Last week, a small group appeared outside State Rep. Joe Brennan's South Bethlehem office to complain about toxic rhetoric from right-wing maniacs. For those of you who missed them last week, and chances are that you have, they'll be doing a repeat performance on Tuesday night, but this time it will be at Bethlehem's Town Hall. City Council must apparently be saved from right wing disruptions. Here's a copy of an anonymous flyer making the rounds:Increase the Political Peace
Demonstration
Tuesday Jan. 18, 2011
6:30 PM
Bethlehem City Council Meeting
Town Hall, Church Street
“Public Servants are Not Targets”
“Stop the Toxic Rhetoric”
“Hate Speech is Violence”
Bring your hopes for American Democracy and signs supporting peaceful public discourse.
Stand in support of Bethlehem City Council members and against right-wing disruptions of their meetings.
This is what happens when women leave the kitchen.
ReplyDeleteJust kidding!
Bethlem council does not need to be protected from anything except the mayor's crooked ways and their own rubber stamps
ReplyDeleteOMG! Don't people have better things to do with their precious time?
ReplyDeleteJust who is the judge of what is "toxic" speech? A passionate argument against a liberal cause? These people are tirants who want to control free speech. More evidence of how the left wing does not allow a crisis to go to waste.
ReplyDeleteYou can't make this stuff up. Voicing one's disapproval of the left's toxic agenda is toxic speech, I guess. I'm more afraid of union thugs and the Paul Kanjorskis of the world who call for candidates for public office to be shot. The left is projecting their own vicious tendencies here.
ReplyDeleteI've sent in a column to Patch.
ReplyDelete“Public Servants are Not Targets”
ReplyDelete“Stop the Toxic Rhetoric”
“Hate Speech is Violence”
I'd like to thank this group for reminding us of what we've witnessed this past week. Taking advantage of a tragedy to libel your political opponents only illuminates their moral bankruptcy.
I'm all for supporting peaceful public discourse by having peaceful discourse. Accusing your political opponents of creating a “climate of hate” is not what I consider peaceful discourse. Just sayin'
Hey baggers want some French Fires with you Big Whinnburger. Or maybe some cheese with that whine.
ReplyDeleteA few people act goofy and your panties get all knotted up.
The great thing about mainstream Dem''s is we laugh and ignore them. You give your wackoes TV shows and let them decide who should run for office.
Whaaaaaa!
My Freedom, my freedom!! Stop cashing your SS or disability checks, stop using medicare and maybe someone would take you seriously! HAAAAAAA!
LeRoy Chopps
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThe great thing about mainstream Dem''s is we...
-----------------------
Thank you, your opinion is important to us.
Wayne, The comment above yours is full of the kind of inane nonsense I'd prefer to delete. I let it stand only bc you prefer things that way,
ReplyDeleteOh poor babies, better get your towels. On a thread about words, speech and freedom, O'Hare carefully censors those words he doesn't want to hear.
ReplyDeleteHypocrite
740/905 loves the teabag stuff; likely hit in the chin with more balls than Johnny Bench.
ReplyDelete740/905,
ReplyDeleteI'm not the government and have no obligation to read your nonsense or to shove it down my readers' throats. Most of your comments don't even make any sense and are barely responsive to the topic of the post. You just use the comment thread to tee off on people you don't like and try to shout them down. I let one of your comments stand bc Wayne thinks I should let them stand. But now we go back to my way.
"You just use the comment thread to tee off on people you don't like and try to shout them down."
ReplyDelete----------------------
Then, in a fashion, he's on topic. Similar tactic looking for the same result. Shutting down your opponent is easier than having that "peaceful public discourse."
So Bernie, do you think the press will be out in force to cover this event?
Wayne, All I can say is your approach is not mine. I believe the press will be there bc it is right before a City Council meeting and would be hard to avoid. At the last event, Patch, the Bethlehem Press, Channel 69 and I were there.
ReplyDeleteHow many of you, recently, have been on the receiving end of public rants challenging your honesty, legality, intelligence, and patriotism? Try sitting on the dais while a citizen loudly claims YOU are corrupt, guilty of serious crimes, and/or have No RIGHTS under the constitution to hold office. Now imagine the citizen who is ranting is leaning toward you, he's dressed in baggy clothes, speaking incoherently while clutching a copy of the constitution. He claims YOU have never read the constitution and YOU are destroying the country. YOU are killing HIM, and he's getting madder and louder and madder and louder...
ReplyDeleteThis happened twice at recent Bethlehem City Council meetings, and this blog and others dismiss it as unimportant; they cooly ridicule council and Bethlehem police for escorting the ranting gentleman out of City Hall.
Now, another group of citizens is saying, publicly, "Enough. Stop threatening, stop screaming. You must be civil to engage in civil discourse."
This is not rocket science. If you want people to behave in a civil manner, you have to set and maintain a standard of civility. The members of Bethlehem City Council have managed to do this for decades. Why is this too much to ask of citizens?
Still waiting to hear Karen condemn just one of the similarly dressed nuts on the left - or Paul Kanjorski for frickin' goodness! Obama instructed his nuts to bring guns to combat knives. Where does Karen stand on this dangerous incitement?
ReplyDeleteAnd finally, why is Karen speaking out now? Is it because she's using the ghoulish tactic of political grandstanding on the souls of victims killed by a lunatic? Oh yeah. And it's Bernie's fault.
Your a sicko, Karen. Just pray for the dead and wounded and stop using them and their families to score your own political points. Sick. Sick. Sick.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe political rhetoric in this country is actually rather tame.
ReplyDeleteI think American's have been paying a little too much attention to the Disney world view of American History.
Most political assassinations or attempted political assassinations have nothing to do with politics and have to do with insane people.
I'm all for improved table manners amongst the media and the politicos, but at the end of the day it shows a bias that they think the actually can control everything bad in society. They can't. They are mere reflections of society.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteKaren,
ReplyDeleteA link to my previous blog on this point is here. It includes a video of the entire speech and ejection. Contrary to what you are claiming now, this gentleman never called you corrupt, never accused you of serious crimes, never said you have no right to hold office, never said you are destroying the country, never accused you if failing to read the Constitution, and never said you were killing him. Your recap of what was said is so inaccurate that you should consider a new career as a blogger.
You correctly indicate he was wearing baggy clothes. Is there some rule I'm unaware of that prohibits people from speaking if they wear baggy clothes? You add that he carried a copy of the Constitution. Is there some Bethlehem ordinance that bans that?
He did state you're not God, and you're not. Perhaps you need to be reminded of that a little more often.
What I stated then and will repeat now is that the speaker was loud, scary loud. Was an ejection warranted? Probably. But it should have come from the Chair. Unless there is a clear and imminent danger to your safety, no police officer should disrupt a meeting like that well-intentioned officer did. I don't fault him. I fault you.
Karen Dolan said...
ReplyDelete^ see above ^
-----------------------
You're referring to one gentleman, not a group or a movement or a member of such as far as anyone knows. If you or others fear him there are more effective ways to deal with it than having a protest out front. Seriously, if you're worrying about a Tuscon like incident do you really think a few people holding signs would have stopped what happened? Ridiculous.
I understand your concerns, I don't understand this particular method to deal with him... no, actually I do believe I touched on that above. If this is about one particular person please deal with it accordingly.
I don't live in Bethlehem but from what I gather from residents this ordinance that bothered him is a real concern. A protest may just discourage more articulate people from speaking out on it. I don't think that's what you want.
Just so you are aware of your history Karen Dolan, politicians had duels and called one another the devil. Someone who fancies themselves a progressive lover of history would certainly know that.
ReplyDeleteYou should try to actually read the constitution, maybe have Mr. Spadoni translate it for you.
http://toledoblade.com/assets/pdf/TO42474.PDF
I sure hope you lose the election in three years so that you don't have to fear for your life anymore. Better yet, resign to make a statement.
I am not one of the protesters. I'm not even speaking out on this except by exercising my constitutional right to respond to a blog post. Jeepers, people. Talk about getting your panties in a knot.
ReplyDeleteBernie, respectfully, you attended one meeting where this citizen was in attendance, and you sit behind or to the side of him, so I doubt you experience what we, the council members, experience when we are being screamed at. As for what he said, I take careful notes at meetings and my quotes of what this man says when he visits us at council come from more than one visit, more than one rant.
Obviously I don't fear the right or left leanings of an individual when they speak at Courtesy of the Floor, but I know what unhinged people sound like and lately more than a few of them rant about the constitution. Why that is the case is a question for the pundits and the psychiatrists, but honestly, Bernie, are you insinuating that I should ignore recent history in favor of being politically correct?
Lastly, how am I at fault for this, Bernie? Saying so made a snappy closure for your post, but please tell me, how is it my fault that a citizen screamed at a meeting, or that the chair didn't gavel him down, or that a police officer followed his own instincts and escorted him out? Please explain.
And I know I'm not God, Bernie. You are.
At least on this blog.
Karen,
ReplyDeleteLet's review, shall we. You claim that on two separate occasions, this gentleman made certain statements. I was only at one of these meetings, and that is the one that was filmed. In that meeting, he stated NONE of the things you attribute to him.
Strike One.
You go on to slam this guy bc he wears baggy clothing and was carrying a copy of the Constitution.
Strike two.
As if this were not enough, you go on to claim that I dismissed it as unimportant and ridiculed you and the police, when I did nothing of the sort.
Strike three. You're out.
How are you at fault? Your comment here is not only factually challenged, but you even go so far as to put on airs about how someone was dressed and whether he carried a Constitution. That's how you're at fault.
Another way that ALL of you are at fault, as I have stated repeatedly, is that you allowed a police officer to assume the role of your chair. A call for ejectment should come from a Chair, not some poor patrol officer who has better things to do than be a baby sitter.
And since I am God on this blog, as you correctly observe, I sentence you to five Hail Marys and three Our Fathers.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteBernie, my rosary beads are threading through my fingers, and I am kneeling on bare, rough stone while doing penance.
ReplyDeleteActually, right now, I'm posting on the internet.
Bernie, please look closely at my posts. I'm not targeting any single person or any political party or belief system. The issue is civil discourse, from all sides of the political spectrum. I can't understand why this is so complicated.
When I was growing up, in the sixties and seventies, the "toxic rhetoric" and threatening language was, as I recall, mostly from the far left: radical anti-war protesters, radical African-Americans, radical anti-establishment types, radical feminists (I admit to being one of those for a few years while at Rutgers University although I was never violent nor did I use violent rhetoric. No regrets. The times called for a strong position, and I was one of many many women who stood firm during that fight for equal pay and access to opportunity.)
I've learned since that all politics is cyclical. The players change, but the issues repeat themselves. We have to keep fighting the issues: how to form a more perfect union, etc.
I can't understand why this simple idea is being twisted. I have stood up for civility since my first run for office: In 2004, civility was number one on my "platform." I was terribly naive then.
In my blog posts about this issue, I have not mentioned any recent terrible tragedies or taken a political stand on recent tragedy(s), and yet look at how many posts accuse me of exploiting a tragedy. Why?
You tell me, Bernie. I don't understand the venom.
Karen,
ReplyDeleteI do not believe you have attempted to exploit this issue nor have I accused you of anything other than (1) misrepresenting what Lee Schantz had said (that's understandable bc he was too loud, as I said at the time, scary loud); (2) attacked his attire and the fact that he carried a Constitution; and (3) incorrectly claiming that I dismissed what had happened and had ridiculed both you and the police.
And at the same time you're making your statements, McVeigh's Musketeers are conveying a completely different message than what you've just expressed. She lays everything at the feet of right wing maniacs and her circular called for people to stand against "right wing disruptions" of City Council. Her words.
When you say you were not trying to exploit the death of a 9 year-old girl, I believe you. But before tonight's meeting, Norco Dem Chair Walt Garvin joined McVeigh's marauders. He certainly is trying to score political points from this tragedy. I find that very offensive.
And McVeigh, at tonight's meeting, claimed there was a "direct line" between right wing invective and the shots fired in Tucson.
And what about her 5 steps? Incredible. If someone is arrested, he can't speak? Anyone who uses the word "idiot," "moron," or "thief" is to be gaveled down? That's a license to steal. No one can challenge the legitimacy of his government? Ban the use of score cards, which I believe is done by Prof. Antalics? Why? It's cruel? "Attacks" on younger or female members are a no go?
You might as well have no public discussion at all.
I have no problem with someone saying we all need to be nicer to each other, and if that is all you are saying, I have no problem with you. I do have a problem with McVeigh's message. Not only is it illogical, but it misses the point.
The real problem here is a mental health care system run aground. It is almost impossible to commit a crazy person, and they end up in jail or on the streets. We need to have a "seriously disabled" standard, and we also need to have after-release follow ups.
It's not the toxic rhetoric, which does come from both side. It's a bad mental health care system.
Thanks for participating in this debate. I am sure you will take it on the chin from some people, but I appreciate your candor and follow-ups. I hope you understand where I was coming from, as I think I get your point.