White House now using the OWS's 99% language in their arguments

[bigtree]

from Business Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-draws-closer-to-occupy-wall-street-says-obama-is-fighting-for-interests-of-the-99-2011-10


___ In a call previewing Obama's upcoming bus tour through North Carolina and Virginia, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said President Obama "will continue to acknowledge the frustration that he himself shares," about Washington's laggard response to the financial crisis.

Earnest added that while on the trip, President Obama will make it clear that he is fighting to make certain that the "interests of 99 percent of Americans are well represented" — the first time the White House has used the term to differentiate the vast majority of Americans from the wealthy.


read: http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-draws-closer-to-occupy-wall-street-says-obama-is-fighting-for-interests-of-the-99-2011-10

[piratefish08]

1. NOTHING will kill this movement quicker than asshat politicians deciding to jump on board.

i trust these kids more than ANYONE in the beltway.

[bigtree]

3. well, the White House has to stay as close to the movement as they're able

. . . or it will drag them under.

I don't see what the problem is if politicians are motivated to reform their legislative initiative to appeal to the protestors or to try and mollify their demands. Nothing is going to be accomplished in the street alone. There will still be a need to build the political coalitions in Congress that are necessary to transform the agitation into action.

[Marrah_G]

8. When I see any of them take real risk or take real action, that will be different

Until then, I frankly just think they are saying what they think will do the most to re-elect them. Washington IS the problem. All of them. None of them leave DC poor. None of them leave wondering if they will have health care or a job or heat this winter.

[bigtree]

9. the elections, the protests, the pandering, every instigation of our political system

. . . is integral to moving the legislative process forward. I'm not as cynical about the end result of it all. I think the politicians will respond and that we will see some legislative progress which was inspired by this growing protest movement. That's what we want, isn't it?

[Marrah_G]

21. You outlined the very parts of the political system that are destroying our country

This is about real change, not campaign slogans, sound bites, a couple token votes that do nothing while they continue to rob us blind. I am all for legislative progress, but I will say again- I want to see these politicians take a damn risk. Risk their re-elections, risk their campaign chests, do something for the SOLE reason that it is the RIGHT THING TO DO. Washington is the problem, corporate greed and corruption are the problem. The two are so intertwined these days that it's hard to tell one from the other.

Frankly the moment the movement becomes part of the Dem party is the day I turn my back and I expect many others feel the same.

[bigtree]

23. all of that has been a part of politics since the beginning

. . . the challenge is to persist in working to overcome those inevitable instincts.

I don't know what you expect to be accomplished without a working legislative vehicle. Otherwise the protests are what they accuse the establishment of -- just hollow words. To transform the agitation into action there will be a need to develop a legislative strategy and to build coalitions within the political system to advance the ideals into law. Frankly, the prospect of waiting for some third party to emerge in the numbers needed to form a perfect legislature is as exasperating as waiting for government to act.

[Marrah_G]

25. I think we just really disagree on this part on a fundamental level

Disagreement is okay :) OWS has already accomplished an enormous task... people are beginning to take notice and talk about the problems and how to solve them. That's what protests are for... to raise awareness about a problem.

[bigtree]

27. oh, yes

The movement has brought folks to the streets. Having spent so much time in so many lonely, but insistent crowds, it's fantastic to see such a growing number of folks expressing themselves in this very public and vulnerable manner. It has to give you great hope for the future to have so many folks standing up and willing to engage the political system to effect the ideals and changes they want.

[Skidmore]

29. This is also about finding a way to see actualization and results too.

Unless you get some viable non teabagger candidates for Congress and put a lot of these guys out of work, people can freeze in the streets to no avail.

[Marrah_G]

44. Or perhaps... just maybe....

The people we have already elected might get scared enough to actually start doing their jobs instead of working for the sole benefit of the 1%. That would be something huh.... representatives actually representing people instead of corporations. I am no longer of the belief that the Tea Party is the problem. I think the bigger problem is the bought and paid for people in all three branches of the government. Our own party is so corrupted it is barely recognizable.

I know alot of people think this is just silly idealism, void of all reality, but frankly, the lower you set your expectations, the lower the results are that you settle for.

[xiamiam]

33. well words are one thing..actions another..remember helping main st vs wall st

i loved that..never happened..so just using the words are not going to do much unless there is action

[defendandprotect]

40. Obama's "populism" has an odd way of coming and going -- right around election time ... !!!

[Marrah_G]

46. yup

[ret5hd]

7. I somewhat understand how you fell, but how (exactly) will new regulations, etc...

be written, how will new laws be enacted, without at some time at some level politicians being "on board"?

[KurtNYC]

35. they aren't jumping on board -- they are "speaking back to the customer

in language the customer uses"

Classic customer relations / marketing technique.

They will talk the talk but they won't walk the walk (even in comfortable shoes).

[stevenleser]

37. Actually, there is not enough evidence to make that accusation. OWS has only existed for one month

we don't know who is paying lip service and who intends to align their policies with OWS.

[KurtNYC]

42. the Obama campaign did polling back in 2007/2008 to find 2 words

to use for their campaign. They picked the right 2 words apparently because the voters gave them the WH, senate and the house.

They didn't deliver enough and now Americans' needs for hope and change have found a new outlet.

Respectfully, I think 3 years is enough time to know what the priorities of this administration are. And I hope they can change.

[stevenleser]

43. OWS gives everyone a blank slate. They want everyone to join.

They want to help the 99%, not satisfy past vendettas with whatever political group or person you are upset with.

[stevenleser]

49. "These kids" would not agree with your assessment. They want everyone to jump on board who are

willing to work to benefit the 99%. All of their communications say as much.

[me b zola]

2. While pushing an agenda and legislation that of the type that is fueling the protests

Was he using OWS's language before or after he pushed for and signed the trade agreements?

[bigtree]

4. I don't see the President's agenda as 'fueling the protests'

. . . even though there are certainly issues and concerns with the conduct of this presidency that many have objected to.

[me b zola]

10. The protests aren't about him

But the agenda/legislation that he is continuing on from Reagan is what is fueling the protests. He just signed into law a trade deal--that he pushed for and gloated over!--that is the type of thing that drove people to occupy.

So he can try to use the OWS "branding" to sell his product (his campaign) but as long as he supports policies that the occupiers are protesting I don't think he will fool many people.

[stevenleser]

38. Your subject has it right. And it works that way in both directions. nt

[me b zola]

11. IOWs, the emperor is not wearing any clothes. n/t

[bigtree]

15. not my words

It makes a simple argument to just paint every initiative and action from this presidency with the same negative brush. The reality is much more complex and substantive. There are many, many progressive policies, positions, executive actions, and legislative achievements that have come about as a result of this presidency.

[Marrah_G]

5. Dear WH- please stay away from OWS

it is not there to bolster your F'n campaign.

[bigtree]

12. It's not going to do a bit of good for the protest movement and their goals

. . . to weaken his campaign. I think most of the folks participating realize that.

[TBF]

14. Yes - and it goes both ways. Co-exist on this one. nt

[Marrah_G]

19. There is a difference between wanting to weaken and not wanting to be used as a tool

OWS is separate from his re-election campaign and frankly the more his administration tries to connect itself to the movement the more it will weaken the movement. This is about the people and the people regaining their own power.

[stevenleser]

41. The problem here is that you seem to have an agenda that is different from helping the 99%

You don't like Obama and some or most/all Democrats. That's fine.

Hurting him, or shunning him is not the same thing as promoting the interests of the 99%.

As Occupy Wall Street has said in their facebook updates, OWS is about including anyone who wants to further the interests of the 99%.

[Donnachaidh]

6. "well represented"? WHERE?

In the mandate locking in insurance company profits? In the *3* trade agreements sure to suck even more jobs offshore? In the ongoing wars sucking billions out of our pockets, so we can allow big oil to lock in their profits? In the keystone oil fiasco, which will pollute our country at the same time it makes the wealthy elites even wealthier?

Yeah -- they've got our backs. AGAINST A WALL. :grr:

[Laelth]

17. +1 n/t

-Laelth

[TBF]

13. If the WH is smart they will quietly support the protests and stay out of the way -

Obama's best hope for reelection is that folks are pissed enough at republicans to vote for him again. The more we educate the public the more it should help him.

[bigtree]

16. he should go further

He should press even harder for some of the changes folks are demanding. Isn't that what we want out of our politicians?

Further, I think it's about time the President said a few words about the safety of the protestors and the local government and police response to them.

[TBF]

18. I wouldn't mind supportive words from him -

but I'd hate to see this turn into a democratic party event - as soon as they split us along party lines we lose. Just my two cents (what we "want" out of our politicians of course will factor into this assessment).

[MorningGlow]

20. Tacit approval without glomming on and stealing the spotlight

I like it!

On edit: Of course that begs the "put up or shut up" follow up, but one thing at a time.

[justiceischeap]

22. This is one of those situations where Obama can't win

If he mentions OWS or uses the language of OWS, he's attempting to co-opt the movement (by some). If he doesn't recognize what the people want, he gets criticized for being out of touch (by some). I don't really care if he uses OWS language to show his support, what matters to me is that he actually do something (which I doubt he will). That is what bothers me, is the pandering. That said... he has to acknowledge this--that's his job.

[Javaman]

24. this is like the drum player running after the marching band after the parade is over.

not a good move by the prez and he should fire his handlers...along with holder and geithner.

[kickysnana]

26. Talking the talk is not the problem I have with Obama. n/t

[NorthCarolina]

28. Bad move...bad, bad move. nt

[Zorra]

30. Some Language We"d Like To Hear From The White House:

The Citizen's United SCOTUS Decision has caused a serious breach of national security, and I, as Commander in Chief, am issuing an Executive Order nullifying this decision in the interests of the maintaining and continuing the safety and security of the American People.

The Senate Majority and House Minority Leader have come to a consensus with the President and their respective legislative bodies as well, and have issued a joint statement that the lobbying of elected officials by wealthy private interests has led to to unequal representation in government and must be abolished in the interests of maintaining democratic government. Both legislative bodies and the President are in solidarity with OWS in their desire to abolish all lobbying of elected officials by wealthy private interest groups, and hereby make a solemn commitment to make every possible effort to shut down K Street and to propose and compose a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit lobbying of elected officials now and forever.

We therefore promise, if the President is re-elected and control of the House of Representatives is returned to the Democratic Party, and the Senate maintains majority status as a result of the election of 2012, to pass legislation making it illegal for any corporate entity or representative of any corporate entity to lobby any elected official, and will propose the most severe criminal punishment for convicted perpetrators of the crimes.

Etc.

[bigtree]

31. wow

I'm sorry, but I really didn't expect that to be so rational and well outlined. Have you done any critical analysis on the idea? Any forum or publication debated/discussed this initiative yet?

[Zorra]

47. I've been pretty much otherwise

"occupied" with what might be called more "direct result fringe activities" for awhile.

The maze of the system has fruitlessly absorbed too much of my time. Logic, reason, integrity, and compassion get quickly overridden and neutralized by greed and ego, thereby necessitating alternative methods for actively helping to generate the critical progressive political, social, and economic changes that are so obviously and immediately necessary for the preservation of our ability to democratically determine our lives individually and collectively.

If you'd like to take the idea and are in a space to run with it, by all means do so.

I'm totally open source.
;-)

[woo me with science]

32. Well, that takes some nerve.

Obama Administration Pressures Prosecutors To Drop Criminal Investigations Of Banks Over Mortgage Fraud
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/08/24/obama-administration-pressures-prosecutors-to-drop-criminal-investigations-of-banks-in-mortgage-fraud/


My suggestion to the President: Come back to OWS when your policies reflect your mouthed support for the movement.

[PoliticAverse]

34. "laggered response"? So he thinks the wall street should have been bailed out sooner then ? n/t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

36. Talk is cheap.

Especially before an election.

[defendandprotect]

39. Obama is the 1% -- and the OWS 99% know that -- !!!

[emulatorloo]

45. Obama wasn't born as a 1 per center. And he points to himself when he talks about higher tax rates

For the top percent.

So please stop your fucking disinformation campaign.

[stevenleser]

48. I don't think he is a 1 percenter now even.

I saw somewhere that 1% starts at around $8 million net worth and $750/k per year income. I dont think the Obamas qualify.

[defendandprotect]

51. ROFL .... you mean you think that ....

if Obama is 1% it's because he's worth $8 million ????

No -- it means that Obama is supporting the 1% -- Wall Street --

with pro-corporate policies/decision making --


As I said, the OWS 99% understand who Obama is --

Try to find just one "Obama 2012" sign in any of those crowds of democrats!!!



ROFL

[stevenleser]

53. Sorry, ignored, can't read your response. nt

[defendandprotect]

50. Interesting ... but wasn't that Obama who extended tax cuts for the rich ... ???

Then played the "debt crisis" game with the GOP while government was forced

to borrow $120 BILLION to cover those tax breaks?

And, btw, at 1/2% higher rate given the game play and S&P downgrading our credit rating!


eh -- you seem to have run out of debate at the end there --

Fortunately, there's always vulgarity for those who can't find words!!


:rofl:

[emulatorloo]

56. You are nothing more than a manipulative propagandist with your cherry picked

factoids. You never tell the full story, just your distorted half-truths. I have no idea what your endgame is with your continuing manufacture of false narratives based on half of the story, but it isn't debate.

It is a fool's game to debate with liars.

[Better Believe It]

52. mmmmmmm .... could an election be coming up for President?

I think we'll be getting double dosses of "change we can believe in" and anti-Wall Street political rhetoric in the coming months.

Been there and heard it all before in 2008.

[blindpig]

54. Talk is cheap

Fool me once, shame on you.....

[hulka38]

55. ...I really mean it this time.