DNC protesters must have assurances
Bruce Baker, Westminster
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
In light of Re-create 68 and the current buzz about dreaming of riots in Denver, I offer these observations.
The problems in Chicago in 1968 were caused by party insiders crushing their fellow Democrats. Inside the hall, Eugene McCarthy was smashed and, outside, lots of ordinary folks were smashed.
The Democratic Party won control of Congress in 2006 by promising to end the war in Iraq, but that promise was a deception. Many people are upset. Unfortunately, half the Democratic Party insiders are supporters of big oil, globalism and Zionism. If these insiders can't deceive people, they will crush people.
Instead, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper and Denver police should make these guarantees to all would-be protesters:
1. Law enforcement, at all levels, will not allow any undercover police or agents provocateurs.
2. Denver police will assign dozens of uniformed officers to assist protest organizers in maintaining order and will walk beside any demonstrations to ensure protester safety, public safety and access to routes that pass next to the convention meeting hall.
If Denver serves all the people, chances of chaos will be very small.
May 13, 2008
6:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
Earl writes:
and maybe they will all sit in a circle and sing kumbaya.
May 13, 2008
6:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
guarantees?
Yea You have the right to be silent, If you give up that right anything you say can and will be used against you.
You have the right to a Lawyer, If you can not afford a lawyer one will be appointed to you.
Do understand these rights I have read you.
Now stand still your getting blood on my shoes.
This should be the only Guarantees!
May 13, 2008
6:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Earl, Gene,
And maybe they will all sit in a circle and sing the Times They Are A Changin'.
May 13, 2008
7:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
mjsimmons writes:
Here is an assurance. The city held a lottery for spaces to meet and greet and spaces for them to march for these groups. The main man for Re-Create '68 has already said that they will not go along with those, cause they missed out on the lottery. Boo Hoo, As for under cover cops that is probably the best idea to have in the crowds.As for Agent Provocateurs (IMHO) I would expect that more from the crowds that want to protest and not obey the current rules as already laid out. It is already assumed that the Denver Police Department will already have effective parade enforcement for all the groups. I am not inclined to agree with you on this Mr. Baker. Your post to the editor will probably make it to Mr. Rosens Stupid letter post in his show.
May 13, 2008
7:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
Zionism? Here we go with the Anti-Jew Pro-Arab crap again.
May 13, 2008
7:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Gene,
Good point. Although I think everything about recreate 68 is "wannabe hippieism" (See: SASQUATCH isn't the only one who can make up words!).
May 13, 2008
7:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Earl,
It might be beneficial for you to look up the origins of the song Kumbaya.
I always find if fascinating when people imply that wanting peace and protesting their government is a *bad* thing.
It seems to me that civil disobedience is the very cornerstone of our success as a nation.
I suppose Earl and company might prefer Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940s, when protesters would be seen only briefly before being loaded onto trains.
May 13, 2008
7:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wechasa writes:
Charles_B,
The individual who obviously would prefer Germany in the early 1930s is JSeifert. His 6:48 AM letter certainly illustrates that.
And, of course, that makes him the spokes-person of the day for the "conservative" Republicans.
Just as a little by the way, you might want to go to the comic page, and look at the cartoon of the coyote and the little girl; it's a wonderful little squib on McSame/Bush 2.0, who equally obviously prefers something other than American freedom of speech and assembly.
May 13, 2008
8:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
From the letter writer:
"The Democratic Party won control of Congress in 2006 by promising to end the war in Iraq, but that promise was a deception."
...and once again.
The Democrats have put forth and have had bills passed that would bring out troops home. Bush (a Republican not a Democrat) has vetoed those bills everytime. When the Democrats try to get enough votes from the Republicans to override the veto they cannot, even though many of those Republicans want us out of their as well. You can say the Democrats have not kept their promise all you want but it is still a lie no matter how often you say it.
May 13, 2008
8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Unfortunately, the Democrats are often in as you put it: " a 'chaotic' mood", and I might add, a disorganized state. I wish that wasn't the case. The Republicans are often a juggernaut, and I would like to balance them with a more unified and determined opponent.
May 13, 2008
8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
It is truly generous of Gauleiter Bruce Baker to offer to spare the citizens of Denver from "chaos" if the DPD stands back and allows Recreate68 to solve the problem of Zionists in the ranks of Democratic insiders. We should eagerly accept this hudna and happily anticipate the prospect of a judenrein DNC.
Hope! Progress! Change!
May 13, 2008
8:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Charles_B,
In the Germany of the 20's and the 30's the protesters ruled the streets. Constant street violence between Nazis and Communists made the German people ready to accept anyone that would bring order. Really poor choice of metaphor, man, especially with Butler's use of a word beloved of Hitler in his justification for a not so thinly veiled threat.
Greenleaf,
I'm really surprised at you. Read this letter, I mean really read this letter. There is no wannabe hippieism here, no "give peace a chance," no flowers in the soldiers' gun barrels. This is a demand that the Denver Police give recreate68 a blank check.
May 13, 2008
8:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Earl writes:
charlene go put your blue dress on and get over it.
dont need to look up the orgins of the song and in your mind getting peace through riots and such make a point of how the far left think. I protest your form of government every time I have to pay taxes to support worthless socialist programs for the lazy. you can be a disobediant as you care to and it wont make any difference to me.
between you and the old pouch and backward and the left behind guy I am not sure which one of you will be leading the march for r-68 or the other protesters. poor backward seems to know all about operation chaos as he is a closet Rush lover and is not willing to come out of the closet yet. and sorry backward I dont need to go anywhere in my suv to know that you have no new ideas at all. if you do what are they, raise taxes for free something or another?
May 13, 2008
8:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
Well,if it makes the letter writer feel good to make ringing demands of the City Administration in perfect period vernacular,let him do it.It's a free country.Maybe they'll have a free concert at Civic Center,too,just like the old days.My suggestion for the concert headliner:Jefferson Wheelchair.
May 13, 2008
9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Party insiders?
Just goes to show that neither party has a clear cut definition.
You know where I stand.
May 13, 2008
9:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
AH Wechasa
I have missed your insightful messages, So I wish for 1930 Germany funny. Even more funny as me as a spoke-person for the republicans afraid not. What I do not like is I know better then you protesters threating violance if they do not get their way thats more of the Brown shirt and Communist rallies of the 30's. You see these clowns think that if they threaten us we will give in well we have learned better no more. Its time well hold these idiots responsible for their actions so if they threaten violance I say plan on getting it return. I have nothing against peaceful protest but threating to burn cars and smash property I say you lose that right.
May 13, 2008
9:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
CWW writes:
Hope all these wanna-be hippie freaks have health insurance for after the riot . . . . . . but they probably don't.
More freebee healthcare from the taxpayers.
May 13, 2008
9:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wechasa writes:
Konyok,
After the Reichstag fire, and Kristalnacht, perhaps you will be so kind as to detail for us just what "protests" there were, and who was "protesting". JSeifert's posting might be considered an almost exact transliteration of what one would have heard in German, after those events - with, of course, the exception of any formality allowing for a lawyer, or suggesting the right to remain silent. The rest, however would have been totally in keeping with that period of history.
I really don't know just what you are trying to say concerning the matter of Zionism; but it certainly reads as if your prejudices against Jews are showing. Are these an accompaniment to prejudice against other races, or just limited to, perhaps, Senator Obama and his candidacy?
May 13, 2008
9:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Here's a better solution....
1. Cancel the fatcat convention in Denver (no other city even bid for it... which was a sign to anyone with an IQ above 12)
2. Reconvene the Democrat convention in Antartica
3. Ship Hickenblunder, Ritter (aka Ag Trespass Man), and the whole Democrat fatcat gang to Antartica on permanent exile
4. Ship that bearded fat man Al Gore (or any other bearded fat men.... Michael Moore, Rosie ODonnell, etc) along for entertaining stories about how the 20 below zero temperatures are proof of global schwarming.
5. Colorado citizens can then enjoy a relaxing, Democrat crime free week instead of being kicked out of their own homes by some drunken Democrat party fatcats and their stoned supporters.
May 13, 2008
9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wechasa writes:
JSeifert,
In a little booklet in front of me, which is a copy of the Constitution of the United States, it reads as follows:
"Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE . . . ."
I happen to support this position, as an American.
Rather obviously, you do not. You would, first, abridge the freedom of speech - including such rhetoric as you might deem "inflamatory", BEFORE there be any actual violence, or physical action, resulting. You would do this on the strength of the idea that, somehow, because you don't like what is being said, others should not have the right to say it.
Then, secondly, you would cut off the right to assemble, threatening those who would assemble with bloody violence for daring to want to exercise their Constitutional rights. And again, you have no actual grounds for this action, except your own inability to understand the meaning of FREEDOM.
We are a Nation of LAW. And as such, the moment of ACTION - when that ACTION actually breaks the Law - is well covered by Statute; and the public is well protected.
The riots of '68 were STARTED BY THE CHICAGO POLICE. Go get a clip of the TV news. The protesters DID NOT RIOT. The Chicago goon squads waded into a peaceful march, and started a bloody, brutal repression of RIGHTS. (Which included many attacks on the TV journalists recording the event, and showing the public just what Chicago goon squads were.)
If you WANT riots, and blood in the streets - as it seems you do - I am certain you will do what you can to effect your desires. But, that will be YOUR responsibility.
And, your earlier posting certainly indicates your desires.
May 13, 2008
9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Wechasa,
The Reichstag fire and Kristalnacht - the pogrom against Zionists - were the AFTERMATH of a political culture of street violence which the German government was unable to contain.
(Nope, I'm not Jewish. I'm a lapsed Mormon of impeccably Aryan German and Scots Irish ancestry. But, I do know that the Jews have historically been the canaries in the coal mine of civil liberties. The word "zionist" in this letter means something, and it's not pretty.)
Let's be clear about this.
The Democratic Party, love it or hate it, is an authentically democratic party with proud and honorable traditions. This upcoming convention in Denver is the culmination of caucuses and primaries around the country according to longstanding procedures. The insurgents spoken for by Bruce Baker strive to impose their will upon the delegates of the convention. (He thought that the Jewish influence on the party is great enough to merit mention.) The threat by the insurgents is to create chaos for the delegates and for the citizens of Denver, completely innocent in this dispute, if the Denver Police don't accede to the insurgents demands for complete access to all convention and city facilities, despite any inconvenience or expense to the residents of the city.
Many of these recreate68 people are the same ones who attempt year after year to prevent Columbus Day parades. You can believe what you want about the morality of Christopher Columbus, but an objective observer cannot possibly deny the demonstrators are trying to deny the free speech of the Knights of Columbus and others.
Do you for a minute believe that, given the power, Bruce Baker would respect the free speech of those that disagree with him?
You've got the wrong metaphor for this situation, my friend.
There is no shortage of venues for Mr. Baker to express his opinion, including right here at the Rocky. But, to threaten chaos in the streets of Denver is something serious.
If this were some right wing character, I would have exactly the same position. Political violence and threat of political violence is always the last resort, not a romantic game to play.
May 13, 2008
9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Wechasa,
The right to peaceably assemble? I stand right by your side on that one, brother. Jeez, I kinda thought that was what the Democratic delegates were attempting to do.
May 13, 2008
10:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Reason writes:
We readers of the RMN forums are so lucky to have our own resident quack to apply his immense psychic,er um, psychological abilities to posts and recognize the hidden truths, motives and desires that are not written. Where would we be without without this quite certainly amazing and successful "doctor" to read through what someone writes and realize which words they really wanted put in their mouths when their fingers started moving? What is with the name change, Original Gansta, did you get tired of having your posts ignored by anyone who realizes you typically write a lot of assertions(often contradicting themselves within the same post in which they are written) without much evidence, and had been reduced to back patting with those who share your myopic views on the world? You're the quack, what would you describe as the personality type of someone who creates a new identity rather than cope with the actions and thoughts associated with the old identity?
May 13, 2008
10:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
conniesz writes:
The riots in Chicago were started by the police - that is pretty much an accepted fact at this point in time. Anyone not accepting that is living in an illusion.
Peaceful protesters do NOT have to bare their faces - I am permitted full anonymity when in public and if I choose to walk in Denver during the time the Democrats are meeting, the rules do not change.
I hope there are massive peaceful demonstrations all over the place - in every city park and on the 16th street mall - all places where people are allowed to gather peacefully. You should not need a permit to meet several hundreds of your friends in a public place - and as long as it stays peaceful, I don't expect the Denver police to do much of anything about it.
If some wingnuts attempt to stir up trouble, I sincerely hope the demonstrators learned from the huge anti-war marches of the 70s and provide their own protest marshals to spot and remove the agitators.
I look forward to this state hosting the convention of the majority party of Colorado - look around you. The times have changed - Democrats run the state of Colorado now. All you whiners on the right can either get used to it or continue to blow hot air - your reign of terror is over.
May 13, 2008
10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
airbornebigfoot writes:
what if they had a protest, and nobody came?
because most of the protestors wont be able to attend, Gasoline will be ten bucks a gallon.
I would enjoy seeing rioting in the streets, and would almost pay to see denvers finest dispensing stick therapy on national television. talk about your free publicity!!
May 13, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
So the Democratic party has too many supporters of big oil, globalism and Zionism? I guess the writer wants the USA to abdicate all of its strategic interests in the Middle East then.
I'm kind of feeling a little empathy for you Dems here. We conservatives have our ugly extreme, but I hadn't seen this kind of thinking too much before, and apparently the letter writer embraces the Democratic Party as his own. Good luck with his ilk.
May 13, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigRedMenace writes:
Re-Create '68? Alright...bring back Nixon.
May 13, 2008
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
Good post conniesz.
"The riots in Chicago were started by the police - that is pretty much an accepted fact at this point in time. Anyone not accepting that is living in an illusion."
Your dealing with people who have been in a constant state of illusion since 2000. Don't expect that to change.
"If some wingnuts attempt to stir up trouble, I sincerely hope the demonstrators learned from the huge anti-war marches of the 70s and provide their own protest marshals to spot and remove the agitators."
This is what law enforcement needs to watch closely for, even more closely than the protesters. With their great uniter Rush Limbaugh predicting riots, if nothing happens, there a sure to be Limbaugh followers out there trying to make it happen.
May 13, 2008
11:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
I don't know which is more ridiculous: the cons gloating about the possibility of rioting at the DNC, or the libs girding themselves against the conservative conspiracy to incite the riots.
May 13, 2008
11:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE . . . . Note: It says PEACEABLE No where does it say we have to put up whith what they want to do. If they are PEACEABLE go for it! If not then what they get is what they get. The Police are there to UPHOLD the PEACE not seat there and let them run amok.You Leftist Flap the constitution in our faces but when it work against you you resort to its a living document and it does not really mean that. Well buddy what it says is what it says. So I suggest you inform your fellow Hippies PEACEFUL Protest anything else and expect the laws to be enforced.
May 13, 2008
11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
bropous, but they do call names when confronted with reality, don't they?
I stick by my post. Your ilk is hoping for a riot and your leader is predicting it. We'll just have to wait and see whose right.
This ones funny;
"People who listen to Rush Limbaugh do NOT riot."
Evidently, your selective memory doesn't recall the Republicans trying to break into the voting offices in Florida during the 2000 elections.
May 13, 2008
12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
And they also act ignorant win confronted with reality, right Gene?
May 13, 2008
12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
For all you conservatives/republicans who wish for riots. Insurance on companies damaged durring civil riots is nul and void. Your rich republican business owners will not be repaid for the damages to their property.
So, if things go bad and you are cheering at home, watching it all on tv, feel a moment of sorrow for the poor merchants who will lose out.
The interesting aspect of this is that Rush and his ilk (love that word) have been outed in their desire to see violence, no matter whom it hurts.
May 13, 2008
12:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Pajama, bropous,
"sativa" is more botanical.
May 13, 2008
12:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
bropous:
"I want assurances that anyone who attempts to loot or pillage is shot on the spot."
The Islamic world has the draconian style of law-enforcement you desire.
So why are you enabling the terrorists by adopting their rhetoric?
May 13, 2008
1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
It looks like we're in serious danger of somebody calling somebody else "Mr. Poopypants." Maybe we should all take a breath, myself included, and put this into context.
I've gone back and grabbed some links to the Rocky's coverage of the controversies between DPD and Recreate 68 over protest venues:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
It's incomplete, I know. This is what the Rocky's query tool gave me.
May 13, 2008
1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Pajama,
I always liked the hippies in their naivete, but I never had the time to be one. I was always too busy with my studies and work. Maybe I can be one when I retire. I still wouldn't smoke dope, I'm allergic to smoke of all kinds. I kind of like the sound of the word sativa however.
May 13, 2008
1:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
I think that we can all agree that the city has a tough job trying to accomodate so many different interests.
The Secret Service has NOT produced their security plan, further complicating everything.
I'm sure that in the back of all of the grownups is the fear that the bad guys could take advantage of the confusion and stage an attack.
There are also the comfort and security of the residents of the city to consider. One of the big conflicts is that Recreate 68 wants to use civic center park, but the Taste of Colorado needs that time to set up.
Recreate 68 has been increasingly asserting itself as the lead organization of the protests, claiming a right to set schedules. (A claim that is likely to produce some disruption from the Anarchists ... )
In this letter today, Bruce Baker SEEMS to speaking as a spokesman for Recreate 68 demanding that the DPD allow Recreate 68 to set routes and keep order along protest routes, and that DPD only intervene when requested by Recreate 68 protest organizers.
My problem is that Mr. Baker, kind of sounding like he is affiliated with Recreate 68 uses the term Zionism as a rationale for the protests. He hints rather broadly at "chaos" if the police do not accede to the group's demands.
So, is he or isn't he?
May 13, 2008
2:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
bropous,
"Glad they stood up to help stop the THEFT of the 2000 election by the Algore Dhimmis,
I knew it. You guy's all ways have an excuse.
"But not ONCE have I EVER advocated a riot, leftbackside. Wrong guy. I advocate exactly the opposite.
Yeah right, that's why your in here salivating about it everyday.
You are definitely a Rush Limbaugh junkie. Of course your name calling gives that away.
May 13, 2008
2:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
I think that bropous is over-reacting a bit. We can't lock them up, that WOULD be violating their constitutional rights.
I'm shocked at the under-reaction of the Democrats on this forum. I've seen bickering about Rush Limbaugh and whether Republicans riot, but nothing about Baker's threats or rhetoric. This is YOUR convention and YOUR city. Your silence can only be interpreted as tacit approval.
So, when they have their triumphant Anti Zionism torchlight parade down the 16th mall televised around the world you won't have any one else to blame. (They are planning a different theme for each day. If Mr. Baker speaks for Recreate 68, the emphasis he places on Zionist insiders crushing the people suggests that will be prominent theme.)
May 13, 2008
2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
peterpi writes:
Chicago's difficulties were caused by a mayor who wanted "order" at all costs, and a police force that rioted. That's fact established by a neutral commission. Part of the problem now is an imperious and imperial-acting SS (Secret Service) that refuses to co-operate with the City of Denver so that the city can plan march routes and protest areas.
Sasquatch and his kind who want to sit in their suburban isolation and splendor and dream of watching with Rush Limbaugh the city burn, baby, burn on their 54" HDTV ought to be ashamed of themselves.
If a conservative demonstration was set upon by cops, they'd be screaming bloody murder. But, gee, it's perfectly OK in their book for the Denver Police to stomp on, tear gas, taze, beat the crap out of liberal protesters. As long as the blood is cleaned up and the tear gas fumes have dissipated by the time they enjoy their corn and hot dog at the Taste of Colorado.
All people have the right to peaceably assemble, period.
May 13, 2008
2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Will the Denver rioters be Americcans? Or will Democrat supporting Palestinians and other non-Americans come to Denver to join in too?
Palestinians seem intent on rigging the election for Obama through the use of illegally campaigning for him. As this news report proves. What is to stop the same nuts from coming here to join in the Democrat riots?
As this proves, Obama can always run for President of HAMAS, after his defeat in November.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.co...
May 13, 2008
2:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
"All people have the right to peaceably assemble, period."
Unless the Democrat officials demand that you be contained in a limited space, several miles away from where anyone can hear or see you.
And of course, you can only do it with a "permit" from the same Democrat officials.
And don't forget, that they will only allow a small percentage of the people to obtain that permit.
So you would be correct... if you believe the US Constitution and Bill of Rights contains microscopically small print that states... "All rights are subject to the whims of Democrat party officials and their stormtroopers".
May 13, 2008
3:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Konyok,
I just tuned in and saw your comment. This subject has come up 7 or 8 times in recent months, and as an independent and citizen of Denver, I have weighed in heavily on several occasions. The Rhetoric has dropped off somewhat since the early forums and some of the posters who seemed to relish the idea of rioting in the streets at the expense of the Democrats seem to have dropped out of the conversation.
We can't tolerate violence, but we may not be able to totally avoid it either. Every society has its anarchists and I fear we aren't above it ourselves! I believe that the city can hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Personally I think(hope?) that this is an exaggerated threat and just as this forum's level of emotion seems to be fading, that Recreate 68 will prove to be pretty mild after being discussed to death.
May 13, 2008
3:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Oh_Wise_One writes:
"don't taze me bro!" hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
May 13, 2008
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Peterpi,
It's like the classic libertarian saying, your rights end at the tip of my nose.
How much should the people of Denver be expected to accomodate the protesters? The city will already be full of delegates and the media. With a contingent of protesters determined to sleep in the park and then stop traffic, it's more than just the Taste of Denver.
Where does their fist end and our nose begin?
Whether the Chicago riot was caused by the cops or the protesters is an academic question. You can blame it on the cops and then file it away. The problem is that we're talking about Denver, 2008. Greenleaf may be right, it might just turn out to be a big dud. (Remember Y2K?)
But, this guy is threatening "chaos" if things don't go down his way. Is that acceptable to you?
May 13, 2008
3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fresh writes:
All of you are idiots of the highest order!
I feel sorry for the lot of you!!
May 13, 2008
3:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Gosh, Fresh.
Here I was thinking I was just a third or fourth class idiot.
May 13, 2008
3:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
greenleaf writes:
Konyok,
Forget what I just said about the rhetoric cooling off.
SQUATCH just waded in, a little later than he has in the past.
May 13, 2008
3:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
PajamaPulitzer asked:
"Charles_B: What would you do with looters?"
Arrest them--not shoot them.
May 13, 2008
4:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Ironic Goose-stepping idiocy of the day:
"A few quick summary executions will restore law and order."
Satire is dead..thanks thanks to Limbaughtomy victims like STALINSQUATCH.
May 13, 2008
4:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
TC writes:
What purpose will demonstrating at the DNC serve? These protesters are idiots. If there are protests, and violence it will serve only to further marginalize and already marginal opposition party.
Why not demonstrate at the RNC if you don't like conservative policy?
May 13, 2008
6:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
GetReal writes:
Democrats eating their own this fall.
Whether it's the Clintons usurping the nomination away from Barry or not, there will be riots.
These people don't need a reason, and their pre-warnings of violence may be carefully and cleverly worded but in no way abstain them from guilt.
It's going to be the professional anarchist/activists that will join Recreate 68 and manufacture a provocation with police to incite an over-reaction and ensuing riot they hope will then be blamed on the authorities.
Instant card blanche riot.
All in living color for the cameras.
That is what they are hoping for and will initiate.
They have stated as much.
People just don't realize the seriousness of these freaks who will descend on Denver, and in larger numbers than predicted.
The most seasoned of these protesters have graduated from rock throwing and favor hurling lethal projectiles like frozen bottles of water, cans of pop, D-Cell batteries and even human feces "bombs".
They also enjoy the combination of a Wrist Rocket sling shot and a bag of marbles.
I have posted this link a few times and if you haven't seen it you should-
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/
What a lovely party.
I understand not all protesters are violent but all it takes is a couple dozen of these sickos strategically placed around town to create mayhem.
For the Dems, the chickens will indeed come home to roost.
I wish the cops and innocent bystanders well.
May 13, 2008
6:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
GetReal writes:
Warning- That link in my last post is graphic and not work safe.
May 13, 2008
8:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
This is from the section of "Recreate68" handbook on dealing with police.
"When dealing with police, park rangers, health officers, or other law enforcement (collectively referred to as police)keep your hands is view and don't make sudden movements. Avoid walking behind police. Never touch the police or their equipment (vehicle, flashlights, animals, etc.).
Yep, these are some bad dudes.
The Rush Limbaugh crowd has blown this out of proportion as usual.
First of all, these are people who are upset with the Democratic Party. The reason conservatives are in a panic over this is that they are used to the "fall in line" attitudes that are common place with the Republican party.
TC - what the neo-conservatives in here are doing, what they always do in forums like these, is to give the Democrats a bad name. It's propaganda at it's best and nobody is better at than the Republican party. It's how they win election, slandering and defaming the Democratic candidate.
Your absolutely right when you ask, "What purpose will demonstrating at the DNC serve?" It doesn't. It's important to know that these are people who are upset with the Democratic party. They are not representative of the Democratic party or their goals. What the "propagandaist" are trying to do is to meld them with the Democrats. Don't let that tactic work.
And by the way, groups like the "swiftboaters" are forming on the Republican party. They are far more dangerous than these guys ever will be.
May 13, 2008
8:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
Why not demonstrate at the RNC if you don't like conservative policy?
Or in other words, why will leftists riot at a left-wing convention?
Three reasons:
First, the left has no sense of irony;
Second, the left does not understand the proper role of self-interest in social institutions; and
Third, the left tends to rosey hopes of "prgoress" including utopian fantasies about new types of human societies.
That's why they'll come to Denver and not to the twin cities.
May 13, 2008
8:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
Why not demonstrate at the RNC if you don't like conservative policy?
Or in other words, why will leftists riot at a left-wing convention?
Three reasons:
First, the left has no sense of irony;
Second, the left does not understand the proper role of self-interest in social institutions; and
Third, the left tends to rosey hopes of "prgoress" including utopian fantasies about new types of human societies.
That's why they'll come to Denver and not to the twin cities.
May 13, 2008
10:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
"Why not demonstrate at the RNC if you don't like conservative policy?
Or in other words, why will leftists riot at a left-wing convention?"
See yankee your predictably missing the point. The protester dislike the Democratic policies. There the same people that voted for Nader in 2000. Get it.
May 14, 2008
6:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
I see. So Recreate 68 is actually a hot bed of Naderites. That is an - interesting - analysis. And what, leftside, is the policy fault line between Glenn Spagnuolo/Ralph Nader andthe Democrats that would cause rioting in the streets of Denver? What is it that Hillary and Obama have got so wrong?
Your long on generalities and short on specifics as is you're habit.
May 14, 2008
6:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
GetReal said:
"I have posted this link a few times and if you haven't seen it you should-
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/
What a lovely party."
If GetReal were a Democrat:
"I have posted this link a few times and if you haven't seen it you should-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jmLVR...
What a lovely party.
Whadda clown.
May 14, 2008
6:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
It's understandable that Yankee doesn't understand why some Democrats will protest their own party since there is no dissension allowed within the ranks of the brain-dead, lock-step Republican party he so accurately represents.
May 14, 2008
7:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
Charles B
OK - So the Democrats are the party of policy differences and Repbulicans are in lock step on the issues - got it. Then, I'll ask you the same question I asked leftside.
What are the policies of Barak and Hillary that are first at odds and second bringing out the protestors?
May 14, 2008
7:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
I do understand why the Democrats "protest thier own party." In fact, I gave three reasons at 8.47pm. It's getting the Democrat basse to understand what's going on that is the challenge.
May 14, 2008
7:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
I don't know Yankee. I guess it would be the same "policy fault line" as between McCain and Barr.
"...Democrats that would cause rioting in the streets of Denver?"
Those are your words and the words from "Limbaughite's" that probably will turn out to be false.
"What is it that Hillary and Obama have got so wrong?"
What is it that McCain has done so wrong that Barr would want to enter the race as an Independent?
Here's some breaking news for you and others who don't get out of the house much. Some Democrats don't like Obama or Hillary, some Republicans don't like McCain. Of that group some dislike them so much that they will protest against them. Just so you know.
May 14, 2008
8:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
leftside,
You don't know? Well, earlier you patiently explained
See yankee your predictably missing the point. The protester dislike the Democratic policies. There the same people that voted for Nader in 2000. Get it.
Now you tell me that you don't know what the policy differences are. Then what point am I missing (predictably)? Or couldn't you think of a better slur?
But now you have a new lesson - not every member of a party likes their candidate. That dodges the question of why Recreate 68 is coming here but you certainly are a hot bed of pertinent revelations.
You must not have read the letter at the top of this page so I will paste some of it here for you.
"Unfortunately, half the Democratic Party insiders are supporters of big oil, globalism and Zionism. If these insiders can't deceive people, they will crush people."
That's pretty clear don't you think? Funny you missed it.
But wait, we haven't yet heard from Charles on the question of policy disputes.
May 14, 2008
8:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wechasa writes:
As usual, Yankee is full of unsuported assertions, which he thinks are "facts"; and upon which he relies as if they were part of a new form of "gospel", which he is now "revealing" to the poor, benighted, "unbelievers".
Of course, these "facts" are taken from the equally unsupported assertions made by the letter writer; since, as assertions, they currently serve Yankee's purpose, and fit into his own fantasy. By re-asserting them, Yankee supposedly gives them "verification"; and - again, supposedly - bolsters his own imaginary bloviation, attempting to make it sound as if it were, somehow, a matter of established evidence, truth, and certainty.
Typical "conservative" Republican display. Worth, perhaps, a bronze medal from the Nixonite wing of the party's propaganda machine.
May 14, 2008
8:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
It's hard to compete with a disingenuous liar who twists post to support his lies but I'll try.
This response: "See yankee your predictably missing the point. The protester dislike the Democratic policies. There the same people that voted for Nader in 2000. Get it." was in response to this question you asked at 8:47
"Why not demonstrate at the RNC if you don't like conservative policy?"
You asked the question and I answered it.
"not every member of a party likes their candidate" Was in response to this question:
"What is it that Hillary and Obama have got so wrong?"
Once again you asked a question and I answered. What are you embarrassed that the answer's were so simple. If so, then stop asking stupid questions.
May 14, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Yankee:
I *don't care* what disputes any protesters may have with the Democratic party or what you think will or won't happen and why.
May 14, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Charles_B, Leftside,
The Democratic party is well defined on its right flank. Joe Lieberman and others have found themselves on the wrong side of that bright line. The party's boundaries on the left are not so clearly drawn. Most of the time, the party's candidates police themselves, knowing that if they get too "liberal" they will lose in general elections. But, activists in the party, like yourselves, I presume, don't see the left as a threat, but rather as cantankerous allies who usually come through in the end to fight the challenge from the right.
This is not the case in the Republican party. The Oklahoma City bombing was the great game changer. Sympathy for the militia movement and the ultra right wing evaporated in a millisecond. The likes of Eric Rudolph or David Duke are shunned and rejected by the Republican party, which does indeed have a hard boundary to its right, beyond which no respectable party member may stray. The porous border for Republicans is leftward, as evidenced by discomfort with McCain. There isn't much wiggle room in that direction because, well, that's where the Democrats are.
Whether Recreate 68 represents dissidents from the party or outsiders trying to influence the party, the reaction of the party and its members to Recreate 68 will become a key ingredient in how the party is identified in the future. You have to deal with the possibility that this could become your Oklahoma City moment. That's not Rush Limbaugh hysteria, that is the kind of contingency planning that a political party with pretensions of governance has to think about in a real world.
The very name of the organization is a provocation. It is a reminder of a trauma that the Democratic party took years to recover from. If things go badly and you have chosen to sympathize with Recreate 68 instead of the population at large of Denver, the organizers of Recreate 68 will have achieved what they seem to want and you will see the historic change of realignment this election cycle slip through your fingers. Can you imagine Candidate Obama giving his acceptance speech on the 40th anniversay of MLK's "I have a dream" speech, and the world's media focusing on the mayhem outside of the Pepsi Center? You can't blame that on Rush Limbaugh or SASQUATCH.
May 14, 2008
9:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
Good post Konyok but let me make a couple of correction.
"But, activists in the party, like yourselves, I presume, don't see the left as a threat, but rather as cantankerous allies who usually "come through in the end to fight the challenge from the right."
I'm neither an activist nor in support of Recreate68. I see them as the same fools that cost the democrats the election in 2000. They didn't "come through in the end" then and I don't expect them to come through in this election. What I dislike from the right is the same exaggeration that we have grown used to fighting in here and trying to meld this group as typical Democrats. I don't believe they will riot and I do believe that the right is hoping and in fact egging this thing on. Which makes it a much different scenario than the McVay. The left wasn't egging this guy on by any stretch.
"This is not the case in the Republican party. The Oklahoma City bombing was the great game changer. Sympathy for the militia movement and the ultra right wing evaporated in a millisecond. The likes of Eric Rudolph or David Duke are shunned and rejected by the Republican party, which does indeed have a hard boundary to its right, beyond which no respectable party member may stray."
I don't agree with this paragraph at all. The right is far from squeeky clean in supporting their fools as well. Look at the criticism of Clinton and Waco just as an example. Wasn't David Duke elected into office at one time? They've got their own baggage but refuse to admit it as well.
May 14, 2008
9:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
bropous,
"Enter Reinstigate 68. Their riots will remind the conservative base that the Left cannot be trusted with governance in a time of war, and the freak show that will be their week-long temper tantrum against mommy and daddy will be a clarion call to those who are planning to sit this one out."
Since your predicting this riot, probably stronger than anyone else, what are you going to do if they don't riot?
Konyok, I would advise you to go to their site as well. I did yesterday and posted at 8:39PM the first paragraph telling the protester's how to deal with law enforcement, peacefully. Admittedly, I didn't go through the pages line for line but basically the website was informational, maps, locations of events, times etc. I didn't see anything there about inciting roits. I think it's all being blown out of proportion to generate the conservatives to get out and vote. Typical.
May 14, 2008
10:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wechasa writes:
Konyok,
In addition to "leftside", I have to disagree with your evaluation of the Republican "hard boundary". If such exists, why then is there such a vigorous defense of torture - to call it what it is - when dealing with SUSPECTED "terrorists"? And, why is there such stress on the need to report SUSPICIOUS behavior, especially of those who have a non-"christian" religion? And, why the emphasis on preventing - or, as one writer expresses it, "massive police and National Guard presence to keep . . . coralled" - assembly, and free speech, on the SUSPICION of something happening - something that is, actually, being egged on to happen by those who most loudly hold themselves to be "patriotic/patriots"?
Your "hard boundary" does not actually exist. The ideas of repression, regression, and abandonment of Constitutional Rights - even to the point of torture - have seeped through, to the point at which they are now a take for granted part of "conservative" Republican response to almost anything that might be seen as threatening to the idea of Republican rule, or critical of "conservative" Republican programs - including continued war anywhere in the world the Republicans want war. Your reactionaries managed to not only make their point; their policies now lie embedded in the Party structure, and are a substantial part of Party platform.
Or do you simply refuse to acknowledge the far right-wingnut religious "core" Republicans, and their attempts to shove their superstitious fantasies down every one else's throat as Laws. Even McSame/Bush 2.0 is seeking their support; and the Republican pundits and high gurus are working as hard as possible to keep this group, and its voters, happy.
May 14, 2008
10:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Leftside,
Waco eclipses Bush's worst authoritarian wetdream. Clinton got off easy. (The allegations of sexual child abuse were spun into a nice comforting justification.) Waco then led to Oklahoma City.
I refer you to bropous' last posting - that is a sincere Republican reaction. They police that boundary with an almost terror stricken dread.
Recreate 68's website is exactly what all organizational websites are - an advertisement that attempts to shape their public image. If Mr. Baker represents the organization, then his public threats trump the website.
But, the thing that will really vex you guys in the future is the increasing desensitization to the use of words like Zionism. We all understand that code and it will be a tar baby that you will struggle to get off of yourself to no avail.
May 14, 2008
10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Wechasa,
How is torture a specifically "right wing" phenomenon?
I'm afraid that "repression, regression and abandonment of Constitutional Rights" is a word string without any content.
I don't know about shoving fantasies down throats, either. That is great, if trite rhetoric, but has nothing to do with the discussion here.
When you finish with the same McSame mind candy, well, I have to discount what you have to say.
There is a very serious issue and you can't just just shut your eyes and say "I'm not listening."
May 14, 2008
10:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Torture? Torture is...
Listening to Al Gore talk about his "lockbox"
Watching Sean Penn do his "Spagnoli" routine about how his Toyota Prius saves the environment (when he's not flying around in his private jet)
Listening to Obama make excuses for his corrupt bosses and "spiritual advisors"
Watching Michael Moore expand faster than the Michelin Man on helium steroids
Seeing Rosie O'Donnell adopt more children to serve as pets
Listening to Alec "I'll Move to France If Bush Wins" Baldwin go on ANOTHER drunken screaming voicemail to his 12 year old daughter
Listening to Nancy Pelosi whine about how her 100 seat taxpayer funded Air Force jet is not big enough for her collection of poodles and staffmembers
Listening to Obama's spiritual advisor Jeremiah Wright call Americans the cause of 9/11
Seeing Obama defend the phone calls that the PLO are making for him to try to influence American citizens when they vote
Listening to Hickenblunder make excuses for why he's now going to charge taxpayers to cover the funding gaps that the Democrats need for their Drunkfest '08 convention in Denver.
Watching the dazed and confused look on Obama supporters when they are asked to explain why Obama is losing more and more primaries.
May 14, 2008
10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Konyok:
I also need to chime in and re-emphasize what O.G. was getting at.
There is no "hard border" that has kept fringe elements out of the modern Republican party. Many of those elements have simply been incorporated *into* the party. They're the uncle in the upstairs bedroom that nobody likes to talk about. Radicalism defines the modern GOP. The disastrous PNAC inspired foreign policy, fiscal recklessness, the suppression of science, unprecedented secrecy, rule by crony, hatred of government, warrantless spying, torture--all of these are departures from the themes of accountability and individual liberty that were once purported to be the conservative ideal.
The differences between Democrats are more visible merely by virtue of their existence. There is very little overtly expressed dissension within the ranks of the GOP.
I'm not a registered Democrat and my party activism will be restricted to supporting Obama. I don't want another reactionary judge like Alito or Roberts on the Supreme Court.
May 14, 2008
10:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Torture? Torture is...
Reading Little Ricky's internet droppings.
May 14, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
Konyok,
"Waco eclipses Bush's worst authoritarian wetdream. Clinton got off easy. (The allegations of sexual child abuse were spun into a nice comforting justification.) Waco then led to Oklahoma City."
That's certainly how the Republicans spin it.
"Recreate 68's website is exactly what all organizational websites are - an advertisement that attempts to shape their public image. If Mr. Baker represents the organization, then his public threats trump the website."
That's certainly how the Republicans spin it and all Limbaugh needs to get these wingnuts in an uproar. More importantly, he knows it. Their just that easy.
May 14, 2008
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Democrats are on the verge of becoming the ruling party, it is their burden to make the case that they are up to the job. The reflexes of an opposition party do not serve a ruling party.
Leftside: It is easy to say that being concerned about the deaths of Americans at the hand of their government is "spin." That is facile and you ought to know better. It is a part of our history and it had its consequences. (What you seem to be saying is that waterboarding suspected terrorists is evil, but killing nonconformist Americans is OK if the right party is power.)
Charles_B: Again, you are stringing words together. Nothing in your list of "crazy uncles" in the attic is an objective, generic Republican attribute. Everything that you cited is characteristic of an administration that is struggling with a war time situation.
But, all of this is diversion.
The Democratic National Convention is being held in a one-party Democratic city. Protesters citing "Zionism" as one of their grievances are threatening "chaos" if they are not allowed to set the rules for protest. This is YOUR tar baby and your reluctance to take a stand against it does not speak well of your party's readiness to govern.
May 14, 2008
11:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
Konyok, they were stockpiling weapons, the FBI had a warrant to search the premises, they camped out in front of their compound for 50+ days in hopes of avoiding confrontation and finally when they determined to go in the BD's fired on them. You don't fire on the FBI when their delivering a warrant.
Had this same thing happened during this administration the Republicans would have made Bush out a hero. Granted the Democrats "may" have tried to spin it the other way but the Republicans have a lot more power in that regard. "Liberal Media" and all....
May 14, 2008
11:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
No, Leftside. Had this happened under a Republican it would have become a firestorm. The true spin power was shown by the Democrats in making it "all about sex." It was bad JuJu all around.
I don't mean to beat Democrats over the head with this, I just want to remind you that rhetoric is not reality.
The true believers of both the right and the left forget the rule of thirds - 1/3 of the people are generally with you, 1/3 are generally against you and the floppy middle needs to be convinced and will change allegiances at the drop of a hat.
The floppy middle is sick of Bush, but you're mistaken if you think that you've closed the deal. Even more mistaken if you think that the Republicans have stinky feet argument is going to take you all of the way. A bad scene in Denver might completely reverse things this year.
Believe me, I'm not vested in a Democratic victory. I prefer McCain over Obama. But, I do care very much about my city, and I do care that a possible Democratic administration be ready to take the reins.
All of the reflexive knee jerk reasoning that I am hearing here make me more pessimistic than ever.
May 14, 2008
11:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
The best way to avoid a bad scene in Denver is for rank and file Democrats and progressives to make it known that troublemakers are NOT welcome. It's that simple.
May 14, 2008
12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
Konyok,
"The floppy middle is sick of Bush, but you're mistaken if you think that you've closed the deal."
2004 taught us that. I'm certainly not counting any chickens.
May 14, 2008
12:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
mjsimmons writes:
Truly, I hope that no RIOTS occur. I as a citizen of Denver and of this the United States of America, would love to see the Democratic National Convention go off with out a hitch. The past issue of what occurred in 1968 in Chicago is in the past. Whether it was caused by the Police and/or the Protestors is now irrelevant and past into history.
What matters now is that those who wish to Protest "PEACEABLY” can do so. This is what Mayor Hickenlooper and the rest of the Denver City Council has tried to set up and do with the lottery of spaces to protest and camp. It is sad to see all this bitterness in a time when a country needs unity. I have listened to Mr. Limbaugh’s show and though he “Dreams of Riots in Denver.” He is not advocating such, Mr. Limbaugh’s views are a matter of record in what he wants done with liberalism. Such a riot (should it occur) would be the end of the liberal Ideals and thought.
Mr. Bakers request of no Police and/or Undercover Officer Agent Provocateurs. I ask this why in all the name of reasoning sanity the police would wish to start up a riot and cause property damage and the possible loss of lives and injuries. Granted at this time the Re-Create 68 crowd is moderating their tone, which tells me that they have meet with officials and some horse trading went on. Trust me when I tell you, we the people of Denver have no wish for riots here in Denver. We are already going to have issues with getting to and from work and home or just trying to shop in Downtown (specifically on the 16th street Mall). As a Security guard I can tell you specifically I do not want a riot.
Respectfully
M. Simmons
May 14, 2008
1:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Leftside,
I'll just whisper it here ...
... right, left and middle, we need each other. To keep ourselves honest and to compensate for our own particular brand of myopia.
We're all Americans and have a common destiny.
(Till the next SASQUATCH eruption anyways ... ;)
May 14, 2008
1:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
The reason that I popped off to start with was the Zionism comment in the letter.
In the western world, every repressive regime across the spectrum from the right to the left (Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Saddam, Pinochet, etc., etc.) has begun or intensified its repression with a campaign against Zionism. It is the best predictor of a police state. Even Idi Amin and Robert Mugabe found Zionism to be a justification for political violence.
When the letter writer unfurls this banner, I get very, very, very nervous. When it passes without comment, I despair.
Mr. Baker is NOT an idealist looking for some way to vent his frustration against the system. He is either a seasoned radical political operative or a wannabe seasoned radical political operative. He is a David Duke trying to insinuate himself into progressivism.
May 14, 2008
1:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Konyok claimed:
"Nothing in your list of "crazy uncles" in the attic is an objective, generic Republican attribute. Everything that you cited is characteristic of an administration that is struggling with a war time situation."
Konyok I'm sure you *wish* that was the case. In reality, the Republican party is utterly defined by the actions of Bush over the last seven years. He could not have done the things he's done without a nodding, lock-step, Republican congress backing his every move, singing his praises and doing jingoist dances in his defense whenever logic and rational thinking illuminated the radical and reckless nature of his ideas.
All you need to do is look at the results of the three house special elections that have taken place over the last several months in solid Bush, longtime Republican districts. The Democratic candidates are 3-0 and it hasn't even been very close.
Bush is an anchor and the Republican party will feel the tug in November.
Regarding the protests, I have never voiced support for violence, and I feel no need to renounce hypothetical circumstances.
I support peaceful assembly and non-violent civil disobedience. If someone breaks the law, write a ticket or put them in jail. I *do not* support granting protesters anything they wish for beyond their right of assembly and freedom of speech.
May 14, 2008
1:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Charles_B,
You miss the point altogether. Being able to objectively critique your opposition is NOT endorsement or approval. You weaken your case by using loaded language. ".. jingoistic dances .." is a fine phrase, but meaningless in this conversation.
You have heard people in this forum spout off "nuke the muslims" rhetoric. Bush and the Republican party consistently denounce that kind of language. That is an example of policing the boundary to the right, keeping out the "crazy uncles."
YOUR disagreement or discomfort with some solipsistic aesthetic concern of your own does not constitute "logical or rational thinking." To invoke logic and reason you actually have to exercise it, not repeat yourself ad infinitum with ever more clever language. Logic and reason require processing what's in front of you, not wishing it away and changing the subject.
What the results of special elections have to do with the vulnerabilities the two parties have to their respective flanks is a mystery to me. Was that the talking point on Daily Kos today?
When you say that you feel no need to renounce hypothetical circumstances you are saying something that I can understand. You're right, at this point all we have are the public statements. I interpret Baker's letter as a threat. You can choose to ignore it.
May 14, 2008
2:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yankee writes:
leftside,
"Once again you asked a question and I answered. What are you embarrassed that the answer's were so simple. If so, then stop asking stupid questions."
The stupid question was:
Posted by Yankee on May 14, 2008 at 6:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And what, leftside, is the policy fault line between Glenn Spagnuolo/Ralph Nader and the Democrats that would cause rioting in the streets of Denver?
And your response:
Posted by leftside on May 14, 2008 at 7:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know Yankee. I guess it would be the same "policy fault line" as between McCain and Barr.
Didn't embarass me at all. At least you told me you don't know what this issues are. Charles B just responded:
Posted by Charles_B on May 14, 2008 at 9:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yankee:
I *don't care* what disputes any protesters may have with the Democratic party or what you think will or won't happen and why.
He can't even acknowldge his ignorance and prefers to pretend he doesn't care.
The first of the three reasons for Recreate 68 coming here was:
First, the left has no sense of irony;
You and Charles B demonstrate that admirably. You both pose as men interested in the issues when in fact you don't take the trouble to familiarize yourself with the questions.
The demonstrators are coming here and if they riot it will because that is the only way they can draw attention to themselves in a free society.
Again, here is what Baker wwote:
"Unfortunately, half the Democratic Party insiders are supporters of big oil, globalism and Zionism. If these insiders can't deceive people, they will crush people."
No one is going to pay attention to these crackpot ideas unless you can call attention to yourself by throwing bricks through windows, block traffic or otherwise disrupt civil harmony.
The reason they are coming to the DNC as opposed to the RNC is that they sense kindred spirits in the Democrat party.
May 14, 2008
3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
leftside writes:
No Yankee, that was a follow up question by you. The original question by you was this:
"Why not demonstrate at the RNC if you don't like conservative policy?"
But thanks for proving my disingenuous remark.
May 14, 2008
3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Yankee said of the potential protests:
"No one is going to pay attention to these crackpot ideas unless you can call attention to yourself by throwing bricks through windows, block traffic or otherwise disrupt civil harmony."
Whereas the "crock-pot ideas" on the right *have been incorporated into the Republican Party*.
That's the difference. The crackpots reside *outside* the Democratic Party and *inside* the Republican party.
Konyok, does that shed light on why the special elections turned out the way they did?
The only people left in the Republican Party are the ones on the fringes. That's why Democrats have defeated Republicans in these once overwhelmingly Republican districts.
It's a fantasy to think that the reason there is no equivalent protests on the right is because they are self-policing.
Denunciations from the Bush administration of radical language are thrown out to maintain plausible deny-ability. The Republicans are masters of the proxy war and all of their spokesmen, from Limbaugh to Kristol are willing bag-men.
So dismiss my alliterative phraseology to your hearts content, but "jingoist dances" hits the nail on the head.
May 14, 2008
3:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Bruce writes:
Thanks to those who addressed the content of my letter. As I Implied, the DPD owes a DUTY to protestors to insure they have a full opportunity to exercise their rights. DPD has a long track of helping groups do this. DPD blocked intersections and gave right of way when motorcycle riders made a run after the Bailey High School murder. DPD assists Martin Luther King Day “Marade” marchers every year. DPD assisted Columbus Day organizers conduct their march, in spite of counter demonstrations interrupting the march.
Protestors have a constitution right to be located where their presence can be seen and heard by those people they are trying to address. This interpretation has been upheld by court decisions. This should be a reasonable interpretation to all people. Similar to the Columbus Day march, DPD should insure there is no blocking or stopping of any DNC protest marches.
DPD and the City of Denver should not be the enemies of any protestors! As long as protestors are treated fairly, which up to now they have not been, protestor anger will be directed at the Democrats and their meeting rather than at the City of Denver. The police that blocked, beat and water-hosed the civil rights marchers in the 1960’s were wrong. The city officials that ordered the police to do those things were thugs and bullies. Denver officials should not order wrong actions.
I have found that if I treat people fairly and give them the respect and rights they are entitled to, most people are fair with me.
As for those contested observations in my letter: Congress declared the 1968 riots to be a police riot. Mayor Daly was a Democrat insider and he ordered the attack by police. Congress could have ended the war in Iraq by not funding the war. Bush could not veto a bill that never came to his desk. It would have taken only 39 Democratic Senators to end funding (Sander-I. VT and Hagel-R. NE) would have made the 41 votes in the Senate to filibuster any funding of the war. Dems have 49 members so 10 could have defected to Bush, but the war would have stopped. No one complained about big Oil and Globalists supporting the war, good. As for Zionists, please consult the AIPAC web site and notice how they celebrate the bipartisan support they have. The supporters of Zionist Israel (which include many supposed Christians- Hegge, et al) know that the continuous demonizing of Arabs and Islam gives the supremacists in Israel (Zionists) cover as they continuously commit their crimes against humanity. They want the hell that is the US Occupation of Iraq to fester for years to come, and they are pushing for the US to murder lots of Iranians, too!
May 14, 2008
4:11 p.m.
Suggest removal