We are the 99 Percent

[mhgaffney]

Originally Posted by peacepipe

I will say this the federal reserve act of 1913 which established the fed needs to be repealed & replaced with a more transparent fed,one that has to submit itself to audits. I'm not for abolishing the fed outright.

The reason the Fed refuse a audit -- is because they know better than anyone that if the people learned the truth -- how corrupt they are -- there would be a public outcry unlike anything we have ever seen - of people demanding the abolition of the central bank.

In short -- there is no way to reform the Fed. Of course we need banks -- but we should adopt a different model.

Look at N Dakota -- which is prospering - no depression and high employment. N Dakota has a state bank with a different kind of charter. This is what we need -- state banks -- with a charter to look after the needs of the people who live in the state -- not the .05 %

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

If you do a validity search, nobody denies their legitimacy. In fact, the WSJ came out with a supportive take on the whole concept:

Of course, Kapur says there are risks to the Plutonomy, including war, inflation, financial crises, the end of the technological revolution and populist political pressure. Yet he maintains that the “the rich are likely to keep getting even richer, and enjoy an even greater share of the wealth pie over the coming years.”

All of which means that, like it or not, inequality isn’t going away and may become even more pronounced in the coming years. The best way for companies and businesspeople to survive in Plutonomies, Kapur implies, is to disregard the “mass” consumer and focus on the increasingly rich market of the rich.

A tough message — but one worth considering.
http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2007/01/08/plutonomics/

Sound like they're all in favor of it.

Well - of course the WSJ would be in favor of it.

It's also a NewsCorp publication now as well.

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

or so the libby left would like you to think... fact is, you have no solid proof outside of left leaning editorial commentaries that the Tea Party has been transformed into a neo-con puppet.

*coughcough*

Originally Posted by alkemical

I've been to several Tea Parties, and after finding out there were "several" Tea Parties, i started digging. One day Michael Savage stated there were the same, "several tea parties" - So I started digging:

it's true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Par...hip_and_groups

Leadership and groups

An October 2010 Washington Post canvass of 647 local Tea Party organizers asked "which national figure best represents your groups?" and got the following responses: no one 34%, Sarah Palin 14%, Glenn Beck 7%, Jim DeMint 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Michele Bachmann 4%.[23]

The success of candidates popular within the Tea Party movement has boosted Sarah Palin's visibility.[101] Rasmussen and Schoen (2010) conclude that "She is the symbolic leader of the movement, and more than anyone else has helped to shape it."[102]

The movement has been supported nationally by prominent individuals and organizations,[103][104] including:

501(c)(4) Non-Profit Organizations:

Tea Party Patriots, an organization with more than 1,000 affiliated groups across the nation[105] that proclaims itself to be the "Official Home of the Tea Party Movement.[106]
Americans for Prosperity, an organization founded by David H. Koch in 2003, and led by Tim Phillips. The group has over 1 million members in 500 local affiliates, and led protests against health care reform in 2009.[103]
FreedomWorks, an organization led Dick Armey. Like Americans for Prosperity, the group has over 1 million members in 500 local affiliates. It makes local and national candidate endorsements.[103]
Tea Party Express, a national bus tour run by Our Country Deserves Better PAC, itself a conservative political action committee created by Sacramento-based Republican consulting firm Russo, Marsh, and Associates.[107][108][109][110]

For-Profit Businesses:

Tea Party Nation, which sponsored the National Tea Party Convention that was criticized for its $549 ticket price.[111][112][113][114] and because Sarah Palin was apparently paid $100,000 USD for her appearance (which she put towards SarahPAC[115]).[116]

Informal Organizations and Coalitions:

The National Tea Party Federation, formed on April 8, 2010, by several leaders in the Tea Party movement to help spread its message and to respond to critics with a quick, unified response.[117]
The Nationwide Tea Party Coalition, a loose national coalition of several dozen local tea party groups.

Prominent Individuals:

In July 2010, Representative Michele Bachmann, a Minnesota Republican, formed the House congressional Tea Party Caucus. This congressional caucus, which Bachmann chairs, is devoted to the Tea Party's stated principles of "fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government".[118] As of March 31,2011, the caucus consisted of 62 Republican representatives.[119] Jason Chaffetz and Melissa Clouthier have accused them of trying to hijack or co-opt the grassroots Tea Party Movement.[120]


Koch Industry influence
Main article: Political activities of the Koch family

In an August 30, 2010, article in The New Yorker, Jane Mayer said that the billionaire brothers David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch and Koch Industries are providing financial and organizational support to the Tea Party movement through Americans for Prosperity, which David founded.[127][128] The AFP's "Hot Air Tour" was organized to fight against taxes on carbon use and the activation of a cap and trade program.[129] In 1984, David Koch also founded Citizens for a Sound Economy,[130] part of which became FreedomWorks in a 2004 split,[undue weight?] another group that organized and supports the movement.[131] Koch Industries issued a press release stating that the Kochs have "no ties to and have never given money to FreedomWorks".[132] Former ambassador Christopher Meyer writes in the Daily Mail that the Tea Party movement is a mix of "grassroots populism, professional conservative politics, and big money", the last supplied in part by Charles and David Koch.[133] Jane Mayer says that the Koch brothers' political involvement with the Tea Party has been so secretive that she labels it "covert".[134]



I'm not here to pick on the Koch's - but it does illustrate the co-opted nature of the party. Look at how Clear-Channel's been involved in organizing them as well.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by epicSocialism4tw

Krugman is an odorous turd fresh from the bowls of dead Mussolini.

Nobody reads or respects Krugman.

Here he is receiving the Nobel Prize in economics:

[Tombstone RJ]

Originally Posted by alkemical

I've been to several Tea Parties, and after finding out there were "several" Tea Parties, i started digging. One day Michael Savage stated there were the same, "several tea parties" - So I started digging:

it's true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Par...hip_and_groups

Leadership and groups

An October 2010 Washington Post canvass of 647 local Tea Party organizers asked "which national figure best represents your groups?" and got the following responses: no one 34%, Sarah Palin 14%, Glenn Beck 7%, Jim DeMint 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Michele Bachmann 4%.[23]

The success of candidates popular within the Tea Party movement has boosted Sarah Palin's visibility.[101] Rasmussen and Schoen (2010) conclude that "She is the symbolic leader of the movement, and more than anyone else has helped to shape it."[102]

The movement has been supported nationally by prominent individuals and organizations,[103][104] including:

501(c)(4) Non-Profit Organizations:

Tea Party Patriots, an organization with more than 1,000 affiliated groups across the nation[105] that proclaims itself to be the "Official Home of the Tea Party Movement.[106]
Americans for Prosperity, an organization founded by David H. Koch in 2003, and led by Tim Phillips. The group has over 1 million members in 500 local affiliates, and led protests against health care reform in 2009.[103]
FreedomWorks, an organization led Dick Armey. Like Americans for Prosperity, the group has over 1 million members in 500 local affiliates. It makes local and national candidate endorsements.[103]
Tea Party Express, a national bus tour run by Our Country Deserves Better PAC, itself a conservative political action committee created by Sacramento-based Republican consulting firm Russo, Marsh, and Associates.[107][108][109][110]

For-Profit Businesses:

Tea Party Nation, which sponsored the National Tea Party Convention that was criticized for its $549 ticket price.[111][112][113][114] and because Sarah Palin was apparently paid $100,000 USD for her appearance (which she put towards SarahPAC[115]).[116]

Informal Organizations and Coalitions:

The National Tea Party Federation, formed on April 8, 2010, by several leaders in the Tea Party movement to help spread its message and to respond to critics with a quick, unified response.[117]
The Nationwide Tea Party Coalition, a loose national coalition of several dozen local tea party groups.

Prominent Individuals:

In July 2010, Representative Michele Bachmann, a Minnesota Republican, formed the House congressional Tea Party Caucus. This congressional caucus, which Bachmann chairs, is devoted to the Tea Party's stated principles of "fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government".[118] As of March 31,2011, the caucus consisted of 62 Republican representatives.[119] Jason Chaffetz and Melissa Clouthier have accused them of trying to hijack or co-opt the grassroots Tea Party Movement.[120]


Koch Industry influence
Main article: Political activities of the Koch family

1. In an August 30, 2010, article in The New Yorker, Jane Mayer said that the billionaire brothers David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch and Koch Industries are providing financial and organizational support to the Tea Party movement through Americans for Prosperity, which David founded.[127][128] The AFP's "Hot Air Tour" was organized to fight against taxes on carbon use and the activation of a cap and trade program.[129] In 1984, David Koch also founded Citizens for a Sound Economy,[130] part of which became FreedomWorks in a 2004 split,[undue weight?] another group that organized and supports the movement.[131] Koch Industries issued a press release stating that the Kochs have "no ties to and have never given money to FreedomWorks".[132] 2. Former ambassador Christopher Meyer writes in the Daily Mail that the Tea Party movement is a mix of "grassroots populism, professional conservative politics, and big money", the last supplied in part by Charles and David Koch.[133] 3. Jane Mayer says that the Koch brothers' political involvement with the Tea Party has been so secretive that she labels it "covert".[134]



4. I'm not here to pick on the Koch's - but it does illustrate the co-opted nature of the party. Look at how Clear-Channel's been involved in organizing them as well.

1. Again, no link to this article. IMHO it's nothing more than an editorial opinion piece and until you show me the actual article it means nothing. The New Yorker Magazine (a great mag no doubt) is as liberal as you can get.

2. Here is the only proof the Koch has provided financial assistance to the Tea Party. But my point is still valid and you haven't proven jack crap. My point is this: YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT THE TEA PARTY IS NOTHING MORE THAN A NEO-CON PUPPET. Sorry to b**** slap you about this.

3. Jane Mayer writes for the New Yorker Magazine. How come she's not concerned about who is behind the OWS movement? Why does the Tea Party have to divulge any of it's financial supporters?

4. But you are nitpicking my friend, you very much are. The above wiki link proves nothing. It's based on an opinion piece written by the New Yorker Magazine. Until you can show how much Koch and other's have organized, directed and financied the Tea Party you have nothing but speculation based on heresay via a liberal magazine.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The right-wing idiot version of events...

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

1. Again, no link to this article. IMHO it's nothing more than an editorial opinion piece and until you show me the actual article it means nothing. The New Yorker Magazine (a great mag no doubt) is as liberal as you can get.

2. Here is the only proof the Koch has provided financial assistance to the Tea Party. But my point is still valid and you haven't proven jack crap. My point is this: YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT THE TEA PARTY IS NOTHING MORE THAN A NEO-CON PUPPET. Sorry to b**** slap you about this.

3. Jane Mayer writes for the New Yorker Magazine. How come she's not concerned about who is behind the OWS movement? Why does the Tea Party have to divulge any of it's financial supporters?

4. But you are nitpicking my friend, you very much are. The above wiki link proves nothing. It's based on an opinion piece written by the New Yorker Magazine. Until you can show how much Koch and other's have organized, directed and financied the Tea Party you have nothing but speculation based on heresay via a liberal magazine.

Are there, or are there NOT multiple tea parties?

Yes or no?

Are some of them FOR PROFIT?

yes or no?

That is all.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

1. Again, no link to this article. IMHO it's nothing more than an editorial opinion piece and until you show me the actual article it means nothing. The New Yorker Magazine (a great mag no doubt) is as liberal as you can get.

2. Here is the only proof the Koch has provided financial assistance to the Tea Party. But my point is still valid and you haven't proven jack crap. My point is this: YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT THE TEA PARTY IS NOTHING MORE THAN A NEO-CON PUPPET. Sorry to b**** slap you about this.

3. Jane Mayer writes for the New Yorker Magazine. How come she's not concerned about who is behind the OWS movement? Why does the Tea Party have to divulge any of it's financial supporters?

4. But you are nitpicking my friend, you very much are. The above wiki link proves nothing. It's based on an opinion piece written by the New Yorker Magazine. Until you can show how much Koch and other's have organized, directed and financied the Tea Party you have nothing but speculation based on heresay via a liberal magazine.

The New Yorker is one of the most respected journalism sources in the world, and has been for almost a hundred years. What you are saying is that you will not accept any opinion that you don't already agree with, regardless of the source.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Smiling Assassin27

I don't know who came up with this lame picture, but it's making the rounds on Wall Street - and with all the other Americans co-opted by its propaganda.

Hey, bankers! Is that the best you've got? Really? Because this picture is so lame that it actually gave us several of our talking points. We'll start with this one:

Corporations get generous tax breaks for not hiring people and shipping jobs overseas instead. They make money from those free trade agreements pushed through by their functionaries in the government. And Wall Street's making billions for not lending to smaller businesses that might compete with some of those mega-corporations.

Now you're calling the demonstrators hypocrites for buying stuff from corporations. Who else are they going to buy it from? Everyone else was driven out of business!

by RJ Eskow

[alkemical]

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011...-seminar-tapes

A close-up view of the oil billionaires' dark-money fundraiser and 2012 strategy session.

According to an agenda (PDF) for an earlier Koch seminar (Aspen, 2010) that accompanied the leaked invitation, previous Koch seminars have featured "such notable leaders" as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), and Reps. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Mike Pence (R-Ind.). Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also have attended.

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...for_Prosperity

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a group fronting special interests started by oil billionaire David Koch and Richard Fink (a member of the board of directors of Koch Industries). AFP has been accused of funding astroturf operations but also has been fueling the "Tea Party" efforts. [1] AFP's messages are in sync with those of other groups funded by the Koch Family Foundations and the Koch's other special interest groups that work against progressive or Democratic initiatives and protections for workers and the environment. Accordingly, AFP opposes labor unions, health care reform, stimulus spending, and cap-and-trade legislation, which is aimed at making industries pay for the air pollution that they create. AFP was also involved in the attacks on Obama’s "green jobs" czar, Van Jones, and has crusaded against international climate talks. According to an article in the August 30, 2010 issue of The New Yorker, the Kochs are known for "creating slippery organizations with generic-sounding names," that "make it difficult to ascertain the extent of their influence in Washington." AFP's budget surged from $7 million in 2007 to $40 million in 2010, an election year. [2][3]

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...1&postcount=53

Glenn Beck's syndicator runs a astroturf-on-demand call-in service for radio programs


Premiere On Call, a division of the Clear Channel subsidiary that distributes Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck, is a service that hires actors to call into radio shows and read a script that purports to be a true story presented by the public. They bind their actors to confidentiality agreements, and disavow any involvement in fraud, saying "Premiere, like many other content providers, facilitates casting--while character and script development, and how the talent's contribution is integrated into programs, are handled by the varied stations."

The actors hired by Premiere to provide the aforementioned voice talents sign confidentiality agreements and so would not go on the record. But their accounts leave little room for doubt. All of the actors I questioned reported receiving scripts, calling in to real shows, pretending to be real people. Frequently, one actor said, the calls were live, sometimes recorded in advance, but never presented on-air as anything but real.

Michael Harrison, the editor of Talkers Magazine, the talk-radio world's leading trade publication, said he knew nothing of this particular service but was not altogether surprised to hear that it was in place. There was, he said, a tradition of "creating fake phone calls for the sake of entertainment on some of the funny shows, shock jocks shows, the kind of shows you hear on FM music stations in the morning, they would regularly have scenarios, crazy scenarios of people calling up and doing pranks."

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit..._the_Tea_Party


You can see that the Koch's do use foundations as a "tool". They operate just like Soros, Gates, etc. It's how "business is done".

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I don't know who came up with this lame picture, but it's making the rounds on Wall Street - and with all the other Americans co-opted by its propaganda.

Hey, bankers! Is that the best you've got? Really? Because this picture is so lame that it actually gave us several of our talking points. We'll start with this one:

Corporations get generous tax breaks for not hiring people and shipping jobs overseas instead. They make money from those free trade agreements pushed through by their functionaries in the government. And Wall Street's making billions for not lending to smaller businesses that might compete with some of those mega-corporations.

Now you're calling the demonstrators hypocrites for buying stuff from corporations. Who else are they going to buy it from? Everyone else was driven out of business!

by RJ Eskow

It's an example of how it's not a "free market", it's a private market that's wanted.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by alkemical

It's an example of how it's not a "free market", it's a private market that's wanted.

Yep.

Economic theory says that one of the basic elements of a free market is transparency. Yet Wall Street's fighting tooth and nail against a process that would allow more transparency in the derivatives market. They don't want transparency - and that means they don't want a free market.

We haven't had a free market for decades. We've had a lootocracy that makes money through deception, confusion, and obfuscation.

People should conduct their business in the light of day - and gambling with other people's money should be illegal. The words "free market" and the phrase "Wall Street" don't belong in the same paragraph, much less the same sentence.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Smiling Assassin27

Farce.

Hmmm ...a bearded guy in sandals protesting the moneylenders. Where have we seen that before?

They love making fun of the demonstrators' looks, but it's pretty difficult to step outside the system and live outdoors without looking a little rough in the eyes of the moneyed classes. Jesus and his disciples probably looked pretty rough to some people, too. I'm sure the rich people looked down their noses at Him after He overturned those tables. That's not done in polite company.

Think about it: A guy rides into town on a donkey. Then he says the moneyed interests are exerting too much influence on the government -- and on some of the religious elite, too. And what was that about the wealthy? Oh, yeah -- "It's easier for a camel to pass through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter heaven."

[alkemical]

It's sort of funny when you think about it. The illegal/black markets - are really the "free markets".

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

3,000 years of moral law condemns people who make excess profits from money without contributing to society. Every single prophet to make those arguments - which is to say, all of them -- was condemned by the plutocracy of the day.

No matter what you believe or don't believe spiritually, it's clear that oligarchic wealth has corrupted our politics, polluted our culture, and debased our basic sense of morality.

[mosca]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Now you're calling the demonstrators hypocrites for buying stuff from corporations. Who else are they going to buy it from? Everyone else was driven out of business!

Pretty much sums it up. Free market competition is nowhere near what it once was. We need a new age trustbuster ala TR.

[Rohirrim]

Like I said before, the banksters, Wall Street, and the corporations could fix this economy next week. All they have to do is take that 3.6 trillion they're sitting on and give all their American workers the kind of bonuses they give each other. Problem solved. It's not like American workers haven't earned it. They work longer hours than ever, with fewer and fewer breaks, and their productivity has gone up 80% over the last couple of decades. So, where's their reward?

Instead, the greedy bastards who destroyed our economy want to not only sit back and wait for the government to fix it (while they keep their money safely hidden) they want to attack the government at the same time and stop any meaningful reform that would block this kind of reckless greed from ever ruining our country again.

What patriotism! It brings a tear to your eye, don't it?

Meanwhile, the Tea Party is marching to give these guys more power and wealth. What a system!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[mosca]

Epic wishes he coulda been alive during the McCarthy era with as much Red Scare smack that he talks.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Fixed it for you.

[broncocalijohn]

All I will say is a few posts up, LABF didnt like the fact that the stereotypical look of a protester which was a bearded hippie type. How many times does he portray Tea Partiers or Republicans as Red Necks, hillbillies, etc.
Can't have it both ways dude.

[NUB]

The "Occupy Wallstreet" movement gets jailed because they are actually thinking about the source of the country's problems instead of whining that a black liberal is the President.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by NUB

The "Occupy Wallstreet" movement gets jailed because they are actually thinking about the source of the country's problems instead of whining that a black liberal is the President.

Yeah.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

All I will say is a few posts up, LABF didnt like the fact that the stereotypical look of a protester which was a bearded hippie type. How many times does he portray Tea Partiers or Republicans as Red Necks, hillbillies, etc.
Can't have it both ways dude.

Once again, your meager powers of comprehension fail you.

The reference to "bearded hippie types" blew up in your face - thanks to the foregoing Jesus reference - and you don't even know it.