Do you think OCCUPY WALL STREET is "CONTROLLED OPPOSITION"? Explain your answer?

Tea Party is not, thus the media hates us.

OWS is controlled by Soros and all the other rich liberal fat cats. The poor drugged up fools don't realize they're just tools.

What happened in the Bush era is nothing compared to what is going on right now,it is a disaster in this country, wars we do not have the money for,in debt to China and everybody else jobs shipped overseas and any products made here have to have parts from outside of the USA,We let millions in our country every year and they get a free ride,we kick and fight with each other rather then take the scales off of our eyes and work together . People time is running out and not a lot of people look into the facts,some watch TV some listen to others some stand on tradition , how many people lost there jobs and people who want to work but can not get anything.

If you do get a job at a fast food restaurant you work with people who do not want you there ,they do not speak English and make your life a living hell,and this job is the only job a College graduate can get with a 3.8 gpa

I am convinced that the October2011 movement is definitely not "controlled opposition," and I believe the same is true of the other Occupy movements. They have consistently rejected attempts to be co-opted by political opportunists from both parties. They have refrained from making specific demands which could lead to shoehorning them into one or the other of the parties.

The movements are demonstrating that both parties are bought and paid for by corporation and rich elite money. They are causing the greater American public to question the whole concept of Capitalism. They are scaring the hell out of elected politicians.

Buddy Roemer has tried every hard to worm his way into the OWS movement hoping, I believe, to eventually get an endorsement from them. I do not expect he will succeed. He is just another slimy politician who wants to promise to do what it takes then take what he can get away with.

The Tea Party sprang up when the taxpayers money was used to bail out privately owned banks and Auto compaines.

When Bush took over the national debt was 5.7 trillion

When he left office it was 10.5 trillion

that's an increase of 4.8 trillion over 8 years

When Obama became President the national debt was 10.5 trillion

Now it's 15 trillion

that's an increase of 4.5 trillion in 3 years

So Obama has added as much debt in 3 years as Bush did in 8 years

I have another term for you: a subtler cousin named "co-optation".It will surely be an increasing trend as we enter an election year.

New York City activists from OWS spent weeks planning the November 17 day of action alongside organizers from unions and community organizations, including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). But when the Occupiers showed up for the day's culminating rally and march over the Brooklyn Bridge, they found a completely different event from the one they had planned.

Instead of a series of platforms for coordinated "people's mics" that had been agreed to at planning meetings, there was a blaring sound system, an emcee and a series of people pre-selected to tell their stories.

Instead of the plan for a "lightly marshaled event" in which protesters would be led to the pedestrian path of the bridge, but free to go wherever they wanted, there were hundreds of marshals working alongside riot cops to keep the streets clear. Like the sound system and the emcee, these marshals were provided by the SEIU. (Don't be too hard on the marshals, by the way--many of whom are hard-working union organizers who may well have hated their assignment that night.)

According to one OWS activist, a lot of the people running the rally with their headsets and two-way radios tried hard to ignore the gazes of organizers with whom they had spent countless meeting hours not mentioning any of these plans for what actually took place.

For most protesters, the SEIU takeover of the event probably only registered as a series of oddities. Why were people shouting "Mic check!" over a deafening sound system? Why were marshals chanting, "Whose streets? Our streets!" as they worked with police to keep us on the sidewalks?

The effect was like a clueless dad trying to use his daughter's new slang. But the organizers from OWS knew what was taking place.

Why did the SEIU take over the march? Let's back up first to consider the context.

It's true, as the OWS website declared after the raid on Zuccotti Park a few days before, that "you can't evict an idea." But you can steal it. You can empty it of its content until all that's left is a slogan that used to mean something.

For example: "We need a leader willing to fight for the needs of the 99 percent." That's SEIU President Mary Kay Henry announcing the union's early endorsement of a presidential candidate in 2012: Barack Obama, the largest recipient of Wall Street campaign contributions in the history of the world.

Having SEIU officials...shape, fund, dictate and decree an anti-GOP, pro-Obama march is about as antithetical as one can imagine to what the Occupy movement has been. And pretending that the ongoing protests are grounded in the belief that the GOP is the party of the rich while the Democrats are the party of the working class is likely to fool just about nobody other than those fooled by that already.

It's not going to be easy for the Democratic Party to take in a movement that was born in response to watching Barack Obama sell his soul to the One Percent. Add to that the difficulty of maintaining support from all the people who defend the Occupy movement even as Democratic (big D, not little d) mayors repress the tens of thousands who are actually occupying.

No matter how disappointing the Democrats have been in defending working people from the budget-cutters and social reactionaries--much less promoting positive measures to make unions stronger--organized labor will be devoted to electing Democrats in 2012. Union leaders may be happy to see the mass mobilizations of the Occupy movement, but they don't want them to get too militant--and they want the movement's enthusiasm benefit their drive to elect Democrats next year.

Thus, the SEIU's marshalling operation to make sure Occupy demonstrators didn't take the streets on November 17 is connected to the union leadership's devoted support of Obama and the Democrats.

And now we can see that the Democratic Party is fielding its most experienced forces, whose aim is to steer the movement toward the safe terrain of electoral politics.

I support OWS and I probably have different opinions about things with other OWS protesters but thats whats so good about it, we're aligned by one opinions, the opinion that there are social and economic mechanisms put in place by the 1% in order to perpetuate their wealth and their power over our society.

Not even remotely possible. A lot of mentally deficient "pundits" grasp at those straws to try and make a deluded point. they are spontaneous demonstrations against the liars and thieves in government.

yerboyz r gonna get tossed out for 25years,,,,

the reps have one sometimes- constituency,,,you have the lapdog press, 40 years of a crumbling coutry

you broke it bought it & own it,its yer baby,time to payup

ows are defectors

g t f o oooooooo h

well the tea party gets the proper permits and cleans up after the are done where as the OWS bowel movement squats on public property and when forced to finally leave pretty much has trashed this public space

OWS is a collection of extremist.