spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:56 PM
Original message |
it appears protest is no longer a viable form of dialog in the american democracy |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 04:02 PM by spanone
|
tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:57 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Not viable, not even legal anymore. |
Vincardog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:58 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I did it. It did not make the TEE VEE it never happened |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 03:58 PM by Vincardog
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:58 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Not sure what you're talking about |
|
but I don't think protest was ever meant to be a dialogue.
|
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. talking about the protests in san francisco and yes protest is a form of dialog imo |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. I still don't understand |
|
There ARE protests in S.F. They ARE occurring right now. So I don't understand the complaint.
And no, it's not a dialog. It's a form of speech, but not a dialog.
|
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. they changed the route so the protesters cannot be seen...to eliminate the protests |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 04:33 PM by spanone
it's a form of dialog
|
DemocratInSoCal
(402 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
OHHHHHHHH.....RIIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHT. The ones they won't have to show alongside the torch.
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. The protests that have been receiving non-stop coverage |
|
for two hours.
I don't get your objection. The protestors are getting widespread coverage, China is embarrassed, and nobody's hurt. Sounds good to me!
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
I think they changed the route to minimize the chance for violence - and that's a smart thing.
And protest is a monologue, not a dialog.
|
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. you are allowed to disagree |
MADem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:58 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Clue in the people who aren't married to their tee vees or computers as to what you mean. |
|
There's an oblique reference there and in the post that follows yours.
|
DemocratInSoCal
(402 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. They're Changing The Route To Avoid Protesters Completely nt |
MADem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. What, for the Chinese torch? |
|
Completely unsurprising to me.
They should have run the thing through at night in a rainstorm while American Idol played on the tee vee. That would have done the trick...
|
mike_c
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:59 PM
Response to Original message |
5. huh?-- are you seeking the "most obscure post of the day" award? |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 04:00 PM by mike_c
:rofl:
|
aikoaiko
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 06:25 PM
Response to Original message |
15. They changed the event to keep the protesters from stopping the event |
|
There were even posts on DU saying the "the bus was blocked", the torch run was "collapsing" and it looked like it was going to be completely canceled. It wasn't to keep them from being seen -- it was to keep them from completely disrupting the event.
as it turned out, the anti-Olympic/China protesters significantly interfered with the event (with the speech of those who would celebrate the Olympics) even though they carried on.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:31 AM
Response to Original message |