ivan

Hang around with many leaders? I didn't know that was a pre-requisite to be a student of history. machiavelli sure thought there was a connection in this old'un'but'good'un

Woulda had to have been right after, I reckon... like on the CBS Evening News. January 31, 1968 fact checking motherfuckers! okay, FEBRUARY 1968!

FUCk?

not being a protestologist, i'll have to muddle my way through w/ what anecedotes my eye-balls happen upon...

walter kronkite, a corporate shill, didn't admit on national tv in january of 1968 that the vietnam war needed to end? Before or after Tet? tet was in january of 1968, so right after the point being, you can get the mainstream media to acknowledge your views and report your demands in an impartial and perhaps even sympathetic way, it's just not going to happen instantly and in all venues mainstream news throughout much of the us eventually swung round civil rights for blacks and fags too, no? certianly though, protest movements do need to have an eye towards controlling their message and getting it out independtly where possible - the abolitinists of hte 19th century generally owned their own printing presses, only half of which got thrown into rivers by angry mobs

walter kronkite, a corporate shill, didn't admit on national tv in january of 1968 that the vietnam war needed to end?

the ecological equivalent of abbott and costello?

goddamit, still the fawk'n AAC!!!

tatyana, sweet sweet tatyana, you to me, tatyana, whisper the secret for how to make fuck the best to you please and thank you

"the world" segment i heard (which yeah, featured the author of the sciam article), made more or less exactly that point life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on life...

somebody was listening to jew-pee-arrrrr yesterday! suicide bomber ants in malayasia - hot shit!!! i liked the researcher: "yeah, ants fight a lot like people - the leaders just kinda stay towards the back and let all the workers sort shit out before finally wading in to finish off the enemy"

and, according to a wikipedia, about 11 million camel-toed hotties w/ fuck-all for fucking hangups hanging out on la playa? from an austrailian fashion-week shoot:

you like, put some time n' shit into that! i'd only disagree w/ the "We now have a significant segment of the society that has openly replaced compassion with contempt for those less fortunate." - as you know i don't think most things ever change, and that's certainly one of them. our nation has historically been bigoted and abusive towards catholics, indians, jews, chinamen, immigrants, mexicans, the poor, slaves, etc. certainly the ease with which the plight of modern life can be captured and portrayed for all to see is a change, but the underlying apathy and hostility towards "the others" is as american as stickign yer dick in an apple pie

fuckers have poison heel-spurs, i wouldn't go calling'em pussies since even smart cats leave'em alone

huh? on msnbc's website, which i imagine is corporate enough forya, i saw plenty of flag-draped dipshits being given plenty of noose to hang themselves, and plenty of political cartoons portraying them as buffons too - here's one i used as a warm up for a class a few weeks back:

who needs a safety net when ya gotta whole wild continent of crocs, bunnies n' kangroos to consume?

do greece and italy at least print their bonds on nice, soft, absorbent, charmin-worthy paper?

OMFG! I can't even begin to picture that! Seriously, though, ivan, I agree with your points. The OWS movement needs to clean up its PR image before the "silent 99%" will sit up and take notice. Right now, all they see are crackheads, stoners, and college-educated hippy wierdo freaks whining about their exhorbitant student loans and no job for their liberal arts degree. teaching's like acting - ya gotta wear a costume to get into character god i love test days, my day to thank all of you who haven't been fucking paying a bit of attention for weeks now

nobody is putting anybody up front at all b/c there is no leadership and no front - in the absence of either it's pretty easy for anyone, corporate or otherwise, to characterize you as they want.

and my friend walking down the street in pdx?

The media has gone out of its way to show the weird. It's well documented. as they have w/ the teapartiers, 60's era hippies, feminists, abolitionists, etc. for-profit media exists both to entertain and edify. such is life. so, why do you fall for it? what have i said that makes you think i've "fallen for it" - i think i have a pretty good idea of what the movement's about, who comprises it, etc, but if being realistic about tactics and strategy is "falling for it," then i guess i have.

again, strategy conversation - is putting homeless folks, however representative or symbolic of the movement, up front the best stragegy to win popular support, which is as key in a republic as in a dictatorship in terms of effecting change? like or not, the average joe doesn't give a fuck about homeless folks. they do care about affordable healthcare, living wages, economically damaging free trade deals, corporate domination of the congress, etc., etc., but they won't listen to a word of it if the spokesman looks like a crackhead. sorry. i don't know who on earth would label me conservative, but i still wear a tie to fucking work

The media has gone out of its way to show the weird. It's well documented. as they have w/ the teapartiers, 60's era hippies, feminists, abolitionists, etc. for-profit media exists both to entertain and edify. such is life.

Exactly. Sleeping where they can't be ignored is fundamental to their gaining a voice. not being high as a kite at all hours is another?

don't blind yourself, it just gets in the way of accomplishing what you want - the media has shown both the serious and the seedy element, and there IS a substantial seedy element - really now, was it the corporate media that made my very liberal portland friend make his observation to me about all the scary homeless types in pdx?