On 11/1/11 9:01 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:37:50 -0400, John
wrote:

On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote:


Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.


A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

“The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.”

The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown
Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power
since October 9.

But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public
review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m.
and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also
required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain
$1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any
assembly activity.

Those rules make damn good sense.

Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either!

They have the million dollar liability insurance thing in Ft Myers
too. (blame lawyers for that)
It is actually pretty cheap, considering. I think it was a couple
hundred a week or so according to the news here.
When you think about all the bad things that could happen, it sounds
like a bargain.


It's too bad ordinary citizens can't force the financial services
industry and corporations to cough up billions for ruining the economy
of this country.

On Nov 1, 5:42*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 11/1/11 4:37 PM, John H wrote:





On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, *wrote:

Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.

A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

“The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.”

The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown
Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power
since October 9.

But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public
review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m.
and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also
required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain
$1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any
assembly activity.

Those rules make damn good sense.

Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either!

You would have been happy as an Aryan in Germany between 1935 and 1945...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you sure he wasn't?

On 01/11/2011 5:03 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:28:24 -0600,
wrote:

On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote:

Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Maybe, maybe not.

What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful
protest. What then?

Would fleabaggers support that?

the productive people..ie the middle class...already pay the taxes.

the rich...beloved of the right...pay no taxes

You only think that because you have never invested in yourself to get a
good job and saved to become "rich".

Just a homey couch slug with a mouth waiting for a handout.
--
The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is
the problem.

On 01/11/2011 7:23 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/1/11 9:01 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:37:50 -0400, John
wrote:

On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote:


Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.


A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

“The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.”

The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown
Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power
since October 9.

But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public
review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m.
and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also
required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain
$1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any
assembly activity.

Those rules make damn good sense.

Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either!

They have the million dollar liability insurance thing in Ft Myers
too. (blame lawyers for that)
It is actually pretty cheap, considering. I think it was a couple
hundred a week or so according to the news here.
When you think about all the bad things that could happen, it sounds
like a bargain.


It's too bad ordinary citizens can't force the financial services
industry and corporations to cough up billions for ruining the economy
of this country.

Funny, your so low you bite the hand that feeds you while voting for the
corruption that keeps you down.

You are pathetic. Now that bpubharic is back out of jail you should ask
it for a date.
--
The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is
the problem.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:50:27 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, jps wrote:


Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.


A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted ?Occupy Nashville? demonstrators? ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

?The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,? said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. ?Today?s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators? free speech rights.?

We probably have a better test case going on in Ft Myers. There is a
long standing law against camping in the park and pretty much anywhere
but a designated (zoned) camp ground within the city. You also need a
permit to do much more than visit the park and it closes at night.

It is going to be interesting when they try to make the case that
"camping" is "speech". If the protesters win, the result might be
chilling. It would say that if you have something to gripe about, you
can camp anywhere you want.

It does make me wonder how long these people would last in Lafayette
Park, right outside Obama's front door, in DC.

And I suppose I would be allowed to camp at Lake Anna State Park if I have a gripe or two.

Sounds good to me!

So you like the jackboot Nazi type of government, huh?

In article 8a33ea9c-7074-4588-8ac5-dbcd181e2913
@g1g2000vbd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Nov 1, 5:42*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 11/1/11 4:37 PM, John H wrote:





On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, *wrote:

Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.

A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted ?Occupy Nashville? demonstrators? ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

?The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,? said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. ?Today?s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators? free speech rights.?

The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown
Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power
since October 9.

But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public
review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m.
and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also
required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain
$1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any
assembly activity.

Those rules make damn good sense.

Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either!

You would have been happy as an Aryan in Germany between 1935 and 1945...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you sure he wasn't?

That's a very stupid question, Suckling Don. Hey, I notice after I've
found Harry's little consulting company and therefore can see if his
clients might have some services I may need that you two calmed right
down! I wonder if I talk to them about our buddy Harry if I'd get a
discount on services??

In article , dump-on-
says...

On 11/1/11 7:02 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote:

Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Maybe, maybe not.

What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful
protest. What then?

Would fleabaggers support that?

Who is John Gault.

If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault.

Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came.

Clueless, low information voter.

Glad to see the two of you wasting your time reading my drivel.



Atlas Shrugged is entirely too long, complex and dull a book for an
ex-marine who was posted stateside to read.

You seem to be the designated fill-in for Ingersoll, whose house was
damaged in the storm, and his now-obvious sockpuppet, iLoogy the
"non-boaterer."

Hey, Harry, where did you get the idea that I'm a non-boater? And where
did you get the idea that I'm loogy?

On 11/2/2011 8:55 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , dump-on-
says...

On 11/1/11 7:02 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote:

Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Maybe, maybe not.

What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful
protest. What then?

Would fleabaggers support that?

Who is John Gault.

If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault.

Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came.

Clueless, low information voter.

Glad to see the two of you wasting your time reading my drivel.



Atlas Shrugged is entirely too long, complex and dull a book for an
ex-marine who was posted stateside to read.

You seem to be the designated fill-in for Ingersoll, whose house was
damaged in the storm, and his now-obvious sockpuppet, iLoogy the
"non-boaterer."

Hey, Harry, where did you get the idea that I'm a non-boater? And where
did you get the idea that I'm loogy?

He's fishing for a confession. Keep him guessing. He isn't all that bright.

--
1-20-13 The end of an error

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:38:30 -0400, Drifter wrote:

On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote:


Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.


A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

“The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.”

The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown
Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power
since October 9.

But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public
review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m.
and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also
required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain
$1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any
assembly activity.

Those rules make damn good sense.

Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either!

A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da
bond, eh?
By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting?

The government. I'm speaking of the one headed by BamBam.

On 11/2/2011 5:33 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:38:30 -0400, wrote:

On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote:


Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's
constitutional rights...

Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS.


A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing
new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to
protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN).

“The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because
it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN
Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in
restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.”

The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown
Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power
since October 9.

But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public
review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m.
and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also
required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain
$1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any
assembly activity.

Those rules make damn good sense.

Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either!

A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da
bond, eh?
By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting?

The government. I'm speaking of the one headed by BamBam.

Bam who?

--
1-20-13 The end of an error