pawnman Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Story As the right-wing blogosphere railed and a U.S. senator vowed financial retaliation against the Berkeley City Council for its effort to boot the Marine Corps out of town, three war protesters ratcheted up pressure from the left by chaining themselves Friday to the front door of the downtown Marine recruiting office. The demonstrators snapped their locks shut at 7 a.m. and spent the next 7 1/2 hours blocking the door, waving and chanting as hundreds of cars driving by honked in support. Finally, at 2:30 p.m., police snipped the chains and arrested them. Two of the three were cited for blocking a business and released, and the third was booked into jail on an unrelated traffic warrant, police said. The demonstrators promptly said they will keep protesting outside the recruiting station at 64 Shattuck Square until the Marines leave Berkeley - which is what the City Council advised the service to do in a vote Tuesday night that called the Marines "unwelcome intruders." The council also voted to allow members of Code Pink, the protest group that helped organize Friday's blockade, to park at a designated space in front of the recruiting office every Wednesday afternoon and operate a loudspeaker. The council's action apparently made Berkeley the first city in the nation to call for the ouster of a military recruiting station from its borders. "We made really great statements by blocking the door," said one of the three blockaders, 64-year-old Mary Ann Thomas of Oakland. "It's time we became more articulate about what we're doing." Conservative bloggers and Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., also believe more articulation is necessary - from the opposite side of the political spectrum. DeMint began drafting legislation Friday to cut $2.1 million in federal funding to Berkeley in a current congressional budget bill and transfer the money to the Marine Corps. The funding would include $750,000 for prospective ferry service, $87,000 for the Berkeley Unified School District nutrition education fund and $243,000 for the Chez Panisse Foundation, which promotes nutritional awareness in school lunch programs. "The First Amendment gives the city of Berkeley the right to be idiotic, but from now on they should do it with their own money," DeMint said in a statement. He called the council's vote "a slap in the face to all brave servicemen and women and their families." Conservative blogs blasted the council and Berkeley in general all day with comments such as one on "Gathering of Eagles": "These cretins disgust me." Members of the council who voted to condemn the Marine Corps station were unbowed. "I guess they've never heard of free speech," Councilwoman Dona Spring said. "I've had a lot of nasty phone messages today, threatening me with things like saying, 'I'll take you out.' But they can go ahead. I don't feel scared." Code Pink said it has begun to circulate a petition calling for a Berkeley ballot measure that would make it more difficult to open and operate recruiting stations. The measure would be modeled after anti-pornography laws, organizers said, mandating that - like porn shops - new recruiting offices be subject to public hearings before they would be allowed to locate near homes or schools. The Marines, meanwhile, were not ready to back down. "It's just another protest," said Marine Corps Capt. Richard Lund, head of the recruiting office. As he spoke in the early afternoon, with the protesters still chained to his door, a small band of demonstrators on the sidewalk shouted at passing cars and students at Shattuck Square: "Marines out of Berkeley! Marines out of Iraq!" Heated words were exchanged whenever people tried to enter or leave the office, but the protest was peaceful. "You guys are just cannon fodder!" the chained protesters shouted at three teenage boys who walked past the office and said they wanted to go inside. "They want to train you to kill babies!" The teenagers turned around and left. At one point, UC Berkeley student Kyrolos El Giheny walked up to the front door and tried to go inside to talk to Lund about a possible Marine career. He was unable to get past the chained protesters. "They told me, 'No business as usual today,' " El Giheny said. "It's kind of nutty. It's really an infringement on my rights." "Support the troops, oppose the war" my ass. 1
Toro Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 The measure would be modeled after anti-pornography laws, organizers said, mandating that - like porn shops - new recruiting offices be subject to public hearings before they would be allowed to locate near homes or schools. Un-f***-ing believable "They want to train you to kill babies!" Well, that pretty much sums up everything. Code Pink....good Lord. F***ing California. Learn to swim.
M2 Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Hard to believe that Arnold is their governor! Y'know, if they tried that shit in Texas, they would get their asses kicked! I propose that all Federal and state funding to Berkeley be terminated until they pull their heads out their collective asses. Redirect that money to a city that appreciates it! Cheers! M2
brabus Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 "The First Amendment gives the city of Berkeley the right to be idiotic, but from now on they should do it with their own money," DeMint said in a statement. The perfect response. Lets see how long their whining lasts when millions of funding is cut. Some people are just such idiots. I love the standard 1st amendment argument...yeah we have free speech, but there's a line between free speech and acting like a total piece of shit. I wish this was back in the 40s or something when good old fashioned ass kickings were kosher.
JeepGuyC17 Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Apparently the city of Berkeley has decided that it no longer needs the services which we, the armed forces of the United States, provide. Perhaps we should allow terrorists to operate freely within the city. Let them defend themselves with smiles and flowers. Or maybe they DO want the benefits of having their country defended by the greatest military in the world, as long as its ranks are not drawn from THEIR sons and daughters.
Guest Bender Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Well, look...you goota see the good in things. I may not be a porn star (yet,) but at least now I'm treated like one! :D Berkley...like I ever got riled up about those kids before...why start now. BENDY
Riddller Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Y'know, if they tried that shit in Texas, they would get their asses kicked! You know damn right!
Guest Joe Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Why should their protest be allowed if they are violating others' rights? If they want to stand there, fine, but they shouldn't physically confront anyone who tries to enter. Am I wrong?
LJDRVR Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Pretty sad. Well-intentioned (for the most part) kids, whose idealism and desire to do something good has been corrupted by egotistical, self-serving adults who, given their level of education, ought to know better. The ironic thing is this: If those protesters really wanted to do something for peace in the world, if they really wanted to be part of a solution and serve their fellow humans, they should walk right in and raise their right hand. Of course I've been brainwashed by the guv'mint war machine!
Eeyore Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 In reading several different news paper articles the Marines currently have no intention of moving. The 1st amendment works both ways. A thought, a letter campaign of thanks from those who support and defend our great nation to the city council Berkeley.
HerkDerka Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 (edited) Flush it all down. HD Edited February 6, 2008 by HerkDerka
Eeyore Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 letter to Berkeley. Open_letter_to_Berkeley_City_Council.doc
Dupe Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 DeMint began drafting legislation Friday to cut $2.1 million in federal funding to Berkeley in a current congressional budget bill and transfer the money to the Marine Corps. The funding would include $750,000 for prospective ferry service, $87,000 for the Berkeley Unified School District nutrition education fund and $243,000 for the Chez Panisse Foundation, which promotes nutritional awareness in school lunch programs. Does anyone else think Rep DeMint's idea is equally silly? Sure, Berkeley's actions are pretty dumb and short-sighted (this isn't really news). However, I don't think targeting public school nutrition programs is really that wise. Let's face reality: the kids using public school nutrition (nor their parents) in Berkeley don't have much to do with the anti-military fight. They are really the most likely to join the Marines in a few years.
HerkDerka Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 (edited) Does anyone else think Rep DeMint's idea is equally silly? Sure, Berkeley's actions are pretty dumb and short-sighted (this isn't really news). However, I don't think targeting public school nutrition programs is really that wise. Let's face reality: the kids using public school nutrition (nor their parents) in Berkeley don't have much to do with the anti-military fight. They are really the most likely to join the Marines in a few years. When you consider that the only thing most self-centered liberals care more about than themselves is their precious brat-ass children, it's probably a good tactic. HD Edited February 6, 2008 by HerkDerka
HercDude Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 "I guess they've never heard of free speech," Councilwoman Dona Spring said I am so damn sick of this retarded liberal talking point. "I can say and do whatever I want, and you have to listen to me and not say or do anything back because I have free speech." Do these people just not know what free speech is, or do they think we are dumb enough to believe that free speech means you can say whatever you want with out repercussions? Just because you’re a communist faggot who lives under the privilege of the First Amendment doesn't mean you are free to do whatever you want and the government must ignore you, or worse, cater to your moronic delusions. The fact that this lady is an elected official, and not just some washed up hippie (or maybe she is) is downright scary.
Dupe Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 When you consider that the only thing most self-centered liberals care more about than themselves is their precious brat-ass children, it's probably a good tactic. HD This may come as a shocker: not everyone in Berkeley is an uber-liberal. Some folks are just working to get by. The "precious brat-ass children" probably have parents who are able to give them $15 lunches of humus, organic carrots, and bottled mineral water from Norway. It's the low income kids who have to eat what ever Norma the lunch lady throws in the fryer at school. These are the kids that will be hurt if the bill passes. Thankfully, I think the bill is just a political shot over the bow and unlikely to make it out of committee. Targeting children is usually not a way to win support for your cause and generally provides more fodder for the other side.
Dupe Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 This may come as a shocker: not everyone in Berkeley is an uber-liberal. Some folks are just working to get by. The "precious brat-ass children" probably have parents who are able to give them $15 lunches of humus, organic carrots, and bottled mineral water from Norway. It's the low income kids who have to eat what ever Norma the lunch lady throws in the fryer at school. These are the kids that will be hurt if the bill passes. Thankfully, I think the bill is just a political shot over the bow and unlikely to make it out of committee. Targeting children is usually not a way to win support for your cause and generally provides more fodder for the other side. Counter point to my own arguement: the initial article said that $2.1 million in Federal funding was in jeopardy. Of that, about a third is for a ferry service, and roughly 15% for school lunch programs. It didn't say what the rest of the money was directed towards.
HerkDerka Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 (edited) This may come as a shocker: not everyone in Berkeley is an uber-liberal. Some folks are just working to get by. The "precious brat-ass children" probably have parents who are able to give them $15 lunches of humus, organic carrots, and bottled mineral water from Norway. It's the low income kids who have to eat what ever Norma the lunch lady throws in the fryer at school. These are the kids that will be hurt if the bill passes. Thankfully, I think the bill is just a political shot over the bow and unlikely to make it out of committee. Targeting children is usually not a way to win support for your cause and generally provides more fodder for the other side. You're missing the point. Take money away from liberals and they'll freak. HD Edited February 6, 2008 by HerkDerka
pawnman Posted February 6, 2008 Author Posted February 6, 2008 Counter point to my own arguement: the initial article said that $2.1 million in Federal funding was in jeopardy. Of that, about a third is for a ferry service, and roughly 15% for school lunch programs. It didn't say what the rest of the money was directed towards. Bingo. Whoever wrote the article may be sympathetic to Code Pink (certainly had that tone to it), and thus, they're portraying DeMint's proposal in the worst light possible. Besides, cutting the funding doesn't remove the mandate for free school lunches. Berkely would just need to find a new source of funding for it.
Dupe Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 You're missing the point. Take money away from liberals and they'll freak. HD I don't know...maybe it will work. The threat of revoking Federal Student Loans got quite a few college employment offices to reinvite recruiters back onto their pitch. At the same time, I have a big issue with using education funding as a carrot (granted..most of the money isn't education funding...but why include it?). Its the political equivalent of divorcing parents spinning their kids against each other.
Guest MizzNav Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 You're missing the point. Take money away from liberals and they'll freak. HD Yes, Liberals do love free handouts from the governments for everyone, not just themseleves. Taking them away will surely send a messege. The problem with today's society is a signle word: entitlement. Many people believe the government has to give them something if they don't want to work for it. Is welfare okay? yes, but to live off of for years, NO. These people want everything but want it through someone else's blood, tears and sweat. They hate wars and the military who defend the constitution, but want to be safe and free under the constitution. They are so impossibly stupid that there is no way any rational person could ever reason with them. I think maybe the rep is just trying to get to them with the only thng he can, thier entitlement to government funds. You want your government to provide for your community, you have to provide the opprotunity for your community to give back to the government. Its not required that you do give back, but just give the opprotunity for other to take up the slack for those less thankful. I don't believe they should take the school lunch money away, but strip them of every single dollar that doesn't help the poor (highway, police and other municipal funds), and they will change thier tune pretty damn quick.
Guest nightwolf Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 I say let the people that have a problem with the recruiters succeed from the country> The recuiter can leave since it wouldn't be an American country. Form their own and then we have a really short civil war... Don't believe in the military=no protection=easy target
Guest Flying_Bulldog Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 Don't confuse these morons with a typical liberal. Its almost the same as saying every Muslim is a radical and every Christian is an evangelical born again, the fact of the matter is that it just isn't true. Also, the idea of today's society claiming an entitlement is applicable to both sides of the political isle, not just the liberals. Conservatives and liberals alike believe they are entitled to something or another, right or wrong. Take money away from conservative and tell me they won't freak, just like you say liberals will. Using the children, who have nothing to do with the actual problem is going to do nothing but demonstrate an ignorance regarding the whole issue. How is hurting the kids making anything better? It's not. However, people are entitled to their free speech, whether you like what they are saying or not. Just because some moron told someone that the marines aren't conducting business as normal and that they'll train you to be baby killers should not prevent someone who knows the facts and has a good sense of what the military actually does from walking in, rather than turning around, and raising their right hand and joining. Don't forget, we all signed up to protect EVERYONE'S rights, not just the conservative right's.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now