You can contact him and give your opinion as to what he should do there:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

That's my suggestion.

I said that there was a way to contact him. And, so there is. Please don't read more into my post than I write. Thanks.

I assume that President Obama is informed about what happened in Oakland. What he decides to do is something we'll find out, I imagine. Contacting him at the White House might influence that. I do not believe he reads DU.

the Oakland PD, so many innocent civilians wounded and brutalized, wrongfully arrested and detained for exercising their 1st Amendment rights. Are you saying that a US President does not know what to do in a situation where civilians are being attacked and brutalized HERE? LBJ and JFK knew what to do.

If he needs us to email him, that is not a very good sign, is it? It's obvious. The OPD is known for its brutality, no Democrat should stand by and put citizens in danger from an organization known for its criminal brutality against US Citizens.

Even the UN has contacted the WH asking that they protect US citizens from these attacks.

he's looking for the Governor of the state, which people evidently have forgotten about.

You know, there were clashes like this throughout NY in the 80's and 90's, some worse, and there was no involvement by the current President.

Frankly, it's absurd to expect the President to get involved. Other than a passing comment at this time, what exactly is he supposed to do?

"Passing comment" from the most powerful man in the world? Yeah that isn't worth anything at all..

And by the way, Oakland was told 9 years ago to get their police under control. For 9 years they have done nothing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/judge-says-oakland-police-face-federal-takeover-if-city-fails-to-quickly-improve-department/2012/01/25/gIQAL0wBRQ_story.html

before he gets involved.

This could be coming to a city near you.

Where are you Mr President???

For 99% of us, this whole "occupy" thing has been over for months, background noise.

Personally, I think the 'movement' has gone about this the wrong way since the beginning.

Too many corporatists who call themselves "Democrats" in order to be elected.
People who call themselves "Democrats" who willingly put Medicare and Social security on the chopping block...
People who call themselves Democrats and make behind-closed-doors deals with Big Pharma and the blood-sucking insurance companies...
People who call themselves "Democrats" and don't give a flying fuck about the working person...

And on, and on and on and on and...

My grandfathers (who put their lives and livelihoods on the line for workers' rights) would find their beloved party absolutely unrecognizable.

Exactly !!!

Then again, I expect him to be since he went along with the TARP program.

when he finished attending a fundraiser at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel.
http://dyn.politico.com/politico44/sidecar-archive/2012-01-28

He's either attending another fundraiser or preparing to attend another one.

The local leaders need to comment and get involved. The thread should be titled, where is the Governor of California and the mayor of Oakland. Obama has bigger fish to fry, as in the economy, wars, rethug obstruction etc!!

and looks like, bucking for a takeover.

what you're suggesting? You do know that the Fed has to be careful not to be seen as heavy handed in these local matters, right?

Stop trying to raise the profile of OWS by scapegoating this president. It seems desperate, and mark my word, it will lose support from former allies, except those wedded to Ron Paul's campaign. Professional activists know that inciteful behaviour can be a powerful tactic, and can even grab a few headlines, but they should also be prepared to have public opinion turn against them.

I agree with the poster upthread who sees the tactics of OWS becoming more desperate & anarchistic as they fade from the headlines. I think it's beyond ironic that OWS claims to be leaderless, and above "politics", but you're here calling for the nation's top "political" leader to save their bacon, and give them a little publicity in the process.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was the first to disparage some by using the phrase the "professional left." Has he or anybody else at the White House begun calling peaceful OWS protestors "Professional activists"? Or did you make that up on your own?

I wholeheartedly agree! Throughout 2011 their protest seemed non-violent and peaceful. Now that the media no longer reports about them, they seem very desperate to up the crazy for attention. They may have good intentions, but they have gotten way out of hand. And now folks want Obama to get involved, not likely.lol Like I said before, let the local leaders get involved, where the hell is the governor of CA?

How soon we forget.

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/doj-aggressively-investigating-police-bruta

Now people may make the argument that the Obama administration isn't doing enough to combat police brutality, but we can't say he's doing nothing.

The police brutality against occupy happened months ago.

Still, I just said the DOJ was doing something. I didn't say they were doing enough or being decently effective. The jury's still out on that.

that lead to the original consent decree against the OPD (the decree settling the civil suits).

From the original cases, 1 cop was acquitted and 2 have had mistrials. The 4th is a fugitive.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/04/BAUI15N8BA.DTL

I expect that next up would be the earlier assaults on OWS, and then this most recent one that happened over the weekend. Seems to be a backlog now...

Californians elected a governor - let Jerry deal with this.

& Jean Quan in the Mayor's office. ALL DEMOCRATS, but let's just bypass all these many layers of representation, and go straight to the White House. Is this not the most ridiculous & inauthentic poutrage we've seen so far?


Obama's critics are putting in overtime in an effort to insinuate that he's against OWS, and I think it'll have unintended consquences in the way of public opinion.

And yet feds trained with locals in an organized nationwide crackdown of Occupy in December, targeting the blue cities first. How is that possible?

I'm not saying Obama was responsible for that, I'm sure all elected officials were asking for it.

or perhaps the Federal law enforcement officials, when asked, simply advised local law enforcement the best way to handle protestors occupy public property.

Do you think the President is gunning for OWS?

He needs to get out there and now as it is more his responsibility than the President's.

The point is that these scenes are what is building the power of OWS. If we want our favorite scapegoat to jump over the layers of authority whose job is to address this, fine, but don't be surprised if OWS losing all steam in the process. It is the anger that is building the movement. I believe Obama gets this and is wisely working behind the scenes as is his usual approach.

No one believes force used against peaceful protesters is appropriate, but:
1) Who should be the first to step in: local, state or federal officials?
2) Is not the violence paradoxically helping to build the groundswell of support for OWS
3) By "daddy", I mean that no one ever said that protest would be met with civility on the part of the powers that be. We must face the potential risk to ourselves if we are going to fight for what we believe in.

On top of that, my opinion is that intervention by Obama's part is not appropriate at this point, and so I might conclude this is yet another reason for Obama bashers to bash Obama.

Could you respond to some of these points? Or do you not want to discuss...

with Occupy... I sadly suspect that his Administration and the folks around him are on the side of more conservative Democrats who criticise Occupy as rabble rousers here and elsewhere. That being said, what we need to make sure is that the Administration is not offering aid and comfort to enemies of Occupy in "cities that desire to address the problem" while leaving Occupy DC in place as a fig-leaf, since a crackdown on Occupy DC would require him to comment on the issue. Of course, there seems to be more energy in Oakland and NY than DC or anywhere else at the moment (although this is in part due to the weather).

I don't think it matters what side Obama is on. In fact, I think it's best if his administration keeps their distance. But I agree, it would be heartbreaking if they are offering aid to the enemies of Occupy.

I'm not invoking any chess game, nor have I ever. Obama's style however would indicate to me that his administration would first allow local and state responses, but if inadequate, I'd expect a stern warning to local law enforcement and civic officials regarding inappropriate use of force and preservation of 1st amendment rights...

just because the president doesn't jump out front and make public statements about something means he isn't doing the right thing. i am sure the justice department is watching this closely and the fact is a federal judge already on the case - has been since before the occupy movement and is doing so independently of the executive branch. because the president of the united states hasn't gone all pissed-off-blogger doesn't mean he isn't doing his job

is baby-sitting, or not among the President's duties (see post 33). One irony here is that the DOJ has done a much better job under Holder using federal law to reform LOCAL police departments so that federal civil rights are more secure. Obviously the President should speak out against violations of federal civil rights regardless of whether the violators are federal, state, or local governments, and he should make the protection of federal civil rights a top priority.