Bring your video camera to your town hall

[PubliusInfinitum]

As long as protestors recognize that the criticism they receive for what they say is free speech too. Too often protestors feel as if they have the right to speak freely WITHOUT RESPONSE. If you try to respond to the CONTENT of what they say, they invariably fall back on the pitiful " you're trying to restrict my free speech" mantra. It's pretty lame to not listen to responses when you "protest".

This is what DilloDuck had to say about protesters in 2005. Seems he has changed his stance, according to who is protesting.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-and-dissent-be-considered-anti-american.html

Well I'd sure like to know how you think that sourced comment is relevant?

I seriously doubt that DD gives a red rats ass what the Left feels about his protests... and no American could possibly care less what you idiots feel about their right to hold their reps accountable. You can cry about it all damn day and we'll still be there making our points with little regard for how you feel about it.

Given that the issue is your means to usurp our rights... my position is that you can kiss my ass.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Now that is a beautiful piece of verbal gymnastics!

Not really. Same principles applied across the board. Didn't require any gymnastics. FWIW, it actually takes some gymnastics to NOT see how the same principles apply.

But it's bullshit. Any concerned citizen can show up and participate in the meetings.

Well, except for the ones that are becoming invite only due to the reps being afraid of standing up for their positions.

They can not stage an organized, unpermitted protest at the meeting.

They can't intentionally disrupt the meetings individually or in groups, lawfully.

They can do both of those things but they are subject to arrest for the those actions under almost any disturbing/obstructing ordinance and more specific laws where larger protest are more common. If any violence were to erupt as a result, there may be inciting charges.

Well, since police have not arrested the protestors en masse, that doesn't seem to be an issue. Unless your contention is that the police are witnessing illegal behavior and doing nothing to stop it? You have yet to prove that anything that they are doing is illegal. Simply claiming it as such does not make it so.

Nice side step. But we're not dancing.

Like I said before ther first head got cracked last week, protesting is a dangerous business. Have a little patience.

 

[Sweet Willy]

As long as protestors recognize that the criticism they receive for what they say is free speech too. Too often protestors feel as if they have the right to speak freely WITHOUT RESPONSE. If you try to respond to the CONTENT of what they say, they invariably fall back on the pitiful " you're trying to restrict my free speech" mantra. It's pretty lame to not listen to responses when you "protest".

This is what DilloDuck had to say about protesters in 2005. Seems he has changed his stance, according to who is protesting.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-and-dissent-be-considered-anti-american.html

Well I'd sure like to know how you think that sourced comment is relevant?

I seriously doubt that DD gives a red rats ass what the Left feels about his protests... and know American could possibly care less what you idiots feel about their right to hold their reps accountable. You can cry about it all damn day and we'll still be there making our points with little regard for how you feel about it.

Given that the issue is your means to usurp our rights... my position is that you can kiss my ass.

I salute your honesty.

And screw you too, my fellow American!

 

[RadiomanATL]

Now that is a beautiful piece of verbal gymnastics!

Not really. Same principles applied across the board. Didn't require any gymnastics. FWIW, it actually takes some gymnastics to NOT see how the same principles apply.



Well, except for the ones that are becoming invite only due to the reps being afraid of standing up for their positions.

They can not stage an organized, unpermitted protest at the meeting.

They can't intentionally disrupt the meetings individually or in groups, lawfully.

They can do both of those things but they are subject to arrest for the those actions under almost any disturbing/obstructing ordinance and more specific laws where larger protest are more common. If any violence were to erupt as a result, there may be inciting charges.

Well, since police have not arrested the protestors en masse, that doesn't seem to be an issue. Unless your contention is that the police are witnessing illegal behavior and doing nothing to stop it? You have yet to prove that anything that they are doing is illegal. Simply claiming it as such does not make it so.

Nice side step. But we're not dancing.

Like I said before ther first head got cracked last week, protesting is a dangerous business. Have a little patience.

No response, huh?

 

[Sweet Willy]

Not really. Same principles applied across the board. Didn't require any gymnastics. FWIW, it actually takes some gymnastics to NOT see how the same principles apply.



Well, except for the ones that are becoming invite only due to the reps being afraid of standing up for their positions.



Well, since police have not arrested the protestors en masse, that doesn't seem to be an issue. Unless your contention is that the police are witnessing illegal behavior and doing nothing to stop it? You have yet to prove that anything that they are doing is illegal. Simply claiming it as such does not make it so.

Nice side step. But we're not dancing.

Like I said before ther first head got cracked last week, protesting is a dangerous business. Have a little patience.

No response, huh?

It made next to no sense. But I'll give it a go. If you insist.

 

[Annie]

It's time to face facts. The town hall hecklers aren't "protestors" at all. Their only aim is to disrupt the meetings and rob you, the constituent, of the right to speak to your representative.

This is a crime. Get that crime on video, and take it to both the local authorities and to the FBI field office. We can't tolerate this kind of activity in a free, democratic society.

You are correct. Those SEIU folks, along with AFL/CIO folks should be checked to make sure they are really constituents. In any case, they should not be allowed to bully and physically attack real constituents.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Nice side step. But we're not dancing.

Like I said before ther first head got cracked last week, protesting is a dangerous business. Have a little patience.

No response, huh?

It made next to no sense. But I'll give it a go. If you insist.

Still no response.

 

[Intense]

City Council Meetings, School Board Meetings, Town Hall Meetings, all have their hang ups, limitations and Rules. They can be extremely bias and restrictive. Those in power tend to see it that way. Try not to loose it, what you do effects those around you. Take the protest out of their jurisdiction. Outside. Thats all. If they refuse to let anyone speak Intensify the effort where they at best have no Jurisdictional advantage. Relate to it like the threat of being held in Contempt Of Court. Willy is actually saving you stitches. Keeping the cost of health care down.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Now that is a beautiful piece of verbal gymnastics!

Not really. Same principles applied across the board. Didn't require any gymnastics. FWIW, it actually takes some gymnastics to NOT see how the same principles apply.

This makes no sense. There is only one group of organized protesters with the intent to disrupt these meetings. They aren't asking questions or giving responses, they are shouting mantras and slogans.

But it's bullshit. Any concerned citizen can show up and participate in the meetings.

Well, except for the ones that are becoming invite only due to the reps being afraid of standing up for their positions.

"The ones that are becoming invite"......I don't understand this at all. You'll have to clarifyn this thought.

They can not stage an organized, unpermitted protest at the meeting.

They can't intentionally disrupt the meetings individually or in groups, lawfully.

They can do both of those things but they are subject to arrest for the those actions under almost any disturbing/obstructing ordinance and more specific laws where larger protest are more common. If any violence were to erupt as a result, there may be inciting charges.

Well, since police have not arrested the protestors en masse, that doesn't seem to be an issue. Unless your contention is that the police are witnessing illegal behavior and doing nothing to stop it? You have yet to prove that anything that they are doing is illegal. Simply claiming it as such does not make it so.

After last weeks arrest, you'll see more preparations for these events. Be patient.

.

 

[Intense]

It's time to face facts. The town hall hecklers aren't "protestors" at all. Their only aim is to disrupt the meetings and rob you, the constituent, of the right to speak to your representative.

This is a crime. Get that crime on video, and take it to both the local authorities and to the FBI field office. We can't tolerate this kind of activity in a free, democratic society.

You are correct. Those SEIU folks, along with AFL/CIO folks should be checked to make sure they are really constituents. In any case, they should not be allowed to bully and physically attack real constituents.

The Unions are not above being boycotted, should they bring it to that.

 

[Annie]

City Council Meetings, School Board Meetings, Town Hall Meetings, all have their hang ups, limitations and Rules. They can be extremely bias and restrictive. Those in power tend to see it that way. Try not to loose it, what you do effects those around you. Take the protest out of their jurisdiction. Outside. Thats all. If they refuse to let anyone speak Intensify the effort where they at best have no Jurisdictional advantage. Relate to it like the threat of being held in Contempt Of Court. Willy is actually saving you stitches. Keeping the cost of health care down.

All those examples are right on regarding the norm and no response. However, every once in awhile something is afoot that makes folks turn out. Sometimes to those that always are involved, it seems unfair that the 'loud mouths' get the podium, but that is how our system works.

 

[Soaring]

If you don't want the populace angry and shouting at public meetings, then don't propose stupid shit like this healthcare program that Obama and his dumbass liberal democrats are pushing. It's quite obvious that the American people as a whole don't want it. Why keep pushing it? Dumb politics on the part of Comrade Obama. This healthcare package will be his Waterloo.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

This is what DilloDuck had to say about protesters in 2005. Seems he has changed his stance, according to who is protesting.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-and-dissent-be-considered-anti-american.html

Seems to be whats happening now. I mean, the reps seem to think that they have a right to speak without the people responding, and proponents of the reps seem to be falling back the whine "they're restricting our free speech by protesting...wahhhh".

So it looks like dildoduck was correct then, and correct now.

Now that is a beautiful piece of verbal gymnastics!

But it's bullshit. Any concerned citizen can show up and participate in the meetings.

They can not stage an organized, unpermitted protest at the meeting.

They can't intentionally disrupt the meetings individually or in groups, lawfully.

They can do both of those things but they are subject to arrest for the those actions under almost any disturbing/obstructing ordinance and more specific laws where larger protest are more common. If any violence were to erupt as a result, there may be inciting charges.

Again a leftist comes to define holding one's representative accountable for their actions with regard to policy before them that greatly affects their lives as an UNPERMITTED PROTEST... which DISRUPTS the laying down of nonsensical bullshit designed to decieve the public.

Of course the only violence which has come from ANY of the recent town hall-hall meetings was organized and perpetrated BY THE LEFT!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

This is what DilloDuck had to say about protesters in 2005. Seems he has changed his stance, according to who is protesting.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-and-dissent-be-considered-anti-american.html

Well I'd sure like to know how you think that sourced comment is relevant?

I seriously doubt that DD gives a red rats ass what the Left feels about his protests... and know American could possibly care less what you idiots feel about their right to hold their reps accountable. You can cry about it all damn day and we'll still be there making our points with little regard for how you feel about it.

Given that the issue is your means to usurp our rights... my position is that you can kiss my ass.

I salute your honesty.

And screw you too, my fellow American!

Willy, point of order sir;... there are no Leftist Americans.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Now that is a beautiful piece of verbal gymnastics!

Not really. Same principles applied across the board. Didn't require any gymnastics. FWIW, it actually takes some gymnastics to NOT see how the same principles apply.

This makes no sense. There is only one group of organized protesters with the intent to disrupt these meetings. They aren't asking questions or giving responses, they are shouting mantras and slogans.

Your response is a non-sequitor. I'll repeat:

Seems to be whats happening now. I mean, the reps seem to think that they have a right to speak without the people responding, and proponents of the reps seem to be falling back the whine "they're restricting our free speech by protesting...wahhhh".

So it looks like dildoduck was correct then, and correct now.

Well, except for the ones that are becoming invite only due to the reps being afraid of standing up for their positions.

"The ones that are becoming invite"......I don't understand this at all. You'll have to clarifyn this thought.

You said that anyone can show up and participate. I responded except for the ones that are becoming invite only. No clarification necessary.

They can not stage an organized, unpermitted protest at the meeting.

They can't intentionally disrupt the meetings individually or in groups, lawfully.

They can do both of those things but they are subject to arrest for the those actions under almost any disturbing/obstructing ordinance and more specific laws where larger protest are more common. If any violence were to erupt as a result, there may be inciting charges.

Well, since police have not arrested the protestors en masse, that doesn't seem to be an issue. Unless your contention is that the police are witnessing illegal behavior and doing nothing to stop it? You have yet to prove that anything that they are doing is illegal. Simply claiming it as such does not make it so.

After last weeks arrest, you'll see more preparations for these events. Be patient.

Fine, so I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Not really. Same principles applied across the board. Didn't require any gymnastics. FWIW, it actually takes some gymnastics to NOT see how the same principles apply.

This makes no sense. There is only one group of organized protesters with the intent to disrupt these meetings. They aren't asking questions or giving responses, they are shouting mantras and slogans.

Your response is a non-sequitor. I'll repeat:





You said that anyone can show up and participate. I responded except for the ones that are becoming invite only. No clarification necessary.

They can not stage an organized, unpermitted protest at the meeting.

They can't intentionally disrupt the meetings individually or in groups, lawfully.

They can do both of those things but they are subject to arrest for the those actions under almost any disturbing/obstructing ordinance and more specific laws where larger protest are more common. If any violence were to erupt as a result, there may be inciting charges.

Well, since police have not arrested the protestors en masse, that doesn't seem to be an issue. Unless your contention is that the police are witnessing illegal behavior and doing nothing to stop it? You have yet to prove that anything that they are doing is illegal. Simply claiming it as such does not make it so.

After last weeks arrest, you'll see more preparations for these events. Be patient.

.

Fine, so I guess we'll have to wait and see.[/QUOTE]

What's the option?

But here's what's going to happen...

Some one end up dead at one of these meetings... and this will of course be a result of 'extreme rightwing Nazis...' which will require quick action! and LOTS MO' POWUH! And naturally... the old Town Hall meetings thing... well, dey'done... can't risk it! OR! Better yet... COPS! at everyone single one... Bullet proof glass... LOTS of rules... and rules which basically set aside the means of anyone being able to hold ANY rep or senator accountable to anyone, for anything.

Now that's based upon how the local schoolboard reacting to the public outrage which came as a result of their pissing away hundreds of millions of dollars on all manner of nonsense.

Now my position is that when you have to put a bullet proof glass between you and those who you're sworn to serve... you're probably doin' it wrong.

What those who are getting high on their own power believe is that their power gives them a RIGHT to screw you anyway they want; when in reality, all power does is give one the MEANS to screw you... but it does NOTHING to solve the 'what goes around, comes around principle. And THAT is where the bullet proof glass and the COPS come into play...

But in the final analysis, the WGACA Principle wins out... Ask King George, Adolf, Horohito, Bubba and Saddam...

 

[Centrism'sVoice]

It's time to face facts. The town hall hecklers aren't "protestors" at all. Their only aim is to disrupt the meetings and rob you, the constituent, of the right to speak to your representative.

This is a crime. Get that crime on video, and take it to both the local authorities and to the FBI field office. We can't tolerate this kind of activity in a free, democratic society.

You are correct. Those SEIU folks, along with AFL/CIO folks should be checked to make sure they are really constituents. In any case, they should not be allowed to bully and physically attack real constituents.

There's nothing in those 3 sentences I disagree with. Sorry if I disappointed you.

 

[Centrism'sVoice]

It's time to face facts. The town hall hecklers aren't "protestors" at all. Their only aim is to disrupt the meetings and rob you, the constituent, of the right to speak to your representative.

This is a crime. Get that crime on video, and take it to both the local authorities and to the FBI field office. We can't tolerate this kind of activity in a free, democratic society.

Because only YOU and those who agree with you are entitled to free speech?

You obviously have me confused with Publius. Or maybe -Cp.

 

[Darkwind]

It's time to face facts. The town hall hecklers aren't "protestors" at all. Their only aim is to disrupt the meetings and rob you, the constituent, of the right to speak to your representative.

This is a crime. Get that crime on video, and take it to both the local authorities and to the FBI field office. We can't tolerate this kind of activity in a free, democratic society.

You are correct. Those SEIU folks, along with AFL/CIO folks should be checked to make sure they are really constituents. In any case, they should not be allowed to bully and physically attack real constituents.

The Unions are not above being boycotted, should they bring it to that.

??

How do you boycott an union?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

It's fair play. The left isn't crying foul. The left is crying because we're laughing so hard.

ROFLMNAO... OH GOD! Now that's precious!