Michael Moore's Support of Occupy Wall Street Fraught with Hypocrisy

How Obama Can Really Help Economy
.
The Stock Market and the jobless rate continue to slide into negative territory since Obama's election. Both are voting No to Obama's various schemes and he continues to not get it. Irresponsible federal spending, Cap & Trade programs that will hurt manufacturing, increased taxes that will stifle small business job creation, threats of more regulation, planned Federal Judge appointments that are not favorable to tort reform and a host of other ideas are not the sort of things that make the business community feel optimistic. In addition, all of Obama's talk of big changes and government solutions mean that business can't clearly plan so they wait, shrink and posture their business plans in a defensive manner.

.
The fact that Obama either does not care or does not understand that he is scaring the hell out of the U.S business community is nothing short of amazing, given that he seems like a bright fellow. His plans to spend money to boost the economy will lead to a second dip recession once the money stops flowing and inflation kicks up.

.
A promise of fiscal responsibility, predictably constant taxes, tort reform, no cap & trade schemes, judicial appointments that are not activist in nature, a no new taxes pledge, a commitment to a balanced budget and a level or reduced capital gains tax is what will turn the market around and get business hiring again.

How Obama Can Get Back Our AAA Credit Rating & Potentially Prevent A Double Dip Recession & A Stock Market Crash
.
The 2011 Cut Cap and Balance bill called for drastic cuts in federal spending, a federal spending limit based on the GDP, and enshrines a balanced budget into the constitution before the debt ceiling can be raised from $14.3 trillion to $16.8 trillion. The bill was not even voted on in the Senate, controlled by the Democrats, and of course was therefore not sent to be signed by the President, which he said he would guarantee a veto on before he ever read it .

.
The fact that Obama says he will veto Cut Cap And Balance sounds like its meaningful reform to sane americans.
.
There were five Democrats who voted for the bill: Dan Boren (D-OK), Jim Cooper (D-TN), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Mike McIntyre (D-NC), and Heath Shuler (D-NC). There were seven Republicans who voted against the bill: Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Paul Broun (R-GA), Francisco Canseco (R-TX), Scott Desjarles (R-TN), Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Walter Jones (R-NC), Connie Mack (R-FL), Ron Paul (R-TX), and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA).

.
This was a bipartisan bill.
.
A copy of this 2 or 3 page bill (brevity is a plus) is attached at thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.2560:
.
If Obama had been willing to pass this, if Reid had been willing to allow it to be voted on in the Senate, we would not have lost or credit rating.

.
After 2012 elections we need to push this bill through into law.
.
OF COURSE IF OBAMA WANTS TO GET OUR CREDIT RATING BACK HE SIMPLY HAS TO CHECK HIS EGO AND GO BACK AND DEMAND HARRY REID VOTE ON AND PASS THIS BILL IN THE SENATE. OF COURSE IT WOULD BE HUMILIATING FOR HIM, POSSIBLY EVEN POLITICAL SUICIDE WITH THE LEFT, BUT IT WOULD BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY AND OUR ECONOMY. BALLS IN YOUR COURT OBAMA.

Obama's Debt Ceiling Flip Flop – Your Choice, Was It A Lie Or Stupidity?
.
President Barack Obama opposed increasing the debt ceiling in 06. Here is a direct quote from Obama back then when he voted against increasing the debt ceiling:

.
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

.
Though he opposed the debt limit in 2006, in 2007 and in 2008, when the Senate voted to increase the limit by $850 billion and $800 billion respectively, Obama did not even bother to vote for or against it. On the other hand, he did vote for TARP while in the Senate, which increased the debt limit by $700 billion.

.
The audacity of his flip flop is amazing.

Obama and the Democrats all too quickly sided with OWS and have been fanning the flames of class warfare. The riots we have had and the bloodshed that will follow are on their hands.

Anarchists Voted For Obama
.
With Anarchists rioting at the RNC in 2008, after peaceful protests at the DNC, you can tell which candidate they are voting for. Obama obviously gets the Anarchy vote. Not sure that is a ringing endorsement but with associates like Bill Ayres, 1970's weather underground bomber its no real surprise I suppose.

.
With anarchists and radicals “rioting” in NY in Sept/Oct 2011 – advocating the anti wall street doctrine of Obama you have more proof as to who they are voting for.

Occupy Wall Street Vendetta Mask Has Domestic Terrorism Overtones.
.
The vendetta mask is a Guy Fawkes mask. Historically, on 5 November 1605, Guy Fawkes a member of the Gunpowder Plot, was arrested while guarding explosives the plotters had placed beneath the House Of Lords.

Guy was a domestic terrorist who was going to detonate a bomb underneath the seat of government in England.
Wearing the Vendetta mask and embracing the imagry & the history of that mask carries terrorist overtones.

85% of the most poorly educated and chronically unemployed vote solidly Democrat. 95% of both groups voted for Obama.
.
13% of the population is african american and about 15% is latino or 28% total and they almost exclusively vote Democrat.
.
1/4 of our registered voters are represented by these two groups.
.
That means that about 1/2 of registered democrats have educations and jobs and the other half don't.
.
Furthermore if 50% of Americans are not paying any federal taxes after the earned income tax credit, we can reasonably and statistically assume that a very large percent of democrats pay zero federal taxes. These folks, be they Democrat, Republican or Independent, have no skin in the game and don’t care if we run deficits as long as they pay not one dime in federal taxes at the end of the day.

.
Basically 25% of our population are deciding our future by buying the votes of the 25% poorest and most poorly educated Americans.
.
Is all of this a good thing for our republic's financial health? Has voting Democrat been good for African Americans & Latinos, let alone America as a whole?

If 50% of the people in this country pay no federal taxes after the earned income tax credit, how is if fair to increase the taxes on those who do?

.
If you want fairness, you have to end the earned income tax credit.
.
Unless everyone is forced to pay even a small amount of taxes and has some skin in the game in terms of caring about how efficient or fair government is, then this is not a truly representative democratic republic.

Who makes up the "Quixotian" 1% that the 99% are supposedly demonizing?
A research report of taxpayers is pretty eye opening, see attached:
web.williams.edu/Economics/wp/BakijaColeHeimJobsIncomeGrowthTopEarners.pdf
.
Executives, Managers, Supervisors (Non -Finance) 31%
Medical 15.7%
Financial Professionals, Including management. 13.9%
Lawyers 8.4%
Computer, Math Engineering, Technical (Non financial) 4.6%
Not working or deceased 4.3 %
Skilled sales (except finance or real estate) 4.2%
Blue collar or miscellaneous service 3.8%
Real estate 3.2%
Business operations (nonfinance) 3.0%
Entrepreneur not elsewhere classified 2.3%
Professors and scientists 1.8%
Arts, media, sports 1.6%
Unknown 0.9%
Government, teachers, social services 0.8%
Farmers & ranchers 0.5%
Pilots 0.2%
.
FYI, they earn 22.8% of the income in this country but pay over 40% of the federal personal income taxes. Sounds pretty FAIR already. Ain't the truth a bummer.

Prosperity is earned. Dependency is re-distributed. Choose Prosperity!

Obamas Domestic Terrorist Friend
.
William Ayers, for those who don't know him was a member of the Weather Underground. These are the bombings his association was tied to.

.
February 21, 1970, bombs were exploded three gasoline-filled fire bombs at the home of New York State Supreme Court Justice Murtagh. The same night, bombs were thrown at a police car in Manhattan and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. March 6, 1970 a bomb under construction blew up in the groups home, killing three members. October 6, 1970 They blew up the 1886 Haymarket Riot statue in Chicago. Bombed the Unites States Capitol on March 1, 1971. Bombed the Pentagon on May 19, 1972. They bombed the United States Department Of State January 29, 1975.

.
William Ayers is unrepentant and has written and spoken about wishing he had done more during those years as an active member of the Weather Underground.

.
Knowing all this, would you want to be on the same board, have a political fundraiser thrown for you in his home, let him appoint you to another board of directors, shake his hand or even give him the time of day?

.
In a new afterword to his memoir, released after the election, 1960s radical William Ayers, who admits to bombing and planning to bomb government targets in the 70's, writes that the campaign controversy over their relationship was an effort by Obama’s political enemies to “deepen a dishonest narrative” about the candidate. “We had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign,” he writes. Obama had been denying most of these statements for months and now we know it to be a lie.

.
As an internationally known figure, controversially pardoned by President Carter, Obama knowingly entered into a long term friendship with an unrepentant terrorist. Obama still refuses to publicly distance himself from Ayers or to admonish Ayers murderous, insurrectionist past. After the Militia arrests the week of 3/29/10, the media should start asking him why not.

I don't care about Michael Moore one way or the other. Let's start writing some articles about the real issues that got the people out there in the first place.

I suspect that most americans and even the OWS folks are not really so much against wealth as they are against things like: extremely wealthy going to Washington to petition the rules to make sure the can make more or the wealthiest asking for government help when business goes bad

I think that you have it wrong: thre is nothing wrong with being rich and that is not what the protest is about. The protest is about the special influence that corporations have on Congress, how they highjack the political system, how they beg for subsidies while proclaiming a free market, etc etc. Nice distortion though.

No one espouses killing the American Dream...But those of us old enough to remember the 50's, 60's, and 70's, when those that managed to achieve that dream, paid their fair share of both Corporate and Personal income taxes and more importantly paid their workers fair wages and benefits. Today's "Executives" in most major corporations seem to be more interested in outrageous salaries, stock options, personal benefits, and perks. And Wall Street and Multinational Banks seems to have turned into the Caesars Palace of New York and the World Stage...Gambling our "American Dream" away on the backs and bucks of the ever dwindling Middle Class of this country...

So in my estimation...Kudos to Michael for being a success story...And NOT ignoring the working class as so many other 1 Per-centers have.

Ending corporate control over government has nothing to do with disliking rich people

Mark, sweetheart, OWS is not about how wealthy someone is. Please, keep up. It's about the disparity of wealth; how the workers pay has not kept up with inflaction yet the corporations (note the word CORPORATION) and CEOs continue to make exuberant amounts, plus bonues, while the workers checks are shrinking and there are no more bonuses or healthcare, or anything else for them. And, as previously stated, the wealthy are buying the politicians, the judges, the media and slanting it/them the way they want. Individuals, small businesses are being advised to bend over, spread 'em and...wait for it...wait for it...

Dear Yourmom--Regarding your statement, "i'm sick of these rich people!!!...money taken from them and redistributed...i'm sick of working everyday for $9.00..." This is ridiculous. People should not be punished because they were worked hard, took risks, exercised their brain, or maybe were even just plain lucky or born into to a good situation. Anyone is entitiled to MAKING their own American dream come true. Keyword "making-- it's not just handed to you. If you don't like that, then move to another country that gives you more of what you're looking for. Or here's an idea...quite bellyaching and change you situation. Get an education (formal or informal), work towards a promotion, move to a city where they are more opportunities, get a job that pays for your education--think outside the box. There are endless ways to make your own life better. But if you're not willing to make some serious sacrifices, take some big risks, and put in a lot of hard work, or even ask for help (not a handout) like many wealthy people have had to do to get to where they are, then I regret to inform you that in fifteen years from now, you'll still be sitting there, with your hand outstretched for some kind of a handout, feeling just as frustrated as you are today. It is in your hands and your hands only to prove me wrong, which I hope I am. And no, I'm not rich, but I do live by my own words. You are me a few years ago except I wasn't looking for charity and I took accountability for the position I was in. I too was tired of working for $8-9/hr, so I did something about it. I got a bachelor's degree at the age of 30, a higher paying job, and am pursing a graduate degree. But don't think for a minute that it was easy or that I didn't have to bust my butt, juggle the different facets of my life, have many late nights, and make one sacrifice after another. But I keep in mind the big picture: hard work and sacrifices for a few years=a lifetime of easier and happier years ahead, for me and my family.

I wish you good luck!

I honestly feel bad for people who lack the critical thinking skills to understand that when very rich people fight for progressive ideals that benefit those less fortunate than themselves, it doesn't make them hypocrites. Its admirable (and refreshing) to see successful people, such as Michael Moore, stick up for people and policies that benefit the poor even if those policies potentially could lower their own wealth (through progressive taxation).Think about this... a super wealthy person who own 20 cars, a luxury jet and mansions around the world fighting for a for regressive tax system with substantially lower taxes for himself is considered a conservative hero while people like Moore, who stick up for the less fortunate are considered hypocrites. Somehow the conservative movement has sold this pile of #$%$ to a large proportion of the lower and middle class.But I guess most conservatives can't understand a person who is not 100% focused and driven by their own selfish greed, even when they attained levels of wealth that enables them to own and do basically whatever they want. Sad but true statement on conservative American thinking these days.

Mr. Whittington you are a complete and total idiot if you think that someone is a hypocrite for having wealth and believing that the political system is constructed in such a way as to benefit the wealthy more than everyone else. Your assumption is that somehow someone with money isn't allowed to have an opinion about how our political and economic system works. Had you bothered to watch Moore's films you would understand that his position on the matter has been pretty consistent since the 80s. Are you suggesting that only the poor are allowed to have opinions about the root causes of their socioeconomic status in life? Or that being rich automatically means you'll agree with other wealthy d-bags?