A perfect example of not getting it if ever I saw one.

From the NYT:

Leading Democratic figures, including party fund-raisers and a top ally of President Obama, are embracing the spread of the anti-Wall Street protests in a clear sign that members of the Democratic establishment see the movement as a way to align disenchanted Americans with their party.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the party's powerful House fund-raising arm, is circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to declare that "I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests."

The Center for American Progress, a liberal organization run by John D. Podesta, who helped lead Mr. Obama's 2008 transition, credits the protests with tapping into pent-up anger over a political system that it says rewards the rich over the working class -- a populist theme now being emphasized by the White House and the party. The center has encouraged and sought to help coordinate protests in different cities.

Judd Legum, a spokesman for the center, said that its direct contacts with the protests have been limited, but that "we've definitely been publicizing it and supporting it."

He said Democrats are already looking for ways to mobilize protesters in get-out-the-vote drives for 2012.

Glenn asks, "Can that scheme work? Can the Occupy Wall Street protests be transformed into a get-out-the-vote organ of Obama 2012 and the Democratic Party?"

And then proceeds to document the extensive connections between the power structure and Wall Street, which leads him here:

Given these facts, does the Center for American Progress really believe that the protest movement named OccupyWallStreet was begun -- and that people are being arrested and pepper-sprayed and ready to endure harsh winters and marching to Jamie Dimon's house -- in order to devote themselves to ensuring that these people remain in power? Does CAP and the DCCC really believe that most of the protesters are motivated -- or can be motivated -- to turn themselves into a get-out-the-vote machine for Obama's re-election and the empowerment of Chuck Schumer and the Democratic Party? Obviously,  when the GOP nominates some crony capitalist like Rick Perry or eager Wall Street servant like Mitt Romney, few if any of the protesters will or should support them, nor can it be denied that the GOP in its current incarnation is steadfastly devoted to a pro-Wall-Street, corporatist agenda. But it also seems to me quite delusional to think that you're going to exploit this protest as a way "to mobilize protesters in get-out-the-vote drives for 2012″ on behalf of the Democratic Party that I just documented.

"Jamie Dimon is one of the great bankers," said Bloomberg. "He's brought more business to this city than any banker in (the) modern day. To go and picket him, I don't know what that achieves. Jamie Dimon is an honorable person, working very hard, paying his taxes."

For all the reasons casey pointed out, above, there is very little in the president's bill that's going to create any jobs, or increase demand.  There's far too much in it that represents policies that haven't worked in the past, and aren't going to work now.  Couple that bill with the trade bill - which is estimated to send jobs out of the country, and what's the net gain?

There's a big picture here that you're not seeing (eye exam?).

"several signs that violated the building's protocol"

"A police spokeswoman said 129 people were arrested. Earlier today, a National Lawyers Guild official said she had been told that 65 men and 35 women were arrested and then were booked at stations in the South End, Mattapan and Brighton."

What a cluster**.  How can we get the country behind it if our own team isn't behind it?

Oh, and to completely make your head explode, Nader wants Bloomberg to run and protect us from the filthy rich.

More accurately with context, Prof. Warren's remark was in response to a U Mass-Lowell panel, when a student, after mentioning that Scott Brown was able to fund his education through posing nude for Cosmopolitan, asked how Professor Warren paid her way through college.

Although Bruni found Warren's response to be funny, he also found it to be "unfortunate", because Brown modeled in part to earn school money, which he had to drum up on his own." Professor Warren, despite her own un-priviledged background is now tagged elitist, an unfair characterization according to Bruni.

I think killing what comes out of that might be the first real goal I have for an actual result of this movement.

Can Theo, who broke the Red Sox curse, work the same magic with the hapless Cubs? The Lovable Losers' World Series drought is even longer than Boston's was.  

I don't think they particularly assert things here any more than any number of other posters.