Your are reading the blog Random Observations from Dallas.

only search RandomObservationsFromDallas

It has taken me a while to determine my true feelings about the Occupy Movement in general and the Occupy Dallas actions and public reactions.  This is almost certainly due to my left-leaning empathy for disenfranchised individuals who are so motivated to participate in some way in the public debate.  There are far too many outlets for both the "liberal" and "conservative" opinions and too much talk about the "right" and "wrong" of what is the equivalent of driving our economy and government off a cliff.  There is far too much Aristotelian, situational "right" asserted by the Occupy Movement and, in equal measure, far too much of the Emmanuel Kant view that what is "right" is empirically provable through observation of the reality of what can see and hear with our senses.


Neither is correct and for similar reasons.  The "right" thing to do may be the moral high-road, but the "correct" thing to do often requires a great deal of individual sacrifice required by meeting the needs of one's conscious at the expense of personal comfort available to people such as Penn State assistant coach McQueary, who some say was in a no win position.


So, what is wrong with the Occupy Movement in general. First and foremost your chosen moniker "Occupy" which all too often brings to mind the idea of take up position in a place that is not exclusively yours.  Nazi Germany did a lot of "occupying" of places that were not theres to control.  Those who finally opposed them waited to late to act, to the serious detriment of all involved.


Second, the constitution of this great nation guarantees the right of the people to peaceably assemble.  Unprejudiced and even people sympathetic to the movement can not escape that the movement is not always peaceful and no matter how you twist and turn your grammar, one can not make the word "assemble" a synonym of "occupy."


Your movement has made to little of the resources available in abundance in every place you "occupy" - self-policing by and self-censuring from those many in the movement who do have a clear view of their cause.  The reason the worst of the movement has become it's personal persona is the inability of the "true" members of the movement to separate itself geographically and politically from your "camp followers."  Step up and remove yourselves from these undesirables and someone with a microphone might stick a microphone and news camera in your face. 


The Dallas City Council, and the city attorney's office, in general conducted themselves in such a manner as to reflect well on our city; which, to no one's surprise is not viewed as a city known for it's tolerance.  My sole objection to the City's response has been the direction and actions of the Police Department which has not acted as the impartial authority required from those that enforce the laws, regardless of their political purpose or reason for assembly.


Each and every day the homeless, drug addicts and drug dealers and criminals engaged in the black-market resulting from the dealings in which these criminal occupiers engage for their continued existence.  

One can see these groups every single day from windows at City Hall and Police Department headquarters.  The police department can hardly be views with impartiality in it's daily failure to confront these "occupiers" in force and with such supreme execution as they did in response to members of the Occupy Dallas movement.  There is something mean and low in the police department's moving against the protesters in the middle of the night.  It brings to mind one of Adolph Hitler's favorite phrases - "Nacht und Nebel".  A truly frightening practice used by the Nazi movement against those who even remotely attracted their attention through any activity that reflected views which did not meet their party's political dogma.  Because of the nature of the DPD's actions the entire police department leaves their ultimate controllers, City Manager and staff, with a lingering smell that won't quite go away.




As to those who dismiss the Occupy Movement out-of-hand, without attempting to understand the source of the Occupy Movement's feelings of having been used by those who's job it is to prevent it, I can only quote, with absolute disgust, Newt Gingrich's comment that they should get a job and take a bath before they come back.  I'm say to those of you who sympathize with Mr. Gingrich and find justification in his comments for your own views that the Constitution protects "the people" of this country - not just the well-groomed, well-dressed, well-expressed, or well within the stereotype of those you from whom you draw courage because they only speak and act in a manner that matches your own.


When I first heard news of the Occupy Movement on the national evening news I said to my partner "this is not going to go away."  I repeat that now for the reason that great movements succeed because of the unspoken recognition that something must be wrong in our community to cause these people to act so vehemently in support of their feelings.  


You could use the cover of Hustler magazine as a book-wrapper for the Bible and in doing so, not reduce the messages contained therein by one iota.


To those on both sides I say this.  Take efforts so that your words and deeds reflect that which is the best of you and not take the easy outs available to you of absolute acceptance or rejection.  The underlying message of the Occupy Movement has not yet clearly been heard.  But, it will be, once distilled through reasonable public commentary.  Then, watch out.  Because their is truth in the assertion that special interests have high-jacked our government to the special benefit of the very few while spreading the cost and misery of their success among the many.

Please support the advertisers whose fees for making using of my blog page make it possible for my blog, and blogs by anyone else, to contribute to public debate. I do not need the minimal income generated by your "clicking through" these ads to support myself. However, I could never afford the expense of supporting such a blog site on my own and your viewing those advertising sponsors' messages does make this forum available to all. These ads are no security risk to your computer or your privacy for multiple reasons. First, I have absolute and total control over what ads and advertisers appear on my blog. I have nothing to gain from your visiting an advertisers site and finding as a result that your computer is infected or your privacy infringed upon. Second, these ads are placed and serviced by a reputable sales organization - AdSense. They would quickly go out of business if readers who click through the ads they place on this blog became the least bit dissatisfied by the results. Finally, Google and Blogspot.com have nothing to gain from damaging your computer or infringing on your privacy and everything to lose if they do.

Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner

A Question of Occupiers

Rating:  Uninformed
Author:  Deborah Lewis, Garland
"A question for occupiers

"How did I become your enemy? How does vilifying me help? I have worked for a "big bank" for over 18 years. I earn a very modest income. I have never received one of the huge bonuses you talk about. I live in a 1,200-square-foot house. I am a single parent.

My "big bank" has over 250,000 employees, most of whom are just like me. We all have families and mortgages and bills to pay. If you continue to attack my "big bank" they will have to lay off more people. How will that help our economy? How will it help if I lose my job?

If I am your enemy, who on earth is your friend? I had nothing to do with the bad loans, the risk taking or the trillions of dollars of debt run up in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am as upset as you are. Probably more so. You should see what has become of my 401(k) plan. I will never be able to retire.

If you want to blame someone, go to George W. Bush's house. Or locate Angelo Mozilo, the former head of Countrywide Mortgage, and I will go with you.

But I am not your enemy.

Ms. Smith, it is a complicated but reasonable answer to say that you are your own enemy.    Have you not ever, during the course of your employment not found yourself at odds with what your employer told you to tell your customers and that which you knew to be the truth?  This never happens to you?  Do you never feel a conflict between what you know and what you are told to say? If you have never had this conflict between your personal ethics and your employer's demands then you are a rare individual.  The length of your employment, the modesty of your income, your lack of "huge" bonuses, the size of your house and your parental status are irrelevant, except to attempt to earn our sympathy.  I for one am not buying it.


The size of your employer and the number of your fellow employees is also irrelevant.  Consider the size of the Nazi war machine and those individuals who comprised it.  Did they deserve a free pass because they were but one member of a large organization made up of single individuals who as small cogs in a big wheel.  No, they absolutely did not.

You say you had nothing to do with the bad loans?  Really, please tell me for which bank you work, at such a size that it has 250,000 employees, that did not participate in "bad loans."  I will give  you a public citation of how "your" bank did indeed participate in these bad loans.


You say you had nothing to do with the bad loans, the risk taking or the trillions of dollars of debt run up in the ware in Iraq and Afghanistan and that you are as upset as those occupying.  Not true.  You and I are in our small portion responsible for these things.  Why?  Because we allowed it to happen.  Did we complain when our home values increased dramatically and are home equity with it?  Did we think we too would ride this "hot air balloon" of our chief asset without ever thinking at some point the hot air would have to run out and our balloon come down to earth and reality?  Did we rise up in righteous anger and with our pens put to paper complain to our Congress and the President?  Did we do anything to help those who did go to George W. Bush's house (ranch) other than watch it on the nightly news and then switch over to "America's Greatest Loser" only to find out it had nothing to do with George W. Bush?  


Ms. Smith the question you should be asking yourself, as should we all, is not "why me" but instead "why not me."  We allowed this to happen by thinking we could escape the consequences of inaction by not participating. 


Therefore, just like you, my 401k is a wasteland of investments I was told were a reasonable choice for a place to put my money when I wasn't using it.  Well, I was wrong and so were the people who told me so.  Read my previous blogs on Bank of America and you will see how we common folk, who are as average as average can be, allowed our leaders and employers to take our money and give it to the unworthy in the form of a guaranteed profit or a guarantee against loss, which is the same thing.


We did this through the sin of omission.   We were asleep at the wheel because we thought someone else would pick up our slack.  Turns out, they tried and failed to get our attention when it mattered.  Now they try to get our attention to keep us from allowing the peril facing our way of life to grow any greater.


Then, again, asleep at the wheel you ask "why me."