Amanpour Touts Wall Street Protests as ‘Revolution,’ Pleased Politicians ‘Finally’ Recognize It
Offering the kind of respect, admiration and promotion ABC News has yet to offer Tea Party activists, Christiane Amanpour on Sunday asserted the far-left protesters are a “populist movement” representing a “revolution,” cited how it has “finally” been recognized by politicians, characterized it as an answer to the Tea Party and included an “Occupy Wall Street activist” on her roundtable.
“The revolution is being televised and tweeted and Facebooked,” she trumpeted in plugging the roundtable, proclaiming: “The Occupy Wall Street protests are suddenly all that Washington can talk about. Are we witnessing the birth of a new kind of Tea Party?”
“This week,” she touted at the top of the program, “inside the uprising as the Wall Street protests spread, Washington finally takes note.” Following soundbites from Eric Cantor and Jay Carney, she asked: “Is this the left’s answer to the Tea Party?”
Introducing the roundtable, she repeated her “finally” formulation:
Washington reacts to the Occupy Wall Street protests now entering their third week. Yesterday thousands of demonstrations marched in New York’s Washington Square Park. That was their second mass rally. Meantime, the protests have quickly expanded to other cities, including Los Angeles, Chicago, as well as here in the nation’s capital. And this week, politicians of both parties finally realize that these young people could not be ignored.
The roundtable featured Jesse LaGreca who is blogging about the protests for the far-left Daily Kos, a favor This Week did not extend in April of 2009 to a Tea Party activist. Amanpour prodded him to do more so his “populous movement” could have greater impact:
I want to ask you, some of your most-vociferous supporters, like our colleague Paul Krugman, has spoken quite glowingly about this populist movement and you’ve even heard people around this table saying it should be harnessed, but also saying that it’s the moment now to perhaps try to translate that into some kind of political question, political demand. Is there something that you can make this about?
In between her segments on the Wall Street protests, which included an on-scene update from reporter Cecilia Vega at a park in New York City, Amanpour delivered a friendly interview with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. She wondered if President Obama is being liberal enough to satisfy Pelosi:
It’s no secret that you were quite disappointed in some of the President's previous public advocacy. Do you now think that there is a pivot that’s significant, that there is a new combative President who’s going out and really doing what you had hoped to uphold the Democratic flag?
Amanpour’s questions to Pelosi in the pre-recorded session run on the Sunday, October 9 This Week:
> The President is barnstorming the country trying to sell this jobs bill. But it looks like the Senate Democrats aren't dying to take it up. Why not?
> He keeps saying that I want the people to push this through because he doesn't think it's going to make it in either the Senate or the House.
> It’s no secret that you were quite disappointed in some of the President's previous public advocacy. Do you now think that there is a pivot that’s significant, that there is a new combative President who’s going out and really doing what you had hoped to uphold the Democratic flag?
> Do you think the case has been made well enough for accountable government, effective government?
> When the American people look in, they see this increasing dysfunction in this building, in this town. At the same time, congressional approval amongst people is at somewhere 14 percent, the lowest since we have been taking those polls.
> People, American people, are now occupying Wall Street, they are spreading their protests to various other cities in the United States. They're expressing frustration, they’re expressing fear over joblessness. Do you support them?
> I just want to get your reaction to some comments by Eric Cantor today, he said quotes, “I'm increasingly concerned-”
[CANTOR: -about the growing mobs, occupying wall street and the other cities across the country. And believe it or not some in this town have actually condoned the pitting of Americans against Americans.]
> The story now seems to be one of class warfare. Are you concerned and worried that this is going to be the story going into the elections?
> Can I just ask you about a little local spat? There was a back and forth between Elizabeth Warren and between Senator Brown in Massachusetts.
[DEBATE QUESTIONER: To help pay for his law school education Scott Brown posed for Cosmo. How did you pay for your college education?
ELIZABETH WARREN: I kept my clothes on.
RADIO HOST: Have you officially responded to Elizabeth Warren’s comment about how she didn't take her clothes off?
SENATOR BROWN: Thank god.]
What did you make of all of that?
[PELOSI: The response that you just gave, “thank god,” I think spoke volumes how clueless Senator Scott Brown is. It spoke volumes of disrespecting women.]
- Brent Baker's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Crapping on cop cars is real
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 4:29pm.
Crapping on cop cars is real revolution!!!!!
That's no revolution. It's
Submitted by rbosque on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 4:35pm.
That's no revolution.
It's just a bunch of illiterate dumb hippies that think everyone owes them a living. If this were a real revolution, I (along with most of America), would be there mowing them down with lead.
Middle-Aged NY Protester Still Lives at Home with his Parents
Submitted by HollyW on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 4:41pm.
According to the Daily Rash, a middle-aged man from North Carolina who lives with his wealthy parents traveled to New York to protest against them. http://www.thedailyrash.com/many-middle-aged-wall-street-protesters-stil...
Back when , we called parasites like him....
Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 8:13pm.
...a "bum". Of course, that term is no longer politically correct. How about "maturity-challenged" instead?
If it is a parody, it must hit a lot of the fossilized 60s rotted leftovers right where they live.
Someone please tell the OW$
Submitted by kata on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 4:42pm.
that the park they are occupying is owned and ran by Mayor Bloomberg's girlfriend.
The OWLs would be funny*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 5:10pm.
Knowing how stupid these young people are, sadly, leaves no room for humor
Cajun!!!!!
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 10/11/2011 - 9:01am.
Ouch, my tummy hurts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We Are The 53%
Student Loans and Debt
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 5:10pm.
I don't know how big of a portion of these demonstrators are young adults who owe tens of thousands or more of student loans. But for those people, I can't help but feel a little sorry for them.
It's illegal for a private enterprise to enter into a loan agreement with a minor. Hey, when your seventeen, you're not smart enough and don't understand the ramifications of getting into burdensome debt. And what private enterprise is going to extend tens of thousands of dollars of credit to a seventeen year old anyways? Chances of getting paid back are next to nothing.
Well, just because a kid turns eighteen, or twenty-three, it doesn't mean they are any "smarter" with regard to debt. But still, no private enterprise is going to loan a young twenty-something $40,000 with no collateral or co-signer. That would be bad business, because defaults would be sky high.
But our federal government will "fill that void". Our benevolent federal government will loan a young adult who has no understanding of what they are getting into a boatload of money, so they can attend a "University" and go down a career path where they might be able to make some money and pay back the loan, or maybe they'll learn about some kind of "social study system" where they are just wasting their time, and after four or six years they'll owe $40,000 or more with nothing to show for it.
And the upshot of this whole system is, the loans owed to the feds can not be defaulted on. The kids taking out these loans owe the feds for the rest of their lives, unless they perform some sort of service to the federal government. Well, there used to be a term for that, and it was called "Indentured Servitude", a system that was once considered a rung above slavery.
Our federal government shouldn't be in the business of creating Indentured Servants. But we are, because it funds the most bloated, overpriced, liberal leaning industry in the entire nation, and that's the University and College System.
It's far worse then funding NPR. Nobody owes $40, 000 or $50,000 or more after listening to four years of NPR.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Well here's a thought
Submitted by mandrake on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 5:40pm.
Next time you're being treated by a doctor. Ask him/her how education was paid for. If he/she says anything other than "my rich parents" then get up and walk out.
sorry mandrake*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 5:52pm.
Could you explain your comment to this lil ole lady?
Because, the way I see it, if a doctor worked hard, had a job on weekends, and paid for his education himself, then that doctor probably can relate better to his patients, especially this one, than the lil rich boy.
I'll try
Submitted by mandrake on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 6:01pm.
But I'm pretty sure the wages of a weekend job don't cover the cost of a medical education. The point I was trying to make was that the above post seems to believe that 'student loans' are wrong. I believe they are an investment in the future.
Docs
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 6:13pm.
How did we have docs before government student loans? Somehow it happened. And by the time a kid is twenty-two, and has done the work and gotten the grades for medical school, maybe they then "qualify" for a student loan at that stage of their life.
Maybe you, mandrake, want student loans to 18-22 year-old's who have no way of ever paying those loans back, but I think it sucks. I also think "higher" education would be affordable except for all the loans and grants that the government doles out to subsidize the university and college system.
Your comment about my saying student loans are "wrong". They are wrong to the degree that they have ballooned the cost of higher education to where it's out of control. The cost of going to a college or university has far outstripped the rate of inflation over the last 40 years. Why? Federal Money!
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Grad students
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 7:45pm.
Make a few bucks, while working for the PHD. I know because I have helped several achieve their Doctorate. And no, I am not one.
Options for financing college
Submitted by Unsane on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 11:30pm.
While I can definitely agree with you that federal money has been subsidizing the skyrocketing cost of a college education over the decades, I have to disagree on the whole student loan business. Student loans aren't the only game in town.
Part of the problem is the snobbery of some universities (and some parents and students) who wouldn't dare stoop to such a low as attending community college for two years before going to a university. This is the path I took. Every semester I registered by phone (registering by Net was a few years away when I went to school) and after the semester ended I went to the bursar's office with a credit card. I paid for my books and tuition on that credit card, timed to give me the full 55 day grace period to pay off the balance in one fell swoop without paying a penny of interest on it. These maneuvers saved me huge money in tuition. Sure, I guess I could have attended the four-year-university from the word go, but I was much more interested in paying $400 a semester for classes than $1200-1300. And there was a great motivation for me to do this: mommy and daddy were not paying my tuition. I was, and I alone. Besides, what real advantage was there to taking freshman and sophomore level classes at the four-year university anyway, especially considering that my university had an agreement with the community college I attended to take the community college credits when I transferred to the university, no questions asked?
Then, when it came time to transfer to the university, I was feeling the sticker shock of higher tuition. So once again it was time to get creative. After some discussion with various people, I entered the recruiter's office for the university's AFROTC detachment. And, after a semester and a summer of proving my worth to them through various hurdles (such as qualifying tests, Field Training, and so on), I signed a contract with them: they paid my tuition (well, most of it: I loved getting measly $50 tuition bills from the university), I owed four years to the USAF as a commissioned officer. I viewed this not as a trade but as a win-win for me.
I wound up taking student loans because for a good portion of my particularly demanding senior year, I didn't work. In order to get them I had to take a mandatory tutorial explaining what a loan was, how educational loans were different, and the consequences of not paying them back. As at this point I had just about fully paid off an auto loan, and was 26 years old, I found the whole process an insult to my intelligence and a slap in the face; but sadly, I understood why it was necessary. To say that the kids don't know what they are getting into when they take out a student loan, to me, is ludicrous to say the least.
I point all this out not to brag but to underscore an more fundamental point: I'm not the brightest guy out there. But I had an objective to meet, and was determined to get that objective by whatever legal means I had at my disposal. It worked. If I can do that...why can't other people?
There ARE tons of other options available other than student loans or mom and dad. They just have to be explored, considered, and taken.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Student Loans Today
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 2:32pm.
The student loans of today are way too easy to get. They are used to go to non accredited schools. These loans are used for a lot of other purposes besides going to school. I'm guessing times have changed since you got your loan when you were 26.
The student loans of today are similar to the mortgages of the real estate boom. If you have a warm body the government will loan you money. It's not going to end well.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
The problem
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 10/11/2011 - 1:35am.
Not to give away too much about me, but 26 wasn't terribly long ago. But indeed, one major thing has changed with student loans:
The only entity giving them out is the government.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Right, before the Fed gov't.
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 3:25am.
Right, before the Fed gov't. took over everything, you could get a good education, that didn't cost an arm and a leg, 1 parent made enough to take care of the family, and housing, education, and health care were on par with our pay.
In an attempt to bring up the bottom, we squished the middle class. Are the rich richer? Of course - they have the means to keep their $$$. Us peons don't, unless we live in a rathole eating ramen for most of our lives to save up to buy stuff outright.
I remember when they discontinued layaway. I remember thinking either it was not cost effective, or credit was now so loose, it was unnecessary. We went from a "take a summer job to buy your 1st car" to outlandish sweet 16's that are shown on tv.
I guess the OWS crew didn't get the same memo I did in 2009 - that the era of "Big credit" is over, and no, your wants do NOT count, just your needs do, so if you want something, figure out a way to get it on your own!!!
Ronald Reagan
Student loans are a risky investment in the future.
Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 8:21pm.
Loans to docs, nurses, pharmacists and any other health care professionals are just as risky as loans to lawyers, political scientists and musicologists. Even though we have a built-in advantage of having an aging population with increasingly complex medical needs, there is no guarantee that there will be enough resources to pay for all of the care required. The population of health care professionals is shrinking relative to the size of the potential market for them. While this might seem to keep salaries high enough to pay those student loans, if the health care system goes bankrupt nobody will get paid.
I had student loans myself, but my loan burden as a percentage of my income as a physician was in no way equivalent to what the debt to income burden is today with shrinking professional salaries and vanishing reimbursement for services.
Nobody argues that student loans have a purpose in financing higher education, but not everybody needs to go to college. The myth of having a university degree automatically insuring a better paying job in this environment is now shot to hell.
Snobbery
Submitted by Unsane on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 11:13pm.
So, to hell with any doctor who put himself or herself through school and worked nights and weekends? To hell with people who joined ROTC in college, and either had the military pay for their medical education initially or had it paid for with the GI Bill? To hell with any doctor who, oh, I don't know, secured a series of scholarships and had their medical education paid for that way?
Either you support aristocracy or are some virulent, nasty form of snob.
P.S. The recent "Occupy Wall Street" protests only confirm what I have known for some time: as much as I personally despise dispensing advice to other people about how to raise their kids, I would submit the absolute worst thing a parent could do for their children is to set up a fund to pay for their kids' college education. All I think that does is breed the next generation of spoiled brats with entitlement mentalities.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Two words.
Submitted by NeoKong on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 5:23pm.
Wisconsin.
All the unions thugs, school teachers and all their little socialist and marxist friends had a real good time for a few weeks protesting in the State House. All the Democrat fleabagging legislatures took off and ran to Illinois in protest against the duly elected new governor Scott Walker.
They had their bums and slackers. They had children. They had all their little signs. They had all the media coverage they could want.
Just a few months later in an attempt to pack the State Supreme Court with one of their hand picked liberal, rubber stamping, union supporting judge Kloppenburg she was crushed against Justice Prosser. Not even close.
The lefties threw millions into that race and lost because the voters saw what they were voting for in those demonstrations and they rejected it.
Let those kids rant all they want. The GOP did not have their vote anyway.
Amanpour Go Home
Submitted by rammingspeed on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 5:51pm.
All stops have been out for quite awhile, and Amanpour's contemptible promotion of a radical political ideology is just another brick on their path to revolution. The woman, and her network, are bald faced Marxists who are in panic mode because they see their efforts crashing. Good for them. They deserve their pain, especially because they present themselves as objective journalists, rather than the vicious activists that they truly are.
I think they want another
Submitted by robert108 on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 6:11pm.
I think they want another revolution like the one in October, 1917.
Perhaps, but...
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 10:41am.
The funny thing is that I think that, in many cases, you are right. BUT...if somehow we can give them what that revolution led to for just one day, just one day...the kids that are whining for it now will be the VERY first to protest, and they will do so before 12 noon.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Amanpour: NUTS (BIASED TOO LIBERAL TRUTH GETS LOST
Submitted by Frances Assisi on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 6:11pm.
Call Al Gore, all that crap is leaving a fecal footprint! Gore should see & cleanup this "convenient truth which stinks just a little less than his movie, Michael Moore and the ubiquitous Pelosi, and charge the cleanup to the Potus so he can wink some more giving his support legitimizing occupiers, move on.org, and his favorite union SEIU thugs. Holder could visit with his Panther friends to ascertain if unwashed bodies constitute legal actionable behavior, a party all around
Amanpour: NUTS (BIASED TOO LIBERAL TRUTH GETS LOST
Submitted by Frances Assisi on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 6:13pm.
Call Al Gore, all that crap is leaving a fecal footprint! Gore should see & cleanup this "convenient truth which stinks just a little less than his movie, Michael Moore and the ubiquitous Pelosi, and charge the cleanup to the Potus so he can wink some more giving his support legitimizing occupiers, move on.org, and his favorite union SEIU thugs. Holder could visit with his Panther friends to ascertain if unwashed bodies constitute legal actionable behavior, a party all around
Careful Frances*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 8:58pm.
Discrimination against those unemployed that "stink" may have been included in this new proposal.
Is this proof that Obama plans ahead?
I am no more interested in Amanpour's comments on . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 10:39pm.
. . . America than I am those of Hugo Chavez, and for the same reason.
An idiot touting idiots, big
Submitted by ant on Sun, 10/09/2011 - 11:37pm.
An idiot touting idiots, big deal. Which idiot is Amanpour? Doesn't matter. Hey, isn't ABC a 'Company'? Doesn't Amanpiss have a comfortable living and a swank apartment in NY? Were not the TeaParties railing against big government bailouts for the same people Amanpour's now railing against? Where were you back then, Iranian? Where were you?
The Checkbook Revolution
Submitted by Avitar on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 12:28am.
Rob from the rich and keep everythhing.
Her glee was disgusting! So
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 3:15am.
Her glee was disgusting!
So from what I gather, she will only accept the *truth* if it comes from those she identifies with - isn't that being a bigot?
The OWS people focus on Wall Street as the perps, while the TP id'd our reps/Washington as the root problem, and she wants to conflate the 2 movements as one? I'm smarter than that, when do I get MY show???
Ronald Reagan
jusr wondering
Submitted by D'saredumbpeople on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 7:42am.
is she a man or a woman. and who cares what the foreign talking bag says anyway.
Skank!
Submitted by billwhit1357 on Tue, 10/11/2011 - 8:47am.
The only English news I have is CNN, on cable, and when this woman(?) has a segment, I turn it, can't stand to listen to her liberal vomit.