Updates and links to follow downthread.
1 posted on
04/11/2009 8:50:02 AM PDT by
abb
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet; 3D-JOY; 444Flyer; 4everontheRight; 4Speed; A Mississippian; A.A. Cunningham; ...
2 posted on
04/11/2009 8:50:55 AM PDT by
abb
("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
Only government approved protests will be allowed.
Mark
3 posted on
04/11/2009 8:52:16 AM PDT by
MarkL
(Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
To: abb
About time our side stopped worrying about what the commie opposition says. Screw them, move forward.
4 posted on
04/11/2009 8:53:39 AM PDT by
raptor29
To: abb
David Allaire, president of the Board of Aldermen, said a discussion about tweaking the permit requirements is already under way.
"I think it's a good idea to look at the permit and see if there are some additional requirements that we want to put in place, and also look and see if this is something we want to actually have in an ordinance to give it some basis of law other than just a policy," Allaire said Friday. I don't know about Mr. Allaire - but personally I don't think there is anything more fulfilling than calling a committee together to discuss tweaks to permit requirements.
To: abb
French farmers/truckers occasionally paralyze the roadways in protest, I don’t think they get permits for it. The French have more balls than we do in that regard.
To: abb
"All we did, in my opinion, by not giving them a special event permit was not give them the city's official approval, which would limit our liability if something went wrong," Notte said.
There ya go! Limited liability!
God save us from the Nottes of this world.
9 posted on
04/11/2009 9:00:05 AM PDT by
RobinOfKingston
(Democrats, the party of evil. Republicans, the party of stupid.)
To: abb
Jolly good for these people!!! It’s very heartening to see that at least a few Americans still have some guts. A PERMIT!!! Unfrigginbelievable.
10 posted on
04/11/2009 9:00:24 AM PDT by
Oldpuppymax
(AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
To: abb
"I think it's a good idea to look at the permit and see if there are some additional requirements that we want to put in place, and also look and see if this is something we want to actually have in an ordinance to give it some basis of law other than just a policy," Allaire said Friday. Does anyone see any "additional requirements" in the 1st Amendment to the Bill of Rights?
These people are hidious...
11 posted on
04/11/2009 9:02:23 AM PDT by
cbkaty
(I may not always post...but I am always here......)
To: abb
Right on. Power to the people. Productive people.
13 posted on
04/11/2009 9:04:55 AM PDT by
ChildOfThe60s
(If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there)
To: abb
The rallies aren't meant to be divisive or partisanyeah... I wonder how many of those obnoxious Cinco De Mayo rallies last year by the illegal immigrants were denied for not having the "right" permits...
14 posted on
04/11/2009 9:05:20 AM PDT by
John123
(The US may be going down the drain, but everyone else will drown first...)
To: abb
Obstructing the rights of free people to non violent protest is an act of violation of our first amendment rights. This might be the beginning of the revolution. It is coming and by the sick liberal RATS pushing will be the cause of a civil war yet. Majority of Americans have just about had it.
15 posted on
04/11/2009 9:06:30 AM PDT by
Logical me
(Oh, well!!!)
To: abb
16 posted on
04/11/2009 9:08:41 AM PDT by
mainestategop
(MAINE: The way communism should be)
To: abb
It occurs to me that most taxpayers work on Wedensday, so the turnout at these events will be lower than it would have been if April 15 was a Saturday or Sunday.
If wearing red on Friday is supposed to indicate support of American troops, what symbolic gesture should taxpayers who still have jobs use to indicate support of the Tea Parties?
19 posted on
04/11/2009 9:15:23 AM PDT by
Bernard
(If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember exactly what you said.)
To: abb
Some Saudi kings need to be bowed to. If you have a small government, you need small people to run it.
20 posted on
04/11/2009 9:17:31 AM PDT by
Bernard
(If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember exactly what you said.)
To: abb
Here is the permit...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
22 posted on
04/11/2009 9:23:20 AM PDT by
Drango
(A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
To: abb
Alderman Notte needs some talkin’ to about freedom and liberty. Maybe we could have ACORN arrange a bus tour protest of his home...
William Notte
52 Chestnut Avenue
Rutland, VT
willnotte@gmail.com
779-6369
To: abb
Original Tea party didnt ask permission. Its time to start pushing them, if they want to start making mass arrests for protesting without a permit, thats fine, it will fuel the mass sit in at the jails! The masters are *way overdue* for a good solid scare.
31 posted on
04/11/2009 9:56:10 AM PDT by
DesertRhino
(Dogs earn the title of "man's best friend", Muslims hate dogs,,add that up.)
To: abb
Ethan Allen and Seth Warner would have told the ‘aldermen’ just wear to shove their permit...
33 posted on
04/11/2009 9:59:36 AM PDT by
who knows what evil?
(G-d saved more animals than people on the ark...www.siameserescue.org.)
To: abb
The very act of requiring a "permit" to protest and out-of-control government is the prime example of that government control.
IF they choose to not have the Tea Party due to the lack of a permit, then the liberals win. They will find it as easy to defeat America on that front as they are finding how easy it is for commiebama to do it through killing the economy.
For generations to come, tyrants who aspire to the presidency will be supercharged on how easy it was for commiebama to take down America, and the citizens just sat on their collective asses and did nothing about it.
The forefathers braved war, starvation, and tyranny to establish this great nation, and we're not even willing to brave a misdemeanor for not having a permit?
All of the civil rights demonstrations didn't have permits, especially when they all discovered the dire need for new color TV sets and it turned into riots. It's easy to get people to engage in civil disobedience ifyou offer them a new TV free of charge.
Of course, being Vermont it doesn't surprise me much, but the council is hiding behind the same liberal cowardice that evoked silence from Washington after NK's missile launch the other day.
The very act of going ahead with the protest will just underline the purpose for it, and, it could even make the news if it gets rowdy enough.
Commiebama told his flying monkey's in ACORN to "get in their face" (while he hid in the campaign bus), so I'm guessing that's what they understand too...so protest on, and get in the faces of those who try to block free speech, expression, and assembly.
It's time for rights to work both ways again.
36 posted on
04/11/2009 10:09:10 AM PDT by
FrankR
(We are only enslaved to the extent of charity (bailout) we receive...think about it.)
To: abb
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
40 posted on
04/11/2009 10:23:17 AM PDT by
oh8eleven
(RVN '67-'68)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson