Despite mainstream media claims that the Occupy Wall Street protests are a grassroots, populist movement representing the 99% of Americans who are "anti-greed," evidence keeps churning out that they are anything but.
As has been reported here and elsewhere, the Occupy protests are comprised of professional radical left-wing agitators at the top and clueless college students who are desperate for a cause at the bottom.
A former Bill Clinton pollster surveyed 200 Occupiers and found that half of them had participated in a political movement before and they comprise "an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth" and they reflect values "that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people."
Interestingly, only 15% of them are unemployed, which is much closer to the real unemployment rate than I or others would have guessed.
In most places where the Occupy Movement spread, trash and clashes with police followed (a marked contrast with the Tea Party, which curiously was labeled as angry and violent by the media, without any compelling evidence).
However, it is the Occupy Movement that has a disquieting view toward violence as means of social change.
Nearly one-third said they would support violence to advance their agenda, but that's not stopping Democratic leaders or President Obama (whom the Occupiers overwhelmingly supported in 2008) from embracing them.