Re: “Bachmann: Protesters’ focus on wrong target,” Nov. 4 news brief.
Michele Bachmann calls Occupy Wall Street protesters misguided and says they should instead direct their anger at Washington politicians. But why deal with middlemen when you can take your complaints to the power brokers of American politics? The Supreme Court ruled that corporations are people and money is speech; Washington politicians are merely mouthpieces of their campaign donors, protecting the very people who profit while the country languishes.
And seeing that a majority of politicians in Washington are Republicans, Bachmann knows fulls well that they will ignore the OWS protesters just as surely as they have ignored the majority of Americans who support raising taxes on the rich to balance the budget and implement public works programs to spur economic growth and reduce unemployment.
Congress is stonewalling America’s recovery in order to protect the interests of its wealthiest funders. In 2012, it’s time to occupy Congress with representatives who will work for the interests of 99 percent of Americans, not the 1 percent.
William Autrey, Boulder
This letter was published in the Nov. 9 edition.
Re: “Occupy movement isn’t about government,” Nov. 4 letter to the editor.
I take issue with letter-writer Joan Jacobson, who opines that corporate greed bears most of the responsibility for our economic problems.
It is up to the government, not to guarantee success, but to provide a level playing field for citizens and businesses alike, by enacting and enforcing rules and regulations (in other words, governing). When this is not done — as in the reigns of the last four presidents, and unfortunately, this one — the greedy few will always take advantage; and others, should they wish to survive, must follow suit.
There always has been, and always will be, greed — corporate and otherwise — but presidents such as Theodore and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who faced many of the same problems, limited the deleterious effects of corporate greed by putting their respective feet down and enforcing business and consumer regulations.
R. Kiefer, Arvada
This letter was published in the Nov. 9 edition.
If you have been watching the Occupy protesters in Colorado, and elsewhere, it is easy to see that anarchy has taken root. If I threw a brick or rock at a cop on one of your streets, it would be fair for the cop to use lethal force and potentially shoot me. If I hit him in the head with a brick, it could kill him. The cops have the right to meet lethal force with lethal force.
The goons in Oakland were throwing bricks and rocks and Molotov cocktails at the cops, but the cops did not fire back with lethal force. In Colorado, one of the [self-proclaimed] Occupy protesters in Fort Collins was arrested and charged with arson for setting a fire that destroyed a $10 million condo under construction and an adjoining building.
Anarchy has taken root among many of those claiming to be the oppressed 99 percent. What a joke.
Steve Sinn, Manitou Springs
This letter was published in the Nov. 9 edition.
The Occupy folks are expressing the frustration that so many of us feel about the economy. Congress’ idea of fixing the economy is to split the baby in two. But unlike the biblical story of King Solomon, they give most of our baby to the rich and powerful and leave us with the diapers.
Congressional gridlock is weakening our country because our two political parties are pulling in different directions. Democrats usually seek a beneficial balance between us ordinary Americans and the corporations where many of us work. Republicans focus rigidly on giving more wealth and power to those who are already wealthy and powerful. And we know who will pay for that.
Many of us are struggling to have a decent life. We can’t afford to hire a lobbyist or to give a lot of money to politicians. But we can make our government and the corporations take notice of us. We can remind them that we don’t have to buy the politics or the products of those who ignore us or treat us like commodities instead of human beings. How much more of the diapers are we going to take?
Doug Long, Rio Rancho, N.M.
This letter was published online only.
Re: “The more things change … ,” Nov. 3 Mike Rosen column.
In mocking the Occupy protesters and rationalizing dangerous economic deregulation, Mike Rosen calls it “a futile moralistic exercise to calculate where ambition ends and greed begins.” Mr. Rosen, ambition is when one works or studies hard to become an entrepreneur, scientist or doctor – productive careers that Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” easily directs to societal benefit. The greed protested by the Occupy movement goes far beyond that – it is a symptom of a loophole-pocked system where “money is speech.” Tax loopholes, subsidies, lobbying and bailouts reward not success but money, and its devious use for political influence. Worse, that money often comes from areas like mortgage bundling and derivatives speculation – pursuits with low to nonexistent societal value. The Occupy movement seeks to rein in reckless financial activities and campaign finance loopholes. This would create more opportunity for everyone to succeed, moving more resources toward productive ambition and fewer towards destructive greed.
Bennett McIntosh, Littleton
This letter was published online only.
No matter what your political or economic persuasions are, you have to appreciate the dedication and physical fortitude of the Occupy Denver community. Not many people sleep on the sidewalk on Broadway when it’s below freezing, for the purpose of sending a message to Wall Street.
Of course, us old timers are having flashes from the past watching the people rise up, take over the streets to confront what we protesters labeled in the ’60s and ’70s as “the establishment,” which in some circles included anyone over 30. The loosely defined establishment, according to us, was sending young people to die in the jungles of Vietnam, it was propping up despotic governments in Central America, it discriminated against blacks and women, it degraded the environment, and maintained a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction.
Depending on what history you read, the antiestablishment movement made a dent in the establishment’s armor. Apartheid, American-style, was eliminated. Women made advances in equality in the workplace and the decisions regarding their reproductive choices. We accelerated the end to the senseless war in Vietnam. We raised the consciousness of the people about the environment, how it was being degraded by industrial polluters, and it needed to be taken care of. We alerted the American people to the fact that the establishment had a huge stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, long before that phrase became vogue in the 21st century.
To you Occupiers. I’m following your story. You’re taking on a formidable establishment, but it’s possible that you can make Wall Street teeter a little bit. All of you and I know there’s plenty of money in this country so that everyone could have three squares and warm shelter on cold nights. The money just isn’t distributed where it needs to be. The 1 percent has a lot of the money, and they determine where the rest of it goes.
Bill Richey, Aurora
This letter was published online only.
For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.