When is Obama going to condemn the sickening police brutality against peaceful protesters?

[peacebird]

There is more than enough documented proof of horrific over reaction and brutality. There is proof of police pretending to be part of OWS in NYC to cause trouble. Pepper spraying seated protesters. On and on. When will Obama address the nation and demand police use restraint. When will he stand up for democracy in America?

[Blue_In_AK]

1. I don't believe that he will.

He is studiously maintaining an aloof, hands-off attitude when it comes to police action against free speech and assembly in our own country, even as he condemns it elsewhere. I'm not sure I understand his rationale.

[Fumesucker]

8. He is supporting his base...

The 1%..

[awoke_in_2003]

33. hoisted on his petard. nt

[indepat]

11. Maybe he will on the 12th of never: is there even a part of his base the President not

causing to wonder what his grand strategy is, where is politics lie? :patriot:

[lbrtbell]

32. You're not sure you understand his rationale?

Here's his rationale: He's on the side of the 1%.

There, mystery solved.

[Tesha]

38. His rationale? He doesn't support *US*, he supports his corporate "constituents". (NT)

[roguevalley]

46. his goal is re-election. Alienating even one vote is something he

won't do. and consider ... he hasn't lifted a finger for the poor and he's using the safety net as part of his strategy to appease everyone on everything while getting nothing for nobody. HE DOESN'T CARE! I am taking him on his word. If he cared, he would speak. But since election, everything has been put through the re-election prism and what might hurt a legacy or a re-election has been bypassed or ignored.

Truly, take him at his word.

[QC]

2. Don't hold your breath. n/t

[L. Coyote]

64. He did so a long time ago. So the question is really mute.

[Enrique]

3. after a number of conservatives condemn it first

then he'll have cover.

[EFerrari]

6. The Egyptian junta did about an hour ago.

That should count.

[gateley]

4. I don't know if he's seeing any of what we are - or the sheer

volume of it.

If he saw something like this posted by Luminous Animal:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2345114

He might be moved to comment. I would hope.

[tblue]

23. Haha! That's a joke, right?

He will not mention a word unless he is asked. In which case he will refuse to take sides. OR he will say it's important to keep law and order and he understands people's 'frustrations.'

He's not on our side. He's really not.

[piratefish08]

5. words matter.

"So I want to be very clear in calling upon the Egyptian authorities to refrain from any violence against peaceful protestors. The people of Egypt have rights that are universal. That includes the right to peaceful assembly and association, the right to free speech, and the ability to determine their own destiny. These are human rights. And the United States will stand up for them everywhere."

President Barack Obama - Jan 28, 2011

[chill_wind]

13. "These are human rights. And the United States will stand up for them everywhere"

else.

[CrispyQ]

62. ~lol

That actually made me laugh out loud.

[shraby]

18. I added that to Joe Biden's birthday card in the message.

[tblue]

24. Oh now that's freaking brilliant.

Good on you!!!

[Poll_Blind]

7. He's not going to take a side until he finds out which side wins.

:rofl:

PB

[QC]

49. +1

[gkhouston]

9. When. Pigs. Fly.

And no, that was not a suggestion to construct a trebuchet.

[Tesha]

42. Actually, the thought of launching a squadron of helium-filled porcine balloons...

...upwind of the White House does have a certain
Pink Floydish appeak, doesn't it?



He's a smart guy -- maybe he'd get the symbolism?

Tesha

[begin_within]

10. He serves the 1%. So never.

[Rex]

12. He did.

Right here -Link- and here -Link-. Oh and last week when he said this, "______ __ ______ __ ______ _ _________ __".

[Cherchez la Femme]

40. Tut, tut -- those aren't BIG BLUE LINKS

the only ones that matter! :P

[MannyGoldstein]

14. Pay to play, baby.

Peas for the 99%.

[saras]

15. The first time a cop beats up a banker

[tblue]

25. LOL! True.

Sad though, huh?

[lonestarnot]

58. Sure as hell isn't funny IMO.

[lonestarnot]

57. Sadly, that may be the answer .

[MedleyMisty]

16. Didn't I hear a couple of days ago

that he said it was up to the cities to decide how much force to use?

He's part of the 1%. He's not on our side. No one who could become president in our current system would be on our side.

[Poll_Blind]

21. You heard correctly. From the AP: Obama: Cities must make own decisions on protests

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2011/11/15/obama_cities_must_make_own_decisions_on_protests/">HERE

PB

[awoke_in_2003]

34. Imagine if LBJ would have said such a thing...

during the Civil Rights marches in the south.

[Quartermass]

17. I am incapable of believe that he will.

Because he is owned by the corporations and you don't bite the hands that feed you.

So no. obama will NEVER condemn the police brutality.

[Ichingcarpenter]

19. Chomsky said this years ago...

Almost right after the election. At the time I was taken aback by the statement

[tblue]

27. Saving that pic!

Thanks. I feel like this administration is acting out a high-tech pepper spray on us.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

20. My petition

http://wh.gov/bmO

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. If, and when, he thinks it will help his campaign.

"History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians.  Now, to go and stick one at the very head of government couldn’t be wise." Mark Twain

[Rex]

26. I wonder if he is scared to piss off the police unions.

To act as if politics are not involved, it to be naive to the political process.

[tblue]

29. He couldn't give a damn about any union

except in so far as they do the election legwork.

[Rex]

30. 2010 stung bad, those kind of wounds don't go away.

I think they are scared of what it would do to their poll numbers.

[awoke_in_2003]

35. +1000. nt

[Martin Eden]

28. That's an easy question

He'll do it when his advisers tell him it is to his political advantage.

[awoke_in_2003]

31. about the same time...

that he comes out and supports gay marriage.

[PufPuf23]

36. When and if it is self-serving to win in 2012. nt

[JoeyT]

37. It's another one of those states' rights issues.

Just like everything else that would require a modicum of courage to take a stand on.

[MindPilot]

47. Funny how states have the "right" to beat up citizens.

But states don't have the right make their own marijuana laws.

[Skittles]

39. he won't do that

repukes would not like it

[sabrina 1]

41. Because he can't. Our government has been coopted

It is no longer about individual politicians. The truth is no one could get near the WH unless those actually running things, felt they could depend on them not to disrupt the Status Quo built up over decades. That doesn't mean, imo, that some do not have good intentions and hope once they achieve power, they can do some good.

To believe that, you have to support the Global Neo-liberalism that has destroyed democracies from one end of the world to the other.

See what is happening in Europe. Their elected officials, IF they talk about democracy, are ousted and replaced by Bankers, unelected by the people. These installed leaders are on board with the failed policies aimed at saving the Banks, Austerity eg, which will enslave Europeans for generations to debt to the IMF, just as happened initially, with the same policies, in Third World countries. Who ever thought that first world countries as in Europe, and now here, would ever be indebted to the IMF? But that is what has happened.

If Obama, like Papandreou in Greece, were to speak out against these policies, he would be removed. The robo cops all over the world, notice how uniform they are both in appearance and in tactics, are protecting Neo-liberal policies of the Global Capitalists.

Whether he supports all of it or not, I don't know, but if he wants to stay in power, he will have to look like he does. The only hope left to end this takeover of sovereign nations, is the people.

[fasttense]

59. Yes, he could have stood up to those banksters.

FDR did, many a great leader stood with the people against the corporations. If he had gone into power and NOT appointed Summers, Geithner, Ben and all those Goldman Sachs executives and friends to his cabinet and departments. If he had taken the side of the liberal Dems instead of the side of the conservative Dems in the health care debate, the renewal of the uber rich tax give aways, stronger laws in support of labor. If he had only vetoed the bush tax give aways to the uber rich. If he had moved immediately and gotten regulations passed to stop the bankster's plunder by grabbing the financial collapse as the reason, the need, for abrupt change. If he had prosecuted the torturers, the banksters, the war criminals and thieves.

There was a whole lot he could have done and he would have been guaranteed reelection because the people would have loved him, his base would have loved him.

But instead......

[Orsino]

43. He's waiting for us.

I think this is an area where he might step up, even if he won't oppose the banksters directly.

But we have to make this an issue too large for him to ignore.

[They_Live]

44. It's not like he can do anything anyway,

he's only the President of the United States.

:sarcasm:



:hide:

[notadmblnd]

45. I don't think he will speak about it specifically

[bvar22]

48. He doesn't have a Magic Wand!!!!

What do you want?... a PONY???

He is way smarter than us,
so whatever he does is OK with me.

He can't say anything because its all Joe Lieberman's fault!

He doesn't have the votes for THAT!!!

He is the President of ALL the People,
and Wall Street Bankers are people too,
so he really can't take sides.

Saying nothing is the most Progressive, Historic thing any president has ever done!

Why do you hate the President?
The Political Correctness Commissar had notified us that you have
NOT made sufficient Positive Posts about the President over the last 2 years
to qualify you for the position of asking a question..
UNREC!!!!




Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[QC]

50. You never really loved Him! n/t

[peacebird]

53. I kept looking for the 'sarcasm' tag.. Who knew the leader of the free world was as powerless as a

Newborn kitten....?

[Fumesucker]

56. I give you about a 9.2..

No little blue links..

;)

[bvar22]

61. Oh, Man!!!

How could I have forgotten THAT? :shrug:








Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[TorchTheWitch]

51. Never - he's already condoned it

He actually said it is up to the individual jurisdictions to use whatever force they deem appropriate. Never mind the law or anything so quaint as that.

How is it not obvious that this is a NATIONAL (read, FEDERAL) effort that the police are engaged in? They get their orders from their respective mayors, and the mayors all got together and made the decision to do this and do it this way... they did not get together on their own. If the admin gave a rat's ass about what is going on - and there is no way they don't know what atrocities are going on - they would be doing something about it. The fact that they aren't also makes it obvious that they're involved.

Just how many more decades need to go by with the 99% sinking further into the abyss until people realize that the government no matter which party is in charge is NOT on the side of the people???

[krabigirl]

52. most likely, never, or wait, after the election. nt

[kath]

54. Yeah, right - as if his donors/owners would actually let him do that.

[Stinky The Clown]

55. I can imagine the answer . . . . .

[MedleyMisty]

60. I posted about the Egypt thing and the tear gas being used on them coming from the US

Tonight Tahrir got real again, with tear gas and rubber bullets (someone lost an eye to the rubber bullets because the snipers were aiming at the eyes - plenty of other people got hit near the eyes). Hundreds were injured and at least two people were killed.

The Egyptians on Twitter made a point of saying that SCAF has the backing of the US. Perhaps that's one reason why they show so much solidarity with Occupy. If we free ourselves, that would greatly help their struggle.

So yeah. Obama spoke up on Mubarak's suppression. Has he said anything about SCAF's?

[CrispyQ]

63. Obama's a tool. Just like most politicians. They have their own agenda & it isn't the People's.

I don't see how we can solve our problems at the voting booth. I just don't.

[progressoid]

65. Aaaaahahahaha!

Oh, wait, you were serious.

Sorry.

[Itchinjim]

66. Sigh, 18....