From:   bf0189@gmail.com
Sent time:   Thursday, October 06, 2011 11:58:56 AM
To:   september17@googlegroups.com
Subject:   Re: Re: [september17discuss] American Jobs Act
 

Agreed I have nothing endorsing actual legislation that get rid of the root of the crisis such as universal health care, glass-steagall..etc

On , David DeGraw <David@ampedstatus.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> for what its worth, agree w/ Robert here.   But, when it comes to
> specific legislation, i do think glass-steagall could be endorsed "as a
> first step."  It is a demand that we can achieve and it shows we know
> our shit
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/6/2011 12:03 PM, Robert Christ wrote:
> The moment we endorse any politician, or any piece of
> legislation, the media will latch on to that as our one demand.  At
> that point, they will have no need to cover us specifically,
> whatsoever, and can spend their time discrediting our movement by
> filming their talking heads "discussing" whatever or whomever we
> endorse.
>
>
>
> No Demands.
>
> No Endorsements.
>
> Not Yet.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:01 PM, David
> DeGraw David@ampedstatus.com>
> wrote:
>
> please,
> please do not endorse the Jobs Act.  Highly problematic legislation.
> plus we cannot be seen as supporting Obama or partisan in any way, we
> facture the whole 99% concept in my opinion.
>
>
>
> the Press con Obama's is giving right now is the best one I seen in
> years.  Lots of OWS questions.  They asked why he never prosecuted WS
> execs.  Lots of talk about the American people having every right to be
> pissed off.
>
>
>
> CONGRATS EVERYONE!!!  WINNING! ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/6/2011 11:56 AM, bf0189@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
>
> It strikes me as a heavy bastardization of German's unemployment system
> (and will be more bastardized once it reaches Obama to sign and
> finalize)
>
>
>
> Putting a small band-aid over a wound won't fix anything. We need real
> reform.
>
>
>
> On , Charles chcreinhardt@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey guys,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > A thought just occurred to me. I haven't heard much about this yet,
>
> >
>
> > but do you think that OWS might do itself a service by endorsing,
> at
>
> >
>
> > least as one of many goals, the passage of the American Jobs Act in
>
> >
>
> > its entirety, or even an expansion of its policies (and perhaps a
>
> >
>
> > reduction in the ratio of tax cuts composing it)? It has been
> accepted
>
> >
>
> > as a foregone conclusion by the entire American mainstream
>
> >
>
> > commentariat that Obama's jobs bill will be absolutely eviscerated
> or
>
> >
>
> > at least highly attenuated by the corrupt legislatures in this
>
> >
>
> > country.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > What if we tried to draw more attention to the legislative battle
> of
>
> >
>
> > the AJA as a pillar of our emerging program (in addition to legal
> and
>
> >
>
> > anti-trust action against the banks and tax reform, etc)? That way
> the
>
> >
>
> > movement can shed light on the very obstacles to the bill's
> passage or
>
> >
>
> > enhancement, which will serve to illuminate the architecture of
>
> >
>
> > corruption in our legislative process. That way, the bought off
>
> >
>
> > Democrats and Republicans can be named and shamed with the enhanced
>
> >
>
> > lens of this movement. Furthermore, the limited scope of the bill
>
> >
>
> > itself can serve as grounds for further criticism of the White
> House
>
> >
>
> > approach.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I'm sure this has been suggested before, and I understand that
> there
>
> >
>
> > are caveats to our involvement in the political process but I want
> to
>
> >
>
> > know what the status of the current dialogue is about this course
> of
>
> >
>
> > action or line of thinking.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Sincerely,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Charles Reinhardt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >