News Analysis: Occupy Wall Street - Guests: Max Keiser, Carol Gould, Anna Miller

[stockholmer]

Run time: 23:26 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhptvldsp8U   Posted on YouTube: September 26, 2011 By YouTube Member: GJT771 Views on YouTube: 309   Posted on DU: September 27, 2011 By DU Member: stockholmer Views on DU: 1221

 
Guests: Max Keiser, Carol Gould, Anna Miller

More than one week has passed since protesters have camped out near Wall Street in New York; the place protesters have renamed Liberty Square. "Occupy Wall Street" protesters identify themselves as the 99 percent that no longer tolerate the greed, corruption and the injustices of the one percent.

[Pharaoh]

1. kickin for later

[KoKo]

2. Good Discussion from Press TV..

The only thing I hope for out of the Wall Street Occupation is that "If you build it...they will come."

In the discussion by both Keiser and Gould they felt the movement would fail because of lack of Leader and Funding which is probably why our MSM Cable doesn't cover it...no money in it for them..so why anger their biggest corporate and political Campaign funding supporters. Yet Anna Miller seemed to feel it is better at this point to be leaderless and with a looser agenda.

The hope is that if the occupation can keep going long enough that support and leaders (with prominence) will emerge.

"If you start it ....others will come" might be a better way of looking at it.

[blackspade]

3. Not sure I agree with Max or Carol between 5:00 and 10:00

As for Carol, I think focusing on a 'leader' of a movement undermines the focus of the movement.
As for Max, chalking all this up as an Addbuster stunt is a slap in the face to all of the protesters out there shedding their blood and time.

OK, Carol totally lost me at @13:00. Lauding the Teabaggers for their takeover of the Rethug party in the name of working within the system is totally wrong. The teabaggers are a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America.

[ljm2002]

4. Anna Miller was a great spokeswoman...

...very calm and very to the point.

I didn't agree with the other two much this time. Both Max Keiser and Carol Gould seem to be dismissing the movement. You can make legitimate criticisms, and some of their criticisms were legitimate. But they were being quite dismissive which I though was too bad. Max was wrong to dismiss it as an Adbusters stunt.

It's true we want to see leadership. But there are people on Wall Street, and they've been there for days, and that has to count for something. You never know where the spark will come.

Of course Carol Gould was simply un-informed about what the Tea Party really is. She acts like it's a grass roots movement, which it presents itself as, when nothing could be further from the truth.

I think one of the big issues today is that people are thinking in the same tired old ways. Max wants to see a single focus, Carol wants to see a strong leader. Max thinks the Wisconsin demonstrators are the "real thing", largely because the issues were traditional and easily defined (in my opinion); Carol worries about a revolution in America because it could mean Communism or Fascism would take hold. I don't think she is totally off base in that worry; however, I do think there are new forms brewing and that is where our real hope lies.

[kenfrequed]

5. Carol Gould is incomprehensibly stupid

Seriously, she refutes mass movements for lack of leadership. She believes that refutations of the banks would lead to communism or nazisim almost invoking Godwin's law by absurd analogy. She then seems to not recognize (or fail to recognize) the fact that the tea party was a huge public relations attempt by the very forces of Wallstreet that feared a generational shift to the left and had to push astroturf movement onto the main stage.

Her analysis is moronic on a good day and on a bad just propagandous pablum. One could forget she's a brit very easily if you tuned out her accent and imagine her being a standard CNN commentator.