General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

171. Did you think that everyone in an occupation camp was sleeping at the same time?

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 03:14 PM

Dec 2011

Everything is not free speech. But would you say that a soldier, when he is sleeping in a tent while at war, is not at war while he is sleeping? Only when he is awake?

In a few of the court rulings that were in favor of the occupiers judges stated a concern that when operating 'under the umbrella of the 1st Amendment, applying local ordinances may be violating the Constitutional rights of the occupiers'. Iow, the Constitution trumpts local ordinances.

People sleep in tents during the day when camping. Does that mean they are not really camping when getting some rest during the day?

The question is not whether they are sleeping or not. The question is, if they were not exercising their Constitutional Rights, would they be there and since that statement includes occupying public space until their grievances are addressed, clearly they need rest.

Money can be transferred to candidates electronically even while the donor is sleeping. Is that money still speech?

And again, is the soldier who is sleeping, at war while s/he is sleeping?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

186 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Occupy Wall Street Banned From Democratic National Convention [View all] annabanana Dec 2011 OP

That's right. cliffordu Dec 2011 #1

well crap oldhippydude Dec 2011 #12

Occupy is protest Obama's fundraising and Democrats as much as Republicans texshelters Dec 2011 #162

"it will not tolerate planned Occupy Wall Street demonstrations" Matariki Dec 2011 #2

I heard they are handing out pepper spray The Straight Story Dec 2011 #3

Whether they tolerate or not is meaningless. Cleita Dec 2011 #4

Agreed, and it should be quite interesting. Magoo48 Dec 2011 #41

Agreed Beavker Dec 2011 #152

And unfortunately that sounds like an open invitation to do just that. Dare me anyone? jwirr Dec 2011 #30

Exactly. texshelters Dec 2011 #164

That's the writer's interpretation of the situation. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #60

City council passing resolutions is the "writer's interpretation" ? loudsue Dec 2011 #167

sad. this is delusional but then the dems think they can 'harness' roguevalley Dec 2011 #5

Not by banning them, they won't! nt Remember Me Dec 2011 #83

What does the article have to do with Dems? Sheepshank Dec 2011 #126

Exactly it was their decision & they had to know it would cause problems........... Historic NY Dec 2011 #135

Good point. AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #144

The Dems and the city of Charlotte have a DEAL. Bill Anolon Dec 2011 #158

And more than a year ago when this arena was decided by the DNC... Sheepshank Dec 2011 #163

If you think the DNC has no present leverage on Charlotte, you are wrong. Bill Anolon Dec 2011 #180

you failed to prove anything. Sheepshank Dec 2011 #181

Since when does the DNC control the City of Charlotte, NC? pnwmom Dec 2011 #139

Since the DNC picked the lucky City of Charlotte as a convention site Bill Anolon Dec 2011 #178

pure made up conjecture... Sheepshank Dec 2011 #182

This should ensure lots of demonstrators. Shades of Chicago 1968. McCamy Taylor Dec 2011 #6

kerZAKly! I sure hope cooler heads prevail on this.. . .n/t annabanana Dec 2011 #9

Good Point, McCamy. I do expect Chicago '68. The pot is bubbling...and they make it worse. KoKo Dec 2011 #13

We lost the election, too demosincebirth Dec 2011 #109

And still a good possibility if nothing is done about the voting machines... Xtraneous Dec 2011 #136

with police armed to the teeth oldhippydude Dec 2011 #19

But, that would take an intelligent approach Remember Me Dec 2011 #84

That would really work! truedelphi Dec 2011 #99

I'm always up for a challenge. mmonk Dec 2011 #7

And how did 1968 go? boxman15 Dec 2011 #8

Perhaps they would be "better off". . annabanana Dec 2011 #11

This message was self-deleted by its author KoKo Dec 2011 #14

in fact oldhippydude Dec 2011 #20

Its the republicans who are tearing this country up, not the democrats. It's like getting killed by demosincebirth Dec 2011 #138

Occupy cares not republican, democratic, or other. 2pooped2pop Dec 2011 #168

Your thoughts on the RW republicans and your preference to replace "They all must go."? demosincebirth Dec 2011 #183

What I personally think should happen to the republicans 2pooped2pop Dec 2011 #184

I thought so, Don Quixote's " the impossible dream." demosincebirth Dec 2011 #185

Probably, but it looks like the only dream left. 2pooped2pop Dec 2011 #186

DLC style dems are just as guilty as wall st enablers themadstork Dec 2011 #17

bingo oldhippydude Dec 2011 #18

Those who met violence with violence -- people like the SDS -- helped bring on the Nixon years. pnwmom Dec 2011 #115

Chicago '68 was a police riot. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #120

If Obama was a functional outlet there wouldn't be an OWS TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #22

Yeah, it's a shame the Democratic party refuses to learn any lessons from history no limit Dec 2011 #54

I guess you haven't noticed Remember Me Dec 2011 #85

"the movement would be better off going after the gigantic financial institutions" Occulus Dec 2011 #89

or Goldman Sachs. Chan790 Dec 2011 #159

Read my reply number 99. truedelphi Dec 2011 #101

It was LBJ's fault that Nixon won, not the protesters in Chicago. Ken Burch Dec 2011 #108

Likewise it will Obama's fault if the GOP retakes the WH. Chan790 Dec 2011 #160

Actually it went quite well if you were committed to ending the war. nt. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #111

I agree with you. Some are trying to create the same senario as 1968 and demosincebirth Dec 2011 #137

Exactly! AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #145

hmmm... I doubt that will have the expected result. got root Dec 2011 #10

"Wall Street of the South" THAT tells you everything you need to know. Odin2005 Dec 2011 #15

Headquarters of Bank of America. kenny blankenship Dec 2011 #28

sure is... G_j Dec 2011 #37

Telling, that. dixiegrrrrl Dec 2011 #38

Repeat of a post above Sheepshank Dec 2011 #127

All the more reason laylah Dec 2011 #42

Damn, I didn't know that! Odin2005 Dec 2011 #46

Wachovia as well Enrique Dec 2011 #50

Wachovia was bought out by Wells Fargo. glowing Dec 2011 #65

These two posts are telling. I was not happy about the location of the convention and now it seems jwirr Dec 2011 #32

Sounds like I need to make plans to be there themadstork Dec 2011 #16

Yeah, no way this could BACKFIRE on them, eh? Fire Walk With Me Dec 2011 #25

Just issuing this order is going to backfire on them. jwirr Dec 2011 #33

yo dawg- Huey P. Long Dec 2011 #21

They are not nadinbrzezinski Dec 2011 #23

Someone, or a whole lot of someones Fire Walk With Me Dec 2011 #24

Did you expect anything less? UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2011 #26

You didn't really think the 99% were going to be invited, didya? kenny blankenship Dec 2011 #27

Having been around for a while I assume they are trying to avoid another Chicago 1968. It might jwirr Dec 2011 #29

"a representative"? boppers Dec 2011 #143

They are not elected and they should be invited guests otherwise you have just ended the system jwirr Dec 2011 #155

Good luck with that, Charlotte. EFerrari Dec 2011 #31

the ghost of mayor daley............. madrchsod Dec 2011 #34

What does anybody expect? First the party pisses off the unions -- AGAIN -- by picking a right-to- Brickbat Dec 2011 #35

good lord...read the article again. Sheepshank Dec 2011 #128

Yup, I jumped to conclusions. Brickbat Dec 2011 #129

ok...that I understand :) n/t Sheepshank Dec 2011 #156

How can a city government in the US legally do this? caseymoz Dec 2011 #36

it isnt legal themadstork Dec 2011 #39

Which gets around the question caseymoz Dec 2011 #48

4th amendment - didn't you hear TBF Dec 2011 #44

They were pulling shit like this long before that. caseymoz Dec 2011 #47

that's true - TBF Dec 2011 #49

Yes, and I'm afraid it will get that brutal. caseymoz Dec 2011 #142

Any NC Du'ers here that will let me occupy their yard? PuraVidaDreamin Dec 2011 #40

Here we go again with free speech zones.... Jello Biafra Dec 2011 #43

Well, at least they aren't trying to co-opt the movement. OneGrassRoot Dec 2011 #45

Mare Daley: Da police ain't here to create disorder. Da police is here to preserve disorder. ChairmanAgnostic Dec 2011 #51

Please explain how the Charlotte City Council is actually secretly the DNC. With links. emulatorloo Dec 2011 #52

+1,000 nt AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #146

When you have nothing original to offer ... GeorgeGist Dec 2011 #53

Is it too late to move the convention? That's the obvious response. saras Dec 2011 #55

The Democrats more than likely requested this be done. in_cog_ni_to Dec 2011 #56

They wanted Charlotte because NC went blue in 2008 - first time since Carter slay Dec 2011 #61

Ba_Lon_EY Sheepshank Dec 2011 #130

The point is, why did the Dems choose to hold the Convention there? There have been objections sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #140

I'm sure they pulled the name out of a hat Sheepshank Dec 2011 #157

Well, I didn't say they chose it because of OWS. I said, they now need to make a statement sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #172

Well, that poses the question "Which side are you on?" Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #57

yep. (n/t) bread_and_roses Dec 2011 #68

So how many vendors selling merchandise will this effect? glowing Dec 2011 #58

I plan to go to Charlotte and protest with Occupy regardless slay Dec 2011 #59

And I thank you now for your service to this country. Occupy. -eom Huey P. Long Dec 2011 #64

the schism is approaching librechik Dec 2011 #62

I think you need to re-read the OP...nothing to do with the DNC Sheepshank Dec 2011 #131

thx, got that straight, finally! librechik Dec 2011 #176

Free speech zones. Remind me, where have we seen those before? Nt xchrom Dec 2011 #63

Outside of women's health clinics.. Fumesucker Dec 2011 #73

And anywhere George W. Bush went - anywhere plus a buffer of one or two miles, that is. kenny blankenship Dec 2011 #75

I was just pointing out where free speech zones started. Fumesucker Dec 2011 #77

It was first used against the fundies at abortion clinics mwrguy Dec 2011 #91

rec mdmc Dec 2011 #66

OWS has a way of showing up where they aren't invited Jack Rabbit Dec 2011 #67

If they thought the teabaggers caused political change... 2pooped2pop Dec 2011 #69

If 1968 comes to mind one-eyed fat man Dec 2011 #70

Occupy DNC deacon_sephiroth Dec 2011 #71

+1 (nt) rbnyc Dec 2011 #110

Not smart. Rex Dec 2011 #72

Stupid Stupid Stupid LiberalLovinLug Dec 2011 #74

"0. Occupy Wall Street Banned From Democratic National Convention" greiner3 Dec 2011 #76

The mock and undermine crowd liking this one Kingofalldems Dec 2011 #78

Every Democratic Convention in recent history has restricted protesters frazzled Dec 2011 #79

So, inconvenient protest is inconvenient. Occulus Dec 2011 #90

I'd suggest ... frazzled Dec 2011 #92

It was Blaine the mono, from King's "The Dark Tower III: The Wastelands"; the context is even apt Occulus Dec 2011 #93

One thing that people who did not live during the Great Depression do not understand - truedelphi Dec 2011 #106

Consider THIS post rec'd! Those encampments were not just for show. annabanana Dec 2011 #116

I do see exactly that in the consitution. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #124

So then you agree that ... frazzled Dec 2011 #133

Where in the 1st Amendment is there is a time limit on when Citizens can exercise their right to sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #141

You can't exercise it in your sleep frazzled Dec 2011 #151

Did you think that everyone in an occupation camp was sleeping at the same time? sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #171

Well, even so.... AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #147

Same old faces, same outcomes: Daley, Sr., and Daley, Jr. heckling at the Democratic Convention '68 leveymg Dec 2011 #80

Thank you for those photos. Yet as someone who truedelphi Dec 2011 #103

Man, FUCK the Daleys. Both of 'em. AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #148

What about the RNC? rbixby Dec 2011 #81

why not both? FirstLight Dec 2011 #82

Thank you fo rthat piece of common sense. truedelphi Dec 2011 #105

1968 redux jaysunb Dec 2011 #86

Wow. Talk about buying trouble! n/t TygrBright Dec 2011 #87

I have some honest questions about this ... JoePhilly Dec 2011 #88

Very good points, JoePhilly. Thank you! n/t truedelphi Dec 2011 #107

Optimism may prove to be quite helpful next year, but...... AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #149

Which "They"? JoePhilly Dec 2011 #174

banning "noxious substances," Viva Dec 2011 #94

A Suggestion unionworks Dec 2011 #95

nice FirstLight Dec 2011 #97

The playing field unionworks Dec 2011 #100

Welcome to the revolution unionworks Dec 2011 #119

Genius! bluedigger Dec 2011 #96

Mark My Words unionworks Dec 2011 #98

Yup. Chicago 1968. Bonobo Dec 2011 #102

You DO realize that they're doing Occupy a favor, don't you? MannyGoldstein Dec 2011 #104

.... SammyWinstonJack Dec 2011 #112

Very good point HeyHeymymy Dec 2011 #113

Charlotte, NC made the decision -- not the DNC. n/t pnwmom Dec 2011 #114

What a convienient cop out unionworks Dec 2011 #118

I think that point would defeat the point of this thread, Mom Capn Sunshine Dec 2011 #121

series? that is your argument? Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #122

the people have rights. barbtries Dec 2011 #117

Another example of why the convention shouldn't be in N Carolina. baldguy Dec 2011 #123

This was genned up by the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce to stimulate motel/hotel bertman Dec 2011 #125

If so, then I have a big FUCK YOU for the Charlotte C of C. AverageJoe90 Dec 2011 #150

I think they should We are Devo Dec 2011 #132

Standing room only at the next public meeting in Council chambers! MrMickeysMom Dec 2011 #134

I have seen one of the organizers from Charlotte on TV. He was very impressive and sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #173

Great! I'd love someone to upload the stream! eom MrMickeysMom Dec 2011 #179

1968 and today have something in common. SavWriter Dec 2011 #153

Call Them and tell them how you feel! fredamae Dec 2011 #154

They are poking the hornets' nest texshelters Dec 2011 #161

Move the Convention texshelters Dec 2011 #165

Why not "Occupy" a field with Tents? fredamae Dec 2011 #166

Of course HarryPowell Dec 2011 #169

The article says it's the city's doing JNelson6563 Dec 2011 #170

Amendment 1 aggiesal Dec 2011 #175

Because protesting these Conventions has done so much good to date. snark WhatsNext Dec 2011 #177