Topic: Occupy Pensacola: Alleged "Conservatives" Better Wake Up

[rickl]

Karl Denninger's "boots on the ground" report.

More photos in the comments.

[Pandora]

Why is Denninger po'd at conservatives?

[IronDioPriest]

Yeah, I don't get it either Pan. I just read the whole thing and I don't understand why he's going after conservatives here.

Is he saying that because he went to a sparsely attended event in Pensacola and found people to be more Tea Party-like than the radical Leftists we're seeing elsewhere, that means Tea Party people everywhere are turning against conservatives? Or that conservatives should be careful not to turn against the Tea Party-like people? Or that the Tea Party-like people are turning back to the Left? I'm not sure what we should look out for.

I think it's important to keep eyes and minds open in observing this. But it isn't logical to turn a blind eye to the radical Leftist catalyst of these protests. The reality is that the SEIU and professional Leftist agitators are the organizers, and radical anarchists and Communist organizations and anti-Semites are supporting it. For God's sake, the NAZI party was just identified in New York as an organized participant.

Perhaps there IS crossover in some of the concerns of people attending these things. But "by their fruits, ye shall know them." It is as plain as day on the face of it that there is a universe of difference between the character and motivation of these protests and that of any Tea Party event I've ever been to or seen portrayed.

The VERY closest thing I've seen was the anti-ObamaCare protest at the capital when the alleged-but-fictitious "spitting" incident was supposed to have occurred. And that was NOTHING like what we're seeing play out now. Not even close.

[IronDioPriest]

Not the same thing Karl. Not the same people.

[Pandora]

I don't know where Steve Doocey's kid was yesterday, but he was outdoors interviewing protesters wearing purple SEIU shirts, holding signs, so I presumed it was an OWS dealio somewhere.

I heard a few minutes of a Hannity-replay radio show yesterday during which he was talking to "Grim", 37 year-old, unemployed mother of an 8-year old daughter, who was espousing cutting the military in order for "education to be funded".  What she wants is to not have to pay the 80K in loans she owes -- no one should.  Bragged to Hannity that she was "an Ivy-League-r"; turns out she's sort of attending Columbia now, when she isn't "working for social justice". (So, what was 80K in school loans for?)

The folks Denninger saw in Pensacola looked as though they have some things in common with TEA Party folks, but from I've seen, and heard, including the virulent anti-Semitism, coming out of other OWS areas, they are the exception.  A third of the NYC contingent are anarchists, a third want "more checks and balances" = more government, the others don't know what the hell they want except students loans should be illegal.

It seems Karl is annoyed with conservatives because he believes we don't know what the OWS-ers know; that some of the big banks, some of the big investment firms, and some of the big corporations, including and with the connivance of government, have run a giant rip-off scam on the country.

Well, we do.  What we also know is without the government's coercion, approval and connivance, GE would not be making a fortune in selling us CFL bulbs made in China, NINJA loans would not have been made, sliced/diced/and sold as securities and the TARP money supposedly paid back by GM was lent to it by AIG by virtue of a chunk of bailout/stimulus money.  We should not forget to mention Big Education, although there doesn't seem to be OWS cognizance of that little factoid; it's the loans that are pissing them off

[rickl]

I think it's only natural that events in big, liberal-dominated cities will have more of a leftist slant than events in small towns and rural areas.

I can't speak for Karl, but I gather that he considers conservatives to be hypocrites who are trying to blame Democrat politicians for the mess rather than acknowledging that it is collusion between the big banks and both parties in government, and it goes back decades.

In addition, most conservative sites I've seen tend to mock and ridicule the protesters as "stupid smelly hippies" rather than treating them as individuals with grievances.

Ticker Forum has been, hands down, the best site for coverage of these protests that I've seen anywhere on the internet.  All viewpoints are represented, and numerous commenters have actually gone and seen it for themselves, and reported back.  It's important to realize that TF is primarily an economic forum, and there is no filter for political ideology.  Commenters run the entire gamut from conservative Republican to liberal Democrat, with a heaping helping of libertarians.  There are a couple of radical libertarians who make Ron Paul look like Mitt Romney.  (There may even be socialists and Marxists there as well, but they best keep their heads down.  Publicly advocating confiscation of private wealth is a quick way to get banned.)  I don't agree with every commenter there by any stretch.  Some of them make my eyes glaze over, or want to do a facepalm.

Personally, I am very wary of the Occupy movement.  I think it was organized and backed by the radical left, and I've said so on several occasions at TF.  But there is plenty of evidence that normal, mainstream Americans are joining in.  Some are even calling it "Tea Party 2.0".  Yet most conservative sites refuse to recognize this, and continue to run the "stupid smelly hippie" nonsense.  I guess it's easy and fun to mock people who look weird.

Another thing:  Even if Occupy was started by the radical left (and I believe it was), the Law of Unintended Consequences might come into play.  If it goes mainstream, it could end up being the left's worst nightmare.

[rickl]

As if on cue, the following comment showed up there while I was writing mine here:

I find it offensive that there are so many who have problems with OWS, on the grounds that many of the protesters are young--or dressed in jeans and T-shirts, or whose beards and hairstyles don't conform to their sense of decorum.

Am I to assume that the middle-aged and oldsters here despise their own kids and grandkids, and have no sympathy for the economic interests of young people? While it is true some may want student-loan forgiveness, you can be sure that any oldsters present don't want to give up their SS or Medicaid, or the tax deduction for mortgage interest, or whatever. Hell, some of the oldsters don't want housing prices to go down, and/or would like Section 8 to pay more on their rental properties. The older crowd among teachers and health-care workers would raise hell if their little set-up were threatened.

It would be more worrisome to me if the protesters all turned out dressed in suburbanite and corporate-clone uniforms, and basically looking like they came out of cookie-cutters. I would be far more suspicious of people who let their corporate masters pick out their wardrobe and dictate their grooming standards. I know these types. They view blue-collar working-class America as mere prey to corporate America and sneer at anyone who doesn't shuffle paper for a living at a government or corporate job. Working for a living is for people who f**ked up.

If these people are not well represented at the protests, it's because there is no serious threat to their government jobs, their jobs working for government contractors, their government-subsidized jobs, or their Medicare.

This sneering at people because of their age and grooming standards is utter bullsh*t.

(Emphasis mine.)

[BMG]

Well, I notice this guy is copying the style of Zombie and I can't help but note that he seems to be attempting to say, "Look at these OWS protestors, they aren't anything like the media says!". This smacks of a propaganda campaign to attempt to shift the perception of these OWS people as being something other than communists and anarchists.

But the trouble I see with this guy's premiss and his approach in attempting to change the perception of the population is:

The vast majority of news agency out there are reporting the exact opposite of what he is 'reporting'...EVEN the hardcore leftist media. So he seems to be fighting a loosing battle here...

Now, having said that I do agree that there are some elements of OWS that actually have a portion of it right. But those elements are in the minority and by a large degree from what I can tell.

The vast majority of what we're seeing now is 1,000 arrests in the last month, speakers at these rallies calling for violent conflict and still more speakers at the rallies calling for the killing and/or expulsion from the country of Jews. None of that is anywhere near mainstream thinking and as rickl just pointed out when he wrote:

"Another thing:  Even if Occupy was started by the radical left (and I believe it was), the Law of Unintended Consequences might come into play.  If it ends up going mainstream, it could end up being the left's worst nightmare."

...I don't think it 'could' end up being the left's worst nightmare. I think it 'will' end up being the left's worst nightmare. And also as rickl pointed out, I believe it was started by Soros et. al. and the violent aspects of leftism are going to take it over - they already are. Once this ball is rolling (and I believe it already is) I think it's going to be EXCEEDINGLY difficult (if not impossible) for the democrats to avoid getting buried under the mountain of crap that they have uncovered.  

[IronDioPriest]

As if on cue, the following comment showed up there while I was writing mine here:

I find it offensive that there are so many who have problems with OWS, on the grounds that many of the protesters are young--or dressed in jeans and T-shirts, or whose beards and hairstyles don't conform to their sense of decorum.

Am I to assume that the middle-aged and oldsters here despise their own kids and grandkids, and have no sympathy for the economic interests of young people? While it is true some may want student-loan forgiveness, you can be sure that any oldsters present don't want to give up their SS or Medicaid, or the tax deduction for mortgage interest, or whatever. Hell, some of the oldsters don't want housing prices to go down, and/or would like Section 8 to pay more on their rental properties. The older crowd among teachers and health-care workers would raise hell if their little set-up were threatened.

It would be more worrisome to me if the protesters all turned out dressed in suburbanite and corporate-clone uniforms, and basically looking like they came out of cookie-cutters. I would be far more suspicious of people who let their corporate masters pick out their wardrobe and dictate their grooming standards. I know these types. They view blue-collar working-class America as mere prey to corporate America and sneer at anyone who doesn't shuffle paper for a living at a government or corporate job. Working for a living is for people who f**ked up.

If these people are not well represented at the protests, it's because there is no serious threat to their government jobs, their jobs working for government contractors, their government-subsidized jobs, or their Medicare.

This sneering at people because of their age and grooming standards is utter bullsh*t.

(Emphasis mine.)

But for every person who wants to claim that this is some kind of an organic middle-class movement that represents mainstream pro-American concerns, I can find 5 videos and a dozen photos that demonstrate the opposite. That was never, ever the case with the Tea Party protests. The accusations were made, but no evidence was ever produced.

Look, I'm not saying people should dismiss this. To the contrary, I think it needs to be faced head-on. But comparisons that attempt to draw similarities with the concerns and demographic of a typical Tea Party need to be held up to the light of all the facts, not just the ones that suggest some similarity. There are vast differences, and those differences mean something.

[Pandora]

I think it's only natural that events in big, liberal-dominated cities will have more of a leftist slant than events in small towns and rural areas.

I can't speak for Karl, but I gather that he considers conservatives to be hypocrites who are trying to blame Democrat politicians for the mess rather than acknowledging that it is collusion between the big banks and both parties in government, and it goes back decades.

It is currently Democrats who have escalated the mess -- and the statism -- but what Karl "considers" is mostly baseless, imo.  Many, many Democrats are TEA Partiers and many conservative sites, mainstream and otherwise (like us), acknowledge the Republicans are just as much to blame.  On how many venues was the piece on the Ruling Class prominently posted and agreed with, for instance?

In addition, most conservative sites I've seen tend to mock and ridicule the protesters as "stupid smelly hippies" rather than treating them as individuals with grievances.

I suppose this is inevitable, given the state of Zuccotti Park and the various pics of the protesters, including the one of the guy crapping on a cop car.  Let's not forget, either, that the meme was firmly implanted by what we saw occur by the occupation of the Wisconsin state Capitol building.

Ticker Forum has been, hands down, the best site for coverage of these protests that I've seen anywhere on the internet.  All viewpoints are represented, and numerous commenters have actually gone and seen it for themselves, and reported back.  It's important to realize that TF is primarily an economic forum, and there is no filter for political ideology.  Commenters run the entire gamut from conservative Republican to liberal Democrat, with a heaping helping of libertarians.  There are a couple of radical libertarians who make Ron Paul look like Mitt Romney.  (There may even be socialists and Marxists there as well, but they best keep their heads down.  Publicly advocating confiscation of private wealth is a quick way to get banned.)  I don't agree with every commenter there by any stretch.  Some of them make my eyes glaze over, or want to do a facepalm.

Personally, I am very wary of the Occupy movement.  I think it was organized and backed by the radical left, and I've said so on several occasions at TF.  But there is plenty of evidence that normal, mainstream Americans are joining in.  Some are even calling it "Tea Party 2.0".  Yet most conservative sites refuse to recognize this, and continue to run the "stupid smelly hippie" nonsense.  I guess it's easy and fun to mock people who look weird.

Another thing:  Even if Occupy was started by the radical left (and I believe it was), the Law of Unintended Consequences might come into play.  If it goes mainstream, it could end up being the left's worst nightmare.

It could also end up being a nightmare for the right.  Consensus seems to be that the Occupants are too lazy/gun-less to practice the violence some are preaching, but I don't see the influence of the radical left waning and Dylan Ratinger (??) Donnie Deutsch calling for another Kent State doesn't bode well.

[LadyVirginia]

Look, I'm not saying people should dismiss this. To the contrary, I think it needs to be faced head-on. But comparisons that attempt to draw similarities with the concerns and demographic of a typical Tea Party need to be held up to the light of all the facts, not just the ones that suggest some similarity. There are vast differences, and those differences mean something.

Sure some well meaning folks might go to one of these things but the its roots aren't pure and it's not based on principles that respect people. This OWS is not based on general, overarching principles as defined in the Declaration of Indenpence and the US Consitution.  It's based on a "what about me attitude". The people going to these things will never end up at the same conclusion as the Tea Party people.

[charlesoakwood]

The comparative analysis of ten to twenty well comported people enjoying a sunny day versus OWS in NY is highly suspect.

[IronDioPriest]

"...if Occupy Wall Street was a genuine grassroots movement genuinely outraged by the idea that banksters own the government, then they would be marching on the Obama White House."

[Pandora]

"This sneering at people because of their age and grooming standards is utter bullsh*t."

The guy has a point as regards age, but, excuse me!, from what I've seen, the majority have no "grooming standards".  No matter his youth, the commenter should well be over the notion that the way one presents oneself as regards grooming and dress will DEFINITELY impact one's message.

[rickl]

Well, I notice this guy is copying the style of Zombie and I can't help but note that he seems to be attempting to say, "Look at these OWS protestors, they aren't anything like the media says!". This smacks of a propaganda campaign to attempt to shift the perception of these OWS people as being something other than communists and anarchists.

Karl Denninger is as honest as they come.  He reported what he personally saw.

Funnily enough, I'm just about to go over there and post a link to Zombie's "Occupy San Francisco" photo essay.

[Pandora]

Yep, "conservatives" better wake up.

[Glock32]

Randomly pick a few hundred people from a Tea Party rally and appoint them to the highest administrative levels in the Federal bureaucracy, and then do the same from a OWS rally. Does anyone seriously have any doubts as to which group would produce something in line with our ideals of restrained government, individual liberty, and free enterprise?

I don't.

[BMG]

@rickl:

Though I don't know this guy's work and I trust that you're quite sincere in what you're saying when you say:

"Karl Denninger is as honest as they come.  He reported what he personally saw."

I can't get over the fact that he's about the only guy saying it and the evidence against his position is mountainous. Maybe he's honest, etc. But I think if that's the case then what he's (perhaps) mistakenly done, is taken something out of context (the protest he saw) and is equating it to the national stage...and the two situations just aren't adding up.

[Pandora]

Well, I notice this guy is copying the style of Zombie and I can't help but note that he seems to be attempting to say, "Look at these OWS protestors, they aren't anything like the media says!". This smacks of a propaganda campaign to attempt to shift the perception of these OWS people as being something other than communists and anarchists.

Karl Denninger is as honest as they come.  He reported what he personally saw.

Funnily enough, I'm just about to go over there and post a link to Zombie's "Occupy San Francisco" photo essay.

Have no reason to doubt either.  (Although he did vote for Obama ... hmmm    .)

He didn't personally see any of the other OWSes, though.

[rickl]

(Although he did vote for Obama ... hmmm   

Yes, because he was in contact with McCain's people and tried to advise them of what he believed needed to be done.  They blew him off.

I think he said later that "There's 0% chance that the Republicans will do the right thing and 5% chance the Democrats will".  That was the basis for his vote.

I wasn't at TF at the time, or I would have tried to talk him out of it.