[Vision2020] Kerry speech/student tasered

g. crabtree jampot at roadrunner.com
Sat Sep 22 17:03:49 PDT 2007 

You're quite right the "another " was in error.

g
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Saundra Lund" <sslund at roadrunner.com>
To: "'g. crabtree'" <jampot at roadrunner.com>; "'Sunil Ramalingam'" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 4:21 PM
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Kerry speech/student tasered


In part, Gary Crabtree wrote:
"You apparently believe that the kid who was tazered had every right to not
follow the rules set out at the event Kerry spoke at. By your standard
should he have been allowed to go on for another 15 minutes?"

Quit your gross exaggeration -- the guy had spoken for all of about 30
seconds before the cops first interrupted him.


Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
- Edmund Burke

***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2006 through life plus
70 years, Saundra Lund. Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside
the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the
author.*****


-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of g. crabtree
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 4:06 PM
To: Sunil Ramalingam
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Kerry speech/student tasered

Now I'm afraid it's you that is deliberately misconstruing a point. I am
"choosing" to stick to nothing. I most assuredly did not accuse you of
"supporting state action to squelch political speech." I was attempting to
determine where you think the line is to be drawn. You might note the
question marks sprinkled through out my posts.
 
You apparently believe that the kid who was tazered had every right to not
follow the rules set out at the event Kerry spoke at. By your standard
should he have been allowed to go on for another 15 minutes? An hour? Till
the cows came home? What about if instead of a topic that is near and dear
to your heart he had elected to carry on about repealing the 13th and 14th
amendment? That would still fall under the umbrella of political speech
after all. Or does that take the discussion that extra centimeter and become
the dreaded "Hate Speech." Abhorred by all and protected by none.
 
Candidates at a debate have rules laid out in advance stipulating time
limits. If they egregiously exceed these limits the moderator will cut them
off and if ness kill their mike. Is this a constitutional travesty?   
 
How about the AARP event that Ms. Hovey announced earlier today. If I jump
up and commence a 90 minute conservative rant about the evils of the current
Mayor and council, even though the event schedule has been clearly laid out,
will that be just ducky by you? Political speech at a political event after
all.
 
Nice try on the "I was six" dodge. I was 10. At least a dozen years before I
started to be aware of anything that didn't involve girls and debauchery.
We've both been to school. You write as though you may have been paying
attention. It's not as though the events surrounding the 1968 democratic
convention in Chicago were an obscure, seldom mentioned event. The whole
Chicago 7 situation revolved around the notion of violent demonstration as
political speech at what was a decidedly political event. Still diggen' the
all's fair speech wise at a political gathering?
 
Just so there's no mistaking my intent this time around, the point I am
making, and the question I am asking is where do you draw the line? Oh, and
for the record I did not tell or challenge "Andy to find support for his
statement," I told him flat out there was none to be had. Subtle difference
I know and, I suspect, you know as well. It just wouldn't have made your
case quite as well to have been accurate.
 
g
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
<mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> >
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com> >
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Kerry speech/student tasered


> Then Gary, you are choosing to stick to a belief that I have never 
> supported.  The only thing you are proving is that you don't know squat 
> about me or my beliefs.  Your position is the written version of covering 
> your ears and shouting "La la la," but have at it, it's still a free 
> country.  For now.
> 
> You just told Andy to find support for his statement about you in your
last 
> hundred or so posts.  I challenge you to find me supporting state action
to 
> squelch political speech in my posts.  Good luck and pack a lunch.  You
have 
> nothing but your wish to pin a belief to me, one that I don't hold.  You 
> want people to support what they say about you, but you don't hold
yourself 
> to the same standard when it comes to others.
> 
> I am talking here about a person who was engaged in political speech.  It 
> was not accompanied by violence.  This doesn't have to be construed as 
> political speech in 'some vague way .'
> 
> The Yippees in Chicago in '68?  I was 6, Gary, I must have missed the 
> footage while I was riding my bike, so I'm not talking about them.  Not 
> interested in bait-and-switch.
> 
> Sunil
> 
> 
>>From: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com <mailto:jampot at roadrunner.com>
>
>>To: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
<mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> >
>>CC: <vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com> >
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Kerry speech/student tasered
>>Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 11:56:42 -0700
>>
>>I understand perfectly well that you're unhappy with Theresa's boy
>>and I'm skeptical about your assertion. Would you have extended your 
>>argument to the Yippies in Chicago in '68? Violence as speech in a 
>>political setting. I do not believe that the constitution gives a person 
>>unlimited license to act the fool as long as what they say (or do) can in 
>>some vague way be construed as a political statement.
>>
>>g
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
<mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> >
>>Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com> >
>>Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 10:49 AM
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Kerry speech/student tasered
>>
>>
>> > Wrong.  I absolutely would make the identical argument.  I'm talking 
>>about
>> > the Constitution, not my own preferences.  And isince you missed it, 
>>most of
>> > my condemnation here is for the person I voted for in the last
election, 
>>not
>> > Bush.
>> >
>> > Sunil
>> >
>> >
> 
> 
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>               http://www.fsr.net <http://www.fsr.net>

>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> 
> =======================================================
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070922/93bc391b/attachment.html

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list