Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties
Union, said she feared that police could use facial recognition software
to track the city’s demonstrators.
“It raises concerns about a surveillance society where people can be subject
to government retaliation for engaging in constitutionally-protected
expressive activities,” she said. “When the police maintain dossiers on
lawful protesters, political expression is always in jeopardy.”
The NYPD did not return calls and emails for comment.
Eugene
O’Donnell, a professor of police studies at John Jay and a former cop,
said although police probably have video recordings of “tens of
thousands” of interactions between cops and protesters, the NYPD is also
using footage to make sure it’s not being edited to misrepresent
officers’ actions.
Taking
the mic next - a doctor from Colorado who is upset about the current
state of health care in the country. She wants the health insurance
companies to be "removed" from the system so that the costs will go
down.
Burnett, for one, doesn't fit into this journalistic milieu.
Greenwald makes that evident when he points out that she "featured a
video clip of herself explaining to one of the protesters that the U.S.
Government made money from TARP, and then demanded to know if that
changed his negative views of Wall Street."
Why on earth would that fact form the basis for having positive views of Wall Street? Let me kick this to the Daily Bail, who correctly notes that Burnett "didn't do her bailout research before she decided to ridicule protesters for not doing doing their bailout research."
According to the U.S. Treasury's own figures, available
publicly to any reader, including pneumatic (we understand if you need a
dictionary for that one, Erin) and arrogant CNN reporters, as of TODAY,
taxpayers are still more than $95 BILLION IN THE RED on TARP. And
that's including all interest and other income. There is still $122
BILLION of TARP funds that have NOT yet been paid back.We understand that Burnett was excluding GM, but she somehow missed that AIG, alone, still owes over $50 BILLION.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/occupy-wall-street-erin-burnett_n_998494.html
And it defies credulity to think that Erin Burnett doesn't know that the
deal she's touting, that allowed the "U.S. Government [to make] money
from TARP," was nothing to write home about, unless the letter you're
penning reads: "Dear Mom, did you hear about how badly taxpayers got
hosed in the deal structure of TARP? Here's an article from Bloomberg's Mark Pittman explaining it. Here's another Bloomberg piece from Mark Fisher titled, 'How the U.S. Blew Trillion-Dollar Trade of Century.' Erin Burnett said what now?"
1) Multi-part Slate series The Great Divergence 2010:What’s causing America’s growing income inequality?
by Timothy Noah examines changes in inequality in the USA and evaluates
multiple explanations. He introduces the series by writing:
In the late 1970s, a half-century trend toward growing
income equality reversed itself. Ever since, U.S. incomes have grown
more unequal. Middle-class incomes stagnated while the top 1 percent’s
share of national income climbed to 24 percent.http://rs.resalliance.org/2010/09/22/inequality-in-the-usa-driven-by-politics/
The False Divide
A joke making the rounds on the Internet goes like this:
There's a plate of 12 cookies sittng on a table. The rich
take 11 cookies leaving only 1 cookie left on the plate. They then turn
to the Tea Party and say ‘Those unions are trying to take your cookie.'
This works about equally well with Republicans vs. Democrats.
It's why Republicans versus Democrats is largely a false divide. The
monied interests would rather have us arguing Republican vs. Democrat
(50/50 split) than Rich vs. Everyone Else (1/99 split).
Democrats represent the U.S. Chamber of Commerce almost as well as
Republicans. Don’t forget that Glass-Steagall was repealed under
President Bill Clinton.
Democrats simply play the game differently. Rather than trying to
purposefully divide the electorate to play the statistical odds,
Democrats try to appeal to a majority with a populist message.
The trouble is that this populist message gets undercut frequently once they're in office.
A great example of this is the Affordable Care Act enacted by
President Obama and the Democratic (at the time) majority Congress.
Rather than implement a single-payer plan or a plan that included a
public option, Democrats put forward a plan that keeps health care in
the hands of the health care industry.
Note that the idea of mandating health care insurance was originally proposed by Stuart Butler of The Heritage Foundation. That is, it was a corporate-approved plan.
Also observe the failure of the Democratic Party to pass the Employee Free Choice Act.
Note the strong opposition from corporate-backed organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and The Heritage Foundation.
Because of this conflict, Democrats constantly undermine their brand.
During elections, they market to the 99%, but then often work towards
the interests of the 1%.
No wonder the voting public is cynical.
Without a strong brand, Democrats win mostly in the face of strong
reaction to the opposition party - 1992 and 2008 being the two most
recent examples.
Demonstrators have
descended on Washington, with protests planned at the Ronald Reagan
building later today
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/oct/07/occupy-wall-street-protests-live
Armed with the slogan “We are the 99 percent,” an estimated 200
Madison residents gathered in Reynolds Park by 6 p.m. Friday to stand
with the Occupy Wall Street protest in New York City, aiming to speak up
against the influence of corporations in government.
The event, dubbed Occupy Madison by organizers, is one of the many
protests scheduled to take place in cities around the country in support
of opposition to the power of the 1 percent of people in the United
States who control an estimated 50 percent of the country’s wealth.
http://badgerherald.com/news/2011/10/09/in_wake_of_occupy_wa.php
The second issue of the Occupied Wall Street Journal came
off the presses this morning. As it was unloaded from the truck to
Liberty Plaza, people thronged around to read the latest news published
for and by some of the occupiers.
While it is not an official publication of Occupy Wall Street,
it operates in tandem with it, covering the growth, issues and ideas of
the movement and has the mission of combatting misrepresentation in
mainstream media. The latest issue has English and Spanish versions and
includes pieces from Naomi Klein, Chris Hedges, and covering topics from
the difficulties facing OWS at reaching out to communities of color to
why high school students have joined them
Today, I interviewed Arun Gupta, editor of The Indypendent
and one of the co-creators and editors of the Occupied Wall Street
Journal, at Washington Square park, whtere the Occupy Wall Street
movement held it's first official General Assembly outside of Liberty
Plaza.
In the interview he discusses everything from the strengths and
weaknesses of the movement (ranging from it's ability to create an
excitement on the left not seen for over a decade to it's difficulties
in involving other neighbourhoods in New York), where it may go from
here, and why the OWSJ was started.
The U.S. Capitol Police says the protesters were charged Tuesday with
unlawful conduct for protesting inside the Hart Senate Office Building,
where some senators have offices.
Video footage from television news stations shows the demonstrators
attempted to unfurl a banner inside the building that said "Tax the
Rich." The banner was grabbed by a police officer, and the protesters
were arrested.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/arrested-protest-us-senate-office-building-14713419
As economic protests continue throughout Europe, many wonder
whether such efforts will be in vain. This column explores what happened
in Iceland, where a “pots-and-pans” revolution in response to the
devastating financial crisis gave rise to a new constitution.
Political upheaval is the most common precursor of constitutional
change. The collapse of communism in 1989 produced a large number of new
constitutions in East and Central Europe and Asia (Elster 1995).
Economic crises are less common triggers of constitutional change. The
Great Depression did not prompt the Americans to change their
constitution – changes of the law, such as the Glass-Steagall Act of
1933, were thought sufficient.
Pots and pans
Iceland’s spectacular financial collapse in October 2008 was, in
effect, political as well as economic. One of the most vocal demands of
the “pots-and-pans” revolution that led to a change of government in
early 2009 was for a new constitutional order, a new republic even, to
replace the provisional constitution from 1944 when Iceland unilaterally
separated from occupied Denmark.
The new parliament promised at once to quickly revise the provisional
document, essentially a translation of the Danish constitution with a
nationally elected president with potentially significant powers
substituted for a monarch. This promise was not kept, however, except
for a few minor revisions to adjust the article on parliamentary
elections to demographic changes, to transit from a bicameral parliament
to a unicameral one, and to append, in 1995, some new articles on human
rights.
The demand of the pots and pans for an overhaul of the constitution
was a demand that the political class – discredited by the collapse of
the banks to which it had been so close and so generous[1] – eventually
honour the promise it had for so long failed to keep. In its own
interest, the political class wanted the constitution to continue to
preserve the significant bias of the electoral system in favour of the
provinces to safeguard their overrepresentation in parliament (Gylfason
et al. 2010, 7,140). The parties behaved as pressure groups of political
insiders.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/iceland-from-crisis-to-constitution.html
Right to information
“Information and documents in the possession of the government shall
be available without evasion and the law shall ensure public access to
all documents collected or procured by public entities.” This article is
intended to help uproot a pervasive official culture of secrecy.
Appointment of public officials
“Qualifications and objective viewpoints shall decide appointments to
offices. When a Cabinet Minister makes an appointment to the posts of
judge and Director of Public Prosecutions, the appointment shall be
submitted to the President of Iceland for confirmation. If the President
withholds his or her confirmation, the Althing must approve the
appointment by a two-thirds majority vote for the appointment to take
effect. Ministers shall make appointments to other posts as defined by
law following recommendation by an independent committee. If a Minister
does not appoint to such an office one of the persons regarded as most
qualified, the appointment shall be subject to the approval of the
Althing by a two-thirds majority vote. The President of Iceland shall
appoint the chairman of the committee.” The civil service committee is
intended to put an end to ministerial appointments of incompetent people
to high office.
FDR:
These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the
institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to
take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires
the overthrow of this kind of power.
Eric Cantor:
I for one, am increasingly concerned, about the growing mobs occupying Wall Street, and the other cities across the country.
FDR:
. . . liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the
growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their
democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is fascism.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/13/1025773/-Mark-Fiore-Then-Meets-Now?via=blog_1
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
