• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal Judge Orders Cincinnati Not To Ticket OWS'ers

Again with the ad hominem?

No, I do not think you are being very honest with this subject. The fact that you can't "figure out" what's being protested or what people are saying in protest reeks of dishonesty because it's so clear as day as to what they are protesting.
 
In protest being force to abdicate the protest for a few weeks is irreparable harm. From what you percieved as "a snowball's chance in hell", others apparently (and those who apparently have careers in law and are judges and such) thought there was at least enough merit to consider the arguments. The people must always be able to redress the government.

This all seemed nice and open in our system as a proper check on law being executed against the rights of the individual. They even ruled the way you wanted. You can arbitrarily set times in a park and claim no one can be there during said times (with no constraint on how one defines those times) to infringe upon assembly and protest rights. I don't see what the big deal here is other than the fact that so many people are blindly against OWS that they are near the mouth foaming stage perpetually. It's protest, protest is good for a healthy Republic. We must protect it and uphold it to its maximum.

"Enough merit to consider their arguments" gets you inside the federal courthouse; it does NOT get you a TRO. "Substantial likelihood" is akin to the "clear and convincing" standard of proof....it's more than a 50/50 chance, which these plaintiffs can almost certainly not show. It's approximately a 75% or better chance of succeeding at trial.

I'd remind you that "others in law, including the judge" agreed with you for only a few hours. Apparently, this federal judge realized PDQ that she had screwed up and reversed herself; there is no TRO now.
 
No, I do not think you are being very honest with this subject. The fact that you can't "figure out" what's being protested or what people are saying in protest reeks of dishonesty because it's so clear as day as to what they are protesting.

What are their demands? To whom are they directed? How would I gauge whether they had been granted?

BTW, I have many flaws. Dancing around an issue and obfuscating what my POV is ain't one of them. If you make one more ad hominem attack on me, I will report it to the Mod Squad. You well know this violates the DP TOS, and you well know this is not debate.

You choose the behavior, you choose the consequences. Just because you wish I did not start this thread or hold the POV I do gives you no speshell dispensation to tank it. There are places on DP where you can vent your spleen towards me; I suggest you avail yourself of them and return to actual debate on this thread.

JMO, of course.
 
Last edited:
"Enough merit to consider their arguments" gets you inside the federal courthouse; it does NOT get you a TRO.


Apparently in this case, it did.
 
I lived in Cincinnati for like 10 years. Trust me, these people will disappoint you and ruin the parkland they occupy. The city's not known as a hotbed of treehuggers.

Rainbow hippies clean up after others. They take the reaponsibility onto themselves to do so.

I have my issues with them, they're too "Luddite" for me, for instance.

But I trust them on this.

They clean up Gathering sites for two reasons.

One, they actually care about and respect the land.

Two, it pisses the Feds off to have nothing to use against them.

The Feds actually terrorized a community with claims that a fugitive child rapist was at the Gathering.

He was.

John Buffalo, old biker-type and head of "security" for the Rainbow, found his ass, tied him up and delivered him to the authorities of the nearest town. Demonstrating to the locals that the Rainbow doesn't harbor scum.

The Feds were PISSED that he didn't turn him over to them, even though they took custody from the locals immediately. They lost their anti-Rainbow PR campaign to scare the locals.
 
What are their demands? To whom are they directed? How would I gauge whether they had been granted?

I answered your questions already.
 
You threw it at me first. What the hell is your damned problem? You think you can just say my arguments are bull**** and then if I return the favor start crying cause I asked Caine (who is someone I have respect for and why I asked him not to immediately jump on the insult wagon) not to start with insult.

Jesus Christ. If you can't take it, don't dish it. And is this deflection all you have left for your arguments here?

WTF post of mine are you referring to?

I think you are confused; I am not calling you a liar. I am not calling you a whiner. I am directed your attention to the "emperor has no clothes" problem I see in OWS protests.

In other words, where's the beef?
 
I answered your questions already.

You replied, yes. But "entanglement of government and corporations" is a meaningless phrase. Flowery, but meaningless.

I could tell when the former Soviet Union finally allowed its Jews to leave. I could tell when a state government had divested itself of investments in South Africa before the end of apartheid. I could tell when the War In Vietnam ended.

Etc.

To achieve the "unentanglement" the OWSers allegedly want, what concrete steps do they demand be taken, and by whom?


rules for radicals.jpg
 
WTF post of mine are you referring to?


What bull****. Someone is funding this, stage-managing it, etc. Prolly Soros, but who knows anymore?

These are mostly white young adults who have too much time and not enough comprehension of their own nation's laws and businesses.

Really? You couldn't remember. You called my argument bull**** and then went on to some conspiracy thing about how this is all funded by someone (it's a waste of money if true), and then launch into an attack on the protesters claiming that they don't know what they're talking about. As I said, I just returned to you what I have gotten. I didn't ask for civility out of you as I did Caine because I don't expect it out of you; I just gave you what you threw out and all of a sudden it was apparently a huge deal. Enough of your deflections, stay on target.

I think you are confused; I am not calling you a liar. I am not calling you a whiner. I am directed your attention to the "emperor has no clothes" problem I see in OWS protests.

In other words, where's the beef?

I've told you the major point and contention of the protest already. I really cannot understand anyone who honestly tries to claim they don't see it. This is mere data collection and there is a lot of it.
 
Rainbow hippies clean up after others. They take the reaponsibility onto themselves to do so.

I have my issues with them, they're too "Luddite" for me, for instance.

But I trust them on this.

They clean up Gathering sites for two reasons.

One, they actually care about and respect the land.

Two, it pisses the Feds off to have nothing to use against them.

The Feds actually terrorized a community with claims that a fugitive child rapist was at the Gathering.

He was.

John Buffalo, old biker-type and head of "security" for the Rainbow, found his ass, tied him up and delivered him to the authorities of the nearest town. Demonstrating to the locals that the Rainbow doesn't harbor scum.

The Feds were PISSED that he didn't turn him over to them, even though they took custody from the locals immediately. They lost their anti-Rainbow PR campaign to scare the locals.

Sounds like an excellent group.....very effective.

They're environmentalists? I never heard of them; "Rainbow" to me conjures up Gay Pride or Jessie Jackson's (ugh) presidential campaign.

Is there any reason to anticipate they'll be in Cincinnati?
 
You replied, yes. But "entanglement of government and corporations" is a meaningless phrase. Flowery, but meaningless.

I could tell when the former Soviet Union finally allowed its Jews to leave. I could tell when a state government had divested itself of investments in South Africa before the end of apartheid. I could tell when the War In Vietnam ended.

Etc.

To achieve the "unentanglement" the OWSers allegedly want, what concrete steps do they demand be taken, and by whom?


View attachment 67117057

As I said the "how" isn't part of the OWS movement. This is a different type of experiment focused on demonstrating magnitude. They want people at large to acknowledge that there has become a serious problem with our economic models and how government has interacted and intervened in the market. The idea is to try to show that there are many many people across several ideologies who believe this a problem and by showing magnitude perhaps it is then possible to wake everyone else up. So that they will take earnest look around them, at the government and rules and the interactions and dynamics of the system. It's a noble cause, don't know if it will work or not. But I certainly will defend and uphold their right to protest and assemble to its maximum.
 
Really? You couldn't remember. You called my argument bull**** and then went on to some conspiracy thing about how this is all funded by someone (it's a waste of money if true), and then launch into an attack on the protesters claiming that they don't know what they're talking about. As I said, I just returned to you what I have gotten. I didn't ask for civility out of you as I did Caine because I don't expect it out of you; I just gave you what you threw out and all of a sudden it was apparently a huge deal. Enough of your deflections, stay on target.



I've told you the major point and contention of the protest already. I really cannot understand anyone who honestly tries to claim they don't see it. This is mere data collection and there is a lot of it.

I think you're missing the big picture here, Ikari. I'm enraged by the bad behavior in big business in the US; I'm enraged by Citizens United; I'm more concerned about this country's ability to sustain its middle class than I have ever been in my life. In short, I prolly have somewhat the same values and objectives that you perceive the OSWers to have.

What I am complaining about (apart from crappy judging on the federal bench) is that these OWS protests are noisy, grabbing a lot of attention and gathering steam but accomplishing NONE of my objectives. I don't see any way they can ever be effective with these tactics.
 
As I said the "how" isn't part of the OWS movement. This is a different type of experiment focused on demonstrating magnitude. They want people at large to acknowledge that there has become a serious problem with our economic models and how government has interacted and intervened in the market. The idea is to try to show that there are many many people across several ideologies who believe this a problem and by showing magnitude perhaps it is then possible to wake everyone else up. So that they will take earnest look around them, at the government and rules and the interactions and dynamics of the system. It's a noble cause, don't know if it will work or not. But I certainly will defend and uphold their right to protest and assemble to its maximum.

I uphold any American's constitutional rights, Ikari, even those of the most odious. This difference of opinion we're having isn't about which of us is more patriotic.

You say you "don't know if it will work or not". I say "there's no basis for believing OWS protests could succeed in achieving any goal of mine bearing on the issues they seem to be raising".
 
I think you're missing the big picture here, Ikari. I'm enraged by the bad behavior in big business in the US; I'm enraged by Citizens United; I'm more concerned about this country's ability to sustain its middle class than I have ever been in my life. In short, I prolly have somewhat the same values and objectives that you perceive the OSWers to have.

What I am complaining about (apart from crappy judging on the federal bench) is that these OWS protests are noisy, grabbing a lot of attention and gathering steam but accomplishing NONE of my objectives. I don't see any way they can ever be effective with these tactics.

Their point is not to accomplish your objectives. It's to make noise, grab a lot of attention, and gather steam. They're trying to motivate others to stand up and take stock. They don't endorse a single philosophy, rather they leave that to the individual. But it's saying "look at all these opposing groups, we've all come here as one to say there's a problem with corporate capitalism and we do not wish to maintain this intervention of State and Corporation.". The various groups can't agree on how to solve it, and many would probably not endorse my solution for corporate capitalism. Yet there is a problem and that's what they're demonstrating and they're trying to get people up off their couches and perhaps out participating in the system rather than watching American Idol.

As for the Judge, I find nothing offensive in what she did. If the system errs, it should err on the side of the People and not the State.
 
So instead of stupid insults directed at me, how about you just calmly present your argument? A little civility maybe? You don't have to, it would just be nice.

Protest is more important that basketball. While I think there are reasonable rules which can be put on parks for camping and what have you, some rights are too important to let fall to petty laws. Protest and assembly, due to the necessity of these being allowed in order to maintain a free Republic, are some of those. I would most certainly think it reasonable to excuse the camping laws for such a large protest.

How about if I go play basketball after hours in order to protest allowing protest on park grounds after hours but not basketball???


Its a re-tah-ded slippery slope.
 
I uphold any American's constitutional rights, Ikari, even those of the most odious. This difference of opinion we're having isn't about which of us is more patriotic.

I never brought patriotism into the equation. I merely said that I certainly will defend and uphold their right to protest and assemble to its maximum.

You say you "don't know if it will work or not". I say "there's no basis for believing OWS protests could succeed in achieving any goal of mine bearing on the issues they seem to be raising".[/COLOR]

I say I don't know if it will work in terms of their goals which is to try to motivate more people to stand up and take stock. They have no obligation towards achieving your goals and your goals are most likely not part of their current strategy.
 
How about if I go play basketball after hours in order to protest allowing protest on park grounds after hours but not basketball???


Its a re-tah-ded slippery slope.

If there were true cause to protest. Say the cops were running around beating people playing basketball because they...well cops do that sort of thing for the fun of it. Yeah, I'd allow it.
 
In protest being force to abdicate the protest for a few weeks is irreparable harm. From what you percieved as "a snowball's chance in hell", others apparently (and those who apparently have careers in law and are judges and such) thought there was at least enough merit to consider the arguments. The people must always be able to redress the government.

This all seemed nice and open in our system as a proper check on law being executed against the rights of the individual. They even ruled the way you wanted. You can arbitrarily set times in a park and claim no one can be there during said times (with no constraint on how one defines those times) to infringe upon assembly and protest rights. I don't see what the big deal here is other than the fact that so many people are blindly against OWS that they are near the mouth foaming stage perpetually. It's protest, protest is good for a healthy Republic. We must protect it and uphold it to its maximum.

Regularly closing the park at dark is "Arbitrary" to you?

:roll:
 
If there were true cause to protest. Say the cops were running around beating people playing basketball because they...well cops do that sort of thing for the fun of it. Yeah, I'd allow it.

I see... trying to make it personal....

Its re-tah-ded.
 
Regularly closing the park at dark is "Arbitrary" to you?

:roll:

There's nothing that prevents them from changing those hours, is there?
 
I see... trying to make it personal....

Its re-tah-ded.

No, just showing that there are many situations in which I would endorse the use of public land for the securement of our right to assemble and protest.
 
There's nothing that prevents them from changing those hours, is there?
Changing those hours just to accommodate people protesting would be arbitrary...

NOT changing the hours would be a "standard" .
 
There's nothing that prevents them from changing those hours, is there?

why should they. I work a few blocks from that place. These people are making a nuisance out of themselves. Why should the law be changed to accommodate a bunch of whining assholes?
 
Changing those hours just to accommodate people protesting would be arbitrary...

NOT changing the hours would be a "standard" .

Yes, or changing the hours to prevent protesting. There's no restriction on that restriction and they can do as they like.
 
why should they. I work a few blocks from that place. These people are making a nuisance out of themselves. Why should the law be changed to accommodate a bunch of whining assholes?

So what? You ain't got a right to not see every asshole out there. In fact, in any given day you're going to come across numerous nuisances and assholes. Just because these guys have gathered doesn't mean that we should try to find as many ways as possible to prevent them from gathering.
 
Back
Top Bottom