Yesterday, using a permit obtained by the labor union behemoth SEIU, Occupy squatters stormed the Congressional offices of Colorado Republicans Mike Coffman and Scott Tipton, ostensibly to protest the powers that be. As the squatter movement hasn't been entirely clear what they stand for (or against), it was hard to tell what they were there to do, other than express themselves for self-expression's sake.
One area the Occupy movement has seemed to coalesce around is their opposition to crony capitalism and the bank bailout, something that finds them on common ground with the Tea Party.
The difference is the Tea Party has been intellectually honest, targeting members of both parties when they violate the principles of the grassroots movement. The Occupier's decision to target only Coffman and Tipton makes clear they are getting their marching orders from liberal strategists, not ideological principles.
If they weren't beholden to labor union priorities, they would have stopped by Ed Perlmutter's office. After all, he voted for the bank bailout — neither Tipton nor Coffman was even in Congress at the time of the vote.
And…oh yeah…Perlmutter LOVES crony capitalism too. Remember this gem from 2009? Per The Washington Times:
Rep. Ed Perlmutter of Colorado inserted a provision into the recently passed House climate change bill that would drum up business for “green” banks, such as the one he has invested in and his family and a political donor helped found in San Francisco.
Guess the SEIU drawn treasure map of Congressional offices to protest must have mistakenly left off Perlmutter's office.
That, or the Occupy movement has been co-opted by partisan political forces which it claims to reject.
Or as Compass Colorado President Tyler Q. Houlton emailed the Peak:
"The fact that the Occupy movement only protested in Republican offices shows their obvious ties to national Democrats. If the Occupy Wall Street extremists were true to their philosophy, they'd be condemning Rep. Ed Perlmutter's vote for the bank bailout and the unethical banking legislation he sponsored that directly benefited his family."