We are the 99% of the 99% who aren't being obnoxious idiots.

[Guest]

Came across a neat little blog piece giving some thoughts on the OWS (Occupy Wall Street) protests.

He is of the opinion, and I concur, that these protests are pointless because they have no clear purpose.

The Abolitionist Movement, the Suffrage Movement and the Civil Rights Movement all had defined goals; the ending of human bondage, procuring the right of women to vote, and the end of racial segregation.

Even the Tea Party had the real national impact, which was the historic 2010 election that swept the Republicans into control of the House of Representatives. This was possible because of the clear goals of lower taxes, balanced budgets and smaller government, which was easy to get behind.

If the OWS has any coherent message, it is the end of crony capitalism. A goal of the Tea Party, also. We also oppose the bailing out of corporations with connections, but it must be understood that the corporations have a rational purpose in this corporate self-interest. It is the politicians who are willing to sell us out to these corporations who are the villains here. Crony capitalism is the fault of poor government, not the free market.

These protesters should be occupying government, not business.

The problem with OWS is that their demands are all over the place. OWS is trying to be all things to all people in the ultimate goal of delivering it's real demand, which is ending capitalism.

If you're part of the 99%, is that what you want, the end of the free market?

http://occupylolstreet.com/2011/11/06/thoughts-on-ows/

[Guest]

Herman Cain and others have been saying all along that the OWS protesters should be protesting at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. and at Congress......

Obama campaign attracts Wall Street money, despite tensions

July 22, 2011

"So much for President Obama’s Wall Street problem.

About a third of the money his top fundraisers have brought in this year has come from the financial sector, suggesting that strained relations with Wall Street have not hurt the president’s ability to attract donations there for his reelection campaign, according to data released Friday by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The numbers represent a notable increase from 2008, when bundlers in the investment and banking arena accounted for about 20 percent of the total brought in by top fundraisers for Obama.

The data suggest that the president has been at least partly successful in stopping a shift in Wall Street contributions away from Democrats and toward Republicans over the past two years. Business leaders have frequently clashed with the White House over far-reaching new financial regulations, proposals to close tax loopholes for hedge-fund managers and other policies.

Republicans have sought to take advantage of the rift by openly courting Wall Street donors. The top sources of corporate money for presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who reported raising $18.3 million, include contributions from employees of Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and other financial firms, according to Federal Election Commission data.

Between his 2012 campaign and the Democratic National Committee, Obama raised a combined total of $86 million in the second quarter, much of which was brought in by 244 supporters, each of whom bundled at least $50,000 worth of contributions.

Eighty of those bundlers work in the finance, insurance and real estate sectors, according to the analysis. More than half of that group work specifically in the securities and investment industry, and nine are listed as having raised $500,000 or more.

Among the biggest bundlers in this category are former New Jersey governor and financial services executive Jon S. Corzine; Orin Kramer of Boston Provident; and Mark and Nancy Gilbert of Barclays, who are listed as a couple."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-campaign-attracts-wall-street-money-despite-tensions/2011/07/22/gIQApIugTI_print.html