There are other ways to get involved in local politics than running for office. Go to Township Supervisor meetings. Go to County Commissioner meetings. Make appropriate, well thought out comments during the times when they open for public comment. Get to know the local politicians, so that you know whose judgement you can trust.
The question is, where is the money coming from to pay these people to protest? Whose agenda is benefiting from these protests? The Working Families Party has close ties to ACORN, which has close ties to Obama.
This portest does not accomplish that. The way to accomplish that is to get involved in local politics. Of course, I, also disagree with the premise that these lily-white protesters represent 99% of the population.
Oh yeah. I wanted to ask you about this ad...http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/help-wanted.php
How many of the people are there because someone is paying them?
OK, except the fact that only 7 of 9 of 34 witnesses recanted and of those 7, most did not actually recant their testimony. Additionally, when Troy Davis got the chance to get a rehearing, his defense team did not call some of those who they claimed had recanted.
What questions? That 7 of 9 of 34 witnesses sort of recanted their testimony (except that they didn't really and that the Davis defense team did not call several of them even though they were in the courtroom during his appeal)?
Most of these people have been involved with politics for at most 4 years. It takes a lifetime of work to change things. They are out there saying,"We voted for a guy we knew nothing about who promised he would fix everything. It turns out he is even more in the pockets of the moneyed interests than the other guy that we didn't like because he was old and uncool. We demand that you fix it for us."
I am not telling them to give up. I am telling them to stop throwing a temper tantrum and start doing the hard work that is necessary to fix things.
OK, I followed that link and the link on that page to the Adbusters call for the protest and I still don't know what they stand for, unless they think that people who work for corporations should have no right to petition Congress to address their grievances. Or maybe it is, profit is evil? What is the goal of the movement? If it si to get money out of politics, that is like saying they want to get water out of people.
Returning the power to the 99% of us who should rightly hold it in a democracy.
Well, that is really easy to accomplish. Get involved in local politics. Go to your local Township Supervisors' meetings and County Commissioners' meetings. What are these people doing in New York (or Chicago, or San Francisco, whatever city) unless they live there? They should be expending this energy where they can actually make a difference in their local political scene. If you get involved with local politics, you will get to know people from other local community political groups, then you can work together to change things at the state level. The most effective way to fix the sorts of problems we have with our political system in this country is to get involved locally.
There's no simple, short way to sum up the sentiment other than "fuck Wall Street".
The problem with this is that the locus of the problem with Wall Street is in Washington, not on Wall Street, or the business districts of other cities. I have seen that at least some of the "Occupy" protesters are calling for the government to gather more power to itself to fix problems that result from the government abusing its power. That is the problem I have with this movement, too many of the protesters want to give more power to the people who caused the problems by abusing the power they already have.
What does the control that the National Committees have over the Presidential primaries have to do with the primaries for the governor's race (or state legislator for that matter)? Personally, I think that the government should stop paying for the primary elections, but that is another issue.
BTW, if you get involved, you can have an impact on even those National Committees, but it a lot of hard work and takes years/decades.
The people who did the French Revolution "cared enough to get out there" and that did not turn out so well.
Were you supportive when the tea party movement "cared enough to get out there"? They had a plan. Their plan was to reduce government spending, especially money being given to corporate giants. Their plan called for Congress to identify what provision of the Constitution gave it the authority to pass any new law. It called for the government to work towards a balanced budget. It called for the government to simplify the tax code.
What is the plan of the "Occupy" movement? I am sorry, I am not willing to "stand in solidarity" with a group until I know what the group stands for. So, I will repeat, what does the "Occupy" movement stand for?
Wickard v Filburn was not about WWII era food rationing. It was about the federal government passing laws regulating how much wheat a farmer could grow so as to drive up wheat prices. The law in question represents one that tried to address a problem that the government should not address.
Copyright and patent are definitely problems that need to be addressed at the federal level. However, the overreaching expansion of the commerce clause is a result of the problem I am talking about: people asking the federal government to solve problems that either shouldn't be addressed by the government, or should be addressed at the state or local level.
Additionally, if people spent more time paying attention to local politics, those local officials would be able to pressure Congressmen and Senators to more properly address issues that are truly federal. Furthermore, people would have a better idea of how a local official who is running for higher office would actually behave once he/she got that office.
There is a real easy answer to this question. The reason this is happening is because people keep asking the government to "solve" ever more problems. In addition, instead of trying to solve those problems that are properly the business of government at the local level, people try to get them addressed at the state or federal level.
I'm not sure if you noticed, but the topic under discussion was governor of California. Now if the one you want is eliminated before the primaries get to your state, you are in the wrong state (not California). You actually demonstrate the problem I am trying to get people to address. The way our system works, you can't fix things by voting for the "right" person for President (although you can make them worse by voting for the wrong person). In order to fix things, you need to get the right Township Supervisors, County Commissioners, state legislators and governors, House members and Senators. The best way to fix things is to start at the local level and work up from there.
An enourmous group showing dissatisfaction can be very powerful, even if such dissatisfaction isn't outlined or even homogeneous.
But not nearly as powerful as a somewhat smaller group that knows what they want to accomplish. Additionally, the power of such a group as the "Occupy" movement can very easily be harnessed by cynical politicians to make things worse. The Democratic Party is right now attempting to harness the "Occupy" movement, yet the some of the very politicians who are cozying up to it are among the ones most responsible for the circumstances that the "Occupy" movement is protesting.
You presented no facts that show that the food supply is any more poisonous in the U.S. than in any other country. I presented facts: the prognosis for someone diagnosed with cancer is better for someone in the U.S. than in most other countries. You presented opinion that the incidence of cancer is less in countries with fully nationalized healthcare.
You know, you could always, gasp, get involved during the primaries and select a different party candidate. If you want a different slate of candidates you need to get more involved before and between elections.
Sorry, to reply a second time, but I forgot to answer your question. The answer is, I have no idea what the "Occupy" protesters are doing now. They are making a lot of noise, but I have yet to see what it is they wish to accomplish.
Supportive of what? What does this movement stand for? It appears to be protesting that Wall Street accepted money that the politicians gave them and that Wall Street is not paying off the protesters student loans. What are they trying to accomplish? In order to gather support, you need to have goals that people are willing to support. I have yet to hear a coherent set of goals put forth by the "Occupy" movement.
Slashdot Mirror
That 7 of 9 of 34 witnesses sort of recanted their testimony
Mmm, 7 of 9.
There were 34 prosecution witnesses that tied Davis to one or both of the murders he was accused of.
There are other ways to get involved in local politics than running for office. Go to Township Supervisor meetings. Go to County Commissioner meetings. Make appropriate, well thought out comments during the times when they open for public comment. Get to know the local politicians, so that you know whose judgement you can trust.
The question is, where is the money coming from to pay these people to protest? Whose agenda is benefiting from these protests? The Working Families Party has close ties to ACORN, which has close ties to Obama.
This portest does not accomplish that. The way to accomplish that is to get involved in local politics. Of course, I, also disagree with the premise that these lily-white protesters represent 99% of the population.
Oh yeah. I wanted to ask you about this ad...http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/help-wanted.php How many of the people are there because someone is paying them?
Showing the country that we care, and we're serious, ...
Care about what? serious about what?
OK, except the fact that only 7 of 9 of 34 witnesses recanted and of those 7, most did not actually recant their testimony. Additionally, when Troy Davis got the chance to get a rehearing, his defense team did not call some of those who they claimed had recanted.
What questions? That 7 of 9 of 34 witnesses sort of recanted their testimony (except that they didn't really and that the Davis defense team did not call several of them even though they were in the courtroom during his appeal)?
Most of these people have been involved with politics for at most 4 years. It takes a lifetime of work to change things. They are out there saying ,"We voted for a guy we knew nothing about who promised he would fix everything. It turns out he is even more in the pockets of the moneyed interests than the other guy that we didn't like because he was old and uncool. We demand that you fix it for us."
I am not telling them to give up. I am telling them to stop throwing a temper tantrum and start doing the hard work that is necessary to fix things.
OK, I followed that link and the link on that page to the Adbusters call for the protest and I still don't know what they stand for, unless they think that people who work for corporations should have no right to petition Congress to address their grievances. Or maybe it is, profit is evil? What is the goal of the movement? If it si to get money out of politics, that is like saying they want to get water out of people.
Returning the power to the 99% of us who should rightly hold it in a democracy.
Well, that is really easy to accomplish. Get involved in local politics. Go to your local Township Supervisors' meetings and County Commissioners' meetings. What are these people doing in New York (or Chicago, or San Francisco, whatever city) unless they live there? They should be expending this energy where they can actually make a difference in their local political scene. If you get involved with local politics, you will get to know people from other local community political groups, then you can work together to change things at the state level. The most effective way to fix the sorts of problems we have with our political system in this country is to get involved locally.
What does the Troy Davis case have to do with this (except that it was about a guilty man that anti-death penatly advocates claimed was innocent)?
There's no simple, short way to sum up the sentiment other than "fuck Wall Street".
The problem with this is that the locus of the problem with Wall Street is in Washington, not on Wall Street, or the business districts of other cities. I have seen that at least some of the "Occupy" protesters are calling for the government to gather more power to itself to fix problems that result from the government abusing its power. That is the problem I have with this movement, too many of the protesters want to give more power to the people who caused the problems by abusing the power they already have.
What does the control that the National Committees have over the Presidential primaries have to do with the primaries for the governor's race (or state legislator for that matter)? Personally, I think that the government should stop paying for the primary elections, but that is another issue.
BTW, if you get involved, you can have an impact on even those National Committees, but it a lot of hard work and takes years/decades.
The people who did the French Revolution "cared enough to get out there" and that did not turn out so well.
Were you supportive when the tea party movement "cared enough to get out there"? They had a plan. Their plan was to reduce government spending, especially money being given to corporate giants. Their plan called for Congress to identify what provision of the Constitution gave it the authority to pass any new law. It called for the government to work towards a balanced budget. It called for the government to simplify the tax code.
What is the plan of the "Occupy" movement? I am sorry, I am not willing to "stand in solidarity" with a group until I know what the group stands for. So, I will repeat, what does the "Occupy" movement stand for?
Wickard v Filburn was not about WWII era food rationing. It was about the federal government passing laws regulating how much wheat a farmer could grow so as to drive up wheat prices. The law in question represents one that tried to address a problem that the government should not address.
Copyright and patent are definitely problems that need to be addressed at the federal level. However, the overreaching expansion of the commerce clause is a result of the problem I am talking about: people asking the federal government to solve problems that either shouldn't be addressed by the government, or should be addressed at the state or local level.
Additionally, if people spent more time paying attention to local politics, those local officials would be able to pressure Congressmen and Senators to more properly address issues that are truly federal. Furthermore, people would have a better idea of how a local official who is running for higher office would actually behave once he/she got that office.
There is a real easy answer to this question. The reason this is happening is because people keep asking the government to "solve" ever more problems. In addition, instead of trying to solve those problems that are properly the business of government at the local level, people try to get them addressed at the state or federal level.
I'm not sure if you noticed, but the topic under discussion was governor of California. Now if the one you want is eliminated before the primaries get to your state, you are in the wrong state (not California). You actually demonstrate the problem I am trying to get people to address. The way our system works, you can't fix things by voting for the "right" person for President (although you can make them worse by voting for the wrong person). In order to fix things, you need to get the right Township Supervisors, County Commissioners, state legislators and governors, House members and Senators. The best way to fix things is to start at the local level and work up from there.
An enourmous group showing dissatisfaction can be very powerful, even if such dissatisfaction isn't outlined or even homogeneous.
But not nearly as powerful as a somewhat smaller group that knows what they want to accomplish. Additionally, the power of such a group as the "Occupy" movement can very easily be harnessed by cynical politicians to make things worse. The Democratic Party is right now attempting to harness the "Occupy" movement, yet the some of the very politicians who are cozying up to it are among the ones most responsible for the circumstances that the "Occupy" movement is protesting.
You presented no facts that show that the food supply is any more poisonous in the U.S. than in any other country. I presented facts: the prognosis for someone diagnosed with cancer is better for someone in the U.S. than in most other countries. You presented opinion that the incidence of cancer is less in countries with fully nationalized healthcare.
You know, you could always, gasp, get involved during the primaries and select a different party candidate. If you want a different slate of candidates you need to get more involved before and between elections.
What facts? That you appear to think it is the government's business what I choose to eat?
Sorry, to reply a second time, but I forgot to answer your question. The answer is, I have no idea what the "Occupy" protesters are doing now. They are making a lot of noise, but I have yet to see what it is they wish to accomplish.
Supportive of what? What does this movement stand for? It appears to be protesting that Wall Street accepted money that the politicians gave them and that Wall Street is not paying off the protesters student loans. What are they trying to accomplish? In order to gather support, you need to have goals that people are willing to support. I have yet to hear a coherent set of goals put forth by the "Occupy" movement.