More BS From R. Decker
The crap we hear from local Occupy spokesman, Robert Decker never ends. From today's Times- Standard, his statement to the Board of Supes regarding the ordinance prohibiting hanging out directly in front of the courthouse:
”These regulations prevent people from assembly, to gather and discuss things,” Decker said."
All the stuff the police had to haul away from the sidewalk in front of the courthouse is ample evidence there has been more than enough assembly, gathering and discussion of things there. It's obvious no one's right to free speech has been infringed.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 10:10 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Fred doesn't like competition in the field of never-ending crap, but he's such a prolific producer, he has nothing to worry about.
Fred works on his own blog. Decker imposes his twisted perspective on anyone he encounters. A moment in the sun for and otherwise dull and ignorant zealot.
Fred doesn't demand your attention with a lot of specious nonsense.
If you don't like it Anon, move your barcalounger out to the sidewalk and if you are offended then be kindly offended but save your caustic opinions and jugements for those who are sympathetic to your rant.
Decker inflicts his drivel on all of us. Fred just posts an observation that you, for one has had to access to condemn.
Keep it up Fred.
I neither agree with the Occupy people at the courthouse or disagree with their movement. But I thought Fred Mangels was a "libertarian" ? Doesn't libertarian stand for individual freedom and constitutional rights?......guess not.
Whose freedom or constitutional rights am I ignoring? Nobody's.
As I've pointed out umpteen times here and elsewhere, you can still protest at the courthouse. The crap the police hauled off proves there's been plenty of protests at the courthouse. Enough said.
So Fred, I have to comment here on James Decker's new work on the so called "fair wage" initiative.
He has a post about it on his blog, and his blog allows comments, but apparently not comments that disagree with his point of view.
I posted that these efforts failed once before, and that if I he were to apply the same logic he is applying towards walmart being here because the voters voted it down in 1999
( I know, they didnt, and they voted down a zoning change and then more recently approved a zoning change, but dont confuse James Decker with the facts),
then the will of the people has already been expressed by the previous failure to get enough signatures to place it on the ballot.
Thats it. Nothing nasty, no name calling, just a pretty bland opinion, which lasted on his blog before he deleted it.
James old boy, you have made my freaking night!!! Thanks for deleting my post. So much for the free exchange of ideas, lol.
Post a Comment
<< Home