Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Surrender, by any other name...


What with the new baby and all, I completely forgot to cover the July 4?Th Parade Committee meeting last Friday at the VFW. The headline in today’s Gazette indicates that the Committee made no decision on the Town Manager’s offer/bribe to provide insurance and police security for free (about 10% total overhead) in exchange for allowing protesters.

If I were still a committee member resignation post my immediate response would be --excuse the military metaphor--“NUTS!” Especially after I found out on my return from China about the despicable display of non-veteran protesters infiltrating behind the “Iraq Veterans Against The War” banner.

Would the town really run its own July 4TH Parade next year (and would any spectators come?) if the private Committee sticks to their guns? Hell no!

The Town Manager, at ACLU urging, already backed off his April 23 declaration that the private committee could not hold a July 4th parade on July 4 so when the ACLU also threatens a federal lawsuit for not giving them the time slot held for seven straight years he will also cave.

And we saw most recently how lawsuit-shy the Select Board is even after the BIG CITY town attorney told them they had nothing to worry about over scheduling the election to replace X-Czar Awad on September 16 thus disenfranchising Umass students from running for the office.

Yesterday’s Republican article suggests the town’s 250 Anniversary Parade is in trouble. Chairman Barry Roberts candidly admits they “ can use a lot of help and money with the parade.” Well maybe they ought to solicit the protesters at $500 per placard.

And if the town is now struggling with this once in 250 years Parade how are they going to deal with promoting two? Obviously two Select Board members—Brewer and O’Keeffe will not support that, and patriotically-challenged Awad is gone as of 8/31, so the Town Manager had better start watching his back.

I hope the Committee comes to a clear, decisive decision soon.

9 comments:

O'Reilly said...

The Town Manager changed his posture because the Board voted a unanimous 'sense of the board' that Shaffer ought not disenfranchise the Parade Committee.

They may have been motivated by reasons stated in the ACLU letter but Shaffer showed no signs of taking it into consideration, not one iota, just a willful stubbornness based on some inexplicable self assured moral righteousness.

Create where due, stubborn refusal to accept new information where due, too.

The Town Manager, at ACLU urging, already backed off his April 23 declaration that the private committee could not hold a July 4th parade on July 4 so when the ACLU also threatens a federal lawsuit for not giving them the time slot held for seven straight years he will also cave.

Anonymous said...

Per O'Reilly's quote:

"...just a willful stubbornness based on some inexplicable self assured moral righteousness."

Sounds like an apt description of players on both sides of this debate.

As Larry likes to say, "hmmmm....."

LarryK4 said...

Actually I stole that from Stephanie.

And my "self assured moral righteousness" is based on a 9-0 Federal Supreme Court decision.

Max Hartshorne said...

Larry there you go again, making statements that are going to haunt you and show up in countless other places and will soon accuse you of assault and battery. "Watch his back?" Whoa, fighting words. In Amherst that is.

LarryK4 said...

Yes indeed!

Hey at least that one is a jailhouse metaphor rather than military.

One prominent guy in the legal profession criticized my use of the term “locked and loaded”; yet he was comfortable saying “keeping their powder dry” in reference to other middle-of-the-road Amherst political types staying out of this fiasco--at least until she stayed beyond the deadline for getting the replacement election on the already scheduled September Primary or November Presidential ballots (thus costing taxpayers less than a stand alone election)

O'Reilly said...

My righteousness (if you want to call it that) is based my understanding of the first amendment freedom of speech and right of association, not some self-assured moral bearing.

Why do protest advocates rule out organizing their own event, with or without the organizational or financial resources of the town?

Anonymous said...

O'Reilly said... Why do protest advocates rule out organizing their own event, with or without the organizational or financial resources of the town?

Because they are lazy & selfish? As in, "I want, so do it for me"

Anonymous said...

I actually think that the audience for their parade, would be too small to get their point across. Parade committees' money and audience, for a bunch of jerks that do not know what freedom is all about and do not care how it came to be, would be a slap in committee's face.

LarryK4 said...

Yeah, plus there simply are not all that many of “them”. At the closed door meeting with the Town Manager Harry Brooks represented himself as the Chair of the town democratic committee (at the next meeting of that committee he was thrown out as chair) his WIFE Paulette Brooks represented herself as the Chair of the Republican Committee and in Amherst we know that is about three people, and the Green Party representative (gee, there’s another 1.5 people) and the rookie League of Women Voters President (their former President said she had not problems and loved the Parade). Thus these 4 or 5 folks purported to speak for thousands. And they only really speak for themselves. Selfish indeed.