Skip to main content

Matt Wuerker
(Click for larger image)

Originally posted to Comics on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 02:50 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Hey cartoon fans.... (100+ / 0-)

     Given all  the brouhaha over the comics section I wanted to preface the comments this time with a little comment myself.  For those of you that might think that saying something positive about the tea party is me spreading right wing memes I want to say a couple things.....

    A)  There is no right wing meme being served here.  This is a critique of Occupy, maybe not from the left, and certainly not from the right, but from a pragmatic political point of view.  
    I couldn't agree more with the general beef articulated by Occupy but I'm mystified by where they then go with it.  It's well and good to get creative and think deeply about the political system but the great tragedy of Occupy is that it's rendered itself politically inert.
    On the other side the Tea Party went and took their furry at the state of politics and actually pursued a political strategy and went about electing members of congress.  At last count the Tea Party caucus, that's only three years old, had 60 plus members.   Sadly they've succeeded wildly ( and yes there's a lot of astro turf and Koch money that's helped them hugely) but you have to give them props for building a serious political movement that they've converted into real political power.  If only Occupy had been as electorally focused.

    B)  Thanks for looking at the cartoons.  They are offered to entertain, and maybe provoke a little thought and discussion.  I have a great gig drawing cartoons for Politico--working with editors who let me draw anything I want.  
    The opinions in the cartoons are mine and mine alone.  The cartoons get reprinted different places including once a week here on the DK.  I'm happy to be a cartoon contributor and enjoy following the discussion on the site.

    •  thanks for the explanation, matt (49+ / 0-)

      i do appreciate the insight into the panel.

      i wish that the comic had shown something about how  the tea party bus is running well because of the koch-funded mechanics and that the occupy bus keeps getting its tires knifed by pretty much everybody else, including the cops and most of the democratic party.

      If only Michael Phelps hadn't smoked that pot...imagine what he could have accomplished with motivation and good lung capacity.

      by papa monzano on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:04:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Jen Sorenson usually (7+ / 0-)

        is an active participant in the comments section. But this is a good start. And there are plenty of people who think that Occupy is a good start, but needs to find a direction; I know people who would normally be sympathetic to their cause, but who ended up delayed by protests which turned them off. We need to go from Occupy the Streets to Occupying the voting booths and beyond.

        "If we ever needed to vote we sure do need to vote now" -- Rev. William Barber, NAACP

        by Cali Scribe on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:04:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for putting in the note (13+ / 0-)

      There's been a lot of sturm and drang, but I liked Kos' point about supporting editorial cartoonists!  

      Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

      by Mindful Nature on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:06:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I still laughed at it (24+ / 0-)

      I take it as constructive critisism.  Occupy has moved the conversation in a powerful and meaningful way, but until they get politically organized they will not be the voice they should be.

      •  "Politically organized" = groveling to Blue Dogs? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        George Hier
        •  no, dear - by REPLACING the blue dogs in the (15+ / 0-)

          election booth!

        •  how about some basic organization first (10+ / 1-)

          so many Occupiers, IMHO, seem actively hostile to organizing on any level past "let's agree to show up at this place". For example, Occupy Philly had problems with those black bloc anarchist dillweed trolls Al Giordano once blasted to smithereens and couldn't come to a consensus on how to protect the commune they had built outside City Hall from these people.  

          They were so afraid of being co-opted and becoming "mainstream" that they isolated themselves and became irrelevant.

          People act like the Civil Right Movement just happened cuz negroes got fed up and took to the streets one day. This is an insult to history. The Civil Rights Movement was tightly organized. Birmingham was chosen because Bull Connor was there. The Freedom Riders were given extensive training. The Bus Boycott has more or less made every boycott before and after look like a amateurish joke. Without that commitment to organization, we'd still have segregated bathrooms in Mississippi today.

          "Occupy was so concerned about not being co-opted that it deterred people from trying to fill any leadership or organizational gaps that emerged,” a senior labor official in Washington told The Daily Beast.

          “It’s not like May Day, where there was a huge labor rally with a lot of other groups and organizations,” said Ian Williams, a graduate student at Hunter College who lives in Brooklyn. “It’s an inwardly focused day.”

          And therein lies the problem: so long as Occupy remains a symbolic phenomenon that exists only to sustain its own subculture—to speak to its own members—it won’t be able to tap into the broader economic anxiety that is still festering across a battered, wary electorate.

          If your left-wing movement can't figure out how to co-operate with unions......yeah, good luck wit dat.

          Somebody left their copy of Rules for Radicals at home.

          "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

          by TheHalfrican on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:23:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Activist volunteers would love to help them! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Some young Occupiers only see politics on TV or in the media. Politicians are in DC or hidden in city hall. Meanwhile they have neighbors fighting the fight from since they've been born and could help them avoid the pitfalls that will keep them from succeeding. And what great, innovative  volunteers they might be. You can't change political systems by standing outside and shaking your fists at the parties.

        •  Let's not forget that even (5+ / 0-)

          the Bluest Dog will be voting for Democratic leadership, and it's the leadership that controls the reins of power. I want John Boehner crying in his cocktails come November 7 when he's a lame duck Speaker.

          And if people get involved early enough in the process, we might even have a chance to replace some of those Blue Dogs to boot. That means starting now to identify those we might want to target with primary challenges in 2014, and looking for candidates who actually have a chance to win.

          "If we ever needed to vote we sure do need to vote now" -- Rev. William Barber, NAACP

          by Cali Scribe on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:09:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Great comment, Cali (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ChurchofBruce, Noodles

            Making sure that we don't follow the Tea Party example by putting unelectable - for whatever reason - but ideologically pure candidates in otherwise winnable races is the mission for 2014. We need to remove the gavel from Boehner's hand.

            "Mitt Romney isn't a vulture capitalist: vultures only eat things that are dead." -S. Colbert

            by newinfluence on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:16:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  The perfect way for them to lose relevance (0+ / 0-)

        ...would be to become just another party or protest movement. We already have enough of those to make a rich din of background noise.

    •  ? (6+ / 0-)
      On the other side the Tea Party went and took their furry at the state of politics and actually pursued a political strategy and went about electing members of congress.
      So the Republicans were less successful at excluding right wing lunatics from power than the Democratic Party is at excluding progressives.  We can blame this on Occupy, even though it was true before most Occupiers were born.

      I just genetically engineer them, I don't nominate them for President.

      by happymisanthropy on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:11:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's because OWS wouldn't choose a side. (14+ / 0-)

        How many OWS representatives showed up Democratic caucuses? How many progressive Dem candidates got their endorsement?

        Their non-partisan stance, and leaderless philosophy, was good in order to open the dialogue--and in that respect the movement was highly successful! But without parties, you lack a political organization. And without leaders, you lack a political voice. As soon as the Democrats started picking up their issue of economic justice, OWS had nothing else to offer to the process.

      •  I deal with Occupy Dallas daily on Facebook (5+ / 0-)

        Where I get constantly bombarded by a steady stream of "why bother, both parties are the same!" messaging.

        Well, if that's your message, don't be surprised if people stop bothering.  After all, you told them to be cynical about the political process and encouraged them to believe both parties are equally bad.

        At least, that's become my experience.  I keep calling them out on the constant false equivalence but everyone must see that happened at a lot of Occupy locations.

        *The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10*

        by Rick Aucoin on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:11:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  When they say (3+ / 0-)

          that this election won't make much difference, they are not saying that they don't intend to do anything.  They are saying that our government and especially our Congress is owned and corrupt and therefore no matter who you vote for they will go to Congress and they will be owned too.

          We still intend to do a lot of things but many of us believe that both parties are bought and paid for and the only chance of really influencing them is from outside the two corporatist parties.

          IOW, the Occupy Dallas folks have a good point  and they also have a lot of evidence to back it up.  But that is not a defeatist message -- it's a different approach than the one we advocate here on this site and the path we have followed in electoral activism.  There is more than one way to approach this and they can be complementary.

          "Justice is a commodity"

          by joanneleon on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:54:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  In a sense it's not a false equivalent. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LucyandByron, LaEscapee

          It's our job to explain that it seems like they are all the same because there are Democrats that are just as bad as Republicans, but in actuality there are plenty of really good people on the Democratic side fighting for the causes they believe in.

          But we also need to realize how hard it is to make that case when our President appoints Republicans and neoliberal Democrats to pretty much every position that has anything to do with economic policy making.

          •  When you say both are the SAME, it is. (0+ / 0-)

            When you say "both parties are equally bad" then you are doing nothing but the Republican's work for them.  

            There is ONE of our political parties which benefits from people dropping out of the process.  There is ONE of our parties which benefits from lower voter turn out.

            There is ONE of our parties which benefits from increased cynicism about the political process.

            And that party isn't the more liberal one.

            So every single time someone says, and I quote from Occupy Dallas just this week "both parties are equally bad" they are doing the Republican's work for them.

            Every time someone says "voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil" they are doing the Republican's work for them.

            Because if you vote for the more liberal of the two parties, in every single election, you are NOT doing "evil".  If you vote for the more liberal of the two parties, in every single election, you are making the nation MORE LIBERAL.

            You aren't wasting your time, you aren't wasting your effort.

            But that's not the message I get from Occupy Dallas on an almost EVERY SINGLE DAY BASIS.

            I am not a partisan Democrat, I'm a liberal first, second, and third.  And somewhere about 5th I'm a Democrat.  It gets me into a lot of fights around here, because I'm an old school Obama Administration Skeptic.  See my signature, for instance.

            But compared to Occupy Dallas I'm practically a founding member of the OFA and that's pretty fuckin' sad.

            *The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10*

            by Rick Aucoin on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 11:38:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's just semantics. (0+ / 0-)

              It doesn't matter whether the complaint is 'both parties are the same' or whether 'both parties are equally as bad.'  It's still the same mindset and its still your (our) job to make the point that it's not true due to the individuals.

              These people that you speak of are either political neophytes or people that are (rightfully) skeptical due to years of Democratic centrism, acquiescence, and its own inability/unwillingness to get the Mary Landrieus and Ben Nelsons (and yes, Barack Obamas) in line.

              You're not going to change their minds trying to sell them this bigger picture from the start.  You're talking about people who generally don't even have a concept of the caucus system.

              You need to show them the bit of day light by showing them the Sherrod Browns and Elizabeth Warrens.  You need to point out to them that Bernie Sanders caucuses with the Dems.  

              You need to empathize with them while teaching them about how we got to where we are and that the change they seek simply will not take place outside of party politics, so the choice is to either change the Democrats from within, or see no change at all.

              It seems to me you're trying to convince them with a backhoe, when what is need is a trowel.

              •  Actually, no. (0+ / 0-)

                I'm not trying to fix everything that is wrong with Occupy.  I am simply reporting on what is wrong with Occupy, and this is a primary issue, a central and unavoidable problem with the entire Occupy movement.

                When they constantly trumpet that there is (their exact words) "no difference between" the parties, when they sound like sour little Ron Paulites, then they are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

                I'm  not here to waste my time trying to fix them, they're unreachable as far as I'm concerned.  Maybe some other, more saintly, person than I will take the time to try.

                *The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10*

                by Rick Aucoin on Fri Sep 21, 2012 at 01:07:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Ah, so you're just bitching. Got it. NT. (0+ / 0-)
                  •  Call it what you will. (0+ / 0-)

                    The complain in the cartoon was about the ineffectiveness of Occupy.  

                    My comment was my own anecdote about why their ineffective, and even worse, why so much of at least Occupy Dallas is working for the Republicans.

                    I'm not going to aggrandize that by calling it "reporting".  Its just what I've seen, and I've now passed it on to you good people to make of it what you will.

                    I will tell you one thing.  It sure as shit ain't my job to "fix" what's wrong with the now-pretty-much-dead Occupy movement.  

                    They got a little bit done by raising some hell.  Good on them.  Then the going got tough and they got the hell out of Dodge.  

                    Story over, time for whoevers up next.

                    *The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10*

                    by Rick Aucoin on Fri Sep 21, 2012 at 03:57:48 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  With us or against us. Got it. NT. (0+ / 0-)
                      •  Are you being deliberately obtuse? (0+ / 0-)

                        i took the time to point out exactly how they are helping the Republicans, and not with an insipid "with us or against us" ideal.

                        If you weren't going to bother reading what I typed I wish I'd saved the effort.

                        *The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10*

                        by Rick Aucoin on Fri Sep 21, 2012 at 07:36:31 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  That might be (0+ / 0-)

                          the shade of lipstick you like to put on that pig, but what you explained was that they are not helping the Democrats, and whether you like it or not, that does not equal helping the Republicans.

                          Look, I get it.  You made yourself quite clear.  You don't like the attitudes and mindset of people who could quite easily be out there voting for Democrats, but you're not going to do a fucking thing to bring them into the fold by engaging them.  Instead, you just want to hang out at DK and bitch about them.

                          That's cool.  But if your theory is that them not voting for Democrats makes them part of the problem, perhaps you should look in the mirror and ask yourself whether giving up on them isn't also part of the very problem you're bitching about.  Instead, you decided to leave them on their own, possibly to bump into Atlas Shrugged and be absorbed by the very Paulites you spoke of.  

                          I mean fuck dude, if it's not your job, then whose fucking job is it?  You're talking about a bunch of ignorant wayward kids for the most part.  They're not unreachable.  Quite the opposite.  They are desperate for someone to reach out to them.

        •  Look at this political compass (0+ / 0-)

          See where I am? Audrey. Now find Obama. Find Romney. From where I sit, there is Very Little Difference. I will still go out and vote for all of the damn dems though. Because there IS NO choice that is actually anything close to what I want.

          "I'm grateful for my job - truly, but still...ugh." CityLightsLover

          by Audri on Fri Sep 21, 2012 at 05:59:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks, Matt. (8+ / 0-)

      I, for one, wasn't confused about your comic.  In fact, I found it to be prescient, much to the chagrin of many on this site.  
      It's about time the, um, "activists, er, liberati" actually accomplished something.  Teabaggers bloviate, too.  And they elect people to office!

      Why do people who call you RETARDED get elected to office? HMMM?

      by ChiTownDenny on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:11:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  While I think that quite a number of cartoons (8+ / 0-)

      posted here have been objectionable, this one strikes me as pretty reasonable.

    •  yeah here's the thing. Occupy actually got (4+ / 0-)

      a few things done, some lasting things. More than a few, on a large scale and on a smaller more personal scale. Did it make America perfect? No. Neither did your comics - so maybe that's your next subject?

      And the Tea Party you've got running around the track? They HAD success - the unlasting kind. What do they have today? His names Mitt Romney. And he is possibly the most gargantuan political disaster in this country's history.

      I love ya, Matt. And I get your back here bigtime. But this was a foul ball.

    •  thanks fro sticking around to chat. that's nice. (8+ / 0-)

      yeah, I'm saddened by the Occupy Fizzle myself, although not surprised.

      I try to take a more holistic and universal look at it though: they were wildly successful in changing the political language and focus and the tactic was unusual enough to get the attention of otherwise inattentive Americans. If they do nothing else, which the Daoist in me says, may be that is as it was intended, they've accomplished much.

      everything is impermanent. I don't think the methods they used would have been good for much else. they were perfect for the time and place in which they were employed and today, thanks to them, we have a nation of people who understand income inequality and fairness vs. unfairness - something nobody by wild eyed hippies were talking about before Sept 17, 2011. And those pebble that they dropped over those few months are still being heard and echoed in our political debates today at the very highest levels. They set the stage for Obama to become a populist and for Romney to be viewed with distrust. And by that, they may have saved the country.

      It is up to us now, to pick up the political mantle and amplify those themes. The good news for us is that by and large, this populist message is closer to the actual heart and soul of the Democratic party than the tea baggers' message was to the establishment GOP. So in that regard we don't have to take an adversarial stance within our own party, for the most part, knowing that the establishment of the party doesn't even believe in what we're pushing.

      Anyway, thanks for the cartoon and for the discussion.

      For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

      by mdmslle on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:14:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  the "per cent" meme (7+ / 0-)

        I don't think anyone today can hear any mention of "per cent" without having the 99% vs the 1% in the back of their minds. That's partly what made Rmoney's mention of the 47% so devastating for him. Between his membership in the 1% and his dissing of nearly half of the population, he walked right into the political minefield laid by the Occupy movement.
        I, too, would like to have an Occupy caucus in Congress, but the Occupy movement didn't have the kind of financial underwriting that the Tea Party did, and I'm not sure they would have taken it if George Soros or someone else had offered it to them.

    •  Rec'ed for interaction (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, DRo, DaveCaswell

      Not sure all the commentary hits the mark (see separate comment below) but I do like the idea that here in this community the cartoons become an opportunity for further dialog.

      I can understand the perspective that a successful cartoon ought to stand on its own without further explanation. But here in DKos I think we ought to forget about the "purity" of the art and grab our opportunities for deepening the ideas that the cartoons provoke/inspire.

      You can call it "class warfare" -- we call it "common sense"

      by kenlac on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:16:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks, I agree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Its time for Occupy to take it to the next level.  

      "Mitt Romney is Dick Cheney with more charisma"

      by Betty Pinson on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:18:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for the Info! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, AmazingBlaise, edrie

      BTW, good cartoon.

      The cartoon critics weren't claiming that all of the cartoonists here were out to spread RW memes into all of their strips. They just had problems with a few strips here and there.

      Regarding this cartoon, it isn't hard to understand why the "Tea Party Express" has 61 votes in Congress. They've got the backing of the most vocally crazy elements of the GOP and they have tons of corporate cash backing them up.

      The Tea Baggers are also organized from the top down, whereas Occupy is a grassroots movement from the bottom up and more times than not grassroots movements have a harder time raising cash for stuff like political campaigns.

      I miss Speaker Pelosi :^(

      by howarddream on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:18:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong, It's a very right wing meme (6+ / 0-)

      And while it's OK with me that you express you POV, at least admit what it is.

      The tea party has not succeeded, it was paid for by the existing powers, is not the equivalent of Occupy (which has rejected the US political system as the tool of the 1%).

      I'm glad OWS isn't electorally focused or it would end up controlled by people like you, who just don't have a clue.  

    •  No explanation needed. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Adam AZ
    •  Well... (6+ / 0-)

      They main issue is: one movement is decentralized and truly grass roots.  The other is an AstroTurf outfit disguised as 'grass roots'.  One is heavily funded, the other is basically not funded.  But I understand.  Movements need momentum or they die.  I OWS zeal to be decentralized, they have become irrelevant.

      Why is Mitt Rmoney so happy that an American embassy was attacked? Why does he hate America?

      by RichM on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:33:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The built nadda. (7+ / 0-)

      They had an idea and a few angry people, and then the astroturf factory ran with it and corporatized it.
      Something that the Occupy movement actually doesn't want. This isn't much of an issue mind you, as the Occupy message is not corporatocracy friendly anyway.

      The corp owned media legitimized them at every turn, and presented them as though they were actually rational. Not so even with the Occupy message. They denounce, deride.

      The cops have been used as a weapon even when the marches are peaceful, they leave the ol' teapartiers alone.
      The "teaparty" is just another branch of the GOP who saw an opportunity to gather some more votes.

      That cartoon would be far more accurate if the scoreboard read "Koch Bros" 61  

      Fuddle Duddle--- Pierre Trudeau.... Canadian politics at......A Creative Revolution

      by pale cold on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:38:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Tipped for an argument in good faith (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bdop4, Robobagpiper, genocideisnews

      and food for thought and continued appreciation that your cartoons appear here at Daily Kos.

      Although I have to say, I'm not so sure I agree with you today -- for one thing, I really don't think that Occupy would ever have an opportunity to pursue a Tea Party model, precisely because of the astro turf and infusion of money that is, I think, more than a parenthetical aside -- I think it is one of the legs of the three-legged tea party stool. The second leg is that angry conservative white people in the USA have less education and are more likely to march in lockstep than people who are likely to support Occupy, which is a very diverse group. The third leg of the stool is that Obama is in the White House, and Obama's presence fires up these angry conservative whites in just unimaginable ways -- they always hate a Democratic president, and in this case he is black, which makes them even angrier. Occupy has a lot to be angry about, but I would argue that Obama is more of a unifying symbol for right-wing anger than the broad category of bankers, corporations, and plutocrats and their Washington allies who are screwing the working class in the USA.

      Occupy has put a high priority on process -- as a supporter of Occupy, I'm nevertheless sympathetic to the argument put forward in this cartoon, and elsewhere, that Occupy may have spent too much time and energy on process, and not enough on getting shit done. But at the same time, I think it is important to ensure that this movement doesn't get washed out by Democratic Party priorities or go the way of organizations like Move On, which once knew how to push Democrats around, but more and more are simply echo chambers for the DNC.

      Just a few thoughts, but again, I'm sorry about all the recent vitriol about cartoons around here -- I think they're great food for thought, and I do not expect to agree with everything I see on the Daily Kos front page.

      "As the madmen play on words, and make us all dance to their song / to the tune of starving millions, to make a better kind of gun..." -- Iron Maiden

      by Lost Left Coaster on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:43:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Pragmatic = right wing (4+ / 0-)

      The Tea Party is funded by billionaires, supported by Fox News and is the darling of most Republicans.  Who paid for that shiny bus and race track?  The Tea Party's owners.

      They succeeded wildly because they are a pawn of the institution.  There's no "people power" there, just angry whitey bastards having their rage channelled for the benefit of their masters.

      Their electoral focus went in the same direction it was already going in.

      Occupy?  It's just people.  Crowdfunded, has no media support and is shunned by everyone in power (in many cases brutally - especially by Democratic mayors!).

      It's hard to be electorally focused when the binary choices available are both bad.

      "LOL Occupy failed" isn't thought provoking, but being a little wittier and less "pragmatic" into poking at the truth behind the why would be.

      Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
      Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

      by The Dead Man on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:44:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Occupy's agenda is deciding this election (6+ / 0-)

      Not the Teabaggers.

      Everything in this campaign--from "the 1 percent" to "the 47 percent"---come directly because of Occupy.

    •  now YOURS is a political cartoon with punch - (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, CwV, reddog1

      accurate punch.

      i was supportive of the goals of the occupy movement initially UNTIL the non-leaders started saying they were not "political".  that is when they lost me.  

      without the understanding that change ONLY comes through the political system and not some imagined "revolution" (constant drawing comparisons to the "arab spring"), the movement ceased to move forward.

      in the sixties - the movement of angry youth facing draft and death turned to the polls - they fought for the right to vote at 18 - they fought for change that would impact their lives through the political system.

      for those who still claim there is no difference between the parties, just look at which party attempts to rein in the abuses of corporations, wall street, banks, etc., and then look at which party wants to rid us of ALL regulations! (from osha to environment to business practices).

      the open hostility of many in the extreme version of occupy who refuse to acknowledge that real change will ONLY come through the political system, i want to ask "how's that arab spring revolution working out now for the people who simply tore down their government without another system in place.

      thank you for this cartoon - it is excellent political commentary on the differences between political activists.


    •  You forgot to put the corporate sponsors' logos (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KateCrashes, joanneleon, George Hier

      on the Tea Party Express bus.

      Because if you want to know why one has been politically efficacious, and one not, there's your answer.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:06:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's easy to make excuses, but for all of (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dutch Doctor

      the astro turf and Koch money, it takes votes to get people elected to Congress.

      I don't see many Democrats running away from money and your point is completely valid:

      Occupy identified the dividing line between the 1% and the 99% (which, ironically, includes nearly all of the tea party sympathizers).

      If only they had provided a good rejoinder to , "So what?"

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:21:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Occupy themselves..acknowledge they are NOT (0+ / 0-)

      Democratic...but rather ANARCHISTS. That is literally the handbook of rules they follow. I have seen it.

      In a sense they want to destroy our democratic government...but can't agree quite how to do that.

      Too bad we could have certainly used their energy..

      DEMOCRACY is a Relay Race... and you pass the baton by VOTING! So don't vote for OBAMA, VOTE for M&M's, MEDICARE and MIDDLECLASS

      by LOrion on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:48:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  but your interpretation sucks (0+ / 0-)

      you continue the basic misconception of what Tea Party is.

      the basic tea party is the talk radio republican base that was always there to do what the GOP/rove wanted them to do after being told by their radio gods.

      there may be people who joined for various reasons but the teaparty was successful not as any kind of popular movement but because they were already there ready to go. they are the made-to-order pro corporate constituencies that rove ordered around to pressure and intimidate politicians and media when and as needed and to function as  'popular outrage'. when rove lost the white house they lost central control of the talk radio army and dick armey mobilized it with kochs money to stop public option.

      because the left and OWS didn't know this fact they played the game and even blamed obama for health care failure. and allowed team limbaugh to convince the ignorant teabaggers that defaulting was good because it would force obama to make cuts.

      OWS for a while was just about the only thing louder than talk radio the last 20 years.  OWS  'failed' because the left allowed a few blowhards on the worlds loudest soapbox to continue to read coordinated talking points over them, first to egg on the cops and local govs to throw them out and then long after they trailed off to distort what OWS had done.

      i like the cartoon but the interpretation is not right. and things aren't going to get better until the left and OWS recognizes the protests should be happening at the limbaugh megastations. they are where most of the groundwork has been done to defeat any real progress the  last 20 years, and are the true headquarters for the tea party/GOP. they are the single biggest reason we're in this mess, stupidly getting a free speech free ride from the left, and why the tea party has been more noticeable- not because OWS was peaceful and creative.

      This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

      by certainot on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:50:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Protests are so 20th century. (0+ / 0-)

        OWS could do in 40 odd days what they could do in 40 odd months. They need a fucking goal. Why aren't they against having to buy a seat for political office. That's not fair either, but I never hear OWS complain about. No problem there, huh? But give the Dem's this election and start making it a reality they they must agree to. I'm all for emergent properties, but artificial selection has the additional advantage of some crude rudders.

        Spend the next 4 years getting pledges from candidates for publicly funded elections and those who don't face challengers aren't an OWS supporter. Get most Democrats or liberals agreeing with with this and it will change in time. OWS is probably the best way to get Greens and others to add numbers and demands to the Dems.

         They're pushovers. This could work beautifully!

        •  there will be no national rational discussions abo (0+ / 0-)

          bout election reform or any other major reform we need as long as those 1000 coordinated radio stations can shout over everything as if corporate 1% and the stupid and  racist 20% = 50%.

          stuff like publically funded elections (like getting serious about global warming) are a good idea but doomed as long as the talk radio dynamic dominates.

          This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

          by certainot on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 09:42:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Again, radio is so 20th century (0+ / 0-)

            I'd bet within 10 years, with much of it's advocates aging, it will become a rapidly less important. For anyone 50-ish or younger there is a lot of personalized niche media using other means to access far less unified news sources.

            In any case I think that if publicly funded elections get under the national conciousness it will resonate loudly when taxpayers see a way to "buy back" control of their government. What are the good conservative arguments against it?

            •  we don't have 10 years& we've got less than 2 mo (0+ / 0-)

              to make sure we get congress and they don't get the senate

              BTW one of the main reasons we have computer voting is the talk radio gods sold it as a cheaper way to go

              and they will object to publicly funded as another tax and an attack on free speech- money equals free speech

              This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

              by certainot on Fri Sep 21, 2012 at 06:52:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  good for you (0+ / 0-)

      for so thoughtfully pre-empting the potential for shit storm.

      i think this one here is a great single panel, and, a fan of the editorial carton since having been a bit of a strange, unusually politically aware nixon-era 7 year old kid, i totally got where your coming from here grieflessly.

      my default setting is that i really dig your work, i'm glad to find it here, and just in general am really grateful to kos and crew for showcasing some excellent and varied social / editorial comic work.

      i was dismayed that kos had to open up that can of comics meta this week.  still shaking my head that that became necessary.

      keep your eyes on the sky. put a dollar in the kitty. don't the moon look pretty. --becker&fagen

      by homo neurotic on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:55:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Your analysis is not pragmatic, it is blindered. (3+ / 0-)

      Blindered by the false belief that the war here is left vs right, Dem vs Rep.

      The Tea Party is about left vs right, Dem vs Rep.  Which is the wrong war to fight to enact legitimate change

      Occupy is about the populace vs the entrenched systems.  Which is the correct war to fight to enact legitimate change.

      The Tea Party doesn't really want anything most corporatist Republicans don't already want.  They do not threaten the system.  Thus, they have representation inside that system.  They are a fig leaf of populism.

      Occupy rejects corporatism, including Democrats who represent this.  They challenge the system itself.  Thus they have little/no representation in the system.  Occupy is legitimate populism.

      What's wrong under Republicans is still wrong under Democrats.

      by gila on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:59:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "...the populace vs the entrenched systems." (0+ / 0-)

        And how do you figure that the populace effects change without legislation? How do you change laws without engaging with legislators?
        Throwing electoral politics over your shoulder is not how you make democracy work.
        It's how you abdicate and someone else makes it work for them.
        "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -- Plato

        •  by changing the terms of the debate (0+ / 0-)

          it's not complicated.  Centrist, pseudo-pragmatists just want you to think it is.

          Legislation pales before what is actually being debated.

          If we're fighting over the ACA, we're fighting over a corporatist-friendly health-care model written by industry insiders and the Heritage Foundation.  No matter the outcome, we have already essentially lost overall.

          If we're debating Medicare For All, we are fighting on our terms and have already won an immense victory.

          THAT is what Occupy is about.  Changing the terms of the debate.  Which is the most important battle to be won, as it sets the parameters for all other battles.

          And they succeeded.  Before Occupy, we had President Obama going on about deficit cutting, after having empowered the likes of Rahm Emmanuel, Larry Summers, and Tim Geithner.  It wasn't until Occupy exploded that we got even the tepid populism Obama has since offered up.

          We'rearound the issue of tax fairness in this election because Occupy set the stage for it.  If Occupy hadn't happened, we'd be debating deficits and austerity.  That's all Obama talked about before Occupy.

          What's wrong under Republicans is still wrong under Democrats.

          by gila on Mon Sep 24, 2012 at 11:10:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The Tea Party was taken over almost immediately (0+ / 0-)

      by Dick Armey & the Koch Brothers, via their Americans for Prosperity.   That's why they have the bus, I assumed.

    •  Camparing grass roots to astroturf roots is B.S. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      genocideisnews, George Hier

      You depict strong committed activists as losers sitting in a Kumbya circle; how many Tea Party activists had to endure beatings, tear gas, and pepper spray for sitting on the ground in a public place?

      Did OWS have a cable network dedicated to creating and pushing their message?

      You can shove your false equivalency, but you sure draw pretty!

      Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. -Abraham Lincoln

      by jexter on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 07:59:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Who are they? (0+ / 0-)

      Occupy Wall Street?  Who are they?  I vaguely remember something about them from last year...

      "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

      by Subterranean on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 08:47:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  not (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      George Hier

      tea party is an implementation of GOP strategists wet dreams.  How can we get back the "fiscal responsibility" tag GWB gave away?  I know...lets start a "grass roots" anti-tax, pro-business, 'don't tread on me' movement.

      Nice to know that there is still a person who believes that the Tea Party was a grass roots movement.  

      Occupy has been marginalized...not because they aren't relevant but because the "left" is really the middle and has no intention of moving to left.  Much easier for GOP to invent a movement, co-opt the movement and absorb the goals of said movement because they were always the same fucking movement.


      But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have laid my dreams under your feet; tread softly, because you tread on my dreams. – Yeats

      by Bill O Rights on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 08:56:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I couldn't have said it better myself! Thank u n/t (0+ / 0-)

      Well behaved women rarely make history.

      by IamNotaKochsucker on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 10:00:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I still think you're wrong on this subject (0+ / 0-)

      OWS should not get political.  They should not try to be an anti-tea party.  They should, and do, encourage people to vote, but they don't really need to say who to vote for.  Let's face it, no OWS'er is going to vote for Mitt...the epitome of the 1%, and hence the movement is not politically inert.  But, there are a lot of other races, and lots of ways of looking at the overall problem, and what I take away mostly from OWS is that its not about politicians, its about the corrupting force of the big banks and corporations behind them.  

      There are other groups and movements that can push the electoral politics side, DailyKos itself being a prime example.

  •  Note to activists (13+ / 0-)

    Don't try to take over public property with tent communities in order to make your point.

    Try doing something that isn't by definition set up to fail.

    Nobody's impressed by you getting arrested. In the 60's a bunch of white kids getting arrested may have been worrying or somehow unusual.

    In today's America getting arrested isn't hard, in fact it seems to be a national pass time. With our prison/criminal justice system, I can't imagine anything that's less newsworthy than someone getting arrested in this country.

    For a bunch of artistic liberals, you're thinking way way inside the box.

    Hint, if your parents and grandparents were doing it, try something else.

    •  We stopped the Vietnam War and got rid of Nixon (5+ / 0-)

      just sayin.

      •  I think Nixon got rid of Nixon. (5+ / 0-)
      •  time stopped the Vietnam war (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Terrapin, Pragmaticus, George Hier

        and reporters got rid of Nixon. I don't think the Vietnam war would have ended if it weren't for public exhaustion from the so-called "silent majority" - quite a bit like Afghanistan actually.

        Sit ins didn't accomplish either, IMO. Of course that's just IMO.

        They were newsworthy though, I'll give you that. Back then.

        Just not sure what your comment has to do with 2012. I was sort of making the point that while they may have had an impact (to whatever end) back then, they just don't seem to now.

        •  and, you left out one major difference: (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          84thProblem, kefauver, George Hier

          the media actually did it's job.  the images of dead soldiers and deal vietnamese played a major role in ending that war.  

          that was why dubya and his daddy banned free press coverage of the results of war.

          from the gulf war one embeds to the banning of showing the bodies returning home - the republicans GOT what turned the american people against the war.

          reality.  images.  media.

          now we have talk shows that masquerade as news.

          •  Maddow is better than anything we had back then (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Adam AZ

            You give the white male talking heads from back then way too much credit. They maintained the status quo in a way many of our news anchors today simply don't.

            Way too much rose colored glasses regarding our history going on in this thread.

            •  maddow is great - but she is behind a paywall that (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              many people can't afford to breach.
              there are a few excellent journalists remaining, but their reach is limited.

              we often forget that not everyone has internet access, cable access, satellite access.

              now, with the digitization of television, even free stations are limited to "line of site".  

              we have become a low information nation - that explains a great deal about the middle of this nation that is so "red".  it will eventually change with the younger generation turning to technology - but for older americans in poor regions, much of what is happening is still limited to few choices.

              •  I'll bet more people have Internet than (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                joanneleon, Adam AZ, George Hier

                people had TV's back then.

                Rose colored glasses don't do anyone any good.

                •  you'd lose. the middle of this nation (0+ / 0-)

                  is far different than either coast.  i'm late for a meeting, but if you want a clearer picture, let's talk more later and ask those who live in the "boonies" of the nation... like in the middle of farm country, the mountains, the far reaches of the south.

                  we are privileged - i am privileged.  if it weren't for my neighbor who graciously lets me log into her wireless, i'd be without now.

                  poverty affects many americans - and the internet is a luxury many can't afford!  (same goes with cable, satellite, etc., both of which i cannot afford and do not have.)

                  •  In 1960 (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    LucyandByron, George Hier

                    there were about 47 million households who had tv's

                    Right now about 90 million households have Internet

                    Average household size in 1960 was 3.6.

                    Average household size in 2000 was 2.7.



                    So I'm not only right, I'm more than double right, you arrogant jerk.

                    •  when was the last time you drove through (0+ / 0-)

                      south dakota - in the middle of the state?  or kansas?  or any other of the very red states.

                      your insult is counter-productive and your numers are non-factual when taken in perspective.

                      for example, the census numbers per every ten years

                      in 1960, the u.s. population was 179,323,175.
                      in 2010, the u.s. population was 307,745,538

                      as of july, 2011, the total population via census (underestimated, for sure) was 313,847,465.

                      and, for more information, the studies showing world internet usage show as of 2010/2011 in the u.s., here is the breakdown of internet users by state.  please note that some states, such as arkansas, still have over 30% without access or use.

                      before you start hurling about insults or calling me an "arrogant jerk", how about doing some research on your own (if you choose not to believe me).  google is your friend, my friend.

      •  Feminist & Environmental Movements and more... (6+ / 0-)


        Consumer advocacy movement

        Voting rights (lowered the voting age to 18)

        Public Education Reform

        Renewable Energy Movement (Jimmy Carter was listening)

        Dirty Fuckin' Hippies accomplished quite a lot, probably more than any generation since.  

        Scared the hell out of Republicans so bad they had to start stealing elections.

        "Mitt Romney is Dick Cheney with more charisma"

        by Betty Pinson on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:23:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So-called "dirty hippies" like to take credit for (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          exotrip, kefauver, Adam AZ

          things they helped do, but which a lot of well dressed people got done.

          I'd be careful of that.

          •  Can you tell me (0+ / 0-)

            how many DFH's have served in Congress and the Executive Branch or became influential political leaders?

            Their political ambitions were so threatening to Republicans they began asking candidates if they had ever smoked marijuana.

            Hillary Clinton
            Bill Clinton
            John Kerry
            Sherrod Brown
            Paul Wellstone
            Pat Schroeder
            Hamilton Jordan
            Jody Powell
            Gary Hart
            Stephanie Tubbs Jones
            Emanuel Cleaver
            Rev. Jesse Jackson
            John Hall
            Sonny Bono

            The list is pretty long, I've run out of time to work on it for you.

            "Mitt Romney is Dick Cheney with more charisma"

            by Betty Pinson on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:47:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Even if all of those people were hippies (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kefauver, Adam AZ

              (and that's VERY debatable) aren't I recommending Occupy do exactly what they did and brand themselves differently so they can get things done? That's what many of those people ended up doing.

              Clinton didn't accomplish anything until he stopped looking and acting like a hippie, for example.

            •  You are proving snowcity's point ... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Adam AZ

              ... by providing a list of people who were able to effect tremendous, positive, constructive change by cutting their hair, taking a shower, putting  on a suit and participating within the system that we have now.

              The romance of manning the barricades might work great for selling some artwork or getting laid but it really does not do any longterm, lasting good in this world.

              Please do not be alarmed. We are about to engage... the nozzle.

              by Terrapin on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:51:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  And when 18 year olds got the vote (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Little, edrie

            thanks to the DFH's, every candidate for Congress and the WH began paying attention to the "youth vote".

            I mean, where do you think the "youth vote" came from?  That's right, the DFH's.

            I feel badly that Reagan began reversing the good education reform we started, resulting in you getting a GOP version of revisionist history when you were in school.  Its a good opportunity for your generation to become active again in education reform.

            "Mitt Romney is Dick Cheney with more charisma"

            by Betty Pinson on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:53:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Have to Disagree (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            84thProblem, joanneleon

            The well-dressed people back then were people like Karl Rove and Mitt Romney.

            Vietnam did not appear on the radar until their were protests, leading to the Ohio State tragedy.

            It is true that MLK began changing his focus to the war and may have been the catalyst had he not been cut down, but that is just conjecture.

            •  not true. it was dan rather's field reporting (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              84thProblem, kefauver, George Hier

              and cronkite's news coverage that made the difference.

              folks back then USED to sit down for dinner as a family and talk about issues of the day - they sat in front of the teevee after dinner and watched the news.

              the most important images coming over the teevee screen were the ones that showed the non-living soldiers and victims of that war.

              americans lost their taste for blood when it was in their living rooms in technicolor.

              the youth protests were significant - why? because for people of my generation, it literally WAS about life or death.  the draft was ever present - and to this day, many people from my high school and college days are not there to make "reunions", having died in their late teens and early twenties.

              haven't you noticed that there is very little coverage of today's military?  why?  because if most americans were confronted with the reality of what we are doing in bush's war(s), they would demand that we end the conflicts.

              ignorance truly is bliss when a nation has no functioning press.  

              •  I think you had to have both (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                edrie, genocideisnews, George Hier

                I'm not going to disagree with you concerning the importance of news coverage of the war, but I think the protests accelerated the process and helped force a dialogue, which in turn motivated the journalist to pursue the story.

                I'll grant you that there were a lot of moving parts back then, but I don't think you can dismiss the protests out of hand.

            •  Revisionist history doesn't do anyone any good (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Adam AZ

              Most of the whites who marched with blacks (one example) were relatively well dressed young people, like most back then, not dirty hippies. Not all, but most.

          •  and, as a member of that generation, we VOTED! (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kefauver, CwV

            we campaigned, we worked to change the government THROUGH the political process!

            now, it appears to be the self-destructive fad to throw away that critically important tool available to every american - the right to cast a ballot (and know when it is simply wasted on idealism).

            we learned about that idealism the hard way with george mcgovern.  mcgovern was a good and decent man who didn't stand a chance to win - ever.

      •  Nixon never would have been driven from office (0+ / 0-)

        ... if the general anti-authoritarian attitude of the late 60s had not happened first.

        Ditto for the end of the Vietnam War. Nixon decided he had to tiptoe his way out or risk continual domestic violence at home.

    •  Tell you what: (4+ / 0-)

      when you've developed an effective tactic of political intervention that doesn't involve a hundred million in SuperPAC money and/or an army of lobbyists, get back to us. Until then, what would you actually propose we do? Other than donate to the democrats and hope for the best?

      Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

      by Dale on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:38:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Vote in off year elections - turnout in 2010 -30% (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        edrie, kefauver

        Vote for the most progressive candidate with a chance to win - in primaries and general elections

        I'm entirely in favor of OWS.  But tea party will keep winning if you don't vote and they do.

      •  Run for office. (0+ / 0-)

        Support one of your number that can run for local office and start occupying the halls of power.
        You've got to have at least a couple sharp poli-sci majors that can be worked up. Many city and town council elections are non-partisan so you don't have to join any particular party.
        Democracy is run by those that show up. Figure out how it's done.

    •  The brutality of the arrests does not alarm you? (3+ / 0-)

      The militarization and belligerence of the police? That democratic mayors would condone/order this?

      Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
      Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

      by The Dead Man on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:49:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ouch (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snowcity, susanWAstate, Cinnamon

    Were that it were otherwise.

    Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

    by Mindful Nature on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:04:33 PM PDT

  •  Well. (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MaikeH, Eric0125, Shockwave, Tool, DRo, George Hier

    If the Tea Party bus were suspended by puppet strings draped across the Koch Brothers fat hands, I might like this more.

    Please read and enjoy my novella, Tulum, available in soft cover and eBook formats.

    by davidseth on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:05:18 PM PDT

    •  Yes, the Tea Partiers have plenty of help (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      from big corporate interests, but the fact is at least they're interested in actually working within the political system and running actual candidates and have specific, tangible legislation and policies they want to enact.  That's the only tried and true way to affect real tangible changes in this country, but apparently Occupy is not interested in that.  I think that's what Wuerker is getting at here.  Occupy's lack of impact relative to the Tea Party has less to do with funding than it has to do with their approach.

      “Th’ noise ye hear is not th’ first gun iv a revolution. It’s on’y th’ people iv the United States batin’ a carpet.” - Mr. Dooley

      by puakev on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:14:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's relatively easy to find champions in (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        davidseth, George Hier

        Congress if you're an ostensibly populist movement agitating for tax cuts, privatization, and deregulation. Jim demint and others will be happy to dress up as foaming-at-the-mouth insurgents, if thats what it takes to convince the teabaggers that they're doing something qualitatively different than other Republicans have been doing for decades.

        But how do you work the same magic with Democratic office holders that are getting most of their campaign donations from the financial industry?

        Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

        by Dale on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:49:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The system is broken, it's hard to work within it (4+ / 0-)

        when the binary choices do not work.

        Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
        Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

        by The Dead Man on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:50:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Political choices (0+ / 0-)

          are never actually binary. You weigh one against another and others all the time. This one is good on this and not that, but that one is bad on most things but excellent on this one thing!
          A binary worldview is exactly the problem in this non-Black&White world.
          That way lies extremism.

          •  That's just splitting hairs (0+ / 0-)

            You got "1" and "0" as choices in our system.  Sure you can hem and haw about which digit is better, but you're still trapped in a binary system.  Now if we had a hexidecimal system like some advanced democracies, then we would have a wider field to choose from that would fit citizens far better.

            Our binary system has already devolved to the point where 50% (or more) of it is nothing but negative extremism - corporate, social.

            NOW SHOWING
            Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
            Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

            by The Dead Man on Fri Sep 21, 2012 at 03:41:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  hexidecimal system like some advanced democracies" (0+ / 0-)

              What? Like Italy? That has gridlocked so continuously that their Parliament has collapsed 44 times since WWll?  Or Israel? Where a couple of tiny extremist minority parties drive the agenda because without them, there is no single party that can form a government? Or for that matter, any multi-party Parliamentary system where you vote for the party and the party picks who will sit in which chair? And if they have to form a Govt with other parties, they can bargain away certain portfolios? If you like hyper-partisanship and trust the parties to do the right thing, this is your system.
              Unless you are planning to completely rewrite the Constitution and come up with a different system entirely, we will have a First-Past-The-Post, slightly modified Majority system with one person in each position of power. And because this is a VERY large country, there will almost inevitably be two major parties, most of the time.
              There's a possibility of the GOP breaking up (if we can defeat them embarrassingly enough) and for a couple cycles, that would mean one Major and a several minor parties, but within a few cycles, it will coalesce back into two major parties competing for 50%+1.

  •  Nice cartoon (10+ / 0-)

    As someone who wants to support Occupy, all I can say is "OUCH".

    On facebook I am friends with "Occupy Dallas", and they are pretty clear in their, "both sides are the same" line.  The reason the Tea Party is so strong is they incorporated into the  Repuplican party, and won the primaries in areas they could easily win the election.  It was a brilliant strategy.  The Occupy movement could really learn from that.  Instead of fielding better Democrats in primaries where the final election is a foregone conclusion, instead they vote 3rd party.

    Minority rights should never be subject to majority vote.

    by lostboyjim on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:05:38 PM PDT

    •  That seems a bit of an over-generalization (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave, bdop4, CwV

      I'll bet many progressive Democrats participate in the Occupy Movement and many more are probably discovering leadership skills that will serve them well when they do decide to run for office.

      We're ALL better off when we're ALL better off!

      by susanWAstate on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:13:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What Occupy could use - (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Trobone, susanWAstate, Shockwave

    One message. They've tried to accommodate everyone when one congealed message would probably serve them well.

    Money. If they only had the Koch wallets backing, their grass would be a little greener and more comfortable. I'm rolling my eyes, btw.

    MSM attention. See: Money and Koch wallets.

    Strange but not a stranger.

    by jnww on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:07:19 PM PDT

  •  Well done! nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    puakev, edrie
  •  I think this one is great (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    highacidity, sydneyluv, mdmslle, tofumagoo

    The message: if you want your views represented in government, then run for government.  Good message and I hope many more progressives run for school boards, dog catchers, and any other local elections.  We need people there, too.

    "It looks like how music sounds." --My four year old nephew upon looking through a kaleidoscope for the first time

    by Mote Dai on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:10:42 PM PDT

  •  Isn't it true that Occupy didn't choose (8+ / 0-)

    to align themselves with any politicians or political parties?  In fact, I recall that they specifically dissuaded politicians from getting involved in the actual protests.  The 'baggers were actively courted by publicans and covered, indeed were actively urged on by the right wing media like fox news, cnn and politico.  I don't really see the comparison between the two groups given that reality.

    A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

    by dougymi on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:12:00 PM PDT

  •  I, for one, will not be throwing any pie at you (9+ / 0-)

    Matt.  I totally agree with you here.  

    I do think/hope that most activists in the Occupy movement will vote for Obama, if they vote at all.

    At least one of my FB friends was very active in posting Occupy stuff, and now she is constantly putting up stuff that leads me to believe she will not be voting at all.  She is disgusted with both parties.

    I understand some of this frustration.  But the bottom line is that one of the parties will govern in the White House and that person will likely pick several Supreme Court justices.

    And furthermore, we truly can't let the Tea Party make any more inroads.  We need to take back the House and maintain and improve our seats in the Senate.  Without this there truly will be no moving forward.

    Idealism and its time and place, as does pragmatism.  It is time to be realistic and GOTV.

    I fall down, I get up, I keep dancing.

    by DamselleFly on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:12:40 PM PDT

  •  More false equivalency from dunderheads. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I guess cartoonists are the same whichever side they're coming from ...

    If they had any smarts, they'd have real jobs, wouldn't they?

    Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

    by Clem Yeobright on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:12:40 PM PDT

    •  I bet you don't talk to people like that in person (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peregrinus, kefauver

      Why not follow Matt's example and engage thoughtfully as he has done above?  

      No one likes armed missionaries. -- Robespierre.

      by Gator Keyfitz on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:22:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He's too bitter (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Clem Yeobright

        hope he votes though.

        •  You talking to me? You talking to ME? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          peregrinus, KenBee, allensl

          Nah, I'm not bitter. I have no association with Occupy at all.

          It's like the Seinfeld about the Catholic-converted-to-Judaism dentist telling Jewish jokes. When Jerry complains, he's asked "Ah, you're offended as a Jew, are you?" and he replies "No, I'm offended as a comedian!"

          Me, I'm offended as a moderately intelligent human being.

          Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

          by Clem Yeobright on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:34:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  He gets to publish first and then we discuss? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KenBee, genocideisnews, George Hier

        Is he offering to withdraw the cartoon and delete the post if he's shown that he's wrong?

        Get me that commitment and sure, I'll discuss it.

        Do YOU think TP and Occupy are equivalent and/or parallel organizations?

        And yes, I frequently tell dunderheads that's what they are. They need to know. What do you tell them?

        Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

        by Clem Yeobright on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:29:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  deal. show me I'm wrong and I'll delete the toon (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright, Little, George Hier
          •  Ah Jeez, Matt (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Clem Yeobright, Little

            You shouldn't be here. Just let people discuss the ideas behind your work.

            You are a political cartoonist. That means you piss people off. It's your job. You're not doing Garfield, here.

            I don't think you can be proven wrong because you are giving an opinion.

          •  Give me an hour to formulate my reply. (0+ / 0-)

            and keep your finger close to the 'delete' button.

            Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

            by Clem Yeobright on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:50:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  DEAL! here's how you're very wrong... (5+ / 0-)

            The teabaggers began in a GOP lobbyist office and was meant to siphon off the far right anger at Bushjr. It had an entire TV network to boost its actions including buses and high profile speakers etc. It succeeded in keep the wingnuts in the fold and gave them a place to caucus without harming the GOP.

            Your cartoon merely shows you've swallowed the 'conventional wisdom' of the village and totally misunderstand what really happened with the teabagger insurrection even though you hint at the "astroturf" etc.

            Occupy on the other hand was never any part of a political party. It had no billionaires giving it unlimited money. It wasn't begun by Democratic consultants. It had no TV network to plan its moves and publicize its every action. No high profile network speakers, planners and logistical support. Occupy was truely a grassroots show of frustration and an attempt to get America to see what the 1% was doing to the 99%, in that they succeeded.

            In reality both movements were sucessful. Teabaggers were kept within the GOP fold. Occupy succeeded in changing the political narrative from 'deficit reduction' to 'wealth inequality'.

            The main thing wrong with your 'cartoon' about the matter is your false measurement of each movements sucess.

            NOW DELETE

            America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

            by cacamp on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:19:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  As an admin (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I'm overriding Matt's excessively accommodating offer.  There will be no deleting because someone doesn't like the opinion proferred.

              Tom Tomorrow's most recent book is TOO MUCH CRAZY from Soft Skull Press.

              by Tom Tomorrow on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:04:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  it wasn't about "dislike" at all (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                genocideisnews, George Hier

                but no one really thought he'd delete so don't get your panties in a twist. But the fact remains he's totally wrong because he fails to understand the basis for the tea party, as I pointed out.

                America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

                by cacamp on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:26:53 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You must be an off the scale genius (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  To get all that from this cartoon.

                  Cartoons are a body of work.  Wuerker has been very supportive of ows in previous cartoons.

                  And spare me the misogynist "panties in a bunch" crap.

                  Tom Tomorrow's most recent book is TOO MUCH CRAZY from Soft Skull Press.

                  by Tom Tomorrow on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:38:14 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I said "YOUR panties" not a womans (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    George Hier

                    But my explanation still holds... the cartoonist doesn't understand what either of the movements were trying to accomplish. He thinks the TP was a grassroots effort to aquire political power; it wasn't. It was an insider effort to rechannel the far rights anger at Bushjr away from the GOP and to keep those angry people within the GOP. In that it succeeded but not in the way the cartoonist thinks it did.

                    I can't help it if neither of you can or will engage those items. Sometimes it's easier to avoid the truth by poking around the edges such as citing some pro-Occupy cartoons in the past or even refering to your panties as misogynist instead of denying you wear panties and/or they got in a twist.. :). ha, I made myself laugh, sorry.

                    btw, the cartoonist also misunderstand the success of the "Occupy" movement but I won't bother to explain that to you again.

                    America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

                    by cacamp on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 06:56:54 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  You cartoon had no cats in it! There are cats (0+ / 0-)

                in the wold! Therefore: WRONG.

                Fuck me a tuna, this is nuts.

          •  Here's what I think (3+ / 0-)

            Your cartoon is titled "Not in the Race". It shows two buses and a scoreboard labeled "Angry Base Race" and "Votes in Congress" with the score 61 to 0.

            You could have stopped with your title, because - just as you say there - Occupy is not in the race because it never entered any race such as you depict.

            You might as well have labeled your buses New York Knicks and Dailykos IGTNT Group. The former attempts to score points in the NBA and the latter does not. How can it be interesting that the Knicks have 61 basketball points and IGTNT has none?

            I have no association with Occupy and no qualifications to speak for it or even about it in depth. Reading the comments here - and bernardpliers's excellent diary on Mass Movements - I can accept that Occupy has in its single year of existence not been very effective on its own terms, even in defining its goals. Still, it is clear that Occupy never undertook to score points on the scoreboard you depict, and therefore it is utterly uninteresting that it has scored no points on that board.

            Good political cartoons, like good caricatures, may exaggerate some features of reality to highlight points of comparison and contrast. There is no reality behind the thesis of this cartoon, so it obfuscates rather than clarifies. It offends me especially because it constitutes a 'cheap shot' and it seems to me you took a bit too much delight caricaturing the Occupy characters and belittling them and their 'bus'. But that's all 'bright shiny object'. The fact is, the cartoon is a failure and I believe that in future years you will be ashamed of yourself for having published it.

            But do as you will.

            Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

            by Clem Yeobright on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:02:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Clem, I agree with you. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              genocideisnews, George Hier

              Except for the last line of the last paragraph.   I found this cartoon taking the easy route of the never ending need in american political media for a sports metaphor to explain everything.  OWS, for better or worse, specifically did not want to take a political side or list specific goals.  They never entered any race.  

              OWS has clearly not lived up to any of the expectations put on them.  But that has nothing to do with them and everything to do with those who tried to define them.

              "Wall Street expertise, an industry in which anything not explicitly illegal is fair game, and the illegal things are fair game too if you think you won't get caught." — Hunter

              by Back In Blue on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 09:13:38 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  No,he gets to express his opinion as long as the (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright, Little

          Site adminstrator let's him do so.  You don't get to censor him, but you do have the same opportunity we all do to express your opinion.  My opinion is you've wasted an opportunity by resorting to name calling, which is seldom successful with those who are unpersuaded, of which I am one.  

          No one likes armed missionaries. -- Robespierre.

          by Gator Keyfitz on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:40:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "If he's wronlg". (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright

          Man, you realy need to step back and check yourself. It's a cartoon. Kos pays this guy to make cartoons for DKos. He's never "wrong" for doing his job.


        •  ask a politically apathetic teen bout TP & OWS (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I have. Like it or not, OWS & TP are now widely perceived to be mirror images of crazy people with crazy signs. At least among those who don't know any better.

          "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

          by TheHalfrican on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:33:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That may be true, but it's because of the need (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            genocideisnews, George Hier

            for media, and hell, just about everyone else to define it as such.  From day one everyone wanted to know what OWS wanted but OWS couldn't explain it on their terms.  The media compared them to the Tea Party because they wanted it to be a repeat of the summer of 2009 on up to the midterms.  It was quite a ratings bonanza.  But that didn't happen because OWS is nothing like the Tea Party.

            So I agree in a large part with Clem (which might be a first) that the basic premise of OWS being in any race with the tea party or any political group fails and therefore the political viewpoint fails as well.

            Unfortunately, this cartoon continues the same never ending horserace, hardball, sports metaphor that seems to be necessary for all political discussion.

            "Wall Street expertise, an industry in which anything not explicitly illegal is fair game, and the illegal things are fair game too if you think you won't get caught." — Hunter

            by Back In Blue on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 09:03:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Huh (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright

      odd use of the term "false equivalency"

      I usually think of that when Republicans say that a  Democrat's exaggeration of an economic indicator is equal to Bush lying us into the Iraqi war. (As an example)

      In this case they are both movements, and it is fair to compare them.


    •  er, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright

      that's just a weird response, man. And I didn't like the cartoon.

      Jobs in the arts ARE "real jobs."

  •  I think this phenomenon (6+ / 0-)

    can at least be partially explained this way:

    The Tea Party is not a grass roots organization the way Occupy is. Teabaggers are paraded around by the nose by astroturf organizations funded by old timer Washington insiders like Dick Armey and Randian billionaires like the Kochs, whereas no one claims ownership or leadership of Occupy Wall Street.

    It's easier to organize a legion of useful idiots like the Tea Party than it is to organize an actual grass roots small-D democratic leaderless movement that, by definition, is anti-establishment.

    The country-fried rubes in the Tea Party aren't primarying Repubs from the right, their puppeteers are... the Kochs, Grover Norquist, etc.

    Occupy has no such puppeteers to threaten Dems with primaries from the left.

    •  huh? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peregrinus, Gator Keyfitz, ThinkerT, edrie

      Eric-- "the Tea Party aren't primarying Repubs from the right". ??????? That's exactly what they've been doing.  And in a few short years they've moved the Republicans way to the right.  Yes there's lots of corporate money and media machines taking advantage of them but there's also a much more motivated and politically meaningful grassroots aspect to the TP that has taken a lot of pissed off voters and gotten them to elect a bunch of their people to Congress.  Imagine what Obama could have done if Occupy had done the same from the left and put 60 progressives in Congress.....

      •  Out of context (4+ / 0-)

        Sure, if you cut my sentence off half-way through, you can use 8 question marks to explain your confusion. But you see my point if you read the entire sentence.

        My point is that the asthmatic angry old people sitting in inflatable chairs listening to Glenn Beck yammer on in the Washington Mall aren't the driving force behind the Tea Party. The Kochs, Grover Norquist, et al are. They point at an unsuspecting establishment Republican and yell, "Sic 'em!" and their horde of zombie ignoramuses charge the targeted Repub's town halls and make noises.

        Occupy is not structured that way. It is an amoeba of anti-Capital sentiment. There is no one or two leaders yelling for Occupiers to "sic 'em" on Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman.

  •  Now that (0+ / 0-)

    is humorous.   Kind of looks like a drum circle with no drums.  Sooo on target.

  •  Anyone in the racing game................... (3+ / 0-)

    can tell you that to have a sucessful racing team you need sponsors with deep pockets willing to burn through some $.  The tea baggers have the Koch's and Adleson; OWS has only, relatively speaking,  nickle and dime individual supporters.

    No contest.  

    The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation--HDT

    by cazcee on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:16:39 PM PDT

    •  so where was Soros and Librul Hollywood at? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Lupe Fiasco was nice enough to stop by OWS to answer questions about 9/11 Truth and Building 7 (UGH), but I guess he wasn't sticking around and coughing up cash.

      "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

      by TheHalfrican on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:36:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tea Party = Mitt Romney. (14+ / 0-)

    Occupy = a complete change n the national conversation.

    This cartoon missed the mark:

    With that in mind, ThinkProgress compiled a brief list of Occupy Wall Street’s accomplishments over its first six months:

    Income Inequality: The 99 Percent movement refocused America’s political debate, forcing news outlets and eventually politicians to focus on rising income inequality. While debt and deficits were the primary focus of the media before the movement started, their attention after the movement began shifted to jobs, Wall Street, and unemployment. By the end of October, even Republicans were talking about income inequality, and a week later, Time Magazine devoted its cover to the topic, asking, “Can you still move up in America?”

    Occupy Our Homes: The movement has drawn attention to many of the predatory, discriminatory, and fraudulent practices perpetrated by banks during the foreclosure crisis, and across the country, Occupy groups, religious leaders, and community organizations have helped homeowners prevent wrongful foreclosures on their homes. Activists in Detroit are working to save their fifth home, and similar actions have taken place in cities like Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Cleveland, and Atlanta. The movement has drawn so much attention that local political leaders and even members of Congress have stepped in to help homeowners facing foreclosure.

    Move Your Money: On Bank Transfer Day, activists helped more than 40,000 Americans move their money from large banks to credit unions, and more than 650,000 switched to credit unions last October. Religious groups have taken up the cause as well, moving $55 million before Thanksgiving. This year, a San Francisco interfaith group moved $10 million from Wells Fargo and other groups marked Lent by moving more money from Wall Street. As a result, analysts say the nation’s 10 biggest banks could lose $185 billion in customer deposits this year “due to customer defections.”

    Fighting For Positive Policies: Occupy groups have pushed for positive policy outcomes at both the state and federal levels. Occupy The SEC submitted a 325-page comment letter on the Volcker Rule, a regulation to rein in big banks. Pressure from protesters forced New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) to reverse his opposition to a millionaire’s tax, and activists fought Indiana Republicans’ union-busting “right-to-work” law, and have pushed big banks to stop financing destructive environmental practices like mountaintop removal mining in coal states.

  •  OWS has done a lot for everyone by... (11+ / 0-)

    ...redirecting the discussion from deficit reduction to wealth and income inequality.  A lot.

    Still, IMO, they do not plan to enter partisan politics.  They seem to have organized themselves for post-partisan politics unlike the tea baggers.

    They function around some sort of anarchist principles which work during occupations but are not effective elsewhere.

    If the country collapses, they will be around to help gat us out of the ensuing chaos.

    They have connected among themselves and this may allow them to reconvene at the right time.

    But we have a two party system whether we like it or not (I don't) and to change things we have to start there.

    Love OWS but I don't count on them for the change we need to bring to politics in this extreme polarization we now have.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:17:59 PM PDT

    •  Thanks! (5+ / 0-)

      I don't remember any banners during OWS that said "We're coming to save you!" or "We know the Tea Party was Mean to You, We'll Make Everything Better"

      Just because there was a movement doesn't mean it was created for the Professional Left's benefit.  Why do people keep expecting that?  Really am confused...

      Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

      by allensl on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:36:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am not the "professional left", trust me (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        But I think we need to accept the political environment we operate in if we want to effect change.

        I consider OWS part of the solution but not the instrument of change.

        I really hope that OWS people and leaders (yes many promising leaders) engage in the existing political system as individuals at least.

        Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

        by Shockwave on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:54:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          It will be great when Occupy folks get into politics - but that wasn't what the movement was/is about.  

          And I didn't mean to imply/state anything about your political stance - was just wondering why the political side of the left just assumed that Occupy materialized for their benefit.  All the digs they make seem to be based on the fact that Occupy is doing 'it' right.  Not sure why they think that was the point.

          I'm left and voting for the Prez, and GOTV'ing and donating, and if Liz W doesn't win my father and I are both committing sepaku.    And I donated to Occupy and support their view.  I just don't understand why there can't be multiple avenues to change going on at the same time, without people denigrating either/both.

          Sorry to bend your ear...  ;)

          Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

          by allensl on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:43:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  This is a very good point (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave, Clem Yeobright
  •  Nice (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    allensl, KenBee, DRo, George Hier


    You almost had a half way decent political cartoon. Had you had piles of cash flowing out of the Bus with a Koch Brother sigh or Americans for Prosperity sign it might have been more salient.

    Right now - just more garbage shitting on Occupy.

    If you ever glen any money from your chosen profession maybe you can kick a few bucks towards a few occupy candidates..

    like George Martinez

    or our own

    Seneca Donae

  •  Here ya go. Save you all trouble. (6+ / 0-)
    Rant rant concern concern longevity popularity OWS blah rant concern concern rant no leader disorganized concern rant troll troll clear message leadership inside the process electoral rant concern concern rant optics white privileged out of touch drum circle rant strategy rant concern troll rant.
    •  A few political things that I think it could be (6+ / 0-)

      argued would not have happened had Occupy not existed.

      -- Millionaire's tax in NY extended.
      -- National bank settlement for billions & billions more than originally negotiated.
      -- Homeowner's bill of rights legislation in CA.
      -- Millionaire's tax ballot initiative made more progressive in CA.

      Along with simply the general perception of banksters and Citizens' United.

      No question there have been failures as well.

  •  I just thank God that the Organized Political Left (9+ / 0-)

    was there to change the national conversation from Deficits to Income Inequality...they totally managed to change the political climate.

    oh, wait...

    Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

    by allensl on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:23:59 PM PDT

  •  one bus, one driver vs community bus (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    driver probably union, and paid.


    One volunteer bus, several volunteer mechanics...

    Carton looks about right to me :>

    both these non-comparable entities have moved the politics because they have the message from their respective constituencies, that's where the comparison pretty much ends.

    This machine kills Fascists.

    by KenBee on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:24:57 PM PDT

  •  Hahahaha. (4+ / 0-)

    Now all the people who were talking down to those of us who didn't like your previous cartoons are getting upset over this one.

    I love it. I just love it.

    If you say "gullible" real slow, it sounds like "green beans."

    by weatherdude on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:25:16 PM PDT

  •  Thank Occupy for the language they created (16+ / 0-)

    Occupy created a nationwide understanding of the idea of the 1%. It has informed everything since. It explains Mitt Romney in two symbols-- not two letters. Not two words. Two symbols.

    Occupy gave us a language with which to explain our fundamental grievance with American society, and that language is part of why Obama is winning.

    Not fuckin' bad for a bunch of dirty hippies in a park.

    If your American flag pin wasn't made in America with metal from American mines enameled by Americans, you are a terrorist.

    by Mahall on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:26:51 PM PDT

    •  That's their one contribution. (0+ / 0-)

      They coined a useful phrase, then decided to hold their breath and stamp their feet and thought that would magically make more people come to their Hoovervilles.

      •  Seriously don't mean to be snarky, but... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        genocideisnews, George Hier

        What have you done-- or written-- that has had as great an impact?

        Maybe something. I don't know. But I don't care how writers achieve what they achieve. The important thing is that they achieve it.

        I'm not saying they should continue. I'm saying they accomplished exactly what they intended-- What Is Our One Demand? To change the debate.

        And they did.

        If your American flag pin wasn't made in America with metal from American mines enameled by Americans, you are a terrorist.

        by Mahall on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 11:09:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Dislike this cartoon and won't be tipping it. (4+ / 0-)

    Cartoonist seems to be making the point that the Tea Party is "doing much better" than Occupy at attracting followers.

    Any portrayal like this, to whatever degree founded, if it's honest, must take into account the generous behind-the-scenes corporate funding of the Tea Party and the knives out for Occupy. Forces bent on Occupy's destruction, have included especially the police and the corporate media.

    If it doesn't take these factors into account, the cartoon is merely trollish and offensive.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:30:11 PM PDT

    •  you're welcome to dislike the cartoon (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ThinkerT, Little, peregrinus, MuskokaGord

      but you really ought to stop and read it.  The cartoon is pointing out that the Tea Party has elected lots more people to Congress.  That's not an opinion and isn't terribly trollish really.  What's with the need to dis people?  How about offer a thought or opinion?

      •  But the timing is really far off, don't you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        think? This cartoon is 2010. The Tea Party is completely buggered right now. The cream that came to the surface is Mitt Romney. That's not "racing around the track." Have you seen a poll?

        And that leads me to wonder what's under the cartoon. For what that's worth, it just seems like more hippy-bashing, which bothers the living fuck out of me personally - it's so wrongheaded, movement-wise - and which doesn't seem like you. So I'm left confused.

        •  I think a lot of people (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          on the left are mad that they didn't get their own 'tea party'.  The right got a very intense short-lived boost from their group and the left really wanted OWS to be their version of the tea party and are disappointed that that's not what OWS was about.

          Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

          by allensl on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:59:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  not really (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The TP actually has demonstrated more pragmatism by staying in the tent.  I thought for sure they'd take their fundamentalist show and follow Ron Paul on a third party tangent that would have handed Obama the election.
          Instead they stayed inside the big tent and while the fat lady is humming the election aint over.  It all comes down to voter turn out and if the D's stay home then Mitt's in the White House signing the legislation coming out of a Tea Party Congress.  Buggered?  Not them.... but maybe us......

          •  Wow. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            84thProblem, genocideisnews

            Okay. You've got a very different take on this than myself. I see Dems very motivated, and the polls reflecting that, and a lot of that because of Occupy's game-changing movement.

            And I'm all for continuing to motivate, butI don't see how kicking, once again, the hippies does that. This cartoon is a shit in DKos's Jesse LaGreca's mouth. He's still working very hard to get Dems elected.

            And don't mean that as harsh as it sounds. I am way on the side of the cartoonists here, and the ones that go after Obama for all the right reasons. Maybe I should have said it's like waving some shit near his left ear.

            •  Jesse is in the minority with OWS (0+ / 0-)

              Those who I know who have been active in Occupy are mostly going with none of the above-- both parties are corportist and not worth working with approach to this election.

              And even if I was disagreeing with Jesse what's with this you're either with us or you're with the terrorists stance?  The groupthink in here gets mighty thick sometimes.  It's actually ok to disagree from time to time.....

    •  but how many OWSers even entered a primary??!?!?! (0+ / 0-)

      The Tea Party was unabashed about running moderate Republicans outta town on a rail by supporting Tea Party candidates. Screw the corporate money- those Teahadist candidates got real love and grassroots support from those wackos. And. Alot. Of. Them. Won.

      The only OWSer I ever heard was running was some Green Party dude...........and that caused alot of consternation and protest from his Occupy brethren because they thought he was -wait for it- "co-opting the movement blah blah blah".

      "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

      by TheHalfrican on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:43:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Good god (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The cartoonist has a job and a family and for reasons I don't even understand is spending the evening hanging out here, and you slag him as trollish?


      Tom Tomorrow's most recent book is TOO MUCH CRAZY from Soft Skull Press.

      by Tom Tomorrow on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:43:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I Did A Diary Comparing The Two Movements (4+ / 0-)

    as seen through Eric Hopper's 1951 book "The True Believer: Thoughts on the nature of mass movements"

    There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

    by bernardpliers on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:32:16 PM PDT

    •  Exerpt (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DRo, Clem Yeobright
      While the Tea party has attempted to use a strategy of leaderless resistance, this has not prevented the movement from being co-opted instantly by the corporatists and career men seeking personal advancement and the protection of the status quo.  They followed Hoffer's model, and they have made the Tea Party part of the status quo. This has been unsatisfactory to the base, who have been cheated out of the overthrow of the existing order.  

      The rich men of words at Fox wanted to attract fanatics to the Tea Party, but they also want to make  it just another part of the status quo without actually breaking any eggs.

      Although figures like Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry bring a religious fin de siècle to the debate, they are unwilling to assume the role of Hoffer's "man of action" (or Karl popper's tyrannical  "Great Man") who will purge their mass movement of fanatics with the ruthless terror of a Night Of the Long Knives.  

      Nationally, the Tea Party is stuck uncomfortably in the role of a minority party in a system that deprives it of the power it would have in a parliamentary system.   The status quo needs a way to fully absorb it using mythology and propaganda, but it doesn't have a coalition system where the Tea Party could live. The Tea Party lacks both formal political and street fighter mojo, and this frustration drives its members back to subverting the status quo in the area must accessible to them: the GOP. No doubt the GOP would like a ruthless purge of the Tea Party, but it lacks a way to insert a loyal leadership.

      At the state level, the Tea party is represented by several governors who seem to fit the model of misifits and failures who see themselves as messianic figures.  The passage of GOP laws in Wisconsin had remarkable parallels to the Enabling Acts (which hardly seems coincidental), and governors like Scott Walker seek a swift nihilistic dismantling of the present order.  There is not enough time between the 2008 and 2012 election cycles to run them for national office.  But these people also seem to have a very short shelf life, and they would need to advance through the ruthless use of power rather than fair and free elections, and we see that in new voting laws.  

      There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

      by bernardpliers on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:50:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I see what you're getting at, but I don't (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LaEscapee, tofumagoo, Clem Yeobright

    think you've hit the bulls eye.

    One should realize the Tea Party is very much a faction of the long-established GOP base. It is only recently that they were given a separate identity. In this way the Tea Party had a vast head start in this "race". A more apples-to-apples comparison would be between the Tea Party coalition and the Blue Dogs on the other side of the aisle.

    OWS stands outside of establishment Dems. The are focused on creating a movement with the public, rather than with congress-critters. There are pros and cons to that approach (as well as different ways of evaluating their success with the public).

    I think where the cartoon does hit the mark is in the idea that OWS seems much more interested in the "theater of protest*" than with the practical creation of structural change. Once you've gotten everyone's attention, the question becomes what do you do with it. They unfortunately seem to not make a distinction between tactics (occupation, mic checks, etc.) and a movement. Occupation should not be the sole purpose of the organization, but its very difficult to see what their trajectory is beyond it. Obviously they have given up on the idea of effecting change from within the structure of the Democratic Party (and sometimes one can hardly blame them), but other than the mere expression of (very justifiable) outrage one struggles to understand how they would bring about the change they desire, even when one aligns with that desired change.

    (* a loaded phrase that I use here only because I'm coming up short on a different way of describing it at the moment)

    You can call it "class warfare" -- we call it "common sense"

    by kenlac on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:35:30 PM PDT

    •  couldn't agree more (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tofumagoo, peregrinus

      I've watched for years and participated a lot in the theater of protest.  The anti war movement glamorized the street protest for a couple generations.  Sometimes it works and changes political perceptions  ( Vietnam, globalization are two great successes that way ) but to gain political power you need to then convert that into votes and caucuses in Congress.  Sadly the right has been way better at this than the left.

      •  But the Tea Party's job was much easier. (0+ / 0-)

        All they had to do was take the proclivities that were already there and let them off the leash. One could probably list two dozen now retired GOP congress critters from 5 years ago who would have easily jumped on the Tea Party bus had it existed at the time.

        Another way of saying it is that the Tea Party can create a congressional coalition merely by taking reps who already had extreme views and encouraging them to be more extreme -- it's a downhill push for them.

        OWS, on the other hand would need to create that kind of moment from scratch -- if they were even interested in it in the first place.

        You can call it "class warfare" -- we call it "common sense"

        by kenlac on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:52:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Absolutely right! The right has been (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        genocideisnews, George Hier

        better at 'protest theater' than the left.  But blaming Occupy for the lefts shortcomings seems a little harsh.  Occupy didn't come into being for the left's convenience - it was never about the 'left', and is not now about the 'left'.

        If the 'left' wants a movement, maybe they should create one?

        Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

        by allensl on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:04:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I remember reading the Rolling Stone article (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tofumagoo, Satya1

    about Occupy's future and the infighting that was going on.  I seriously think Marisa Holmes needs to step down and let Shen Tong take over.  Tong actually has experience with leading real protests from his time in China during the Tiananmen Square uprising.  Holmes from this article sounds like a very stubborn individual who just wants the movement to spend all it's time protesting outside the banks.  She also told Ben & Jerry to fuck off when they wanted to donate a lot of money to their movement.  I understand she doesn't want businesses or the Democrats to co-opt the movement like the Koch Brothers and the GOP have but think of what that money could've done to help the movement.  They could've paid for permits, hired lawyers to argue their cases and bail out members that were arrested.  They could've used that money to fuel their movement and Holmes said no.  If you look at OWS's Twitter account, they're now urging people to not vote and even starting to take up the "Limited Government" rhetoric that the Tea Party uses.  Here's the article by the way:

    I used to be a hardcore supporter of OWS  and loved how they got a lot people to move their money from the big banks but now they're allowing the radical leftists and anarchists take over.

    •  not the radical leftists. . . (5+ / 0-)
      I used to be a hardcore supporter of OWS  and loved how they got a lot people to move their money from the big banks but now they're allowing the radical leftists and anarchists take over.
      The small size of many Occupy groups has left them vulnerable to takeovers by the Ron Paul libertarian kookers. They are anything but radical leftists.
      •  That's true! I did see Ron Paul supporters at (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        George Hier

        Occupy LA.  In fact, a guy I know who is a hard core Libertarian ideologue who worked on Ron Paul's CA campaign was there with his minions.  This guy actually tried to claim that the tea party movement was an anti-war movement because it helped elect Rand Paul and Justin Amash.  Plus I really hated Ron Paul after I saw him in a debate trying to claim that OWS supporters are angry over government regulations that caused the economic collapse.  Now if he had said the Fed's monetary policy, I would let that slide but apparently he either ignored or forgot about all the signs demand for the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall.  This is why I can't stand Libertarians or Ron Paul supporters.  I agree with them on the war on drugs, some foreign policy views and would be willing to support auditing the Fed but only if they supported reinstating Glass-Steagall.  Unfortunately, as much as they hate the Fed and the bankers, they refuse to want to break up the banks.  They treat capitalism like a religion.  I should know because I lived with an obnoxious Libertarian for two years.

      •  I know a lot of people who joined Occupy (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kefauver, George Hier

        supporting Ron Paul, we changed many of their minds by explaining just how much his policies benefit the 1% at the expense of everyone else. Most the Paulites either left, or changed their opinion on him. Oh the joy of getting to know people, spending long nights discussing politics with them, and actually changing their minds.

        I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

        by Futuristic Dreamer on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:50:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  From the beginning (2+ / 0-)

      most OWS activists I talked to or read from seemed to think that voting was a waste of time.  But then I stumbled on a Jesse Jackson quote:

      In 1960, Martin Luther King supported Kennedy instead of Nixon to prevent America from going backward. Then he marched in the streets of Birmingham to pass the Civil Rights Act to move the nation ahead.

      In 1964, Martin Luther King supported Johnson instead of Goldwater to prevent America from going backward. Then he marched in Selma to pass the Voting Rights Act to move the nation ahead.

      For Dr. King, there was no conflict between voting strategically to prevent the triumph of reaction and leading a nonviolent mass movement to pressure a president to achieve profound social change.

      When we in the movement struggled for social justice, we helped weak presidents become stronger. When we in the movement struggled for social justice, we helped good presidents become great.

      I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

      by Satya1 on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:26:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The President Challenged the 99% today... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DRo, poopdogcomedy, bubbanomics

    Pres. Obama's statement today at Univision that

    "Washington cannot be changed from the inside, it has to be changed from the outside."
    is the perfect opportunity for OWS and the 99% to get involved in the 2012 election.
    There is a golden opportunity for change this cycle if down-ticket Dem voting occurs across the country. Then let Pelosi/Hoyer and Reid/Durbin whip them into shape.

    It is better than waiting around for the evolution of a new system and would ensure that Corporatism is at least slowed and not allowed to dominate or stall progress.

    The key is how to get them to seize this opportunity.

    "The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few or many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is democracy". Aristotle

    by MuskokaGord on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:42:54 PM PDT

  •  Also, when I had a Twitter conversation a few (0+ / 0-)

    months back with Shawn Carrie, who's close to Holmes, he sounded crazy.  I told him what I read about the infighting in Rolling Stone and of course he used the corporate media card and claimed that RS hyped up the infighting story.  RS has been one of the few publications to shine a positive light on the the movement and Matt Taibbi has tried offer them demands to make but now they're turning against the very news source that wants to help them.  

  •  OK, I get this one. (0+ / 0-)

    It may not be particularly funny but not all political cartoons are meant to be funny.  It's 99% right on.  And yes I agree that the first thing I thought of when Mittens went all 47% was 99 vs 1%.  It was a 1-2 punch that was set up months in advance.  Thanks for the toon.  

    A bad idea isn't responsible for those who believe it. ---Stephen Cannell

    by YellerDog on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 03:55:46 PM PDT

  •  cartoon's ok, explanation not so much (3+ / 0-)

    The teabaggers began in a GOP lobbyist office and was meant to siphon off the far right anger at Bushjr. It had an entire TV network to boost its actions including buses and high profile speakers etc. It succeeded in keep the wingnuts in the fold and gave them a place to caucus without harming the GOP.

    Your cartoon merely shows you've swallowed the 'conventional wisdom' of the village and totally misunderstand what really happened with the teabagger insurrection even though you hint at the "astroturf" etc.

    Occupy on the other hand was never any part of a political party. It had no billionaires giving it unlimited money. It wasn't begun by Democratic consultants. It had no TV network to plan its moves and publicize its every action. No high profile network speakers, planners and logistical support. Occupy was truely a grassroots show of frustration and an attempt to get America to see what the 1% was doing to the 99%, in that they succeeded.

    In reality both movements were sucessful. Teabaggers were kept within the GOP fold. Occupy succeeded in changing the political narrative from 'deficit reduction' to 'wealth inequality'.

    The main thing wrong with you 'cartoon' about the matter is your false measurment of each movements sucess.


    America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

    by cacamp on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:15:24 PM PDT

    •  spot on (0+ / 0-)

      I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

      by Satya1 on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:28:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  One more thing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      genocideisnews, George Hier

      Your points are well taken.

      Another problem with the cartoon is the assumption that Occupy is the Democratic Party base.  I'm sure Occupy does not consider themselves as such.  And neither does the Democratic party establishment.

    •  I think where you miss... (0+ / 0-)

      despite the explanation (note, there wasn't a 'hint' about astroturf in the explanation, it was explicitly stated), is this is more a comment on electoral politics than social movements.

      It's not questioning the success that you see in Occupy.  It's just comparing the resultant political power, regardless of how the two movements got there.

      But as an aside, I think you're about the strongest critic I have seen in these comments about your cartoon, and you kept your reaction measured and reasoned.  Which puts you light years ahead of critics of certain other cartoons.

  •  daily kos radio (0+ / 0-)

    can matt and jesse talk about where occupy went wrong on a dkos radio show?

    If only Michael Phelps hadn't smoked that pot...imagine what he could have accomplished with motivation and good lung capacity.

    by papa monzano on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:22:28 PM PDT


    how dare you.  i'm outraged.

  •  this is so wrong about the "Tea Party" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    George Hier

    they have zero political power outside the GOP because they were always a part and parcel of the GOP. If they had truely done what you give them credit for doing they would have become a seperate political party.

    That btw, was the job people like Sarah Palin and Dick Army were paid to do. Give the disgruntled teabaggers a little room to blow off steam but keep them within the GOP at all costs. A big portion of the GOP was super angry at Bushjr and they were threatening to bolt the party. Backed into a corner the GOP paid several 'consultants' to form the 'tea party'. Guys like Dick Army and some lesser known GOP operators. They enlisted FOX and some big money GOP supporters. After a lot of internal dessention within the tea party people the GOP won and the "tea party" stayed in the fold where they now reside in harmless limbo.

    What the cartoonist doesn't understand about far right politics is that there has always been a "tea party caucus" and other far right groups within the party. The tea party has merely taken up a different name but it still functions within the GOP and is in fact no different than several other rightwing parts of the GOP.

    America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

    by cacamp on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:44:23 PM PDT

  •  Koch Bros. et al (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    George Hier

    paid for the Teabagger bus, candidates, and campaigns in 2010. The plutocrats put the folks with the funny tri-corner hats in harness to serve their interests and advance their agenda. It was the same dialogue the right has been having for decades.

    Occupy changed the conversation last year. Until Zucotti Park filled up there was no national conversation on social justice, fairness of opportunity, or economic inequality. The systematic dismantling of the middle class over the past 30 years was exposed and has become a big part of the national political campaign picture this year.

    It is critical that the DLC and other neo-liberals not be able to co-opt Occupy. Playing the game that is familiar to politicos will only serve the same corporate interests with the same results. Standing outside the system is absolutely necessary when the system is irredeemably corrupt. Social movements of the scale needed take time. How long has the Right in this country been grinding on the memes of a liberal media and ineffective and freedom robbing government? If Occupy does not fit the usual pictures of the political class, that is a good thing.

    If progressives were voting for policies they believe in, they would be voting for Dr. Jill Stein.

    by Wahrheit on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:17:03 PM PDT

  •  There are ways to effect change (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    genocideisnews, George Hier

    and pressure the govt from the inside and there are ways to effect change and pressure the govt from the outside.

    The mistake that a lot of critics make, imho, is in drawing an equivalency between the Tea Party and Occupy. They are two entirely different kinds of movements.

    The Progressive movement went big in 2005 and beyond, as the R party was imploding. And the Progressive caucus was very large.  A lot of members of Congress in it.  But what real change did we get from that Progressive electoral movement?  Now Nancy Pelosi is advocating for the Simpson Bowles catfood commission.  Many women in the progressive caucus voted to erode women's rights in the health care bill process.  Some progressives voted for the president's austerity grand bargain in August 2011. Our civil liberties are under full attack and the we wage more war than ever and it gets funded and hardly anyone, hardly any progressives in Congress even speak out about it.  NDAA?  Case closed.  I could go on all day.

    The civil rights movement did not, as far as I know, set out to put candidates in Congressional races and fill seats.  They did things differently and pressured from the outside.

    I think Occupy is more like the civil rights movement.  

    The Tea Party is more like the Progressive movement.

    "Justice is a commodity"

    by joanneleon on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 05:49:55 PM PDT

  •  changing the conversation is a good thing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    like I said in a number of posts here.....  OWS deserves plenty of credit for that.  

    But--changing the Congress is how you get to actually change laws, change how our tax dollars are spent, change the judiciary and the actual direction of the country.

  •  We're Not In That Race... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    genocideisnews, George Hier

    ...because we're driving on the highway instead. Occupy is not a Democratic version of the Tea Party and was never intended to be. We're a non-partisan social movement. We don't reject organization - indeed, we do horizontal organization very well - we reject hierarchy. You don't need top-down structure to have organization.

    There's people in this thread talking about how we don't get along with unions, but that's untrue. In many, many cases we get along very well with union locals, leaving the nationals feeling threatened because we are radicalizing workers and helping them actually empower themselves instead of begging scraps.

    There's people in this thread complaining about "radical leftists". Liberals should be cheering for us "radical leftists" if they have any interest in advancing progressive policy at all; we shift the Overton window. You, on the other hand, do your best to keep us from doing that work, and in doing so work against your own supposed goals.

    No significant social change in this country has ever started from the ballot box, not in the whole history of the United States. Many of my comrades are choosing to vote, but we're not a Democratic party vote-getting apparatus, and no worthwhile social movement ever will be.

    To be frank, cartoons like this and some of the venal complaints I see tell me something I've been quite sure of for quite some time: By and large, liberals are fine with how things are and how they are going.

    •  I'm sorry, Dark Evil Omen (0+ / 0-)

      but how in the world does the cartoon say that?  that things are fine and going in the right direction?

      and yes, a lot of social change has started outside the ballot box but short of the Revolution and the Civil War the actual change that may have started elsewhere was enacted precisely through the ballot box.

       Remaining too pure to engage in electoral politics may make you feel pure but as the cartoon attempts to point out-- it also takes you out of the game....

      •  It Doesn't, You Do (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        genocideisnews, George Hier

        What major social changes were enacted through the ballot box? Was universal suffrage ever the product of voting? No, it was not. Was the eight-hour-day a product of voting? No, it was not. Were Jim Crow laws struck down by voting? No, they were created by electoral politics and brought down by a mass social movement.

        It's not a matter of purity, it's a matter of efficacy. What value is there in a Democratic Tea Party? The Democratic party has already made it clear that it doesn't want anyone anywhere on the left side of the political spectrum at all. The Democratic voting base elects conservative presidents and centrist (or conservative, sometimes very conservative) Congresspeople. The Tea Party is an irrelevancy; it maintains "significance" because the right-wing media says it does. Have their positions advanced in any real way publicly? No. Have ours? Yes.

        You want more progressive Democrats? Democrats need to start nominating and voting for them. Let us provide the political cover as we try to advance our goals instead of doing your best to fight our useful work.

        •  getting people to consider the value of voting (0+ / 0-)

          ...actually advances your useful work.  With all due respect--you're laboring under a very false dichotomy

          •  I Think Many People In The Occupation... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            genocideisnews, George Hier

            ...would be fine with a general "get out the vote" drive and, indeed, some are working on just that. I have, in fact, comrades who are doing GOTV work with local Democrats. However, you're asking for us, as a movement, to act as Democratic proxies. We're not.

            Think about Wisconsin. We saw how converting a powerful mass uprising in Wisconsin into an electoral machine against Walker not only failed to unseat him but also completely enervated the left in that state. There was potential for a sustained movement for real change in that state that the Democratic party completely destroyed by twisting it into a useless electoral machine.

            I've been involved in the Occupation since October, right near the very begining. We lost almost all of the Democrats and centrist liberals that decided to be involved in the beginning. Why? Because we wouldn't do what they said. There was never once a simple suggestion or proposal to stage a GOTV drive. We had to support the Democratic party. We had to accept worthless "leadership" from the SEIU. We had to only engage in "approved" actions.

            Cries of co-option emerged because that's what we were experiencing. We saw no help from the Democrats and little from the proxies, just demands. And all we saw from the same sort of thing in Wisconsin was a movement being snuffed out before it could do anything useful.

            So, no. Getting Democrats elected is your job. Our work is different and most Democrats hate it just as much as the Republicans.

  •  amazing (0+ / 0-)

    and so in line with what I wrote today as well!

  •  You dont have to explain your art matt. (0+ / 0-)

    You dont have to justify it.
    You don't have to defend your art,
    or your opinions.
    Its ok for you to have an opinion.
    Even if it's different than somebody elses opinion.

    I'd like to apoligize to you on behalf of open minded people everywhere.

    I feel ashamed that you felt you had to post your preface explaining your comic today.

    It's cool that you spent some of your personal time to hang out here tonight and talk with the crowd.
    thank you for that, that was nice of you.

    Seeing the treatment of the artists here recently has left me feeling a little paranoid and well, a little afraid to post my true thoughts on things here. Every time recently that I'm about to hit the post key here I find myself thinking, will I get banned? or vilified? I hope I dont get banned. (don't really care about the vilified thing though) but I hit the post key anyway.

    Because I hate the 'correct thought police' and bullies everywhere.

    I sure hope this isn't the 'comic's standard' here now, that an artist MUST explain and justify thier art when presenting it to us.

    peace, love, joy matt


    •  thanks, but no need (0+ / 0-)

      Dennis--I enjoy the back and forth--- and I'm not doing this to justify my opinion or the cartoon.

        You shouldn't worry about justifying yours either.  this ideally is a community where we're all entitled to our opinions and maybe even some courtesy or respect.

      It is interesting to me that in forums where people comment anonymously the anonymous are the one's who don't respect those simple ground rules.  Maybe Kos should be like Facebook and have people just do the simple thing of going by real names.......

  •  I don't agree with you. I demand you be censored (5+ / 0-)

    You're praising the tea party. It's a DEMOCRATIC SITE Hello! let's have a loyal Democratic book burning, but it's OK, because it's not like the religious right.

    But seriously, the tea party hasn't accomplished shit.

    Did you see what happened at the RNC with Ron Paul's delegates? Rand Paul basically sold out everything he said he stood for to prop up the party apparatus like what happens to most fringe politicians that think they are going to pretend like the conquer the Whigs strategy is relevant in this day and age in the bought game of politics.

    Occupy changed the national narrative to income inequality. The tea Party has not defeated the ACA.

    It took the DHS and their denial and most mayors of major cities to shut Occupy down via the tent cities because they were seen as a threat. The tea party has been betrayed at every turn by the Republicans party apparatus. Plus the tea party doesn't control the Senate and that's where their legislation goes to die like all progressive legislation.

    What race are you even talking about and what are the metrics? Where is the eta party in the foreclosure crisis that the president and Congress have abandoned unlike Occupy our Homes which comes to their aid when no one else will.

    I respect your work as an artist, but this one is complete BS, but I'm glad you have the right to post it.

    ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

    by priceman on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 10:38:06 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site