My Photo

October 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

BlogStats


« Ruminations – 12jul14 | Main | Sandbox - 14jul14 »

12 July 2014

Comments

George Boardman

Right wing park? Jeffy's definitely gone over the edge this time. But it is amusing to see somebody take a ridiculous position and then refuse to back down because he might have to admit he isn't perfect.

His paranoia may result from sleep deprivation because of the neighborhood he lives in: Drugs, drinking, late-night rowdiness, a bank robbery, and now alleged prostitution.

Jeffy better speed-up his departure to Italy because he definitely needs the rest. Addio!

Barry Pruett

Cross Post: I am speaking for myself and not behalf of the rest of the board. In your comment, July 12, 2014 at 6:49 am, you (Pelline) clearly and unequivocally advocate censorship by time, place, and manner restrictions on speech based its content (in this case political speech). You (Pelline) regularly censor speech based upon content on your blog – and that is your choice and you are free to continue to do it. As a director fo the park and having taken an oath to defend the Constitution, I will vigorously defend the God-given right of free speech from unreasonable restriction and from bulliyng and intimidation by a recalcitrant blogger. Clearly, I am not a politician (and never intend to be), as I actually say what I think. I will continue to mock those who seek to censor free speech in our society. As you (Pelline)must always have the last word, you may have it…let free speech continue to reign in America.

Todd Juvinall

Again I ask Pelline. Why did you choose to support the OWS takeover of the public park in NYC?

fish

jeffpelline says:

July 12, 2014 at 6:49 am

Barry,

There’s no need to strike an insulting tone in your appointed role as a Western Gateway Park director. As someone who is politically active yourself, you should know the law: Parks cannot regulate the content of the speech, but they can regulate the time, manner and place in which the speech is delivered. Here’s the National Parks’ policy: http://www.nps.gov/dewa/planyourvisit/first-amendment.htm

Western Gateway Park’s mission is supposed to be “filled with fun for individuals, families and groups.” For whatever reason, the park is hosting more events from political activists, so perhaps the board ought to think more deeply about its policy for handing this. I know of no other park in the county, or region, where this is occurring with any regularity: Pioneer Park, Condon Park, Truckee River Regional Park, just to name a few.

How do you know that taking to the en masse to discuss political alternatives to the standard lefty drivel isn't just, “filled with fun for individuals, families and groups.”

I'm not really that political but when I think deeply about it it sorta sounds like fun to me!

fish

...taking to the en masse...


...taking to the park en masse...


Sigh.....

RL Crabb

What he implies is that if someone visiting the park is offended by the beliefs of a gathering he or she does not agree with, then the park should be able to bar them. What utter bullshit.

Gregory

Earl, I think Jeff Pelline isn't being that general in his criticism... it's more that if *he* is offended (or pretends to be offended) by the beliefs of the gathering, then the park *should* bar them.

After all, all proper-thinking people recognize "hard-right" (as defined by Jeff) rhetoric as hate speech... don't they?

George Rebane

It is interesting to me that events at parks and our fairground hosting events that celebrate various politically biased leftwing causes like 'earth day', 'environmental celebrations', 'LGBT pride', 'one world workshops', 'stopping gun violence', etc are not seen by liberals and their lamestream as advocating a polarized and polarizing ideology, and therefore are excused from such criticism.

fish

Perhaps better in the "sandbox".

As a park director, you ought to worry just as much about the rights of park visitors, not just the “God-given right of free speech.” As the National Park Service policy states: “If you feel harassed or impeded from enjoying the park by a person exercising their First Amendment right of free speech, please notify a park ranger.”


What do you consider "harassment"? Have you been subject to any act or behavior meeting your definition of harassment while at the park?

fish

From the suggested protocol:

Freedom of Speech & the First Amendment


National Park Service Statement on Free Speech

Call (570) 426-2440 for information about Free Speech permits

The Right of Free Speech

In conformity with the rights that are guaranteed in the United States Constitution, the National Park Service allows people to exercise freedom of speech, and groups to assemble peacefully on park land. However, to carry out its mission of preserving the cultural and natural resources of the parks, and to protect the rights and safety of visitors, the National Park Service does manage these activities through a permit system. Permits regulate aspects of activity such as location, dates and times, and number of participants.

Your right to a permit for the Exercise of Free Speech

There is no fee for a permit to exercise one's first amendment right of free speech. However, a permit is still required for first amendment activity in the park; those without a permit may be asked to leave. Content is not regulated.

To apply, please download and complete this application.
Application for General Use (short form)


Your Rights as a Park Visitor

The content of what permit-holders have to say is not regulated, and the opinions expressed by permit-holders may not conform to the vision and policy of the National Park Service. Indeed, the permit-holders may have requested a specific location in a park to speak out because they are specifically opposed to National Park Service policy or plans. As a visitor to the park, you are welcome to consider the point of view of those who are exercising their right of free speech in the park. Please also avail yourself of the opportunity to learn the National Park Service's answer to such opposing views.

You may contact the park's superintendent of the park with your questions and opinions at:
Superintendent
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area
1978 River Road
Bushkill PA 18324.

If you feel harassed or impeded from enjoying the park by a person exercising their First Amendment right of free speech, please notify a park ranger.


Again....have you been harassed or impeded from using the park when political activities were occurring?

fish

....and now the predictable complaints about tone.

Now Rebane weighs in with his jaded view: “It is interesting to me that events at parks and our fairground hosting events that celebrate various politically biased leftwing causes like ‘earth day’, ‘environmental celebrations’, ‘LGBT pride’, ‘one world workshops’, ‘stopping gun violence’, etc are not seen by liberals and their lamestream as advocating a polarized and polarizing ideology, and therefore are excused from such criticism.”

My point is the same: Come up with a policy that balances the right of free speech (for any group) versus your rights a park visitor.

But I’m not talking about a “theory”: I’m talking about two events that are coming up right now at Western Gateway Park.


Have you complained about activities such as these occurring in the park?

"Come up with a policy...."

...and then you suggest one. The policy implemented by the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Which leads me back to my earlier question....have you been harassed or impeded by those holding political get togethers at the Western Gateway Park?

Barry Pruett

There have never been any instances that I know of when a park visitor was hararssed by a permitted user exercising her free speech. Jeff has created a hypothetical in order to backtrack from his assertion that the park should restrict free speech. We should not be surprised that Jeff would advocate censorship at the park, as he is already on record censoring his blog and advocating for censorship by The Union of letters to the editor. One would think that a person with a degree in Journalism would be an ardent supporter of the first amendment. Northwestern should ask for the certificate back.

fish

It's his blog to censor...and it shows. I would really like him to answer the question though.

fish

There have never been any instances that I know of when a park visitor was hararssed by a permitted user exercising her free speech.

So these things that he complains about were indeed permitted activities? And they give you a description about what will occur during the permitting process?

No saying we're going to talk politics and then conduct human sacrifices?

Barry Pruett

Yes. He was complaining about the Park failing to restrict the speech of permitted users. Then Pelline backtracked to the natioanl park policy which is if you feel harassed talk to the park ranger. The national park does not say what they will do then. I have not now or ever will advocate restricting free speech based on content...only radical progressives like Pelline do that.

George Rebane

Gentlemen - the FUE's assertions are even less defendable here than they are in their native puff-ball lined lair. The usual response to such counters as you have offered is from their cricket corps that is dispatched regularly to answer points that expose their reasoning and argument.

Expect nothing more here from the Left, but do rejoice should perchance a brave soul from that dismal side emerge to do battle with you in our arena. And if we be so lucky, dispense no gratuitous abuse upon them. Instead, coax them gently to remain as long as possible in the dialogue, and in doing so reveal to one and all the substance in their argument. Send them away with some vestige of triumph so that they will be more likely to return the next time. The intelligent bystanders monitoring your dialogue will judge you both on the merits of your argument, and that should content all participants.

stevenfrisch

You guys are so on a wild goose chase.

Pelline never said anyone should be barred or banned or restricted based on the content of speech. I agree with you on the point that the Parks should be open for free speech, as Greg noted, but you diminish your case when you intentionally misrepresent (or perhaps I should just say bold-facedly lie about) what someone said.

I love the Barry line, "I have not now or ever will advocate restricting free speech based on content...only radical progressives like Pelline do that."

Well, Pelline did not do that, but you are happy to leave the impression he did. That is commonly known as the "false premise' fallacy.

Barry you may say you are speaking on behalf of yourself and not on behalf of the other board members, but you are talking about a subject that is directly relevant to the management of the Park that you are elected to represent, so you are not speaking in your capacity as a private citizen you are speaking as a representative of the Park.

With all of that said, parks should be open to all users, regardless of point of view, to exercise their free speech, and the only restriction to their use should be conflicts with other permitted uses, health, safety or nuisance concerns, or the rare instance when the speech meets the legal standard for incitement to violence.

George Rebane

stevenfrisch 317pm - if it was not the proscription of excessive rightwing speech, then what was the purpose of the FUE's criticisms of the Tea Party and Jefferson events being held in the park? Why did they even deserve mention since they provide none of the objectionable aspects that were itemized, or actually charged, in his posts? Your rebuttal is welcome on two counts - addressing the question at hand, and once more exposing the widely different interpretations of the content of someone's speech. Thank you.

fish

Well jeffy is evading the question as should be expected and he's exhibiting the time tested method of not responding to my half of the exchange with Barry by metaphorically sticking his fingers in his ears and going..... lalalalala...I can't hear you.

This is doubly interesting because just this morning at 9:27 he was incensed that we couldn't, ... debate an issue on its merits. Precious little mockery on this thread and we still have a "no show" from the perpetually aggrieved FUE.

jeffpelline says:

July 12, 2014 at 7:52 am


Steve,
We’re in agreement that the goal isn’t to “trump free speech.” The goal is to manage it: just like all parks do. No other park in our county that I know of has become such a venue for political activism, so the Western Gateway Park board has a duty to address it — not blame the messenger.

I'm quite sure your goal is to "manage" free speech.....just like you do on your blog. Suppress anything that makes jeffy uncomfortable.

Jeff Pelline

The purpose, as I said all along, was to weigh the rights of "free speech" versus the rights of a park visitor. It is not unusual for parks to have such a policy, because it is respectful to all the "customers."

RL Crabb

What planet are you talking about, Steve? He specifically mentions the tea party and the Jefferson people. The whole point of his argument is aimed at those groups. I've attended many events at Western Gateway, and never seen a problem, or even a mention of a problem from an event hosted by either ideology. Pelline is just looking to create controversy where none exists, except in his own fevered imagination.

fish

You guys are so on a wild goose chase.

Not if the intent is to show that Nevada Citys crusader for truth and transparency is a hypocritical wanker.

Well, Pelline did not do that, but you are happy to leave the impression he did.

No but he greasily implies that political activities at the park make him feel harassed and that gosh darn it something should be done! We need a policy that makes me the evidently overly sensitive Former Union Editor not feel uncomfortable....even when he can't seem to explain why he feels so.

stevenfrisch

Here is Mr. Pelline's full original post:

_______________________________________________________________________________________
"Editor’s note: We enjoy Western Gateway Park, and my nephew likes its disc golf course. But it also has become a home to hard-right political activism — hosting a “Nevada County Tea Party” and “State of Jefferson Town Hall meeting” in less than a two-week period. This is from the tea party website:

* July 23 BBQ – Happy Birthday, Nevada County Tea Party!

Location: Western Gateway Park In Penn Valley
Come on by after work and enjoy visiting with your fellow patriots, the founders of the Nevada County Tea Party and your present and past board members.

Hamburgers and hot dogs provided.
Bring your service, sides and beverage of choice.
Lazy Dog Ice Cream available for purchase!
Mark Meckler, co-founder of the national tea party movement, will be our guest speaker at 6:30pm
* Aug 2, 3:30 PM – State of Jefferson – Town Hall Meeting
Location: Western Gateway Park in Penn Valley
– Free Admission — Bring chairs & blankets. Live band, food available from 3:30 to 5 PM.
Speakers: Terry Rapoza and Mark Baird (spokespersons for the movement)
Hear the reasons it is: TIME FOR 51
http://www.jeffersondeclaration.net

My conclusion: The Park needs to come up with a policy that weighs the rights of political activism with the rights of the park visitors. The park is supposed to be “filled with fun for individuals, families and groups,” and the presence of political activism undermines that. An example of weighing the two rights is here.
________________________________________________________________________________________


Absolutely now where in here does Mr. Pelline say there should be a 'proscription on excessive right wing speech". From the very beginning he was saying that considering the increase in popularity of the Western Gateway Park as a venue for political speech the Governors should consider a policy dealing with managing use.

There is no "widely different interpretations of the content of someone's speech", their speech stands for itself. It right there in black and white. Jeff did not say speech should be proscribed based on content.

What you guys are saying Jeff said it utter fantasy (or bullshit).

You guys must be really bored today why don't you go out and cut your grass?

fish

The purpose, as I said all along, was to weigh the rights of "free speech" versus the rights of a park visitor. It is not unusual for parks to have such a policy, because it is respectful to all the "customers."

HOW HAVE YOU FELT HARASSED, OR IMPEDED, OR DISRESPECTED, OR THREATENED BY THE POLITICAL ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED IN WESTERN GATEWAY PARK?

stevenfrisch

Argh...George I just responded to your requested response and it failed to show up after initially appearing.

stevenfrisch

Thanks for picking that post up George.

George Rebane

stevenfrisch 339pm - To reasonable people reading Pelline's post, the conclusion is clear, his requirement of the "weighing of two rights" stands only on the assumption that there is an imbalance in the expression of such rights that aggrieves one side, and therefore should be set aright. Your argument that no such conclusion is obvious to the intelligent reader simply boggles the mind.

Again, if there is no implied infraction, impropriety, or inequality, then why even raise the issue of what events are scheduled in that or any other public park?

Barry Pruett

Steve: I call bullshit. Jeff added his "conclusion" only after his grossly unconstitutional proposal was exposed. Clearly, Jeff advocates censorship of speech. His radical progressive views of censorship have no place in this community or elsewhere in America.

Jeff Pelline

Barry,
My conclusion summed up my comments in the thread, which you misrepresented on this blog.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: Barry Pruett | 12 July 2014 at 04:53 PM

What "clearly unconstitutional proposal" was proposed Barry? He said that considering the increasing political events at the Park the Park should consider a policy on such events. That is SOP for parks in areas where political events are hosted.

That ain't unconstitutional buddy, it is good pro-active governance.

You say, "Clearly, Jeff advocates censorship of speech." I challenge you to point to one of his statements that states that the content of speech should be censored. I just re-read the entire thread and it is not there.

The fact that you responded to his suggestion with hyperbole and implied he suggested proscribing free speech is a lie, he never did.

You are a member of the Board of Governors of that Park and you should know better than to respond to public suggestion the way you did.

It may "boggle {George's] mind" to have policies to address free speech rights......but it's SOP.

If you guys were not so busy engaging in false premises as a way of life you would see the error of your ways.

fish

Hahahahahahahahahaha!

That's all you got? Weak sauce Steve......

You guys must be really bored today why don't you go out and cut your grass?

Too hot...maybe tomorrow!

Barry Pruett

No. Jeff suggested that the political speech was bad for the park and he personally did not support it. I informed him that restrictions based on content are unconstitutional. His reply was that we could regulate the political speech through time, place, and manner restrictions. Content cannot be regulated. Jeff only came up with the natioanl park nonsense when his advocacy went sideways. He is certainly advocating for restricting political speech. No other logical conclusion can be reached.

Jeff Pelline

Barry,

I challenge you to point to one of my statements in that thread that states that the content of speech should be censored. It's not there, which is why you are backtracking and unable to point to such a statement.

Here's what I said: considering the increasing political events at the Park the Park should consider a policy on such events. That is standard operating procedure for parks in areas where political events are hosted. And it is good pro-active governance.

You are lying.

Barry Pruett

I wrote it above. You just do not like what you said.

fish

No other logical conclusion can be reached.

Sure it can Barry...after all who are you going to believe....Steves client or your own lyin eyes?!


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaha!

Enjoy Italy Associate Bob....don't forget your custom pasta killin fork!


Barry Pruett

Also...you still have not answered the question from fish. As a user of the park, have you been intimidated by free speech at Gateway Park? Your non-answer speaks volumes as to the make-believe scenario you are attempting to create.

JeffPelline

Barry,
No you didn't; you summarized your own view. Please point to a direct quote from me in the thread that proves your point. It's not there, which is why you are backtracking.

Barry Pruett

Your post at 7:05am states that the park should regulate political activism. If that is not regulating content, I do not know what is. You still have not answered the question from Fish. Tick tock. Tick tock.

George Rebane

The chasm between us is highlighted again. A conservetarian sees no need for government intervention while a common resource is not unequally denied to its franchised users. Were the resource to become scarce, then there must be some coming together to figure out how to equitably allocate it. No such scarcity exists nor is it anticipated. Yet the progressive sees government intervention required just on the basis of their own arbitrary perception of some inequity, even if it be only in a schedule that they somehow deem to be one-sided.

BTW, let me add something more to these progressive pyrotechnics - there is a third event at that park that would raise the ire of collectivists. The county Republicans are holding their annual BBQ there on 17 August. My goodness, have those rightwingers not even a smidgeon of propriety?!

For the record, my 324pm and 424pm questions stand unanswered.

Barry Pruett

George: I love how you have the ability to summarize in such a succinct and logical manner. We would not even be having this discussion absent the radical progressive censorship tactics through (1) bullying and intimidation or (2) suggested outright regulation of the content of speech. Not a single commenter here (save Pelline) would dream of regulating free speech. Our society cannot function without it. We (conservatarians) may not agree with one's speech, but each would fight to the dying breath to defend it.

JeffPelline

Barry,
No it doesn't. It specifically states "the content of the speech is not the issue." The phrase "time, manner and place" is used by the National Park Service to manage the rights of free speech vs. the rights of park visitors. It is a common legal term: "Limits that government can impose on the occasion, location, and type of individual expression in some circumstances." http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Time,+Place,+and+Manner+Restrictions

"Hi Steve,
You are correct: The content of the speech is not the issue, as I stated above. But if the park is becoming a venue for political activism, the Western Gateway Park board might revisit its policies for “time, manner and place.” The park is supposed to be “filled with fun for individuals, families and groups,” and the presence of political activism undermines that."

Throughout the thread I repeatedly state that the issue is not about censorship.

Yes, I noticed the GOPers are going to the Park too. Nowadays the leadership is more in line with the hard right, so that's no surprise. Like I said the park is becoming a home to hard-right political activism. And on top of that, one of its directors is defending it tooth-and-nail. It sounds like a conflict to me.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: Barry Pruett | 12 July 2014 at 05:15 PM


He can personally not support the 'speech' as much as he wants. I personally don;t support it either. I think the entire State of Jefferson nonsense is nothing but a naked political ploy to rile people up so they go to the polls like a bunch of zombies and pull the Tea Party candidate level.

But what we support is irrelevant. Jeff did not propose limiting free speech.

And WTF kind of statement is this, "Your post at 7:05am states that the park should regulate political activism. If that is not regulating content, I do not know what is. " You are an attorney Barry, you know there is a difference between regulating an activity and regulating content. I assume they had to get a permit or permission for their event, that is regulating an activity. My guess is you already regulate activities am I right? Otherwise what would you do when two parties show up for an event at the same place at the same time?

What total nonsensical jabberwocky your position appears to be.

George Rebane

re Pelline and Frisch arguments - To contest the use of a venue where some one-sidedly offensive speech may occur, usage that does not deny or circumscribe unintended and potentially opposing speech at the venue just on the basis of its scheduled frequency is downright scary in a constitutional republic such as ours. And especially so since there is no extant rule, regulation, or law that has been violated. Only that one side attempts to gratuitously paint the other as somehow denying equal access to non-applying thinkers of different thoughts.

Don't Limbaugh and other conservative radio hosts go through similar and constant attacks to silence them on the weight of the same arguments?

re stevenfrisch 609pm - your logic is really impenetrable, but expected. One doesn't have to be a lawyer to know that you can *constructively* regulate the expression of content by regulating access to venues where such expression may effectively occur. The same as you can exert constructive control over guns by regulating (as recently) the access to ammunition, or magazine capacity, or storage, or transport, or usage, or ... . Or as did the IRS, you constructively regulate expression by intimidating "scrutiny", "delay", and "denial" of an organization's tax status.

RL Crabb

It's no use arguing with the Pelline spin machine. It's not about censorship, even though the headline is directed at the "hard right" activists. I'm sure he would be just as perturbed if it was the League of Swimmin' Voters or Rural Turtle Coalition. Let's chalk it up to the super full moon.

fish

Dance monkey.....dance!

fish

It's no use arguing with the Pelline spin machine.

Yeah...don't stand next to it either!

fish

What total nonsensical jabberwocky your position appears to be.

More "Pot meet Kettle".....well I'm off to KFC.....be thinking bout you jeffy!

Russ Steele

Does anyone know where the Lefties are holding their parties this year? Were do they hold their conservative hate rallies ? Behind the Vets Hall in Nevada City? On the Banks of the Yuba? Safeway parking Lot in Grass Valley? Dog run in Condon Park in Grass Valley? Why not schedule them at Western Gateway Park in PV also, then we would have the balance the Pelline is looking for. My goodness, it seem to me the people falling down on the job are the Lefties for not providing the proper balance and using the Park also.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: George Rebane | 12 July 2014 at 06:15 PM

What a ridiculous point you are making George.....when Chicago was faced with the impending march of the Nazi's in Rogers Park, a neighborhood where thousands of survivors of the Holocaust lived, many people and groups, like the ACLU, supported their free speech rights. They had every right to march through Rogers Park, but the City restricted them from marching past the Synagogue during the times of traditional prayer services, because it was likely to incite a riot. The idea that we don't 'regulate' speech as an activity is ridiculous. We do it every day. Do Cathedrals play their organs at 3 am? No. Why not? Because it is against the noise ordinance.

There is a clear difference between regulating activity and regulating content.

Would the Western Gateway Park regulate the activities of NAMBLA if they wanted to do a rally in the Park? You bet your ass they would...they would firewall every other activity around it and they would monitor content to ensure it was not obscene.

This is another classic example of you guys not really understanding law. It is funny really.

RL Crabb

It's odd that he bemoans "too much politics" at the Thursday market in GV and the Constitution Day parade in NC, and then wonders why no one is paying attention on election day. There is much in the right wing agenda (or the left wing agenda) that offends my sensibilities, but hiding it behind the bushes is no way to operate a democracy. It's one thing if people are waving signs in your face, but I've never seen anyone confront people who just want to enjoy the parks.

fish

This is another classic example of you guys not really understanding law. It is funny really.

Well it's a good thing you were here to pull jeffys flabby chestnuts out of the rhetorical fire because you really aren't fooling anyone with your argument.

You are a pretty good pseudo-attorney though Steve.....todays contribution was reminiscent of the old joke....about a good attorney being able to get a sodomy charge reduced to "following too close".

Todd Juvinall

Wow I take my honey to see America and come back to this. I have too admit I see why Pelline is adios from the trusted position of the news. My goodness Pelline, I haven't heard so much bullcrap since i listened to Nancy Pelosi talk about illegal kids and suckers. And Frisch, my my, you are the biggest brown noser here (watch out you will suffocate). You tortured explanations are as crappy as John Roberts on ObamaCare.

All this public place "content" vs "others" rights was settled last week in the SCOTUS case on abortion clinic setbacks. We won, that is free speech won, over regulations on the distance one must be from the clinic on public property. Sorry Pelline, you lost, I think it was 9-0. Frisch is too much a babbling idiot to understand. But that is the usual anyway.

Also, I have attended numerous lefty democrat gatherings at Condon Park over the years when I was a "non partisan" Supervisor and also a candidate for Assessor. Those people are truly nutty but I never told them they should not use the venue. Even though dogs and children ran for their lives. I still supported their right to spew on that public land.

Bill Tozer

Geez, its not like any political advocacy or issue advocacy group has taken over the park. Yep, they have taken over the baseball fields, the creek, the pavilion and now threaten not only the disc golf course, but have invaded and barricaded the free roam dog area as well. Holy smokes! The Redcoats have taken Cambridge, Lexington, and most of Concord and are marching on Gateway Park in Penntucky, California.

Quick, man the fire hoses and let the dogs loose upon them. Them Vast Right Winger Conspiracy members are getting uppity lately. Them undiverified Tea Party types ( you know who you are) don't know their place. Whatz next? They will be drinking out of the Progressive drinking fountains and demand to be treated like they are equal to us! Sic the dogs on them and I will personally aim the water cannon upon them graybeards.

This all reminds me when I was a Brother BM type many moons ago and was managing a half way house and free treatment center for drunks and dopers. Non-profit. Another place and time. Anyway, had no real problems besides the usual loitering complaints with the neighbors. But, one particular neighbor was beyond redemption. She fought to have no cars parked on the street (legal to park so said the police and CHP) and so we (I) acquiesced to be good citizen/neighborly and extend the olive branch. Then the lights we had in the parking lot (the parking lot she wanted us to build so there would be no cars on the street)...the lights were too bright, even though she could never see them from anywhere on her property. A volunteer built a redwood handicap ramp and she complained to the authorities that if looked unpainted so we painted it. Painting a redwood ramp for Pepe's sake.

So, what does this have to do with this thread??? Glad you asked. The last straw was when she testified to the zoning board that we should be sent packing because when somebody walked by her house, she would "feel apprehensive."

FeEl apprehensive? Now, how do you combat that? There is no argument, no words to appease her fears. Felt apprehensive even though there was a park close by and people walked down the street all day long.

The Fat Pillsbury Squishy Boy feels apprehensive. He don't friggen want Dr. Rebane on the radio for seconds a month nor does he think we should have some Sherrif who won his case before the Supreme Court here either. If that ain't enough, he keeps demanding that Dr. Rebane moderates his own blog to be more moderate. What a demented control freakazoid.

Hey, Fattis Maxiums, you don't want any of the Hard Right speaking in public. Tough shit. You have a hard on for the hard right cause that is the closest you will ever get to anything hard. You give ass wipes a bad name.

And now out of mercy I have something for you to run back to your fort with. Its better than food!! I will repost this just for you, your Assholiness. How can we miss you when you won't go away?

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t1.0-9/1474369_10151952514715911_161286978_n.png

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t1.0-9/1527095_10151900142360911_514304862_n.jpg

And just for you My Lard:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/1800235_10151941202650911_109499134_n.png

George Rebane

stevenfrisch 657pm - thanks for using the Nazis to march past Holocaust survivors' homes to incite riot as an analog to the Tea Party and SoJ events at Gateway Park. I know you did the best you could. My 615pm stands.

Bill Tozer

Mr. stevenfrisch rode "Would the Western Gateway Park regulate the activities of NAMBLA if they wanted to do a rally in the Park? You bet your ass they would..."

Mr. stevenfrisch, Mr stevenfrisch. What is this obession you have with NAMBLA and man/boy relationships? You are one sick mo fro. You have brought this odd topic up before and now you are like a dog returning to its vomit, sicko. Hey, whatever floats your boat but for the sake of people who have just digested their dinner, please keep your deviate thoughts and weaknesses to yourself. NAMBLA again? Can always count on you to keep bringing that up. There are more appropriate web sites to discuss your unresolved issues and taboos than Dr. Rebane's blog. You might even meet someone who is in to what you are in to.

You God's sake get help man....I think I am going to vomit perv. Thanks for ruining my dinner again. Get help!!

Bonnie McGuire

Last year Jeff was disgusted with the Constitutional Day Parade in Nevada city because of the political content instead of it being totally for kids and families to have fun. He seemed to forget that both the Fourth of July and Constitutional Day celebrations remind us of where our freedoms (and fun) we take for granted come from. As another person on his site put it, "I don’t get it. If a Constitution Day Parade isn’t the proper place to air your political beliefs, when is? Isn’t having the ability to exercise our Free Speech Rights as American as Apple Pie?"

stevenfrisch

Jesus H. Christ you people really are insane...

Patty Haley

I wish there was a like button/option for these comments!

fish

Jesus H. Christ you people really are insane...

Not half as insane as thinking that that was a convincing argument!

Todd Juvinall

fish, the atheist used the Lord's name in vain! Too funny!

Bill Tozer

Talking about insane, Nero is fiddling around racing to fat cat fund raisers while Rome burns.

http://rebelpundit.com/chicago-southside-residents-go-off-on-obama-over-amnesty-worst-president-ever-elected/

fish

fish, the atheist used the Lord's name in vain! Too funny!


Let's not get carried away Todd. I don't recall from my rather cursory reading of scripture that Gods only begotten son had "H" as a middle initial.

fish

I think the entire State of Jefferson nonsense is nothing but a naked political ploy to rile people up so they go to the polls like a bunch of zombies and pull the Tea Party candidate level.

Indeed it is a political ploy but that is different how from the left saddling the country with President Hope n Change?

fish

Throughout the thread I repeatedly state that the issue is not about censorship.

jeffy 90% of that which spills from your hole is disingenuous bilge. Did you have any plan to answer how you felt harassed of impeded from using the park or has your pseudo-attorney advised against it?

Bill Tozer

Fish, Mr. Fattis Maximus feels apprehensive about going to the park. To be honest, I feel the same way about going to doggie Parvo Park as well. Not only that, those militant extremist "my way or the highway" types on the bike path leave me feeling uncomfortable. Not that I have ever used the bike path or had a run in, its just the sight of them. And of course all those freaking looking youth gangs playing disc golf and those weirdos having the flea market at the park ruins everything. I want to go to Western Gateway Park and not see anybody. That is what I call a family outing in the city.

I don't know why Fattis just doesn't go to the safe political free zone of Pioneer Park and be amidst his own kind. Yes, they do wander up from Pioneer Park and piss in his front yard. But, besides that, he is much jollier when he is among his subjects. He can also use the wonderful disc golf course in Condon Park, but he will have to put up with the profanity spewing drugged out juvenal delinquents there. The world is just not run the way His Excellentasscy sees fit. Drives the poor sow bug bonkers when things to do go the way His Highass wants them to.

George Rebane

All said and done in this thread, it appears that there is no answer forthcoming to my 324pm and 424pm questions which go to the heart of this imbroglio.

We can discuss points of law, and he said/she said recriminations until the cows come home. But now if, as argued, that there is no desire to proscribe free speech and all is in order with the scheduled events at Western Gateway Park, then why did the local leftwingers AGAIN raise hue and cry about such gatherings of neighbors who don't think like they do?

And these kinds of 'critiques' are only the local echoes of what is a constant national din from our academe, the lamestream, and progressive politicos. As always, stuffing the bulging bag of politically incorrect speech and thought is a distinctly one-sided affair. It was ever thus.

fish


Posted by: George Rebane | 13 July 2014 at 08:17 AM

That would seem to be the "official" story and they are sticking to it. This was a post directed to Barry on the "Ruminations" thread it seems more appropriate for this one.

Steve: I call bullshit. Jeff added his "conclusion" after his grossly unconstitutional proposal was exposed.

Technical point Barry....jeffy never explicitly called for those on the.....wait for it...."HARD-RIGHT" who use the park to be denied access. He wanted somebody else to establish a policy that made him not feel harassed when he was there. It was only after the fact when his pseudo-attorney showed up because the master rhetorician was flailing so ineptly that they moved the goalposts and made it a "scheduling issue". It makes him a chickenshit....to use an administrative mechanism to stifle his political foes....but it's jeffy so I'm sure you aren't surprised.

I should add that he hasn't defined "harassment" or even offered that he felt so by the activities conducted there. The link provided by him was sufficiently vague that anything might be considered harassment if someone was to be made uncomfortable. This a condition that jeffy seems to find himself in regularly.

fish

The world is just not run the way His Excellentasscy sees fit.

This really seems to be the crux of the matter William.

fish

In which jeffy doubles down.....and Steve weighs in again as well.

What the advocates of the State of Jefferson are proposing is essentially a “Balkanization” of the United States of America. A separation of people into like minded camps that have the power to exclude those who do not think and believe as they do. Look at the views of one of the local proponents, George Rebane, who has stated clearly that he believes that like minded should have ability to live together and create policies to safeguard that right.

So this would be a change from your earlier position where you say that this will never happen....just let the crazies rant?

Steve you need to learn to quit when you are ahead. There will be no legislative mechanism by which the State of Jefferson comes into being.

Al

Fat wah

fish

Jory Stewart says:

July 13, 2014 at 8:21 am

Right on, Steve. Thank you!

What is it with you land use planner types that you can't seem to shed the "60's"?

Right on Steve......Right on.

George Rebane

fish 840am - thanks for the heads up on SteveF's comment. I read the whole thing, and it certainly points to nothing but disconnect. The man claims an understanding of the Constitution, yet does not recognize that all SoJ and similar initiatives follow strict constitutional processes. Are his misrepresentations of people's desires and actions intended, or is the discussion beyond his ability to follow?

BTW, as I've made plain before, SoJ has almost no chance of success through a strict constitutional process. Today its useful purpose is to let those who will listen know why so many of us believe that the country is well on its way in the wrong direction, and that there are tens of millions of voices in the land, as currently structured, that are ignored both on Main Street and in the legislatures.

Bill Tozer

Free speech, free expression and free association aside, here is a new topic I wish to hit on. Its not as juicy as Big Boy making ribs for his nephew but just as predictable. Politicians haggler, make speeches, and chew the fat as the enemy approaches the gates. Nothing new under the sun:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/14/world/middleeast/iraq.html?_r=0

Gregory

"Jesus H. Christ you people really are insane..."-Frisch, last night

We also have his Lardship the FUE serving an old Peanuts "Psychiatric Help 5 cents" cartoon for what he terms the "hard-right" blogs... What is it about left leaning authoritarians that leads them to accuse people who disagree with them as needing psychiatric help? Frisch and Michael P. Anderson (owner of a tiny local IT support company, Clientworks) have both accused me on this very blog of being "haldol soaked" and have as yet not retracted that slander; they apparently think it funny.

Pelline, reading of some right wingers daring to openly use a local park for a gettogether, raised an alarm based ONLY on the politics of the people involved; it that isn't a call for prior restraint of speech, nothing is. At least the City of Skokie could point to prior bad acts of Nazis when they tried to do the same when Nazis wanted to parade though a town with a large Jewish population purely to provoke outrage... TP gatherings have always been peaceful, have harassed no one and they seem to pick up after themeselves, so what does Jeff and Steve have to complain about besides their message?

The local tea partiers and Jeffersons, in contrast to the Famous Marching Nazis in Skokie, just want a nice place to listen to each other and have some hot dogs, and the lovely park their taxes support, Western Gateway Park, is where they want their picnic. In short, they aren't trying to provoke or harass anyone... unlike his Lardship and his sidekick, Stevie.

fish

"Jesus H. Christ you people really are insane..."-Frisch, last night

Yeah....I think that towards the end of the exchange Stevie realized the his "Lardships" (Good one right back at you Greg) argument was crap and he was just looking for a way out. He's used that method with me, I've seen him use it with you.....really his version of "Go fuck yourself"!

Bill Tozer

I may be crazy, but I ain't stupid. Flubber and Son of Flubber were entertaining movies back in the days of Herbie the Love Bug, but tolerance has beget intolerance. So Flubber now has a side sick lawyer, the Son of Flubber? Never trust them quasi lawyers. They wear collared shirts to hide their foreskin. Like Father, like Son of Flubber.

Bill Tozer

The park is supposed to be “filled with fun for individuals, families and groups,”. No problem with that. No prob Mr. Blob. Don't know what got The Blob's dander up. He keeps repeating himself with the quote about the park being fun for groups, families and individuals.

Of all the family reunions, get togethers, events and groups, I have yet to hear about one solitary group that never had a good time at the park. Oh, there was that one lady that threw a event to raise money for some "save the" cause and did not raise enough and she became a wee bit out of joint after dipping into her own pocket for a few grand. Poor planning on her part to say the least, but I digress. Heck, we once held a company picnic there (off the record) one Sunday afternoon before 2008.

Looks to me that groups do and will have a fun time at Western Gateway Park. And most of these Tea Party shindigs are family outings as well, composed of humans that are born individuals. Individuals, families, and groups having fun. Mission accomplished. So, I see no prob, Mr. Blob. Lighten up and enjoy the ho down, ass wipe.

fish

Sure. I don’t blame you. There are a lot of misquotes and outright lies being tossed around on this subject by the detractors — not to mention nasty insults and personal attacks. It’s their MO. The other day, I posted a famous cartoon of Lucy from Peanuts offering “5 cent psychiatric help,” but I don’t that that would help. The email thread on the hard-right blogs would confound any “shrink.” Now back to the subject at hand.


Dance monkey........

Barry Pruett

Again, Pelline is advocating regulation based on content (political speech). This type of content based regulation is patently unconstiutional. The national parks regulation has to do with preservation of resources...not regulating political speech as Pelline is advocating. Confusing the subject by mixing words further confuses the reader of his nonsense. He has been backtracking ever since he posted the hit piece on the Park. He should just apologize for his ignorance of the Constitution and move on to what he does best...restaurant reviews.

fish

Barry,

Has there ever been a complaint to your knowledge about "Tea Party" groups or those on the HARD-RIGHT™ abusing their park privileges or violating the terms of their permit?

Barry Pruett

To my knowledge there as never been complaints.

fish

So the "balance" between political activities and the general use of the park seems to be in order? You have a permitting process so we can "regulate" NAMBLA Day in the Park as well as provide an environment full of "fun and frolic for all" it would seem?

Gregory

Here's more from His Lardship:
"The other day, I posted a famous cartoon of Lucy from Peanuts offering “5 cent psychiatric help,” but I don’t that [sic] that would help. For whatever reason, it isn’t moderated. The email thread on the hard-right blogs would confound any “shrink.”"

Email thread? Can the self described high tech specialst from The Chronicle, supposed Internet News Editor from C/NET News and legend-in-his-own-mind blogger really be so bloody ignorant of internet technologies as to think anything in RR (or the FUE blog) is an "email thread"? Jeff, here's a hint: if an email server isn't involved, it ain't email.

Perhaps someone who runs a local IT services company that Jeff trusts can give him a basic summary of the technology differences. I've corrected Jeff on this before to no avail.

Jeff Pelline

Barry,
You are lying again. The national park regulation ALSO has to do with ensuring that the "activity does not interfere with the enjoyment of the park by other visitors." Here it is:
"The goal of the park in issuing a permit is to ensure that the permitted activity does not interfere with the enjoyment of the park by other visitors and that the natural and cultural resources of the park are protected."

http://www.nps.gov/lavo/planyourvisit/permits.htm

fish

I support and promote many of the “nonpartisan” events at the Park — the Daffodil Run, the United Way BBQ events, disc golf tourneys and many more — just as I do at all the other parks. If the park wants to become know for hard-right political gatherings, that’s up to them. But I do think they should consider a policy that ensures that the activity does not interfere with the enjoyment of the park by other visitors, as I’ve said all along. This does not regulate the content of speech; it merely manages the “time, place and manner,” a common proactive proactive practice by parks to serve all their “customers.” I am not aware of this level of political activity going on now at the County’s other parks (Pioneer Park, Condon Park, Truckee Regional Park).

Well according to someone in a position to know there haven't been any complaints except those darting from neuron to flabby neuron inside that lefty skull of yours.....I know, I know you voted for a republican once so you've been imbued with some magical evenhandedness and "fair minded" street cred about things political.

Other than CARING SO DARNED HARD ABOUT THE COMMUNITY CONCERNING WESTERN GATEWAY PARK SCHEDULING have you ever felt harassed or impeded as a result of political activities occurring there?

fish

"The goal of the park in issuing a permit is to ensure that the permitted activity does not interfere with the enjoyment of the park by other visitors and that the natural and cultural resources of the park are protected."

You claim to be some sort of newsman. You do realize that merely repeating your claim again and again doesn't constitute evidence.

Who has had their day at the park diminished by the political activities occurring there?

fish

Barry,

At this point I have to side with you on the matter of censorship.

Prior to this last exchange I thought it possible that the master wordsmith was just extremely clumsy about his choice of language. Pelline clearly wants Tea Party activities stopped, a form of censorship, based on a vague statement about, "The goal of the park in issuing a permit is to ensure that the permitted activity does not interfere with the enjoyment of the park by other visitors and that the natural and cultural resources of the park are protected." He has produced no evidence that anyones park experience has been diminished by Tea Party political events held at Western Gateway Park. He won't even admit that his own experience has been diminished after being given multiple opportunities to do so.

Resolved: Jeff Pelline is clearly in favor of censorship of political views he finds distasteful. No other conclusion can be drawn.

Barry Pruett

Jeff: You have created a straw man argument. There have been no complaints...except from you. Please point to national park policy that manages speech? Please tell us what the national park policy is when someone is offended by free speech? It is you who are lying. You have doubled down on your unconstitutional suggestions. If I wew lying where is the obligatory email from you asking a retraction or you will sue me. Fool.

George Rebane

fish 656pm - Mr fish, you have nailed the FUE's approach, and his gratuitous calling political opponents liars. Can anyone fathom what is Barry Pruett's lie? Pelline's complaint is based on nothing more than his own opposition to the socio-political thought of those scheduled to use the park for its intended legal purposes. His seeking to elevate that use into a public liability is right out of Alinsky's playbook.

Among their own constituents (and blogs) such tactics must seem really powerful and subtle. I can still see the crowds in Chicago and Detroit with tears in their upturned eyes chanting 'O-baah-mah, O-baah-mah!' waiting for the mannah from the messiah's mysterious "stash" to rain down and wash over them. But does he really think that such a two-digit approach would work on everyone, especially here?

Barry Pruett

The guy is a liar and a crap stirrer. No wonder he could not keep a job at his usual target.. The Union.

fish

Posted by: George Rebane | 13 July 2014 at 07:21 PM

I've seen people get backed into bad arguments before...and this one was a corker. Apparently his ideology trumps logic, reason and common sense.

Jeez FUE learn to fold when you're playing a bad hand.

Moron.

Barry Pruett

Jeff knows where and when the Park meetings are. They are not televised so he will have to get out from behind the computer and show up. If he thinks it is that important for the Park to censor speech, he should show up and advocate the same in person. Until such time, I consider the matter of censoring constitutional freedoms closed.

Gregory

The juicy middle of this latest Pelline crapstorm is that it's so clearly one sided, partisan and un-American.

There is no Half Dome at Western Gateway Park, no Old Faithful. It's a local park open to all, created for all to use, and it's ludicrous to hold up a National Park regulation meant to handle political demonstrations as a model for use of the stage area... Western Gateway is supported by Western Gateway Park District taxes which I pay, but Jeff Pelline does not, and since TP and Jeffersons have no history whatsoever of disruptions of the peace, Pelline's agitprop to the contrary should be denied.

Bill Tozer

Well, the fat lady certainly has sung, but I got a tiny suspicion that it ain't over until he says its over. Ego maniacs are that way. The Pillsbury Jelly Filled Dough Boy can whistle Dixie all night long, but Fattis Maxiumus has a way of turning good into evil, wrong side out, and assign devious motives to anything just to bolster his over overinflated Michelin Tire Man ego and defend his/its indefensible positions.

Once it leaves the mouth, you can never get it back. I would say stop while you are ahead, put that would imply way too much credence or a semblance of credibility to tubby's position.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t1.0-9/1176262_10151583640755911_1690990733_n.jpg

Helpful Hint: In the spirit of cooperation, perhaps warning signs can be posted at the entrance of Gateway Park.

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/t1.0-9/1185869_10151584266070911_1732286559_n.jpg

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t1.0-9/1234236_10151630736695911_248784026_n.jpg

https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/1150246_10151603968500911_183692924_n.jpg?oh=8383e7cee623b6bc2e66e2c5bf7c1c95&oe=544B386A

Todd Juvinall

Barry, in Pelline's comment quoting the Park Service, what is the definition of "activities"? If that is the benchmark it would seem to me a common reading of the word would be some sort of physical activity that gets in the way of others. Not speech.

For the brown noser, Steve Frisch. You have stated numerous times you only come to this blog for the comedy, meaning you think this is all funny. I think you have now prove you are the "butt" of that comedy.

Bill Tozer

Good point Mr. Gregory. Pulling out a federal guideline from the National Park Service to defend his position regulating little ole Western Gateway Park in tiny Penn Valley, California (a place near Smartsville and Timbucktoo in the lower foothills above Marysville) is akin to Custer's Last Stand.

Even Lucifer himself is looking for that loophole along with every inmate in prison. Its the "some other dude did it too" defense. Me thinks his Lardship has grown accustomed to addressing those with lower IQs than found on this blog, which is indeed unfamiliar territory for the Sad Sac when visiting here. Happy trails.

Jeff Pelline

Barry,
This is not a "straw man" argument. This is about doing the right thing for ALL the customers of Western Gateway Park as a board member, not just your like-minded political activist friends. It's about being proactive. It's about being principled. It's about being a leader. Worse, though, look around the at the absolute cesspool of comments that you find yourself immersed in. Go back and read this thread. It's an angry, hateful mob that nobody would listen to if it weren't for Anna Haynes' www.ncvoices.us LOL.

Bill Tozer

Boy Barry, you just got smacked down. How will you ever recover?

"It's about being proactive. It's about being principled. It's about being a leader."

Perhaps its about Fattis's being proactive, about Fattis's being principled. Principled? Now that is a oxymoron for the record books. No worries.

As a leader, Mr. Pruett you clearly spelled out your duties and adherence to Constitutional principles regarding Western Gateway and in your own personal life. Its called integrity: being the same at play, at home and at work. Also known as wholeness of the personage. Integrity is a foreign concept to Mr. LOL. To paraphrase Emerson, Mr. Fattis, "what you do shouts so loudly I cannot hear what you say."
Good luck separating politics from anything local, be it the Chamber of Commence, your monologue blog, or the lights hanging across Commercial Street in the Berkley of the Foothills. Its about leadership? Hard to be a leader without subjects and damn impossible for you to be simply a fellow among fellows.

Pout, don't shout. You get what you get and you don't throw a fit. My advice to you is like throwing pearls before swine.

Gregory

I'm looking forward to the forthcoming Other Voices in The Union where Jeff Pelline makes the case for a new Western Gateway Park regulation, solving the non-existent problem of Conservatives ruining the park experience for everyone else.

Jeff, conservatives meet at our local parks. The looney left meet at our local parks. So do Boy Scouts and swim clubs. Its where locals go for open, common space.

Just what part of " the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" do you not get?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad