COMMENTARY

Peter Burgess

Great Occupy Wall Street Humor Occupy Wall Street Humor: Great Cartoon Plus The Onion By Joe Romm on Oct 16, 2011 at 8:00 am This hilarious cartoon is making the rounds: “I am the 1%. Smithers, release the hounds.” And The Onion has a great short piece on Occupy Wall Street, “Nation Waiting For Protesters To Clearly Articulate Demands Before Ignoring Them”: NEW YORK—As the Occupy Wall Street protest expands and grows into a nationwide movement, Americans are eagerly awaiting a list of demands from the group so they can then systematically disregard them and continue going about their business, polls showed this week. “The protesters need to unify around a shared agenda with precise policy goals so I can begin paying no attention to them whatsoever,” said Tulsa, OK poll respondent Kaye Petrachonis, echoing the thoughts of millions across the country. “If they don’t have a clear power structure organized around specific demands first, then I’ll never be able to completely tune them out due to a political conflict of interest or an inability to comprehend complex, detailed economic concepts. These people really need to get their act together.” Once Occupy Wall Street has a concrete set of objectives in place, the majority of Americans said they would go back to waiting for the sluggish economy to recover while blindly accepting things the way they are. D’oh! Related Post: What was the best climate or energy humor of 2010? Tags: 99 Percent MovementhumorThe Simpsons PREVIOUS IN TP CLIMATE PROGRESS NEXT IN TP CLIMATE PROGRESS 21 Responses to Occupy Wall Street Humor: Great Cartoon Plus The Onion prokaryotes says: October 16, 2011 at 8:08 am WASHINGTON — The voice behind the greedy Mr Burns said Friday he offered to take a 70 percent cut in pay to keep “The Simpsons” on the air, only for Fox Television to reject his proposal. Harry Shearer is among voice cast members locked in a contract dispute with Fox, a unit of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. that is threatening to axe the hit cartoon show after 23 seasons if no deal is reached. “All I would ask in return is that I be allowed a small share of the eventual profits.” But he added that in a meeting Thursday, Fox told his representatives that there were “simply no circumstances” under which it would let voice cast members “share in the show’s success.” Fox threatened Tuesday to deep-six “The Simpsons” over the dispute, saying that as “brilliant” as the show may be, the network could not keep producing it under “its current financial model.” Shearer — who also voices Smithers and Ned Flanders, among other characters, and hosts his own syndicated radio show on the side — is the first cast member to speak out on the row. “We’ve had a great run and no one should feel sorry for any of us,” he said in the statement released through his Los Angeles publicist. “But given how much joy the show has given so many people over the years — and given how many billions of dollars in profits News Corp. has earned and will earn from it — I find it hard to believe that this is Fox’s final word on the subject. At least, I certainly hope it isn’t.” The Daily Beast news website has reported that Fox wants the voices behind Bart, Homer, Marge, Lisa, Krusty the Clown and other “Simpsons” characters to agree to a 45 percent salary reduction. Wall Street analysts suggest “The Simpsons” might be worth more dead than alive, because News Corp. could sell past episodes to cable and online channels, and not just to local television stations as is now the case. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/07/fox-remains-unyielding-in-simpsons-voice-actor-pay-dispute/ fj says: October 16, 2011 at 10:03 am Not really a joke but If each WallStreeter supports 3 New Yorkers, how many did Bernie Madoff? http://t.co/llilGZYW #occupywallstreet #AskMike @NYCMayorsOffice pl says: October 16, 2011 at 10:33 am The Simpsons may be the remaining voice of reason in the surrounding political insanity…no wonder Fox wants to silence it. Jeff Huggins says: October 16, 2011 at 10:38 am Not Really So Funny (the Onion piece) The Onion piece IS funny, of course, but not in one sense: WE — not merely the politicians and the public at large, but WE here — contribute to this problem. These days, once a key fact is made clear, or once a very compelling and grounded piece of reasoning is made clear, or once a compelling case is made, or once a valid demand is clarified, it is placed in the “well, that’s nice” bucket or corner of our culture and largely ignored. The mainstreams of our political culture and culture-culture are such that they have implicitly adopted some sort of “trump card”, used over and over, which is this: It is acceptable and even cool today to ignore fact and reason. “That’s a nice fact, who cares, let’s move on.” The media cycle enables this too. But other things enable it, too, including some of the dynamics in the blog community and the environmental movement, and etc. A mixture of those things might include: Most importantly, things that aren’t covered and aren’t done; Secondly, a preference for “new news” rather than an even-larger focus on action (although both are important); Thirdly, a mixture of tendencies that prevents one from actually getting “into the end zone”, i.e., that prevents one from actually getting a specific aim accomplished. Regarding the latter, consider this, as examples: Although we have, here, periodically critiqued The New York Times’ usually dismal coverage of climate change — it can at least be called dismally insufficient — we haven’t altered the Times’ mindset. We haven’t changed much of anything on that score. Perhaps a very little, but not much. This despite the fact that Paul Krugman and Thomas Friedman and etc. admire, supposedly, ClimateProgress, and ClimateProgress has their ear, at least to a degree. But we stop “two steps short” of actually writing or doing the things that could actually prompt the Times to change its paradigm and improve its coverage. Similarly, CAP is presumably a highly influential — and perhaps THE MAJOR — progressive organization and think-tank, with close ties, at least historically, to the Dems. And it’s located right there in Washington. Despite this, CAP’s influence — and our influence — on the Obama Administration with respect to climate change can only be counted as a dismal failure at this point. Why is that? How can it be? In my view, one of the reasons is that we always stop “two steps short” of what could be written, and could be done, in order to actually influence matters. So I don’t get it. How are we going to shift the momentum in the “battle” with the naysayers, and build suitable momentum with the public, if we can’t even prompt the New York Times and a Democratic Administration to get with the program and get responsible? I ask, how? At this point, it’s not the “other side” in the football game that’s our main problem. Instead, the main problem is that we can’t even get our own center, quarterback, halfback, and ends — the people who would presumably be on our team, on our side — to do much of anything, or to even wear the same uniform. And nobody is willing to say or do the things necessary to help bring that about. Thus, we seem to “enable”, at least to a degree, this tendency of our culture to be able to “successfully” disregard facts. To be clear, it’s not that we (here) disregard facts, at least not scientific facts. (We seem to sometimes disregard other facts that are inconvenient, such as some of these that I’m pointing out.) Yet our team — if you can call it that — doesn’t pull itself together enough, or adopt effective tactics with the right degree of persistence, to actually prompt the necessary recognition of facts to the point where they actually result in action — even action on the part of our own team. Again, witness the dismal coverage of The New York Times, and witness the dismal performance of the Obama Administration when it comes to climate change. We can’t even change THOSE TWO THINGS. If we can’t change THOSE TWO THINGS, how in the heck do we think we can influence much of anything else?? Be Well, Jeff Sailesh Rao says: October 16, 2011 at 12:22 pm Occupy Together peacefully until Governments of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% shall perish from the face of the Earth everywhere. JT says: October 17, 2011 at 1:09 pm Excellent post indeed. Please post this far and wide. George Fripley says: October 20, 2011 at 1:16 am My take on the Occupy Wall Street – and more power to them! Winter of Discontent Now is the winter of our discontent Since all of our financial systems are bent And austerity measures become the new vogue It’s banks, not traders, that have gone a bit rogue. Out slick politicians make speeches and spin Unable to admit to the trouble they’re in Unable to see much past coming elections In denial of looming share market corrections. So now here we are in winter’s embrace No heating, no pensions, no financial grace While Greece drags us down and America dithers I think I’ll drink wine as my pension fund withers …and dies. danny6114 says: October 16, 2011 at 11:31 am Fox can’t share profits of The Simpsons with their actors because that money helps subsidize the propaganda machine over at FauxNews. Hank says: October 16, 2011 at 12:21 pm I don’t get the cartoon. Can someone please explain the humor? thanks. prokaryotes says: October 16, 2011 at 2:42 pm I’m not saying that this happens everywhere, but some use such methods. For example an agent provocateur, could be used to discredit the 99% movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur An assistant editor with a right-wing magazine admitted in a column Saturday evening to posing as part of the 99 Percent Movement in D.C. “in order to mock and undermine” it. http://www.nationofchange.org/conservative-writer-admits-infiltrating-99-percent-movement-mock-and-undermine-it-1318177250 Undercover officer spied on green activists Legal documents suggest Kennedy’s activities went beyond those of a passive spy, prompting activists to ask whether his role in organising and helping to fund protests meant he turned into an agent provocateur. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jan/09/undercover-office-green-activists Or just straight police force to remove “protesters”. Sasparilla says: October 17, 2011 at 10:12 pm In case you’re talking about the cartoon itself, the character is Mr. Burns from the Simpsons, the owner of a nuclear power plant and embodiment of every socially repugnant aspect of right wing or libertarian thought, shortcuts with nuclear plant safety included. In the cartoon, Mr. Burns is sometimes shown coordinating with the Republicans considering things we’d expect written up in the Onion. Smithers is his assistant and often in the cartoon when Mr. Burns doesn’t want people legitimately bothering him he tells Smithers to release the hounds which ravenously chase the folks off (or pour the molten lead etc. etc..). Ed says: October 16, 2011 at 12:45 pm Hmmmm. I find it interesting that the peolpe we elect to office are all rich !! When was the last time this country elected anybody from the middle class. If you look at the at the industrialized countries around the world, in the majority (if not all ) the same holds true. With all the arrests around the world in support of OWS, granted some are legit, can it be said that the rich own the PDs ???????? Bill says: October 16, 2011 at 3:56 pm If we elected people from the middle class, we could, and probably would end up being governed by a bunch of Joe the Plumbers. april says: October 17, 2011 at 10:54 am Bill, Joe the Plumbers are considered to be a poor class. Also, the world would be better off if Joe the Plumber, whose main concern isn’t ruling the world, ran this country. Sasparilla says: October 17, 2011 at 10:13 pm Right there with you April. Cindy says: October 16, 2011 at 4:32 pm WHY IS IT THAT I CANNOT PRINT THIS? ALSO, CANNOT GET ON MIKE RUPPERT’S WEBSITE? AND NOT POSSIBLE TO GET ON SOME OF OCCUPY WALLSTREET WEBSITES? TOO ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT? T Joe Romm says: October 16, 2011 at 6:29 pm Try not using all caps! Lee Eisenberg says: October 16, 2011 at 11:13 pm Along with Mr. Burns, another One Percenter is Thurston Howell III. Raul M. says: October 17, 2011 at 7:58 am manipulators anonymous – I do not follow – isn’t it that people are able to say and show that it is too difficult to follow a set of demands. I thought that is what OWS is about. It being to difficult to follow the enablers of the 1%’s demands. I guess I had it backwards. So it’s that the OWS group has the demanding platform. Raul M. says: October 17, 2011 at 9:58 am If the inside of a turbine fan used for a windmill is of a screw shape and the entire turbine is laid on it’s side suspended between two towers would the turbine get sufficient turn to power in most winds? Raul M. says: October 17, 2011 at 10:14 am Is a dampening system needed to lower vibration of a turbine suspended between two buildings? Electric power is a useful and commonly needed thing. Such a turbine could provide power to buildings in remote locations and still being quiet.