VideoDump: THE "CRAZY FOLK" OCCUPYING ZUCCOTTI PARK. (Oh! Was that last year??? Seems like just yesterday...)

Occupy Wall Street: Exclusive Archival Footage
September 28, 2012

"Occupy" initial protest poster. Pretty Awesome.

I was a "passive" supporter of the "Occupy Wall Street " movement that spawned in New York City at Zuccotti Park during the Fall of 2011.


I was relieved to see this group forcing subjects of inequality into the public forum for discussion. And who could disagree with that initial protest poster? And the images of the rich on Wall Street being confronted by the poor?


But I sometimes disagreed with their methods (do I really have to sleep in the park?) and extreme rhetoric which was either not specific enough, or too specific on the wrong subjects (forgiveness of  all student loans?).


I really don't live very far from Zuccotti Park. And I had planned to get down there to view the scene for a while during the height of the protests, even when this blog was just a twinkle in my eye. But alas, my good intentions were set aflame with laziness. Laziness which, I guess, could bear witness to my lack of desire to actually join such a discombobulated movement; one that I was not receiving a clear message from. 


So when I finally DID go, camera and "assistant" in tow, the "guerrilla" portion of the movement had already ended. The tents were taken down and sleepovers were now prohibited by the good ol' NYPD after a midnight raid on November 15th, 2011.


From what I understand, the press wasn't invited. To the raid, that is. I wonder why?


When the one-year anniversary of The OWS Movement rolled around this year, on September 17, 2012, I thought I didn't have much to contribute. On the contrary, Now I've found actual footage of my visit to Zuccotti Park on November 28th 2011, just 2 weeks after the cops made protesting there, a 9-5 job, rather than a 24-hour one.


Here's what I saw and did. Warning: I am NOT a great videographer, yet. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below: I first Arrive, apparently not knowing where to aim the camera. People are milling about.

THE ENVIRONMENT

What was left after the raid? Mostly "stragglers," so to speak. I do not mean this in a degrading way. And not the homeless stragglers that joined along with the tru-blu protesters previous to the raid. Daytime Stragglers. People hanging around, singing songs, talking and playing chess during the day then going home at night. It certainly didn't feel like a protest. 

It could have easily been a community fair. Some were selling buttons and worthless trinkets made of cardboard, asking others to "support the movement." Some people had a bucket out for donations to "occupy wall street," as if there was a legitimate and accountable not-for-profit "fund" to be found, somewhere.  These were the results of a morally strong campaign, turned free-for-all. No movement can survive that. Then there were the stupid signs. Every movement seems to have that, as well.

Santa Claus stopped by as well. Sans reindeer. Con signia stupido.

And you can't have any meeting, without a "Paulbot," showing up.

Some of the sights were truly a spectacle. You can't allow others to make a circus of your movement nowadays.  

Below: Trannies?

THE INTERVIEWS

Up on liberty street, across from Investment Bank, Brown Brothers Harriman, there were some tru-blu die hard occupiers "in the house." They manned what I called the "argument line." That was the line where protester meets civilian walking to work on Wall Street. They argue.  This is where I found most of my interviews, the best part of my journey. 

Below: One of my frequent criticisms of the OWS movement was its lack of one, or a few central figures. I realize that the protesters intended it to be that way for many reasons they think are valid, but it was in my opinion, a huge problem within the movement. If they ever did feel that they needed a leader, the guy above would have been the perfect spokesman. He, in a couple of minutes, lets us know succinctly, exactly why he stands out there. And he's far from a "freeloader." These are the people I like to think of, when I think of OWS.

Below: Had another great conversation with an older gentleman who was obviously a veteran. I was trying to goad him into giving me some extra information about his "class status." I wanted to know more about the people who come to these protests. He ended up going into a little rant about the term, "middle class," that still has me reflecting to this day. Sometime into our conversation, we were rudely interrupted by a drunk occupier who started bugging us all for money to get "more pizza." I gave the guy a dollar to make him go away. After that there was another interesting interview with an articulate older lady that I enjoyed. She seemed like she didn't belong. I tried to tell her so.

Below: This girl was sweet. A college student from Maine. But I didn't believe for a minute that she knew what the hell she was doing out there. Maybe I'm just being stereotypical.

Below: A Zuccotti Park security guard. Not a particularly great interview, at all. But I was pleasantly surprised to find that he morally supported the movement. And he was getting paid. That's the way to attend a protest.

MITT ROMNEY "TO DO" LIST: 1. OPEN MOUTH, 2. INSERT FOOT

For all you "freeloaders" out there. 
9/20/2012

Most Americans. No, Most people on earth, by now know of presidential candidate Mitt Romney's "off the cuff" comments on the working poor at the home of Marc Leder, private equity mogul of Sun Capital Partners and sex party host, in May of this year. 

Incidentally, Mr. Leder is a man who was personally inspired by Mr. Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, to go into private equity in the first place. In the secretly-taped video, Romney made several controversial comments, including mentioning that 47% of people in America, all Obama voters, pay no federal income taxes and that welfare is creating culture of dependence upon government and that's why they won't respond to his message of "low taxes." His implication was that president Obama is buying votes by supporting their dependent lifestyles. 

An excerpt:

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax…[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

Later in the video, Mr. Romney implies that his campaign would be a lot easier if he were born to Mexican parents. I bet a lot of Mexicans would disagree. He also maintains that Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in peace and the the conflict with Israel will remain an unsolved problem in the region. What leadership.

The video was taken by a self-proclaimed "opposition researcher" from Georgia at the 50k-a-plate dinner and put on Youtube. It was then found by James Carter IV, grandson of the former president, who by the way, Mr. Romney never hesitates to dis from the campaign stump. It goes to prove the old adage that nobody needs more enemies. From there, it ended up in the hands of Mother Jones, a liberal web mag, who formally "broke" the story, nationally. At press time, the magazine claims to be preparing more provoking excerpts for release.

The video spurned an uproar in the media. Mainstream press in 41 states mentioned the video release on the front page,  with negative implications. Some conservative bloggers don't believe the statement was a big deal. Many down-ballot republicans jumped ship. RNC Chairman, Reince Priebus opined that Mr. Romney was "on message." Others, a group that includes me, were tremendously offended by such statements, that implied a real malice for the working poor in this country, if they are Obama supporters. The crime of that demographic? Not making enough money. 

Mr. Romney's first response to the release of this video, was a statement to imply that he would like the "whole thing" released, rather than excerpts. The owner of the video quickly obliged on Youtube. (at bottom of post). Mr Romney doubled down on his comments, first in a hastily called 10PM press conference, then in a USA today OP-ED.

Within 72 hours, the Obama campaign released a commercial exploiting The Romney campaign's gaffe:

(Obama ad-2 minutes)

See, Mr. Romney can't take the comments back, cause the tea party wants to hear him speak that way. And the people he dissed, he's already written off anyway, regarding their vote. Another precarious position for a politician to be in. You don't have much respect for the people you largely need to vote for you.

Soon after the release of the video, and candidate Romney's response, more news broke. It was revealed (I first noticed the story on NPR) that Mr. Romney's father, George Romney, former Governor of Michigan, was a welfare recipient for 5 years as a child. This is a fact that Mr. Romney's mother, Lenore LaFount Romney, proudly cited in reference to his relation to the common man, during George Romney's Michigan Gubernatorial race in the early 1960's.

(Mr. Romney's mother-3minutes)

On top of welfare, the Romney family apparently received 100K from the federal government as relief for having fled to Mexico and losing their assets in returning to America. Why did they flee? Cause the Romneys and other Mormons in their group wanted the freedom to practice polygamy. They saw government restriction of marriage as oppressive. How ironic. Someone should ask Mr Romney how he feels about government restricting marriage rights now. 

(Charts-Click to enlarge)

As I mentioned, I am disturbed by Mr. Romney's comments. While my conservative friends are quick to point out that I was not ever going to vote for Mitt Romney anyway, I take particular umbrage at the implication that the working poor of America have to be "convinced" into personal responsibility and caring for their own lives. My conservative friends are also quick to point out that Obama had a similar gaffe during the democratic primary four years ago when he implied that rural folk cling to "guns and religion." It is widely speculated that Obama lost PA to Hillary due to this gaffe and he still pays a political price for it, to this day. However, it's important to point out that Obama was talking of reaching these voters, as opposed to writing them off as Romney implicated.

Where I'm from, "personal responsibility" isn't measured by how much federal income tax one pays. It is my understanding that most people would like to be in the highest tax bracket, if not to pay more taxes. And as you can see from the chart above, it's not like the poor aren't working, or haven't worked all their lives, in the case of seniors who pay no income tax.

I take umbrage to Mr. Romney's statement, because I believe it perpetrates a stereotype of the poor that is most oppressive to them. This kind of stereotype is made of the same type of stuff that makes it hard for the long-term unemployed to get work. "If you are poor, or unemployed, something must be wrong with you. It's your own fault." This "hatred of the poor" seems emblematic of most Americans. But in my experience it has no foundation, and only makes a bad situation, more difficult to get out of for those that need our assistance. Many people have needed welfare as a safety net, and rebounded becoming fully productive members of society, like George Romney did. In short, Mr. Romney telling rich people, behind closed doors that poor people are losers, does nothing to help poor people to escape poverty and in fact, hurts them. Is this something a potential president of everyone-rich and poor-should be caught saying behind closed doors?

One more thing. I suspect Mr. Romney may have cut off his nose to spite his face regarding that 47%. It most likely includes his most loyal base: White seniors, who generally, pay no federal income tax on Social Security. Can you say Florida? A state Mr. Romney can't win without? Politically, Mr. Romney's statement was unpresidential, unproductive, degrading, untrue and just plain stupid.
(Fundraising Video-37 minutes)

KnowledgeBase: FREE ONLINE COURSES AT TOP UNIVERSITIES

Pssst. Hey kid. Wanna take free classes at Harvard?
9/15/2012

Well ya can...

It's a common refrain that "there's no such thing as a free lunch." This may be true. However there are such great deals one comes across in life that could be so beneficial to a consumer, that they may as well be for free. such is the case with the courses being offered online at some of America's Ivy League universities including The University of Pennsylvania, Stanford and Princeton. The price? The cost of admission to the Internet, whatever that is, for you.

"The idea of a degree is that you spend a fixed time, right after high school to educate yourself for the rest of your career. But careers change so much over a lifetime now that this model isn't valid anymore."

          -Stanford Professor Sebastian Thrum

Online courses have been around for decades. At first, educational institutions offered online components to traditional courses, in a form of "hybrid." While in law school, for example, I was given assignments to be completed online in various courses.

Slightly newer are the "virtual schools" which offer courses which are completely online. For example the advertising has been ubiquitous for the University of Phoenix, the biggest "virtual school," founded in 1976 with over 450,000 students nationwide. But there's also Kaplan University Online and thousands more of different levels, from high school through post-graduate school programs.

Many of these online programs are accredited by various organizations, just like their traditional counterparts (University of Phoenix has been accredited, for certain programs, since 1978).They vary from each other a great deal and run the gambit from for-profit to nonprofit institutions, but not with total acceptance. Now, that Ivy league colleges are getting involved, it gives the idea of a "virtual school," much more credence.

Even with a law degree from the University of Chicago, Dennis Cahillane, 29, couldn't get hired. But after taking several free Stanford courses in building databases, he recently landed a job as a programmer for a media website. And now he's planning to work his way through Coursera classes in his spare time till he's earned the equivalent of a B.A. in Computer Science from Stanford, he told FastCompany.

Why would a top school do such a thing as offer courses for free? Well for one, the Internet is kind of a big deal these days, and while nobody can successfully predict in which direction it will turn, no educational institution wants to be left behind. Many educational institutions feel that the best way to hedge any bet on the Internet, is to remain relevant with online "branding." Also, according to the New York Times, traditional college tuition and fee rates have gone up 559% since 1985. This is a trend thst is not sustainable if schools wish to continue to expand. And online courses are inexpensive and very easy to administer,with the right program support. Unfortunately, these courses do not offer a degree or anything besides a certificate at this point. But isn't the knowledge what you really want anyway?

So now, Stanford is offering online courses like an "Introduction to Mathematical Thinking," The California Institute of Technology is offering an "Introduction to Astronomy," and so on.

One can even learn the "Principles of Obesity Economics," at Johns Hopkins or, something personally close to my heart, "A Beginner's Guide to Irrational Behavior," with Duke Behavioral Scientist, Dan Ariely.

Central to these efforts are new companies that work with the universities to offer this course content online. One is called Coursera and another is edX.

Maybe these courses are before their time, but in the near future it is foreseeable that people will return to college throughout their lives, updating what they know through online courses.

EPILOGUE:

While writing this post, which I started in Baltimore, I researched several schools online. Several of them, pursued me quite aggressively as a prospective student. I'm still getting phone calls. This bring us to some distinctions of the for-profit coporate-run schools. But that my friends, is a whole different post...

PRESIDENT CLINTON'S REMARKS @DEM CONVENTION 2012

Bubba's back in town...
9/7/2012

Former President Bill Clinton spoke in defense of a second term for President Barack Obama on Wednesday, September 5, at the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC. Mr. Clinton's official role was to formally nominate Mr. Obama for a second term, the first time in history a former president has ever done so.

I say, that he spoke "in defense of" Barack Obama, because that's exactly what it was. It appeared, to me, that Mr. Clinton made it his business to get directly involved in presidential campaign "tit for tats," between Mr. Obama and his rival, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. He mounted a searing defense, point by point, for Mr. Obama against the claims made in the Republican National Convention of 2012, just a week previous. He made Mr. Obama's case, better than the President, himself. Quite frankly, there is nobody better in politics, to make a case, than Bill Clinton.

Mr. Clinton hovers at around a 70% favorability rating in most polls. He's quite frankly, the most popular politician in America, right now. And probably the most talented at feeding off of an audience. His popularity is amazing, when you remember all of the political adversity he's come through like sex scandals of the type that have killed political careers and being one of only 2 presidents to be impeached in history. Mr. Clinton is, indeed, the "Comeback Kid."

On the other hand, Mr. Romney does not have high favorability ratings. In fact, Mr. Romney, has been invoking Mr. Clinton's name in a positive light, on the campaign trail. His Vice Presidential running mate, Congressman Paul Ryan, has invoked Mr. Clinton's name, as well.

Mr. Clinton's speech puts Mr. Romney in a precarious position. The speech was long and professorial, but excellent, with some in the press calling it the best speech of his post-presidential career. The speech is even more impressive, when you remember that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama aren't really close friends. It's always more impressive to get "kudos" from a former enemy. Mr. Clinton's speech is the most relevant at the 2012 convention.

Mr. Obama properly gave Mr. Clinton a well-deserved hug afterwards. Hillary seemed to enjoy the speech, which was taped for her playback at an undisclosed location (as of press time) in the world. Incidentally, her ratings are hitting the roof, as well. There is talk of a presidency run.

To sum it all up, Bill Clinton's entire speech deserves posting on GBJ. Below his speech, you will find former Governor Mitt Romney's response, via commercial.

Former Governor Romney's response, is classic. The "Give Me A Break," campaign, I think, is very effective: 

KnowledgeBase: YOUR RIGHTS AND THE POLICE

If ever a bunch of strange men in black, rush to your door...

September 6, 2012

A close friend asked me for some advice regarding the police. 

So I figured this may be handy for us ALL to remember.

YOU & THE POLICE

Some Practical Suggestions

If you are arrested or taken to a police station

*You have the right to remain silent and talk to a lawyer before you talk to the police. Tell the police nothing except your name and address. Do not give any explanations, excuses, or stories. You can make your defense in court based on what you and your lawyer decide is best.

*Ask to see a lawyer immediately. If you cannot pay for a lawyer, you have the right to a free one and should ask the police how the lawyer can be contacted. Do not talk without a lawyer.

* After you have been arrested and booked, you have the right to make a free phone call to a lawyer. The police may NOT listen to your conversation with the lawyer. You should not discuss your involvement in the offense in the presence of the police during any phone call, nor should you discuss this subject with any person who is not your lawyer.

* You must be taken before a judge for arraignment and bail within 72 hours of your arrest.

This is not complete advice.  Be sure to consult a lawyer

IN THE BEGINNING....

Now Why Would I want My Ass Hanging Out???
September 4, 2012.

I saw another guy with sagging pants today.


It wasn't a mistake. For those who are just stepping off Plymouth Rock, sagging pants are still "the style" with the male youth of today. for almost ten years now it seems, belts worn low, just below the waist, showing off a variety of colored boxer shorts are just as "in," as tattoos for young teenagers.

When I say, "young teenagers," I mean of the inner-city type. Although I hear the phenomenon is world-wide now (including with the lead singer of Geen Day), it's usually poor kids or those from a background of poverty, much like my own origin. They seem totally confused about the world and their place in it, largely because nobody sees fit to invest in them. But that's another blog post. To these young ones, low ridin' is cool. I, personally, don't think it's cool at all. But of course, I'm forty now.

Oh, the things I think when I see those sagging pants!

"Follower." "Poor." "Stupid." "Imbecilic." "Retarded." "Naive." "Ignorant." The list goes on...

Nothing good. I basically assume that a guy with sagging pants is broke and can barely read. I can't be the only one who thinks this. It's not just a fashion statement to me, like it is to some peers my age. "It's just the style now," they say, when their kids come around, pants a-sagging away.

I'm not trying to be mean, but, no it's not. It's a fashion statement that says, "I'm a follower." It's like tattooing a teardrop under your eye to show that you belong to a gang of lowlifes, just not as permanent. You may as well sport handcuffs as jewelry and flash welfare cards instead of credit cards.

If this is fashion, it's a race to the bottom of the clothes pile (please excuse the pun). Even when I see old street hustlers I know, we frequently share laughs about how the kids of today couldn't even run from the cops if such a time should come, with sagging pants. In fact, one guy DIED trying. "They waddle like ducks," we guffaw.

The style really looks quite ridiculous. A few weeks ago, I saw a kid getting arrested in the subway with sagging pants. Since he was handcuffed, his pants had fallen down to his ankles. During rush hour. How absurd.

Maybe there's truth to the saying that you really don't start getting old until you think the youth are all idiots. C'est la vie. The sad part about it is, it's not all youth that are sportin' sagging pants. And NOTHING is more juvenile, than a grown man doing it.

Judge Greg Mathis, of the TV show bearing his name, is just one of the folks who say that this is a style derived from prison. He says that since prisoners aren't allowed belts, they always walk with their pants sagging. I have heard other rumors that homosexuals sag their pants in prison as sort of a beacon, but that sounds like crap. The possible prison origin of this low ridin' style doesn't surprise me a bit, though.

I too, was influenced by prison, as a teenager. Fat and loose sneaker laces with white-on-white Adidas were my thing and I remember being told the same story with that style. "Prisoners are forced to take their laces from their sneakers," so the story goes.

I also remember my dad telling me about my "gumby" haircut some 20 years ago. "White people are laughing at you," he would say. I figured that they were gonna laugh anyway, if they were laughing. Now I realize that he was just embarrassed, and not just because of the white people around. In fact, I hold the same type of embarrassment for the young folk I see looking ridiculous in sagging pants. Even though they are of no blood relation.

There has been some national public uproar about the fashion faux pas. Laws were written against it, as early as five years ago. Some schools, have resorted to equally ridiculous prevention methods like zip-tying a student's pants up and in Fort Worth, you can be kicked off the bus for sagging pants.

Most recently, State Senator Eric Adams started a campaign to convince young folk in New York City to abandon this craze; a campaign covered in the New York Times. "You raise your level of respect, when you raise your pants," he says in his media-attracting video (see video at bottom). It may be true, but it's still  HILARIOUS.

Even funnier, Mr. Adams spent $2000 on billboards against the sagging pants style in New York City. So sure, this wasn't a publicity stunt. But the movement was still good for a really funny ad campaign. "Stop The Sag."

Even Barack Obama has chimed in. Brothers should pull up their pants,” he said on MTV . “You are walking by your mother, your grandmother, your underwear is showing. What’s wrong with that? Come on.”

Interestingly enough, a politician-centered movement is JUST THE thing to convince young folk to continue the craze, ironic as it may be. And then there was that very stupid, but very relevant song on American Idol. "Pants on the ground."

Even with all of the corniness of the "anti-sagging" efforts, It's odd to me that this particular pants style, would become popular, or attractive to young ladies. It makes a guy look so very "unemployable" and "broken down" (those words describe it perfectly). My best guess is that these young men are in a search for an identity. Why they would choose to identify with an identity in associated with prison, is something I fail to understand, like trigonometry.

It seems to me that one would want to emulate "ghetto" success stories (as rare as they are) rather than emulating dudes that hang on corners. But again, I'm forty.