Ser Scot A Ellison Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Davos,I've never treated the Constitution as "Holy Writ" but as the Supreme law of the US. If we change it we must toss it out completely and start fresh or chage it as it calls for it to be changed within its text. Otherwise the liberty protections written into it mau as well be written in water. If we can set aside the portions of the Constitution without using Art. V. then the rest of the document is meaningless as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 It's not tied to it, but this kind of thing absolutely overshadows whatever point they were trying to make. Are they just protesting for the right to OD in front of the Vancouver Art Gallery? And at least part of the problem has been that the tightly-packed nature of the camp made it hard for paramedics to get to not only this woman but to the guy who had the nonfatal OD earlier in the week. They are further occupying a public space that belongs no less to anyone else and have no right to create a drug-ridden unsanitary and ultimately dangerous environment for others.It only overshadows their point if you let it. It's purely a publicity problem in that respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Davos,I've never treated the Constitution as "Holy Writ" but as the Supreme law of the US. If we change it we must toss it out completely and start fresh or chage it as it calls for it to be changed within its text. Otherwise the liberty protections written into it mau as well be written in water. If we can set aside the portions of the Constitution without using Art. V. then the rest of the document is meaningless as well.Except just last page you and FLOW were bringing up the intent of the "Framers".If the US constitution is not Holy Writ, who the fuck cares what the Framers thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord O' Bones Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Why then accept the unverified account of a self-interested protestor?1. It's been verified, just not by people you trust.2. We have already seen statements from the OPD that were proven false almost instantly with video evidence.3. You're not from around here, so I'll forgive you this one, but it's the fucking Oakland Police Department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzanth Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Are they just protesting for the right to OD in front of the Vancouver Art Gallery? Obviously not. Maybe you should read some of their signs? Seriously, the meme that occupy protests lack a purpose is really getting old. Anyone paying attention should easily be able to identify their general aims. Generally speaking most protesters want more regulation of financial institutions, less money in politics, and higher taxes for the rich. How is that so hard to grasp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Shryke,Only in the context of Sologdin's assertion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdyphillip Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 It's not tied to it, but this kind of thing absolutely overshadows whatever point they were trying to make. Are they just protesting for the right to OD in front of the Vancouver Art Gallery? And at least part of the problem has been that the tightly-packed nature of the camp made it hard for paramedics to get to not only this woman but to the guy who had the nonfatal OD earlier in the week. They are further occupying a public space that belongs no less to anyone else and have no right to create a drug-ridden unsanitary and ultimately dangerous environment for others.According to statistics, there are 3000 Over doses per month in the United States. That means that 1 person in 5000 in our population have this occur in a year. It seems to me that there are far less problems with this in the Occupy movement. I can't find an accurate count of how many people are protesting, but I know it is in the tens of thousands, and so far we have reports of 2 ODs... This is just another way that conservatives are trying to discredit the movement. The facts speak for themselves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afterroots Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Speaking of the Oakland PD, this guy in the video below is shot with a rubber bullet for filming the police. I know that sounds rather sensationalist but, ahhh, just watch the video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 HP,Aemon is not a Conservative. Just an FYi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdyphillip Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 HP,Aemon is not a Conservative. Just an FYi.Oh... my apologies then... I am always putting my foot in my mouth around here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted November 7, 2011 Author Share Posted November 7, 2011 Obviously not. Maybe you should read some of their signs? Seriously, the meme that occupy protests lack a purpose is really getting old. Anyone paying attention should easily be able to identify their general aims. Generally speaking most protesters want more regulation of financial institutions, less money in politics, and higher taxes for the rich. How is that so hard to grasp?Just another sign of the decline of collective american intelligence. Unless its black and white and clearly.deliniated in a neat red or blue box it doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 http://volokh.com/2011/11/02/colbert-on-ows/ :laugh:I'll say this for the OWS, they provide a lot of comedic material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Lol, you aren't joking, huh? "self-interested".Why would I be joking? Are you seriously claiming that the OWS protesters don't have a bias?? If there is an incident between the police and protesters, it is in the interest of the police to tell a version of events that make themselves look good, and the protesters look bad. And the exact same same thing applies to protestors. They have an an incentive to maximize any police wrongdoing because it supports their message. If they weren't self-interested, and didn't have a bias, they wouldn't be out there protesting at all.One thing that does intrigue me a bit is that the protestors seem very conscious of the police, and cell phone cameras pop out to record every confrontation. So how come nobody has posted any video of this guy standing there, with arms crossed, doing nothing wrong, and then suddenly being beated by police batons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Why would I be joking? Are you seriously claiming that the OWS protesters don't have a bias?? If there is an incident between the police and protesters, it is in the interest of the police to tell a version of events that make themselves look good, and the protesters look bad. And the exact same same thing applies to protestors. They have an an incentive to maximize any police wrongdoing because it supports their message. If they weren't self-interested, and didn't have a bias, they wouldn't be out there protesting at all.One thing that does intrigue me a bit is that the protestors seem very conscious of the police, and cell phone cameras pop out to record every confrontation. So how come nobody has posted any video of this guy standing there, with arms crossed, doing nothing wrong, and then suddenly being beated by police batons?Because, according to the story, he wasn't over with the main group of protestors.Plus, we know he was for sure beaten anyway and then held without medical attention for like 24 hours, so what's the justification for that in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdyphillip Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Why would I be joking? Are you seriously claiming that the OWS protesters don't have a bias?? If there is an incident between the police and protesters, it is in the interest of the police to tell a version of events that make themselves look good, and the protesters look bad. And the exact same same thing applies to protestors. They have an an incentive to maximize any police wrongdoing because it supports their message. If they weren't self-interested, and didn't have a bias, they wouldn't be out there protesting at all.One thing that does intrigue me a bit is that the protestors seem very conscious of the police, and cell phone cameras pop out to record every confrontation. So how come nobody has posted any video of this guy standing there, with arms crossed, doing nothing wrong, and then suddenly being beated by police batons? Here are four examples of the police arresting people. All of them completely unnecessarily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 In the middle of an Occupy Chicago teach-in this week, traders at the Chicago Board of Trade dumped several sheets of paper on top of the heads of protesters below. Demonstrators were angered to find out they were showered with employment applications for McDonald’s.http://www.mediaite.com/online/traders-from-chicago-board-of-trade-dump-mcdonalds-applications-on-occupy-chicago-protesters/Ahh, the concern of the elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Here are four examples of the police arresting people. All of them completely unnecessarilyI only watched the first two, but neither had enough context to determine whether the arrests were valid.Here's one for you. The free speech/assembly mavens at Occupy D.C. decided that it wasn't enough to have their own protest -- they wanted to interfere with the right of other people to assemble peaceably by disrupting the meeting of the Americans for Prosperity Ronald Reagan dinner. They kept trying to bash their way in, and then blocked the streets and exits to prevent people from leaving after it was over. One older lady fell down the steps and got hurt in the struggle to get out of the building while being obstructed by your paragons of free speech and assembly. http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/07/koch-group-staffers-event-attendees-911-hung-up-on-us-four-times-during-occupy-dc-mob/2/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I like that you mention the Occupy DC incident without talking about the car that hit 3 people there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Undead Martyr Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Shryke,Yes. Usurpation of power is usurpation of power even when the population is cheering on the usurpation.Davos,Then it is time for a Constitutional convention or subdivison of the nation into smaller units where it is easier to find concensus regarding the nation's political direction.A government "by the people" exists to serve the people's will. I would argue that the public's desires are the basis for power, and that obstinately clinging to obsolete legislation is the true usurpation."The government belongs to the living, not the dead."In any event, it's not as if the public opinion polls suddenly changed the Constitution. That happened in legislature because of popular support/demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazydog7 Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I only watched the first two, but neither had enough context to determine whether the arrests were valid.Here's one for you. The free speech/assembly mavens at Occupy D.C. decided that it wasn't enough to have their own protest -- they wanted to interfere with the right of other people to assemble peaceably by disrupting the meeting of the Americans for Prosperity Ronald Reagan dinner. They kept trying to bash their way in, and then blocked the streets and exits to prevent people from leaving after it was over. One older lady fell down the steps and got hurt in the struggle to get out of the building while being obstructed by your paragons of free speech and assembly.How is it legal that there is a group that is so utterly pretentious it calls itself "Americans for Prosperity?"So you get your news from the Daily Caller and you complain of our "liberal" bias? That's like a Mormon complaining that a co-worker has a drinking problem. Oh and in case you couldn't hear it in the videos you posted once more "Fuck the Daily Caller" gotta love the sensationalist headlines following in the grand tradition of Yellow Journalism. I never thought I would say this but they really do make Fox News look fair and balanced in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.