Comment: It's one thing for you to accept the name "teabagger"

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Dude I call myself a (see in situ)

It's one thing for you to accept the name "teabagger"

And in doing so you should be aware that this title is one the media have applied spitefully. If you want to embrace the term, that's your call. But you should not assume others are called "lefty suckers" any more than you should be OK with getting called a bigot for being a self-identified "teabagger". And if you really have worked with these people, I find it very strange that you would refer to them so disrespectfully.

Occupy actually has had far more of an effect than the Tea Party. The Tea Party was disabled in its infancy. Occupy, on the other hand, was seen as a much more severe threat that needed to be disabled very quickly. Obama even adapted the 99% rhetoric, though it was only lip service, of course.

Also, if OWS' policies only supported the institutions they oppose, then why did said institutions employ third parties that contemplated assassinating occupy protesters with sniper fire?
http://rt.com/usa/fbi-assassination-ows-sniper-227/

Why did the NYPD, at behest of banks, care enough to track protesters out-of-state?

The ring is democracy. So long as the ring exists, it will enslave. It is not who controls the ring that makes it evil. It is the ring.

Oh, then you hate democracy / the will of your fellow man. good to know. I can't help but wonder, then, why you're here.

The problem isn't government. The problem is a government that is not controlled by its people, but only moneyed institutions. It IS possible to have a government that represents its people; this sort of thing is what the Reagan administration, at the behest of corporations, tried so hard to destroy during its campaigns of central american genocide.