Debate the hottest political topics, poll the public opinion, post your own opinion polls and find out what others think!
You can even post your own public opinion polls using our poll builder and find out what others think on the issues that matter to you!
The majority of members in the corporate media disparage the Occupy Wall Street protesters as lacking focus and a definite aim. In the article Gunning for Wall Street, with Faulty Aim, the NY Times stated "group's lack of cohesion and its apparent wish to pantomime progressivism rather than practice it knowledgably is unsettling." Leuven from Belgium says the article attempted to portray protesters as naive, misguided youth haven taken to the streets to "assuage their adolescent boredom by pretending it is 1968."In Wall Street Demonstrations Test Police Trained for Bigger Threats, Joseph Goldstein of the NY Times argues "to the NYPD, the protesters represented ... a visible example of lawlessness akin to that which had resulted in destruction and violence at other anti-capitalist demonstrations." Leuven says the "piece stops just short of suggesting that, because the much more malign threat posed by terrorists is among the NYPD’s main concerns, they should be forgiven for their disproportionate response to the 'unorganized and, at times, uninformed' Wall Street protesters."In the video provided, Fox News is seen mocking the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Their show Red Eye attempts to portray the protesters as hippies, nude people, and pot smokers. Bill Schulz acts like an ass towards the protesters. He says stupid jokes and is in general just rude. Essentially, Fox was trying to make the protests seem as not serious. The station also tries to link the movement to the hippies from the 1960's.Leuven argues the media and "writers were deployed by the establishment to defend itself against the forces of change (the other main instrument being the police), and tasked with quieting the rumblings of democracy. Poking fun and diminishing the protesters efforts was intended to function as a deterrent, destroying the morale of the people in the street and discouraging others from joining them for fear of humiliation. They raised the specter of what Jean-Paul Sartre calls fraternity terror, putting those within the establishment on notice that open sympathy with the occupation movement will not be tolerated. Like the occupiers themselves, these sympathizers will be summarily judged, humiliated and driven out. And for those who are merely afraid of the implications of the movement for their positions of affluence and security, they provide assurances that the distant thunder that they’re hearing won’t be followed by a storm...Whatever their actual motivation for acting as instruments of the establishment—whether they really identify themselves with it or whether they’ve become enamored of its comforts, or some combination of the two—it should now be clear that these writers are little more than tools of the system. If they merely identify themselves with what they argue, we can hope that witnessing these protests triggers some hidden sympathy for the effort that escapes this self-identification and begins to undo it. Sadly, a darker possibility remains the more probable explanation; that they are so enamored of the comforts of the establishment, so isolated from the suffering that pervades American society, that they truly wish to see the effort fail, since its success would mean precisely the loss of these extraordinary luxuries and their position of power. Girded by these luxuries against sympathy and self-doubt, their identification with the corrupt establishment is allowed to stand unencumbered by conscience or scruple. Any sympathies that they might have had have been buried alive and, because they neither act on them nor allow them to become a part of their social identity, these sympathies suffocate under the weight of their own lassitude and complacency"Leuven says the possible reasons for the Corporate Media resenting the Occupy Wall Street Posters are:They are deployed by the Establishment to defend against change and to quiet the rumblings of democracyThey actually identify with the EstablishmentThey have become enamored with the Establishments Comforts"They are so enamored of the comforts of the establishment, so isolated from the suffering that pervades American society, that they truly wish to see the effort fail, since its success would mean precisely the loss of these extraordinary luxuries and their position of power."What do you think? Why does the Corporate Media resent the Occupy Wall Street Movement?
"writers were deployed by the establishment to defend itself against the forces of change (the other main instrument being the police), and tasked with quieting the rumblings of democracy. Poking fun and diminishing the protesters efforts was intended to function as a deterrent, destroying the morale of the people in the street and discouraging others from joining them for fear of humiliation. They raised the specter of what Jean-Paul Sartre calls fraternity terror, putting those within the establishment on notice that open sympathy with the occupation movement will not be tolerated. Like the occupiers themselves, these sympathizers will be summarily judged, humiliated and driven out. And for those who are merely afraid of the implications of the movement for their positions of affluence and security, they provide assurances that the distant thunder that they’re hearing won’t be followed by a storm...Whatever their actual motivation for acting as instruments of the establishment—whether they really identify themselves with it or whether they’ve become enamored of its comforts, or some combination of the two—it should now be clear that these writers are little more than tools of the system. If they merely identify themselves with what they argue, we can hope that witnessing these protests triggers some hidden sympathy for the effort that escapes this self-identification and begins to undo it. Sadly, a darker possibility remains the more probable explanation; that they are so enamored of the comforts of the establishment, so isolated from the suffering that pervades American society, that they truly wish to see the effort fail, since its success would mean precisely the loss of these extraordinary luxuries and their position of power. Girded by these luxuries against sympathy and self-doubt, their identification with the corrupt establishment is allowed to stand unencumbered by conscience or scruple. Any sympathies that they might have had have been buried alive and, because they neither act on them nor allow them to become a part of their social identity, these sympathies suffocate under the weight of their own lassitude and complacency"
The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations have been demonized as, essentially, a confused collective of scattered media-savvy hippies by conservative news coverage. Are they missing the important shared sentiments between the group and the Republican's treasured Tea Party movement? Or is the media intentionally ignoring the glaring similarities in the messages of the left wing youth-movement to "Protest for American Revolution" (quoted directly from their website) and the, though often misguided and convoluted, G.O.P.-based movement rooted in the ideals of the actual American Revolution?!? You can't define one as patriotic and not the other. Though many are trying. "Some," Talking Points Memo and others have noted, " are drawing parallels between the anti-Wall Street protests and the Tea Party -- a comparison the conservative organization loathes.""So, rage against duly elected government is patriotic, quintessentially American," The Daily Show's Jon Stewart observed in the above clip, "Whereas rage against multinational shareholder-accountable corporations is anti-American, gotcha."Tea Party Patriots co-founder Mark Meckler said the protesters are breaking laws by wrongfully camping in a park and marching on the Brooklyn Bridge. "That's not tea party behavior, that's not America-loving behavior" he assured Fox News in an interview. "Everything you described there, I believe, is a misdemeanor," Stewart retorted. "The actual tea party was a fucking felony!"" ... Did you know what the tea party actually was? Do you you know how much trouble you'd get in if you broke into a ship, stole the cargo from the ship's owners, and just threw it overboard?!?....You're named after the most celebrated act of theft and vandalism of private property in our nation's history and you can't stomach a little park camping?!?"According to Meckler's site, the Tea Party Patriots' mission is “to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets.”A portion of the statement released by the Wall Street protesters via Nation of Change reads, ""We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.....Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone."If the Tea Baggers consider themselves great American patriots and an obvious parallel can be drawn between the common intent of the two groups, can't those occupying Wall Street, then, be given the respect they deserve as patriotic citizens exercising their Constitutional rights?
On October 21, 2011, a new movement aimed at ending the Stop & Frisk policy of the NYPD. Hundreds of people marched from Harlem's State Office Building to Harlem's 28th precinct. Car Dix of the Revolutionary Communist Party stated at the protest "We are here today to put our bodies on the line to stop this racist, immoral, illegitimate and unjust ‘new Jim Crow’ from the gateway of stop and frisk to the wholesale mass incarceration of Black and Brown people." He continued "We are serious and we will continue until we Stop Stop & Frisk!"According to the NYCLU, "the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices raise serious concerns over racial profiling, illegal stops and privacy rights. The Department’s own reports on its stop-and-frisk activity confirm what many people in communities of color across the city have long known: The police are stopping hundreds of thousands of law abiding New Yorkers every year, and the vast majority are black and Latino." NYCLU continues saying "during the first six months of 2011, 362,150 New Yorkers were stopped by the police. 317,376 were totally innocent (88 percent), 184,186 were black (51 percent), 119,853 were Latino (33 percent), and 33,805 were white (9 percent)"Does the Stop and Frisk policy of the police need to end?
Dylan Ratigan from MSNBC says Americans are fed up at our government because it is corrupt and unfair. Ratigan says our government is corrupt and defines the corruption as "there are platinum citizens. there are institutions within the financial institutions that have control of our government that get treated differently than anyone else in America." He says there are two types of citizens in America - platinum citizens and non-platinum citizens. He defines platinum citizens as those with "the rights of the too big to fail banking institutions to take out as much money as they want and to gamble as much as they want." The non-platinum citizens are "all the students with the student debt, which is all the unemployment in this country, which is all the retirees that are getting zero percent interest." Next, Ratigan says the citizens of our country are deeply against what they perceive is unfairness in the system. He says the Tea Party and the Occupied Wall Street movements are driven by unfairness in the US political system. Still, more shocking, are Ratigan's comments about how 94% of elections are won by the candidate who raises the most money. Politifact fact checked these numbers and came up with the following: "Indeed, the percentage for 2010 was lower than it had been in recent election cycles. The center found that in 2008, the biggest spenders won 93 percent of House races and 86 percent of Senate races. In 2006, the top spenders won 94 percent of House races and 73 percent of Senate races. And in 2004, 98 percent of House seats went to candidates who spent the most, as did 88 percent of Senate seats." So Ratigan's number was slightly off, but his point is still relevant. He flat out accuses the US government of being purchased by lobbyists and special interests groups pouring money into candidates electoral races. The candidates are then beholden to these special interest and lobby groups because of their donations. Do you agree with his assessment? Is the US government bought and owned by lobbyists and special interests?
"Indeed, the percentage for 2010 was lower than it had been in recent election cycles. The center found that in 2008, the biggest spenders won 93 percent of House races and 86 percent of Senate races. In 2006, the top spenders won 94 percent of House races and 73 percent of Senate races. And in 2004, 98 percent of House seats went to candidates who spent the most, as did 88 percent of Senate seats."
According to The Call for the 16th Day of Protest to Stop Police Brutality, Repression, and the Criminalization of a Generation throughout "the U.S., Black, Latino, and poor neighborhoods are treated like occupied territory by increasingly militarized armies of law enforcement. People are criminalized and brutalized for their perceived status – socioeconomic, immigration, mental health, and/or racial, gender, or sexual identity. People living in our communities, especially youth, are routinely stopped, harassed, beaten, and even killed." It lists the following examples:In Chicago, the home of the first Black president, police have shot 44 people so far this year, mostly youth of color, including 13-year-old Jimmell Cannon, who was shot eight times.NYPD continues to stop hundreds of thousands of youth of color every year for the most minimal suspicion, fewer than 10% of which result in arrest, and far fewer in charges or conviction.Police nationwide continue to kill with very little consequence. Twelve Miami cops shot at 22-year-old Raymond Herisse 100 times, then threatened those who recorded the incident, destroying their cellphones. A Tucson SWAT team shot at 26-year-old Iraq War veteran Jose Guerena over 70 times, claiming that he fired at them and then leaving him to bleed to death in his home. Both their allegations of gunfire and drug-dealing were later revealed to be false. In New York and New Jersey, at least 28 people have been killed by police since October 22 of last year, while at least 35 people have been killed by law enforcement in Washington State in the last 12 months. The killing of 22-year old Oscar Grant in the San Francisco Bay Area in 2009 resulted in a rare conviction for the officer who shot him; however, he was freed after mere months in prison, while people protesting the outrageous verdict were met with police violence and mass arrests. In the weeks following that cop’s release, SF cops killed Charles Hill, a 45-year-old homeless man, on a subway platform and 19-year old Kenneth Harding after he supposedly failed to pay a $2 train fare, then left him dying on the pavement in front of dozens of outraged witnesses. Police routinely abuse the mentally ill and disabled. Fullerton, CA cops beat to death homeless and mentally ill 27-year-old Kelly Thomas, described by many in the community as “a gentle, childlike soul.” In Fresno, CA, 28-year-old Raul Rosas, Jr. died after being tasered by police. His girlfriend said "I didn't call the Fresno County Sheriff to kill him. I called because he needed help with his mental illness.” Raul went into cardiac arrest and was denied access to three medical ambulances that showed up to assist. Recently enacted anti-immigrant laws have given police in the states of Arizona, Georgia, and Alabama sweeping powers to stop people "suspected" of being undocumented on no other basis than appearance. The hostility and racism stoked by these policies have already culminated in violence, as seen in the killing of 15-year-old Sergio Adrián Hernández Güereka by a border patrol agent and the beating death of 42-year-old Anastasio Hernández Rojas at the hands of La Migra. More than one million have been deported under the Obama administration.Racially targeted mass incarceration exacerbates the criminalization and marginalization of Black people, playing the same role as the Jim Crow laws that sprang from the Virginia slave codes of 1705. In 1954, 90,000 Black people were incarcerated. Now, over 900,000 Black people are imprisoned, a tenfold increase, while the total U.S. Black population has merely doubled in the same period. The U.S. also has the highest incarceration rate worldwide, with 2.4 million people in prison.Young schoolchildren are increasingly labeled and treated as criminals by school security and local police. Eight-year-old Aidan Elliot was peppersprayed and handcuffed by Colorado police, and ten-year-old Sofia Bautista was removed from her elementary school, then taken to a NYPD precinct, handcuffed, and interrogated for hours, while police nationwide continue to use tasers on students as young as sixWhat do you think? Are Black and Latino neighborhoods treated like Occupied Territory?
Larry King
March Madness
Natasha Fame Leslie
Ryan Seacrest
Sanu Dellafiore
John Armstrong
Fred Hanna
Georgia Hester
