Guess Jan Schakowsky Was "Patriotic" After All

Well, after a full day of marching with communists (*literally* - CPUSA people!), I guess she figured it was OK to stand next to a guy with an American Flag for a 30 seconds.

Yes, yes. She should have stood next to an American flag for at least an hour. Or, erm, hmm... Nah, that's probably not enough to make her a Real American™ in the crazed eyes of right-wing extremist morons. So maybe two hours. Ehh, no probably not good enough. She should have carried one. Or, better, also worn a flag pin. Or actually, her clothes should have been made of American flags. I mean, if we can't see the ol' Stars & Stripes on her underwear, she must hate 'Murca! Right?

Idiot.

The right wing is going after Holder, he'll be subpenaed shortly.  Obama's learning a painful lesson about wimping out and letting bygones be bygones. Even after endlessly capitulating and sucking finance c*** they don't want him at the party.

Back to topic:

This, as usual, from the same
"mainstream" news media that didn't have any problem with the gun-toting
"patriots" of the Tea Party and their catastrophically-spelled
signs. Well, then again, the Tea Party has corporate sponsorship, while
the OWS protesters are doing this on their own. It pays - literally - to
have friends in high places.

So.
First they ignore you: check.
Then they ridicule you: check.
According
to Gandhi, the next step comes when they fight you, but here is the
spot where his marvelous wisdom could use a bit of enhancement.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you...
Then they get scared.

Frightened bankers send out manual on how to deal with the OWS 'violent mob'

 Ummm.... 200-300 Mexicans that are **dead** thanks to the guns that Holder's "Operation Fast & Furious (aka, Gun Runner) mean **nothing** to you? 

Scary.

And the **hundreds** of Mexicans who are **dead** as a result of Alberto Gonzales' "Operation Wide Receiver" mean **nothing** to you?

**Move** **along** **pitiful** **troll**.

Rebel Pundit is an Andrew Breitbart tracker in Chicago. His name is Jeremy Segal and he's a real estate agent for Coldwell Banker.

Rebel Pundit was wrong!?  I cannot believe it! I must now question my entire worldview. I guess you are also going to tell me Rush Limbaugh is full of it.  Head is spinning. 

I fear the Democrats are gonna try to take over the Occupy movement and use its momentum to attract votes.  The fact is that 3 out every 4 dollars that Goldman Sachs donated in the 2008 elections went to Democrats.  President Obama received 1 million dollars, four times the amount McCain received.  The Democrats are just as status quo as the Republicans.  

And this, right here, is why liberal "movement" politics haven't had the tiniest fucking shred of relevance for decades. 

Conservative "movements", like the Tea Party most recently, have frequently resulted in significant electoral swings that then result in vast, important, and alter-peoples'-lives type policy changes. Liberal "movements", on the other hand, mostly wind up with a bunch of people engaging in pointless exercises in vanity, like voting for Ralph Fucking Nader, and actually changing absolutely NOTHING. My fear -- and suspicion -- is that this one will be no different.

Somebody asked me yesterday if I "sympathize" with the Occupy people. My answer was that I do, but only with the 50% of them that will vote in the next election, and then only those who won't throw their vote away on somebody who won't be able to do dick to actually CHANGE anything.

They donated heavily to Obama in 2008 because they knew he was going to win. I highly doubt he'll get anywhere near that amount leading up to the 2012 election. 

However, I do agree that the Occupy Wall Street movement should be very weary of letting it be co-opted by the Democrats as the Tea Party eventually became fully funded by the Republicans. That's one of the reasons the movement seems much more disorganized than the Tea Party: they don't have people like the Koch brothers backing them up. 

If they want their message to be taken more seriously, it shouldn't become just an extension of either party, though it may be harder to affect real change if it's not part of the establishment.

eventually became fully funded by the Republicans

Not so much... The Tea Party was, from the get-go, comprised entirely -- yes, pretty much entirely! -- of people who were functionally Republicans but, given their party's last decade of unadulterated Suck™, were too embarrassed to say so. 

The Tea Party was a partisan thing from the start. I'm not sure, yet, what the Occupy thing is.

I'm afraid he will:

Financial Sector Helps Barack Obama Score Big Money for Re-election Fight

and there there's this: The Bankers on Obama's Team

I agree, be opening but very leery of opportunist Democrats.

So is it your suggestion that the Occupy movement change is message from one that is open and inclusive to all points of view to one that is open to all points of view unless you're a Democrat?

You're right about the Wall Street donations to the Democrats. In all honesty, though, I hope the Democrats adopt the Occupy movement, because it could act as a counterbalance to the Tea Party. Similar to how the Tea Party pulled the Republican Party sharply to the right, Occupy might do something similar to the Democrats.

Then we'd have a large percentage of Americans disenfranchised with the status quo parties because of the parties' adoption of self-interested (and radical) ideologies. This would open the door for moderate candidates and actual dialogue on how to get ourselves out of this mess.

They are. Absolutely.