Here is a primary reason why an individual leader would be deadly to OWS:

[Zorra]

It is a guarantee that the 1% would devise a foolproof smear against any individual leader, and that this would destroy the OWS movement.

This is why the RW think tanks have devised and have been spreading the meme that OWS needs a leader.

*THEY DESPERATELY NEED US TO HAVE A LEADER SO THAT THEY CAN KILL OFF OWS ONCE AND FOR ALL*

And this is why we are asking everyone that really cares to stop insisting that we must have a leader.

With collective leadership, this cannot happen.

Also, an individual leader can be corrupted. Ego. Pride. Sex. Greed.

This can not happen to collective leadership.

Please join us and support and participate in OWS.

Peace

[Zorra]

1. Kick

[Speck Tater]

2. K&R. Exactly spot on. nt

[MADem]

3. They do need someone who can say what's from OWS and what's bullshit.

Right now, I could gin up a flyer exhorting everyone to go beat drums at Scott Brown's house and put it on the internet and say it's from "OWS."

They need media representatives--hell, NYC raised half a million dollars--PAY ONE. That way, there's no bias--it's just someone doing a job for a paycheck. No emotion. That person can be fired if they don't deliver.

Someone is controlling the bank accounts with the donations, disbursing the funds and doing the accounting--so there is some sort of "leadership" in the sense that there are individuals associated with those accounts.

Right now, there's no way to know what's real and what's not.

[Zorra]

7. Your concern is noted.

¿ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Us.

Please, with all due respect, stop telling us what we need to do. We can make our own decisions.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[awoke_in_2003]

48. unfortunately, the last cell...

about sound bites, is probably right- people in this country can't understand any idea that doesn't fit on a bumper sticker.

[Beartracks]

56. I hear the "why don't they occupy a job" one a lot.

LOL On edit: Deleted the K&R, since I can neither K nor R your post!

======================

[tblue]

58. That cartoon is so perfect!

Sums it up just right. Let the righties bark. I couldn't care less what they want, demand or say.

[12AngryBorneoWildmen]

84. Translate por favor.

¿ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[Diclotican]

85. 12AngryBorneoWildmen

12AngryBorneoWildmen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%3F

Diclotican

[Jackpine Radical]

95. Who shall guard the guardians?

And I think the initial reversed query mark is superfluous--this is Latin, not Spanish. Pardon the pedantry.

[saras]

72. "there's no way to know what's real and what's not." Yes there is - intelligence

The only moral form of discrimination is that which places all the sensible people on one side of an issue and all the stupid people on the other side.

This is both why OWS is going to win in the long run, and - as OWS "themselves" have explained...

if a message goes out as labeled OWS and everyone agrees it's a sensible message, then it's OWS
if a message goes out labeled as OWS and everyone agrees it's a stupid, inappropriate message, then it isn't OWS
it's that simple
that's what it MEANS to be the 99%

[MADem]

101. So, you'll believe any flyer that purports to come from "OWS" if it SOUNDS good to you?

That isn't what it means to be the 99 percent, I'm afraid. You are free to speak for yourself, but not for anyone else.

And if you suggest that there is no division from within the ranks of the 99 percent, then you're on some good stuff or your view is horribly occluded.

[Javaman]

76. Fail. nt

[MADem]

97. Your opinion. Not fact. NT

[Javaman]

99. Yup, my opinion. fail is still fail, though. nt

[MADem]

100. It's your opinion, though. So I'll give it the weight I feel it deserves. nt

[Javaman]

102. much like yours.

fail.

your turn.

[MADem]

103. I'm not going to childishly bellow "FAIL" because I don't happen to agree with you.

I haven't been a teenager for a long, long time.

[Javaman]

105. sorry to hear that...

I embrace my teen, for with it I will never get old.

I also embrace my life, for with it, I continue to learn.

sorry to hear that you don't.

kind of explains your original post.

your turn.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bengalherder]

4. k&r n/t

[Liberal Veteran]

5. The 1% want us play by the rules they set up since those rules are decidedly in favor of the 1%

And then they whine and bitch and moan that we are bypassing a system that all but guarantees they can manipulate the outcome to continue with the pillage of America.

[AntiFascist]

6. K&R n/t

[woo me with science]

8. The dog was good.

:)

[Zorra]

29. Yep. She's smart, photogenic, and loyal. nt

[Warpy]

9. Given how many leaders of the slightly left of center were assassinated last century

any leader of a real populist movement could never count on much longevity. If they didn't manage to co opt him with sex and money, they'd just bump him off.

Collective leadership can be unwieldy as hell but right now, it's absolutely necessary.

Besides, it drives the rigidly hierarchical thinkers crazy.

Um, crazier.

[caledesi]

19. Well said W! n/t

[immoderate]

39. Why would they bother the leaders? They really embraced these guys...

--imm

[Demeter]

63. I have no idea who these people are

Information, please?

[rampart]

64. the chicago seven

antiwar leaders at the 1968 dem convention?

or agents provacateur?

skolnick has identified these guys as government agents, further asserting that 1 in 6 protestors in chicago were agents of local police or federal agencies. be careful out there.

http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/skolnick-chicago7.html

[KT2000]

62. That was my thought as well

They do not have new tactics, just new weapons.

[Pacifist Patriot]

66. Or her. I'd like to think we've reached a point where a woman would be as...

iconic and effective a leader for the left as a Kennedy or a King.

That being said, I am very much in support of the General Assembly model and fully support a lack of identifiable centralized leadership for the OWS movement.

[tnlurker]

10. K&R

You are correct

[n2doc]

11. Of Course. The moment said leader arrives

The RW/MSM will find something in their past to scream about, or just scream 'hypocrisy' if they are anything other than destitute. No leader means no target. They can't even make shit up if there isn't a person to make shit up about!

[raccoon]

13. There would also be the danger of assassination. nt

[caledesi]

21. Well said raccoon! n/t

[FrenchieCat]

14. I said this same thing a while ago......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x790666

[felix_numinous]

15. K&R! Collective activism= self empowerment.

Empowerment is embodying the exact opposite of that which it opposes (consolidated power), instead of going to war with war, fighting terrorism with terrorism. Fighting assimilates you into the war equation. Empowerment is inner strength and resolve, and invisible to those who gain their power through stealing it and claiming what belongs to others or to the Earth.

This does not mean we do not get angry, but we channel it in ways that do not feed the war machine. This is martial arts being applied to society--knowing that whoever loses their cool is defeated.

I think this is the profound difference between teabagger RW mentality and the Occupy movement. It is truly the new paradigm and infinitely more effective, which is why the police and authoritative powers cannot tolerate it.

What (some) police are trying to do is create an enemy, to incite people to congeal into something they can destroy.

I am so proud and happy to see so many people out there standing ground for all of us (& those of us not strong enough to go)--they are awesome!!

:hug: :patriot:

[sweetapogee]

16. right now

an individual or small group on people in NYC has basically complete legal control of about $500,000.00 of OWS money. Leader(s), a name, a face, maybe? Half mill can do a lot of un-official talking for the 99% and I predict this will either force someone to the top or be the downfall of the movement.

[Zorra]

17. C'mon. Give us a bit more credit.

We didn't just fall off the turnip truck.

Do you think we are as non-transparent, devious, and corrupt as Congress, and/or the 1%?

¿Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Us.

[sweetapogee]

18. allow me to explain

it is not you Zorra that I address my concerns to. It's some RW puke troublemaker mole that could smell the green.

[Zorra]

20. Gotcha. Post retracted.

Apologies
:hi:

[caledesi]

23. No....that is a GOP "value"...$$$ N/T

[Zorra]

25. Nope. That's wrong.

It's fail-safed and bullet proof.

Post un-retracted.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. That's silly

There's nothing to prevent an individual leader/representative, chosen and given left and right margins by the movement, could not properly represent the movement. If that rep strayed from the GA-approved message they could be fired easily enough.

For that matter we could do that with our Democrat reps in congress and the WH -- if we were brave/principled enough.

Without a rep the other side never bargains. They can't, in practical terms. If you're waiting for mass, unconditional capitulation by the 1% as the movement's defintion of victory you might be waiting a while.

[Zorra]

24. sorry, but that is so wrong. After the damage was done, OWS would be toast.

You apparently have a lot more trust in the 1% than we do.

They can knock out an individual leader, and we lose the fight.

There's no way they can knock out the collective mind and win.

We have no genuine bargaining power in government. It has become almost exclusively the province of the 1%.

OWS is how we will attain egalitarian democratic control.

So far we have used "unorthodox" methods as a means to our successes.

We will continue to use "outside the box" methods in order to obtain the ability to negotiate effectively and satisfactorily with the PTB.

The "box" has already been closed to us.

We have no representative legal power to challenge the control of the 1%, because the 1% controls the representation.

The old ways no longer work.

[Liberal Veteran]

26. That's a good point. Essentially we leave them flailing at the wind looking for single target....

That isn't to say an organizational effort might not be something to look at in the future with more defined leadership, but we don't want to give the appearance that this is a some kind of cult of personality where they can cut off the head to force the body to die.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

30. Again, that's silly

Nixon disgraced the GOP -- and yet they were still mustered Ronald Reagan less than a decade later.

And what success is OWS gpoing to have? OWS is running 180-degrees from the dems. OK, their choice. But if the dems reverse GOP gains next year it will have done so without OWS by OWS's own up-front admission. If the dems cannot reverse GOP gains -- or the GOP takes the WH and/or senate -- then OWS will be defeated. Not only with the GOP not give OWS what it wants it can call the election an electoral refutation of OWS's policies.

The 1% are not going to suddenly say, "Gosh, those protesters are still sitting there. Maybe we should voluntarily pay back our Bush-era tax cuts." I'm curious as to how anyone is foolish enough to think the 1% will embrace social justice absent the force of law. And if no one is that foolish then I'd like to know why they're so foolish as to think the law will materialize based on a movement that has deliberately disenfranchised itself from the law-making process.

An embassador that embarrasses his nation doesn't spell defeat for his nation, it just means the nation gets a new embassador.

[Zorra]

31. Silly, yes. Nice framing! Again.But not appropriate. Anyway,

I had a long response almost finished, and something unusual happened, and I lost DU and other websites I had onscreen.

Unfortunately, I have to go now, but will reply to your post later.

Let me just say that to draw an analogy between a long standing political party like the GOP that has all the power and wealth of the entire 1% behind it, and a ragtag bohemian fledgling democratic movement like OWS is unreasonable.

Later.

[Zorra]

32. Continued.

To draw any analogy between a long standing political party like the GOP that has all the power and wealth of the entire 1% behind it, and a ragtag bohemian fledgling democratic movement like OWS is unreasonable. The GOP has every status quo means at their disposable to create public opinion.

How is OWS running 180 degees from Dems? OWS is espousing and promoting the long standing traditional essential ideology of the Democratic Party, the core principle of supporting the 99% over the 1%, a principle that has all but been abandoened since the DLC/Third Way co-opted the party.

If you believe that OWS, with its unquestionable pro labor, pro human rights, pro-regulation of corporations, etc, is running 180 degrees from the Democratic party, then what does the Democratic Party now stand for in your estimation? All that is left is representation of wealth and commercial interests, the same agenda that the GOP has.

It is entirely reasonable to believe that the folks in Wisconsin, and OWS, were part of the reason for the widespread gains by labor and the Dems in the last election. It is not unreasonable to believe that the same could hold true for the elections of 2012, due to the anti-1% national dialogue created by labor and Dems in Wisconsin and OWS. Dems will get collateral benefit from OWS without OWS having to adopt a political position.

OWS is the complete total natural antithesis of the GOP. Everything they do and stand for are the very things we are trying to eliminate.

It's a complete shame that the Democratic party does not adopt this position to counteract the GOP and the 1%. We wouldn't be forced into doing their job for them if they did.

The 1% will not have to embrace social or economic justice, we already know that they will never do this under any circumstances. That's the reason they took over the government. So that they could have total control. .

That's why OWS came into being. We are going to non-violently remove the 1% from any position of control through the sheer power of numbers. There are billions of us, and only a few thousand of them. They will be forced to voluntarily abdicate their position of power if it comes down to it. Does the name "Custer" mean anything to you? Their criminal co-opting of our government and of our ability to govern ourselves gives us the absolute right to stop them by any non-violent means we find necessary. They have assumed illegitimate power over our government and our destinies, and it is our natural right to employ whatever methods we find necessary to regain our rights and abilities to determine our own destinies, lives, liberties, and pursuits of happiness.

The law making process is broken. Congress is controlled by the 1% and will never take any effective measures whatsoever to redress our grievances.

We are either going to have to force them to redress our grievances through direct action and subsequent egalitarian negotiations, or create an alternative system that will eventually supplant existing government.

Like the colonists that fought off the British in our War for Independence, the exact circumstances under which our grievances will at last be redressed are unknowable. But we do know that the status quo is unacceptable, and that it is a hopeless case.

Things have to change, and we are going to change them come hell or high water.

There is no other option. It's literally a matter of the survival of the planet.

[RoccoR5955]

52. OWS will NEVER be defeated because

You cannot defeat an idea whose time has come. The message of OWS is clear enough for me. Perhaps the people calling for a clear message and a clear leader should think a bit, and that's part of it. OWS does not need a leader because they want WE THE PEOPLE to think for ourselves.

[harmonicon]

80. You don't get it at all, do you?

The point is that the system has failed. Your suggested remedies to the problems have been tried time and time again. It does not work, and that is why we're in the position we're in today.

[harmonicon]

79. +1 (nt)

[Hutzpa]

27. So from now on anyone that comes to DU with the idea

of finding a leader for OWS should be heckle out of here.

A sentiment I would agree with.

[dionysus]

33. how about spokespeople? all of us here on DU are political junkies.

we know what this is all about. for example, rural people in the heartland are only going to see short clips on TV, most likely highlighted to make OWS look bad. they don't follow this stuff 24/7 like we do, they can be misled in very large numbers.

ie Fox & Friends saying they're defacating in the streets and garbage like that.

don't you think spokespeople would help? not a leader per se, but multiple people that can give a concise message to the press...

[harmonicon]

81. NO!! Don't you get it?!

Every person has a voice, and all of these voices are equal. That is the point!!

[Hutzpa]

90. I think he gets it

it's just that some folks believe in authoritarian method, they believe somebody has to be
in charge to have a voice not knowing times have change and this approach now will create
more confusion and most importantly convey a clearer message to the 1% than any one voice
will. With a single voice leading the movement it will be easier for the 1% to cut down
that individual by either buying them or by killing their sentiment.

We've all seen or read numerous examples of how the 1% can be vicious once they find someone
they can use as a scapegoat to continue they're looting.

All the movement has to do is have different people speaking eloquently from different location
conveying the same message while changing the subject. Using this strategy will drive them nuts.

[Owlet]

28. Similar exchange here

http://occupywallst.org/forum/do-we-want-to-continue-as-a-leaderless-movement-or/

[Ricochet21]

34. K&R

[firehorse]

35. Yes the 1% desperately wants them to have an alpha leader to squash - a group is much better

The tea baggers tried the leader route, it divided them when one leader thought it was best for them to be absorbed into the republican party, their other leader wanted to be a 3rd party.

You saw how bad their ideas worked for them, no reason the OWS should throw out whats working and imitate the failings of the teabaggers.

[tblue37]

36. Julian Assange was very easy for them to attack and hobble.

No matter who the "leader" was, TPTB could undercut and/or eliminate him/her.

But a hydra is much harder to behead--especially since 2 new heads crop up every time one is cut off!

[firehorse]

38. Good point. Bad idea for anyone to be singled out. It's like that story: The Lottery

[Lars77]

50. I tried to make that argument even before those criminal charges arose but i was laughed at on here

Apparently, Assange was the most brilliant man in the universe, a superman that could withstand anything.

Now it is more and more clear that he was grandstanding in the media limelight, and because of his ego and love of publicitiy, he gave his organization a face and a name that could be brought down and discredited.


With regards to Wikileaks it does not matter what he did or not, if they can´t find anything on you they will make it up and they will tear you down and the organization with them.

[hunter]

89. Excellent point.

"Lightning rods" don't protect the building in this kind of politics. They simply become a target for the shit missiles.

[Bonobo]

37. K&R nt

[JoeyT]

40. Agreed.

Creating a single leader of a movement that the PTB hate this much would be a bad idea.

They'd dig through their past and if that failed they'd make something up. If that failed they'd "find" drugs in their house or illegal pornography on their computer.

Though I supported the goals of OWS from the beginning, and sent stuff when I could, I criticized parts of it and didn't think it would do much good. I've never been happier to be wrong.

[Tumbulu]

41. great reasons and the only way to

change the world as we know it.

Thanks you Zorra and everyone else out there working collectively for the change we so desperately need.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

42. I couldn't agree more!! LEADER = TARGET

Faux Noise, that pig with a radio show, the GOP slime machine, and every other idiot will find a way to denigrate the movement once they have a tangible target.

If they can't dig something up they'll just make something up. Look how they destroyed ACORN with lies.

Pfft ... might as well hand them the gun AND the ammo.


edit for formatting.

[bertman]

43. You're right, Zorra. But it's so hard to get used to. REC. nt

[Contrary1]

44. Not to mention the immediate attention a leader would get

from Homeland Security, and the warrant-less wiretaps, searches, and harassment that they're so good at.

[loyalsister]

45. A large bunch claiming anonymity doesn't even need to be trashed

They don't exist. If everyone claims to be what no one truly is you have an assertion with little credibility.
The media and consumer demand for sensationalism is not going away. OWS would do well to turn it against them.

[Chan790]

46. I've started telling religious conservative aggressors that the "leader" is "the example of Christ".

That we're fighting for a world more in line with the acts and teachings of Jesus Christ. (N.B.: I'm an atheist. I dropped out of the seminary at The Catholic University of America though (if I'd followed through, I'd be an Inquisitor today) and know my Bible better than any Bible-schooled preacher alive.)

It's exceedingly hard to argue for any RW POV when you're limited to only the acts and words of Jesus in four gospels and Acts (especially when most of them have never read them (LOL) and I know them from memory.). No letters, no Saint Paul, no Revelations, no interpretations of the New Testament or later Councils...just Jesus. Jesus was in support of the 99% of his day and fought the 1% to his death...he did not however condemn anybody except hypocrites and those that attempted to profit for no real labor off the labor of the masses (eg. the money-changers). No mention of abortionists, homosexuals or anything else RWers like to rail against. Support for sex-workers and the downtrodden.

Jesus was a radical leftist, far far to the left of the Occupy movement. In many ways to the left of Marx and Engels.

This annoys them.

It's logically impossible for them to criticize Jesus. They're actually seemingly physically incapable of it.

I win by default. I'm being disingenuous but their position is indefensible by their own morality.

To quote Gandhi: "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

[Fumesucker]

73. I encourage you to make your post an OP and expand on the ideas you have..

My knowledge of scripture is by no means encyclopedic and yet I've found that scriptural arguments often work where no others will.

I like taking the parable of the Good Samaritan to its logical conclusion..

[The Second Stone]

47. Spot on

All the Republicans have left is character assassination because they have let critical thinking rot in favor of their mindless bigotry.

It would be a huge mistake for the OWS or 99% movement to have traditional leadership.

[h2ebits]

49. Horizontal vs. Vertical Leadership

Traditional Leadership is a Vertical stack and hierarchy ie. the concept of climbing the corporate ladder. The Internet is a horizontal framework and social networks move horizontally. OWS is a product of the Internet structure.

There is no lack of leaders within OWS--all of us, in fact. We each contribute our skills, our ideas, our passion for getting our great country back into the hands of the people. There are many problems to solve--the signage speaks to many of the country's ills. It is not a tidy process, quite messy in reality and change is very, very difficult.

The horizontal framework is hard to comprehend, the media slants, distorts, and lies about OWS, and those who seek to destroy America try to oppress us with use of violence and threats; while money has bought our politicians.

But the great awakening has begun and OWS is a huge factor. It's okay to stand up for yourself, for each other, for your country. There is honor in that and we are being credited with turning the national conversation to the issue of jobs rather than the deficit. In just a couple of months--WOW, that's impressive.

Keep Gandhi in front of you at all times.

[Kaleko]

55. Mighty fine post & analysis.

Welcome to DU, h2ebits.

:hi:

[marions ghost]

61. k & r

:thumbsup:

"Horizontal framework" --rather than the traditional vertical...good way to see it.

[peace frog]

65. The great awakening has begun

Thanks for posting.

[myrna minx]

78. Welcome to DU.

:hi:

[firehorse]

83. Good post, welcome. Make a thread on the topic please to further discussion.

[Zorra]

91. Sweet!!! Welcome to DU!

:party:

[Bozita]

51. Spot on! ... Well stated, Zorra. ... Recommended.

They NEED someone to demonize!

[DeSwiss]

53. Yep. - K&R n/t

[Beartracks]

54. Wow, you've just described democracy! n/t

[avaistheone1]

57. No problem.

k&r

:kick:

[ArcticFox]

59. Three Reasons in Nine Letters

JFK
RFK
MLK

[NuttyFluffers]

60. "Cult of Personality" -- Living Colour

...
Neon lights a nobel prize
A leader speaks, that leader dies
You don’t have to follow me
Only you can set you free
...


;-) The world is old, as are the techniques used to maintain power.

[DinahMoeHum]

67. Better that OWS should have a thousand piranhas than one shark.

Uniformity is not unity; and diversity is not disunity.

[Enthusiast]

68. There is no disputing this. kr

[LittleGirl]

69. excellent thread

thanks. bookmarking.

[TBF]

70. K&R nt

[Uben]

71. I agree....

...as it stands now, they (republican attack machine) have nothing to grasp onto. They can only attack the movement, therefore they have to define it in their terms, and use that definition to attack it. So, they are flailing around trying to find something about the movement they can attack. Newt's best shot was his "take a bath" statement. Even republicans know how lame that was!

They need desperately to find something to grasp on to, and they cannot. How do you attack a premise that everyone knows is true?
The rich are raping this country and the republicans are complicit, but they cannot defend it. As hard as they try, they have to live with the decision they made to just say no to everything that might help this country rebound. There was a resounding "no" to jobs bills, they don't want any more stimulus spending, they don't want any kind of reform other than tax cuts for the rich.
It's obvious they are reluctant to choose a leader, too, maybe for the same reason, a focal point for attack. They change front-runners more often than underwear. Right now, it's Newt, but they know that is a sure loss....too much baggage. Perry? You're joking, right? Romney? Oops, he's a Mormon. Bachmann? Even republicans spit up their coffee on this one.

I put their chances of winning the election at about 8-1, almost insurmountable odds. Their opponent, Obama, has already been scrutinized for four years, and their best shot was "Where's his birth certficate?" Major fail! In two years he accomplished more than Bush in eight. He took away their "republicans are better at defense" argument. They ceded the "we are better at the economy" argument by just saying no to everything. They haven't got anything to run on and the group they have as candidates is laughable. Time is running out, and they lack a viable candidate they can rally around. That translates to loss, and they know it. Their attack machine is fumbling around looking for a target, and they're having about as much luck as they had of getting Bin Laden. OWS was a brilliant and well timed movement. It defeated the republicans.

[Tumbulu]

88. fabulous comments , I agree (nt)

[Courtesy Flush]

74. We need an army of leaders nt

[groovedaddy]

75. Beware of the plants too! They were used a lot in the anti-war movement this go round. They are

usually the first to suggest violence or property destruction.

[dotymed]

77. So true n/t

[certainot]

82. OWS is one of the only political entities last 20 yrs that has been able to message over RW radio.

you are exactly right. they can swiftboat anyone with lies and distortions.and the concept is idiotic anyway.

the think tanks that run the GOP and their PR ops need defined targets. that's why they pressure for leaders and specifics ahead of time from dems.

[jwirr]

86. Excellent points. Since Nov. 22, 1963 liberal leaders have systematically

been targeted in one way or another until by the year 2000 we did not have many leaders left. They used everything from assassination to slander and they made it stick. Finally the people are beginning to catch on but it still works so we will just let our leaders work together as a group that can interchange positions. It has just occurred to me that our progressive leaders in Congress are doing much the same thing and when Weiner seemed to be a favorite it did not take long to get rid of him. If we deny them a target they can have nothing to say. Thank you.

[jwirr]

87. Good point. Since JFK they have been systematically targeting

one leader after another in one way or another. Time to take their targets away.

[deaniac21]

98. They started with Abe Lincoln.

[Mosaic]

92. Agreed. There are many leaders

There are many thoughful individuals working to make America a better place. Work must be put in its proper perspective as computers, robots, and technology take over most tasks. We need Democratic Socialism, or something similar if the word socialism can not be saved in the face of the ignorance and hate of the wrongwingers. We are all leaders.

[bottom line]

94. Shelby

This was already settled when occupydenver elected Shelby, a collie dog mix as leader. :)
Simplified: shared
As long as I've been a liberal, there has always been in the back of my consciousness, an idea that the founding fathers are turning in their graves, that we still have a singular President & a SCOTUS that has no limits. Both were reluctantly put in place as an insurance because they were fighting worldwide "KINGS, queens & LANDLORDS. Oh, we're still fighting... I love that Obama is our insurance. Peace Circle. Ever really wonder why George Washington didn't want to be President? "An Idea whose time has come"
These are such incredible times, Hurray!

[krispos42]

104. Can't rec, so I'll kick n/t