Comments on: An Open Letter

By: emery

emery — Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:51:33 +0000

About the whole protest bit. First I think its great to see this dialog and that it has not completly fallen to the level of dogs attacking one another. My theory on protests. A wonderful amazing right we have and wonderful way to convey a message. Unfortunately most protests are not organized and carried out in a successful manner. For a protest to effective in this day and age all rage and hatered needs to be removed from it. Yes, get pissed and get involved but anger will never be a successful medium for transmitting ideas. Don’t you think it would be much more effective if the protesters were calm, collected and simply stood with signs and were intentionally silent in objection and respect for the losses by the opposition to their cause. Just thoughts from a 24 year old who feels the direction of our country needs change (not just leadership but in the whole way we view ourselves, our resource use, our compassion for others, our foreign policy, other races, sexs) I think there is lots of hope for this country but things will only get better when we as individuals and a government put humanitarian interests first and personal second. Imagine what we could have done to reduce terrorism if we spent $200 billion on humanitary projects (not just aid that 90% + comes back into the us through development contracts) True aid that really went to the people, for clean water, food, minimum wage, health care. What if we spent $1 billion dollars on relief for the people hurt by the sunami? Imagine what that would do for the image of the US in the worlds eyes. Imagine if we stopped playing games with our foreign aid and it really went where it should. Go protest but think about your message and not being a hipocrite. Imagine taking the time to muddle through the politics and find out what you are really supporting when you eat at Wendy’s, or Taco Bell. Imagine if we spoke out against the injustices we saw in a calm collected manner. Imagine if our government forgot about “politics” and focused on making the world a better place and not making money.

By: Tiffany

Tiffany — Fri, 17 Dec 2004 03:43:27 +0000

Oh, I get it… it’s okay to be a jackass, as long as you do it because you hate George W. Bush.

It’s all so clear now.

By: Tom Bridge

Tom Bridge — Fri, 17 Dec 2004 02:55:16 +0000

*Peaceful* disobedience, so long as it doesn’t wreck the city, or otherwise be idiots….that I’m just fine with. But the damn anarchists who want to stop traffic on the beltway, or run rampant through the streets with no respect to those of us who are just trying to do their jobs….

It’s open season on those motherfuckers.

By: Evil

Evil — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:17:22 +0000

They pay federal income tax and DC sucks that income tax up in the form of their federal allocation, which is the only reason this bankrupt city kept the lights on under Barry. And this is their capital. They bought it from Maryland. It’s their couch.

Peaceful civil disobedience, however massive and inconvenient is their right. We moved to the Capital, the Capital didn’t move to us (unless you happen to be 200 years old).

But I see everyone’s point. Inconvenience sucks. So do Republicans.

By: Tiffany

Tiffany — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 19:11:34 +0000

Again, I’d like to reiterate that I’m very much in favor of the presence of protests and protesters. You and I have never met, Michael, so of course you wouldn’t know this about me, but I consider freedom of expression to be the most sacred and fundamental right we all have, to the point of believing it’s our duty to engage in it. What I’m against is gratuitous assholitry. For example, gatherings that require people to stand in the street involve shutting down those streets so that the gatherings can take place safely. So why go outside the barricades and screw up traffic on OTHER streets? Can I please just go to work now?

So yes protesters, PLEASE DO COME to DC. I think it’s great, really I do. I just think that expression is more effective, and has a better chance of surviving, when it’s your *message* that pisses people off, not your *behavior in delivering it*. We should all be exercising our rights, but that’s not the same as abusing our rights.

Also, I agree wholeheartedly that there are plenty of jerks even in supporters of the political figure du jour. But they only tend to be the “actively trying to piss you off” sort of jerks when they’re engaged in confrontations with protesters. And really, that’s when they become protesters themselves.

As for Tractor Guy, yeah, I’d prefer not to get into my rant about him today, either.

By: darpino

darpino — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:49:17 +0000

And don’t even get me started on that tragic moron Tractor Man :)

By: darpino

darpino — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:47:29 +0000

Tiff for the most part I agree with you about the protests that go on through out the year here. They are useless noise. Social Events that most of the world doesn’t even notice let alone pay attention too.

I just disagree with you when it comes to Inaguaration Day. On Inaguration Day the eyes of the world are on our city. Pinpointed to the very street, Pensylvania Avenure. Inaguaration Day is the one day I feel protests have an oppurtunity to get their message out to a World Wide Audience. Therefore making protests on that day USEful not useLESS.

Besides, there will be just as many supporters of Bush clogging the sidewalks as detractors. When Clinton got re-elected the Inaguaration was a big giant love-in of support. Yet it still brought downtown to a halt. And there were plenty of A-holes to go around in that crowd too.

By: JennB

JennB — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:41:39 +0000

Exactly. There’s protesting, and then there’s taking protesting to an extreme because you don’t think your point is being made. Memo to protestors: we get your point. Many of us who aren’t protesting voted for the same person you voted for. You can protest all you want, but you still have to respect those of us who choose not to.

By: Tiffany Baxendell

Tiffany Baxendell — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:44:09 +0000

My point is not that there shouldn’t be protests. My point is that people can protest while still staying off the damn sidewalk so that those of us who don’t WANT to participate in the protest can still use them.

And if it really were just one day of protests, it wouldn’t be such a big deal, but it’s never just one day of protests in DC, and you ought to know that, Michael. There’s the inauguration. A few days later there will be the March for Life and accompanying counter protests. There’s May Day, and any time the World Bank is meeting, and monthly war protests, and International ANSWER trying to shut down the city, and bicycles on the Beltway, and anytime an Israeli dignitary visits, and Tractor Man, and on and on and on. All I ask is that people who have nothing better to do with their time than stand around and scream at buildings whose inhabitants aren’t listening should be a wee bit considerate of the people who don’t choose to participate in their expression. The people on their way to work are (supposedly) not the objects of the protest, so what point does harrassing them make?

As Jones points out, protests in DC are commonplace- tediously so. Acting like assholes only causes their point to get lost in the annoyance they’re causing.

By: Jones

Jones — Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:39:22 +0000

I guess my point is this: historically, protests were something out of the ordinary. After World War I, thousands of veterans marched into DC to protest their lack of pensions. In the 60′s, there were massive marches by african americans for equal rights – marches for a common cause.

Now, it’s just a giant orgie of people with many different, sometimes conflicting causes, making lots of noise.

These protests have become so common-place and so full of disparate extremist views, that they’re just written off as the semi-annual gatherings of the rebels without a clue.