Occupy times square

[Winston OBoogie]

Whatever... I am more responsive to words that people actually write themselves, representing original ideas that they actually think themselves...

I wrote words, they were my own.  I came by them honestly too.

life is short...

Indeed. And precious too.  Even the lives belonging to left-wing, crack-pot hippies from Californee-eye-ay.

PS: It has been part of the terrorist/insurgent/whatever playbook (probably since Viet Nam) to engineer events to generate visuals to influence TV news broadcasts. 

That's right John, stuff like this is just manufactured and engineered by terrorists, insurgents, un-patriotics, et alii - reductio ad absurdum... 
Sounds like the usual hyperbole from Faux News!  :

FYI, the link I posted was from the UK newspaper and website - "The Guardian" - which, as we all know, has major readership among and influence over American protestors. 

At least you didn't liken the folks involved to Nazi's though!

Oh, wait:

the power of visual propaganda was well understood by the Nazis in WWII

Isn't it pretty much well known that to mention "Nazi's" in an internet discussion spells the death of it?


You win.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I know I shouldn't comment here, but still:

I think it's so ironic and of course typical that now the very second the right gets hit by the consequences of their ideological nonsense they start attacking it. Only now. Their lack in empathy and long-term thinking that cumulated in the giant blunder called "Citizens United" finally turned on themselves. And now they start whining like the schoolyard bully who gets paid back for his sins by his peers.

If only there was a way to get rid of the delays and evenly distribute the consequences...

I'm not sure if I should be embarrassed but I had to google citizens united to see what it was  (apparently a conservative PAC).

I'm still not sure what you are talking about...  but this wouldn't be the first time..  I have already called for some kind of reform to disconnect the money bags from political campaigns, but so far every fix has failed IMO.

I think they should evenly distribute tomato sauce on pizza.  The rest of the universe is lumpy.

JR

 

[living sounds]

It's all about the right-wing-judges of course. The supreme court was intended as the last defense line, and now it's failed miserably over and over again. The CU ruling just put the giant exclamation mark behind that.

Does anyone really think a president Romney would put anything but more corporatist-plutocrat judges on the bench?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Whatever... I am more responsive to words that people actually write themselves, representing original ideas that they actually think themselves...

I wrote words, they were my own.  I came by them honestly too.

I just saw a bunch of links...  that I didn't visit.  I see Guardian editorials from time to time but don't read it regularly.

life is short...

Indeed. And precious too.  Even the lives belonging to left-wing, crack-pot hippies from Californee-eye-ay.

No need to try to set up a straw man argument by putting words in my mouth, few here will mistake them for my thoughts or words.

it is unfortunate that life is still way too cheap in so much of the world. Entire generations have never known peace in countries like Afghanistan because of conflict and oppression, and it looks like that will not end with our negotiated withdrawal. That is only one regional example.

Western street protesters have far less to be angry about than 99% of the world. Not a good fraction but I couldn't resist (For extra credit who started that 1%/99% screed** ) , but it is their right to protest as long as they obey the law, and don't harm people or property.

PS: It has been part of the terrorist/insurgent/whatever playbook (probably since Viet Nam) to engineer events to generate visuals to influence TV news broadcasts. 

That's right John, stuff like this is just manufactured and engineered by terrorists, insurgents, un-patriotics, et alii - reductio ad absurdum... 
Sounds like the usual hyperbole from Faux News!  :

If I sound like FOX news you are not listening... or don't want to hear.

I routinely try to point at the man behind the curtain and expose the gamesmanship involved in manipulation of public opinion by both political persuasions.

I don't live in NY but I get a NYC network feed on my satellite so saw plenty of local NYC news. The occupy wall street crowd provoked police and tried to get publicity multiple times. I recall one case where a bunch were arrested for blocking traffic on a bridge... duh, they knew exactly what would happen because they were told it would happen, but they wanted some more news coverage so they stopped traffic.

There is also a small number of anarchists trying to co-opt what appears be a peaceful protest, while some of the protesters I've seen interviewed on TV seem pretty shallow... "I went to college and now I can't get job.  wah wah wah... " (this is a whole nother topic).

For the record I started this thread to discuss what I though was actually a cogent though from that less than coherent protest group that I felt was worthy of deeper inspection. Your drama is detracting from that pursuit, but it's a free country so have at it. 

FYI, the link I posted was from the UK newspaper and website - "The Guardian" - which, as we all know, has major readership among and influence over American protestors. 

At least you didn't liken the folks involved to Nazi's though!

Oh, wait:

the power of visual propaganda was well understood by the Nazis in WWII

Isn't it pretty much well known that to mention "Nazi's" in an internet discussion spells the death of it?


You win.

Huh? I haven't stopped yet...  I was not trying to damn anyone by word association, as you appear to be, but instead I mentioned nazi appreciation of visual propaganda (like Hitlers mass demonstrations and the like) as an example that such thinking is not new or a recent development. The fact that the nazi regime was guilty of some real atrocities was not on my mind before, but now that you mention the symbolic (evil) significance of mentioning that group's name, yeah those were some serious atrocities that they pulled off, a shame that I missed that. My theme was about their communication skills and how the practice of deception goes back thousands of years in conflicts (Sun Tzu). Not much new in this regard.

Sticks and stones...

I now return to my regularly scheduled programming (actually trying to finish up some code this afternoon).

JR

** French revolution..  Democracy for all but just the few wealthy landowners could vote.

 

[JohnRoberts]

It's all about the right-wing-judges of course. The supreme court was intended as the last defense line, and now it's failed miserably over and over again. The CU ruling just put the giant exclamation mark behind that.

Does anyone really think a president Romney would put anything but more corporatist-plutocrat judges on the bench?

It is interesting how things look from different world views.

I fear we are being pulled too far left of center, and you think too far right? (Not to put words in your mouth. )

Surely Kagan and Sotomayer will not be too right wing for you..? They're young so should be around for a while. Obama has been playing fast and loose with the constitution lately,  maybe he could expand the court to 20 and appoint a whole slew of new  justices the next recess,,, oh why wait for a recess?  8)  (I'm joking.... )

I don't look to the judiciary for change... Change is supposed to come from legislation and amendments to the constitution. The SCOTUS must operate within a narrow range of options. They can gong laws or not... While there are some activist judges on lower courts that are outside of their box and making law. The supremes are the last word, (until the legislature speaks again, and again). 

JR

 

[living sounds]

Activist describes the right-wing majority of the current court pretty well. They went out of their way to make corporate-friendly decisions, answering questions that weren't asked in the cases. They try to cloud their activism in unbiased-sounding language ("originalism" etc.), but are clearly aggressively follow and ideology-driven agenda.

And yes, the trajectory has steadily move to the right, since the 70s I think.

The judges Obama appointed had a history of centrist positions, they're not liberal firebrands (the broken system in the Senate where 'majority rule' is no longer happening wouldn't have allowed for this either).


But I'm really curious: Where do you actually get your news from?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Activist describes the right-wing majority of the current court pretty well. They went out of their way to make corporate-friendly decisions, answering questions that weren't asked in the cases. They try to cloud their activism in unbiased-sounding language ("originalism" etc.), but are clearly aggressively follow and ideology-driven agenda.

And yes, the trajectory has steadily move to the right, since the 70s I think.

The judges Obama appointed had a history of centrist positions, they're not liberal firebrands (the broken system in the Senate where 'majority rule' is no longer happening wouldn't have allowed for this either).


But I'm really curious: Where do you actually get your news from?

Again opinions vary... (I made a pun... ).

An interesting thing with SCOTUS justices is sometimes they drift one way or the other after getting into office.

======

These days I read the WSJ cover to cover, and watch a financial news station (CNBC) in the background all day during the week, then I try to catch some of Link TVs rebroadcast of middle east news broadcasts (translated to english, or english service from some countries).  I don't like letting TV or cable talking heads push news at me, but I generally get breaking news from the financial channel that is conservative leaning, I think I noticed the WSJ sifting a little more liberal (on the news side) a few years ago, while the editorial pages have stayed about the same (or maybe it was me shifting more conservative ? nah  8).

Back in the late 70's for one year I read three daily newspapers. The WSJ, the NYT and the Washington Post. between those three I got at least two sides of most world news stories, sometimes three... Back in the 60s after attending a few anti-war rallies in Boston, and then seeing the TV and Newspaper coverage of events I was actually at, I learned to take news reportage with a huge grain of salt. Investing a year into reading multiple newspapers helped me calibrate reading their writing for their audience bias.

I find the WSJ more philosophically compatible with my world view so easier to read but I hope I grasp their biases too.

If anything is important to you I suggest triangulating...  Today it so simple to find out almost anything with a few minutes on google. Read a few different reports.

I would never tolerate talking heads on some cable news or a blog telling me what is important or what to think.. I hope I don't seem like that here.. I am trying to share stuff i think is important... (oh oh... of course nobody listens to me...  ;D

JR

 

[QUEEF BAG]

me and my long deceased cat are listening.

as you say, triangulating your info sources.

but the other thing you mention - "both sides",  that are one of the things i am frustrated with.

the way issues are framed by either or both sides is often times bordering (or beyond) disingenuous.

the way "facts" are gleaned from statistics to support an argument can often be astounding.
and the way misinformation is spread... no sprayed around should be criminal.

both political and corporate.

the battle for our 'hearts and minds'  is only turning my stomach.

oh....and further more....on the subject of news sources,

of the channels that occupy what was once the public's airwaves, PBS and NPR are by far the best.
and certainly under attack.

i couldn't freakin' believe bush got bill moyers thrown off the air for a critical documentary and got away with it
with little hue and cry.
and with at least one leading candidate on the GOP side, threatening PBS, maybe hunting for Big Bird with cheney would
be a nice break from the campaign trail.

f  it  i'm not a big fan of stupid rants...
if i were more articulate, i would continue. 

 

[Spiritworks]

" but the other thing you mention - "both sides",  that are one of the things i am frustrated with. "

Sadly, the opposite sides are increasingly becoming both sides of the same coin. For better or worse, it used to be obvious who was who with regards to political leanings of politicians. But now it seems to me that most of them are using party affiliation simply as a funding machine for their own political/power aspiriations.
I would agree that the govt trying ( did they succed? ) to pull the plug on funding for PBS and NPR seemed to be more an issue of censorship, rather than one of budgetary concerns. I listen to NPR for several hours every day, even though they are thought to be liberal-leaning and I consider myself to be more conservative.
As a conservative-leaning individual, I was more than a little bit dismayed when the newest members of the SCOTUS were placed on the bench. However, the Libertarian in me welcomes a healthy balance.

 

[JohnRoberts]

It is dangerous to become too comfortable with only one news source, while most real news sources do not alter facts, the impression an audience gets is also shaped by what stories are covered and how deeply.  TV News often gravitates toward stories with good visuals... Sometimes I will linger on one of the two spanish speaking stations on my satellite..  Lots of floods and burning buildings, I don't speak spanish but I habla enough to catch the gist of some stories.
====

NPR is one of those organizations guilty of omission.. Favoring stories that reinforce one viewpoint and not another. The stories they do cover they cover well, it's just that there are a lot they don't.. I thought their treatment of Juan Williams was instructive about bias. They have an agenda, just like everybody else, just everybody leans in different directions. News agenda is not even some evil attempt to confuse, but often guided by personal biases that pervade an organization, and rewarded by sympathy with a similar audience that reinforces the bias with viewing. That is the funny thing about ratings, they certainly reflect the size of an audience that is appreciative of the given news delivery, for whatever reason.  People want to think they are smart so news that thinks like they do, makes them feel good, news that interferes with their views, does not.  Of course even this is a simplification. News is still entertainment so how it is delivered is a factor.

The best cure for news bias, is to get multiple sources ... 

Measure twice cut once....

Happy MLK day (a great man worth recognizing)...  Now that's another story down here in the deep south. I recall when it first started, some states (like MS) shared the holiday with Robert E Lee's birthday.  The civil war is ended but not forgotten down here..  ;D

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

Firstly:

I started this thread to discuss what I though was actually a cogent though(t ?) from that less than coherent protest group that I felt was worthy of deeper inspection. Your drama is detracting from that pursuit, but it's a free country so have at it. 

Quickly, if I may:

1/  I don't really agree that the protest group was less than coherent (see below).
2/ My drama - Fair enough, I'll refrain.  Although I see it as all part of the same drama but OK.
3/ I'm not so sure it's as free a country as is often cited and besides, I'm not in your country (see previous posts). 

And:

..."Nazi's" in an internet discussion spells the death

Huh?

Godwin's law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I'm always willing to learn and I never heard of reductio ad hitlerum .. (that is funny), It is not a "law" but a comedian's observation.  I think I've explained myself adequately in this regard and I was trying to inform, not confuse. 

OK.

From the start Media has almost unanimously pushed the line about the movement having no message.  However, the media is just as prone to Attention Defecit as  consumers are and, in my view, it was simply that The Movement had yet to distill their grievances down to simple sound-bytes for the cameras. 

Media has a parasitic or symbiotic relationship with the news they cover, and in the case of the occupation they dearly wanted it to keep being news. With no controversy or substance, there was no real news, and why we got what we got.

Sure this is a symptom of malaise and discomfort with the status quo. I have mentioned several times that words have consequences and IMO the populist class warfare being promoted by one side of the political discussion with promise of ever expanding entitlements feeds this malaise and negative energy.

Near the start of these protests, after it looked like it would persist beyond a weekend or two, there was a feeding frenzy among politicians and interest groups to attach their agenda to that energy and news rotation spot light. I am pretty suspicious of the messages that emerged a month or more later as not being embryonic and generated internally, but that doesn't really matter, if the ideas are supported widely they need inspection. Free speech is about open exchange of ideas.

I see the occupy movement as the flip side of the same coin that is the Tea Party movement, fairly widespread dissatisfaction. The tea party has channeled their energy more constructively to actually effect change through the system.  Young people would be wise to take notes to press their different agenda within the system.   

But the underlying and implicit message of The Movement from the beginning was always the same; reform the banking system to prevent fraud,  seperate the money from the politics for much the same reasons.
More basically speaking; The people had gathered outside the castle in protestation of the evil ogre within.

Reform banking? do they think Dodd-Frank is not going far enough? They are not very well informed IMO.

Crony capitalism is the common evil that nobody defends except for the cronies. Attack that.

For the most part, the people were assembled peaceably, as is their First Amendement right.
I find it very alarming to think that Federal Policing such as the DHS in any way helped coordinate the various attacks and evictions of the 'Occupy' camps as the Department Of Homeland Security is not a "for hire" agency and answers only to its own chain of command.  They cannot decide by themselves to go after the "Hippies" , students and retired Professors just because they're littering the streets!  And yet there seems to be clear evidence they were indeed involved.

Whatever, it's a free country.

It'll be interesting to see the next moves from either side...

I wish DHS would put a little more effort into the illegal activity coming across our borders. The occupation of private property clearly has limits in the context of free speech, but doesn't remotely seem a DHS issue, even though some of the special interest support was from extra national groups.

Of course opinions vary...

The next move will be an election, and it will be a nasty one full of $Bs of negative campaigning, which will not calm down any disenfranchised segments of the population. I hope they don't stir up more anger than we can handle peaceably.  There are enough real issues to decide the election upon,why incite broad ad hominum towards individuals and groups (to get elected obviously)?

JR

 

[fazer]

Hey John.  I see the 1968 democratic convention (republican convention) all over again in  2012.  It's always easier to have a riot in the summertime.  Both tea party and the 99's are going to give it hell this year.  As to what the news decides to report is anybody's guess.