Are these US protests significant?
I must admit that I have been lazy in the past month or so when it comes to current events. Of course I do know what's going on around the world and do check the headlines everyday, but in terms of following things really closely I have slackened off. I've actually been quite busy trying to plan an entire semester in one big chunk as well as teach. Even my output here has become a bit less prolific as a result. It doesn't leave much time to follow news closely, but one thing that has been catching my eye, along with all the middle east madness, are these protests that seem to be spreading across America.
So basically, I would like my American comrades to let me know of the significance of these protests. Is this the point where after 30 years of middle class assault that the electorate is finally taking it back? Is this the saturation or breaking point? It was great to see half a million taking to the streets in London. I would love for something on that scale to start happening in America too. Of course, if this is really the case then I take my hat off to all the American's who are getting involved. Anything that helps to swing the ball back in favour of the little man is alright by my book. I hope to read a lot more about it all this weekend. This is the kind of thing that really interests me.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
What? The only protests I see are the 3-8 people (yes as in 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 of them at most) outside the courthouse every Monday with signs like "No blood for Oil" and "North Carolina Labor Against the War in Afghanistan/Iraq/Libya" and a couple of jobless hippies are playing drums out there when the weather is nice (Fair weather protesters I reckon).
Other than that I have actually seen 0 protesting.....now on the national level the people in Wisconsin are pissed off (as are the folks in New Jersey, Ohio etc) because the Government Union workers are finally getting, oh how should I put this ...ah ;D they are having their pensions and benefits "regulated" in order for those states to achieve a balanced budget.
2012 can't get here soon enough...Obama has shown he knows fuck all about LEADING a country, he's in way over his head and I dare anyone to tell me Sarah Palin could fuck things up worse. I don't even like her but damn Obama sucks, he's got no damn clue he just wants to do interviews, pick his brackets on ESPN, and just continue being a cult of personality.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
Protests? None that I know of here.
Obama might not be a good president, but shit he aint no worse than Dubya. People seem to have selective memory that the wars and country's shit economy were all under Dubya's watch not the current guy.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
I've a general perception of what the protests taking place are about, but no real insight so can't really respond with much. I will try and catch up properly over the weekend.
I do call into question your final paragraph though. It bewilders me how any human being can suggest that someone as clueless and downright stupid as Sarah Palin could in any way be a better president than Obama. And I say that as someone who is notoriously gun shy of slinging praise Obama's way. Did you not see those Sarah Palin videos that I posted in a thread a few months back. She is beyond belief, both morally and intellectually. Kid Thunder could knock her out in a debate! ;D
Re: Are these US protests significant?
That is true, GB.
The wars were Bush's as was the financial crisis. Obama has been sweeping up crap ever since. My problems with Obama are because of his reluctance to seriously reform health care nor come to grips with the financial sector. There were zero prosecutions for the financial meltdown despite fraud being endemic in the system. It wasn't really possible to just stop the wars in their tracks at the drop of a hat either, but I don't believe expanding in Afghanistan has helped. I also disagree strongly with the way the Bradley Manning case has been handled. I'm kind of sidestepping with all of that though.
Still, you haven't really noticed any protests either. The alternative media I have been listening to a little has been mentioning them a lot, but I really haven't been as comprehensively as I used to.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
Miles are you talking about the protests in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio over public sector union's collective bargaining rights? A couple weeks behind but other than those I can't think of any major protests that have been going on.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
VictorCharlie
Miles are you talking about the protests in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio over public sector union's collective bargaining rights? A couple weeks behind but other than those I can't think of any major protests that have been going on.
Yes, all of those.
I'm not that far behind as I know protests are happening, but just haven't given the time to finding out the ins and outs of it all. It was being suggested that this is an expanding thing and that got me curious, just thought I would ask on here first. It seems they aren't such a big deal judging by the mild reactions on here.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
GeneralBulldog just because W was a somewhat poor President (look at the unemployment rate under him thank you very much) doesn't mean we needed to follow his term up with a worse President....yes right now I DO miss W and I never really liked him before.
Miles I didn't say Palin would do a better job I said I don't see how she could do a worse job than Obama. There IS a difference.
To be fair, you also said that you don't like her, which is actually good enough for me.
But I think you are totally misguided on Bush Jr. How could unemployment not rise after the worst financial meltdown since the great depression? Obama is not to blame for this. How can an 8 year term fix 30 years of deregulation and privatised corporations running amok by planting themselves overseas? It's not an Obama problem in the slightest. Obama came to office a couple of months after it all imploded! He has his faults, but unemployment is not one of them.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
I'm not a fan of Obama, but you know what I find hilarious? It's that a lot of people are blaming Obama for the multiple wars and the economic crises that he inherited. Like I said people have selective memory on who was president during the economic turmoil and the wars that the US is currently in.
That is all, you an argue among yourselves.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
OK miles, all I'll ask is "What has Obama done to remedy the situation?" .....the answer is NOTHING. He hasn't done as all President's before him have done and spoken to the people about how this is to be fixed. Obama is the United States' answer to Louis XIV, he's got 0 connection to the common man and no clue how to lead a country.
Lyle, I am not going to sit here defending Obama. I don't like him as you know. But basically you are dealing with the Roman empire towards the end. How can you blame the guy that inherited it all? He was left with no chance. Then of course the crazies get in towards the end and then it all implodes.
I agree with you that he has been a crap President, but let's not pretend that Bush did anything concrete to help the working people of your country. Nor any President in any serious way since Reagan.
It has all been about dismantling working groups and continually providing tax breaks for the rich and expanding the military. To make the rich richer it has been about privatising health care (pre Reagan), expanding insurances, giving free reign to wall street, crushing unions etc. The financial aspects imploded and Obama didn't reign it in, pretty much because the rich now controlled it all.
That is why I was interested in this little bit of a fight back, but it appears that the American's can still afford to put rice on their tables.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
Miles
I'm not sure what the end state was in Indiana or Ohio but the ability of public sector unions in Wisconsin was drastically cut. I think it is awesome but I also do not really care since I don't live in Wisconsin. The pundits and media would like to make this a huge national issues but the truth is that large parts of the U.S. are right to work states, meaning there is very little to no unions, and the fact that the pension plans for public sector employees really are driving states into bankruptcy. As far as the protests go, sure there were a lot of passionate people in Wisconsin getting lots of media attention, but the MAJORITY of the state's population clearly backed the governor and states legislators when they voted them into office based on the promise to end the public sector union's stranglehold on the state capitol.
Re: Are these US protests significant?
To the people involved in the protests, they matter. Are they significant?
About as significant as a British citizen, who currently lives in Korea, talking politics on a boxing forum, with a hard on against the US.
Not really.
JMO
Re: Are these US protests significant?
If public sector unions are the root of all evil, then why weren't police pension plans included? In California, specifically, for well over a decade local governments have been complaining that police pensions, specifically, are over-taxing their budgets. I think that if the problem of public sector unions is to be addressed, then all public sector unions should be affected equally. Unless, of course, the intent is to create a police state, then by all means they should be treated differently.
And I'm self-employed and always have been.
