YELM, Wash. — The town council barred residents from mentioning Wal-Mart (search) at meetings, prompting a challenge by civil libertarians who said a "free and accountable" government depends on a citizen's ability to voice concerns openly. The retailing giant has an application pending to build a superstore, spurring controversy in the small town about 15 miles southeast of Olympia. In a letter to the council, American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Aaron H. Caplan said his group believes it is unconstitutional to ban any mention of Wal-Mart (WMT) at council meetings. The term "big-box stores" also is banned, as is "moratorium." The ban began because council members were fed up with complaints about the proposed superstore and related demands for a moratorium on big-box stores, municipal attorney Brent Dille said. He said officials also didn't want to appear biased if the council ever hears appeals in the matter. "It's the council's meeting. They can decide what they want to hear and what they're tired of hearing," Dille said. "You can understand if you're barraged for two months at meetings — the same people saying the same thing." The policy has been increasingly restrictive over the past five months. No one who signs up to speak at a council meeting about big-box stores, much less Wal-Mart, is allowed to talk, and anyone who mentions either is told to sit down. "They just stop you short in your tracks," said Kellie Petersen, who owns a gardening store in town. Petersen is one of several people who have spoken up despite the restrictions. "My issue was about traffic concerns. I knew enough to use the word 'Wal-Mart' at the very end, so I wouldn't be told to sit down," she said. The letter from Caplan, who is based in Seattle, said, "The ability of citizens to state their views about matters of public concern is one of the cornerstones of a free and accountable government." Mayor Adam Rivas said he does not expect the ACLU (search) protest to spark any policy changes and doesn't plan to respond to the letter. "We don't answer to the ACLU," Rivas said. The ACLU does not plan to sue over the issue, spokesman Doug Honig said. A call to national Wal-Mart headquarters seeking comment was referred to local store officials, who didn't immediately return a call.
I found this on www.foxnews.com. Looks like their Gov't is more screwed up than ours.LOL!
-- Edited by jspeer at 10:08, 2005-07-09
__________________
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
This sounds like what conservatives are doing in Washington with flag burning. If a law is unconstituitonal, "that's OK, we'll just change the constitution...." Whenever they start losing the game, they make up new rules. They did it with Schiavo, they did it with election laws, they did it with eminent domain, and they're doing it now with Wal-Mart.
I can just see this governing body in action, sticking their fingers in their ears, squeezing their eyes shut, singing "I'm Henry the 8th, I am, I am" over and over... How proud they must be of their proactive response to what must be a serious concern. Why do they bother? Why even have a meeting? Why doesn't the council sit down at the table and just hold up their middle fingers for an hour & a half? Does the fact that many people are complaining about the same thing indicate at all that the issue needs to be addressed?
__________________
Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, when you DO criticize them, you are a mile away, and you have their shoes...
If you choose any truth and follow it blindly, it becomes a falsehood, and you, a fanatic.
What manner of dumbassery is this? I can just see this governing body in action, sticking their fingers in their ears, squeezing their eyes shut, singing "I'm Henry the 8th, I am, I am" over and over... How proud they must be of their proactive response to what must be a serious concern. Why do they bother? Why even have a meeting? Why doesn't the council sit down at the table and just hold up their middle fingers for an hour & a half? Does the fact that many people are complaining about the same thing indicate at all that the issue needs to be addressed?
dumbassery
Is that a word? Mindcrime I didn't think you lived in a dream world. This is how business is done in all the favorite public official hangouts. It goes something like this: na na na na na na, you put me here and now your stuck. Why don't you write your congressman, I'm sure they will care. Oh and before you go, here's your tax bill. I'm getting married to the widdow next door. She's been married 7 times before...
You have two choices concerning injustice in the real world. You can take it in the keister, or you can do something about it. I choose to raise my voice and let them know I'm not taking it... If someone wants to sit back and accept the world really is as pathetically depraved & corrupt as they think, then they'll get just what they deserve. All my complaining and proffering and speaking out may be for naught, but it feels wrong not to try...
And if GWB can invent new words when he speaks, so can I. 'Dumbassery' describes his administration perfectly.
__________________
Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, when you DO criticize them, you are a mile away, and you have their shoes...
If you choose any truth and follow it blindly, it becomes a falsehood, and you, a fanatic.
I get where you coming from, I tend to push back myself. Unfortunately to many people just look the other way while sticking their head in the sand. I really like your new word, I used it one another thread already, hope you don't mind.
__________________
Do not go where the path may lead - Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail: Emerson
This sounds like what conservatives are doing in Washington with flag burning. If a law is unconstituitonal, "that's OK, we'll just change the constitution...." Whenever they start losing the game, they make up new rules. They did it with Schiavo, they did it with election laws, they did it with eminent domain, and they're doing it now with Wal-Mart.
i must agree here. conservatives are masters at making up rules as they go. then they pick on liberals because they're breaking the 'new rules.' that's why they hate the supreme court so much, they establish rules that actually mean something.