Stupid Liberal Tricks: Portland, Oregon's Mayor Blasts the Occupy Movement

image: Portland, Oregon, Mayor Sam Adams has "Teh Gay," so that makes it "okay" when he sics his thug cops on peaceable Occupy protesters

Last Saturday in my post, "The Occupy Movement May Be About to Jump the Shark" I sounded the warning that the Occupy protesters need to be vigilant against attempts at co-option by the Democratic Party and such sell out conventional liberal and progressive groups like MoveOn.org. I was specifically referring to last week's "Take Back the Capital" protest and it's stated goal: "Supporters hope the growing activism of liberal groups will translate into Election Day victories in 2012." I questioned what good any of these groups think it is going to do to elect more "liberals" like the mayors of Los Angeles and Oakland, who sicced their thug cops on the Occupy encampments in those cities. Well, you can add the mayor of Portland, Oregon, to the list of sorry ass "liberal" mayors who are making a mockery of that idea:

Portland Mayor Sam Adams is a self-described strong liberal, but despite sharing the politics of many anti-Wall Street protesters who rocked his city, he has also emerged as one of their harshest critics.

Adams told Reuters this week in an interview at City Hall in Portland that the movement had lost its focus.

The Oregon mayor’s running argument with the Occupy movement, much of it conducted openly over Twitter, points to a similar rift between left-wing protesters and liberal politicians in cities across the country, from Los Angeles to Atlanta.

Occupy protesters have denounced economic inequality and the perceived undue power of the wealthy. But they have also clashed with liberal politicians in ways that suggest the movement will not necessarily align with Democratic officials and candidates, political analysts said.

Adams is one of several mayors who, despite expressing sympathy with the Occupy movement, said his duty to maintain law and order compelled him to send in police to dismantle protest camps.

Demonstrations that began in September in New York against banks and corporations have shifted to include opposition to what protesters say is police brutality, as Occupy camps across the nation were forcibly shut down in recent weeks.

“I am a liberal progressive, but I also get to have an opinion on the movement, and I’m going to put it out there,” Adams told Reuters. “Because any good movement has to be nimble, and this one so far hasn’t been.”

The mayor said he has watched the nationwide Occupy protests “devolve to fighting with liberal mayors in liberal cities.”

How much more proof do you need that ANYONE who wins election to a major public office these days is fundamentally corrupt? Just like those other mayors, Adams got into office through an election no doubt funded by fat cat political donors who don't take too kindly to "dirty hippies" loudly pointing out the social inequities in this country. Ergo, he represents the enemy, no matter how "liberal" he professes to be.

Many clueless mainstream liberals and progressives, especially those upper middle class twits who still have good jobs, are no doubt be willing to forgive Mayor Adams because of this:

Adams, who is openly gay, touts his city’s accomplishments in spending $150 million over the past five years on help for the homeless and affordable housing.

Wow, we're supposed to be impressed because the city spent a mere $30 million a year on anti-poverty programs during Adams's tenure? Anti-poverty programs that I gather were already in place BEFORE he became mayor, since he doesn't claim that he helped get them enacted? No doubt, too, that he is trying to hide behind the fact that he is openly gay to "prove" that he is one of the "good" guys. Because one of the side of effects of ten years of conservative gay bashing is that many liberals and progressives now put gays on a pedestal as if they are not just as capable of selling out the common good on behalf of the elites as any straight politician (paging: Barney Frank).

Fortunately, there was good news to be had towards the end of the article:

While the conservative Tea Party movement helped Republicans retake the U.S. House in the 2010 elections, political observers do not anticipate a similar outcome for the anti-Wall Street crowd.

“The difference is the Tea Party got to take over the Republican Party and begin to reshape it in its own image,” Jeffe said.

“It doesn’t appear that’s going to happen in any way quickly with the Democratic Party,” she added, citing a lack of cohesiveness so far in the Occupy movement and distrust of electoral politics.

As well it shouldn't. And if that leads to a massive Republican victory next year, too bad. It might finally spell the death throes of the thoroughly corrupt Democratic Party once and for all. We'll be just as screwed, but at least there won't be millions of delusional liberal and progressives running around making excuses for why "their guy" can't effect change, or even why he or she has to "uphold law and order" at the expense of peaceable protesters seeking economic justice.