here blaming the right
of the political spectrum for the violence and suppression of the OWS movement but the reality is.... The OWS movement is being suppressed
by THE AMERICAN DEMOCRAT ESTABLISHMENT!




erieangel -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/27/2011 11:00:48 PM)

 I'm going to tackle your last statement first:  THE AMERICAN DEMOCRAT ESTABLISHMENT!  It should read:  The American DemocratIC Establishment. 

Most in the OWS movement are openly critical of corrupt elected officials no matter the letter after their name.  As for the mayor of Oakland, she's a hypocrite of the first order...she'd been involved in protests in the past, prior to becoming mayor and now orders her goon squad to stop protesters. 

Many of the problems the occupiers are having are due to city and town ordinances which state "no sleeping in public spaces" etc.  However, according the lawyers with the ACLU, no local or state law can trump the Constitution, which gives us the right to protest.  Since occupying public space is a part of said protest, the Constitution trumps all those local laws.  I predict the issue will come before the courts before too long, though many cities are working with the protesters to find compromise.  When we started the occupation in Erie, we were told by the city 'no tents', but they did allow us hang tarps around the gazebo.  Then all of a sudden, we were told to take the tarps down and that we were not permitted to 'sleep' there anymore.  So people started rotating during the night.  Today, we were told we can have tents, can sleep in the park but the city would like us to vacate the gazebo at night--go figure.




FirmhandKY -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 6:28:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

Firm, OWS is also against those revolving doors. 

Obama vowed when he went into office that no lobbyists would work in his administration.  He lied. 

See, I voted for the man and I am still able to voice my discontent. 

I know, erie.  It's one of the reasons I like you.  While you have a partisan opinion (as we all do), you aren't blind.

Firm




DomYngBlk -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 6:42:27 AM)

Firm, your whole "democrats are bad too but liberals won't admit it" theme is pretty off base. One thing you can be assured of is that democrats thrash our own in the same way we do republicans. If not here then on most other sites the trashing of Obama started quickly with progressives. Hillary was skewered probably worse by liberals than conservatives in the last election. Mary Landreu, Ben Nelson, et al? Most of us want them erased. Joe Liberman? Fuck him.....So I don't think your argument is well thought out.

However, republicans are best at circling the wagons and not shooting at each other......of that there is no doubt.




thishereboi -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 6:44:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

So we now can put the disaster Iraq,the treason,the torture and needless deaths/maimings of our GIs on you rediculously shameless cons and you`ll help?

Thanx!


Since when do you need help blaming everyone on the right for your problems?




thishereboi -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 6:49:00 AM)

quote:

However, republicans are best at circling the wagons and not shooting at each other......of that there is no doubt.


You don't watch a lot of political ads, do you?




Hillwilliam -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:14:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

However, republicans are best at circling the wagons and not shooting at each other......of that there is no doubt.


You don't watch a lot of political ads, do you?


It's ok, they use rubber bullets.




tazzygirl -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:15:06 AM)

Yes, I do. However, Im not a walking political ad, boi. On more than one occassion I have expressed my "discontent" with the administration as I have about the last.

Firm.... OWS has not endorsed or supported any political party or candidate. If I missed such, please direct me to a link that shows they have.

And I think that is the problem... or part of it.. on these threads. The conservatives want them to have a political leaning... and they dont. The liberals keep pointing out this lack of leaning.. and no one is listening.

Quan is up shit creek without a paddle for her hypocrisy. These are people who not only protest, but also vote.




Arpig -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:23:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EmilyRocks

Because the banks own them too.
DING!!!!! We have a winner here folks! They are doing it because they are part of the political process and the OWS is proetesting just exactly that process by which politicians are bought and sold on the open market like any other commodity. That is why they are reacting so violently...it is exactly these low level politicians who are most in danger of being exposed for the corporate tools they are because they don't have the power to prevent changes affecting themselves. All they have is their bully-boys, so they use them.




Arpig -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:28:42 AM)

quote:

One party is with wallstreet and the banksters and one is with the little guy who`s been hurt most,the victims.
Been hitting the bong a little early O59? Both parties are equally in the pockets of the Corporations. It takes so much money to buy an election, and don't kid yourself...they are bought not won, that an aspiring politician has no choice but to sell out. His only choice is who to sell himself to and what his minimum price is.




Arpig -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:34:19 AM)

quote:

So here's an idea. Protest the legal fiction that corporations are "persons" with any of the rights attendant thereto.

If corporations want to influence legislation, let them have to convince the electorate to call their Congressmen because what they're asking for is good for the country, instead of cutting the People out of the loop by sending suits down to Washington with bags full of money.

Because except in fucking Wonderland, a corporation isn't a "person" and bribery is still bribery.

I'd camp out for that one. With or without a bong.
I'm with you, and don't worry, I'll bring the bong...and the beer.

You're absolutely right, that is what is at the root of the whole corrupt system. Kill that pernicious idea and the whole house of cards will crumble.




Owner59 -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:50:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

One party is with wallstreet and the banksters and one is with the little guy who`s been hurt most,the victims.
Been hitting the bong a little early O59? Both parties are equally in the pockets of the Corporations. It takes so much money to buy an election, and don't kid yourself...they are bought not won, that an aspiring politician has no choice but to sell out. His only choice is who to sell himself to and what his minimum price is.


Which party was/is trying to reform/stregthen financial/bank rules and regs and which party is obstructing those efforts?

Maybe both parties receive money from corporations but one party is actually giving them their money`s worth.

Sorry to kill your theory with some facts.




tazzygirl -> RE: Why Are Elected Democrats Politicians Shooting and Beating OWSers??? (10/28/2011 7:57:15 AM)

Owner, to be fair, Democrats in Congress may have been able to avoid much of the bubble ... and chose not too.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.171875