The heart of the #Occupy movement is violence

November 3, 2011

The original Occupy movement

What was I saying about the “new Vandals?”

Conn Carroll of The Washington Examiner today presents video of Occupy Oakland “staff” trying to stop others from trashing a local Whole Foods store. But, as Carroll points out, the presence of Occupy Oakland “officials” tells us they had some idea trouble would break out, yet went ahead with the march, anyway, thus making them responsible.

Why? Because the central idea of Occupy is the seizure of control of another’s property. His final paragraph lays bare the violent logic at the core of the movement:

…When you assert control over something that someone else owns (Brookfield Properties, the taxpayers, etc), there is eventually going to be a physical confrontation when that owner tries to reassert control. That is what we are seeing in police/occupier clashes across the country.

And this is what President Obama, the Chairwoman of the Democratic Party, and sundry others, have aligned themselves with.

Again, this is no longer an issue of freedom of speech; no one is advocating that free political speech be repressed — as long as the rights of others are respected. But these people have crossed a line by trampling on the property rights of others (1) and threatening their livelihoods and even their safety. It is time for city mayors to do the jobs for which they are being paid and order the mobs to disperse — and to send in the police to enforce the order, if need be.

Footnote:
(1) And I don’t just mean who physically owns the ground; companies of all sizes have shareholders, and those shareholders, whether individual investors or big investment houses (who in turn serve individual investors) have a property interest in their shares in those businesses and in their future profits. Same with sole owners of small businesses, whether it’s a hot dog cart on a corner near Zuccotti Park or a crafts store in Oakland. When Occupy “does its thing,” it harms the very people it claims to be fighting for. What about their rights?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Solyndra: taxpayer-funded bonuses for the bankrupt — Update: subpoena issued

November 3, 2011

Remember when Congress, the MSM, and President Obama were all aghast and outraged at the bonuses paid to AIG execs after the 2008 crash?

So you can be sure they’ll be pounding the podium over bonuses paid to executives of now-bankrupt Solyndra:

Karen Alter, senior vice president of marketing, received two $55,000 bonuses on April 15 and July 8 of this year, on top of her $250,000 annual salary.

Ben Bierman, executive vice president of operations and engineering, received $120,000 in bonuses this year on top of his $276,000 salary.

Paula Camporaso, vice president of information technology — $80,000 in bonuses on top of her $107,000 salary.

Dave Sanat, vice president of supply chain — $80,000 in bonuses on top of his $111,000 salary.

Bill Stover, the company’s CFO who took the fifth before Congress at a September hearing, was awarded at least $120,000 in bonuses on top of his $367,000 salary.

The document also reveals that Chris Gronet, one of Solyndra’s founders, was “transitioned to the role of adviser and consultant” from his position as CEO on July 1, 2011, and negotiated a severance package worth more than $450,000.

I especially like paying a hundred grand in bonuses to a “marketing” exec for a company that couldn’t sell enough product to stay in business.  I bet they all had MBAs, too.

Bear in mind that Solyndra was a failing company: it was paying out more than it was taking in. The bonuses were essentially made possible by the loans Solyndra received from the Department of Energy. Even if no loan cash went directly into these bandits’ paychecks, the loans made them possible — money is fungible.

Meanwhile, as Stiles points out in the article, these clowns get to keep their money, but, thanks to the loan “deal” agreed to by the DoE, the taxpayer (that’s you and I) has a lower claim to any money recovered through a sale of Solyndra’s assets than do the private investors.

Obama is so good to his “friends!”

RELATED: Earlier posts on Solyndra.

PS: As a friend pointed out, isn’t it interesting how the various Occupy groups who are so angry at the banks have had nothing to say about the money the Obama Administration has blown on various “Green schemes?” Guess that’s different… somehow.

via Power Line, which also lists the… interesting pattern of political donations made by these executives.

UPDATE: The House Energy and Commerce Investigations subcommittee has lost patience with the White House’s stalling and has issued a subpoena for documents relating to Solyndra. (h/t Hot Air)

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 12,193 other followers