Mayor says no to Tent State overnight

By Daniel J. Chacon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published July 28, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Updated July 28, 2008 at noon

Text size

Photo by Brian Lehmann / The Rocky

Denver Councilwoman Carla Madison, whose district includes City Park, agrees with the mayor that overnight camping in the park is not an option. "If we say yes in City Park, I'm not sure how we could say no in Civic Center park," she says.

More Denver Democratic National Convention 2008

Comments

July 28, 2008

3:32 a.m.

misterchinaski writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
July 28, 2008

6:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Michael writes:

Good decision - and fair, based on law, logic, and reason - not emotion. Non-discriminatory as well. Now let's watch the feathers fly and see how it will be enforced. Will "Tent State" respect the rule of law, or will they ignore it under some absurd pretense of "1st Amendement" "Free Speech" rights? Let's see if David Lane gets in the act too.
July 28, 2008

7:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Do I smell tear gas?
July 28, 2008

7:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowicide writes:

Internet tough guys commenting in here must be from the Drudge Report. You guys are so predictable and inane.

Anyway, aside from these idiots commenting here who think anyone who dissents with their government deserves to be shot, I do think it would probably be a good idea if they get hotel rooms. This isn't burning man, it's the DNC.
July 28, 2008

7:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Cow, is there a difference between free sheech and law violations? I'm all for free speech, but draw the line when it becomes a free for all. You seem a little confused my friend.
July 28, 2008

7:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Radar writes:

I agree with you M.G.
July 28, 2008

7:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

LuvAmerica writes:

The real problem is that to stay in Denver during the dnc will cost a fortune. In other words, the political process, in all the different forms it takes, will be inaccessible to the unconnected.
July 28, 2008

7:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Oh_Wise_One writes:

cowardcide- the only internet punk guy here is you. It's obvious you have never perused the Drudge Report as your ignorance is showing. If you could open your closed liberal mind, you would see that Drudge is a link site with a splash of headlines. Before Obamessiah was anointed, he was luving Hillary.
July 28, 2008

7:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

GladIMNotALiberal writes:

It amuses me how Cowicide writes

"Anyway, aside from these idiots commenting here who think anyone who dissents with their government deserves to be shot"

I didn't see one comment that mentioned anything about shooting anyone....in fact I didn't read one comment saying people shouldn't dissent.
It appears cowicide thinks he knows what others are thinking and then goes off according to that. Typical "i know better than you" trashy liberal.

Do me a favor...comment only on what people write...not what you believe they think. Maybe then you will at least appear informed and not appear like a mindless, repeat what you hear on airhead america, intolerant, close minded, fascist liberal.
July 28, 2008

8 a.m.

Suggest removal

Oh_Wise_One writes:

Frowturd69- and that makes you what? You must be on government money aka tax dollars to cruise around the RMN all day making snarky comments. All of your drivel has to be ignored by rational people.
July 28, 2008

8:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

WhereAreMyKeys writes:

I live 5 blocks from City Park. When I walk there with my dogs and family, I try to picture how Tent State is going to stay there after hours.

Here's what I'd do:

Get a couple of my fellow Tent Staters to roll one of the many dumpsters (already in place all around the Park) over a few centrally located sprinkler heads. Then I'd do the same with the port-a-potties that are coming onsite for the event. This simple strategy would prevent the sprinklers from popping up, and the Tent Staters stay dry. Of course it would kill all the grass, but I'm sure that's not the first thing on their minds.

It took me all of 2 minutes to come up with this plan. Think any of the 50,000 people descending on my neighborhood will think of it? And how will the Mayor's Office prevent it?

Assume for a second that no one uses my idea. How long is the City going to run the sprinklers? From 1100 to 600 every day? That obviously won't happen. They might run them for an hour or two at the most. Aren't tents designed to protect the owner from the elements? Why won't the Tent State people just go inside their tents for an hour or so, and then emerge when the sprinklers are off? This "plan" by the Mayor stinks as well, because then when they come back out to "play", they will tear up the wet grass.

And finally, how is the Mayor going to keep them out of the fountain by the high school, and out of the lakes? Wanna bet we have a break-in "incident" at the zoo as well?

WhereAreMyKeys.TypePad.com
July 28, 2008

8:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

neiman11 writes:

What a joke. Did the city not plan. Did the city not expect protesters as well as supporters. This is America. The right to peacefully assemble is in the constitution. Camping in the city park should be viewed within the right of free speech and freedom of assembly and not controlled by the government. Either Denver and the Obama/DNC should welcome everyone or at least lose their claim of unity or democracy. These liberal fascists are worse than anything the Bush administration has done. FISA is minor compared to outright banning demonstrations. If there are to be free speech zones, what does that make the rest of the city? Maybe we could import some security assistance from Beijing. Let's get Venezuelan Pres Chavez to show us how openness and protecting the poor should really be done. PUMA. This will not stand.
July 28, 2008

8:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

smith writes:

I think the mayor should turn on the sprinklers - the park looks like garbage. At my home, mayor, we sprinkle three nights a week, MWF, and due to the dry weather we've been sneaking in a fourth day on the weekend.

Just a friendly tip.
July 28, 2008

8:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Neiman, that is some seriosly twisted logic brother! Nobody is trying to stop free speech or the right to assemble. Denver is just enforcing the law of no overnight camping in the park...period.
July 28, 2008

8:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

neiman11 writes:

Don't worry about break ins at the zoo, the DNC is handing our free zoo passes to the homeless. They are also giving free movie passes to the homeless. Why are they sending these people to places children and families congregate? Why not just send them to the Day Care Centers. Does anyone realize many of the homeless have serious mental, alcohol, and/or drug problems. Who is screening out the pedophiles. What is this group thinking. In the interest of a clean image on television they put all of our children at risks. What kind of idiots are in charge.
July 28, 2008

8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Glad: The very first comment proposes to "recreate kent state", a reference to the student protesters who were shot to death at Kent State University by panicked National Guardsman in the late 60s or early 70s.

Liberal or conservative, I think most of us find that kind of thinking offensive and inane. The protesters haven't even arrived yet, let alone done anything wrong.
July 28, 2008

8:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

GladIMNotALiberal writes:

Davies...yeah I saw that after I posted. Darn shame that there are people out there that think that way. It's also a shame that people think (like cowicide for example) that if you lean right of center, that is how you view things. Just like people assume that if you are conservative you believe in god. Bad assumption.
July 28, 2008

8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Reason writes:

""This isn't burning man, it's the DNC."

That's true. At least one might run into a few intelligent, talented, decent peple at burning man."

Thanks for starting my morning reading with a laugh.
July 28, 2008

8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

ksells writes:

I live close to City Park. The idea of having it trashed out is appalling. Do people really think that having a ton of people camping out there will not do damage that will not be repaired for at least a year? And who pays for it? The people who visit the park who will not be able to enjoy it's beauty and the taxpayers of DENVER who will have to pay to restore the park. There are places where ecological damage is not a problem (read fields). Use that area even if it isn't a feel good location. If the point is supply free places to stay then you get what you pay for. I believe the point is to make a political point at the DNC, not to have a great location to kill time and be unconcerned with the aftermath when you go home. It certainly would be counterproductive to the messages trying to be made when the citizens of Denver would be angry at you.
July 28, 2008

9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

The sprinklers will just provide fresh bong water!
July 28, 2008

9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

TJH writes:

It's coming...a dope-smoking crowd of leftist human garbage for all of America to see...protesting at the convention...BWHAHAHAHA!!!!! Vote Rebublican!!!!!
July 28, 2008

9:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Rod writes:

Who could possibly want to protest, and perhaps disrupt, the Democrats' convention? After all, they are the party of The People. They've got The Obama, a "Citizen Of The World" (in his own words), a man dedicated to ending the war in Iraq (but escalating the war in Afghanistan), a man who pledges to "tax the rich" and give to the poor, a seemingly holy spirit of pontificated pulchritude enveloped in a lovely blue glowing aura, a figure that transcends race, a man of such proportions as to appear almost Bunyanesque as to seemingly straddle the great oceans. . . why would anyone wish to rain on his parade?

Of course, if those who would protest wish to create a holligans' mosh pit, then it makes sense for the City of Denver turn on the sprinklers at night. It would be a nice gesture, I think, for them to provide bars of soap if they do so.
July 28, 2008

9:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Andy_Eppink writes:

"'This isn't burning man, it's the DNC.' Cow"

There's a difference?
July 28, 2008

9:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

SPUD writes:

Why don't they invite them over to the Govenor's Mansion for a BEER BUST!!
July 28, 2008

9:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

carlos writes:

They're going to turn on the sprinklers? Hey! Break out the SLIP 'N SLIDES! And some soap. We'll make this a REAL party.
July 28, 2008

10:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

RichG writes:

They will not be able to clear out the park. Within the group may be some "undocumented" aliens, and of course it would be a hate crime by the city to kick them out.
July 28, 2008

10:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"Good decision - and fair, based on law, logic, and reason - not emotion. "

why in the world would you think this is a "good decision", michael.

why don't you tell us where you expect up to 50k+ people to go after breaking camp at 11pm?

i personally know Carla Madison and have to say that she's not exactly the brightest person i know....or even close.

her response to the question i just asked michael was, "Everybody is batting around ideas and trying to confirm and calling around and things like that, but there is nothing that's even close enough to a possibility that I would feel comfortable to say."

thanks for the insight, carla.

i'm STILL waiting for ANYONE from the city planning committee on this issue to come forward and explain to us where they think all these folks are going to go.

there are also still a lot of myths floating around about this issue.

the taxpayers have not been tasked to pay for clean up and repairs. the city literally received tens of millions of dollars for security and clean up. why in the world would you jump to the conclusion that they'd send the bill to the taxpayers instead of the feds and the dnc?

no one can say that it will take a "year" before clean up is complete. clean up will start immediately. new sod will be laid down. new trees will be planted if necessary. i don't see these kids bringing chainsaws so i imagine the old trees will do just fine.

the lakes and fountains are going to see a lot of sunbathers and just bathers...but i can't say that i anticipate any permanent damage to those structures.

maybe this is just a ploy by hick's folks to force Tent State U to come up with some better contingency plans should things go south. maybe they want these folks to rise to the occasion and put together a more comprehensive plan for providing basic needs to tens of thousands of people.

who knows.

all that is apparent at this point is that the city is using every excuse in the book (boy scouts???) to nont do the right thing here and allow these folks to camp in the park.

just prolonging the inevitable and wasting valuable time that should be used preparing the area and compiling much needed equipment and supplies.
July 28, 2008

10:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

protea32 writes:

Like I said in another post, the best thing for the Denver authorities to do is...NOTHING. Don't let the protestors write your script. They will get bored and leave, and more importantly, the media will see no story, and they will leave. If the cops are going to do anything, they should take lessons from various Michigan State riots in the 1990's: send out nothing more than a handful of plainclothes officers with cameras, identify those who engage in violence and property damage from the video, arrest them at a later date, when they are sober and isolated, and can gain nothing by 'flexing' for their friends. Same tactic that works with gang members. They most likely won't smash up store fronts unless they see a cop nearby to whack them upside the head. Doesn't help the 'cause' at all just to smash things without the police playing their assigned role. Need the images of 'police brutality' to make it interesting, as well as garner sympathy. They're not interested in rioting just for the sake of rioting, they NEED the black-clad, helmeted cops. Deny them.
July 28, 2008

10:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Michael writes:

"why don't you tell us where you expect up to 50k+ people to go after breaking camp at 11pm?" - jay
I don't freakin' care where they go AFTER their gathering is over and it is time to leave MY CITY PARK. Just like I do not care where 70K people go AFTER the Broncos game is over. Or after a Rockies a game is over. Or any large gathering of people. IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to find suitaable lodging or accomodations - as we all are when we travel. Geez, this ain't that hard. If I cannot afford a room or a place to stay at night when I travel - guess what??? I don't travel because that is part of the cost. Or if you want to camp, then find a local KOA campground or other acceptable and LEGAL place to camp. Why is this so hard for some people?
July 28, 2008

10:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

polanalytic writes:

Will the "tent city" crowd be known as the "Obamanation"? Let's hope that they don't behave "Obamanably"!
July 28, 2008

10:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Fallingstar1971 writes:

Heres my prediction.

1. They will be told to leave, but they will have no where to go or will do the 1st amendment free speech thing, and in the morning, still be there.

2. The city cannot arrest them all simpy because they will have no where to put them. There jails will not be able to handle the influx of people.

3. If the nation guard is deployed to remove them, they will just put them in tents, probably right where they are until they are "processed", meaning they will still be there in the morning.
not to mention how quickly things could get out of control at that point.

This will leave two viable options.

1. Check around the local hotels. Find out the highest price and fine each of them 100 dollars higher then said price. Unpaid fines show up on credit reports. (not a big incentive, but at least its something)

2. Turn this around into something that can help the city. Think about this for a second, your going to have thousands of extra people all in the same place at the same time. Make some money for the city, deploy hot dog stands and other "county fair" like stuctures. Give the area a "facelift" so some of these people may think about comming back and spending more money. Push, Push , Push tourism people. When God gives you lemons, make lemonade. (or lemonade stands). These people are comming, harsh restrictions only make protesters protest even more (now they feel justified). I suggest you make the best of it, or at least a LOT of money from it.

Star
July 28, 2008

10:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Thanks Michael, I was wondering why people think it's the city's problem where the hippies go too.
July 28, 2008

10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

What a discrace to this beautiful city. With or without Mr. Hickenlooper, who happens to be a friend, this city is going to be in some hard times with the DNC coming. This "Tent State" stuff needs to be snuffed out, and while the sprinklers are a non-violent way to clean these dirty hippies, there is no way to regulate this event unless force is used. I agree that tear gas will be an excellent choice, however those people living around the park could recieve some of that gas as well. All in all, force will be needed to move these children who have never been told "NO". Being a college age person, I cannot understand the treatment that these kids have been given by their parents. I grew up working for everything I've ever had, and the fact that these kids have never been said no to ends right here in Denver.
July 28, 2008

10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"I don't freakin' care where they go AFTER their gathering is over and it is time to leave MY CITY PARK. Just like I do not care where 70K people go AFTER the Broncos game is over"

lol...michael no need to go loco because you're cornered.

these folks don't have homes to go to after the game. the hotels are booked. the homeless shelters will be full per reports on the matter...

...so again...where do you people propose that these folks go?

putting your head in the sand isn't a viable answer.
July 28, 2008

10:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Michael writes:

Fallingstar1971 - If they cannot afford a hotel/motel room or legal campground to begin with, what makes you think they have other $$ to spend on other tourist related stuff? Or why would we want them to come back to Denver at all if they are all vagrants and bums? Marketing our city is great, but to an audience that can afford it and we want here - not to one that we probably do not.
July 28, 2008

10:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

happymike44 writes:

Well if they turn on the lawn sprinklers the kids will have showers and fresh water to drink the next day.
Plus these kids are trying to have their own summer of free love.
guess what mom I went to the protest.
Can you guess who is going to be a grandma will be a phrase soon to be heard throughout the land.So why bother these nice ids I mean all they want to do is save the earth and hug a few trees,how much harm will that cause.
Peace and Love will be at the protest site along with some real cool maui waui dude.
Have people forgotten how when you were young you thought you could chang the world.
July 28, 2008

10:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"If they cannot afford a hotel/motel room or legal campground to begin with, what makes you think they have other $$ to spend on other tourist related stuff? "

that's just the point, michael...we don't have available hotel rooms for 50k+ people...so your point is ridiculous.

again...where do you think these people should go every night when they break camp at 11pm?
July 28, 2008

11:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

smith writes:

>>again...where do you think these people should go every night when they break camp at 11pm?

East Colfax. The one's who can afford the hourly motels can come in. The rest will get to sleep with the average commonfolk they passionately identify with
July 28, 2008

11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

warrengfunk7 writes:

These protectors can actually ride the light rail down to the end of the Southwest light rail line and be within walking distance of Chatfield State Park camping sites. They can also ride the Southeast Light rail line to 9 Mile station on I-225 and be within walking distance of Cherry Creek reservoir camping sites. If they bring their bikes, they can use Denver's extensive bike path system to get to many, many more camp sites.

Denver is probably one of the best camping cities in the nation. If they want to camp, they can get to camping sites. Civic Center Park is not a camping site; unless your homeless and have no where else to go.
July 28, 2008

11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

TJH writes:

What will be fun is all the human feces and urine that will be excreted around the convention area. Do you think any of them will wait for a port-a-potty? Not to mention, the same items will be collected in plastic bags to be thrown at any unlucky police officers who anger the protesters.
July 28, 2008

11:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Fallingstar1971 writes:

Someone here said ..

"Or why would we want them to come back to Denver at all if they are all vagrants and bums"

So now students with enough money to be able to fly all the way out to Denver are all "vagerants and bums"?

Sounds a LOT like "We dont serve your kind around here."

Well people, one of those vagerant/bum protesters could get elected president, I would think you would want at least HIM/HER to come back, would you not?

And whose to say that one of them wont be elected someday.

Most of these people are students. STUDENTS PEOPLE. If you tell a child not to do something because YOU CANT HANDLE IT, what do you think that child will do?

Someone here said "these kids have never been told "no"."

If thats true then they should have plenty of money (see my first post)

Turn this into something positive before its too late. If you cant handle a peaceful protest, you sure wont be able to handle a violent one. Think about this long and hard before commiting yourselves to a regretable course of action. THINK. WHAT IF YOUR CHILD WAS DOWN THERE AS WELL?

Star
July 28, 2008

11:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

warrengfunk7 writes:

Also, what about allowing camping along the River North area of downtown? Tell them, as an organization (Camp State University), they would be fined appropriately for any trash and vandalism at the campsite.

The River North area along side the parking lots for Coors Field would be OK for this group. Especially considering that the Colorado Rockies will be out of town,
July 28, 2008

11:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

arvada_mark writes:

I know what to do with the hippies, or I mean protesters at 11pm, put your boot up their #@$'s, kick them out of the park, & tell them you'll see them again in the morning, when hippie activity, or I mean protester activity is allowed. And I agree with everybody that the sprinklers won't deter much, but fire hoses sure will.
July 28, 2008

11:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

Star, my child wouldn't be down there because I would have raised them to respect the laws and the rules already set in place... Thus, these "kids" need to know how to respect the word "NO". It is simple, as the article states, the group has already been told they cannot camp there. If the are going to break the law, they deserve to be punished.
July 28, 2008

11:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

mjeffrie writes:

It never ceases to amaze me. When the Republican Party holds a convention, spoiled-left-wing brats from the 1960's threaten to cause upheaval and rioting; When the Democrat Party holds a convention, spoiled-left-wing brats from the 1960's threaten to cause upheaval and rioting.
July 28, 2008

11:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

arvada_mark writes:

One more thing, who honestly camps in Denver? That's what we have the mountains for. Camping in Denver? Good lord. It's very difficult to listen to or even respect the opinion of people who don't have enough common sense to come in out of the "sprinklers" so to say. Who wants to set up camp on grounds where dogs (& people for that matter) regularly do their business anyway?

Camping in Denver? Please...
July 28, 2008

11:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

knr writes:

The water City Park irrigates with is non- potable. That water is greywater mixed with a Superfund site groundwater. I would think that good "green" liberal protestors would not even consider stepping foot on such "contaminated" land let alone laying down and camping on it.
July 28, 2008

11:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

fluxtube writes:

Those who wanted to have the convention here could allow them to use their private property. Why haven't those folks stepped up yet and offered to help them out?
July 28, 2008

11:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

adamrussell writes:

Is it legal to spray someone with water to intimidate them? Would it be legal for me to do it to the mayor?
July 28, 2008

11:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

redwhiteandBLUE writes:

I would think, these hippie's, I mean protesters(funny..Arvada_Mark)
are already coming with their mind set, kinda rebellious and they're going to camp out anywhere, and don't care about sprinklers. This is going to be really, really interesting.

These posts are hilarious!!
July 28, 2008

12:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Antione101 writes:

Wow,
I'm so glad this isn't in NYC. Last thing we need are another 50,000 liberal freaks. Good Luck to Denver. Now you'll see what liberals are really made of. Ohh and to Arvada_Mark, screw the fire hoses, break out the M-16's, let the paramedics move them.
July 28, 2008

12:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

rbonilla writes:

get a room and pay denver the bed tax....
July 28, 2008

12:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

glowrock writes:

What in the he*l is going on with all of you? Break out the M-16s? Let the paramedics move them? They're all vagrants, why do we want them here? Hippies? What liberals are really made of?

Can I ask you mindless drones a simple question? Why in the heck are you all assuming that this will be a riot situation? Why do you seem to take JOY in the fact that you think it will be a riot situation? Are you that cold-hearted, that cynical, that full of hate that you want to see riots and paramedics all across town?

Don't you think for a minute that protests might just be PEACEFUL? You know, the way most protests are? Sure, there are going to be a few idiots trying to start the insanity, but I'm pretty freaking sure the security in place will take care of those bad apples before they have a chance to infect everyone else with their actions.

Give me a freaking break! Taking joy in anticipation of riots is simply disgusting. Period.
July 28, 2008

12:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

aosb writes:

Would someone please tell me what it is exactly that they are protesting? Presumably they are all on the left assuming the comment about them being college kids is correct.
The DNC is four square against the war. Are the protesters MORE against the war?
Or are they just hoping to incite some sort of violent response to their actions in order to gain noteriety on youtube? Are they bored? If they were to show up for the RNC in MN, well, that would seem to make more sense.
Just wondering.
July 28, 2008

12:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

WhadUsay writes:

It's simple - no camping in the park period end of story. Not for you, not for me, not for anybody. The tent state organizers didn't think anybody would notice or mind?? They didn't plan ahead, they didn't think. They think this is some sort of 1968 love fest? Wake up - this is not a first amendment issue or a freedom of assembly issue - it's a city ordinance that they DO NOT bend for anybody nor do they have to. Not the boy scouts, not the transients not the protestors.

I'm getting a little tired of all these comments about free speech and freedom of assembly. Your rights are NOT allowed to infringe on my rights sorry! Assemble and protest but if you break the law, get rude, get physical, interfere with other people you have stepped beyond free speech and free assembly and you will be held accountable.

Have a nice day.
July 28, 2008

12:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

What part of "NO" is not understood here? The group has been told no to overnight camping from the get-go. They did not like the city govt answer, so they tried to appeal to the "public". The answer from city govt is STILL NO. Plenty of time to make a change of plans. Not like they are being told No the day they arrive and have no other place to go. They are still hoping to get people like Jay and others to get the ruling overturned. Jay's theory is that it will be a horrible mess and we (city of Denver) need to fix it. He does not want the mess spilling into his yard and street. Don't blame him there. Think that is the plan for Tent State also. If they push hard enough, the city will cave-in. Well then they need to cave-in to R68 and any other group that wants to set up tent cities for this event or any other event in the future.
July 28, 2008

12:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

incite_a_riot writes:

Burn the city down.

*chaos in the streets*
July 28, 2008

1:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

protea32 writes:

Can I ask you mindless drones a simple question? Why in the heck are you all assuming that this will be a riot situation? Why do you seem to take JOY in the fact that you think it will be a riot situation? Are you that cold-hearted, that cynical, that full of hate that you want to see riots and paramedics all across town?

The fact that a group called 'Recreate '68' is involved may make some people, mainly those of us who were around then, believe that they are 'spoiling for a fight' (A fight they'll be denied, if the authorities are smart.) It is possible that they are either Detroit Tiger fans, or Nixon supporters, in which case alot of people will look foolish, since the Tigers aren't going anywhere, and Nixon's still dead. When someone says they are going to the D.N.C. to 'recreate '68', what are they planning to recreate? 1968 gas prices? I'm for that. Get 'Laugh-In' back on the air? I'm cool with that too.
July 28, 2008

1:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

DAG writes:

DO THESE PEOPLE NOT WORK? BUY A HOTEL ROOM LIKE ANYONE ELSE, IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT WHY TAKE A VACATION? THEY NEED TO GET PRIORITIES IN LINE LIKE GETTING A JOB.
July 28, 2008

1:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

Silly liberals, Paychecks are for Workers.
July 28, 2008

1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

reor2 writes:

Why don't they just bus them to Boulder for the night. That is where most of them live anyway.
July 28, 2008

1:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

fluxtube writes:

Have we forgotten why we wanted the convention . Money . That is why we wanted the convention .

Now we will treat our guest like tramps invading the city . What a bunch of losers .

Don't be a NIMBY art... Just offer to rent out your home/back yard since it's about money. You shouldn't treat them like tramps, invite them into your home like a family member from out of town.
July 28, 2008

1:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

eyes_of_the_world writes:

What if all the Tent State protesters pitched their tents on a large piece of property that was OKed by its owners, took the time to cover all their own sanitation, security and first aid needs, arranged for transportation to their chosen peacefull protest/march route, had their message covered, in depth, by the national media, had their message presented to the masses via tube and internet and went home without incident after the convention? Wouldn't this be what is best for Tent State, their message is successfully sent, the park, that we as tax payers all own together and want undamaged, for the cops, that we as tax payers all pay for together and want unruffled, for homeowners in the park area that are nervous and for the Democratic party who's leaders would like to avoid the embarasment their constituancy being percieved as violent law breakers?
If you feel strongly about politics thats fine, just treat us, and our city' with respect, as we respect your political ideas. Please.
July 28, 2008

1:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

Responses to a few previous bloggers:

1 - Combined Chatfield & Cherry Creek State parks can accommodate about 2000 total campers. Most sites allow a maximum of 6. Some of these sites are already reserved fot the convention days. So something less than 2000 campers.

2 - There are no available motel/hotel rooms for the convention time.

3 - Where are all these cars going to park? I don't know about you but it's hard for one person to find a parking space around City Park & nearly all of those spaces are 2 hours maximum. Believe me the parking nazi's are all over this, it's huge revenue for the city. What about the spaces that are the once-a-month street sweeping day? More parking violations = more revenue.

Anyway, the logistics of having, lets be conservative and guess the head count at 25,000, that many people converge on the CIty Park area just doesn't out.

No parking, sanitation facilities (by the demonstrators) will probably be insufficient in quantity, after curfew where do they go, with that many people, crowd control will be required & who's going to do that, etc. etc,

The list goes on & on. Things may or may not turn violent (I sincerely hope not). I'm somewhat uncertain what all the protests are about other than, "We don't like things the way they are & we want it changed!" This is sommething I can agree with, but demonstration is probably not the most effective way of accomplishing that change, seeing as how nobody seems to have a plan.
July 28, 2008

1:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Biff writes:

hey protea32...and what makes you think that a group of 50,000 protestors is not a formula for riots? Your the fricken drone buddy. What kind of contribution will these people have for the DNC and Denver? Come to think of it, what kind of contribution do these people have towards our society? Do they work? Do they pay taxes? Do they own homes? Do they have families to support? Do they donate money to their favorite charities? Hell no they don't! You think Minneapolis-St. Paul are having these kinds of problems with the GOP?
July 28, 2008

1:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

NOBAMA 08, he is blowing smoke up your A$$. He has no plan to create a better country, he just knows how to make you think he is right.... Kinda like mind control for liberals. YOUR CANDIDATE WILL RUIN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!! BTW, i'm independent, and will not vote for either of the major candidates.
July 28, 2008

1:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

Proteseters or not, Democratic convention or none, free speech not an issue connected to this; I must agree with the the mayor, camping in city parks is against the law and is stupid to even think that it should be allowed - they want to come. protest, participate or just hang out for the event - let them get hotels and transportation the same as anyone else - the City, State nor the DNC owe them nothing.
Now allowing protesters public access without being caged like animals - some outrageous distance away from the cameras, media delegates and candidates etc - that is a another mater all together - for another day and or another story
July 28, 2008

1:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Michael writes:

Would someone please tell me what it is exactly that they are protesting? - aosb
This is what these people do for recreation. Like most of us go camping (where it is allowed and legal), go skiing, go hunting, go golfing, go scuba diving, or whatever. These left-wing radicals protest stuff - any stuff but mostly anyone who does not agree with how they think the world should be. They love to march, chant, beat drums, yell, dress in crappy clothes, not take showers, and in general make nuisances of themselves. The worst of them like to smash storefront windows, destroy public/private property, disrupt traffic, cause mayhem, and in some cases cause bodily injury to those that try to enforce laws and do not agree with them. This what THEY DO.
July 28, 2008

1:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

michael, right after you tell us where you expect them to go after breaking camp at 11 pm.
July 28, 2008

1:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

Yeah milehi, we are all racist because we don't want our park and city distroyed by unruly protestors. Haven't you been reading, most, if not all rooms, Hotels/motels alike are booked.
July 28, 2008

1:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

isthatright writes:

Hey Jay, why don't they go home? That's what I would do after an event.
July 28, 2008

2:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

arvada_mark writes:

The liberals are losing this argument, BTW.
July 28, 2008

2:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Elwood writes:

I say turn them loose in Invesco Field. That way the DNC Comittee will make sure the mess is cleaned before the end of the convention.
July 28, 2008

2:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

and what about logistics here?
City park = Approx 314 acres

Subtract from that:
Lakes and islands
museum/parking lots
zoo
golf course
misc obstacles

That leaves around 100 acres + or minus. More on the minus.

Conservative view of 40k+ people in park
Very very small 2-man tent 4x8 with inch or 2 for stakes and 2ft easement in front of tent = 29+ acres. This is assuming OPTIMAL location of tents. Never get that in best of situations. Add to that the extra 10K that people are talking about and you are looking at an absolute minimum of 45 acres.......just to sleep. More like 50-70 acres for tents. That leave 30 - 50 acres for festivities, meetings, speeches, porta potties, Dumpsters and other living needs.
Porta potties. Recomendations I have seen are approx 42 PPs per 6k people for 10 hrs before needed servicing.
43K people = 588 PPs. Using conservative numbers for growth that number easily reaches 650+. This would include maint. every 24 hrs for entirety. If all were lined up in one spot that would take up over an acre, not including wash stations. In reality it would most likely take up to 2-5+ acres of space. Lines ya know.

Eating venues? Not knowing where to even start. Significant percentage of people will have minimal "camping" experience. How prepared will they be for providing food and water needs? Or was this promised to them?
Garbage Disposal. Yea right!
Lookie Lous?
I am forgetting many areas of impact here, but bottom line is there is not enough room to sustain 50K + people for 3-4 days and nights.

Talk to the Morrison town people and see what mass "camping" does for their neighborhood before, during and after a Phish concert.

Talk to the SF city management and see how their "tent cities" faired in the Tenderloin. If you could walk the Gauntlet there without heaving you had an "iron stomach"

To let Tent State in you have to let R68 into Civic Park. The Anarchy crowd can assemble and camp at another park.......and on down the line. Let 1 and you let all.

I am NOT advocating violence nor hope for negative impacts for this event. It will affect all of us. But to think that logistically this can begin to be successful, is HOPE at its best and Reality at its worst.
July 28, 2008

2:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

fair enough, colib...although your thought that 2/3rds of the park isn't "park" is kind of laughable.

so where do you propose these folks go after breaking camp at 11 pm?
July 28, 2008

2:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Imsalty writes:

Lets see. 50 thousand people. If you divide that by 1 porta potty for every 100 people, thats 500 portapottys. Each porta potty has a footprint of about 5 feet square. Line up 60 and you have a football field size row. take it across the field and you have room for 40 more. Tent city? How about shit city? There isn't an infrastructure capable of supporting this 4 day invasion...
July 28, 2008

2:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

101st_soldier writes:

Serving in Iraq, I find it a sorry situation that people would be denied an chance to express their dissatisfaction with any political gathering.
The city knew that there would not be enough hotels or campgrounds to support the convention. The city should make available the appropriate areas and transportation to allow as full acess as possible for ALL people to gather. Resorting to such games as "sprinkler warfare" is not a solution, just ignites fervor amoung the people (as demonstrated by the comments here).
If they leave the park, then, they will gather in the streets, on the sidewalks, etc...
Students come in all ages... not just youth.
Allow honest protest, Allow honest support, Befriend all, For someday they might be the ones you look too for help.

God Bless America, and the values she stands for!
Liberty is a precious commodity, lets keep ours!

Just a soldier's comments - hoo-rah!
July 28, 2008

2:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

Yep milehi, if a brick is thrown at my car, you can bet the violence will start. One, because what kind of stupid person throws a brick at a car, and two, that person will for sure not be protesting the next few days due to a couple of factors including a brick to the head... As well, as soon as the Fibs get into town, i'm out, taking a nice ol' PTO. As far as the park goes, I live in Evergreen, so the stench of 50,000 dirty hippy children will be far away from me. I just feel sorry for the people that have to deal with this virus that is approaching us all.
July 28, 2008

2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

arvada_mark writes:

I suppose that with all of these toilets, the city could build a wall around Hippieville, I mean Protest Park, I mean the Venting Vault, I mean the Liberal Lobby, I mean the B!tch!ng Bench. Actually, I mean the park where our kids play. At least it'd keep 'em all in one place. Two days of that (with no city sanitation help) would probalby make most of them go home early anyway. It would truly be a sh!! house.
July 28, 2008

2:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

eyes_of_the_world writes:

Why not have them camp on Invesco field and then the DNC can cover all the expense and be sure of a full house for the big speach. all the infrastructure is already in place. Nutrition, sanitation, first aid, security. They can even lock the place up so nothing turns up missing while they are gone for their march.
DNC- these are your people, you should provide for them.
But something tells me that if this idea came across Barack Obamas desk he would say "no way".
Why?
July 28, 2008

2:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Irondog writes:

Is this tax-free water?
July 28, 2008

2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickystl writes:

Oh boy!! All the far left fringe should be there: ReCreate-68', Code Pink, Acorn, etc. Give um h..... guys and girls.
Unlike 1968, with the alternative media, we'll be able to film all the green mohawks, hate Bush, hate America, crowds all together. And, the average American will be able to view all the hate from the comfort of their living room. This will be better than any movie. I'll have the popcorn ready. The supporters the DNC does NOT want America to see.
July 28, 2008

2:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

jay. They have time now to plan alternative options. Where they go after the festivities is up to the organizers. They need to make plans for their event. Event planning. The city said no multiple times. Make other plans. It is pretty simple. If I am told that there are no accomodations at a specific location, then I must make alternative plans. Do you do the same jay or do you hope for devine intervention?
I DO understand your concern. If there is no planning (to be done by event planners and approved or denied by the city) then they are not going be prepared and drinking water out of your garden hose. The PLANNERS have the responsibility and should have the accountability for that planning. Project Management and Event planning 101.
July 28, 2008

3 p.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

How about 42 ft./sq. per camper [this assumes actual tent (small back-packing type) + support ropes] x 50,000 = 2,100,000 ft./sq. / 43,560 (# of ft. in acre) = 48.2 acres.

Now this doesn't allow for pathways between tents where support ropes are. It also assumes PERFECT placement of tents. This could never happen, with typical civilians, in a million years.

Port-a-potties support about 125 uses before they get gross.
Assume 5 daytime uses per person per day. 50,000/5 = 10,000 uses per day 125 = 80 port-a-lets, cleaned every day x 4 = big $

Who foots the bill? I think Hick is waiting to hear of the logistics plan that the tent state folks need to present prior to obtaining day use only of the park. This plan needs to include repairs for all damages.
July 28, 2008

3:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Biff writes:

Hello 101stsoldier....first and foremost...I appreciate your service to our wonderfull Country. I think the City of Denver knew what they were getting into. I work, pay taxes, give to charity and support the City of Denver and the United States. I live 4 blocks from City Park. I DON'T want these wacko people.....50,000 of them...or even 10,000 of them, trolling around my neighborhood for a week! I don't really think they have any intentions of making the United States a better place to live. For the most part....I believe they are all just board and have nothing better to do....(during summer break for all the college kids). It's really a pretty pathetic existance if you ask me...
July 28, 2008

3:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

jay then correct me on the numbers. You tried to correct me on mapquest before and we know how that fared for you! Lets recap

Golf facilities (building, range, course) take up approx 1/3 of the park. But lets be conservative here and say 90 acres......
Zoo takes up 80 acres but need to add parking to that figure so higher.
The lakes take up more than 30 when including islands, wetlands not included in surface water, which would be difficult to inhabit for this event.
Museum and facilities take up more than 10 acres I am told.
Buildings, parking lots, roads, and other obstacles and obstructions are not defined but from general view add to the over all acreage lost to total usage for this event. These items quickly add up and have to be accounted for space already used for other things than festivities, eating and camping.

90acres + 80(+) acres + 30(+) acres + 10acres + other obstructions take the total number of acres to 210 acres not including misc buildings and maint areas.........210+++++ subtracted from 314 = 204 which roughly represents 2/3 of City Park in Denver. If someone has better numbers, I would welcome those as we do not want Jay upset over the numbers..... He would rather consider things laughable rather than discuss the numbers and supply information from his research.

JAY which parts are laughable and why? I would greatly appreciate your input into these figures also. Are you that afraid of dialogue and discussion that you revert to smack talk? Have we not discussed the fact that smack talk is pretty lame online. Lets smack talk on the court, field etc.....where it means something......
July 28, 2008

3:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Fly fish Dude. The SMALLEST 2-man tent was 4x8 which barellly fit 2 people. Used it as I did not want to be construed as exagerating.......

btw. where do you go to "rip lips"
July 28, 2008

3:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

dilligaf writes:

Wow what is this the USSR? If you protest against our government you are a low down dirty commie. I suppose you all think that tank should have ran that protester over in China. Gee we all know what a honest and good job our government is doing.

Some of you scare me. Every man, woman, and child should be standing up to these crooks. Our fore fathers are rolling in their graves seeing what they are doing to us today. I sit back stick our tails between our legs and ask for more.
Now I'm probably in trouble because as I type their spying on my e-mail.

TELL BUSH I SAID HI!!!!!
July 28, 2008

3:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

milehi, yep, i'm speeding away.... Because running is always the right thing to do....hmmmmm..... As for a brick being thrown at my car, I don't know about you, but I have put hours upon hours upon hours into my car, so it is a living object to me. If that sounds stupid, what do you enjoy? What do you spend hours and days of your life doing? I am not about to let some college kid, being one myself, make a mess of something I have spent so much time on. As for the throwing a brick back, it wouldn't be thrown, it would be in my hand. You are right, it would incite violence, but I have every right to defend myself and my property in self defense, and thus, I would be in my rights to protect it by force. As for the hippie kids, maybe you believe the movement is over, but being in college myself, it is easy to see that the movement is alive and well in many of these kids. Many of them have never known the word "NO", because they grew up with boomers that were themselves hippies or hippy children. This country does not allow people to disrupt others lives. I have no problem with them protesting their own parties convention, but when I am paying taxes for land that they destroy, I am going to be angry.
July 28, 2008

3:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

I think the reptiles get away lots cause of #20 & smaller, but that's OK. I try not to "rip lips." The answer to your ? CO, NM, UT, WY, SD, MN, AK, MT, FL & the caymans. I've has as many as 5 different licenses in one season. Lucky me!

& yes, I realize yuo were being conservative with tent size but 32 sq ft per 2 people doesn't account for supports & pathways. I know I'm being kind of nit-picky, but more reality that not gives us a better picture.
July 28, 2008

3:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

irishrock1962 writes:

50,000 liberal protesters in one place ? man,thats alot of nose rings.
July 28, 2008

3:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

dilligaf...once again, it's not about protesting..it's about breaking the law! People can protest all they want, they just can't break the law in the process!
July 28, 2008

3:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

artstarzz - Wonder if you would say the same if you lived next to or within a few blocks of City Park - or hey better yet - open up YOUR back yard to say 10 or so of em.

The Race you are talking about is not "street racing" it is an city event - like the taste of colorado or the Cherry creek art festival with limited and controlled boundries and in the event of the Denver Grand Prix - controlled access - not even compareable to open house camping in any city park - GET a Clue!
July 28, 2008

3:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rallyracer7 writes:

As well, people saying that they should be allowed to camp there...... It has already been decided they can't, so stop your whining and move on.
July 28, 2008

3:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

colib, i'm not sure where your mapquest conspiracy theory comes from....you'll have to refresh my memory.

otherwise, you still haven't answered the question.

where do you think these kids should go when they break camp at 11 pm?

as far as opinions on "numbers"...the golf course isn't part of the park....so your numbers are incorrect from the get go.

clear enough?
July 28, 2008

3:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

This is gonna be an exercise in the intolerable ignorance of liberals and in the pure tolerance of the city police to handle what will undoubtedly be an unruly and violent mob of hooligans showing up in the same place at the same time in order to vent the plethora of typical and boring demands we hear all the time as well as to just get stupid and break things that don't belong to them. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Here's my prediction for how well this will go:

-protesters will say absolutely nothing new
-will get emotional because no one is listening
-will damage property and make huge rectums out of themselves
-will wonder anew why no one wants to have them in their town

Any political philosophy that's based on pure emotion and zero logic can never lead to anything constructive. I hope it turns out to be a peaceful and effective demonstration but based on past performances I'd expect it to turn into a circus.
July 28, 2008

3:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Fly fish dude.....just a non pc figure of speech....met no disrespect.....as I flyfish also. Grew up in the Bozeman area........and lived near the south platte near deckers until gas and road weary crept in.........
July 28, 2008

4:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Ricardo writes:

The perfect solution for Tent State University!

Open up the Denver Stock Yards for them. Place tarps over the pens. Sanitation will not be a problem for this bunch. They won't mind the smell. Bathing won't be a problem! Lots of fresh water!

The mayor can give them a list of where the best epicurean dumpsters are located, even a list of tips on dumpster diving techinques. This will take care of feeding them.

Problem solved!
July 28, 2008

4:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Jay please show me where City Park golf course is not part of the City Park numbers. I was told that the 314 acres included the golf course.
So I guess the question is whether the 314 acres includes golf course or if it does not. We can include that into the figures after the fact.

Mapquest was when I gave you general idea of where I was located. You stated that mapquest said I was over 10 miles from Quebec to downtown. I set you straight with your Mapquest calculations.....

I DID answer your question. Please read my previous post. They HAVE Weeeeeks to make alternative plans. To not make those plans is not an option. Period end of story. If you were told your accomodations were changed or cancelled, would you show up and demand that they not be changed or cancelled? No you would make other arrangements. You are making this political based upon your party affiliation. They HAVE EVERY right to attend and participate in the process. I stand up and cheer for that right. But when their EVENT PLANNER has his ideas changed because he did NOT LISTEN to what the city organizers told him a long time ago and continues with the plan that is NOT valid anymore and that plan needs to be made to accomodate those changes.

If they were attending tomorrow and those plans were changed to not allow camping today, then I too would be supporting the fact that they need to stay at the park.........BUT when you are given months to change those plans for that event, there are no excuses not to make arrangements. That is Openly violating the laws set forth, explained and re-explained to the planners of this event. Openly defy them then. Let the chips fall where they may.
July 28, 2008

4:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

krvus writes:

Colib-
you make great points about the size and how it may affect the park. I agree with you 100%. The size and the fact that they have been told no is enough for me.
But I'll ask cause I know jay is already typing- "But where will they go after 11:00?"
Jay- WHO CARES WHERE THEY GO! They are adult enough to find a place and it's not our responsibility to find them a place, OK? The city has said no and that's it. Heck, it's the Democrat Mayor who told the Democrat protestors that the word was no. Keep up the infighting- your party looks like a bunch of idiots. Side not here: This is coming from a non declared who cannot stand either side anymore!!!!
July 28, 2008

4:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"Jay please show me where City Park golf course is not part of the City Park numbers"

the campers aren't going to be allowed to camp in the golf course, colib....thus it isn't included in the park numbers.

"Mapquest was when I gave you general idea of where I was located. You stated that mapquest said I was over 10 miles from Quebec to downtown."

no clue what you're talking about here colib. you said at one point that you were "right downtown"...but when we dialed you in you were nearly in aurora on the other side of quebec street...which is...you guessed it...10 miles from downtown.

"I DID answer your question."

no you didn't...unless i missed you saying where you think they should go after they break camp at 11pm...if so...please repost it....otherwise please answer the question.
July 28, 2008

4:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

krvus. Thanks.

jay is probably typing away or submitting now. The point I am making is that the Event planner has or had time to change the event planning and accomodate the need for 50K people. Instead of Risk management planning, contigency planning, etc., he has chosen confrontation and civil disobedience. HIS Choice I would have worked with city, federal, and private sources to find an alternative to civil disobedience. Find a new location for staging. If the city, federal, DNC, or private entities wanted or needed them here, they would gladly provide alternatives. I am betting that there are many that would gladly let them camp in their yards to help out for the cause. IT IS important to have a voice. But lets look at practicality and how this can be done successfully.

Hell lets not worry about whether the 90 acres of golf course is or is not included into the figures. Lets use more realistic figures than what I put together and put them into the formula. IT STILL shows that the viability of City Park is not feasable. jay wants to invalidate based upon 1 contentious area.....the golf course......... Jay put your numbers forth and lets look at what you see as feasable........ Love to see sales reps glorified or certified put together detailed project plans.....

Now lets look at R68 and their demands of staying in the Park system. What of the others that are not even close to the 50K + Tent State crowd.
July 28, 2008

4:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

YourNeilness writes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Par...

According to wikipedia, City Park is 330 acres and includes the zoo, museum, lakes, etc., but does not include the golf course.
July 28, 2008

4:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

jay the question is whether city golf course is included in with the 300+ acres listed. When showing city park it always includes the golf course................ IS city golf course included in the acreage defined or not?

Where will they go after 11pm? When? What date or dates will this happen? You are making it sound as of 11pm tonight or tomorrow. I say they go to whereever they have made plans to go for the evening. Easy enough. Plan to find a place to stay BEFORE YOU GET HERE. They have had months to do this!!!!
July 28, 2008

4:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

why in the world would we include land not in the actual park in which the campers will be camping, colib? i'm not sure why you want to include a golf course NEXT to the park in which the kids will be collecting. can you tell me why?

that said, i have no idea why you're still running from a very simple question.

where do you think they should go at 11pm every night?
July 28, 2008

4:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

mostcurious writes:

It's Part II of "Attack of the Obamanoids - Sleepover of the Obamanoids!" Honestly, for people clamoring for change, it sure seems like you do the same things over and over and over again...
July 28, 2008

4:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

DrudgeVisitor writes:

Wow... I can feel the love and peace in here...

101st said "The city knew that there would not be enough hotels or campgrounds to support the convention. The city should make available the appropriate areas and transportation to allow as full acess as possible for ALL people to gather. Students come in all ages... not just youth. Allow honest protest, Allow honest support, Befriend all, For someday they might be the ones you look too for help."

Probably the smartest and most appropriate comment in this thread.

The problem is that the 50,000 protestors are made up of a wide gamut of people... everyone from young skulls full of mush (stolen phrase) who believe they trying to make a difference to hardcore activists whose agendas are as righteous to them as any born-again Christian's faith. Unfortunately, the overall stereotype I have of this group is that it is made up of people who don't respect other people's rights, property or opinions... hence their method of choice in getting their message heard.

The dangerous element of this crowd are the hardcore activists. Their righteous agenda gives them license to do whatever it takes... damn everyone else including the young skulls full of mush who came to help them. They may be a minority, but the crowd and situation can give them great power to do harm.

Groups who come to Denver to respectfully and responsibly protest would have no problem in arranging a temporary campground and transportation to support their cause. They have had plenty of time to do this.

This flap over the park just shows their disrespect.

Oh, and Jay... chances are that most good protestors will be asleep by 11pm since they have a big day tomorrow. The ones left up at 11pm came for the party.
July 28, 2008

5:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

redwhiteandBLUE writes:

All of you are right..this will not be a peaceful protest..sorry to say.

Protesters are people that have a mind set..that have an agenda..

and they want their voices heard. Every group.. Anti-war, Native

American Indians, The Escuela Tlatelolco school and their Human

Rights people are not peaceful. The out of towners that don't care

about Denver will not respect our city, parks or motels. Watch the

mess. I'm not trying to be negative..but we've seen this before,

now there will be additional people.
July 28, 2008

5:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Thanks YourNeilness.

Wiki also states 314 acres and city maps show that Golf course is included.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver,_...

City sites say around 314 acres......not sure if anyone has it right. But truly thanks. With that over half and that is conservative because previous counts identified maint., other buildings, monuments and other misc obstructions, but did not quantify those areas as it would be too contentious and was not wanting to get into a war of numbers but a discussion.

Still a tight fit with conservative numbers for that amount of time.

It seems that R68 and other protest groups wanted to "camp" at parks within city but were told no. They are making alternative plans. I dont see why the event planner from Tent State could not communicate with other groups to identify alternatives.

and Jay if you really really want me to say they should stay at City Park..........wellllll Heck golly jeee lets just get rid of that pesky law stating that after 11pm no one is allowed in the park. It obviously is antiquated and does not fit the freedoms we should enjoy in this fine city. If they feel that the law is wrong, then let them put up their tents. Lets do it. If we say they can stay then they and everyone else gets to stay. Everyone.

Also Jay you seem to feel that if we allow them to stay in the park that they will STAY in the park........wrong they still will be drinking and bathing from your garden hose. Dont trip over them when you go for a morning jog............. Either with or without approval they will be "with" you
July 28, 2008

5:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

I know it's not as much fun when one has facts and cites, but: Denvergov.org says city park is 370 acres and that includes the golf course.
July 28, 2008

5:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

And here is the website link:
http://www.denvergov.org/City_Park_Al...
July 28, 2008

5:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

YourNeilness writes:

You're welcome, COLib, and thanks, denvergirl. I read the parks section on COLib's link and didn't see where the 314 includes the golf course. So, lets just say its 370 with the golf course and 314 without it. So, the golf course must be 56 acres.
July 28, 2008

5:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

jay from your post

"why in the world would we include land not in the actual park in which the campers will be camping, colib? i'm not sure why you want to include a golf course NEXT to the park in which the kids will be collecting. can you tell me why?"

I was trying to figure out total acreage of park simple as that. some maps showed golf course part of park. just trying to figure calculation from which to define amount of real area in park that is accessible for camping. Not all of park is. simple

Your question is invalid and leading as it is not pertinent to the timeframe of the issue at hand. They were told no that they could not stay there. Months they have had to make arrangements. If this does not concern you then you are just trying to be beligerent(sp) as you are not looking for solutions......As stated before......Let them come....Let them stay at the park. When it blows up in peoples' faces, you will blame the city for not planning, when it is not the city's responsibility for event planning. They approve or deny requests......which they have.
July 28, 2008

5:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Thanks Denvergirl and YourNeilness. That is about the 4th different # I have seen...... So we have approx 125-160 acres to work with as far as Tent State goes. Still a massive undertaking to fit that many people within that area and to keep some sort of civility, health and order. I hope that it can be done. I know I wont have Adam Jung doing any of my event planning.
July 28, 2008

5:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

colib...you STILL haven't answered the question and i have no idea why you're running...

where do YOU think they should go at 11pm after breaking the camp they've been at since 6 am?
July 28, 2008

5:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

I know this isn't my conversation, so beg my pardon for jumping in here but I've seen you ask this a dozen times and I'd like to provide an answer:

Question: "where do YOU think they should go at 11pm after breaking the camp they've been at since 6 am?"

Answer: Wherever the heck they want as long as it's not homesteading at the park.

Seriously though, why is this anyone's responsibility except those that chose to travel to Denver to protest the DNC? Have you ever made travel plans to arrive in X city in X state and flat out declined to make plans for accomodations? Airfare booked, roadmaps in hand, gas-stops and bathroom breaks carefully plotted; vacation time booked, time off of work scheduled, even the post office given notice to stow the mail till they get back. All this they worked out apparently but as for where to stay once they get to Denver, no consideration has been given to this minor detail?

The Constitution provides our citizenry the right to assemble, it does not require the goverment to provide care and feeding for any of us, no matter what our beef is, should we decide to converge on an event and make a spectacle of ourselves. Besides you and I both can predict the manner of insulting anti-American deficate that has become a pre-req at this sorts of events, and that is where this takes a turn from needy antagonism into outright foolishness. Don'tcha find it the slightest bit ironic that these same folks that'll be carrying on about "AmeriKKKa!" and "Bush is hitler" are whining that the same government should accomodate their lack of planning?

Anyhow, no disrespect to you just wanted to have a go at answering this question myself, admittedly which wasn't directed at me.
July 28, 2008

5:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

OK Clark Griswald.....errrrrrrrrr JAY

The City has stated in past, present and I assume future, that WALLYWORLD is NOT OPEN. You can either force your way into Wallyworld or you can abide by the laws and attend all of the festivities of Wallyworld during normal Business hours.

Where in the itinerary are the activities starting at 6am and going until 11pm every day? Or these the hours of operation for the park?
Jay seriously. If they want to come here without making alternative plans (responsible folks that I would want to represent and defend)- Official camp sites Cherry Creek Chatfield, Aurora Res, KOA, hotels, host family, negotiated open spaces in Stapleton, Lowry, Fitzsimons, generous land owners, staying with other protestors from area that would be camping, etc THEN they should stay at the park. Let them stay at the park. I have said this in the last posts to you 5:04 5:20 posts LET THEM STAY IN THE PARK. I truly wish you were the 1 responsible for that decision. I really do. Now that you have your answer to a bogus question, what do we do with R68? Do we now let them stay in Civic Park as they requested?
July 28, 2008

5:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

protea32 writes:

Biff says
"hey protea32...and what makes you think that a group of 50,000 protestors is not a formula for riots? Your the fricken drone buddy"

You misundertand me, Biff. The first part of my previous post was a quote from another poster, the second part was my response. If you read the second paragraph, I stated why people WOULD think a group of 50,000 plus protestors is a formula for riots, especially when they use the name 'Recreate '68'.
July 28, 2008

6:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

thevealchop writes:

"We could just get a lot of people just showing up to camp," she said. "People from out of state, if they found out that we were going to open up free camping in the park, would say, 'Hey, we can actually go to the DNC and stay for free. We don't have to pay $500 a night.' "

God forbid people come to Denver, especially for our free camping.

And the whole "turn the sprinklers on" threat... well, that sounds like a hoot. Let us locals know when you're gonna do it and we'll come and run through them with the rest of the free campers.

Our city is run by idiots...

-thevealchop
July 28, 2008

6:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

Sorry that last post was to "jay"

BTW and I think this goes to "duncan", the notion that public parks "belong" to the public is accurate enough; the notion that you can haul a couch and lamp out to the middle of the greenspace and homestead is not so accurate. It doesn't work that way brother. The city government has an obligation to the safety and welfare of the entire city, not just a weekend gathering of hooligans intent on stirring up a ruckus. However many of these folks are planning a peaceful event is an aside; what the adults have to consider is: what happens if someone gets violent in the middle of a crowd of 50,000 people all crammed into the confines of a city park? Crowd control isn't just an urban buzzword it's a reality to the people resonsible for the safety of all these would-be "campers."

If that's not enough for you then figure the situation the morning after five HUNDRED people wake up in a park. It would be a scene of utter destruction. Think about it man. Now calculate 50,000. You can have thousands of port-a-johns and that wouldn't be enough, people are gonna be urinating on the grass, the trees, each other. No telling where the solid stuff goes. Once this happens it ceases to be a Constitutional right of assembly and becomes a health hazard. You can't fall back on the old "the people's park belongs to the people" everytime you get news that isn't to your liking. The city officials have a job to do 24/7/365.

I would think that liberals would be more considerate for the mess they are potentially causing with this whole idea. Unless that's the point.
July 28, 2008

6:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Duncan you sound like a Republican,,,,,,siding with Jay who is a liberal democrat who lives near the park and does not want them to leave at 11pm and enter his neighborhood. Good for you!

you state "You must have kicked his butt jay. This so-called libertarian doesn't want to play any longer." Glad your workday ends early and or didnt have work to finish. Yes not replying in 30 minutes is atrocious. How dare I

You want a train wreck. Fine get a trainwreck. Let them all in. Eliminate that pesky 11pm law. Yes I would be for that if it is for all and not just the protestors. And then donate those tents to the homeless and let them occupy them.

R68 wanted to reserve Civic Park for the same reason. Lets let them do it also........

You want to discuss politics and me being a conservative Libertarian, I am more than up for a discussion. Hecm Duncan I will buy the cup of coffee..........or if you are just smack talking.......online smack is for the ballless. Lets smack talk on the court, field, course etc. It means so much more when done in true competition
July 28, 2008

6:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

yes, i understand that you think the protesters should have made arrangements of some sort, sluggo and colib...but where do YOU think they're gonna go at 11pm on august 25th if they're not allowed to spend the night in the park?

let's put the "theories" aside and talk about reality....
July 28, 2008

6:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

You and I never been on the same page, mayor. Glad Mr. Hinkenlooper decided to stand up and protect the parks, which belong to so many more citizens, than the 50,000 who wanted to take them over. Now does he have the stones to follow through? How much damage will they cause to our city? Remember if it happens folks, who brought them to our beautiful city, and remember them for future references.
July 28, 2008

6:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

jay "yes, i understand that you think the protesters should have made arrangements of some sort, sluggo and colib...but where do YOU think they're gonna go at 11pm on august 25th if they're not allowed to spend the night in the park?

let's put the "theories" aside and talk about reality...."

Do you not accept the fact that Mr Jung should be negotiating those venues along with proper transportation to and from? I have given you multiple locations that I would look into.

Phrase in the Business world. "Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part"

Reality Jay. The logistics of this are out of control. 50K people in that area? We are looking in reality at around 70+acres for 50K campers. That is just the tents. In reality a min of 650 portapotties that will need service at least 3 times during this period....more like 4. Are they on order or being shipped in? Are you providing hoses for water? Do you care if they ask or not?
Again you are using 11pm as the final piece of the festivities. It is when the park closes not the closing of each nights activities......or at least we do not know this as I dont think the Plan + itinerary have been submitted.

Based upon plan submitted by Jung, do you think that he is ready to manage 50K+ people at City Park for 3-4 days and nights?

AGAIN In the end they will stay at the park? Are you ignoring the multiple statements or do you choose to ignore so that you can argue some more?
July 28, 2008

6:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

GetReal writes:

jay-

The reality is you are an obnoxious troll.

Your question (which should be answered by those travelling here) has been answered numerous times and you still persist to ask it.

Isn't Keith Olbermann on?
July 28, 2008

7:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

Jay-

"let's put the "theories" aside and talk about reality...."

OK, that's just it, you're not hearing the reality part, you're just repeating the same question over and over again. The idea that all of these people homesteading in the park is a sound plan and that it should be financed and organized by the city of Denver is an example of liberal thinking: all emotion and no logic. I realize that "Tent State" is a wonderful and paradoxically illuminating phrase (Kent State, we get it) and I realize that all of these 60's throwbacks are just dying to pull this one out of they're backsides, it's just not realistic man.

This entire controversy is the result of inefficient, near non-existent planning by organizers of the protest. It's ridiculous. The city has to continue to function regardless of what these liberal snowflakes think to the contrary and, I realize it's anathema to their philosophical leanings, but it's NOT all about them. That's why all the pie-in-the-sky dreams of protesting, taking it to the streets and sticking it to the "establishment" are wonderful concepts in a free land but the grown-ups have to take control before someone gets hurt. End of story.

I guess these folks just feel entitled to show up and be catered to by the same beuracracy they would be protesting. Well that's their right. But it's not their right to demand accomodations, no matter how you slice it. You just never hear this kind of thing happening with Republican groups. I don't know what that means if anything but you just never have this headache when conservatives are involved. Figure that one out.
July 28, 2008

7:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Duncan I have stated multiple times that if they wish to go against the curfew law then by all means do it. When it blows up dont blame the city. Blame the promoters and organizers first. I am not defending the city or your governmental representatives in any way. But if we let them violate the curfew law, then we can not hold others accountable for violating same law. Plain and simple If you think it is bad law, put forth an alternative and repeal the law. Damn straight we have too many that we refuse to enforce. Opening that up will create wonderful dilemnas for property value next to City Park and any other Denver Park. Rock on Dude
July 28, 2008

8:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

AC7880 writes:

American indpendents who are undecided on who to vote for in the general election are about to get an education. The breakdown of societal norms that the left is about to inflict upon itself, and upon the citizens of Denver, will be very enlightening indeed.
July 28, 2008

9:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

gary writes:

Turn on the sprinklers...Ha Ha Ha..

They will just break them off and then the City will have to pay to repair them. Like some sprinklers will make them run. It is not hard to kick a sprinkler head off!!

Nuff Said!
July 28, 2008

11:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Need_Light_bulb writes:

You republicians aren't too BRIGHT? My GOD! After reading these blogs.Wow! Here’s how republician think. I'm rich, you’re poor so sit in the corner, be quite, do not eat, breath my air, or go to the public park because it's my world. No, No, No, not my park. But you may go to Iraq and die for us so we can tell the next group that asked to be heard again! no..no..no.. and again you must go! Guess who I am? A human being just like you republicians, and making alot of $ from you republicians that are not Brite/Bright enough to change those dim light bulbs. Why would any person with common sense ever make comments like I’m reading?
Go back to the light bulbs, P.S. If you look at that light bulb real close it reads… MADE IN CHINA or sold out by REPUBLICIANS! Mike aren’t you the dimmer switch on the radio in the morning? LOL
July 28, 2008

11:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Need_Light_bulb writes:

Hello! No comment? I understand. It's 11:30 and you republicians are all in bed, doors locked, and cell phone under your pillow worried about those Americans that would like to use the park that belongs us. You're all dreaming of a Starbucks on every corner. Guess what you better look around, a lot of empty stores, homes, and maybe brains. Good luck! Do not think that the OFFICE or Halliburton all help you, they can't help our Americans fighting for your ??????? Wake up!
July 28, 2008

11:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Need_Light_bulb writes:

Good night! Going to take my dog for a walk in our public park! Is that OK?
July 29, 2008

5:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Alive writes:

Need_Light_bulb,

You may walk your dog, just clean up it's poop. Also, if you would like to clean up the poop of these "campers" they may use the park as well. See, wasn't that easy?

P.S. Wear gloves. Poop is unhealthy you know.
July 29, 2008

6:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

gary writes:

need_light_bulb

You need more than a light bulb....

Nuff Said!
July 29, 2008

7:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

Need Light Bulb your thinking is a bit dim. Better check your power source.
July 29, 2008

7:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

CoLib - no offense taken... So you know about the Lower Madison? Or the Gallatin? 2 of your old stomping grounds great fisheries.

& light bulb - when did this become a partisan issue? I thought nearly all posts were questioning the logistics.
July 29, 2008

8:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

light bulb-

Sorry man I had to go to bed early last night after loading my gun and locking my door against starving imigrants. Oh five hundred comes early and having a job is a drag but being a productive member of society has it's drawbacks at times.

Your entire post is a shining example (no pun intended) of why liberals are dangerous when given positions of power; no logic, all emotion. You come out swinging the same old argument that's already been made and defeated and even manage to drag the dead horse of Iraq into the equation. Brilliant! As is usually the case when debating a liberal I find it necessary to bring you back to the topic at hand, which is this:

-protesters demand the privilege of camping in the park with no expense to themselves
-City says no, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone grown up enough to know that it's a bad idea without needing to really spell it all out but being forced to anyway

That's about it. Sorry man but even in a free country you have to think for yourself. These guys are just going to have to either stay home (heaven forbid anyone stay at school and actually study) or act like adults and make plans for lodging just like everyone else does when traveling to another town. Either that or you can let them stay in your yard. In fact I think that's a good idea and I hereby nominate light bulb to be the ringmaster for this inevitable circus.

We're gonna need you to go ahead and rent some port-a-johns at your expense naturally. You'll also need to hire a security detail in case there are any troublemakers, and the clean up will be your responsibilty as well. Just rent a huge rollaway dumpster. Better make it a dozen or more. You do have insurance right? Good cause you'll need it for the damage done to your property. You ok with all that? Excellent. See you there!
July 29, 2008

8:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

I second Light Bulbs nomination!
July 29, 2008

8:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Flyfish dude, I actually lived a bit west of bozeman along the Jefferson. Madison over the hill was about 7 miles and "had" to travel the great distance of around 25 miles to get to the Gallatin. But actually spent most of time on a creek that went through our property. Just getting back into the flyfishing and mostly spent time on the s. platte backcasting into the guy behind me and............
July 29, 2008

9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

COLib - yes I know the Jefferson, also. Nice place to grow up! Yeah I have to stay away from anywhere on the S. Platte. This is not exactly the forum in which to speak of other places...
July 29, 2008

10:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"OK, that's just it, you're not hearing the reality part, you're just repeating the same question over and over again"

that's because you aren't answering it.

gettruthy...forcing the far right to answer inconvenient questions or acknowledge inconvenient facts isn't "trolling"...nice try though.

colib....you're still running from the question and i have no idea why.

this isn't rocket science. i'm not asking you to tell me that you think they should have planned better....that's obvious.

now that they're coming...let's deal with the reality on the ground (works in iraq too).

in your opinion...where do you think 50k people are gonna go at 11pm after breaking camp?
July 29, 2008

10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

These people had months to plan their accomodations. The city has said no to their original plan. Their organizers need to find an alternate plan. There is plenty of time between now and the convention to attempt to locate alternative accomodations.

A quick search on google for the Denver area shows there are 10 bed and breakfasts listed, 5 hostels (hostelling international's website shows more), 50 motels listed (that are NOT the ones that the delegates will be staying in - these are places that are a bit out of the way and may be a bit dingy).

Also a quick search of both vacationrentals.com and craigs list shows 100's of rentals for the week of the DNC in the metro area, and Colorado has 22 KOA campsites (not including other private camping areas). And I have come across a network of vacation sharing type places that are offering up rooms for rent that week.

Perhaps these few places I mentioned cannot hold the masses that are expected, but it shows that with initiative, hard work, alternate accomodations can be found.

No these places are not necessarily conveniently located, they are probably a bit dingy, possibly crowded, but you know what??. . . You have a right to assembly and free speech, not free accomodations.

Perhaps, instead of whining that they are not getting their way, the Tent State people can do a little legwork in the next month and find alternate accomodations.
July 29, 2008

10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

I must weigh in on this with others suggestions... It's not our problem. If they have no idea where they're going for accommodations, it certainly isn't denver's problem. If they break the law in acquiring lodging or camping, too bad. They can join those already in lock-up.
July 29, 2008

11:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Jay I have answered your question multiple times. Each time I have shown you how your question is leading and not a logical question, BUT I have answered it in multiple posts using multiple scenarios, from giving alternative sites and opinions for finding places for them to go after 11pm. Lacking the ability for them to plan at the rudimentary level, I have repeated multiple times that they should stay in the park. I have also stated that if the 11pm curfew law is flawed and does not meet the needs of our citizens, then I would be for changing it. 6:31, 5:53, 5:20, 5:04 and 4:49 posts include all of the above scenarios.

Jay who is responsible for the ammenities and provisions for these 50K+ people? Is that the responsibility of the City or the Event Planner?
July 29, 2008

11:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

P_Denver writes:

jay

They need to go to hotels, motels, or other legal lodging.

What's so hard to understand about that?

If they have no lodging, they should not come.

I can guarantee -- if they went to Yellowstone Park with no reservations they'd get thrown out.

No lodging? DON'T COME.

Yes -- It IS that simple.

Questions from any of the slow-witted readers?
July 29, 2008

11:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Also jay are you willing to repeal the 11pm curfew law completely for City Park? Or just in this instance?
July 29, 2008

11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

Jay-

You wrote the following:
"gettruthy...forcing the far right to answer inconvenient questions or acknowledge inconvenient facts isn't "trolling"...nice try though."

Brother there's no 'far right' in my sector, only a grown up with the ability to reason as well as emote. Besides I think this question has been answered to almost anyone's satisfaction save yours.

The answer, again, is simple: whatever they want to do so long as it doesn't violate property laws, crowd ordinance or any other local statute. That's about all there is to it. The fact that you are attempting to baby-sit a crowd that has made no amount of effort to do anything but show up is ridiculous. The responsibility falls to the organizers of the rally, noone else. Period.

You guys may as well just spell it out and say "We demand to exercise our right to assemble and to make good of every other aspect of our freedoms that we have been granted to us by people greater than ourselves, but we refuse to acknowlege any of the responsibilities that such liberty holds inherent."

No running, no hiding, no Iraq, no Halliburton, no distractions. This is the reality of the situation. If you choose to continue enabling irresponsible people then you may as well open up your yard like light bulb has been volunteered to do and take care of these victims of moral injustice. Remember change begins with the face in the mirror. That's it man. This window is closed.
July 29, 2008

11:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

And to Sluggo, in the right corner wearing the white (for the good guy) trunks, we have a TKO vs. jay (for being obtuse). Great summation, Sluggo!
July 29, 2008

12:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

DrudgeVisitor writes:

I have enjoyed this little exchange. Overall, most of you have been civil and not resorted to name calling when your arguments flop. I have a new respect for the Denver area.

One last observation...

Not only have these protestors and their organizers had plenty of time to make appropriate accomodations, they have also had plenty of time to hold bake sales and car washes to pay for it all. They shouldn't need "free" accomodations provided by the tax-payers of Denver and Colorado.
July 29, 2008

12:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"Jay I have answered your question multiple times."

no you haven't. you've only said they should've planned better.

granted. but we're now faced with the reality of 50k breaking camp at 11pm every night during the convention.

i still don't know why you're running from this question.

where, in your opinion, will these people go at 11pm?

same goes for you sluggo...just asking your opinion....and still don't know why you folks are avoiding giving them.

just tell me where you think 50k people will go at 11pm on the night of the 25th when they are forced to break camp and leave the park.

"They need to go to hotels, motels, or other legal lodging"

as we've established before, p...there aren't hotel rooms availabe for 5k people...let alone 50k.

i had no idea this would be such a difficult question for some of you to answer.
July 29, 2008

12:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

DrudgeVisitor writes:

Ok jay.... how about this scenario...

The City of Denver throws up a tent city/prison complete with judicial services on the outskirts of Denver. Everyone that violates the curfew and/or ban on camping is loaded up on school buses (which are available right now) and shipped to the internment camp where they sit for 48 hours until they are charged or released. They should make it back to Denver by the time the convention is over.

Treat the criminally irresponsible as criminals and everyone is happy.

There... your question is answered.
July 29, 2008

12:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

P_Denver writes:

jay

Sorry: "Willful ignorance" on your part ---

If there aren't enough seats at Coors field for a baseball game - people can't get in.

If there aren't enough seats at Invesco for Obama's speech - people can't get in.

If there aren't enough beds in hotels for all the people who want to come - PEOPLE CAN'T GET IN.

No room -- stay home!

They have no "right" to be here and to break the law by sleeping in the park.

They should STAY HOME!

How hard is this????
July 29, 2008

12:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

jay,

I don't understand what you mean by "breaking camp" at 11 pm every night. If they aren't camping there, why would they set up a tent or have any cooking supplies? If they plan to be there all day, a camelbak with water and snacks should suffice. Then there would be no "breaking camp". And why would they all leave at the same time? If they do, would it be any different than after a Broncos game? And who cares where they go. They can sleep in their car somewhere. Renting a car would be cheaper than paying for a room.
I'm with DrudgeVisitor, Sluggo, COLib, Flyfish, etc....
July 29, 2008

12:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

Right on, P_Denver,

We don't owe them anything. There have been events and activities happening in other places that I have wanted to participate in. But if there was no lodging available or it was too expensive, I had to stay home.
July 29, 2008

1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

Just because the convention is in Denver, does not mean they have to stay in an actual hotel or in the city of Denver.

As I mentioned before, within 1-2 hrs drive of here, there are many motels, hostels, student temporary housing, public and private camping facilities, vacation house/loft/condo rentals, open space, BLM land, corporate lodging facilities, temporary housing (both furnished and unfurnished), places available for swap, people on Craigs list (yahoo and google) offering rooms for rent, lofts for rent. These places are listed today as "available" for rent.

The issue seems to be that no one wants to PAY for accomodations, they want to it for free.
July 29, 2008

1:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

denvergirl,

You are right. But, in my opinion, many of the so called "protesters" are coming to party. And "tent city" would be an ideal social setting for them.
July 29, 2008

1:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

More of the "give me" generation.
July 29, 2008

1:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

alright people, some of you are truly being willfully ignorant about this issue.

of course in an ideal world they should have planned better...BUT...

the reality is that tens of thousands of kids are going to be camping in city park (yes...with tents folks) from 6 am to 11 pm every day during the convention.

instead of allowing them to camp in the park at this point the plan is to force them out of the park at 11 pm every night.

in your opinion....where do you think they're going to go?

again...this isn't rocket science, i'm just asking for people's opinions about where 50k kids are going to go after getting kicked out of park every night during the convention.

stop running and just answer the question.
July 29, 2008

1:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

Thanks Heidi. :) I completely understand that some of the protestors are coming here to just party!

My post was attempting to address the the ad nauseum: where should they go at 11:00? Well they have just about 3 weeks until that 11:00 deadline to pay for accomodations at one of the many places that are available for rent that week. There are places available. It's just not their "ideal" or what they "want". Too bad.
July 29, 2008

1:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

Thanks FlyfishDude52. I wasn't going for the match, and jay has been cool for the most part, but at some point it just becomes pete pete and repeat. Everyone here has been agonizingly accomodating when answering the lad's challenge but it doesn't seem that any answer short of "Where do they go? Why, to the park of course" is going to satisfy him.
July 29, 2008

1:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

fntsymtn writes:

hmmm ... maybe the "tent state" residents will be found in movie theaters, the Denver zoo, botanical gardens, and the rescue missions in town. After all, they do qualify as "homeless", don't they?

As for the rhetorical question: "where do you think they will go...", it was rhetorical right, jay?

I expect that the 50K "homeless residents of tent state" will be respectful of our local laws and will disperse peacefully when the curfew at the park hits. Those who are not respectful and disperse peacefully, I expect that they will find themselves in the soon-to-be over-crowded city jail and possibly the Denver health medical center when they become aggressive. Either way, they WILL leave the park soon after the curfew.
July 29, 2008

1:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

i'll continue to repeat the question until you answer, sluggo....

saying "they should plan better" is great and all..but that's not an answer is it?

...again...in your opinion...where are these tens of thousands of kids going to go at 11pm every night?
July 29, 2008

1:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

Denvergirl,

I wasn't assuming that you were ignorant to the fact that many are coming here just to party. Most of the people could make it work based on your suggestions, but as jay says, they will be expecting to stay at the park. I agree with him there. And I am sure most are prepared to suffer the consequences if they need to be forced out. It is a game for them. Maybe we ought to make an exception for this event because it is going to be mass chaos if we try to stop them. But I believe they should at least be charged fees for staying there.
July 29, 2008

1:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

jay,

You remind me of one of my old teachers, encouraging his students to think for themselves, realistically! ;)
July 29, 2008

1:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Sluggo

Thanks for all of your input on here. Very well thought out and reasonable. You stated ""Where do they go? Why, to the park of course" is going to satisfy him." as it refers to Jay and his "Question"
I have repeatedly stated that if they have no other alternative to stay in the Park. They were going to regardless of what the curfew law states. SO JAY I have answered your question at that level and other levels. Have given options from which to work from. Complete from allowing them to stay illegally, repealing the curfew law and other alternatives.
Other Level. Have said it would be ok to repeal the 11pm curfew law. But to do so permanately.
Other Level. Offered solutions for those that would like to come here with minimal planning and having a place to stay. Heather, Denvergirl and all of the others have offered solutions within that category as well.

So Running? Never have I run. IN FACT have asked repeatedly of you and others that disagree on a multitude of topics to meet for coffee or beers to discuss and create a civil dialogue.

ALSO where is the Itinerary that shows all activities starting at 6am and ending directly at 11pm? Please show me the schedule
July 29, 2008

2:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

P_Denver writes:

jay writes:

...again...in your opinion...where are these tens of thousands of kids going to go at 11pm every night?

P_Denver writes:

At 11 PM, they will go to bed. In their own homes.

THEY ARE NOT WELCOME IF THEY HAVE NO PLACE TO STAY.

Questions?
July 29, 2008

2:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

OK jay, the tsu'ers are going to camp in the park or wherever they can find a spot to pitch their tent or roll out their sleeping bag, if they have them. When they are discovered or reported, the olice will pick them up & they can stay free in jail (this is not really free to denver taxpayers) until they're released. Or, they can drive, walk, hitch-hike (better watch for the cops on this one too) or take public transportation to wherever they have made arrangements to stay for the night.

Failing any of the above doesn't, yet, make this denver's problem. It's as if you're asking a rhetorical question, how many different answers do you want? Maybe your question is more like quantum physics where few of us can explain string theory...
July 29, 2008

2:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

I can see your point, yes they were expecting to stay in the park, but I don't necessarily agree that we should let them camp at the park even if just for this event. That would set a precedence to open parks to campers in the future.

Unfortunately, I believe one of three things is going to happen:
(i) they stay all night with no reprocussions; in essence the city gives in,

(ii) law enforcement/security/national guard enforce the 11:00 curfew and the campers will peacefully leave for anywhere else, or

(iii) law enforcement/security/national guard enforce the 11:00 curfew and wonderful peaceful, but unlawful park campers retaliate against law enforcement personnel.

Personally, I would rather see the 11:00 curfew upheld and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe it's a bit harsh, but I don't care where the group disburses to, that's not my problem, it's theirs, they are the ones who are in violation of the law.
July 29, 2008

2:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"You remind me of one of my old teachers, encouraging his students to think for themselves, realistically! ;)"

i had some teachers like that too, heidi...and they always were my favorites, even though sometimes i wasn't their biggest fan.

colib...i can see the lightbulb going off.

our options are pretty simple as a city....when discussing the reality of the situation.

we can either temporarily suspend the park curfew during this event in order to maintain some control over a huge group of potentially troublesome participants.....OR......we can try to force them through unpopular means to leave the park and roam the neighborhoods near downtown denver....where we can't keep an eye on them and take effective measure to deal with unrest on a massive scale.

pretty simple choices really....when you break the problem down into realistic bites.

"At 11 PM, they will go to bed. In their own homes."

also ridiculous as these folks are from out of town.

i kind of expected a little more from you, p.

i don't see a problem with acknowledging that our city is faced with a dilemma partly of our own design. a permit should never have been granted to these kids without a rider to address the camping overnight issue.

now that it is issued, however, we need to be adults and consider the reality of the situation.

personally, i don't see the problem with letting them camp overnight instead of "letting the chips fall where they may". the latter seems like a recipe for disaster that can easily be avoided.
July 29, 2008

2:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Oh_Wise_One writes:

Jay, a simple answer for your simple mind- they will go 'away' at 11 pm. You have to be the biggest troll on the RMN but you probably think that is a compliment.
July 29, 2008

3:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

You can see the lightbulb going off? My stance has never changed. If you were to read my posts....even gave you the times of those posts......you would see nothing has changed. If you were not willing to review those statements, then I was not willing to cut and paste them for you.
I have shown the logistical problem of what is proposed and still stand by that. If people choose to jump into that mess, then it is their choice. I am all about choices

Since I have repeatedly answered your question, How about answering at least 1 of mine........ Are you for repealing the 11pm curfew permanately? If not why?
July 29, 2008

3:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

jay states "also ridiculous as these folks are from out of town."

How many of the 50K+ are from out of town, or outside the metro area? I dont think we know that Jay. How many from CU Boulder, CSU CU Denver, CU CSprings, UNC, School of Mines, DU?
Sorry for missing any student that I have left off in the Metro area.........ohhhhh ya Metro State....whew
July 29, 2008

3:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

P_Denver writes:

jay,

Seriously, the issue WAS addressed at the time the permit was issued. It specifically said that overnight camping would not be allowed. Many news stories have reported this.

For their own reasons, the "organizers" chose to either overlook this, or to deliberately bait the city with this issue.

If everyone shows up as advertised (doubtful - organizers always inflate their numbers) and has no place to go, then there will indeed be an issue for the city/police to deal with.

And, as ColLib noted, we really don't know how many people will truly be from out of town, and how many will be locals who are just choosing to hang out and party.

This could be an issue based on no real problem.

But, you're also right. A plan is needed. The so-called organizers are the problem. They signed the permit. If the people they are responsible for break the law, the organizers should be put in jail-for the duration of the event. That way they will not be on the street (where they really want to be) during the conference. Make them miss what they came for. That will be suitable punishment as far as I'm concerned.

The others can sleep in the park for all I care. I never go there, anyway.
July 29, 2008

3:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

P_Denver, yes they have applied for the permit as you stated, but that permit has not been approved as of yet. They are required to submit the plans that you, I and others have stated. Their deadline is quickly approaching and the city is feeling the pressure of getting that permit approved on short notice. I know the Denver zoo is concerned on noise and activities of up to 50K+ people there. Could be devastating to some of the animals. I am trying to find what the stance is regarding the Audubon Society and other wildlife groups on what they see as possible impacts(they may have no concerns)
I think the biggest worries are the unknowns at this late of time. I would imagine that most of the portapotties are already reserved during this timeframe for other events. I am in process of looking some up to see if they could provide service for 50K+ people. Hating my job today..........
July 29, 2008

4:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

for the longest time, colib, your only "postion" was "better planning". after finally getting you to face reality and come to terms that we're past the "better planning" stage and on to the "what to do in the real world stage", do i understand that you're in favor of allowing them to sleep in the park vs. roam the neighborhoods near downtown denver? if so...good for you...you're starting to think in realistic terms.

why would i support camping in city park under normal circumstances, colib?

this is obviously a special instance during which a temporary suspension of the curfew and overnight camping laws is the only prudent solution.

i remember as a kid that the pope came out here and drew lots of folks....but i don't remember another instance in which this kind of solution would be required.

seems to be if we open the park for camping every 15 years when we have an event this large, it probably isn't going to cause the city to fall apart.

of course there will be students from du, metro, regis and cu denver....but let's not pretend that that is going to be a sizeable part of the 50k kids descending on the park. let's not pretend that these kids have somewhere to go at 11 pm every night they're here.

like i said...let's deal in reality.

p, you're right in that this could be a solution without a problem.

i hope so.

in the meantime, i think it is responsible for the city to take the measure necessary to adequately prepare for the worst case scenario.
July 29, 2008

4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

The longest time eh. I gave you the times that I said....you did not or refused not to go to the times yesterday that I stated. Just because you suddenly realized what I was saying does not count in the chronological event dude.

Your memory is about as long as your pec$er. Short short short.

Reality is that you do not want them in your neighborhood after curfew. Reality is they do not have the permits completed to even have daytime events in City Park. Reality is they do not have a plan to accomodate and comply with the rules identified in Late June. Reality is that you are willing to cower in front of a protest group that is defying all rules and compliance because they can not meet those conditions. So give them this 1 time break. Every 15 yrs you say. I am looking up the PP issue, please let me in on whether or not the World youth groups were allowed to camp overnight at city park please. It looks as though they did not care to meet those conditions. The reality is that they most likely will be denied a permit. The reality is that once we cower to this group, there will be others that bully the city to do their work for them. You state you do not wish for the curfew to be repealed(could it be property values over freedoms). What of the next group that wishes to ignore the laws, permits etc and defies the city in such a way?
You wish to submit to their will just this 1 time only........to protect your neighborhood(do not blame you for wanting to protect your home...really dont). But to allow 1 group access through pressure of potential disaster is wrong. Open it up. Repeal the law. Allow this by permit only. Not sure how many bums will get a group together for permits..............
July 29, 2008

4:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

denvergirl80205 writes:

Here's another reality: The application for assembly in the city's parks (all of them not just this one) states clearly that assembly is permitted from 9am to 11 pm.

http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/638/...

I think giving in to a group of people who chose not to obey the laws is just assinine. It's much like when you have a little child, and teach them that there are rules and laws in the real world. If you don't like them, there is a PROCESS to have the laws be changed. But until then, if you disobey them, face the consequences. Simple.
July 29, 2008

5:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

sanjay writes:

A few points:

1. The city is just covering their own butt, liability wise. They know if anything happens to anyone staying in the park, they get sued. That's their prerogative. If they don't even let the boy scouts stay there, there's no reason to let the Tent State people stay there either. It's only fair.

2. This is all about a lack of planning on the Tent State people's part. If they had planned ahead and actually asked other anti-war people to board them, maybe some of these people at least would not be facing this problem. All you liberals pontificate about peace, love and understanding, but I wonder how many would be willing to open up your homes and backyards to these gonads.

3. Whoever says just let them stay in the park and handle their own trash and food has never gone to an outdoor concert. The place will look like a bomb hit it afterward. These students will not be responsible enough to pick up their own trash. Trust.

4. If you haven't planned ahead and you don't have a place to stay, don't come. If you still have a problem with that, take it up with your own city government but don't come here and crash the place.

5. Jay, I'm fairly certain you are retarded. Get a clue.
July 29, 2008

5:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"The reality is that once we cower to this group, there will be others that bully the city to do their work for them."

ahhhh...now we're at the bottom of your ire, colilb.

the ol' slippery slope argument. it doesn't work any better in this instance as it does with gay marriage, stem cell research and immigration.

of course they should have planned better.

of course they should have made other arrangements.

the reality is they're coming.

the reality is that at 11 pm every night of the convention we have two choices.

we can let them camp...or let them wander around the neighborhoods near downtown.

again...this isn't a hard decision...when you look at the reality of the situation without the buts and the ifs.
July 29, 2008

6:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

"we can let them camp...or let them wander around the neighborhoods near downtown." Your neighborhood, your house your family. You DEFINATELY are an objective soul are you not?

"of course they should have planned better." BY what I see they have planned it out very well. They have been told the curfew, they chose to ignore and take it to the public(the only reqmt I have seem them fulfill of the 11) They have tried to get a different ruling on multiple occassions but have been denied. They are in GREAT danger of having the day use permit denied, but choose to come anyway because they do not like the answers they have been given. SOUNDS like they have a plan to me. All of this without the ammenities and services needed to sustain 50k+ people.

AND NOW you want the city to step in and take care of all of it because they have chosen not to? The ultimate Govt Nannyism. WOW. No offense Jay as while we disagree alot.......like you for some sick perverted reason, but dude if you raise your children to have that kind of responsibility........use a condom.....

"ahhhh...now we're at the bottom of your ire, colilb." No jay it is about the rights of all. I dont see you fighting for the rights of R68. Why not? Civic Park far enough from you so as not to bother you? It would be very interesting to see who would change their minds based upon political beliefs and locale of protesters to their own property...........

Jay you are cowering my friend.........begging for someone to agree with you.........to protect your property......not for rights of others...........Jay if your arguments were used by some of the Conservatives on here, they would be bashed down as they were only looking out for their own self interests (property and safety) rather than the rights of groups, especially those groups that stick to the rules. If you were for expanded rights within the park(limited but expanded for situations like this) I could sympathize with you more, but this is not the first time you have promoted your rights over others.............
So you are saying that I am against Gay Marriage and Stem Cell? Show me where I said those things......you wont find anything against that. not a 1
July 29, 2008

10:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

clyde writes:

JAY!!!! Quit with the question of where WE think they're going to go. Just post your address and we'll get some busses and you can have a great, big pajama party at YOUR house. You want to let them camp? Fine. Get involved and HELP! Now, back to YOUR address?
July 29, 2008

11:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

DrudgeVisitor writes:

My front yard is three acres... of course, its a long commute to Denver from Tennessee.
July 30, 2008

8:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

CLYDE see that is the problem with what Jay has been debating all along. The reason he is asking that question, is the fact that he lives next to City Park and is concerned that THEY WILL be in his yard. It is not about freedoms or rights for Jay......unless you are talking about freedoms only for Jay
July 30, 2008

9:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

colib...you're still not dealing with the reality of the situation.

they're coming.

we can either deal with it or stick our heads in the sand and "let the chips fall where they may".

which do you believe is the more intelligent, realistic option?

forget it...that's rhetorical.

we're not "taking rights from others" by facing reality and dealing with a situation that shouldn't have been in play in the first place.

theory vs. reality.

why does it often come down to that with you folks on the right?
July 30, 2008

10 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

jay - I've been following your postings about this for a couple of days & you deny the fact that whatever these protestors do after 11:00pm is Denver's problem. The City may have to be reactionary in regard to that but no amount of your asking, "where will they go?" can change the reality. Quit with your angst toward the other posters & bring it up with your Denver council memeber.
July 30, 2008

10:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Reality Jay. Where the Fu&^ did that come from your vocabulary?

Jay this is reality in your world. If they were going to overrun a park in Aurora, I doubt you would be very concerned or not concerned at all. That is reality Jay. You have proven in many posts that rights dont exist until it hits your world.

Reality Jay is the fact that you cower to the potential terrorizing of your hood and want to put forth great effort and money because Jung refuses to. Update the Curfew Law. Allow for special circumstances. You dont want that as it will DIRECTLY and negatively affect your Property values.
Change the Law. Give an exemption that protects the taxpayers.

Again Jay I ask the question. Do you think it is the city's responsiblity to now step in and fix the problem, ie the entire stay, not just allowing overnight camping? Even if the group does not comply with the city's request before approving permit?
July 30, 2008

10:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

it comes down to a simple choice...when dealing with the reality of the situation colib.

we can either allow the kids to camp in the park where we can keep an eye on them, better control their movements and actions and deal with them if necessary, or we can allow them to disperse en masse after using unpopular methods to force them from the area.

again...this isn't a tough choice when you intelligently look at the reality of the situation instead of worrying about "taking the rights away" from someone who may want to camp in the park in the future.

theory vs. reality.
July 30, 2008

10:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Mayor Hickenlooper is most likely under a lot of pressure on this situation. He is in a Lose - Lose situation. (I wonder how many other large city mayors are putting their 2 cents in on this issue privately?) The consequences are far reaching here no matter which decision he and the city make. They go much farther than your immediate problem and concerns Jay. "But they are coming....they are coming" You claim that we want to put our heads in the sand. That is far from the truth.
We are looking at the long term, security, freedoms and rights that are guided and maintained by the City of Denver. We can disagree on which ones are right and which ones are wrong but the fact still remains.
The city should have had tighter controls on the management of getting proper permits and understanding the people they were dealing with.

Right now, I only see 1 option that is fair to all and has the least longterm negative impacts to the city. I do not like it but feel it is the only solution.

DENY the Permit. They have a few days yet to submit, but as of yesterday, they had not even contacted the groups they were required to do in the conditional permit. Deny it in its entirety. That way there are no sound stages, no tents to deal with at 11pm. If they are not allowed to "put up camp" then they will not be in violation.

Hopefully if the city were to do so in a timely manner, a private landowner, or group of could provide an area for the group to assemble and get their message accross.

Bottom line Jay I can back you if you want to allow for changes to the Curfew Laws set forth by the city. I can not back the idea of just allowing this group to hijack the process in this "one" instance. Too many ramifications.

Reality Jay is for you to show how to alieve the negative impacts and provide solutions that will allow for long term continuity. Not "OMG...OMG they are coming OMG they are coming"
July 30, 2008

10:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

Wow! How do you come up with, "we can either allow the kids to camp in the park where we can keep an eye on them, or...?"

You must not get it, jay. Camping in the park is NOT an option. Period. Even the mayor says that & I don't much agree with him on any issue. This time I do.

I can appreciate the fact that it's your neighborhood & you, naturally, want to maintain the status quo. Intelligence isn't much of an issue cause you're suggesting that the offenders (the protestors) have none, but we, who are affected by their actions, do have cerebral function. Here's a tip: the "kids" do have intelligence. They're, as I write this, sitting back and watching us beat this dead horse & laughing, saying, "We'll get ourselves heard, with special dispensation, no matter which way this goes with the City of Denver." Well, I'm not laughing. This is going to be an unecessary expenditure for the City. Let the protestors do it legally or face the music.
July 30, 2008

10:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Jay I ask again "Again Jay I ask the question. Do you think it is the city's responsiblity to now step in and fix the problem, ie the entire stay, not just allowing overnight camping? Even if the group does not comply with the city's request before approving permit?"

Do we as a city take over the management of this group to comply with the approval of the ENTIRE permit?
July 30, 2008

10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

Hey COLib! How many dead horses do you have in your office?
July 30, 2008

10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Hard to type stuffing my face with food.......Horsemeat Does Not taste like chicken. Its a feast come on over buddy!
July 30, 2008

10:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"Camping in the park is NOT an option"

why not?

because you "feel" it's not?

yes...colib...if the city is going to make the strategic mistake of allowing tens of thousands of kids to camp in the park all day, then they need to deal with the reality of the situation and make the appropriate tactical decision to deal with the ramifications of said strategic decision.

i wouldn't care if it was cheesman...which i don't live by...it's about making the best possible choice instead of hiding behind slippery slope theories and boogeyman stories about granting access in the future.

again...reality vs. theory.
July 30, 2008

10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Jay answer the question. We are butchering more horses as I type here
July 30, 2008

10:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

COLib,

"We are butchering more horses as I type here"

Did you get a permit for that?
July 30, 2008

10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

"hiding behind slippery slope theories and boogeyman stories about granting access in the future.

again...reality vs. theory."

So you have RSVP list from the group? but they are coming they are coming.............. who is looking at what boogeyman?

Deny the entire permit. It most likely will anyways.
July 30, 2008

10:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

FlyfishDude52 writes:

COLib - yes, sidewalk sauted horse meat is always a special treat. When & where?
July 30, 2008

10:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Heidi, almost missed your message over the chainsaw noise........ I figured I would start the slide down Jays slope......Permit Shermit..............

For the record. I own a horse and have owned many horses. None were butchered, eaten, or abused. Love them all.

Also Jay having to run here with the reality of projects and approvals of my own. May step in once in awhile, but will offer this.......... Will be at Starbucks around4:30pm today at the Colfax and Fillmore site if you would like to discuss over a cup of coffee or a frap
July 30, 2008

11 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

i'm not sure which question you're talking about colib. as i said before, if the city makes the strategic mistake to allow tens of thousand of folks camp in ANY public park near downtown denver all day...they need to deal with the ramifications by making the appropriate strategic decisions to mitigate potential strife.

this isn't rocket science.

we're back to that same simple choice.

you guys don't read a lot of sun tzu do you.
July 30, 2008

11:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Jay what you are talking about are tactical mistakes and needing to make a tactical decision to provide an immediate and Short term solution to a problem. Strategic is what you are poopooing as slippery slope and the boogeyman

What I read. I read too much crap on here for one. Due to my job I have to read "technical" and "management" type books, articles, and white papers about Project Management and managing large complex projects. Both from a Tactical perspective and Strategic.
Most reading as last months are Eco books. Implementing eco projects into residential. Working to start an Eco consulting company that provide for sustainable living in this ever changing world and environment.
Read about "Doers" like Tesla, Roosevelt and other innovative people.
July 30, 2008

11:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

we're still back at the same place though, colib.

we have the city making a strategic mistake and then refusing to make the appropriate tactical decisions to deal with the ramifications of said mistake.

we're back to that simple choice.
July 30, 2008

12:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

Yes simple choice for you Jay. The boogey man disappears from your hood at the end. The city is left with the cleanup. Would love to give that responsibility and accountability to you.

Deny the day use permit. They Have NOT complied nor will they comply. If they are not have proper permit to be there at all, then there is nothing to worry about at 11pm

And since we are back to the same place......I will ask you to answer the question. Another copy/paste for Jay........

July 30, 2008

10:32 a.m.

Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:

Jay I ask again "Again Jay I ask the question. Do you think it is the city's responsiblity to now step in and fix the problem, ie the entire stay, not just allowing overnight camping? Even if the group does not comply with the city's request before approving permit?"

Do we as a city take over the management of this group to comply with the approval of the ENTIRE permit?

May be here to see your response but again will see you at Starbucks
July 30, 2008

12:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

i'll just cut and paste my answer from before as it appears you've missed it.

if the city makes the strategic mistake to allow tens of thousand of folks camp in ANY public park near downtown denver all day...they need to deal with the ramifications by making the appropriate strategic decisions to mitigate potential strife.

can't make starbucks...i have a rule of keeping some distance from my many "fans" here...

as far as the clean up...of course there's going to be clean up...all over denver...do you really think that allowing them to sleep in the park instead of just spending most of the day there is really going to break the clean up bank?

of course not.
July 30, 2008

1:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

COLibertarian writes:

nice try jay.

Jay I ask again "Again Jay I ask the question. Do you think it is the city's responsiblity to now step in and fix the problem, ie the entire stay, not just allowing overnight camping? Even if the group does not comply with the city's request before approving permit?"

Do we as a city take over the management of this group to comply with the approval of the ENTIRE permit?

You have answered the question regarding 1 of the 11 items on the permit. DO WE AS A CITY TAKE OVER THE MANAGEMENT OF THIS GROUP TO COMPLY WITH EHT APPROVAL OF THE ENTIRE PERMIT?
July 30, 2008

1:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

i'll keep posting it until you read it and come to terms with my answer, colib.

if the city makes the strategic mistake to allow tens of thousand of folks camp in ANY public park near downtown denver all day...they need to deal with the ramifications by making the appropriate strategic decisions to mitigate potential strife.

that's pretty cut and dry.

the city (and you) can't stick your head in the sand at 11pm and pretend that the problem doesn't exist...no matter what the paperwork says.

reality vs theory once again.
July 31, 2008

8:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sluggo writes:

Jay wrote-

"'Camping in the park is NOT an option'

why not?

because you "feel" it's not?"

Now Jay, we all know that "feeling" decisions rather than thinking them through is a liberal tradition but it's not a realistic statement to make to anyone here. By now every reasonable adult has danced with you and we're all getting bored with it. But I'll have one last go at it, just for kicks and giggles:

THE reason that camping in the park is NOT an option is because the city of Denver says it's not. Period. Finito. Therefore, no amount of "feeling" from you, me, COLib or anyone else is gonna make a dent on either side of this debate. It's a moot point. Where do these kids go at 11 p.m. sharp every night all at once and without hesitation? You got me. But it had better be somewhere legal to go and it had better not involve breaking anyone's property or belongings or someone will go to jail. So maybe that's the inevitable conclusion anyway. Like I said, you never get these headaches from conservative protest groups, for one reason or another. But I digress....

The best thing to do in a case like this is to recognize that "Tent State" ain't gonna happen. As asinine as I find it to be for a whole bunch of kids who weren't a gleam in the eye of a consenting adult back during Kent State to demand that they 'recreate '68', and notwithstanding the equally weak concept of a political philosophy that centers itself 40 years in the rearview mirror, what I or you or anyone else "feels" about it is inconsequential. The city said NO and that's that. The tenters are welcome to show up and do their protest thing and make complete @sses out of themselves if they like, or surprise the hell out of one and all by remaining calm, stoic and respectful (doubtful but miracles do happen) but it's just not gonna be happening at NIGHT, in the PARK where they have been told they are NOT camping out.

OK? We cool now?

BTW, thank you COLib, FlyfishDude52, Denvergirl, et al, for a fantastic and very constructive contest. Very informative and intelligent input from one and all. Even you Jay, who tries like hell but keeps getting hung up on the 'what we gonna do at 11 p.m.' thing, good show one and all.
July 31, 2008

1:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"THE reason that camping in the park is NOT an option is because the city of Denver says it's not."

wow

enough said.

Home › News › Politics

Mayor says no to Tent State overnight

By Daniel J. Chacon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published July 28, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.Updated July 28, 2008 at noon

Related Links

Related Stories

More Denver Democratic National Convention 2008

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs

DNC Calendar

FEATURED REPORT:

Delegate Portraits

MORE DNC SPECIAL REPORTS

FEATURED BLOG:

Rocky Truth Patrol

DNC BLOGS

News Tip

Know about something we should be reporting? Tell us about it.

Published July 28, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Updated July 28, 2008 at noon