Protestors and the Republican convention

[larchmont]

As you've probably heard, the protestors in New York are already out there, and they're already getting arrested (200 today).

I'm with them in spirit, sort of. Very "sort of."
If I were going to do it, I'd do it really low-key. Which probably isn't what most of them have in mind.

It's being said that the protesting might actually be GOOD for the Republicans, especially if it gets out of hand.

And it's a mark of how unpredictable this whole presidential race is, that we haven't the slightest idea how that would sort out.

(1) The protesting shows how much opposition there is. But OTOH.....
(2) It's likely that they'd look like jerks, at least to most of America, and so the Republicans would look mighty good by comparison. But OTOH.....
(3) This is supposed to be Bush's parade, and the ugliness would rain on it. But OTOH.....
(4) Part of the Republicans' idea in choosing NY was to show their courage in coming to a place that is hostile territory for them, and this would highlight that. But OTOH.....
(5) Probably the main thing that would be highlighted is how dumb it was to pick NY for this. They had to torture themselves like this? And the whole country too, because we're supposed to watch this? And this isn't our idea of a good time. WTF were they thinking????? But OTOH.....
(6) Kerry would be in a real fix, and he'd have "even more" trouble than usual trying to figure out which side to take. He can't really support the protestors, but he can't really oppose them either. So he might wind up looking like the biggest jerk of all. But OTOH.....
(7) Most people are probably going to just tune out the whole thing, thus depriving the Republicans of their week of free publicity.

etc. etc.

How will it all sort out? Nobody knows, and we might not know even afterwards.

My guess is it'll all be a huge negative for the Republicans -- that those minuses will add up a lot more than those pluses, and that they would have done better having the convention almost anywhere else. I think it'll be one of those "seemed like a good idea at the time" things.

But I'm hardly an objective observer. :D

[bob shiftright]

My guess is it'll all be a huge negative for the Republicans -- that those minuses will add up a lot more than those pluses, and that they would have done better having the convention almost anywhere else. I think it'll be one of those "seemed like a good idea at the time" things.

Yup. Over in the "Red States", Mr. and Mr. "Middle America" turn on their TV, look at this and say "Gee, I'm gonna pull the lever for Kerry because I really want my kids to grow up to be like these people!"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2004/08/28/wus28.jpg

Maybe if Rove had a crystal ball he woulda staged the convention somewhere else, say on Diego Garcia in the middle of the Indian Ocean :D but one thing about NY is that it's as difficult for the protesters to get in and out of Manhattan as it is for commuters and the NYPD is adept at handling crowds and protesters. Imagine what would happen if the convention were in LA!

http://www.downwindproductions.com/mamo.jpg

Or Dallas. West of Moscow-On-Hudson, it's a core belief that anyone who lives on the island is basically, completely nuts. so all scenes like naked AIDS protesters smeared with excrement do is reinforce those core beliefs.

On the subject of 20:20 hindsight :D, yesterday I heard (Democrat) pollster Patrick Caddell, who said he had predicted months ago that Kerry making Vietnam the center of his campaign could only backfire.

[larchmont]

I'd say that about covers it.

And with 90-90 foresight. :D

Except one thing: I feel quite sure it's not true what the anti-Kerry people keep saying over and over again, about Kerry's Vietnam-and-veteran emphasis "backfiring" -- I guess it's wishful thinking on their part.

IMHHHO it's obvious that it will be a huge plus.
So obvious that I have half a mind to take out the IMHHHO.
Or at least the H's.

[HondaMan]

LOL, silly protestors! :lol:

I hope the protest warriors showed them up (again):
http://protestwarrior.com/

[bob shiftright]

LOL, silly protestors! :lol:

I hope the protest warriors showed them up (again):
http://protestwarrior.com/

http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry200408300804.asp

http://protestwarrior.com/nimages/the_sign.jpg

[robert_tg]

I was there yesterday. will post some pics

[bob shiftright]

Harvesting my tomatoes and peppers and putting up a shelf in my garage, I'm afraid! Darn!

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/528mwqch.asp

Having painstakingly outlined this and other guiding principles, my source wanders off humming "This land belongs to you and me" to join the LPers in a new chant: "Amendment one for everyone," they shout. "Amendment two for me and you."

There's a pause--apparently even the Manhattan Libertarians can't think of anything catchy to say about the third amendment, since no one has tried to quarter any troops in their homes recently. But they quickly recover and move on to "Amendment four, no drug war."

Holding signs suggesting that the government "Drop Taxes, Not Bombs," proclaiming "Gun Rights: The real homeland security," and yelling for "The Right to Marry, The Right to Carry" the crowd consists mostly of registered Libertarians. First among them is the Libertarian candidate for president Michael Badnarik, who declares: "Anywhere I am standing is a free-speech zone."

Many people in the small group wear black T-shirts. They bear the legend "Unauthorized Protester" on the front and "Permits? We don't need no stinking permits" on the back. Like good capitalists, the LP is hawking the shirts for $10 a pop. As Manhattan LP chair Jim Lesczynski accepts payment from a girl who later accessorizes with a skirt fashioned out of "Badnarik for president" posters, he jokes that he is "an anti-war profiteer."

[larchmont]

I was there yesterday. will post some pics
You nuts or something?

j/k -- cool! (I guess.)

I'm staying away from Manhattan as much as I can.
Can't help going there tomorrow -- will do my best for a quick in-and-out.
So to speak.

Maybe I'll try to get it as an alternate delegate. :D
Why not, for some reason I keep getting stuff in the mail from Bush and the Republican Party, saying stuff like "Thank you for your past support......." :donno:

P.S. Bob's post is a riot.

[bob shiftright]

I'm staying away from Manhattan as much as I can.
Can't help going there tomorrow -- will do my best for a quick in-and-out.
So to speak.Oh!

For the First Presidential Debate tomorrow? Larch, I didn't know you were that much of a political junky!

I'm .... I'm impressed! :D



Austin, TX - THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE of the 2004 election cycle will be held on Tuesday, August 31, in New York City.

Arrangements have just been finalized between Libertarian Party candidate Michael Badnarik and Green Party candidate David Cobb to participate in this debate in Manhattan, while the Republican National Convention is convened.

Invitations to participate in this debate have been extended to Republican incumbent George Bush, Democratic candidate John Kerry, Independent/Reform candidate Ralph Nader and Constitution Party candidate Michael Peroutka.

The debate is scheduled to begin at 7:00 P.M., and will be held at Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church (formerly known as St Raphael's Church) at 502 West 41st Street in Manhattan.

There will be a joint press conference immediately preceding the debate at 6:00 P.M.

Open public seating is available at this event - with no loyalty oaths or other stringent preconditions required for entry to the debate.

Libertarian Party contact information is provided below.

General inquiries:
Donald Meinshausen
freedonnow@yahoo.com
(551)358-4591

Media inquiries:
Stephen Gordon
communications@badnarik.org
(256)227-8360

Paid for by Badnarik/Campagna 2004.
http://www.badnarik.org


PS Badnarik expects to be on either 49 or 50 state ballots come November, say what you will, his organization is a lot more effective than Nader's!

[HondaMan]

PS Badnarik expects to be on either 49 or 50 state ballots come November, say what you will, his organization is a lot more effective than Nader's!

No doubt...good for them! :thumbsup:

[robert_tg]

It was fun like a big party

[larchmont]

I doubt there are too many old-timers who'd be able to read that without thinking of......

CHUCK BEDNARIK!

Who here remembers Chuck Bednarik?

[pocketkiller]

well the GOP will win again...against the misguided Democratic agenda...this convention is going to be BLOCKBUSTER.

[HondaMan]

Protesting Monkeys Ape Past
http://www.nicedoggie.net/

The UK Telegraph has a wonderfully dismissive piece < http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/09/01/do0102.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/09/01/ixportal.html > on Michael Moore and the host of shallow self-satisfied drooling idiots protesting in New York. The sweetest aspect is that a Vietnam War protester rightly argues that at least back the US was enjoying democracy at home while wrongly propping up dictators abroad. Now the situation is reversed, as we remove brutal dictators and try to build a democracy abroad. This of course doesn't matter to the dancing dipshits, who merely protest because protesting seems cheap, easy, and cool.

More thoughtful anti-war protesters, the ones who stopped drooling on their bibs, did a double take back in 2003 and asked how those who purport to support peace ended up being so completely bereft of morality as to march in support of the most breathtakingly brutal dictatorial regime on earth. Even now these mindless minions point to the heinous acts of the most vile men on the planet, who just slaughtered a dozen Nepalese in cold blood, as providing evidence of their own right and righteousness. Such willing stooges remove all doubt that people really could be pathetically shallow enough to follow the likes of a Charles Manson, and judging by the sanctimonious delight they take in each new hostage execution as "proving" their case, which I suppose is the case that Iraq was better off when the executions where better organized and more systematic, they'll surely rejoice once Iraq is again ruled by genocidal execution squads. You might think this is hyperbole, but they've lauded the victory of totalitarian communism in South East Asia for almost 30 years, and with no signs of letting up. They all plan to vote for a self-confessed war criminal, one who backed these same totalitarian communists, so on the bright side their descent into the darkest depths will surely slow soon, simply because there's nowhere lower to go.

But at least their childish antics are good theatre, even if it boils down to a theater of the absurd, a Kool-Aid induced kabuki dance as they try to recapture the past by protesting Bush's nomination at a protest sponsored by International A.N.S.W.E.R., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Trotskyite Workers World Party. Some things never change.

http://www.nicedoggie.net/

[pocketkiller]

its not a dead heat. GWB is gonna win by a landslide. Mark my words.

[larchmont]

its not a dead heat. GWB is gonna win by a landslide. Mark my words.
And what if he doesn't? :D

[pocketkiller]

that's for you to decide, we're not worried about "if he doesn't"

[larchmont]

that's for you to decide, we're not worried about "if he doesn't"
Better start thinking about it though.....

You know that motto: Be prepared!

[bob shiftright]

Better start thinking about it though.....

You know that motto: Be prepared!

I'm still long oil and gold and short the US dollar, just like Soros!

One big difference is that I'm not, in good conscience, able to dump gasoline into the fire by supporting Kerry. In my case, it's "insurance". If I supported Kerry, it would become arson.

Are YOU prepared for a Kerry win? Are you SURE that you are???

http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/1y/u/upl.gif

[larchmont]

......Are YOU prepared for a Kerry win? Are you SURE that you are???

http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/1y/u/upl.gif
Why the f*** not?

Meanwhile, I'm trying to move as much income as possible into this year and as little as possible into next year, just in case he raises taxes. :D

[HondaMan]

Why the f*** not?

Meanwhile, I'm trying to move as much income as possible into this year and as little as possible into next year, just in case he raises taxes. :D

I bet you that money Kerry will raise your taxes, but you liberals seem to think you are not taxed enough as it is. :rolleyes: :jeffy:

[Ferg]

I bet you that money Kerry will raise your taxes, but you liberals seem to think you are not taxed enough as it is. :rolleyes: :jeffy:


I have a guy in my office who thinks we should be paying more. What's up with that? :eek:

[bob shiftright]

Why the f*** not?

Meanwhile, I'm trying to move as much income as possible into this year and as little as possible into next year, just in case he raises taxes. :DExcellent!

'cause you're gonna NEED it! :D

(All IMVHO, OCICBW, etc. etc.)

http://digilander.libero.it/aliendream/onde/onda-wave.jpg