Occupying Wall Street Journal
Rupert Murdoch seems sufficiently recovered from his Fleet Street troubles to be tapping into the Wall Street protesters with the full weight of his attack journalism.
Yesterday he takes down the Journal paywall to tell us all: “In interviews, protesters show that they are leftists out of step with most American voters. Yet Democrats are embracing them anyway.”
A former Bill Clinton pollster, based on results of “the first systematic random sample” (oxymoron, anyone?), reports that “the movement doesn’t represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.”
It hasn’t taken long for attention payers at Think Progress to pick apart those figures and show them to be distorted in the usual style of Murdoch journalism. What else is new?
From the cheap seats of the empire, the New York Post is agog with headline news: “Thieves preying on fellow protesters,” reporting “Occupy Wall Street protesters said yesterday that packs of brazen crooks within their ranks have been robbing their fellow demonstrators blind, making off with pricey cameras, phones and laptops–and even a hefty bundle of donated cash and food.”
Phones were presumably taken before Murdoch operatives could tap into them, and notice that nice tabloid touch “within their ranks,” as if lower Manhattan were devoid of unaffiliated sneaks thieves, although the Post story goes on relate, “Crafty cat burglars sneaked into the makeshift kitchen at Zuccotti Park overnight and swiped as much as $2,500 in donated greenbacks from right under the noses of volunteers.”
Elsewhere, there are confusion and mixed signals about the movement with Wall Street lobbyists “livid” at Democrats while the President himself in an interview attempts a straddle.
MORE.
7 Responses to “Occupying Wall Street Journal”
The WSJ does misrepresent the results of the poll, but so does ThinkProgress by omitting questions relevant to the WSJ’s claims. At least they linked to the poll results, which is more than I can say for WSJ. But, in the interest of truth-finding, why not just look at the poll directly? It’s not so complicated to need such “expert” commentary. This is like arguing about whether it is raining or not. Just step outside.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/99818396/Occupy-Wall-Street-Poll
Good to see the obligatory ThinkProgress link out of the way early today. Here’s the WSJ link:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204479504576637082965745362.html
Here is the link that includes the actual raw data:
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/culture/2011/10/3790409/survey-many-occupy-wall-street-protesters-are-unhappy-democrats-who-
The poll is interesting for several reasons. Most of the protesters are employed, which speaks against the characterization of them as people who have nothing better to do.
I agree Schoen makes claims that aren’t well supported by the poll, but ThinkProgress seems to do the same thing in their response. I agree with AD, just go look at the poll and decide for yourself.
The most interesting result to me is the answer to “what would you like to see the OWS movement achieve?”. Although there are many answers, the plurality is to influence the Democrats the way the Tea Party has influenced the GOP. The OWS is in danger of sliding from an issue-oriented movement into a partisan movement, something that was ultimately bad for the Tea Party and probably the GOP.
-[They feel that their institutions aren’t looking out for them]-
Well you see that’s the thing. Republicans don’t believe institutions should look out for anybody. Institutions are for funneling wealth from others into them, not the other way around. If there is any complaint about this, then the complainers are just complaining about their own stupidity.
True. At least until the complainers start killing the few at the narrow end of the funnel. I’m telling you, and, I’ve told you time and again, we have seen it around the world….the masses are patient, but they cannot be controlled and if the suffering is real, they will not be ignored. So play it as a game at your peril Murdoch, in their eyes, you are enemy number one.
Without cohesion, it’s impossible to take away any real message from Occupy Wall Street, other than “we hate people that make money”, which is patently stupid at face value, unless you oppose Capitalism.
The only thing I have heard said that makes any kind of sense, is anger at wealthy lobbyists that contribute to campaigns for political favors. Which can be simply stated as “Wealth Fueling Perpetual Political Power”.
However, if that is your beef, then you are targeting the wrong people, it’s Congress that developed the legislation that allows businesses to contribute to politicians in large doses. Wall Street hasn’t done anything illegal. In that instance, it should be “Occupy Capital Hill”, not Wall Street.
The crimes that have been perpetrated by specific individuals with wealth do not represent the System as a whole. Painting them all with one brush is exactly how racism perpetuated in this country for so long.
The entire lot seem naive and misguided as to what is actually wrong in America today. The laws need changed, not the economic ideology.
Mainstream America won’t get behind this motley group, they will just watch them for entertainment.
More good press for the OWS group…..
An “Occupy Cleveland” protester tells police she was raped in her tent over the weekend.
Cleveland police are investigating an alleged sexual assault incident Saturday at the “Occupy Cleveland” rally involving a 19-year-old female student from Parma.
More “cheap seats” reporting…this time from CBS
@adelinesdad
Please show how the poll demonstrates “bound by a deep commitment to radical left-wing policies.” a radical Leftist agenda of the campers.
rudi, I said the WSJ misrepesented the poll.