TYT: We are the 53% vs. the 99 %

[ejbr]

Run time: 05:31 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfEtywGAR0o   Posted on YouTube: October 11, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheYoungTurks Views on YouTube: 302   Posted on DU: October 12, 2011 By DU Member: ejbr Views on DU: 2791

 
Cenk analyzes the Eric Erickson attempt at creating a new movement...a bowel movement...to compete with the 99%. Cenk asks some tough questions for a couple of his followers who share their stories.

[Old and In the Way]

1. Check this website out.

http://actuallyyourethe47percent.tumblr.com/

These people just don't get it....

[ejbr]

2. +1 n/t

[99th_Monkey]

4. Wow .. talk about manufactured faux "populism". it reeks of it.

But I guess the good news that now "they" really are fighting us, tooth and nail.

Isn't that what happens right before we win?

[Old and In the Way]

6. I don't know if it was manufactured or these people are clueless...

either option doesn't work. How can you be a 53%er if you're unemployed and don't pay federal taxes? How are you a 53%er if you're in college, not paying taxes? They could be a 99%er, but not a 53%er. Every one of those examples validates the 99%er movement while invalidating the faux 53% counterpoint. It's like these people are saying, "I'm poor, getting screwed, and totally on the side that will make my problems worse." They've been voting against their best interests for years...now they are vocally and publicly admitting it....if they are real. If this is the product of an RNC/astroturf campaign, they aren't very good at creating a compelling counter-message. Should have used real 1%er's to make their case. How sad for them.

[99th_Monkey]

8. They are "not very good at it" because there's a point of no return

where no matter how much more fucking money you throw at some lame-ass issue, there's a point of rapidly diminishing returns
when it numbs a persons mental capacity to even know up from down anymore, like you've just illustrated so well with your
well-reasoned critique. I hope you post similar sentiments on some of their goofy websites, I'd love to see how they'd
respond.

[ScottLand]

11. Because that's what makes the Republicans what they are.

They are magnificent at convincing weak minds to vote against their own interests.

[ejbr]

16. Don't forget the dog! n/t

[Sirveri]

7. Fighting is typically more violent. This is just more ridicule/mocking.

[99th_Monkey]

9. See Boston ~nt

[Sirveri]

10. that's a lot closer. But I fear we'll need blood on the ground and bodies in the morgue. /nt

[zanana1]

12. The Republicans are good at ridiculing people they don't like.

It's a very popular srategy and it works. When they don't have a good reason to oppose someone or something, they just ridicule it. This has been going on since the 60's, or for all that I know, 1900. If you don't take something seriously, it doesn't become a threat. Anybody can ridicule anything. (I think it begins in kindergarten).

[99th_Monkey]

5. I agree "these people" don't get it

but there may be only about 3-4 actual people involved in this much ballyhooed "push back".

Haven't you heard? Koch Bros and their ilk work with military/intel/internet-savvy type folks,
to gin up supposed "movements" via the internet so one person can "appear" to be 1000+. This,
plus the fact that the voting machine companies are in the pocket of the 1% tells us something
about how sinister and deep the tendrils of these evil filthy rich bastards are buried into our
populous.

Yet, all this is also symultainiously being exposed for what it is, if one is open to hearing
about it and/or knows where to look for accurate information.

I thought Cenk's commentary was very very good, it really carried the OWS spirit palbably, for
me at least, and it's wonderful to behold and be in solidarity with.

[20score]

3. K&R

[txlibdem]

13. K&R

:spank:

[Atypical Liberal]

14. One of the best of Cenk right here.

Passion. Commitment. Man this is the Cenk I love. This kind of stuff is far better than when he was over on TV.

It. Is. Real.

But as for the whole "53%" crap.

Look. As more and more wealth accumulates in the hands of fewer and fewer people, by necessity we will have to tax fewer and fewer people to get the money required to run government. Unless, of course, you only want a government that does things for the few people who are paying taxes and screw everyone else (which is exactly what they want).

Like Jesse James, you can only tax where the money is. As the tax base shrinks, that burden is going to be shifted onto a small group of people. That's the consequence of having a narrow tax base. Solution? Broader tax base!

But a broad tax base means you have to have a more equal distribution of the wealth!

[ejbr]

15. +1 n/t

[CherylK]

17. K & R!!!

:thumbsup: