First in the Nation Caucus Occupation - Is It Real this time or just smoke and mirrors again ?

Just like with the original OWS, it will be their actions that tell us what they actually think as a group. OWS promised non-violence; but then became violent over time. OWS promised to listen to all sides and allow an equal voice in their platforms. I tried to get involved, but they didn't want to listen to my ideas. Instead, they were solely focused on Marxist ideals and getting a lot of freebies from the government without thought to the consequences.

I wonder how many #OccupyCaucus participants are registered Republicans?

Do they plan to stage their "demonstrations" on the street outside the caucus locations? (on public rights of way)

Or do they plan to attempt to actually attend the caucus meetings?

The caucus meetings are private events. They are held by the Republican party, and they are open only to registered Republican voters, if I understand the rules in IA.

I've never lived in Iowa, so I'm not 100% sure. I do have friends there, and I've emailed them a link to the OccupyIowaCaucuses website and asked how they expect that to work. I may share any answers I get from them on here.

--
¢ommon ¢ents

I'm with you Greg..We'll see how it goes.

Protest isn't always pretty. I would expect corporate news to continue making a big deal out of any actions that can be dramatized with some spinning it to the positive and some spinning it to the negative.

In America it isn't possible to get 99 percent of us to agree on anything except the premise that our current government only represents the 1 percent that can pay.

What a wonderful first read for me upon my return to the Vine. I know how much the right has resisted giving any credibility to the OWS movement what so ever. Nice to know that open-mindedness still exists, although I must say that those I see here do have a tendency to be more open-minded than most.

I do expect violence, purposeful and intended. Not committed by the group that wrote the decree you are referring to. I have been a supporter of the below the surface movement from day one. Not the union organized and operated "OWS" movement that has been getting all of the press coverage. If you don't believe in the validity of that last statement you are either in denial, blind, a socialist yourself or ignorant. You certainly haven't gotten out there and talked to people directly, used your own eyes and ears.

Unionization is the the one true road to Socialism. Why would the unions attack Wall Street and American businesses? That's an easy one. Weaken a business and you open the door for union take over. This has been the modus operandi of unions for years, one business at a time, now they want it to be one corporation at a time.

There is more than one movement out there, the success of the people you are talking about relies more on you than on them. The unions movement gets the coverage, the media sees to that. Of course that is only natural, you do realize that all of those talking heads you listen to are union members themselves. I had to have my SAG card before I could spin my first 45 or read my first commercial on broadcast radio, and that was back in the mid-sixties. Then you have the writers union, you know the one that showed Conan O'Brien to be a talentless fool without a teleprompter and Leno to be a superstar. Plus you have various little unions for the technical people. All of media is unionized including FOX. You have no right to expect anything fair and balanced from any media source that is unionized.

My point is, that unless you become a part of this movement and continue to press hard and support the basic principles that you believe in it doesn't stand a chance. Good has to make twice as much noise as evil to get half of the attention.

I'll leave with a thought. Is the Democratic Party, the Republican Pary, a political party, or a union calling itself a political party?

One more thought. Are you aware that in the last two weeks that the Labor Department has issued a new policy making it easier and quicker for unions to force take over votes on businesses?

Great article Greg! The jury is still out for me too, I want to see if they are serious about gathering for cause of positive change and not just about a cause to gather.

"Additionally, this will be a place for spirited, respectful discussion and disagreement. Whatever our individual convictions, we will remember that we are united by the common cause of justice for the 99%."

I also hope that they include the corrupt politicians too.

Greg, funny how I agree so much with you, but just from a slightly different perspective. I am going to provide a couple of links that I would like you to view and maybe dig a little deeper yourself into events that led up to our original revolution. You are right about where the buck stops.All bucks as a matter of fact, including businesses. Who has the biggest bucks?

It is not a question of attacking either or when it comes to politics and big business, you can not successfully attack one with out attacking the other and when you lay out all of the cards big business is more powerful than government even in terms of security and military style forces and capabilities.

The original Boston Tea Party took no action against any British forces,possessions or representatives. The tea belonged to the India Tea Party and the ships belonged to "American" businessmen. Laws were broken, such as breaking and entering, willful and unlawful destruction of property, theft and possibly even piracy, though the action was political in nature, no action was taken against any political establishment or person.

To effectively achieve changes in Washington we must first break the stranglehold. of big business much like our forefathers did. We have an added burden that they did not. We have to do this while at the same time preventing the unions from taking over our economy. They are attacking the right target, and we really can't let them keep beating us to the punch.

Link Link Link If you are so inclined, read the writings of Thomas Paine.

Got to get off for awhile. Back later hope the holidays were great for you.

I found this:

...they seek to become a disruptive political force before next week's caucus.

Starting Wednesday, Occupy protesters are vowing to interrupt candidates at events and camp inside or outside their campaign offices. They say they want to change the political dialogue, but critics fear their tactics could tarnish Iowa's reputation for civil political discourse. http://www.buffalonews.com/wire-feeds/24-hour-national-news/article687240.ece

I wonder if they will actually do anything useful or just be disruptive.

Then there is this:

The goal, Goodner and others here said Monday, is not to disrupt or interfere with the caucuses, but to spend the week beforehand taking “direct action” around Des Moines, something likely to involve marches, sit-ins and perhaps arrests. “We’ll be laying a little human equity on the line,” Goodner said

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-iowa-occupiers-disrupt-gop-caucuses-20111226,0,3342329.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews%2Fpolitics+%28L.A.+Times+-+Politics%29

So the "goal is not to disrupt" but might include arrests - what's wrong with that sentence?

Gregg:  The protest of OWS cannot be for exactly people, because what is know now is that for over 40 years the policies have been designed to protect wealth and to keep that wealth from being justly distributed. That is why the wealthy have had advisers and organizations that designed policies which they take to congress, the congress has approved some of those policies sometimes word for word.  That is why the salaries of the middle class have been going down while prices and the profit margins of the wealthy continues going up.  So what we have to change, no matter who does it is the policies. An ex: Right now there are companies out there that do not pay for the holidays.  Some are not getting paid for Christmas and New Years. How did that happen.  When the companies have decided to have the day off and not pay for it.  There is no regulation that says that a holiday that the whole nation is obligated to  celebrate, has to be paid.  They give you no choice to work it but they do not want to pay for it either.  There are a lot of us who would rather work it.