President Obama and the Democratic leadership are making a critical error in embracing the Occupy Wall Street movement—and it may cost them the 2012 election.

Last week, senior White House adviser David Plouffe said that “the protests you’re seeing are the same conversations people are having in living rooms and kitchens all across America. . . . People are frustrated by an economy that does not reward hard work and responsibility, where Wall Street and Main Street don’t seem to play by the same set of rules.” Nancy Pelosi and others have echoed the message.

Yet the Occupy Wall Street movement reflects values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people—and particularly with swing voters who are largely independent and have been trending away from the president since the debate over health-care reform.

The protesters have a distinct ideology and are bound by a deep commitment to radical left-wing policies.

Until now, the main point of argument that has been leveled against the Occupy Wall Street protesters by the media has been that the movement lacks any clear goals or objectives. Now, suddenly, Schoen and the Wall Street Journal want to argue that the protesters have a “distinct ideology” which motivates them to push “radical left-wing policies”. He even goes on to clarify that,

What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas.

Unsurprisingly, these claims are as misleading as are the research methods being used to assert them.

To back up his analysis, Schoen notes that a senior researcher at his polling firm Penn Schoen and Berland “interviewed nearly 200 protesters in New York’s Zuccotti Park” and claims that the “findings probably represent the first systematic random sample of Occupy Wall Street opinion.”

This is completely disingenuous. Anybody decently versed in statistics would know that the protestors in Zuccotti Park make up only a small, sub-sample of those associated with the entire Occupy Wall Street movement. With the OWS demonstrations spreading to different parts of New York City (Washington Square Park, Times Square, Brooklyn Bridge) as well as to hundreds of cities across the country and globe, it’s rather deceitful for Schoen to claim that the 200 people his firm interviewed in one geographic location, Zuccotti Park, are a “random sample” representative of the Occupy Wall Street Movement.

*Updated 6:30 p.m.

Unfortunately, “earnest” and “principled” reporting is probably the last thing that you’d be supporting if you were idiotic enough to donate money to the American Spectator. Take the “principled” actions of Assistant Editor Patrick Howley, who yesterday decided to clandestinely sabotage the Occupy DC protest’s peaceful demonstration by breaching security guards at the entrance of the National Air and Space Museum with the clear aim of inciting a riot. As a consequence, this event ended with protesters, journalists, and tourists being pepper-sprayed by guards who probably would not have done so otherwise. From Firedoglake:

Immediately after the incident began hitting the newswires Howley published a “Breaking News” story with The American Spectator online [article deleted, here's an original screenshot] in which he reveals that he had consciously infiltrated the group on Friday with the intent to discredit the movement.  He states that “as far as anyone knew I was part of this cause — a cause that I had infiltrated the day before in order to mock and undermine in the pages of The American Spectator — and I wasn’t giving up before I had my story.”

According to Howley’s story he joined the group in its march toward the Air and Space Museum but the protesters on the march were unwilling to be confrontational.  He states “they lack the nerve to confront authority. From estimates within the protest, only ten people were pepper-sprayed, and as far as I could tell I was the only one who got inside.”

He claims that upon arrival at the Museum the group of approximately one hundred protesters split into two factions with the smaller of the two “rushing the doors,” the majority “staying behind.”  Howley then admits in his piece that he snuck past the guard at the first entrance in order to “infiltrate” the building and then confronted another guard.  He then “sprinted toward the door” at which time he was first hit with pepper-spray.

As he describes his next actions “I forced myself into the doors and sprinted blindly across the floor of the Air and Space Museum, drawing the attention of hundreds of stunned khaki-clad tourists (some of whom began snapping off disposable-camera portraits of me).”

Fully inside, despite the orders of the security guards that the Museum was closed to the public, Howley made his way upstairs – to the location where a banner was unfurled protesting the Museum’s exhibit of unmanned drone weapons.

“I strained to glance behind me at the dozens of protesters I was sure were backing me up, and then I got hit again, this time with a cold realization: I was the only one who had made it through the doors. As two guards pointed at me and started running, I dodged a circle of gawking old housewives and bolted upstairs.”

He then found himself “stumbling around aircraft displays with just enough vision to keep tabs on my uniformed pursuers. “The museum is now closed!” screamed one of the guards as alarms sounded. “Everyone make your way to the exits immediately!” Using my jacket to cover my face — which I could feel swelling to Elephant Man proportions — I ducked through the confused tourists and raced out the exit. “Hey, you!” shouted a female guard reaching for my arm. “Get back here!” But I was already down the steps and out of sight.”

I wonder if this is the type of investigative journalism that the American Spectator’s nonprofit teaches to its new recruits. After all, without any reservations or even embarrassment, this senior level editor has admitted to meddling with a protest in order to sway the outcome to fit his pre-planned narrative. If he was allowed to publish this confession to their website without anybody stopping him, you really have to question the ethical and journalistic standards that are acceptable in the American Spectator’s newsroom.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) has admitted that she has no evidence backing her claim that half of job applicants at a local government facility flunked a drug test. She’d used the claim to push for requiring the jobless to pass a drug test to be eligible for benefits.

“I’ve never felt like I had to back up what people tell me. You assume that you’re given good information,” Haley told Jim Davenport of the Associated Press. “And now I’m learning through you guys that I have to be careful before I say something.”

Haley said two weeks ago she’d been told that of hundreds of job applicants at the Savannah River Site, a nuclear reservation owned by the U.S. Energy Department, half failed a drug test. But Jim Giusti, a spokesman for Energy Department, told HuffPost that of the workers hired over the past few years, less than 1 percent failed a test. Additionally, only new hires — not applicants — have to submit to testing in the first place.

It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld (8/3/06):

Are there still Taliban around? You bet. Are they occupying safe havens in Afghanistan and other places — correction, in Pakistan and other places? Certainly they are. Is the violence up? Yes. Does the violence tend to be up during the summer, in the spring, summer and fall months? Yes it does.

Rummy has had quite the 24 hours: First he lied about troop readiness, then he lied about his past statements on war progress:

I have never painted a rosy picture. I have been very measured in my words, and you’d have a dickens of a time trying to find instances where I have been excessively optimistic. I understand this is tough stuff.

And to cap it all off, he contradicts himself for good measure.

So because he can’t get his stories straight, and by popular demand: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Shut The Fuck Up!

“I would just offer that our polling data continues to show that our young people and numbers in general are showing that the people are more hostile to abortion than they used to be.”

56 percent of Americans are pro-choice and 38% of Americans are pro-life, virtually unchanged during the five years that President Bush has been in office, virtually unchanged during the 10 years that Republicans have controlled the House of Representatives, and yes, virtually unchanged in the 25 years since Ronald Reagan came to Washington.

Sessions probably couldn’t read a poll if his seat depended on it, but his counterfactual statement does reveal a greater truth: there is greater hostility toward abortion from a vocal minority who wish to impose their will and religious beliefs on others. Attempting to marginalize the majority is nothing for Sessions to trumpet, but what does he know, he’s just a sitting U.S. Senator.

“I don’t think Ted Kennedy lecturing me on the teachings of the church is something I’m going to take particularly seriously.”

Hey Ricky: I’ll bet you any amount of money that Kennedy has at least read the bible, which puts him one-up on you.

Take the weekend to read your operations manual, and the Shut the Fuck Up!

Back in May, Norm Coleman and some of his fellow Senate Republicans slandered a member of the British Parliament who then appeared before their committee to answer their spurious charges. That MP, George Galloway, smacked Coleman around a bit before knocking him out:

“Now I know that standards have slipped over the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer, you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice.”

Now Coleman finds himself with a job most would balk at: leading the charge to defend Karl Rove in the court of public opinion. But Coleman seems to relish his chance to grab a little camera time that doesn’t include getting pissed on by Galloway. Here’s Coleman’s first move:

Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) issued a statement calling on Democrats to “cool the rhetoric” on Rove and allow the investigation to run its course.

“My Democratic friends would be doing the nation a great service if they spent half as much time getting legislation passed that will benefit the country as they do in attacking Karl Rove,” he said.

So Coleman’s not only cavalier with justice, he’s cavalier with the truth as well. We’ve spent a lot of time covering what passes for priorities in the Republican controlled White House and Congress. From the President threatening his first ever veto on a stem cell bill to the absurd boutique legislation produced during the Terri Schiavo case to Bill Frist‘s cockfighting bill to the proposed flag-burning amendment, hot button political issues have been addressed at the expense of, as Coleman calls it, “getting legislation passed that will benefit the country.”

But those examples are a few weeks old now, and maybe the Republicans have rededicated themselves to issues with a bit more substance. Maybe not. Yesterday, Senate Democrats tried to pass a bill that would have revoked the security clearance of any government official who leaked classified information. Republicans voted it down. Next on the docket is a bill to shield the gun industry from civil lawsuits. Maybe Coleman thinks that pay-for-play legislation is in his constituents’ best interest. The 2006 elections are going to judge harshly the representatives who played games while the American dream slid away.

Senator Coleman, until you figure out what the people of Minnesota set you to Washington to do, Shut The Fuck Up!

“I have no ambition whatsoever to use this as a political issue.”

Vice President Dick Cheney 5/17/02:

[Questioning the sincerety of the administration is] “thoroughly irresponsible and totally unworthy of national leaders in a time of war.”

Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove 6/22/05:

“Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.”

“I’ve never been able to understand his appeal. Maybe his mother loved him, but I’ve never met anybody who does. He’s never won anything, as best I can tell.
[...]
“So far, I think he’s probably helped us more than he has them. That’s not the kind of individual you want to have representing your political party.
[...]
“I really think Howard Dean’s over the top.”

No better example exists of the gaping void between what Democrats and Republicans are allowed to say in public. Over the top…like when Cheney told Senator Pat Leahy to “go fuck yourself?” Or how about during the Presidential debates when John Kerry said:

“If you were to talk to Dick Cheney’s daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she’s being who she was, she’s being who she was born as.”

To which Lynne Cheney, a woman with the severe misfortune of having copulated with Dick Cheney on at least two occasions, replied:

“The only thing I can conclude is he is not a good man. I’m speaking as a mom,” she said. “What a cheap and tawdry political trick.”

Hmmm…cheap and tawdry like Lynne’s lesbian romance novel that encourages condoms? But that’s a whole ‘nother post.

Dick Cheney’s comments about Howard Dean are not surprising in their audacity or their mendacity. The reason Cheney has never met anyone who loves Dean is that he lives his life as cloistered as his nominal boss. Dean was elected governor of Vermont five times, and most recently was elected chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Some people may not want Dean representing the Democratic party, but Cheney has a much higher obligation: representing the American people.

More Cheney fun with facts can be found on CAP.

And even though it isn’t nearly enough, Dick Cheney, SHUT THE FUCK UP!

“Howard Dean reminds me of one of these old soldiers from previous wars you find in a cave somewhere that still hasn’t caught up with reality.”

Wait, who’s in a cave?

Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) 12/5/02

“I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years, either.”