GOP strategy - disrupted Dem town hall meetings

[Sweet Willy]

Actually, you can have it both ways. Gates was charged with disorderly conduct. Which covers a much broader range than just "shouting and yelling". If he went into his back yard and shouted and yelled at a garbage can he wouldn't have been arrested. Under your premise it would have gotten him arrested. Therefore it wasn't simply the shouting and yelling that got him into trouble.Specifically what got Gates in trouble was shouting and yelling at a police officer who was attempting to investigate the possibility of a crime. Those last few parts is what got him into trouble. Not the shouting and the yelling. It was that combined with something else. Obstructing police verbally from carrying out their duties will always get you in deeper hot water.

WRONG.

Crowley justified his arrest due to seven people standing on the sidewalk that he claimed to have looked Gates way when he yelled.

Think there might be seven people at these meetings? Seven people who will be caused to look at the person yelling?

If you can arrest a man for disorderly conduct for yelling in front of seven people, on the sidewalk in front of his house, you can sure as hell arrest a man for yelling and shouting in a public place, in a room full of people. What is the need to yell? Why shout? Are they intentionally trying to cause alarm? Why not just speak? Yelling isn't needed, unless you intend to cause alarm and be disruptive.

No. Wrong. The arrest report clearly states that Gates was yelling at Crowley, in public. Here's the arrest report:

Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Police Report - July 23, 2009

Once again, yelling at a police officer will always get you in trouble.

But this has nothing to do with people exercising their right to free speech at a townhall. Thats the subject. Not a rehash of Gates/Crowley which was IMO an extremely idiotic tempest in a teapot.

Yes, Gates was arrested for yelling at Crowley IN PUBLIC. The justification for the arrest is that there were members of the public present. There is no such crime as "yelling at a police officer."


The comparison is absolutely just. One man is arrested for yelling at a public official and here we have an entire group of people planning to go yell at a public official.

If you thnik Gates arrest was just, you should by all logic, advocate the arrest of anyone yelling at an official inside a public meeting.

I don't advocate either arrest.

 

[Sweet Willy]

and one was yelling racist crap(Gates) and one was exercising their rights to redress of grievance(town hall)

Doesn't matter what you're yelling. There is no description in disorderly conduct laws of particualr speech that is unlawful. The disorderly laws address the distubance of the peace, loud noises, yelling and music.

The stated purpose of this yelling, from the memo is to cause uneasiness.

"The purpose is to make him uneasy, early on and set the tone..."

So the stated reason bears out that the intentions of this yelling is to make someone feel uneasy in public and to "set the tone" with yelling and shouting. The definition of disorderly conduct.

"Look for these opportunities before he takes questions."

They are instructed to intterupt the speaker before he is taking questions.



This entire memo is a plan to disrupt meetings. If I send you instructions on how to build a bomb but then put in a disclaimer that "these are not instructions to build a bomb", they are still instructions to build a bomb.

These instructions to yell and shout, out of turn, in order to make the meeting "uneasy" and to "stagger" the speakers, is clearly a plan to disrupt and cause disorder. Should be addressed by the authorities.

Absolute bullshit.

The purpose is to rattle the speaker off of his message and to make him have doubts about his position. A disruption would be that the speaker is unable to get his message out due to the disorderly conduct of the audience.

This is clearly not what the memo states for the audience to do. Do not try to spin it. You will get called on your BS.

There is no spin, only the instructions in the memo.

The memo instructs participants to yell and shout before they are recognized to speak, before the normal time for them to speak. That's a disruption. An interuption of the normal course of events.

I don't have a problem with it. I have a problem with double standard dipshits who think a man should be arrested for yelling at an official on his own porch but an organized crowd who have conspired to yell and shout at an official during a meeting are somehow above the same law.

It's a double standard. Anyone but a partisan can see the point. You can stand on either side of the issue, disagreeing with or advocating arrest in both cases. However, if you split your opinion on the issue, there is some kind of unreasonalbe, illogical thought process going on.

 

[Navy1960]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0MP8nzg9Vk]YouTube - Antiwar Protesters Force Senate Into Recess[/ame]

Where is all this finger pointing whe

 

[Navy1960]

Forgive me, on the last post, I had intended to say that finger pointing on this issue from one side or the other is completely off the mark. For one side to dismiss these people as somehow extremist or disruptive and then at the same time applaud the actions of others who exercise their rights because they happen to agree with their political stance is somewhat disengeneous. In fact no matter what the protest they all have a right to express themselves and if they conduct themselvese in a manner that is beyond the agreed upon rules then perhaps those rules should be enforced rather than casting stones at people who have every right to express their views.

 

[Sweet Willy]

YouTube - Antiwar Protesters Force Senate Into Recess

Where is all this finger pointing whe

That is an excellent example of yelling and shouting that DISRUPTED a proceeding. As we would expect, there was a call for the "seargent art arms" to restore order.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

only if its a political meeting talking about poltics that relate to how govt interacts with the people.

If its that type of thing then its our right and duty to speak up if we agree or disagree with what is going on so our representatives know we approve or dissaprove of their ideas.


Do you accept code pink's tactics or when cindy sheehan protested outside of bush's home? If you do then you shouldn't have a problem with what this thread is discussing.

If it's a meeting that's being conducted in a venue then my belief is that it shouldn't be disrupted. I don't much mind if people are outside the venue and demonstrating but if they're inside the venue and deliberately disrupting the meeting then they should not be permitted to do so.

ROFLMNAO...

Of course the thing to understand here is that the word "disrupted" is being used, where there is no actual correlation to the underlying concept which that word conveys.

Debate which provides for open participation by the public, does not become "DISRUPTED" by debate of the issues at hand.

The left needs to project this concept, because there purpose is deception. They want to convey the idea, that Leftists are the only ones which enjoy the right to redress their respective legislative representatives at town meetings; their goal here is to establish the erroneous understanding that any oppossing point of view of the Leftist policy which is being discussed represents 'DISRUPTION'...

It's a lie... and it's no more complex than that.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Forgive me, on the last post, I had intended to say that finger pointing on this issue from one side or the other is completely off the mark. For one side to dismiss these people as somehow extremist or disruptive and then at the same time applaud the actions of others who exercise their rights because they happen to agree with their political stance is somewhat disengeneous. In fact no matter what the protest they all have a right to express themselves and if they conduct themselvese in a manner that is beyond the agreed upon rules then perhaps those rules should be enforced rather than casting stones at people who have every right to express their views.

I would agree with you. As we see in your video, the proceeding was stopped and I assume that the disruptors were removed from the building. I don't think an arrest is in order but they should not be allowed to continue to disrupt the proceeding. If they can't abide the rules, they can stand outside and hold a sign or shout. Which brings another entire question about the Gates arrest supporters. If you can stand outside congress and yell you sure as hell can yell on your own front porch.

I will say once more, I don't so much have a problem with the memo. I have a problem with these partisan, dishonest, shit sacks that think a man should be arrested for yelling at a cop on his front porch but these people can yell inside chambers, town halls, pretty much anywhere they want.

Double standard douche bags.

 

[DiveCon]

Forgive me, on the last post, I had intended to say that finger pointing on this issue from one side or the other is completely off the mark. For one side to dismiss these people as somehow extremist or disruptive and then at the same time applaud the actions of others who exercise their rights because they happen to agree with their political stance is somewhat disengeneous. In fact no matter what the protest they all have a right to express themselves and if they conduct themselvese in a manner that is beyond the agreed upon rules then perhaps those rules should be enforced rather than casting stones at people who have every right to express their views.

I would agree with you. As we see in your video, the proceeding was stopped and I assume that the disruptors were removed from the building. I don't think an arrest is in order but they should not be allowed to continue to disrupt the proceeding. If they can't abide the rules, they can stand outside and hold a sign or shout. Which brings another entire question about the Gates arrest supporters. If you can stand outside congress and yell you sure as hell can yell on your own front porch.

I will say once more, I don't so much have a problem with the memo. I have a problem with these partisan, dishonest, shit sacks that think a man should be arrested for yelling at a cop on his front porch but these people can yell inside chambers, town halls, pretty much anywhere they want.

Double standard douche bags.

no, dipshit, a town hall is a venue for doing that
the senate is not

and with gates it was completely different
but you are too much of a fucking moron to admit the facts

 

[Sweet Willy]

only if its a political meeting talking about poltics that relate to how govt interacts with the people.

If its that type of thing then its our right and duty to speak up if we agree or disagree with what is going on so our representatives know we approve or dissaprove of their ideas.


Do you accept code pink's tactics or when cindy sheehan protested outside of bush's home? If you do then you shouldn't have a problem with what this thread is discussing.

If it's a meeting that's being conducted in a venue then my belief is that it shouldn't be disrupted. I don't much mind if people are outside the venue and demonstrating but if they're inside the venue and deliberately disrupting the meeting then they should not be permitted to do so.

ROFLMNAO...

Of course the thing to understand here is that the word "disrupted" is being used, where there is no actual correlation to the underlying concept which that word conveys.
Debate which provides for open participation by the public, does become "DISRUPTED" by debate of the issues at hand.

The left needs to use this word, because there purpose is deception. They want to convey the idea, that Leftists are the only ones which enjoy the right to redress their respective legislative representatives at town meetings; that any oppossing point of view of the Leftist policy which is being discussed represent 'DISRUPTION'...

It's a lie... and it's no more complex than that.

Another dumbass.

Disrupt -
1. To throw into confusion or disorder: Protesters disrupted the candidate's speech.
2. To interrupt or impede the progress, movement, or procedure of: Our efforts in the garden were disrupted by an early frost.
3. To break or burst; rupture.


So let's take a look at the concept which this word conveys, shall we?

The very example given in this definition is the disruption of a speech by a candidate. Pretty fucking neat eh? Then we get along into "impede the progress or procedure".

This memo instructs people to " rock-the-boat early in the Rep's presentation, Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep's statements early."

So they want people to "rock the boat"? Don't we all know what "rock the boat" means?

rock the boat Slang
To disturb the balance or routine of a situation:

Wow......"rock the boat" means to disturb things. To destabilize a situation. But we all know that, don't we?

This memo is a directive to disrupt the meetings. You're an idiot if you read it and think otherwise.

stand up and shout out and sit right back down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions."

Here the memo ask people to stand and shout, before they are supposed to be asking questions. Speaking OUT OF ORDER. This is what normal people call a disruption. An interuptionin the normal sequence of events. Look it the fuck up.


Again, whether or not you think causing a disturbance is a good idea or not, is NOT THE QUESTION. The point is sorting out the stupid, partisan idiots that deny this memo is a "playbook" for disruption. If we substitute the phrase "rock the boat" for disrupt, it's still a disruption, dumbasses.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Forgive me, on the last post, I had intended to say that finger pointing on this issue from one side or the other is completely off the mark. For one side to dismiss these people as somehow extremist or disruptive and then at the same time applaud the actions of others who exercise their rights because they happen to agree with their political stance is somewhat disengeneous. In fact no matter what the protest they all have a right to express themselves and if they conduct themselvese in a manner that is beyond the agreed upon rules then perhaps those rules should be enforced rather than casting stones at people who have every right to express their views.

I would agree with you. As we see in your video, the proceeding was stopped and I assume that the disruptors were removed from the building. I don't think an arrest is in order but they should not be allowed to continue to disrupt the proceeding. If they can't abide the rules, they can stand outside and hold a sign or shout. Which brings another entire question about the Gates arrest supporters. If you can stand outside congress and yell you sure as hell can yell on your own front porch.

I will say once more, I don't so much have a problem with the memo. I have a problem with these partisan, dishonest, shit sacks that think a man should be arrested for yelling at a cop on his front porch but these people can yell inside chambers, town halls, pretty much anywhere they want.

Double standard douche bags.

no, dipshit, a town hall is a venue for doing that
the senate is not

and with gates it was completely different
but you are too much of a fucking moron to admit the facts

A town hall is not a venue that stages disruptions, idiot. You are contending that a town hall meeting is expressly prepared so that people can come and shout and rock the boat so that people leave confused and the message is unclear. What a fucking partisan tool you are.

And yeah, Gates was different. He was on his own front porch, in broad daylight, with seven people watching.

You and anyone else that thinks yelling and shouting on my porch is a crime but yelling and shouting at a public meeting is not, are complete idiots.

 

[DiveCon]

I would agree with you. As we see in your video, the proceeding was stopped and I assume that the disruptors were removed from the building. I don't think an arrest is in order but they should not be allowed to continue to disrupt the proceeding. If they can't abide the rules, they can stand outside and hold a sign or shout. Which brings another entire question about the Gates arrest supporters. If you can stand outside congress and yell you sure as hell can yell on your own front porch.

I will say once more, I don't so much have a problem with the memo. I have a problem with these partisan, dishonest, shit sacks that think a man should be arrested for yelling at a cop on his front porch but these people can yell inside chambers, town halls, pretty much anywhere they want.

Double standard douche bags.

no, dipshit, a town hall is a venue for doing that
the senate is not

and with gates it was completely different
but you are too much of a fucking moron to admit the facts

A town hall is not a venue that stages disruptions, idiot. You are contending that a town hall meeting is expressly prepared so that people can come and shout and rock the boat so that people leave confused and the message is unclear. What a fucking partisan tool you are.

And yeah, Gates was different. He was on his own front porch, in broad daylight, with seven people watching.

You and anyone else that thinks yelling and shouting on my porch is a crime but yelling and shouting at a public meeting is not, are complete idiots.

a town hall is where people can vboice their grievence
if it gets heated yelling is not out of the question
for you to think it is means YOU are a fucking idiot

 

[Sweet Willy]

no, dipshit, a town hall is a venue for doing that
the senate is not

and with gates it was completely different
but you are too much of a fucking moron to admit the facts

A town hall is not a venue that stages disruptions, idiot. You are contending that a town hall meeting is expressly prepared so that people can come and shout and rock the boat so that people leave confused and the message is unclear. What a fucking partisan tool you are.

And yeah, Gates was different. He was on his own front porch, in broad daylight, with seven people watching.

You and anyone else that thinks yelling and shouting on my porch is a crime but yelling and shouting at a public meeting is not, are complete idiots.

a town hall is where people can vboice their grievence
if it gets heated yelling is not out of the question
for you to think it is means YOU are a fucking idiot

And I can certainly voice my grievences at my house.

To contend that somehow I have speech rights at town hall that I do not have at my home is about as unAmerican as it gets.

And "if it gets heated"? That's a real jewel and shows us exactly how blind and partisan you are. So a plan to yell and shout doesn't equal = "if it gets heated", does it? Does the memo say yell and shout "if it gets heated"? Or does it instruct people to begin by yelling and shouting?

 

[Navy1960]

YouTube - Antiwar Protesters Force Senate Into Recess

Where is all this finger pointing whe

That is an excellent example of yelling and shouting that DISRUPTED a proceeding. As we would expect, there was a call for the "seargent art arms" to restore order.

Thats my point though Willy, if these people are seen as disruptive then do the same thing, but don't condemn these Americans for speaking out and exercising a right that is given to them under the constitution. Let me ask you something Willy had those protestors in the video been a bunch of republicans rather than code pink then what do you suppose the uproar in the media would have been? The point is that no matter the cause even if may not agree with them we should never advocate the curbing of free speech. While people should try to act in an honorable and peaceful manner, when doing so, I think it's a little sad that these Americans are condemend as somehow being lapdogs of some extreme movement and at the same time over the last several years on a daily basis this same tactic has been used over and over again by the left and seen as an honorable exercise in civil rights.

 

[Care4all]

no, dipshit, a town hall is a venue for doing that
the senate is not

and with gates it was completely different
but you are too much of a fucking moron to admit the facts

A town hall is not a venue that stages disruptions, idiot. You are contending that a town hall meeting is expressly prepared so that people can come and shout and rock the boat so that people leave confused and the message is unclear. What a fucking partisan tool you are.

And yeah, Gates was different. He was on his own front porch, in broad daylight, with seven people watching.

You and anyone else that thinks yelling and shouting on my porch is a crime but yelling and shouting at a public meeting is not, are complete idiots.

a town hall is where people can vboice their grievence
if it gets heated yelling is not out of the question
for you to think it is means YOU are a fucking idiot

i thought that town hall, public parks etc is where YOU CAN NOT BE DISORDERLY or you will be charged with disorderly conduct ACCORDING TO OUR LAWS, and NOT the front porch of your own home, such as the home of Gates?

people need to read disorderly conduct laws...they ARE about yelling and being disorderly on PUBLIC PLACES not private....?

 

[Political Junky]

The disruptions are planned and people are instructed where to sit, and when to shout loudly, for no other purpose than to make the meeting futile. Thanks to your healthcare industry and con officials.

 

[Chris]

The GOP is getting more and more desperate.

72% of Americans want healthcare reform.

 

[DiveCon]

The GOP is getting more and more desperate.

72% of Americans want healthcare reform.

yeah, but Obamacare IS NOT REFORM

 

[DiveCon]

A town hall is not a venue that stages disruptions, idiot. You are contending that a town hall meeting is expressly prepared so that people can come and shout and rock the boat so that people leave confused and the message is unclear. What a fucking partisan tool you are.

And yeah, Gates was different. He was on his own front porch, in broad daylight, with seven people watching.

You and anyone else that thinks yelling and shouting on my porch is a crime but yelling and shouting at a public meeting is not, are complete idiots.

a town hall is where people can vboice their grievence
if it gets heated yelling is not out of the question
for you to think it is means YOU are a fucking idiot

i thought that town hall, public parks etc is where YOU CAN NOT BE DISORDERLY or you will be charged with disorderly conduct ACCORDING TO OUR LAWS, and NOT the front porch of your own home, such as the home of Gates?

people need to read disorderly conduct laws...they ARE about yelling and being disorderly on PUBLIC PLACES not private....?

a town hall is not on a public street
and it is SPECIFICALLY for voicing ones opinions

 

[Chris]

The GOP is getting more and more desperate.

72% of Americans want healthcare reform.

yeah, but Obamacare IS NOT REFORM

Why do you care?

You have government sponsored healthcare.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The GOP is getting more and more desperate.

72% of Americans want healthcare reform.

Yes 72% want reform.

However only 35% want it to be a government run health care system. And that number is dropping almost daily.

Thats what happens when you propose a 1000 page monstrositiy then say you aren't even going to read it because you can't understand it.