Are you stating that libs exist to fight power and cons exist to fight dissidents? 

This is a gross over simplification. Your position implies that the parties only exist to oppose each other. In reality both of the parties are different faces on the same head.

I have never heard of the “liberal party” and the “conservative party,” at least not in American politics.  Maybe you’re thinking of the Democratic party and the Republican party?  Both of those are fairly conservative.  I’d also point out that until L.B.J.’s administration the Democratic party was the conservative one and the Republican party was, in many ways, the liberal one.  (Of course, what constituted “liberalism” and “conservatism” at the time was different because the status quo was different.)

I don’t really think it’s a gross oversimplification.  Here’s Friedrich Hayek, darling of modern conservative economic thought, explaining that liberals are liberals because they want changes and conservatives are conservatives because they fight changes:

http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/cons.htm

If you want to say Hayek was wrong about anything ever then I have about 300,000 randroids/glibertarians you can argue with until the end of time.

OWS has its faults, but it is doing the job of showing us how corrupt the system is – as evidenced by the  authoritarian reactions against vets like Kayvan Sabhegi and Scott Olson. It’s a mirror on our society that the Ribbon Magnet crowd is not as patriotic as they seem, and would no doubt be coming down on the Founding Fathers themselves if they were around today.

240 years ago, the TEA party would have been marching on Philadelphia with signs that say “Tread on me”, “Go hang yourself, Franklin,” and “You don’t fight for me, George.”

Democrats have been gleefully “me tooing” Republican excesses for years.  You only have to look at how many of them jumped on board Bush II’s war machine after 911.  99% of Obama’s blather is just austerity with a sugar-coating of faux compassion for the people he’s helping the banks fuck over.  Obama cares about Obama and the rich people who made it possible for him to run in the first place.  The rest of us are just there to kneel before him in silent adoration/supplication, while digging in our pockets for tithes that we don’t even have.

No thanks.

I don’t understand how you can on one hand claim that the far Right has been the major force behind political change for almost half a century, while simultaneously claiming that the far Right’s sanctioned “opposition” needs more time, money, votes, and energy so it can prevail against the people it has –in your own estimation– failed miserably in prevailing against for at least four decades.

If the Democrats have routinely done such a piss-poor job of “opposition,” maybe it’s because they’re a lousy excuse for an “opposition” party and don’t deserve any further support.

If you find demonstrations personally distasteful and/or inconvenient, don’t participate.  But don’t expect others to ignore the evidence of our own experience.

No, what I was trying to capture were the root ‘allergens’ that modern day liberals and conservatives (in the actual population, not in Washington) would most vigorously respond to. Think of it this way – what are the things that you would have to oppose/be upset about for someone on the left of the political spectrum to think “yeah, he (or she) is a pretty good guy (or gal)”? What about the same for someone on the right? And yes, this will certainly not capture 100% of the political views out there today’s America (my own included), but I would be surprised if it did not capture a plurality…

The way I see it, the answer in the first instance (left) would be something along the lines of a quite general and flexible principle of opposing power/oppression, while the second instance (right) would be a much more specific mix of Judeo-Christian morality, flag-waving patriotism, free market individualism, American exceptionalism/idealist foreign policy, and unwavering loyalty to your ‘group’. So, to piss off a ‘liberal’ (allow me the generalisation) one would have to promote the interests of the privileged, and to piss off a ‘conservative’ one would have to bring up an issue that explicitly or implicitly undermines one of the already-accepted positions.

In this way conservatives will cheer the cops against the Occupy movement both because cops are often positioned as agents of America, the Beautiful, and because the Occupy movement is arguing that (free-market) individualism is today, at best, a mirage. On the other hand, send those same cops to confiscate the guns from some Texan militia and conservatives will start to see them as jack-booted agents of a communist government. Thus, while more explicitly defined prescriptions tend to keep a group more ‘pure’ and cohesive, the downside is that the world is so complex that those prescriptions will struggle to be internally consistent across all possible situations.

Life: 
Only the well to do can afford health care. If you can buy health care you will have a better chance at a long prosperous life. To be equal we all need health care.

liberty:
The cons make decisions about what you can do in your home and with your body via abortion, and anti sex, or drug laws etc. The libs decide how you must act when you are out side your home via smoking bans, speech bans, religious symbolism bans, etc. Both parties want everyone to act and think a certain way without a choice to think and act for themselves.

The pursuit of happiness:
Greed and economic oppression are devastating the middle class in this country.  This fact is the catalyst that ignited the spark of the Occupy movement. Our pursuit of happiness begins with the secession of hostilities on the american people by the corrupt and greedy capitalist that control the lions share of the wealth. 

If you have children imagine the world your future generations will have to raise your grandchildren and great grandchildren in. Will it be one of lies and oppression or will it be a new renascence of freedom and liberty? The choice is ours alone my friend. Will we unite or will we be trampled underneath.

This is a gross over simplification. Your position implies that the parties only exist to oppose each other. In reality both of the parties are different faces on the same head. I do not claim any grand conspiracy. only that both parties are after essentially the same thing. They are consolidating power in the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court. They have been playing the people against each other in this country to keep us divided and blind to there consolidation of power. 

Only now they have gone to far and we are beginning to see the truth and stand against it. It is time to take off the blinders and see our government for what it really is and to blame the people that paid the bill to form it in this fashion. 

Got any brilliant ideas for what I should do with my IRA?

Your IRA?  I dunno, is that you in the middle?

Got any brilliant ideas for what I should do with my IRA?

There’s a difference between long-standing good advice and actually announcing a date on a national forum and telling everybody to get on board.

Yes, HuffPo announced a date to do it, etc. and as I said I certainly commend them for it; my point is others conceived of this type of action beforehand (not as “banking advice”, but as a way to vote against big banks) and let’s face it, it didn’t get much traction for anyone including HuffPo until the OWS movement stepped up… and many in the OWS movement already wanted this to happen en masse years before HuffPo “invented it”.

Once again, it’s just a bunch of Americans converging to get things done and OWS solidarity is the catalyst for many of those Americans.  So, it’s all gravy, either way.

And… back to the point of this in the first place, it just goes to show how the OWS movement is changing and enabling things for the better while still only in its infancy.

Actually, HuffPo started it one or two years ago.

While it’s highly commendable that HuffPo jumped on board and pushed for it, they didn’t start it.

The same people that’ve been pushing for a mass exodus to credit unions, local banks, etc. for years beforehand are the same ones involved with OWS (behind the scenes and udderwise) that are also now helping to make that former pipe dream a reality.

That certainly includes people from HuffPo as well, but the magazine itself didn’t start the fire, nor invent this “idea” by any stretch.

Actually, Boing Boing was further ahead of the curve than HuffPo if you are to read the comments, etc. and look at Mark’s posts, etc.

For example, almost 4 years ago Teresa Nielsen Hayden (former lead moderator for boingboing to those few who don’t know) pointed out some discussions that included that attention-whore Cowicide and udders trying to explain the severity of the coming economic crisis despite the naysayers…

http://boingboing.net/2008/03/21/good-comment-thread.html

Within that thread, switching to credit unions was brought up.  But, it’s been discussed and pushed by many others and myself who are now involved with OWS.

In the end, I guess it doesn’t matter as long as this keeps moving forward and, once again, I commend HuffPo for helping.  But, in the spirit of accuracy, I wish you wouldn’t say HuffPo started it.  Huge groups of people all over the United States started it years ago and have been begging everyone else to get on board… now those same people are a part of OWS in solidarity.

Do some googling and you’ll see a push in the comments on YouTube to get everyone to switch to credit unions and local banks going back much further than a few years ago.  Unfortunately, I can see plenty are missing from Google nowadays (including my blog from 2004 that called for this), but there’s some stuff still left that’s newer…

Also this almost 3 years ago…
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/02/17/698414/-Screw-bankers-BACK:-switch-to-a-credit-union

Here is more from Douglas Rushkoff, previous BoingBoing guest, on the movement and the points you have raised (I believe these were also linked to from BB):

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/opinion/rushkoff-occupy-wall-street/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/25/opinion/rushkoff-occupy-prototype/index.html

Here’s a really positive and already successful thing that has come from the movement (Move Your Money Day):  http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/03/pf/move_your_money_day/index.htm?source=cnn_bin

Thank you for acknowledging that reality, hungryjoe.

I feel like this news will not have any effect at all on Wall Street.

Despite your feelings on the matter and general naysaying, this movement in reality only continues to grow in strength, passion and effectiveness.  Despite you naysayers from the very beginning, this movement has unquestionably changed the national discourse that was previously, hopelessly entrenched in corporatist babble.

In a very small amount of time, the OWS has already dwarfed the tea baggers who can only sit in awe as we continue to grow far beyond their wildest imaginations and (corporatist right wing radio inspired) irrational fears.

As this movement continues to grow, it continues to inspire oppressed people everywhere; the seeds have grown into solid roots.  We have a solid foundation for mobilizing the nation to finally get a single payer system for health care so we finally invest in one another.  Truly invest in America.

The corporatist media machine has been forced (and I mean FORCED) to suspend its normal programming for manufacturing consent.  The machine is reeling and trying its old tricks to ridicule, lie and ignore the movement… but to their absolute terror… it’s not working.  The media is finding that the MORE they LIE, the LARGER this movement is getting.

The movement is spreading because people are waking up and realizing the mainstream media is full of LIES.  These lies have been the only thing between solidarity of the American public against the corporatist elite. Once the corporatist media lies don’t work anymore on a huge segment of the population, their power on wall street, washington and our individual rights and freedoms are sunk. We are heading closer to that victory. We’re winning this war against them.

So what have you done?

Here’s a really positive and already successful thing that has come from the movement (Move Your Money Day):  http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/03/pf/move_your_money_day/index.htm?source=cnn_bin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Td-4dYb9Y4

http://boingboing.net/2011/10/02/occupy-wall-street-declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city.html

Also, here is *another* article from Slate talking about how the mainstream news, which I guessing you absorb regularly, is also confused about the very simple message that Occupy is sending: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2011/10/how_ows_confuses_and_ignores_fox_news_and_the_pundit_class_.html

Or, you know, you could just use your critical thinking bone. Or ask them.

America – you are doing it wrong.

I get that the unified message could be more coherent. But just sitting around constantly bitching about how unpolished it is, and then instantly assume its “ineffective” based on your own personal marketing sensitivities… hows about you take your ideas to General Assembly and pitch your ideas.
Get online and do something about it. Put your money where your troll is.

The reason the OWS protests are effective is because they refuse the false dichotomy offered by the Establishment Political System. There is also no reason why people can’t participate in OWS and within the political process, but the concern trolling by the professional center is just that.

My wife, who grew up in France, long ago wondered why there weren’t more strikes in the US, as in France they are an effective, if inconvenient, way of popular expression in political struggles. I explained to her the long history of US strike breaking, and the decades of anti-union, anti-liberal propaganda. Lots of otherwise right-minded folks in the center are turned off of this sort of thing because they have been brainwashed, and have neglected to learn from history. 

Make no mistake, OWS is WAY more scary to the Establishment than Obama, Dean, and the other caricature villains they rail against. That OWS is not received comfortably by many citizens in the middle says more about the indoctrination of the latter than the veracity of the former.

OWS has its faults, but it is doing the job of showing us how corrupt the system is – as evidenced by the  authoritarian reactions against vets like Kayvan Sabhegi and Scott Olson. It’s a mirror on our society that the Ribbon Magnet crowd is not as patriotic as they seem, and would no doubt be coming down on the Founding Fathers themselves if they were around today.

Speaking for The Left, Inc., we stayed home because the congressional majority acted like they were on the other side of the isle, and thus did not deserve our support. Had they been voting and promoting the values we support, we would have, in turn, supported them. Instead, we’d had two years of caving in–you’d never have known they were a majority by watching them in action, if you call constant capitulation “action”.

“The only way to accomplish what the OWS people want is through political engagement, and they’re not doing it. ”

Laughably not even close to a true statement. Political engagement is a joke.