KvH - a columnist who really understands Occupy! strategy . . .

[Michael Tee]

. . .  and understands where the biggest danger (co-optation) to it lies!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/will-occupy-wall-streets-spark-reshape-our-politics/2011/10/10/gIQArPJjcL_story.html?wpisrc=emailtoafriend

 - she gets the folly of taking these complaints to Washington, as if Washington people weren't the paid errand-boys of the Street

 - she's hopeful (more hopeful than I, frankly) that the Democrats will sit up and listen (or, as she puts it, will go where the energy is)

-  she senses the grass-roots power of the movement, in contrast with the Astroturf roots of the Tea Party

Good article all around, but IMHO, kind of naively hoping that the political system will respond via movement inside the "two-party" system, whereas I really think that's just not gonna happen.  The only "movement" you'll see from that system is more "progressive talk" from Obama, similar to the last fine performance he gave just before the 2008 elections, followed by a second round of sell-outs once the "danger" of the elections is past.

Unfortunately I believe that the real proponents of change will have to act completely outside the "two-party" system and its phony quadrennial election charades, or be doomed to an endless circle of hope and betrayal.  At some point, they HAVE to learn the lesson of "Fool me once . . . " or get fucked in the ass over and over again.

[Kramer]

I prefer to follow people that have proven track records of success. I tend to not have much faith in tattooed, unclean, skin pierced people that don't have jobs and haven't accomplished anything to brag about in their short unproductive lives. People that have never created a job or probably never worked at one aren't the type of people I have respect for.

[BT]

she senses the grass-roots power of the movement, in contrast with the Astroturf roots of the Tea Party

Could you please provide evidence that the tea party was astroturfed.

[BT]

David Graeber: July 2nd. That was the first actual meeting. What happened was AdBusters put out this call for these protests. We had heard there was supposed to be a general assembly on July 2nd. So I just showed up. But it was a rally, not an assembly. Some Marxist groups had set up stages and megaphones and was making speeches and were planning a march. So we said we don’t need to do this.

[Kramer]

she senses the grass-roots power of the movement, in contrast with the Astroturf roots of the Tea Party

Could you please provide evidence that the tea party was astroturfed.

Clinton was rumored to own an Chevy El Camino with AstroTurf in the back for hooking up with young sluts.

[BT]

EK: We’re also beginning to see “Occupy Wall Street” link up with with more traditional activist groups. Some members of the protest were speaking via videofeed at today’s big confab of liberal groups in Washington. MoveOn.org and organized labor are planning a march in support of the occupiers for Wednesday. How does that change what is, for now, a very decentralized movement?

DG: It is organically happening but there are definite problems that occur. We found this back in the days of the globalization movement. Unions were very supportive and provided resources but they’re very different organizations. The real difficulty is how to work with people who are top-down and have a funding base, as it means there are things they can say in public and things they can’t, and groups where people can say whatever they want and the whole idea is to be decentralized. One problem I’ve already heard of is that people are coming in and changing the tenor of the general assemblies to speeches, and that’s not really what it’s supposed to be about. So you have to balance the aspect where you’re trying to show what direct democracy could be like and the effort to link up with groups that have a form of organization we’ve rejected.

[Michael Tee]

<<I prefer to follow people that have proven track records of success.>>

From what I've seen, you actually tend to follow people who have a proven track record of failure and disaster.  The Occupy! people are advocating a clean break with them, and all you can see is their tats and piercings, which most young people have today, their lack of jobs - - and whose fault is that, when both political parties and the banksters who pay them have colluded in trade policies that led to the export of millions of American jobs? - -  and their so-called lack of accomplishment, which is really unfair when you consider that many of them have degrees (and tens of thousands of dollars of unpaid student loans) to match.  Ridiculous all around.  But as I say, I think you're afraid of them because they stand up and fight back while you bend over to take more from the folks that they're fighting, and what does that say about you. 

PS:  I've watched a lot of tapes and interviews and very few of these folks appear as "filthy" as you seem to think they are.  Better re-examine your own prejudices and why they seem to be so violent and deep-rooted.

<< People that have never created a job or probably never worked at one aren't the type of people I have respect for.>>

And how many jobs have these Wall Street fraudsters created?  How many folks did they rush to hire with their trillion-dollar bailout?  EVERYBODY IN WASHINGTON presided over the biggest loss of jobs in US history.

Kramer you are wrong in just about everything you've said so far - - wake up and open your eyes!

[Michael Tee]

<<Could you please provide evidence that the tea party was astroturfed.>>

I think I'll just take a leaf from your book and tell you to Google "Tea Party" and "Koch" together.

[Michael Tee]

<<Clinton was rumored to own an Chevy El Camino with AstroTurf in the back for hooking up with young sluts.>>

Confirming my long-held belief that not more than 188% of all conservative hatred of Clinton boils down to pure sexual envy at a guy who has always been a natural babe magnet.

[Michael Tee]

<<One problem I’ve already heard of is that people are coming in and changing the tenor of the general assemblies to speeches, and that’s not really what it’s supposed to be about. >>

God-damn right that's not what it's supposed to be about.  I sense here one of the biggest dangers to the movement, organizational support and money.  Fuck!  Shit!  This could be the kiss of death right here.  They won't even need the National Guard.  Without a single infiltrator.

I'm feeling now something I don't think I've felt since the Bay of Pigs.  The Revolution in mortal danger, but STILL ABLE to pull out of it.  This is crunch time, maybe the first of many, but we're going to see if the movement has one or even many Fidel Castros, or if it's just once again led by Jerry Rubins and Abby Hoffmans.  Fuck this, but I have a bad feeling in my gut about this, for the first time, too.

[BT]

<<Could you please provide evidence that the tea party was astroturfed.>>

I think I'll just take a leaf from your book and tell you to Google "Tea Party" and "Koch" together.

I did and came up with nothing definitive. They aren't as obvious in their funding of causes as say George Soros is.

[Michael Tee]

<<I did and came up with nothing definitive.  They aren't as obvious as . . . >>

Apparently that's because they try a lot harder than Soros does to cover their tracks.  Here's just one article that connects the dots:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/25/tea-party-koch-brothers

  . . .   No, no, that's not necessary.  Your satisfaction is reward enough for me.

[BT]

Mikey,

Could you come up with a more objective source. Monbiot is tainted.

[Xavier_Onassis]

<<I prefer to follow people that have proven track records of success.>>

First Sarah Palin (who quit her job), then Donald Trump( who was never elected to anything), then Rick Perry(who is a bad duplicate of Juniorbush) and now Herman Cain(who got 26.2% of the vote when he ran for the Senate. Proven track records, hah!

[Kramer]

<<I prefer to follow people that have proven track records of success.>>

First Sarah Palin (who quit her job), then Donald Trump( who was never elected to anything), then Rick Perry(who is a bad duplicate of Juniorbush) and now Herman Cain(who got 26.2% of the vote when he ran for the Senate. Proven track records, hah!

yup everyone one of them