I agree with the *message* behind Occupy Portland. What I object to is that they've completely lost any ability to (or interest in) control who shows up down there and joins the cause. Someone got jabbed with a used needle last night, and then this guy joins the crowd as well. There's no way this ends well.

Portland is a time bomb ticking. It got really ugly in Oakland Ca last night, but violence was the next logical step to occur. There are no specific demands by OWS, and lord knows nothing could get done quickly in Washington anyway, so all this was predetermined to get really confrontational at some point.

The best possible next step could be that OWS will become much less of a protest, and more of an organized movement with real voter influence. A leader with real (MLKish) skills and credibility will need to step forward for this to happen, IMHO.

Or, there could be an explosion of violence, causing frightened politicians to intervene with immediate specific proposals to change some Wall Street practices. Changes made simply to placate the angry. This latter scenario concerns me some because history has shown that change not well thought out, and implemented in emergency mode, is often destined to have real negative consequences.

I agree with the *message* behind Occupy Portland

I might agree with it if I discerned something beyond gimmee gimmee gimmee. personally I think the whole thing is George Soros funded astro-turf.

As an old semi ex hippie I would go and stand peaceably on the street corner to protest. But I will not be involved or associated in violent confrontations.
If the OWS folks can somehow rid their camps of the criminals their cause would be better accepted by those of us who protested peacefully 40+ years ago.

Gibby does a fine job of summing up. Where is this going? How bad will it get? Who will the new leaders be?

Meanwhile our former leaders are debating dogma in Washington DC. In Milwaukie they're deciding on a baseball stadium and reducing garages on new homes.

Dang I'm tired about hearing about these flakes. You have heard that our old friend ACORN has a hand it it, haven't you??? Or do you strictly listen to MSNBC and NYT??

When they say, "We are the 99% of Americans who don't have as much as the 1%, so we're mad and think the government should take their wealth and property away so that we can have a piece of it. Wealth inequality is a moral breakdown! We should all spread the money around so everyone gets a fair share!" Then I say, you're wrong on so many fronts, not the least of which is you're showing nothing (more or less) than envy. And that's not the same as jealousy. Jealousy just says, "I want what you have." Envy is a different beast. Envy says, "I don't think I can ever have what you have, so you shouldn't have it either." Decades of horrible economic teaching and the politics of envy have kept this monster alive and growing and moving forward.

This way of thinking makes you assume that all rich people are evil and have scammed their way into wealth. That may be true in the tale of Robin Hood, but I choose to live in the real world. Sure, there are some scoundrels, but the vast majority of successful men and women got that way by working hard and serving people—lots of people. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates changed the world in ways we're just now starting to realize. Their positive impact on the world has helped all of us live better lives, and they made fortunes for themselves by doing so. Why is it that you're holy if you help one person but evil if you help a million?

Yes, there are jobs out there. There are jobs out there that haven't even been invented yet. Go create the next Facebook or Weed Eater. Go pick up so much dog poop that you can start your own fertilizer company. And stop complaining that companies are TOO RICH while also complaining that they aren't RICH ENOUGH to hire you! I've seen a lot of you guys. I wouldn't hire you, either. But if you take all of that energy and excitement and pour it into something new and creative, you'll get the chance to serve a whole lot of people really well, and over a decade or two, you'll get to become the very thing you're now protesting: rich people who actually earned their money.

You have heard that our old friend ACORN has a hand it it, haven't you???

Oh, brother, ACORN? You mean the organization that DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE??

yuck yuck yuck on the Burgess story. I've got some more ideas for the blimp ad over Portland.

"Violent criminals not welcome to shape public policy, sorry! If you feel you have been discriminated against, please contact the complaints department down at City Hall. Your friends Amanda, Sam, and Randy will go to great pains to take of you."

Or:

"Tax the drug addicts!"

Or:

"Stop environmental corruption; lose weight!"

Or:

"Sanction stupidity: support mobs of people with a lot of time on their hands, lots of grudges, and a US public education firmly under their belt."

The perceived deterioration of Occupy Portland is caused in part because they've chosen to take in many of the homeless and mentally ill who've few better alternatives.

It's a noble choice in that they're walking the talk. The "Oversimplify Portland" advocates such as Native O would be far happier if they'd just go back over to that park by St. Francis church over on the east side.

It's a sound philosophical choice as it aligns with the refusal to generate the short list of demands everyone wants to see: Part of the point is that there are numerous issues to face and no magic wands.

dave j.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/03/acorn-officials-scramble-firing-workers-and-shredding-documents-after-exposed/

I can watch the Justice Center and the Occupy Portland Camp from our office window and just saw a dozen or more police in full riot gear hop on a SUV with running boards on all sides and take off up Main Street and then south on 3rd.

Oh geez, ACORN and George Soros. Pretty ironic bringing up these old boogeymen while questioning the credibility of the protesters.

It was ugly in Oakland before just last night. Did you miss how the police used "less lethal" force on a crowd of non-violent protesters last week, shooting a flash grenade at a veteran, Scott Olsen, who was critically injured and now sustains brain damage? He risked his life overseas so we all can enjoy the right to free speech, among others, only to come home and be attacked here. Now he can't speak. They literally took away his first amendment rights. But, yeah, let's focus on the incidences of protester violence.

Is it really such a shock to all of you who complain about the "road warriors" and street punks downtown that they would be attracted to this? How, exactly, would you exclude them? It seems inevitable - to me anyway - that the "occupy" portion of this movement will run its course one way or another. Most likely because they will find it impossible to integrate or abide the radical factions that are drawn to it.

But it's simplistic to discredit and disavow the whole thing based on the actions of a few. And to continue the false pretense that you don't know why they're protesting or that it's a "gimme gimme gimme" thing is intellectually dishonest and frankly insulting. Use that Google machine (for something other than running arrested protesters' names - fine bit of sleuthing there) and broaden your horizons a little.

You can disagree with their methods, you can despise the people involved, but can you really argue with why people are upset? It's the 1% doctrine, stupid:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/10/31-2

Don't tell us to vote - both sides feed at the corporate trough.

Don't tell us to get jobs - there are no jobs in construction , architecture etc.

Don't tell us to start a company - the banks won't loan money , even the money we gave them.

We want our country back , we are the 99% , and so are you.

No billb -
I'm NOT part of that 99% losers, but I certainly not a 1%. What I am is someone who DID lose my job, and searched high and low till I got another one. I moved so I COULD get this other job. In addition, I started a small business (in addition to my day job) so I could get ahead. I didn't spend more than I had and I did jobs I didn't like, at hours that I'd rather not have worked, in conditions that I'd rather not have worked in - BUT - it was a job, a rather good job and I made sure the employer was glad that he chose me over the other 499 people who applied for the job.

Oh, and my 'day job' IS in construction. My business didn't/doesn't NEED a bank loan to get up and moving. I don't think the republicans have all the answers but I KNOW that the democrats have NONE of the answers (in most cases they don't even know what the questions are).

No billb, I'm proud to be an American where I COULD scour the country and have the freedom to move there when I found one. I study courses (typically on line) in my spare time, with money I earned, not borrowed. I deal with banks as little as possible, but I also realize that they serve a purpose even in my small life. I DON'T need the government to do for me, outside of keeping enemies off my shores, illegal aliens out of my country (which they do a p*ss poor job of), fixing my roads, arresting criminals and putting out fires - outside of that, get the heck out of my way.

I have true sympathy and empathy for those in need such as the mentally handicap, physically handicap, elderly and infirmed. I have contempt for those who game those systems. No billb, I'm not one of the 99% and I'm very proud of that fact. I'm an American, not one of the losers who call themselves the 99%.

In the varied Robin Hood analogies - it needs to be reminded the redistrubutor of Sherwood Forest was stealing back from the TAX COLLECTORS

Good for you Native, you worked your ass off and played by the rules and succeeded. Why aren't you angry at those in the financial industry and their bought-and-paid-for pols (on both sides of the aisle) who cheated and won?

Roger: "they've [OWS] chosen to take in many of the homeless and mentally ill who've few better alternatives".

The Portland region provides an immense amount of "alternatives". There are over 76 non-profits and many government agencies providing services. Over $187 Million of direct taxpayer money is helping the mentally ill and homeless, besides many other government programs-from fed, state,county and city services. And many religious organizations and other groups help the cause.

Maybe that is why many of this demographics are here. I don't feel too guilty.

Ex-bartender -
No, I'm not particularly angry, I'm not happy but I learned long ago that I can only control myself and I'M responsible for me and MY actions. I play by whatever rules are in effect and I try to play to win, without cheating. If I play with cheaters, I try not to play with them again (I take my business somewhere else). The only place that I can't take my business elsewhere is with the government, in many instances they have made it so that they are the only game in town. Like many other citizens my only recourse there is to look at the candidates (as best I can), inform and educate myself (as best I can) and participate in the elections; try to get folks I don't like out of office (and hopefully replace them with someone who is honest and thinks a little more like I do).

I refuse to be a victim, you can kick me, you can trip me, you can push me down. Bottom line is that I'm a bigger man than you (inside) and I'll just keep getting back up and doing whatever I can until God takes my last breath from me. I've made choices (good and bad) in my life and lived with the consequences. What I think I'm seeing in the 99% group are folks who don't like the consequences of thier choices. Life is a gamble, you take a job, you go in debt for an education, you buy a house with the expectation that it will improve you life, you living situation. It's a gamble, no better or worse than playing blackjack. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, only one thing is certain. In the end we all die, it's what we do between birth and death that counts.

BTW - my work ethic, my credos, my attitude, I got from my father and watching him. He is my hero and since he has passed, I feel it a privledge to carry on in the same way that I feel he would have.

+1 Native Oregonian

I read your common dreams link, and here is my problem with it and its author.

"And when, since Reagan, one-percenters have been taking all of the wealth gained from increased productivity and stuffing it into their own pockets, while stiffing workers, it should come as no great mystery when the people catch on and take to the streets."

Right there is the problem. Blame the rich for ALL our ills, and while you're at it, don't forget to state that the rich are conspiring to take over:

"all of the wealth gained from increased productivity and stuffing it into their own pockets, while stiffing workers..".

ie, the author paints a tableau of the guilty rich contrasted with the blameless workers.

The problem, ex-bartender, is that it is a fiction that the "workers", (or anyone who isn't rich) are blameless.
Society as a whole has failed to organize effectively on a political level because of a myriad of causes, including corrupt public sector unions, millions of poor personal choices, political correctness, political apathy, and a failure of public education. (And this last problem can be laid directly at the doormat of the teachers unions.)

So when we see the rich being blamed and the workers being given halos, we call that kind of polemic what it is: bullshit.

And I will leave you with a personal anecdote. Once, in the glorious state of Ohio, I worked on a pediatric hospital ward. We had a frequent flyer, a baby, who was born with only part of a brain, the part that keeps your mouth eating, your lungs breathing, your heart pumping, etc. Only primitive functions, no cognition possible, the cognitive part of the brain was congenitally absent. The parents would more often than not be drunk and reeking of alcohol when they brought the baby to the hospital to attend to his frequent bouts of hypothermia (which was one of the vulnerabilities of his condition, and exacerbated by the fact that he wasn't being held much by his parents.) To this day, I cannot think of those parents buying booze with their government support checks without feeling depressed and helpless at the way we use our government dollars.

By all means, let's tax the rich, after or at the same time that we fix the waste.
the author of your link telling us to focus on the rich and ignore the waste is tantamount to proving himself to be a union mouthpiece.

It is hard to deny that money is playing far to great a role in the political process. But I may just be an unwashed hippie. So my opinion might not be valid. See the ad hominem fallacy.
Also there are piles of research showing that inequity is the root cause of many of the ills we use to demonize those lazy good for nothing po' people.

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2011-10-25&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email