But apparently, many in Washington are being shaken down by, you guessed it, fear.
video at the link.
A well-known Washington lobbying firm with links to the financial industry has proposed an $850,000 plan to take on Occupy Wall Street and politicians who might express sympathy for the protests, according to a memo obtained by the MSNBC program “Up w/ Chris Hayes.”
The proposal was written on the letterhead of the lobbying firm Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford and addressed to one of CLGC’s clients, the American Bankers Association. CLGC’s memo proposes that the ABA pay CLGC $850,000 to conduct “opposition research” on Occupy Wall Street in order to construct “negative narratives” about the protests and allied politicians. The memo also asserts that Democratic victories in 2012 would be detrimental for Wall Street and targets specific races in which it says Wall Street would benefit by electing Republicans instead.....Two of the memo’s authors, partners Sam Geduldig and Jay Cranford, previously worked for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Geduldig joined CLGC before Boehner became speaker; Cranford joined CLGC this year after serving as the speaker’s assistant for policy. A third partner, Steve Clark, is reportedly “tight” with Boehner, according to a story by Roll Call that CLGC features on its website.
Obviously this 21st Century 5th column is perfectly legal, and in today's political environment, just another walk in the park. Don't EVEN try to argue that point. But aren't you 1% apologists getting kind of uncomfortable defending big money's blatant attempt to crush any dissension? They take OWS seriously, and fear for real reform (you call 'demon regulation')
I'd like to hear some more contrite explanations as to why this is 'just peachy' and 'why am I complaining this is your free market forces at work etc'? Does this bother you? Change your mind? Reinforce your opinions?
ETA: Yikes! They are on to us! Spying n FaceBook?

(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 17:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 17:30 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:...
From:...
From:...
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 17:27 (UTC)You'd have more of a story if someone were paying for this, as oppressed to someone attempting to make money doing it.
(no subject)
Date: 20/11/11 06:02 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 17:41 (UTC)here's your excuse
Date: 19/11/11 17:42 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 17:48 (UTC)The protestor being hit with the uniform orange spray doesn't seem to be reacting to much.
Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:Re: Video of the incident seems to make your objections look foolish and well stupid.
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 18:28 (UTC)Seems like a perfectly non-violent means of enforcing the law.
(frozen) re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:BANG YOUR HEAD
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(frozen) Re: re-defining violence are we??
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Yup.
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:No they don't.
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 17:41 (UTC)Re: Blame government for this
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 18:28 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 18:47 (UTC)L-O-L. Welcome to America. Read a book.
(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 21:24 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 18:28 (UTC)Democrat politicians are just as responsible for giving tax breaks and fuckloads of money to corporations, they just aren't proud of it like the Republicans are.
(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 18:35 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 18:36 (UTC)Wonder how much opposition research that cost.
(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 19:02 (UTC)"Yes but they're wrong, so it's ok to do it..."
lololololol it's like a friggin' comic book around here.
(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 19:08 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 19:27 (UTC)As opposed to OWS where force and violence is okay because... BECAUSE.... Income disparity!!
If you're going to legalize force in a society... shouldn't the gold standard be in enforcing the rules?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 19:55 (UTC)Re: MODS?
Date: 19/11/11 20:04 (UTC)Re: MODS?
From:Re: MODS?
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 20:34 (UTC)I'm sure we'll be able to find a zillion pieces of evidence supporting either position - either proving that the protesters are a mob of violent criminals, or that the government is performing a gradual crackdown on them because it's scared of this movement - ultimately, there's a bit of all spices in a soup. But the purpose and the real meaning of this phenomenon, street activism, no matter if it's called Tea Party of Occupy Wall Street, is somehow the last thing that's on people's minds, and that's sad. Because it's the main point. I'm starting to think all of this is deliberate - drown the real questions with yelling and pointing fingers, and the issue will somehow go away when people get tired, or frozen in the coming winter. Sad.
(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 20:35 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 19/11/11 21:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/11/11 05:42 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Actually.....
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: