Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!

Subject: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:47 PM

The Thread that Would Not Die!!!! Sounds like a Boris Karloff movie........
OLD THREAD HERE

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:48 PM

Here, I'll help the thread get off the ground by posting a few pseudoposts:

---

Am not!

---

Are too!

---

Am not either!

---

Are so too!

---

alex

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:53 PM

And the ever popular "So's yer Old Man!!!"

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: AggieBethie
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:09 PM

Yo momma!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:12 PM

Your momma's a Republican, and your father smelt of union breakers!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Ribbit
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:38 PM

OH Yeah??!!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:41 PM

And furthermore, your whole approach has definite fascist overtones, coupled with a complete lack of respect for logic, social responsibility, common decency, and mutual tolerance.

You, sir, are WRONG, DEAD WRONG, and I look forward to the day when you and your ilk are driven forever from the hallowed halls of both justice and legislation, in this, my beloved country!

Not to mention driven from this thread...

- LH

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:08 PM

lot of taxpayers money to spend to fix a system that "wasn't broken"

I rather understood that it was well and truly fixed last month. I suppose the investment is to make sure it remains fixed for the next time it's needed.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Troll
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:14 PM

Trust Kevin to introduce thread creep.
And you, sir are a poltroon, the son of a poltroon, And, I have it on good authority, you drink CHEAP WHISKEY!

troll

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:24 PM

Aw c'mon guys.....that stuff ain't funny. You need a real comedian in here, someone totally whacked out and off the wall......a real crazed mortar forker!!!!!!

.........so where is MAV boy anyway?

Spaw

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:25 PM

Why you son of a window dresser! I unplug my nose at you you silly git..I wave my private parts at your Auntie!!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Irish sergeant
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:33 PM

You say cheap whiskey like it's a bad thing!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: DougR
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:39 PM

'Peers to me this thread is running out of steam.

DougR

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Troll
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:44 PM

Sir, A gentleman would never serve cheap whiskey if he could afford better. It were preferable to miss a meal than to drink cheap whiskey and it is a choice that any gentleman would instantly make.
Cheap whiskey does have its place but that place is not in a crystal decanter on a gentlemans sideboard.
But I am sure that you knew this already.

troll

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:44 PM

We need MAV to comeback and inject some more of his great wealth of knowledge here. Gets things in perspective....like a pile of horseshit in your grandma's bed.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Uncle Jaque
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:03 AM

MAV is back from DC; had a wonderful albiet cold & wet time. He related how the "protesters" were a distinct minority and did not seem to be getting much sympathy from the crowd - or the local Gendarmarie!

MAV was with a group sponsored by the Washington Times Newspaper, which I understand is an "Alternative" (to the Liberal dominant "mainstream press" that is) publication, considering opening a branch here in Maine. I'm looking forward to it. Might even be an opportunity to branch out into journalizim - whaddaye think?

How about that innauguration speech? Now that was NOT your typical one-size-fits-all middle-of-the-road, don't-rock the-boat (or offend anybody) milktoast and banannas make-em-all-smile political blather we usually hear, was it? Kind of like bagpipe music; yer gonna love it or hate it with a certain level of passion, in most cases. (I don't know too many people who are "iffy" or "take-it-or-leave-it" about bagpipes... or Rush Limbaugh either, for that matter.)

You might hate his gutz, but at least "W" lets us know on no uncertain terms just where he's coming from and what he's about, right up front! I rather admire that kind of conviction and fortitude!

As to my crack about "Emperor" Klinton: those 63 pages or so of Executive orders, edicts, and proclamations (not to mention the pardons of many of his criminal cronies) spewed out of the White House in the last week or so did not go through the Constitutional process of legislative review, were completely devoid of representative oversight or approval, or even Judicial process, for that matter. This is a strategy expected of a monarch, despot, dictator, or EMPEROR... NOT a leader of a free Republic who holds himself in any way accountable to the People... or to God. If any of you enlightened Scholars out there can find credible evidence of any Republican in U.S. history even approaching this precident of Emperial edict, I'd be interested to know of it. Until then, I stand by my assessment sans appology, thank you very much.

Say, you like Ashcroft so much; have they announced who's gonna be Press Secretary yet? You're gonna love "Rush" even better! (he was absent from his radio show without explanation Thursday - meeting with the "Boss"?) Presidential Advisor Charlton Heston; now that has a nice ring to it! Wayne LaPierre might make a good Ambasador to the U.N., dont'cha think?

We note with a certain modicum of delight the belated but no less joyous announcement of the birth of "Revuruund" Jessie Jackson's bouncing baby bastard last week. Such impeccible timing - not unlike the revelation of G.W. Bush's scrape with the law 25 years or so prior, being shouted from the rooftops and from every front page and TV news pundit 3 days before the election. This may not balance the equasion completely... but it's a step in the right direction. By the way, where was the Revruund (I use that term rather loosly, as he is decidedly NOT one of my "Spiritual Leaders" nor do I recognize or respect him as a legitimate Minister of the Gospel - Sort of like "Jimmy & Tammy-Faye" Baker of PTL infamy) during the innauguration? Wasn't he supposed to be leading hoardes of the "disenfranchised" through the streets demanding that "every vote count" (except, of course, for the Military overseas absentee ballotts, or the Cuban - American communities in Miami Dade - who did not forget Elian Gonzalez quite as quickly as they were supposed to, or the thousands of uncounted Military absentee ballotts in California...)??

Where is your hero Algore? Last I heard he was seen driving towards Virginia, looking rather grim and sullen. Where shall we heare from him next? "Ya-all waant friaaaaahs with thayet?" Hold the pickles, Al!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:06 AM

Actually, I think it was YOUR grandma's bed, Spaw...wasn't it?

BTW, you know that state where the license plates say "LIVE FREE OR DIE"???? Is it Vermont?

What I can't figure out is...why haven't they all croaked over there? They place was full of live people the last time I drove through, and I'm quite sure most of them were full time residents...and probably Republicans to boot.

Well, they shouldn't put that stuff on their license plates if they don't mean it.

- LH

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:21 AM

Oh, come now, Jaques...Bill Clinton couldn't possibly be that bad. If he were a Republican you'd love him. The world is probably more subjective than any of us would care to admit most of the time.

Being a Democrat or a Republican means never having to say you're sorry...(about badmouthing the other guys).

2,000 years ago (approximately) people were getting all worked up like this over Marc Marc Antony and Augustus. They got over it, but they managed to kill a lot of people first. I guess we've made some progress after all in these semi-enlightened times.

- LH

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: GUEST,Thom M. at work
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:49 AM

New Hampshire is "Live Free or Die" And speaking of pardons Jacque, let us not forget "Promise me a pardon and I'll make you President Ford".So don't be so quick to grab the high ground. Thom

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 05:31 AM

Well, since my post started with a quote from an earlier post, it wasn't starting no thread drift.

A gentleman would drink cheap whiskey himself so as to save the good whiskey for his guests. So for that matter would a lady.

And doesn't "live free or die" originally refer to defending the right of the citizens of BNew Hampshire to make whiskey? Can we assume that the compassionate conseervaruives are going to roll back restrictive legislation in things like that. Talking of which - how about this? And they make great chocolates and beer as well.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 06:59 AM

The New Hampshire Motto is "Live, Freeze, and Die".
Been there & almost done that.    :-)
Best, Greg

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 07:12 AM

I suggest that "Live Free or Die" would make a better national motto than "In God we Trust". Antecedents of the former notwithstanding, it demands personal accountability while the latter seems to imply that the spirt in the sky'll fix everything and we (as individuals) just gotta sit back and do nothing. Which a lot do well already which explains a lot.

Uncle Jaque, Executive Orders don't require legislative or judicial review. Nor, per the constitution, do presidential pardons, for that matter. Executive Orders are a tool long used by Presidents of all persuasions to speed implementation of some legislation passed by Congress or an interpretation of the law by the Courts. They are not making new law or bypassing anything but the tedious process of implementing regulations in the Federal Register. I think Clinton went overboard but he acted within the constitutional boundaries of his office. Hardly imperial.

Making sure no protestors were allowed to mar the inauguration strikes me as far more Imperial. I suppose I should console myself that at least they weren't rounded up and carted off to a holding camp somewhere. JFK Stadium comes to mind.

Did I miss something in GWB's speech? Sounded like the usual bland, feel-good stuff to me. Full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

McGrath, Good for Belgium. Like the idea or not, at least they've put it on the table and rubbed everyone's face in it. GWB will probably cut off aid, close the embassy and not invite their ambassador to any cookouts. Does make you wonder what the accepted appertif will be at the Belgian Embassy soirees though.

Alex, (From round four) Congress put the censorship thing in but Clinton didn't veto it. Sorry if I wasn't clear. The price of passing the budget maybe?

troll and others

A true gentleman could never conceive (except theoretically) of the existence of cheap whiskey. Let alone discuss it.

Regards John

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 09:01 AM

Well... to bring cheep whiskey and trolls' post into focus, if psooble.... I understand our old pal Chalrlton "the gulf war is a war the Dr. Martin Luthor King Jr. would support" Heston, the man who wants to put a gun in every hand... has a drinking problem. Seems to me, I was always taught by my father, who taught me to fence at the age of four or five, that edged steel goes away when the bottle comes out... seems like a good policey for firearms as well. As to Rush Limpbow (gee, is that Larry's bad spelling or a social comment????) becoming press sec. I think that would be a great idea... it would highlight the genneral idiosy of the present administration. As to the minority of protestors, the majority already spoke, we voted for Gore.
deep breath...
All the best to all
Larry

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: kendall
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 09:16 AM

Ronald Ray gun pardoned more crooks than Clinton. Knocking up some follower is hardly on the same level as drunk driving! Furthermore, most protesters are democrats, we cant afford to go to Washington. And No I did not watch his speech. I cant stand to look at that hatchet faced bastard. I still find it hard to believe that almost half of the electorate voted for him.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 09:23 AM

Well a rich gal she drinks good ole whisky
A poor gal drinks quite the same
My gal she drinks shoe polish
You know she's getting drunk just the same!

-Jim Kweskin and the Jug Band

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: kendall
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 10:29 AM

And that smirk! boy would I love to wipe that off his face!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:06 PM

Skeptic - You want to change the American national motto to "Live Free Or Die"????

Hell, you'd all have to kill yourselves! I've lived in the USA. You guys don't live free. Nobody in modern society lives free anywhere these days, so don't kid yourself.

The last people who truly lived free in North America were the ones who put an end to Custer and his boys at Little Big Horn.

I was born into a society of money-dominated slaves and I'm living in it right now and so are you. "Live Free or Die", indeed! Give me a break. Just because you're not communists doesn't mean you're not enslaved.

- LH

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Troll
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:16 PM

Nope! Can't see Rush as Press Sec. Matt Drudge? NAW. Got it .
Neil Boortz, the Master of Insensitivity!
Gawd! That would be a scream.

troll

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:33 PM

Little Hawk, Nor, come to that, did the Native Americans you talk about. They had a fairly elaborate social structure. (Even the more or less nomadic tribes) And for the nomadic tribes, often with more rigid controls than those found in more complex cultures. Move over to the Iroquois Confederation and you find a culture that was arguably more complex and sophisticated than any in Europe at the time. And had as many constraints on freedom as would any complex and fairly large society.

Society at any level imposes constraints, out of necessity. As humans, we need other people. Initially to raise/protect/feed us until we can do so on our own, then to develop beyond (metaphorically) the grunting stage. There seems to be a biologic need for others as an integral part of development (especially cognitive)and that seems to require some commonality, and so constraints on absolute freedom.

Clearly, modern society is a form of subtle (and not so subtle) slavery. Some of the freedom we trade is done willingly, a lot not. Clearly, the least freedom given up, the better. My point was more to the spirit of the motto than literal interpretation. Especially in contrast to the current motto.

Is freedom willingly given up truly slavery? Absolute freedom seems as dangerous as any absolute. Intuitively anyway.

Regards John

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 02:42 PM

Well said, John. I can't complain about your reasoning on this one. I was keenly aware of the many restrictions on my own freedom from the time I was a Grade 1 student. School really brought the hammer down on what had been a fairly idyllic existence up till then. I found myself being forced to do all kinds of things I instinctively did not want to do by all kinds of people, from teachers to fellow students. What I learned in school was...to be afraid...very afraid...and to feel utterly powerless.

It particulary rankled in my case, because I was a very harmless well-intentioned kid, and frankly did not need to be restricted. I was also quite well inclined toward educating myself, and would probably have been way better off doing home education...or in a Waldorf school or some other alternative, but my parents just went the conventional route. Public school, for me, was a hellish experience, and it made me very skeptical of the value of society's power structures.

I think that the more mature a person is, the more freedom they can be entrusted with. I'm talking about emotional maturity, not the tally of years of age.

There are some people to whom you can give complete freedom, and not have to worry that they will abuse it.

It's important what values people are brought up with, in a moral sense, and in a sense of feeling their own self-worth. Education is also important, provided it's good education. I don't think the present educational system is very good, because its main focus is to teach FACTS to people, rather than imparting the MEANING which lies behind those facts.

People need a sense of meaning. People who have a very strong sense of meaning, and a strong sense of self-esteem, and a strong sense of the value of others...can function well in an environment of absolute freedom, but how many people are strong in all those areas?

So, I essentially agree with your points raised above...we do have to strike a compromise between freedom and social constraints...while striving to raise the general levels of social awareness in people.

I just think that "Live Free Or Die" is a bit extreme sounding...the "or die" part seems to be so strongly suggested. It reminds me of the old conservative catch phrase "better dead than red". Such thinking is just plain silly. After all, the entire Soviet population managed to go on living, functioning, loving their children, cooking supper, and so on...despite being "red", didn't they? Such slogans program people toward a pretty aggressive and paranoid attitude toward life, I think...and they help program people toward violence in defence of something they may not really understand very well in the first place. Such slogans have launched wars.

I once heard a joke based on the "better dead than red" saying...can't remember the whole joke, but the punch line was: Conservatives, of course, would rather be "dead" than almost anything! It's so patriotic to die, after all...

It's an attitude, and it's a worrisome one. It was that kind of attitude that gave German and Japanese soldiers such absolute zeal in World War II...and that made them highly efficient and very dangerous. Fortunately, their gross national products (respectively) were not large enough to sustain the effort.

Small nations fear this kind of patriotic fervor in large nations...with good reason.

- LH

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 03:38 PM

Yes I suppose you could ccall the Washington Times "alternative press" -- it's owned and operated by the Unification Church. And that's about as alternative as it gets.

Alex

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 03:41 PM

Just a quick note, Skeptic:
As a judge in a peacemaker court in an tributary Nation not one of the six Nations, but an Iroquoinaised culture... the constraints of the checks and ballences of Iroquain society is mitgated by the right to be bannished, to take ones share and start a new community, either within the confederacy or not. Much of what is written about Iroquain culture and law has been written by outsiders and does not reflect the reality of Iroquoian life. For example, bannishment was seen as a punnishment. That is as wrong as the applied titles of lords and such that were used to describe Iroquoi subchiefs.
However you are right that among the hundreds of Nations here there were a great variety of cultures, including some that approximated some eliments of capitolism and monarchy.
All the best
Larry

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:04 PM

Little Hawk,

Been there. I was raised in the military and the schools run by the Army for all us 'brats', were much more restrictive than civilian run schools.

Will And Ariel Durant maintained that people pass laws to stop other people from doing bad things. 'Other' being defined as those outside whatever is defined as our community.

If I define my circle as the world, and couple that with a reverence for life (al la Schweitzer), the list of restraints I want to place on myself and "others" starts to get shorter and shorter. And freedom increases for all

Operationalizing that concept is, admittedly, proving more difficult than anticipated.

'Die' is extreme but it's a lot more punchy than saying "Live free or I'll fight you fascist bastards tooth and nail if you try to take it away from me."

If "freedom" is defined as a national value, I'd agree there could be problems. Defining it as a personal issue would seem to limit the dogma.

But posturing aside, I used it to more illustrate the idea of personal responsibility as a positive value. There is a line that each must draw and decisions to make over what to do when the line is crossed. In almost all cases, violence isn't an answer. Still, there can be a very fine line between assertiveness and overt aggressiveness.

Not being a fan of Korsibsky or Hiakaywa (I also thought General Semantics was a lot of smoke and mirrors), I don't attribute as much force to the words as you do. But I'm much more in favor of raising awareness through talking than violence.

Regards John

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:21 PM

Larry,

I was speaking more to the complexity, depth and richness of the Iroquoian Federation than to the actual practices. I would imagine that in any culture that places a high value on family, community and clan/tribe, banishment would be viewed as extremely severe.

I do appreciate the information. And my information came from an outsider. A Social Anthropology book as I recall. Any book you'd recommend that might provide a insight would be appreciated.

I ask this with a little hesitancy. Back in the 60's and early 70's I had a very good friend whose grandfather was the Shaman of his tribe. This was when a lot of well meaning liberals suddenly discovered their were Native Americans outside of TV and movies and how neat they were. A couple of anthropologists interviewed her grandfather about the rituals, practices and beliefs of the tribe. He spent several months laying it all out in great detail. They went away and wrote papers, and he told his granddaughter what he'd done. And added that he'd made the whole thing up. A man after my own heart.

Regards John

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Kim C
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:34 PM

I don't know which inauguration y'all watched but the one I watched had plenty of protesters. I know they complained about restrictions being on them, but that's too bad. Where I come from if you want to march in the parade you have to get a permit and follow the rules. No one disallowed them, they just gave them a few rules to follow. So what. The Constitution only says they have the right to peaceably assemble; it doesn't say they have the right to peaceably assemble wherever they want to however they want to and without restriction.

I say life's too short for cheap whiskey OR cheap cigars.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:46 PM

Life's too short for cigars, period.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:50 PM

Cheap cigars...expensive cigars...they all stink! Cheap wiskey...expensive whiskey...they both taste awful! Yuck!

Skeptic - You are an eminently reasonable man. Here are some other possibilities for a slogan to consider the merits of...

Live free by giving freedom to others to live freely in their chosen fashion.

Freedom for all.

One world, one nation, one humanity.

Unity in Diversity (the motto of the Bahai faith, I believe...which recoginzes and respects all other faiths)

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Do not inflict upon others what you would not wish to have inflicted on you.

And, last but not least...

From each according to his abilities, unto each according to his needs. (That one is the central tenet of socialism, ideally speaking.)

All of them are worth considering, I think.

Thanks for your well-reasoned responses on this thread.

- LH

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 05:50 PM

Kim C.

Why should there have to permits for a parade. I mean permits that allow unelected officials to decide if I can protest? Guidelines are tolerable, if general enough. And if two groups want to use the same park/street/field at the same time some coordination and even denying permission might be in order.

The governments subjective "becuase it might cause trouble" seem unwarranted and ultimately indefensible in even our pseudo-democracy.

Regards

John

Little Hawk: Thanks for your kind words. I enjoy and appreciate your perspective and ideas to.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 06:16 PM

Hey John, Your shaman story reminds me of a Judge I knew from Alaska. He was the Tklingt (I believe, one of the Vancover Island Nations) judge who blew the lid off the story of the "shaman" who went to court in a beating case to have the two native teens bound over to his "court". Turns out he was not a judge in his community, he was the kids Grandfather.
There are some good books, I'll have to get out one of the papers I wrote and dig into the footnotes, one was called something like the Ambiguous Iroquioan Empire... it was one of the better ones. I'll get the exact title one of these days soon for you. However, I recomend a visit, however, walk softly. The "HI Where is your Chief, I wanna know all your wisdom..." approach is not often very much apreciated. There are pow wows, there are Native buisnesses to avail yourself of, sometimes there are needs to be helped out on... stopping Hydro Quebec, for example, which puts you in contact with the people, and keep your eyes and ears and MIND open. I found it to be a huge life enriching thing to spend time in Native communities.
Larry

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 07:52 PM

instead of LIVER FREE OR DIE! how about Give Me Immortality or Give me Death!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Troll
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:34 PM

Larry the difference between you and the anthropologist/socialist type, is that you care about the PEOPLE. They only want to document the culture for their archives.
Not bad Skeptic. You've been reading again I see. Considering the rhetoric from the various protest groups prior to the inaguration,and the memories of Seattle, they probably were afraid of trouble.
And busting heads on national TV really makes an inaguration look tacky.

troll

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:52 PM

troll,

The inauguration was tacky. Look at who they inaugurated. (Just couldn't resist - sorry Kendall

You seem to be arguing that "being afraid of trouble" is a justification. Its also prior restraint. On that basis (and given the statistics) the police need to arrest 18 - 23 yo urban males before the go into a night club because they "might get drunk". Or stop 17 year olds from driving because they have a higher probability of causing an accident or....ad infinitum.

So there "might" be trouble. There might not. The assumption that the suspicion is sufficient grounds to act to limit assembly and speech and so on is one of the major problems. If you don't want the rhetoric and protests, don't become a public figure.

The apologists for this type of behavior (on the part of the police/officials ) need to remember lessons of history. What they can do to people who don't like GWB today, they can do to _________________________(fill in the blank) tomorrow. We either stop this kind of thing when it doesn't seem like a big deal, when the rationale seems so ...rational, or it grows. The bar gets raised another notch.

And people wonder why respect and trust for the government continues to decline.

Regards John

PS: Yes. I'm still reading. BTW your "Learn to Read with Phonics for Dummies - The Movie" is on the way. Hope it helps.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: hesperis
Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:57 PM

petr - Little Hawk says that your "Give Me Immortality or Give Me Death!" is the best slogan he has ever heard in his whole life!

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: InOBU
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 09:03 AM

Thanks troll, your a gentleman.
Cheers, Larry

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Kim C
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:25 AM

Skeptic - as far as parades go, they are usually coordinated events and people who want to participate have to get permission from the city to do so. I think that's the case in most places. Every once in awhile it comes up in the news when a group is denied a permit for whatever reason. Marching in a parade, though, and protesting are not necessarily the same thing.

As far as people protesting on the street corner, I don't know that anyone has to have a permit for that. There may be city guidelines in regards to safety issues, etc., in some areas.

The inauguration was a coordinated event with a lot of high-ranking officials and as such, security/safety issues were a priority. I'm not sure, however, how the protesters thought W would see them from the back seat of a limo anyhow.

KFC

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: InOBU
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:38 AM

Kim C, we seem to have come a long way from Jefferson's view of a revolutionary democracy, haven't we? I don't think ol Thomas would have worried about a permit if an election was stolen in his life time.
Larry

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Jon W.
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 11:21 AM

The election wasn't stolen. The Supreme Court prevented Al from doing that.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 11:25 AM

"I still find it hard to believe that almost half of the electorate voted for him." (kendall

They didn't. Something under one quarter of the electorate voted for him. Only half the elctorate voted for anybody - and most of them didn't vote for Baby Bush.>

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: kendall
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 12:09 PM

I stand corrected..just trying to be humorous. Jon..Those who cast their vote decide nothing..Those who count the votes decide everything..J Stalin

Disney gave us Mickey, Florida gave us Dumbo.

Subject: RE: Conservative Cavalry Round Five !!!!
From: Skeptic
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 12:35 PM

Kim,

Parades or protests (assumption: peaceful). Both are making a statement and teh distinct can be a very fine one. If the KKK, NAACP, AIM or GLA wants to have a parade, is it a parade or a protest? Lets remember the St Patricks Day Parade permit fiasco.

Its always easy to find "sensible" reasons to deny permits. It sounds so logical when teh police or city official says: "Well, our experience has been that these kind of things can get out of hand so its best not to let them get started". The implication is that if you want to give that group a permit, you're some kind of nihilistic anarchist who's in favor of incest, legalizing drugs, human sacrifice and Guinness over ice.

Its called prior constraint and its one of the things our founding fathers tried to address in the Constitution. We're not supposed to do it. The protestors in Washington may well have represented a security threat (note: threat with some probable cause). How was that probable cause demonstrated? Was their at least reasonable suspicion and where was the possibility or procedure fro independent judicial review before the point became moot.

The burden of proof should lie with the police or city, not those requesting the permit. And denial for other than practical reasons should demand a higher proof than some official making a value judgement that (in all practicality) cannot and will not be questioned. rather than the protestors having to go to court to get a judge to order that a permit be issued, it should be the other way around. If the permit is denied for other than practical (space constraints, schedule conflicts) maybe the city ore police should be the ones who have to go to court.

The willingness of officials and the police to justify actions that would seem to violate the constitution ought to be very scary. The willingness of a lot of people (without claiming you're one) to find excuses for those actions is far more scarey.

Regards John