Occupy New Hampshire Derides Both Parties {'Why Does 1% Have Two Parties and We Have None?'}

[xchrom]

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/01/08-1

All political eyes were on New Hampshire this weekend, and members of the Occupy movement hoped to take advantage of the swirl of coverage ahead of Tuesday's Republican Party primary, the first of this election year.

From New Hampshire Public Radio:

Members of Occupy New Hampshire returned to Manchester Saturday to demonstrate outside of the Republican Presidential Debate at St. Anselm's College and spread their message of economic inequality.

***snip

CNN reports today:

Occupy protestors know that many Republicans view them as an extension of the Democratic Party. Elizabeth Grunewald tried to dispel that notion by speaking with folks who are willing to stop and listen to what the group has to say.

"You can't have a slogan that says we are the 99% without including Republicans also," said Grunewald. "It's not aligned with the Democratic Party. It's aligned with the free thinking party."


*** video at link

[liberal N proud]

1. Because the 1% have all the money

They had one party and they bought the other one.

[Huey P. Long]

2. recommend. -eom

[JNelson6563]

3. Both parties are the same!!1!

Yeah, that's it! Of course this very morning I found out I got an extension to my unemployment benefits that the Rethugs fought hard to block. This week me and millions like me will find they can eat and have a warm place to sleep, pay the electric bill and other things we can't live without, thanks to the President making this happen.

But I'm sure Bush would've done the same thing right? Cause, after all, they are exactly the fucking same.

Julie

[MineralMan]

5. There you go...

I'm really glad that your extension came through!

[JNelson6563]

13. OMG, thank you MM! Can't tell you how relieved I am!

This makes such an incredible difference for me, I can't begin to explain it, though as intelligent guy like you can guess. How many millions breathe a huge sigh of relief, just like me, this week thanks to the Democratic President? Yet so many still ignorantly believe there is no difference.

Julie

[MineralMan]

15. You know, a lot of those people who got the extensions

are Republicans, too. I'm thinking they'll be reconsidering who to vote for, come November. It's so clear that it was Democrats who fought for the extension. This may be a very good thing in 2012. I hope so, anyhow.

[G_j]

14. however, that is not a quote taken from the article

is it?


True the Democrats are preferable to the Republicans. But OWS was never about being an extention of a political party.

[JNelson6563]

19. Pretty clearly implied, no?

And I agree, OWS was never about being an extension of a political party. But what is it about exactly?

It is standard practice for any new identity to criticize all the others to establish legitimacy. A clear example of this is religion. The first thing a new one does is basically explain what's wrong with the others to show how "right" they are.

So this makes me wonder what it is they are looking to accomplish by making such statements.

Julie

[G_j]

21. I didn't think so

one of the OWS 'demands' has been to get money out of politics. I see them as nonpartisan.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Get money out of politics

Reform the Financial system

Medicare for all...

Point number one BOTH parties, with few exceptions, they are the same. They both eat from the same trough.

And the exceptions to this are actually on BOTH parties, but I can literally count them with the fingers of one hand. They see point number one to a great source of the dysfunction.

[jwirr]

20. Yes, for years that has been the story we hear - just alike. But they need to ask someone like me

who has been living on welfare programs while I take care of my disabled daughter for years. If the gop had its way we would have been left to starve to death. I have real problems with anyone who thinks both parties are the same.

Both parties may not be doing as well as we want them to but there is a difference in what they do on many issues.

[bvar22]

28. And WHAT did the Democratic Party Leadership give up...

...to get you and a minority of Working Americans an extension on unemployment?

Thank gawd when my father and his father were fighting for Worker's/UNION Rights, they weren't so easily fooled by a few crumbs dribbled out to a handful of people.




[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[TheKentuckian]

29. Bush extended unemployment benefits more than once so it is hard to rule it out.

The TeaPubliKlan insanity in this area, to this degree is a new depth they have sunk to.

[MineralMan]

4. Sadly, the 99% have the attention of about 1%.

And that's a really, really important thing to recognize. Once again, DU is not representative of the general public.

[Zorra]

17. And that's an interesting, and puzzling, perspective, considering

these major indicators of the widespread notoriety of the Occupy Movement:

Time names 'The Protester' as 'Person of Year'

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/time-names-the-protester-as-person-of-year/2011/12/14/gIQAisaRuO_video.html


American Dialect Society names ‘Occupy’ word of the year for 2011

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/08/american-dialect-society-names-occupy-word-of-the-year-for-2011/

Word of the year

The word(s) of the year, sometimes capitalized as Word(s) of the Year and abbreviated WOTY or WotY, refers to any of various assessments as to the most important word(s) or expression(s) in the public sphere during a specific year.

2011[11]: occupy (verb or noun inspired from the Occupy movements of 2011)

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

NEW YEAR"S EVE, NEW YORK CITY


And that's a really important thing to recognize. Once again, some opinions at DU are not representative of the general public.

[msongs]

22. Time = the "foreign" protestor of the year. Note the pic does not appear to be OWS lol nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Acually the photo is from an Occupier, funny THAT

that was creatively transformed

Here



and here

[dionysus]

27. actually was a pic from OWS. the original i think even had 99% on the bandana... but it was stylized

to make it look generic i suppose considering it's supposed to represent the arab spring as well..

[Maraya1969]

6. This is right where they have lost me. If they were so free

thinking why don't they think of the policies between the two parties and see which ends up with a 1% and which ends up with a middle class?

I'm really disgusted with Occupy now.

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

7. "Occupy protestors know that many Republicans view them as an extension of the Democratic Party."

“I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do,” she says. “I support what they do.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/24/elizabeth-warren-i-created-occupy-wall-street.html

[Zorra]

8. There is a glaring reason why republicans believe Occupy is an extension of the Democratic

Party.

We are the very essence of what the Democratic party is supposed to be.

[xchrom]

9. that point is going to get lost -- especially since this thread has turned into a sub-thread.

the point of this was about money and buying influence in both parties -- now lost in an emotional maelstrom of -- GASP -- somebody is claiming they are the 'same'.

[Zorra]

10. Well, no surprise...that is the primary element of

standard diversionary protocol for subjects of this nature.

[Luminous Animal]

30. Funny thing... though the accusation has been made that somene said the two parties are the same...

I don't see that phrase anywhere.

[xchrom]

31. +1

[Huey P. Long]

11. Exaclty Zorra. OWS is a manifestation of the failure of the new Democrats. -eom

[G_j]

12. well said nt

[Raine]

24. Agree ... simply and well said. nt

[frazzled]

16. To answer the question ...

"Why does 1% have two parties and we have none" -- because you have to start another party if you want one (or take over an existing one). No one is going to do it for you. You're not there waiting for some hero or heroine to come along and answer all your needs. That's the white knight theory of politics.

We often talk here about the "paternalism" of the Republican party (and they talk about the "maternalism" of the Democratic party). But this seems childish to me. You want another choice? Don't complain about no one giving it to you: go create it. It's what our system permits (though it won't be an easy job. I might even be interested if it's viable and rational.

[a simple pattern]

18. We don't need no stinkin permits

[Wilms]

23. ^

[T S Justly]

32. K&R (nt)