Philosophers whose ancestors built the gargantuan computer Deep Thought to calculate an answer to that Ultimate Question were mortified upon learning that their computer spent 7.5 million years to come up with, 42. Deep Thought's response was along the lines of: How do you expect to understand the answer, when you don't understand the question?
Perhaps a correlation is there regarding Corporatocracy's denigration of the Wall Street Occupiers for not having a clear message; for not having a tidy answer to Corporatocracy's question of, "What's the Problem?"
Specific grievances probably outnumber protestors--even counting their rapidly-multiplying allies around the country. When virtually everything has been fouled by Wall Street kinds of casino juju, and corporate criminality in general, how might a single clear message be formulated?
Ultimately, Corporatocracy seems to be asking for an answer to a question they don't understand--I mean, under the circumstances, if they actually have to be told what the problem is, doesn't that imply a complete vacuum of understanding?
Of course their posturing is all lies; they know precisely what evil they propagate--and will do everything in their expanding powers to continue to inflict the same upon the "other 99 percent". Virtually everything they do has roots in some breed of lie.
And since they've gotten such a smother of denigration out of the "no clear message" chicanery, maybe it's time to skin their little pet by pronouncing a clear message in triptych--right off the top?
At least it's my opinion that the following three demands offer clear initial focus:
1) End corporate personhood
2) End the Fed
3) End military adventurism
Regarding deceit being Corporatocracy's constant companion, beginnings of corporate personhood represent a fine example. It's widely believed that a Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruling in May of 1886 was responsible for bestowing upon corporations all the rights, under the Constitution, of "...all persons born or naturalized in the United States..."
Actually, in that 1886 "Santa Clara County versus Southern Pacific Railroad" case, the SCOTUS carefully avoided the issue of corporate personhood--the "landmark ruling" was birthed by J.C. Bancroft Davis, a former railroad company president turned court reporter. J.C. slipped the ruling into the headnotes of the case--voila! Instant landmark ruling.
Please see the article, Artificial People for a fuller picture.
For us 99 percent, a premier reward of ending corporate personhood would be the invalidation of the SCOTUS ruling in 2010 that removed any restrictions on the amount of money corporations may spend on elections (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission). Put another way, denying corporations absolute ownership of elections would be a violation of their free speech as "...persons born or naturalized in the United States", as guaranteed under the first amendment.