Some OWSers admire Ron Paul. Read Salon's new piece about the need to forgive student loan debt
, then read this piece about Ron Paul
-- who ain't forgivin' nuthin'. Paul is not your friend.
Next: If you want a laugh, read "Voting, not OWS, will change America"
by a die-hard Obot named Frank Viviano. I happen to agree with the headline, as far as it goes. The laffs come when we read things like the following:
It makes no sense to argue that the Democratic voting collapse was a matter of demoralization. Decisions on whether to go to the polls were made by the early autumn of 2010, just 20 months into an Obama administration that had pushed through what many analysts regard as the most ambitious legislative agenda in modern U.S. history.
As much as anything else, Barack Obama’s ascent to the presidency was about the slow work of acquiring power and responsibility in the machinery of representative government.
The reason liberals stayed home in 2010 was simple: Obama failed. His failure soiled the Democratic name brand, and it even -- stupidly -- turned a lot of people off from electoral politics altogether. (I say "stupidly" because the alternative to electoral politics is usually much worse. Anyone who suggests otherwise should read a fucking book.)
Obama kept the wars going, he protected the bankers, he protected the Bush era criminals, he backstabbed us on free trade, he held off on new financial regulations until too late (and the ones he eventually proposed were inadequate), and he backstabbed us on privacy issues. Worst of all, he blew a rare chance to effect a radical reform of the economy.
Do you know that for less than $1.5 trillion dollars -- much less than it cost to keep the big banks afloat -- the government could have purchased every iffy home loan in America?
Obama isn't your friend either. Some of us have spent the past few years pleading with liberals not to give up on the idea of electoral politics, but Obama's failure made that argument a hard sell. And that
is why 2010 went down the way it did.