D.C. Protesters Picket at Boehner’s Apartment

[ensho]

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/02/17/d-c-protesters-picket-at-boehner%E2%80%99s-apartment/


There were protesters at John Boehner’s apartment early today (there should be every day), not that they got close enough to hand-deliver a letter to him. No, Capitol Police formed a barricade while The Boehner trotted behind, ignoring the demonstrators who wanted to know why he was “treading on D.C.”

The protest, organized by the voting rights group DC Vote, reflects a new, more aggressive approach to objecting to congressional influence held over the city. Last week nearly a dozen demonstrators were thrown out of a House hearing on an abortion measure after staging a silent protest. <...>

“We went to his home because he has come to our home in D.C. and tried to tell us how to live, even though no one here voted for him,” said. “He’s tried to change our local laws and override our elected officials, and so we went to his home to tell him to leave D.C. alone and stop interfering in local affairs and local laws here.

“After so many conservative new lawmakers in the House came to DC with the cry of ‘Don’t tread on me’ we want to say back to them and to their leader Speaker Boehner, ‘Don’t tread on D.C.’,” she said.

-snip-
----------------------------------

don't you love it that he had to hide behind the cops

more power to the protesters - make him wet his pants

[Tippy]

1. K&R......

[Oceansaway]

2. K&R...n/t

[xphile]

3. Figures Boner would hide behind the Capital Police.

I hope they harangue his sorry orange ass every day.

[dkofos]

4. How long before he has them arrested??

[RKP5637]

5. The orange boner! n/t

[Angry Dragon]

6. The people of DC are being taxed without representation

That sounds unconstitutional to me
And the very foundation this country was based on

[Recursion]

9. It's all too Constitutional

Our colonial status is basically specified in the Constitution.

[Angry Dragon]

10. I an not understanding your post ........ sorry

[ProgressiveProfessor]

17. That DC is not to be a state is defined in the US Constitution

"The U.S. Constitution allows for the creation of a special district to serve as the permanent national capital. The District is therefore not a part of any U.S. state and is instead directly overseen by the federal government."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.

[Angry Dragon]

22. Thank you

[jberryhill]

16. Ummm..... no

You do realize that the political situation of DC is specifically Constitutional, no?

Article 1, Section 8 empowers Congress:

"To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States..."

That "District" mentioned IS what became the District of Columbia. The entire point was that Congress would not be located in any state and potentially subject to the laws of such state.

See also:

Amendment 23 Ratified 3/29/1961.

1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

---

In assigning a number of Electors to DC, the 23rd Amendment expressly mentions the fact that DC isn't entitled to Senators or Representatives.

I don't know where you get "unconstitutional" out of that. The Constitution expressly assigns exclusive legislative authority over DC to the Congress and does not provide for Congressional representation of DC.

[Recursion]

19. IMO there is no statutory solution to this problem

It will take a Constitutional amendment, which will take making the states give a shit.

[jberryhill]

49. Or moving the capital of the US

Note the word "may" in the establishment of a district by cession of other states.

If, say, we built an offshore island and moved the seat of the US government to it, then DC could apply for statehood.

[Angry Dragon]

24. Thank you

[kcks]

7. This

is wrong I do not believe that anyone should have to put up with at there place of residence. I do not care which party is involved, I do not know but have those on the right ever gone to Dem's home like this. If so do you think that was a good idea?

[Tsiyu]

11. So you're one of those who believes Repuke politicians

are sort of like "royalty" and they should be sheltered and protected from the people whose lives the politicians affect?

If you'd spelled "their" correctly, I might give you some benefit of doubt.

However, I'll just say this: when the millionaire motherfuckers like Boner decide to become public reps, they also make laws that COME TO OUR HOMES, that affect us WHERE WE LIVE. Boner wants, for example, to make laws that put his influence IN WOMEN'S UTERI. He wants to gut social security affecting THE HOMES OF SENIORS.

He chose pubilc service. Neither he, nor any representative, has any right to NOT be confronted WHERE THEY LIVE when they make laws affecting us WHERE WE LIVE.

Only a coward would not want to confront Boner's corrupt, ignorant, greedy personage wherever they can. Only a sick, greedy, rightwing fool would have a problem with it or would wish to "protect" Boner.

He's not a goddamned infant.

[Michigan-Arizona]

13. Thank you Tsiyu! [phone]

Thank you for saying what I would have liked to have said!

[BobbyBoring]

15. THANK YOU

I wish I had another You Rock heart!

[ensho]

18. love your way with words - thank you and hugs

nt

[Tsiyu]

29. As Barney Fife said; "Nip it in the Bud!"

and a hug back to you, Bobby Boring and Michigan Arizona


:grouphug:

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

33. K & R Tsiyu !

:thumbsup:

[Fire1]

12. There's a name for people like you. I just can't think of it,

right now.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. Important point

How would posters here feel if the shoe was on the other foot? For example, protesting at the home of a OB/GYN who performed abortions?

If we are good with it being done to Bohner, are we good with it being done to those on our side?

[Recursion]

20. How is that comparable?

If the OBGYN were trying to force women to have abortions, the way Boehner is trying to force them not to, of course it would be appropriate to protest in front of their home.

Boehner comes to my city, votes against my Representative having a vote even in the committee of the whole, and overrides the acts of my democratically elected city council. Damn straight I don't see anything wrong with protesting in front of his house.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. The concept is protesting at someone's home regardless of the issue

If we support protesting at a residence, then we must allow protesting at any and all residences.

Too often I see here and elsewhere where it is fine if we do something but intolerable when our opponents do the same thing. I am pointing out that we need to be consistent and willing to put up with it when the shoe is on the other foot.

[Recursion]

28. Not true

If we support protesting at a residence, then we must allow protesting at any and all residences.

Gratuitously asserted, and now gratuitously denied.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Why do you refuse to consider the general case? What basis would you use for limiting such protests

So far there has been brought up a "public figure" standard, and the "who writes their paycheck" standard. What would be yours for determining if it was legal/proper to protest at someone's residence?

I tend to be for rights and liberties and against gratuitous restrictions on them, leaving that role to the repukes. What restrictions do you thing are appropriate about locations for protest and why?

[Recursion]

37. Easy

What would be yours for determining if it was legal/proper to protest at someone's residence?

Simple: if their actions affect my life at my residence.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

39. Since that would be in the eye of the beholder, you would be good for any and all protests at

someone's residence?

[fizzgig]

21. an ob/gyn isn't a public servant or public figure

i would have problems with people protesting outside the home of a pharmacist who refuses to dispense plan b or something similar to that.

but boner is living on our dime and works against our best interests. i hope that asshole is hassled every hour of the day.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

27. So you would apply a public figure standard before allowing some protest locations?

Interesting approach...not without some merit. Consider this:
- How would you have that standard applied and who should do it?
- Would you require a permit or a court decision if the permit was contested by the target?
- Should neighbors have a say in this as well?
There are some thorny constitutional issues here as well

[fizzgig]

32. it seems you didn't read my post very well

i never said i wanted to regulate or ban protests of any kind, i simply said i would not be in support of a protest outside the residence of a private citizen.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. I took it as advocating that be the legal standard, not just your preferences

[Tsiyu]

26. Is that doctor paid with PUBLIC MONEY?

Fuck no! Repukes like Boner don't want the government to pay for abortions even if a 15-year-old girl is raped.

Boner IS paid from the public dole, and has accountability to every single citizen he impacts.

The doctor is in private practice, not out in public making laws the rest of us have to live by.

If you can't see the difference, that's a problem there...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

30. So who writes the paycheck is your standard for who is allowed to be protested and where?

I do not support the Orange Man in the least, but if we are applauding protesting at his residence, we then should accept the right to protests at the residences of those we support. Are we really willing to do that?

What if it was a pro choice Democrat and they the anti choice crowd showed up outside their house with their gory posters? Would you be OK with that?

[Tsiyu]

35. You're starting to get it

"So who writes the paycheck is your standard for who is allowed to be protested and where?"

Do you understand the concept of "public" vs "private?"

Obviously you're having issues with that concept.

You see, when people are elected, they become PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. YOUR employee and MY employee. Why? Because this is a representative government and our "representatives" are supposed to work to make our lives better.

If they make our lives worse where we live, we have the right to confront them where they live.

"Government should be afraid of the people" not the other way around.

If representatives like Boner have no mercy on DC, or on the working person, or on voter rights, etc., they don't deserve the mercy you are desperately trying to show them.

Boner and his ilk have voted to allow the government to SPY on you, to monitor your phone calls, to even enter your home without your knowledge or consent.

But you are concerned that some folks might stage a protest in front of his home?


Some Americans prefer being doormats, I suppose.

Kudos to those who protested in front of Boner's apartment. I hope it marks just the beginning of this sort of thing.

Actions have consequences....

[ProgressiveProfessor]

40. So you would be good with the anti choice gory poster protest outside any elected officials home?

That is actually more even handed than many would be.

[Tsiyu]

44. Would not bother me because the pro choice protesters

would outnumber the anti-choice protesters in the end. :)

And anyone who supports Bonehead Boner could have shown up at his door as well, telling him what a lovely orange King he is, had they wanted to.....

It's time for bold action. I realize your online persona is one of reserve, thoughtfulness and entrenched non-action because "it isn't prudent" but you may be the type who will be left in the dust when the rest of us take to the streets.

Enough is enough. All the intellectual mental masturbation in the world is never going to change anything. It may make some feel "superior" or "above the fray" but that's only because those types have not been severely impacted by government policy.

Those of us who are affected don't have time for the diddling.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

45. Your assumptions are dead wrong

I have more IRL demonstration time than many and some interesting direct action taken.

However, I always find it interesting when some say it is OK if we do it, it is wrong if they do it. Their rationale is always amusing, including yours.

As for the "intellectual mental masturbation", what do you think most discussion board posting is? Those who rabble rouse the hardest online are often the hardest to find in real life.

[Tsiyu]

46. My rationale?

Since I never said "it's okay if we do it but not them" I'm just not sure whose post you might have read.

I'm surprised you admit to RL demonstrations. Wasn't that just an exercise in futility? Shouldn't you have stayed home and read a book or something? And of course, this is the internet. You could be lying through your teeth for all I know or care.

And about the discussion board: DU serves many purposes; some vent, some try to organize, some come here to try to dissuade anyone from any action whatsoever. I have lost my patience with the latter types.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

47. As could you...

The US is not Europe. We have not had an effective general strike in generations. Boycotts tend to work better here, so does shaming, including the picketing of residences and places of work. Street protests have rarely had much effect recently. That may be change depending on the outcome in Wisconsin and elsewhere. Those in power are not going to take the walkouts very well and what consequences are inflicted and how they are handled will be telling.

Pick your targets and methods with care lest your actions be ineffective.

[Tsiyu]

48. You are correct summing up our recent history

But it has reached critical mass now. Too many freedoms and rights (including the right to eat and be sheltered and have health care and to retire with more than catfood to dine on) have been yanked out from under us.

Every time someone stands up against this nightmare - whether in Wisconsin's rotunda or in front of Boner's apt. - it emboldens more people to do the same.


I understand your point about picking battles, but they're ALL our battles now. Every effort should be applauded and encouraged, as long as the protests are non-violent.

Peace.

[spanone]

50. ob/gyn - not a politician....not public servant

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. So should people have the right to protest outside his residence or not?

[PatSeg]

38. Yes they have

Rightwingers frequently post personal information about Democratic legislators on the Internet, which has resulted in threats and vandalism. I personally would prefer demonstrations at the Capital building, but different people have different approaches.

[Recursion]

8. Bring Democracy to DC!

End taxation without representation. Gray has said he's willing to be arrested in civil disobedience, as has most of the council, but they want a lot of residents to be willing to go to jail with them.

[eleny]

25. Did he cry?

[lonestarnot]

42. Well but of course he did!

:hi: ;)

[opihimoimoi]

36. The Dude FAILED at National LEADERSHIP SCHOOL...an F grade

His actions/words are evidence of him cheating stealing and lying....he cannot govern to save his skinny ass.

[lonestarnot]

41. Tee hee!

Get it!

[upi402]

43. Wow!!! good for those folks!

He's either golfing or out boozing - but to the protesters;
:patriot:

[barbtries]

52. and cry

oh, wait, he cries over anything.

[deacon]

53. Sheesh. It's only been a short while since they got some power back and bam...chaos is back.

Why cause chaos in a time of employment crisis? They don't give a damn about anybody.