Regarding [Kate] Zernike [New York Times]‘s story on OWS, I love this notion of conservatives “trying to define the Occupy protesters before the protesters define themselves.” How does a movement not define itself before it starts? The Tea Partiers were very specific: stop spending, stop the bailouts, and once ObamaCare began to metastasize, stop that as well. Protests in the 1960s were highly specific as well: more civil rights for black Americans,
let South Vietnam get clobbered by the Northend the Vietnam War. How is it that Occupy Wall Street couldn’t articulate a similarly straightforward message?
Emphasis added. Read the whole thing. (Via Michelle Malkin‘s Buzzworthy.)
*Er, maybe I should add a “yet to be” where he asterisk now is.
RELATED: Interesting coverage of Occupy DC:
While they work out of their office by day and go home in the evenings, the rest of their time is spent at the square, protesting with dozens of others.
It is not clear what the Occupy DC movement is protesting — a declaration of grievances is being developed, though some organized a recent flash mob outside a reception for Walmart in protest of corporate greed.
Emphasis added. Dozens of protesters?!?? Dozens?