REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Hey Occupy D.C ? Wakie Wakie ! Time to get up and move the HELL out!

POSTED BY: AURAPTOR
UPDATED: Thursday, February 9, 2012 11:42
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2995
PAGE 2 of 2

Monday, February 6, 2012 1:41 PM

BYTEMITE


Geezer: There is a difference between Supreme Court interpretations of the constitution, and what is in the constitution by the letter. Which is what was being claimed. - EDIT: I see this point was already made.

Hero: some of your examples were private property, not public property, and dissimilar. But, good points on the ones that aren't.

On the other hand, it may very well be a dangerous precedence to DISALLOW that behaviour as well. Either way it seems to be a thorny issue.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 6, 2012 2:54 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Well, I'm going to let the website sort out the formatting.

Alabama
Auburn Oct. 15, 2011 25
Birmingham Oct. 15, 2011 300
Huntsville Oct. 15, 2011 150
Mobile Oct. 8, 2011 50
Montgomery Oct. 22, 2011
Tuscaloosa Oct. 8, 2011 40
Alaska
Anchorage Oct. 4, 2011 60
Bethel Oct. 15, 2011 1
Fairbanks Oct. 15, 2011 100+
Homer Oct. 15, 2011 60
Juneau Oct. 15, 2011
Kenai
Unalaska Oct. 16, 2011 10

Arizona
Flagstaff Oct. 15, 2011
Phoenix Oct. 14, 2011 1,000
Prescott Oct. 6, 2011 25+
Tempe Oct. 15, 2011
Tucson Oct. 1, 2011
Yuma
Arkansas Conway Oct. 26, 2011
Fayetteville Oct. 11, 2011
Jonesboro Oct. 15, 2011
Little Rock Oct. 15, 2011 400

Colorado
Aspen
Boulder
Colorado Springs
Denver
Fort Collins
Grand Junction
Pueblo

California
Alameda
Amador County
Anaheim Oct. 7, 2011 75
Arcata Oct. 7, 2011
Auburn Nov. 17, 2011 150
Placer 99% on Facebook
Bakersfield Oct. 7, 2011 ]
Berkeley Oct. 8, 2011 Occupy Berkeley and Occupy Cal at University of California, Berkeley
Camarillo Oct. 5, 2011
Chico
Coachella Valley Oct. 11, 2011
Culver City
Davis 5,000 Occupy Davis and Occupy UC Davis at the University of California, Davis
Encinitas Oct. 15, 2011
Escondido Nov. 5, 2011
Eureka Oct. 13, 2011
Fontana
Fresno Oct. 15, 2011
Gilroy
Grass Valley
Half Moon Bay Oct. 4, 2011
Irvine Oct. 15, 2011 1200 Continuous 24-hour presence since 10/15; continuous 24-hour encampment since 10/25; also protests at UCI
Lompoc Oct. 15, 2011
Long Beach Oct. 15, 2011
Los Angeles Oct. 1, 2011
Marysville
Merced Oct. 15, 2011
Monterey Oct. 15, 2011
Nevada City
Oakland 50,000
Occupy Oakland
Ojai
[41]
Oxnard Oct. 15, 2011
Palo Alto Including a protest movement at Stanford University
Pasadena
Occupy Rose Parade (a separate protest from Occupy Pasadena)
Petaluma Oct. 29, 2011
Redding Oct. 6, 2011
Redlands
Redwood City Oct. 28, 2011
Riverside Oct. 15, 2011
Sacramento Oct. 7, 2011 Occupy Sacramento
Salinas Oct. 15, 2011
San Diego Oct. 7, 2011 Occupy San Diego
San Francisco Oct. 5, 2011 Occupy San Francisco
San Jose
Occupy San Jose
San Luis Obispo Oct. 5, 2011
San Marino Oct. 5, 2011
San Rafael
Santa Ana Oct. 22, 2011
Santa Barbara Oct. 8, 2011
Santa Cruz Oct. 6, 2011 Including protest at University of California, Santa Cruz
Santa Maria Oct. 15, 2011
Santa Monica College
Santa Rosa Oct. 15, 2011
Sebastopol
Stockton Oct. 15, 2011
Torrance Oct. 15, 2011
Temecula Oct. 15, 2011
Van Nuys Oct. 28, 2011
Venice Oct. 9, 2011
Ventura Oct. 14, 2011

Connecticut Branford Oct. 6, 2011
Hartford Oct. 7, 2011
New Haven Oct. 8, 2011
New London

Delaware
Wilmington Oct. 15, 2011 150

District of Columbia
Washington Oct. 1, 2011 3,000 Occupy D.C.

Florida
Daytona Beach
Ft. Myers
Gainesville
Jacksonville
Lakeland
Melbourne
Miami
Orlando
Pensacola
Sarasota
St. Augustine
St. Petersburg
Tallahassee Oct. 6, 2011 150
Tampa
Vero Beach
West Palm Beach

Georgia
Athens
Atlanta
Occupy Atlanta
Augusta
Dalton
Fort Benning
Macon
Savannah
Valdosta
Hawaii Hilo
Honolulu
Kauaʻi
Kona
Maui

Idaho
Boise
Idaho Falls
Moscow
Pocatello

Illinois
Bloomington
–Normal Oct. 5, 2011
Carbondale
Champaign
–Urbana
Chicago 8,000
Occupy Chicago
DeKalb
Galesburg 40 ]
Macomb
Peoria
Rockford
Springfield

Indiana
Bloomington Oct. 9, 2011
Elkhart Oct. 7, 2011
Evansville Oct. 10, 2011
Fort Wayne
Indianapolis Oct. 8, 2011 1,000
Muncie Oct. 19, 2011 20
Portage Oct. 22, 2011
South Bend Oct. 7, 2011
West Lafayette Dec. 10, 2011 50

Iowa
Ames Oct. 13, 2011
Occupy ISU; Weekly meetings, no encampments.
Cedar Valley Oct. 15, 2011 Weekly meetings, no encampments.
Cedar Rapids Oct. 22, 2011
Des Moines Oct. 9, 2011
Iowa City Oct. 7, 2011 Encampment at College Green Park.
Sioux City

Kansas
Kansas City [99]
Lawrence [100]
Manhattan [101]
Pittsburg [102]
Wichita [103]

Kentucky
Ashland [104]
Bowling Green [104]
Lexington Sep. 29, 2011 [105][106][107]
[108][109]
Louisville Oct. 04, 2011 300 [110] Encampment at Founders Square
Owensboro [104]
Paducah [104]

Louisiana
Baton Rouge Oct. 24, 2011 120 [111]
Lafayette Nov. 17, 2011 12 [112]
New Orleans [113]
Shreveport [114]

Maine
Augusta [115]
Bangor [116]
Bar Harbor Oct. 15, 2011 70
Brunswick [117]
Portland [118]
Presque Isle Occupy Aroostook

Maryland
Baltimore Oct. 3, 2011 200 [119] Occupy Baltimore
Cumberland Oct. 8, 2011 3 [120]

Massachusetts
Amherst Oct. 5, 2011 36 [121]
Berkshire County Oct. 10, 2011
Boston Sep. 30, 2011 10,000+ Occupy Boston
Cambridge Nov. 9, 2011 [122] Including protest at Harvard University
Jamaica Plain Nov. 13, 2011 [123]
Lenox
Newton
Needham [124]
Northampton Oct. 6, 2011 50 [125] Including protest at Smith College
Reading 20
Salem Oct. 22, 2011 [124]
Springfield Oct. 10, 2011 [126]
Somerville
Williamstown
Worcester Oct. 9, 2011 100 [127]

Michigan
Ann Arbor [128][129][130]
Detroit [131][132]
East Lansing [133] Including protest at Michigan State University
Flint
Grand Rapids Oct. 8, 2011 350 [134][135]
Kalamazoo [136][137]
Lansing Oct. 8, 2011 350 [138]
Muskegon [139]
Traverse City [140]
Ypsilanti

Minnesota
Duluth Oct. 15, 2011 [141]
Minneapolis Oct. 7, 2011 [142]
Moorhead [143]

Mississippi
Jackson Oct. 15, 2011 50 [144]
Biloxi Oct. 15, 2011 [145]

Missouri
Cape Girardeau Nov. 5, 2011 [146]
Columbia [147]
Kansas City [148]
St. Joseph Oct. 5, 2011 [151]
St. Louis Oct. 1, 2011 [152] Occupy St. Louis;[54]

Montana
Billings [153]
Bozeman [154]
Butte [155]
Great Falls [155]
Helena [155]
Kalispell [155]
Missoula [155]

Nebraska
Lincoln [156]
Omaha [157]

Nevada
Carson City
Las Vegas [158] Occupy Las Vegas
Reno [159]

New Hampshire
Concord [160]
Conway [161]
Exeter
Hanover Oct. 13, 2011 20 [162]
Keene [163]
Manchester [164][165]
Nashua [166]

New Jersey Atlantic City Nov. 5, 2011 25
Jersey City [167][168]
Mount Olive Oct. 10, 2011 28
Newark [169]
Princeton
Toms River [170]
Trenton Oct. 6, 2011 [171]

New Mexico
Albuquerque [172]
Las Cruces [173]
Los Lunas [174]
Santa Fe [175]
Taos [176]

New York
Albany Oct. 21, 2011 [177]
Binghamton Oct. 13, 2011 [178]
Buffalo Oct. 1, 2011 200+ [179] Occupy Buffalo
Fredonia [180]
Fredonia
Ithaca 28 Nov 2011 [181][182] Including protests at Ithaca College and Cornell University
Kingston
New Paltz [183]
New York City Sept. 17, 2011 30,000 [184][185][186] Initial Occupy Wall Street protest at Zuccotti Park has spread to other parts of the city, with separate occupations and occupy groups in Harlem, Washington Heights, and Jackson Heights in Manhattan, in Bushwick, Sunset Park, Williamsburg and Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn, Staten Island, and in The Bronx. See also: Timeline of Occupy Wall Street.
Poughkeepsie Oct. 15, 2011 200
Rochester Helped a family, Harold and Maria Steidel, get a moratorium on their home foreclosure.[187][188]

Protested the closing of a local school, school #6.[189] Reached agreement with mayor to camp until mid January 2012[187]
Saranac Lake [190]
Syracuse Oct. 2, 2011 200 [191] Occupy Syracuse
Utica [192]

North Carolina
Asheville [193]
Chapel Hill [194]
Charlotte [195]
Durham [196]
Fayetteville [197]
Greensboro Oct. 15, 2011 600 [198]
Hendersonville [199]
Raleigh Oct. 15, 2011 [200]
Wilmington [201]
Winston-Salem [202]
North Dakota Fargo Oct. 15, 2011 [143]
Grand Forks Oct. 15, 2011 [203]
Ohio Akron [204]
Athens [205]
Canton [206]
Cincinnati [207] Occupy Cincinnati;
Cleveland Oct. 6, 2011 150 [208]
Columbus Sept. 27, 2011 70 [209] Including protest at Ohio State University
Dayton [210]
Kent Including protest at Kent State University
Toledo [211]
Youngstown Oct. 15, 2011 [212]
Oklahoma Norman [213] Including protest at University of Oklahoma
Oklahoma City Oct. 10, 2011 100 [214]
Tulsa Oct. 7, 2011 [215]
Shawnee Oct. 11, 2011 50 [216]
Oregon Ashland [217] Occupy Ashland
Bend [218]
Corvallis Oct. 6, 2011 60+ [219]
Eugene [220] Occupy Eugene
Medford [221]
Mosier Nov. 5, 2011 20 [222][223]
Portland [224] Occupy Portland;
Roseburg [225]
Salem [226] Occupy Salem
Pennsylvania Allentown Oct. 3, 2011 75 [227]
Bethlehem Oct. 24, 2011 20 [228]
Doylestown [229]
Easton Nov. 17, 2011 [230]
Erie [231]
Harrisburg Oct. 15, 2011 100+ [232]
Lancaster Oct. 15, 2011 [233]
Philadelphia Sep. 29, 2011 [234] Occupy Philadelphia;
Pittsburgh Oct. 16, 2011 2000+ [235][236] Occupy Pittsburgh
Pottsville
University Park Including protest at Pennsylvania State University
Scranton
York [237]

Puerto Rico
San Juan Oct. 15, 2011 200 [238]

Rhode Island
Providence Oct. 15, 2011 [239] Occupy Providence;

South Carolina
Charleston [240]
Columbia [241]
Greenville [199]
Hilton Head Dec. 29, 2011 12
South Dakota Rapid City Oct. 15, 2011 50 [242]
Sioux Falls Oct. 15, 2011 50 [243]
Spearfish [133] Including protest at Black Hills State University
Vermillion [244]

Tennessee
Chattanooga [245]
Clarksville [246]
Johnson City [247]
Knoxville [248]
Memphis Oct. 15, 2011 [249]
Murfreesboro [250]
Nashville [248] Occupy Nashville

Texas
Amarillo [251]
Austin [252][253] Occupy Austin - including protests at Austin Community College
Bryan [254]
College Station [254]
Corpus Christi [255]
Dallas [256] Occupy Dallas
Denton Oct 15th, 2011 [257]
El Paso [173]
Ft. Worth Oct. 10, 2011 200
Galveston [260]
Houston [261] Occupy Houston
Lewisville
Lubbock [262]
Marfa [251]
McAllen [263]
San Angelo [264]
San Antonio October 3, 2011 200
San Marcos Oct. 5, 2011 [272][273] Occupy Texas State at Texas State University–San Marcos

Utah
Ogden Nov. 6, 2011 [274]
Park City Oct. 31, 2011 1 [275]
Provo Oct. 29, 2011 [276]
Salt Lake City Oct. 7, 2011 [277] Occupy Salt Lake City
St. George Oct. 7, 2011 [278]

Vermont
Bennington Nov. 19, 2011 10 [279]
Brattleboro Oct. 7, 2011 1 [280]
Burlington Oct. 9, 2011 1,000 [279]
Central Vermont Oct. 9, 2011 300 [279]
Rutland Nov. 9, 2011 25 [279]
Upper Valley Dec. 9, 2011 20 [279]

Virginia
Arlington [281]
Blacksburg [282]
Charlottesville Oct. 15, 2011 120
Norfolk Oct. 6, 2011 [284]
Richmond Oct. 15, 2011 200 [285]
Roanoke [286]
Williamsburg [287]

Washington
Bellevue [288]
Bellingham [289] Tent
Bremerton [290]
Centralia [291]
Cle Elum [292]
Colville [293]
Everett Oct 25, 2011 150 [294]
Leavenworth [296]
Longview
Marysville [297]
Mt. Vernon
Olympia [298]
Port Townsend [299]
Puyallup [300]
Richland [301]
Seattle 5,000 [302]
Spokane [303]
Stanwood
Tacoma [304]
Vancouver [305]
Walla Walla [306]
Wenatchee [307]
Yakima [308]

West Virginia
Charleston Oct. 15, 2011 [309]
Davis Oct. 15, 2011 [309]
Fairmont Oct. 15, 2011 [309]
Huntington Oct. 9, 2011 100 [310]
Martinsburg Oct. 15, 2011 100 [309]
Morgantown Oct. 15, 2011 [309]
Oak Hill Oct. 15, 2011 [309]

Wisconsin
Janesville Oct. 11, 2011 20 [311]
La Crosse Oct. 15, 2011 20 [312]
Madison Oct. 7, 2011 200 [313]
Milwaukee Oct. 15, 2011 1,000 [314]

Wyoming
Casper Oct. 8, 2011 50+ [315]
Cheyenne [316]
Jackson Hole [316]

Now according to little Rappy, all of the people at all of the occupy sites are vermin and need to be removed. And despite the FACT that IDENTIFIABLE TeaBaggers yelled racial epithets, spit on Congressmen, brought assault rifles to public meetings, blocked public access to town hall meetings, shouted down those they disagreed with, even stomped on a woman's head after they pushed her to the ground, he wants us to believe they are a force of reason and civility. THOSE are the people he supports.

Now let's compare Occupiers. Of the thousands of people involved over weeks of time, there is very little evidence that Occupiers PER SE are involved in anything violent, threating, or criminal.


As for Geezer, he washes his hands of any bias and claims it's all about time, place and manner. Well gosh, if only it hadn't been .... on Federal land ... in front of City Hall ... with a tent ... if there hadn't been so many of them ... or so few ... if only they could thread his very narrow needle of acceptability ... they COULD exercise their first amendment rights ... well, not rights exactly, more like permissions, and maybe not permissions, but more like a qualified, conditional, provisional laxity by authorities. Otherwise, gosh, it's just to bad that ALL THOSE MANY PEOPLE can't be heard, or seen, or make their message public. Because only the most deserving should be able to.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 3:11 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Now according to little Rappy, all of the people at all of the occupy sites are vermin and need to be removed. And despite the FACT that IDENTIFIABLE TeaBaggers yelled racial epithets, spit on Congressmen, brought assault rifles to public meetings, blocked public access to town hall meetings, shouted down those they disagreed with, even stomped on a woman's head after they pushed her to the ground, he wants us to believe they are a force of reason and civility. THOSE are the people he supports.


No one yelled racial epithets or spit at any Congressman, if you're referring to the O-Care signing day show. So that's not a 'fact'. 1 man bought a weapon, which he was well with in his rights to do, to one protest, and ONE (1) lone supporter for Rand Paul, I believe it was, put his foot on a woman - a MoveOn activist - , who had gone after the candidate. ( It wasn't a TEA party rally, it was a debate )

So how's about you get your facts straight first,mmkay ?

ONE incident of any real note, is all you have, compared to the hundreds of arrests and 10's of thousands, if not 100's of thousands of dollars in damage and extra security needed for the OWS gang ?

Pretty easy to see which side has the moral high ground here. Not even close.




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 4:31 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Geezer: There is a difference between Supreme Court interpretations of the constitution, and what is in the constitution by the letter. Which is what was being claimed.



Nope. The duty of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution in cases of dispute is in the Constitution "by the letter", as I quoted above.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 4:42 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Nope. The duty of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution in cases of dispute is in the Constitution "by the letter", as I quoted above.


And I just said that an interpretation of the constitution is different from something being in the constitution "by the letter."

Interpretations by the supreme court have added stipulations or conditions, usually as a fix to a perceived problem. But that does not mean that those fixes were what was originally present or intended in the language of the document. They're fixes.

I'm not saying the constitution is a perfect document, because it allows for slavery and it had the 3/5ths compromise in it. But at the same time, it's important to attribute certain laws to their correct source. What you posted is NOT in the constitution, it's a decision by the Supreme Court. Your argument that because the constitution allows the supreme court to make decisions means that this decision is also in the constitution is incorrect. They are two distinct things, both important to consider in terms of the law, but ONE of them can be reviewed by a different supreme court and overturned.

As a hint, the one that can be overturned by the supreme court is not the constitution itself (not unless a particular amendment were to be repealed by congress). Rather, it's generally the constitution that's held up as a reference, and laws are declared constitutional or unconstitutional relative to it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 5:00 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
As for Geezer, he washes his hands of any bias and claims it's all about time, place and manner. Well gosh, if only it hadn't been .... on Federal land ... in front of City Hall ... with a tent ... if there hadn't been so many of them ... or so few ... if only they could thread his very narrow needle of acceptability ... they COULD exercise their first amendment rights ... well, not rights exactly, more like permissions, and maybe not permissions, but more like a qualified, conditional, provisional laxity by authorities. Otherwise, gosh, it's just to bad that ALL THOSE MANY PEOPLE can't be heard, or seen, or make their message public. Because only the most deserving should be able to.



Ever think of going into advertising? Or doing campaign commercials? you've got the lies, distortions, half-truths, and inuendo down very well. Goes good with your already legendary ability to take things out of context.

Now if you, or SignyM, really wanted to accomplish something, you'd grab a tent and sleeping bag and head for McPherson Square with the intent of getting arrested for illegal camping. Then, rather than try to weasel out of the charges by finely parsing the definition of "camping", or "tent", you'd demand a jury trial and defend it on the grounds that your camping was part of your protected speech under the First Amendment.

Absent that, you could contact Occupy D.C. http://occupydc.org/
or their lawyer, Jeffrey Light -(202) 277-6213 - and send some money or ask to be included in a "friend of the court" brief when someone else is charges with illegal camping.

So when can we expect you in D.C.?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 5:25 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
And I just said that an interpretation of the constitution is different from something being in the constitution "by the letter."



Yes you did. And I disagree.

If the Constitution states that, "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,", that means to me that the Supreme Court is detemining what's in the Constitution "by the letter", since that's their brief.

So if the justices say that something is Constitutional, they're saying in effect that "it's in the Constitution."

This to me is the same as giving Congress the ability to Amend the Constitution. Congress makes changes, and the Supreme Court tells us what it says.

Or do you consider the Amendments not part of the Constitution? If so, then the "It's in the Constitution" argument for free speech is invalid.

Now if you ask if the actual words "You can't camp in McPherson Square" are in the Constitution, I'd have to say 'no'. Then again, neither are "Segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprives children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal.", or "We conclude that a State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth nor to paying or not paying this or any other tax."

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 5:41 AM

BYTEMITE


Key phrase that you're misunderstanding, "under this constitution."

They determine what's ALLOWABLE under the constitution, but a later court might present a different interpretation, which then would establish a different rule of law. The supreme court does not itself CREATE amendments, though it can rule them unconstitutional. Congress does that, by passing or repealing amendments. The supreme court will then review if an amendment that is passed contradicts any existing clauses in the constitution, and whether one takes precedence over another (that is, they determine whether or not something is unconstitutional).

The supreme court does not add to the constitution. Only amendments are written into the constitution.

In this case, what you posted was not an amendment to the constitution, therefore it is not written into the constitution.

It is not in the constitution. It's a supreme court decision, and the current rule of law. There's a difference.

We can however argue whether laws deriving from that decision are constitutional or not, if the Supreme court was correct, or if they were overstepping their jurisdiction. But I suspect we both know which side we'd take in that argument, and we also both know that neither of us could be convinced.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 6:28 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
In this case, what you posted was not an amendment to the constitution, therefore it is not written into the constitution.



Okay. Then neither is the right of Occupy folks to camp in McPherson Square. As far as I can tell by reading the First Amendment, nowhere does it mention camping, or McPherson Square.

Quote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Yep. "Freedom of speech", and "Peaceably assemble", but nothing about camping.

Any reading of the First Amendment on your part that does allow Occupy to camp in McPherson Square would simply be an interpretation on your part. However, you are not - as the Supreme Court is - designated to determine what the Constitution says. You can have an opinion, but they, under the Constitution have "the juducial power".

So the questions of whether something is expressly in the Constitution "by the letter", or if something can be "quoted" from the constitution, are pretty much parlor tricks. Very little is expressly stated in the Constitution, but what is stated is that the Supreme court has "the judicial power" to determine what it means.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 6:38 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Then neither is the right of Occupy folks to camp in McPherson Square.


It's an assembly on public property. The constitution itself doesn't suggest a time limit which means camping during assembly is okay under the constitution. It's only the interpretations of the supreme court that suggests a time limit and says it's not. And those interpretations could change depending on which supreme court is in office.

I disagree with the supreme court's current opinion. I do agree that it is the current rule of law, but that is where the "disobedience" in "civil disobedience" comes in. "Disobedience" is breaking a law.

Frankly I don't care if this law is broken. Police trying to enforce the law are just doing their job, but that also does not mean they are in the right from a moral standpoint, which is distinct from a legal standpoint. I don't agree with the OWS message, but I do think they have a right to be there, and if they want to risk jail going against a law I think is contradictory, good for them.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 6:56 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
It's an assembly on public property. The constitution itself doesn't suggest a time limit which means camping during assembly is okay under the constitution.



Well. That's your interpretation, but you insist interpretations are not the Constitution. I could say, "Quote me the part of the Constitution that specifically allows camping in McPherson Square." You can't. You can only interpret what is actually stated in the Constitution to support your position, as you did above.

And as noted previously, you can do that all you want, but the Constitution doesn't make your interpretation law. It does, on the other hand, make the Supreme Court's interpretations law.

Quote:

I disagree with the supreme court's opinions. I do agree that it is the current rule of law, but that is where the "disobedience" in "civil disobedience" comes in. "Disobedience" is breaking a law.


That's fine.

Quote:

Frankly I don't care that this law is broken. Police trying to enforce the law are just doing their job, but that also does not mean they are in the right from a moral standpoint, which is distinct from a legal standpoint.


And we get into a discussion of whose morality. Let's not.

Quote:

I don't agree with their message, but I do think OWS has a right to be there, and if they want to risk jail going against a law I think is stupid, good for them.



The Park Service also thinks they have a right to be there, 24/7/365, just not to camp there.

If the Occupy folks want to test the law in court, they can do what I suggested to Kiki and SignyM earlier: get arrested for illegal camping, go to trial, and make their case on the grounds that their camping is part of their freedom of speech or assembly.

I don't think that a "Quote the part of the Constitution that won't let me camp in McPherson Square" argument is gonna make it, any more than a "Quote me the part of the Constitution that says I can't charge a poll tax." would.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 7:20 AM

BYTEMITE


All right. Then we're on the same page.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 8:03 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Frankly I don't care if this law is broken. Police trying to enforce the law are just doing their job, but that also does not mean they are in the right from a moral standpoint, which is distinct from a legal standpoint.


Just Following Orders is no excuse, ever.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 1:47 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Now according to little Rappy, all of the people at all of the occupy sites are vermin and need to be removed.
Yes, so? Anybody expected otherwise?

This is fun:
Quote:

Washington, DC -- A new poll shows that 13% of Tea Party members believe violence against the current American government is justified. The January 14-16 poll shows that the Tea Party is more than twice as violent as self-identified members of the Democratic Party. The Tea Party was also more than twice as violent as the Republican Party. The Tea Party was 160% more violent than Democrats and 117% more violent than Republicans.
How about road rage over an Obama bumper sticker?



Or this, which has been mentioned:



As to the spitting, maybe it was "spittle" by the guy shouting at the passing Congressmen. I know our righties will come up with all kinds of interpretations, but the passing Congressman is obviously not expecting WHATEVER hit him...

Quote:

LAWRENCEVILLE — A Gwinnett judge sentenced a tea party member to serve eight years in prison for attacking and hospitalizing a President Barack Obama supporter during a 2009 bar room altercation, a prosecutor said Thursday.

The victim, Patrick O’Neill, then 24, was hospitalized for five days and endured a months-long recovery. He testified that he suffered numerous facial fractures, including a broken nose and orbital ethmoid bone, Taylor said.

According to testimony, trouble began when Morgan was talking to other bar patrons about his negative feelings about Obama, when one of O’Neill’s friends said he had voted for the president.

Morgan replied, “Well, you are stupid as hell,” before making some racist comments or jokes, witnesses testified, Taylor said. All people involved were white, she said.

Later, O’Neill and his friend were laughing about or poking fun at Morgan’s comments when he became angry, fetched a pool cue and broke it across O’Neill’s face. The impact was so forceful that the victim had no memory of being struck or the circumstances leading up to it, Taylor said.

Morgan, who testified he considers himself a tea party member, told the court he was acting in self-defense. He claimed O’Neill and his friend had threatened “to beat him up in the parking lot,” Taylor said, recalling testimony.

Witnesses for the prosecution testified that Morgan tried to run from the scene, but a bouncer and other individuals held him down until police arrived. http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/another-non-violent-tea-party-me
mber-gets-thrown-in-jail---attacked-an-obama-supporter-w-pool-sti/question-1505251/
]



Quote:

Man arrested for battery in Capitol altercation

Madison - A Green Bay man was arrested for battery for an altercation in the Capitol involving members of a pro-union singalong and a former state senator.

Around 1 p.m. Tuesday, a group of protesters was participating in their daily singalong in the Capitol rotunda, when two men along with former state Sen. David Zien began interrupting their singing.

According to Sue Trace, one of the participants in the singalong, Zien yelled "Walker for president" while two men draped Zien's "Don't Tread On Me" flag over the singers' heads.

The two men were Green Bay resident Henry Rahr and Shorewood, Minn., resident Eugene German.

Michael Dickman, 50, said Rahr and German were bumping into him along with other singers and grabbing their banners. Dickman said he tried to pull the flag away from Rahr. Dickman said Rahr then put him in a headlock and punched him in the face, chipping his front tooth.

Rahr, 50, was charged with battery but denied punching Dickman. When asked if he draped the flag over the singers' heads, Rahr said "I don't recall."

Capitol Police were called to the scene and arrested Rahr and German. Police cited Rahr, German and Dickman for disorderly conduct. http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/124320434.html, "1 man with a gun"?
Quote:

Hundreds brought their guns to a Tea Party rally in Greensboro, North Carolina on Saturday to demonstrate that the Constitution protects the right to own and carry a firearm.

Two hundred attended the Restore the Constitution Rally at the Guildford Courthouse in Battleground Park, openly carrying their pistols and rifles. http://www.therightperspective.org/2010/08/17/hundreds-bear-arms-for-2
nd-amendment/
]




"San Diego a Tea Partier with a gun - February 27, 2010, at San Diego Bay. Our counter-rally was across the street."


"Here's the photo the NYT ran of Greg Dement (yes, that's his last name) anchoring a Tea Party-inspired, "right-of-the-NRA" demonstration to openly flaunt weapons in public."


"Vince Vaccaro of Townsend, Mont. , sports his rifle during the Lewis and Clark Conservative Tea Party's "Constitution Rally", Friday, March 4, 2011, on the steps of the Sate Capitol in Helena, Mont. "


"Trey Cathey, right, of Yellowstone County, adjusts his rifle, as he talks with John Richardson during the Lewis and Clark Conservative Tea Party's rally"

Just check "images of Tea Party guns"...you could go on forever.

Okay, that didn't take much time and was interesting. On to more worthwhile activities...



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 3:21 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Barroom brawls? that just speaks to the fact that people on any side of an issue, from any walk of life, need to work on self control, we're adults, lets get these skills down sooner rather than later.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 5:22 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:

"Vince Vaccaro of Townsend, Mont. , sports his rifle during the Lewis and Clark Conservative Tea Party's "Constitution Rally", Friday, March 4, 2011, on the steps of the Sate Capitol in Helena, Mont.



Typical sloppy, uninformed, liberal news coverage from Democraticunderground. That's a Saiga semi-automatic shotgun, not a rifle.

Sorry, Niki. That invalidates your entire post.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 5:55 PM

FREMDFIRMA



With a really halfass magazine, too - seriously, for the time and effort involved he coulda gone with one of the Drum magazines like I got.

I don't mind gunbunnies - I DO mind stupid and unsafe practices though, and that mag looks held together with prayer and electrical tape, thus likely to come apart and fling unusued rounds everywhere, not as unsafe as that, but still, unprofessional.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 8, 2012 4:26 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

With a really halfass magazine, too - seriously, for the time and effort involved he coulda gone with one of the Drum magazines like I got.
-F



And imagine trying to go prone with that thing sticking out the bottom of your weapon.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 8, 2012 6:59 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Now that is a TRULY idiotic reach! The point was "guns", not which kind of toys...er guns...they were wearing/bringing. Desperate, eh? You really seem to have a knack for reaching waaaay outside an argument in an effort to make your point. You didn't even come close this time.

I responded with facts and photos, that's all that needs doing. The original statement was wrong. Period.

Gotta go, I gotta be at a demonstration in half an hour. Have fun.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 8, 2012 8:49 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Now that is a TRULY idiotic reach! The point was "guns", not which kind of toys...er guns...they were wearing/bringing. Desperate, eh? You really seem to have a knack for reaching waaaay outside an argument in an effort to make your point. You didn't even come close this time.

I responded with facts and photos, that's all that needs doing. The original statement was wrong. Period.



Joke, Niki. See the little

When did you have your sense of humor removed?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 9, 2012 11:42 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Given the way you generally post, I didn't even suspect it was a joke.

My sense of humor is just fine, thank you. As is my sense of the ridiculous, which gets exercised regularly on this site, as well as my sense of not being dragged into pointless, endless battles wtih people who seem incapable of civil discourse where either side provides logical arguments and facts...which also gets exercised regularly here.

You have become, from what I read these days, a clone of Rap, so I expect little from you but snarking. Ergo, I expect comments such as those to be quite serious.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 21, 2024 23:55 - 7478 posts
Thread of Trump Appointments / Other Changes of Scenery...
Thu, November 21, 2024 22:03 - 40 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 21, 2024 22:03 - 4787 posts
1000 Asylum-seekers grope, rape, and steal in Cologne, Germany
Thu, November 21, 2024 21:46 - 53 posts
Music II
Thu, November 21, 2024 21:43 - 117 posts
Lying Piece of Shit is going to start WWIII
Thu, November 21, 2024 20:56 - 17 posts
Are we in WWIII yet?
Thu, November 21, 2024 20:31 - 18 posts
More Cope: "Donald Trump Has Not Won a Majority of the Votes Cast for President"
Thu, November 21, 2024 19:40 - 7 posts
Biden admin quietly loosening immigration policies before Trump takes office — including letting migrants skip ICE check-ins in NYC
Thu, November 21, 2024 18:18 - 2 posts
All things Space
Thu, November 21, 2024 18:11 - 267 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 21, 2024 17:56 - 4749 posts
Hip-Hop Artist Lauryn Hill Blames Slavery for Tax Evasion
Thu, November 21, 2024 16:36 - 12 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL