Seriously, can we just ship Berkley to N. Korea?

[ph4ever]

Q: Don't the Marines have a right to free speech and to do business?
Answer: The Marines don't even allow their own members full rights of free speech. So maybe you need to ask them that question. As far as doing business, cities have the right to regulate the businesses they allow into their community. Our initiative will give the citizens of Berkeley that right.

That's pretty much a non-answer as to the free speech part. A lot of companies will restrict their employees right to free speech in a lot of respects....

I respect their right to limit the types of businesses or whatever, but doesn't the recruiting office get grandfathered in if it was there prior to the legislation?

I'll agree that it's pretty much a non answer - I'm just saying that's what codepink give as their answer.

I know that in the cases of strip clubs some cities give them time to re-locate. I would hope that Berkley is free thinking enough to allow the office to move to another location within the city - haven't found anything on that as yet.

[LIPH]

By saying the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in Berkeley isn't the city council in effect saying the Marines don't enjoy the right to free speech while within the city limits? The First Amendment is a wonderful thing, as long as it applies to everyone.

I was just looking at the codepink website to see what they are all about and here's their reply to that exact question.

Code Pink isn't the Berkeley City Council

[popcornjack]

Because it's federal money. If Berkley doesn't want the Marines, fine. But that shows me they don't need any federal anything so yank their federal funding.

Doesn't that set a precedent then that any community that objects to any federal mandate risks losing all their funds?

Didn't they already do this by forcing every state to raise the drinking age to 21, the alternative being the loss of federal funding for highways?

Point taken. So we've already set the precedent and begun the slide down the slippery slope.

Honestly, as long as the local council hasn't passed any legislation that expressly forbids the recruiting office from being there I don't see a real problem. Let the protesters chant their slogans, and sing their songs and spout their rhetoric. I'm pretty sure the Marines can handle that. And the Marines will still be there long after the protesters have gone their merry way.

not in Berkeley they won't. Those protesters aren't going anywhere. They always find something to be against.

[alphabits]

Because it's federal money. If Berkley doesn't want the Marines, fine. But that shows me they don't need any federal anything so yank their federal funding.

Doesn't that set a precedent then that any community that objects to any federal mandate risks losing all their funds?

Didn't they already do this by forcing every state to raise the drinking age to 21, the alternative being the loss of federal funding for highways?

Point taken. So we've already set the precedent and begun the slide down the slippery slope.

Honestly, as long as the local council hasn't passed any legislation that expressly forbids the recruiting office from being there I don't see a real problem. Let the protesters chant their slogans, and sing their songs and spout their rhetoric. I'm pretty sure the Marines can handle that. And the Marines will still be there long after the protesters have gone their merry way.

not in Berkeley they won't. Those protesters aren't going anywhere. They always find something to be against.

Oh, they'll still be there protesting something ..... but it'll be something other than the Marines.

[SharkOnLand]

Because it's federal money. If Berkley doesn't want the Marines, fine. But that shows me they don't need any federal anything so yank their federal funding.

Doesn't that set a precedent then that any community that objects to any federal mandate risks losing all their funds?

Didn't they already do this by forcing every state to raise the drinking age to 21, the alternative being the loss of federal funding for highways?

Point taken. So we've already set the precedent and begun the slide down the slippery slope.

Honestly, as long as the local council hasn't passed any legislation that expressly forbids the recruiting office from being there I don't see a real problem. Let the protesters chant their slogans, and sing their songs and spout their rhetoric. I'm pretty sure the Marines can handle that. And the Marines will still be there long after the protesters have gone their merry way.

not in Berkeley they won't. Those protesters aren't going anywhere. They always find something to be against.

Like shaving.

[popcornjack]

not in Berkeley they won't. Those protesters aren't going anywhere. They always find something to be against.

Oh, they'll still be there protesting something ..... but it'll be something other than the Marines.

"IT'S TOO SUNNY. IT'S TOO SUNNY."

[ph4ever]

By saying the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in Berkeley isn't the city council in effect saying the Marines don't enjoy the right to free speech while within the city limits? The First Amendment is a wonderful thing, as long as it applies to everyone.

I was just looking at the codepink website to see what they are all about and here's their reply to that exact question.

Code Pink isn't the Berkeley City Council

no they aren't but if you would take a moment to read the facts you'll find that codepink pretty much drafted the initiative. They've obviously got "pull" in Berkley's city government s they were also issued a special parking permit for their protests. (which I don't agree with)

Here's the mayor's statement http://www.cityofberkeley.info/mayor/PR ... 8-0201.htm

[alphabits]

not in Berkeley they won't. Those protesters aren't going anywhere. They always find something to be against.

Oh, they'll still be there protesting something ..... but it'll be something other than the Marines.

"IT'S TOO SUNNY. IT'S TOO SUNNY."

Sometimes I think some of those folks would find something to protest in Utopia.

[flyboy55]

The City Council voted 8-1 Tuesday to tell the Marines their downtown recruiting station is not welcome and "if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome guests."

The council also voted to explore enforcing a city anti-discrimination law, focusing on the military’s "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy.

The City Attorney’s office will investigate that possible action and report back to the City Council within 60 days, but City Manager Phil Kamlarz says it’s "unlikely" that the city has the ability to enforce the city’s law against the military.

In a separate but related action, the City Council also voted 8-1 to encourage the peace group Code Pink to disrupt the recruiting office on a weekly basis.

The council’s vote gives Code Pink a designated parking space in front of the recruiting office on Shattuck Avenue from noon to 4 p.m. every Wednesday for six months and a free sound permit during those same hours.

. . .

City Councilman Max Anderson, who attended Thursday’s rally and was one of those who supported the resolution against the Marines, said he doesn’t see any contradiction that city officials in Berkeley, the home of the free speech movement, are in effect telling the Marines that their brand of speech isn’t welcome.

Anderson said, "The military has hundreds of millions of dollars to run ads on TV" aimed at recruiting young people.

He said, "This small counter-demonstration by us should in no way stop them from propagandizing and recruiting," he said.

Anderson said the council’s resolution is only symbolic because it doesn’t intervene in the Marines’ lease with the landlord who owns the building where the recruiting office is located.

But he said the resolution expresses "the popular will of the people" of Berkeley against war and is telling the Marines "this is not fertile ground here" for recruiting.

The town council knows they don't have the legislative teeth to close the recruiting office. They only passed a resolution stating that the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in their area. They also issued a protest permit and parking spot to the protesters opposed to the recruiting office activities.

Nobody's closing anything. The Republican legislators in Washington (and the national media) have jumped the gun on this one, no doubt hoping to make 'political hay' out of it and show themselves as strong supporters of the military.

This link is to the City of Berkeley's own website:

http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/print.asp?id=23925

[LIPH]

By saying the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in Berkeley isn't the city council in effect saying the Marines don't enjoy the right to free speech while within the city limits? The First Amendment is a wonderful thing, as long as it applies to everyone.

I was just looking at the codepink website to see what they are all about and here's their reply to that exact question.

Code Pink isn't the Berkeley City Council

no they aren't but if you would take a moment to read the facts you'll find that codepink pretty much drafted the initiative.

If the members of Code Pink want to set city policy maybe they should run for office.

[RinglingRingling]

The City Council voted 8-1 Tuesday to tell the Marines their downtown recruiting station is not welcome and "if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome guests."

The council also voted to explore enforcing a city anti-discrimination law, focusing on the military’s "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy.

The City Attorney’s office will investigate that possible action and report back to the City Council within 60 days, but City Manager Phil Kamlarz says it’s "unlikely" that the city has the ability to enforce the city’s law against the military.

In a separate but related action, the City Council also voted 8-1 to encourage the peace group Code Pink to disrupt the recruiting office on a weekly basis.

The council’s vote gives Code Pink a designated parking space in front of the recruiting office on Shattuck Avenue from noon to 4 p.m. every Wednesday for six months and a free sound permit during those same hours.

. . .

City Councilman Max Anderson, who attended Thursday’s rally and was one of those who supported the resolution against the Marines, said he doesn’t see any contradiction that city officials in Berkeley, the home of the free speech movement, are in effect telling the Marines that their brand of speech isn’t welcome.

Anderson said, "The military has hundreds of millions of dollars to run ads on TV" aimed at recruiting young people.

He said, "This small counter-demonstration by us should in no way stop them from propagandizing and recruiting," he said.

Anderson said the council’s resolution is only symbolic because it doesn’t intervene in the Marines’ lease with the landlord who owns the building where the recruiting office is located.

But he said the resolution expresses "the popular will of the people" of Berkeley against war and is telling the Marines "this is not fertile ground here" for recruiting.

The town council knows they don't have the legislative teeth to close the recruiting office. They only passed a resolution stating that the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in their area. They also issued a protest permit and parking spot to the protesters opposed to the recruiting office activities.

Nobody's closing anything. The Republican legislators in Washington (and the national media) have jumped the gun on this one, no doubt hoping to make 'political hay' out of it and show themselves as strong supporters of the military.
This link is to the City of Berkeley's own website:

http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/print.asp?id=23925

but gosh... Vitter needs to get people to forget about the hookers... and if he wraps his adulterous butt tight enough in the flag....

[krusin1]

I guess my take is that the U.S. Military (including the Marines) is charged with protecting the entire, sovereign United States of America - even Berkeley.

To me, that means they can set up shop where they deem necessary and appropriate, so long as they don't run afoul of Constitutional prohibitions (search/seizure, etc.)

IMNSHO, the city of Berkeley has no authority to prohibit the Marines from coming to town.

And encouraging protests of the recruiters sounds like organized discrimination to me... suppose Berkeley has any kind of anti-discrimination statute?

[flyboy55]

. . .

The town council knows they don't have the legislative teeth to close the recruiting office. They only passed a resolution stating that the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in their area. They also issued a protest permit and parking spot to the protesters opposed to the recruiting office activities.

Nobody's closing anything. The Republican legislators in Washington (and the national media) have jumped the gun on this one, no doubt hoping to make 'political hay' out of it and show themselves as strong supporters of the military.
This link is to the City of Berkeley's own website:

http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/print.asp?id=23925

but gosh... Vitter needs to get people to forget about the hookers... and if he wraps his adulterous butt tight enough in the flag....

Exactly. There has been far too much 'flag wrapping' going on during the last eight years . . . IMHO. People are getting fed up with it. I know I am.

[green1]

I guess my take is that the U.S. Military (including the Marines) is charged with protecting the entire, sovereign United States of America - even Berkeley.

To me, that means they can set up shop where they deem necessary and appropriate, so long as they don't run afoul of Constitutional prohibitions (search/seizure, etc.)

IMNSHO, the city of Berkeley has no authority to prohibit the Marines from coming to town.

And encouraging protests of the recruiters sounds like organized discrimination to me... suppose Berkeley has any kind of anti-discrimination statute?

They should contact the ACLU and ask for their help.

[seminolegrl06]

I guess my take is that the U.S. Military (including the Marines) is charged with protecting the entire, sovereign United States of America - even Berkeley.

To me, that means they can set up shop where they deem necessary and appropriate, so long as they don't run afoul of Constitutional prohibitions (search/seizure, etc.)

IMNSHO, the city of Berkeley has no authority to prohibit the Marines from coming to town.

And encouraging protests of the recruiters sounds like organized discrimination to me... suppose Berkeley has any kind of anti-discrimination statute?

You made my point before I could!!!! If there isn't compliance with certain anti- discrimination laws or heaven forbid the some parts of the 14th amendment that have been invovled in court decisions to blanket more types of discrimination, perhaps the federal government, needs to take action.

But pulling government funding is just a bonus. I dont want my money going to berekley... but than again there are several things the federal government gives money to that I do not agree with.

[alphabits]

The town council knows they don't have the legislative teeth to close the recruiting office. They only passed a resolution stating that the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in their area. They also issued a protest permit and parking spot to the protesters opposed to the recruiting office activities.

Nobody's closing anything. The Republican legislators in Washington (and the national media) have jumped the gun on this one, no doubt hoping to make 'political hay' out of it and show themselves as strong supporters of the military.
This link is to the City of Berkeley's own website:

http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/print.asp?id=23925

but gosh... Vitter needs to get people to forget about the hookers... and if he wraps his adulterous butt tight enough in the flag....

So, is your problem with the message or the messenger?

[flyboy55]

So now that the facts are out there, and we all realize that nobody's closing anything, merely exercising their rights to free speech, we will continue to argue about the 'fantasy' instead, the fantasy that those 'evil left wingers' in Berkeley (maybe they should be included in the 'Axis of Evil' even) are running roughshod over the rights of the USMC.

This thread is about to 'jump the shark'.

I don't have a good feeling about this . . .

[krusin1]

I guess my take is that the U.S. Military (including the Marines) is charged with protecting the entire, sovereign United States of America - even Berkeley.

To me, that means they can set up shop where they deem necessary and appropriate, so long as they don't run afoul of Constitutional prohibitions (search/seizure, etc.)

IMNSHO, the city of Berkeley has no authority to prohibit the Marines from coming to town.

And encouraging protests of the recruiters sounds like organized discrimination to me... suppose Berkeley has any kind of anti-discrimination statute?

They should contact the ACLU and ask for their help
.

Now THAT is a beautiful idea.

[RinglingRingling]

The town council knows they don't have the legislative teeth to close the recruiting office. They only passed a resolution stating that the Marine recruiting office isn't welcome in their area. They also issued a protest permit and parking spot to the protesters opposed to the recruiting office activities.

Nobody's closing anything. The Republican legislators in Washington (and the national media) have jumped the gun on this one, no doubt hoping to make 'political hay' out of it and show themselves as strong supporters of the military.
This link is to the City of Berkeley's own website:

http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/print.asp?id=23925

but gosh... Vitter needs to get people to forget about the hookers... and if he wraps his adulterous butt tight enough in the flag....

So, is your problem with the message or the messenger?

I have a problem with the all of it. If it was a non-binding resolution, it isn't worth the paper it is written on, and is just a footnote. We have non-binding resolutions passed in Congress and state legislatures all the time. Fed trumps state, state trumps local, and fed overtrumps local in legal standing. Non-binding resolutions are just good for making the people voting for them feel all warm and fuzzy, and let them claim to have voted on at least one issue per session.

I have a problem with two idiot senators from half a country away or further trying to use this to bolster their political careers, especially Vitter who probably seized on this like a drowning man going after a rope in his effort to keep his seat and perpetuate the lies he built his campaign upon.

I have a problem with the media blowing this up to the point that it is on the level of a "real story" rather than the equivalent of Boys State members voting for a national policy legalizing huffing mimeo fluid by grandmothers.

and I have a problem with the idea that the Federal government, and members of a party who claims to be for smaller Government and less intrusion; taking tax money they have collected and penalizing the folks they collected it from in a certain area, reducing them to a state of being taxed without representation or redress, by cutting all services and acting as if the tax money collected is theirs to use to punish and reward, while at the same time it appears their use of Federal powers to coerce runs contrary to their professed belief in less Gov't involvement (and inevitably, the gyrations necessary to reconcile their intitial position of interfering and punishing with the long-standing belief of "hands off")

[flyboy55]

I guess my take is that the U.S. Military (including the Marines) is charged with protecting the entire, sovereign United States of America - even Berkeley.

To me, that means they can set up shop where they deem necessary and appropriate, so long as they don't run afoul of Constitutional prohibitions (search/seizure, etc.)

IMNSHO, the city of Berkeley has no authority to prohibit the Marines from coming to town.

And encouraging protests of the recruiters sounds like organized discrimination to me... suppose Berkeley has any kind of anti-discrimination statute?

They should contact the ACLU and ask for their help
.

Now THAT is a beautiful idea.

The ACLU would probably give their help, if anybody's civil liberties were at stake in this case (which clearly isn't the case).

After all, the ACLU protected the civil liberties of the American Nazis who wanted to march in Skokie, Ill. They don't only defend the constitutional rights of nice people . . .