While the reason for the Fox News network and other right wing-leaning media not giving any attention to the left-leaning protest is obvious, why the centrist news outlets, such as the New York Times and Boston Globe, opted out from the coverage is puzzling.
Even National Public Radio had no coverage of the protest until not covering the protest became news in itself. NPR senior political analyst Cokie Roberts and New York Times pundit Ginia Belfante didn’t believe the protest would be sustained, as it supposedly lacked a clear direction and sizable number.
Is that so? Then why did the tea party protest, also started with a handful of people and vague anger against the government over a year ago, get covered as if it were a velvet revolution?
The Fox network not only made the tea party its centerpiece news month after month, it also promoted the protest rally.
Although it’s hard to tell why the NY Times and NPR opted out from the coverage, maybe they were trying to avoid blame for overplaying the news.
After the Sept. 11 attack and President George W. Bush’s “You’re with us or against us” warning to the world, the so-called centrist-liberal media was engaged in a similar self-censorship practice, which gave a blind eye to Bush’s going-to-war mischief. It probably isn’t necessary to remind you what that did to the country and America’s global image.
Democracy is in danger when one group of media opposes something for an ideological
reason and the rest of the media keeps quiet out of fear.
But now that Occupy Wall Street is apparently news, the highly paid cable and network celebrity analysts and pundits are scrambling to come up with their own interpretations of what it is all about.
Let’s stop guessing. When people in more than 20 cities in the country are speaking loudly for over a month, joined by people in 82 countries around the world, you can’t call it anything but a movement. Although whether that translates into changing the country’s direction through the ballot box, where it really matters, is yet to be seen.
No question, if you ask protesters what the protest is all about, you might get a different answer — jobs, the environment, lack of transparency in the government, a culture of corruption, corporate greed and growing economic disparity.
But I don’t see these complaints as incoherent demands — each of the elements within the demand is connected to one narrative: 99 percent.
The government can’t sacrifice 99 percent to keep making 1 percent of the population richer.
It’s important to note that the public anger manifested through these demands is not only the grievances of those protesters — they also represent the silent majority, who have given up on government after being ignored for far too long.
Unlike some, I don’t believe the protest against Wall Street is against capitalism or free market principles. Rather, it is against the oligarchs pretending to be free-marketers — people who have shut out the public from any meaningful influence in the government.
This protest is all about stopping the government from being the government of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation.
These protesters are true believers in capitalism, people who would like to see the shareholders, the real risk-takers, be rewarded for their enterprise, not the executives who manage companies for a short time and walk away with millions of dollars to join the
“1 percent” rank.
The concentration of wealth in 1 percent’s hand is not because the system rewards those who take risks with their money. If that were true, the real stockholders, the teachers, state employees and the various union workers and municipalities, who are the principal investors in many of the corporations through their pension plans, would be rich today. In reality, those who control the most wealth have accumulated that money on the back of the real shareholders they pretend to speak for.
They have been able to do so by employing ex-government officials as lobbyists, buying off politicians and recruiting their own in policymaking bodies of the government. That’s what these protesters want to change.
• Roger Adhikari is a finance professional who works in Dublin.
Well history of th rise an fall of nations that have thair basis in democracy tells a different story. Hopefully we aren't fallin th same way those nations fell. But if ya look at history it's pretty easy ta see how these nations fell within a decade an never recovered what freedoms they once had.
Nope IMHO when it happens it won't be gradual an it will all be over in less than a decade. Sad epitaph fer a great nation but one that's been written fer other nations in history.
As money dries up, and the current counterfeiting scheme (known as QE, QE2, QE3...QE-n) loses its effect, this will effectively choke the federal government's activities. They won't have the resources to enforce, and the states and locales won't have any interest in taking up the slack, esp when when local interests are opposed to federal ones, eg, the current legalization of marijuana by the states partly undertaken to relieve the courts and prisons of the burdens of enforcement.
It will be a gradual withdrawal of the federal tentacles from our lives. It won't have the money to keep the promises it made and it won't be believed or trusted. It will be increasingly ignored. The main mandate of the federal government, as per the Constitution, is to protect against invasion and facilitate (NOT govern!) commerce between the states. It will return more to those activities.
The federal government has choked off and eaten the very economic base that sustained it. It is now starting to wither.
My point in this is that the problem is way beyond the power of citizens like us to fix. There are simply too many areas of encroachment, too many instances of it, and too many people who benefit from this or that encroachment--to wit, the L3 and Rapidscanner companies who benefit from the nude scanners and sexual organ groping at airports. Perhaps the best bet is through states that want to return to the Constitution (www.tenthamendmentcenter.com and www.tomwoods.com are efforts that support this, and I support them).
Fortunately, federal government overreach contains its own demise--too much money is required to sustain it, too much real economic activity is damaged by it.
--continued
What gives th government its power? How is the government funded? How are politicians placed inta power?
In order ta fix something shouldn't ya first know how its supposed ta operate?
I don't like what's goin on either. How da ya propose we fix it? Be specific.
If/when th current Federal Government's reach an power collapses but doesn't go extinct, what ever that means, what will fill th void? Who will make it collapse an how?
Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
Sort of fits...don't it?
The dollar is well on the way to worthlessness. Before long, it will be revalued closer to zero in terms of real things. The whole effort of the Fed and US Treasury in recent years and intensifying in this current crisis is to print without stopping and to manipulate commodities markets so that external items such as precious metals, metals, agriculture, oil, can not serve as a benchmark of value against a rapidly decreasing dollar, of which there is increasing supply made out of thin air.
The power and reach of the federal government depends on this. This is what is collapsing. There will be no money for them to prop up that reach and power. It won't go away, it will simply lose a great deal of its power. No money for 750 military bases in 130 countries. No money to enforce laws it never had the authority to make in the first place.
Your pension, your social security, your medicare, all will take HUGE haircuts.
I'm not happy about this, but it is coming. It is a slow motion trainwreck obvious and inescapable. On what basis do you hope for a return to normalcy? The debts and obligations are staggering, unsupportable, and they WILL be reset. Think about the consequences of that.
If you look at the reach of the federal government today, and compare it with what it was intended to be at the founding of this country, you can easily see how far it exceeds its authorized powers. Just read article 1 section 8 of the Constitution. The federal's powers were intended to be "specific and few", the rights reserved to the states and the people "many and unlimited".
Now, the federal reach extends into every corner of our life. You violate federal law and be hauled into federal courts by burning the wrong material in your fireplace, by putting incorrect verbage in the ad for your rental house, by cutting a path across your own meadow on your farm, by selling more than 400 rabbits in one year, and... and... the list extends over hundreds of thousands of pages in the Federal Register.
And to cap it all off, these people have taken real money, gold and silver backed, our money, and have made it "their" money, debasing it at will and backing it by nothing. The Dollar has lost 97% of its value since the government seized ownership of it in 1913 under false pretenses.
continued....
Now I wonder who th governments that might opportunistically take advantage of th chance ta move in an take control of th US Government, along with all of th riches it would bring ta them.
Iran? Nope, not strong enough at present.
Russia? A possibility but probably not.
England? Rigghhtt. Nope, don't thank so.
France? That's even funnier than England.
Germany? Nine!
North Korea? With what?
Cuba or Venezuela? Like Iran? Don't thank so.
Let me see, we've winnowed it down ta someone on th Asian Continent or th African Continent.
Don't see any country on th African Continent that could pull it off.
That pretty much limits it ta two countries, India, not a chance an China.
Hum, China, that could be interestin. Could th anarchy in th US be an opportunity fer China? Wonder if they would? After all, seems ta me they have been flexin a little more muscle than thair mouth, unlike th pop gun dictators an tyrants do at present.
No thank ya, fer me, if I have any influence ta keep it alive an not collapse inta anarchy or a dictatorship, th only two ways it can really go, I'll stick with th Republic.
Ys see, even though I don't talk about it much, I've lived several years in countries that are ruled with an iron fist an I have seen, read riots not only in th US but throughout world history, th results of anarchy an what happens ta th general citizenry when such a collapse occurs.
So I hope ya won't mind so much if I still continue ta beat th drum fer our form of government an fix what's wrong with it by tryin ta get th average citizen ta understand th only way that we can fix it is ta unite, educate ourselves on th issues an then elect qualified representatives ta apply our will, get out of our daily lives an allow us ta live with th freedoms we collectively, as th people who govern ourselves by th will of our people, all should enjoy.
In my opinion it is those freedoms are exactly what are slowly an methodically bein taken away with th empty promise that by takin em away we will all be safer an somehow more free.
Well, that's enuff of this ramble fer tanight so I'll catch up with ya later.
Nope, won't go with th current protest crowd. Conductin yerself in illegal activities ta fight illegal activities ain't gonna do it.
frum what I'm gettin frum yer comment about collapse it really seems yer talkin anarchy, which in my mind ain't a good thang either. I mean what with everyone's complaint about higher crime an all I don't thank anarchy is th road ta fixin it.
It seems ya have given up on th Republic form of government an that's really sad cus its really th best form of government that provides th maximum amount of overall freedom ta individual members of society, as long as they fall within th mutually agreed boundaries circumscribed by that society as defined by our Constitution.
Th idea of collapse might have worked once, back in th 1700s but I fear we, as a world populace, have advanced technologies ta th point when our government collapses those who have always resented th US for th freedoms it has provided it's citizenry, can move in an easily take over th nation an establish its own government without any organized resistance from th current US Citizenry as anarchy an total disorganization is exactly what anarchy in th US would creat.
Cont
As to Ormley, dude, go for it. Let me know how your action works out for you. I'll give you a hint how it'll turn out. Unless you've got a few million to spread around in PACs, all your phone calls and letters will be responded to like this "thank you for your concern. senator x or congressman y shares your concern, but yada yada yada." Been there, done that, got no tee-shirt.
Government OF the PEOPLE was a nice thought but hasn't been true for looooong long time. If you want, feel free to join the Occupy Wall Streeters.
The only way to change this is let the collapse wipe away the power of the federal government, and let power return to the state and local level. those levels will be more responsive than the feds.
I disagree. We shouldn't be buyin popcorn an watchin th show. We should be takin action.
Th banks didn't stop these cases frum goin ta trial. WE, through our inaction did.
Hey, if thair was $10 sittin on th counter top begin ta be illegally pocketed, if ya knew no one would stop ya wouldn't ya take it? Especially if ya knew ya would get rewarded fer doin it? It takes a lot of personal responsibility ta do th right thang when everyone else around ya is grabbin thair pile an makin thair stash.
I love music an one of my favorite songs that really tells it like it is, in my opinion, is th song MONEY by Pink Floyd. Look up th lyrics an see what they say. It pretty much defines th entire problem an th only check we have ta balance that equation is We The People.
Ya see friends, we live in a Republic. Under a Republic, an under th law of th Constitution of th US, we are responsible ta elect representatives that will follow established law an should be held accountable when they don't. This includes th bank loan lenders an we all want ta seem em prosecuted because they fail ta act legally an responsibly. It also includes th individual borrower who knows what he or she can afford ta do and what he or she can't afford ta do. No one forced em ta sign on th dotted line fer thair loan an th loan officers, while they should not have given those loans, might be implicated in th lie but it's th individual borrower that perpetrated th lie ta get a loan he or she should never have gotten in th first place. Yep, they wanted somethang better.
Who in this world doesn't? But they lied an unfortunately got caught an it cost many of them thair homes. Boo Hoo. Lied ta get somethang they couldn't afford an lost it. They took th gamble an lost. Then th lendin institution. They should be prosecuted because while th borrower lied, th lendin institution was totally willin ta turn thair backs on th lie ta make money fer thair lending institution an them in turn. Not what we put them thair fer but solely fer personal profit. So we need ta try them as well. But instead we've allowed our elected representatives ta give em a free pass. Taday, as if th problem ain't bad enough, th president is announcin a home refinance program through th fed even if th homeowners can't afford it. An, true ta th sheeple we have become, peacefully bleatin in our green pastures unaware of th wolves bearin down on us, will let it happen.
Th government is comprised of us. It will do exactly what we allow it ta do. Th constitution spells this out in it's first sentence with "We the people." It's not some nebulous monster that controls us unless WE let it. We control it. We give it power. We pay th money for it ta run. When We opt out an shirk our responsibilities ta run ourselves, read th government, th criminal activity takes place an gets excused. It gets excused because WE apparently don't care enough ta get involved in th process an that's why, in my opinion, are in th shape we are in taday.
You blame th government. I say th government is we an blame us. You blame th corporation. I say th corporation is WE an blame us again. You blame th individual. Well the individual is a part of WE and again I blame us for our inaction. Anyway ya look at it th only people ta blame fer all of this is WE THE PEOPLE.
None of those banks have EVER allowed a case to go to trial and have their dealings exposed via the discovery process. NOT ONE CASE. I agree with you that in principle, settlement does not indicate guilt, but when EVERY CASE is settled across that industry, don't you smell something? You should.
I am not claiming that the borrowers were not a problem here. Obviously they were! The issue is, if you are an institution that lends money, it is YOUR responsibility to make sure the borrower can pay. That did not happen in this mortgage mess because the banks did not care--they had no skin in this game; they got their origination fees and loan resell fees, and then loan servicing fees for the eventual buyers.
Fanny Mae Freddy Mac did not care because they securitized these things and passed ownership AND RISK up the line to the buyers of the securities. The ratings agencies (Moody's, S&P, etc) did not care because they were paid by the people issuing the securities for sale! They accepted at face value the AAA rating of these from the Goldman Sachs et al, and NEVER looked at the actual mortgage documents. The pension funds buying this crap looked only at the AAA rating and the interest rate profit they would make, and bought it all. They never looked at the mortgage docs either.
Now, everyone cares because those eventual buyers are demanding their money back because by contract fraud means the originating banks and/or the securities bundlers have to take the properties back and return the money. This is the stage we are at now. Buy some popcorn and watch the show.
But ya see, ta me, th problem is different an that's why it ain't gettin fixed, people are not bein prosecuted fer thair illegal actions an those who should have been in control are shruggin thair shoulders basically say, "It's not my fault."
Well it is an then again it isn't. Th real problem, in my opinion, lays with th masses of citizens that have basically opted out and have shirked thair individual responsibilities ta do th right thang, vote fer th right thang an stop givin those who break th law free passes an, in many cases, rewardin them fer thair failures ta do what they are supposed ta do in th first place. CONT:
btw, the strawberry picker was from Bakersfield, not Salinas, and the amount borrowed was $724K, not $800K, on an income of $14,000; apologies for a faulty memory...