If the President arrived at at General Assembly meetng with a proposal, would you

occupation blog's picture
Express your contempt and disgust, tell him to pound sand and hard-block introduction of the proposal?
15%
Welcome him and encourage consideration of his proposal?
82%
Panic when you saw Secret Service agents jumping out of armored limos and hide out somewhere until they left?
3%
Total votes: 268

16 Comments

And...

You would be welcoming a politician who has vowed to raise a billion dollars for his campaign, which will obviously come from the very people this protest is supposed to be against.  And you'd be listenting to a president who bailed out the criminals on Wall St.  Maybe you should reconsider what you're doing with Occupy?  (I mean that.)

- JAY n LA

panther's picture

The 99% is varied

We can be patient as we build. The 99 % doesn't all think the same and doesn't have the same knowledge or experience.  Each one teach one. By hearing different ideas we can come to a better understanding.  Let's talk about solutions for our problems.

Smile

alhs06's picture

FFS Let's DO SOMETHING about solutions for our problems?

Check out some of the blogs, threads & post's over the past 5/6 weeks.

Lets try to minimize the redundancy by doing a little research onsite.

No offense, thanks for contributing ...but ffs ...

 

My picture reads

"Sell a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you ruin a perfectly good business opportunity."

The 1% philosophy

Mahayana's picture

This poll does not address all sentiments. 4th option?

Welcome him?
Fuck no. To welcome someone, I require that they are worthy of respect.   Encourage consideration of his proposal?
What, did he break down and cry or confess to his crimes? Did he admit that he chose to suck the teet of Wall Street over serving the PEOPLE of the United States of America, of whom he swore to serve? If not then, FUCK NO.
Listen to him? Yes, I would listen to him as I would listen to anyone that stood in front of the GA that had a proposal.  

The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves - in their separate, and individual capacities. -Abe

Laura Diamond's picture

If Obama came to Occupy LA

I would like more options than you gave us in the vote. 

I would listen to the president if he would listen to us, if we had protection from the secret service(police on our side) and if our city was able to really show the president the seriousness of this protest in a peaceful and reasonable manner that the "News" could not portray as a circus.

OccupyNews.net's picture

Obama's past.

There are allegations that Barack Obama used to practice stump speeches when he was very very young, like 10 or 11 years old. I can understand actors acting in front of a mirror at a young age, but the idea of a young kid practicing a presidential speech at such an early age does not jive for me.

I also feel the press did not vet things such as, Barack Obama feeling the need to write a book about his dad who he only saw a couple of times in his life, while ignoring his mother.  When his mother was diagnosed with cancer soon after Obama had his finished his book about his dad, I don't recall Barack Obama coming to her aid in person.

I do recall Barack Obama telling the story of his mother's fight with the insurance companies during the presidential debates and in television ads, but Obama never mentionined his own role in trying to save or prolong his mother's life. Why is it ok to villify the insurance companies while having no personal responsibility to help mom out?

Then there was beer gate.  Barack Obama invited the two men involved in the misunderstanding over whether a Harvard professor was justly detained for breaking into his own home or whether it was racism. Yet it was the two women who had acted brilliantly in how they dealt with what they witnessed and how they reported the incident to the police.

The women were marginalized and ignored, the men were glorified. I find these kinds of things much more telling than the stuff that is talked about in the media regarding Barack Obama.

On the Jay Leno show, Barack Obama was pleased to note that he had an approval rating that was three times higher than congress's approval rating. (something like 39% versus 13%).  

Obama accepted somewhere between 10 million and 200 million dollars in pre-paid credit cards that did not have an actual person or legitimate address attached to the donation.

He was the only presidential candidate to allow this dishonesty, and he got away with it. Obama knows how to game the system and as long as he is re-elected, that appears to be what he cares about most.

The same Navy Seals that allegedly assassinated Osama Bin Laden are then killed just a few weeks later???  I found that highly suspicious for a variety of reasons.  If they truly assassinated Osama Bin Laden, I would have seperated that elite group into groups of 4 and re-assigned them so that they could not be targeted and killed en masse, and as a way to spread their experience into other Navy Seal groups.

Then, they say they did not want to show a picture of the dead Osama Bin Laden, what about a picture just before he was assassinated? If the mission was a fraud, then the assassination of all the Navy Seals would probably follow. Or maybe the Navy Seals were set up in exchange for the promise to not do some heinous act against the U.S?

Nobody from the media questioned the death of all of those navy seals, instead they were martyr'd as heroes. Having said all that I have, sometimes it does seem to me like Obama is trying to do the educated and progressive thing and isn't quite the bad guy that we can make him out to be.

Except when it comes to Wall Street. I think Obama is beholden to Wall Street.

 

 

alhs06's picture

Hate to be a criticizer of the Web Team's "Appreciated" effort's

Hate to be a criticizer of the Web Team's "Appreciated" effort's, or whoever was responsible for posting this poll. But it seems like it's leading me to support a limited & set up view. Something a pollster would do to slant an opinion instead of providing an honest one.

My picture reads

"Sell a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you ruin a perfectly good business opportunity."

The 1% philosophy

A better formulation is a many sided discussion...

We can listen if we will also be listened to.  We do have every right to demand some answers, like:

"How will you promote laws and if needed a Constitutional Amendment to restrict campaign spending, especially by corporations, e.g. to reverse the Citizens United ruling, and perhaps exclusively publicly finance campaigns?"  I think we'd equally like to welcome Republicans to seriously discuss working towards that goal in the (not terribly likely) event many/any would support it.

Politicians aren't individually our enemies[1], although we have abundant reason to be skeptical of their statements.  We should be looking for opportunities to pin them down on specific issues, and the premise of this poll would be one, though it still adopts a submissive stance.

 - - -

[1] George Wallace is an excellent case in point.  Staunch segregationist politician who strongly opposed civil rights till it passed; once his electorate changed and he had different constituents to answer to, his positions changed rather drastically.  See https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/George_Wallace#Change_of_...

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radical also means staying critical and not drinking anyone's kool-aid.

False choice...

I agree with those who want a fourth choice...  Say "express my disgust, let him say what he wants, discuss it on its merits, then citizen-arrest him for war crimes".

Pages