Thursday, November 15, 2007

The Kids Aren't Alright

A group of Boy Scouts in Cambridge, Mass. had the boxes they set up to collect donations for American troops taken away because one sorry softbrain complained that it sent a "pro-war" message.
"We contacted the law department, and it was determined that the best course of action would be to remove the boxes," Weinerman said.
No. The best course of action was to tell this jerk to shut up and let the Boy Scouts to continue to help the heroes.


Robocop said...

Just another low for the antiwar crowd.

Anonymous said...

Um, you forgot to mention it was at 'polling stations'.
Using kids of in a polling station makes it one of the more cynical attempts to circumvent electoral laws.
I don't know about america, but the rest of the world takes this kind of thing seriously.
No lobbying, fund-raising, or message associated with, well, anything, is OK.
The laws and their wording maybe different, but the principle is the same (you owe this concept to the 'Westminster System'). In most civilised parts of the world, the person responsible for such a campaign would face charges.

Robocop said...

Did you miss the point that non-political activity at polling places was LEGAL in MA? Getting care packages put together was not a political activity.

Also, the whole rest of the world does not even have polling places.

Anonymous said...

"Did you miss the point that non-political activity at polling places was LEGAL in MA?"

Unfortunately, some people can't separate supporting troops from supporting the war. While I fully appreciate the difference, I also understand that a large number of people will see this as 'pro-war' message, simply by association between the troops and the war...

"the whole rest of the world does not even have polling places."
yeah, um, I was referring to the rest of the world that votes (hence in polling stations), with the exception of those places 'where votes aren't actually counted'... where people go through the charade of turning-up voting, and the same crooks get in, like: Burma, and Florida (what's the 'returning officer's job there? Something about dumping votes in the ocean?)
... Palestine: they voted, america refused to acknowledge a 'democratically elected government' - you encourage them to vote, so long as they vote for who you want, and impose sanctions if they 'get it wrong' (by voting for the 'wrong' registered candidates) - priceless!

Don't take my word for it. Just try asking someone in any other western country 'what would be wrong with raising funds for troops in polling stations?'.

Anyhow, I'll take your word for it, that the kind of behaviour described is OK in america, you'd face universal condemnation elsewhere in the west....
and maybe that's why I feel a little more comfortable having confidence that after the federal election in my part of the world in 6 days time, we will no longer have a P.M. known as 'bonsai' - as in 'a little bush' (a spineless jelly-back who actually takes George seriously/doesn't question what he's 'instructed' to do by washington)
Australia will be an autonomous nation again.

... and no, there's no chance of anyone trying to raise funds for troops in polling places here (not unless they want a 'custodial sentence').

Robocop said...

After all of that jabber which goes from Florida votes, to George Bush, I have one question. Do you support your troops?

By the way, even most people in the United States on the same political spectrum as yourself still support theirs.

Anonymous said...

"Do you support your troops?"

As I said previously: (
"I've been accused by a few people here of being 'anti-military'. Nothing could be further from the truth, many of my family have served with distinction..."
If I actually listed the decorations/campaigns that past and present family members have received/participated in it would make it very easy to identify me/my family.
(big shout-out to the D.O.D. who are most-likely reading this... got to 'keep-track' of trouble-makers connected with their staff!).

So yeah, of course I support those that who put their lives on the line - a soldier's life is apolitical... they don't get to choose which orders from retards 'up the chain' they obey.
I have not/will not serve, but speak openly with those who I know that do. I respect/understand their decisions, but could not myself, become an instrument of a government that is so morally bankrupt/irresponsible.

Regardless, I believe (as is enshrined in law in pretty-much anywhere that votes - other than america) that you use a polling station for conducting elections, not politically and emotively charged actions such as fund-raising for troops

*A question for robocop "most people in the United States on the same political spectrum as yourself"... I'm interested in knowing what 'political spectrum' you think I occupy?
(It's just when I criticise those who are self-declared 'right wing', there's an assumption that I must be a 'leftie' or 'liberal', and when I dish it out to the 'loony-left', I get called 'Nazi' etc... I'm just interested to hear what you mean by that.... oh, and find out what I believe in!)

Robocop said...

There are some people that are Conservative and Patriotic by name only.

We also have to take into account that one country's definition of a Patriot can differ greatly from another country's definition.

For example, supporting the troops is acceptable in the United States, from those that both support, and oppose the war. Since the event in the story occurs in the United States, this voids any application of foreign definitions.

I, like most Americans, still maintain that supporting the troops is not a political activity. If this even occurred in London, or Liverpool, than how this even would be interpreted would be indeed different.

Supporting the view that "A soldier's life is political" indicates that you have never served in the military in wartime. If you have, then it has been forgotten that soldiers ultimately serve each other. Family history aside, someone in your honored family failed to mention this to you.

As for what political spectrum you are in, I really do not care. There are classifications by name only, and at worst, there is also the "fence sitter" who takes no definite stand in the scheme of things, unless perceived popular opinion suddenly gives them a stand.

The main point of the article was that the activity of the Boy Scouts was legal, since in their realm, supporting the troops is NOT a political activity.

Anonymous said...

Supporting the view that "A soldier's life is political"
If you must quote - please get the quote right - "a soldier's life is APOLITICAL", meaning politically neutral or free from politics.

I can understand that people make mistakes, but the context; the rest of the sentence "....they don't get to choose which orders from retards 'up the chain' they obey" should have made the meaning clear... it's the reason I support troops (didn't you actually read any of the post or were you too eager to reprimand me with your incorrect assumption - in relation to 'supporting troops'. Had you bothered to read further you may have found that we agree on this matter... but you'd have do some reading to find that out.
I also made it clear (in the next sentence) that I have not served/would not serve under current circumstances. You presented a similar conclusion "indicates that you have never served in the military in wartime", as though the result of some grand deductive process (simply reading before responding might have saved you the trouble).

*Anyhow, it's about what the kids did, and those that put them up to it. Whether it the collection was political is irrelevant, as they didn't seek permission to install the collection boxes in the same room as the polling itself, but outside a 150 foot perimeter.
Had the Boy Scouts sought permission for what they actually intended, things may have worked-out differently, their activity may well have been considered 'politically neutral' (I would have said 'apolitical', but that didn't work-out too well last time) . Without the opportunity to review the nature of the activity (as a proper application would have afforded, it's only sensible to 'err on the side of caution', and, remove the boxes).
Then again, the radius was there for a reason, and my point has always been that a wider consensus (as in the rest of the 'free world') would disagree/be horrified at those circumstances (the use of minors in some kind of 'scheme'), and well, so did at least one city official in Cambridge, MA.

"As for what political spectrum you are in, I really do not care." Yeah, me too. I don't much care for what you think you know about me, but when someone starts making assumptions, and presumes to tell me what I believe: "the same political spectrum as yourself", I can't help myself, and get a giggle out of inviting them 'to put the other foot in their mouth too'

Robocop said...

I stand corrected for my erroneous response about a soldiers apolitical life. I do, however, contend that the government, with all of its troubles, is not morally corrupt. At this point in time, it is still voter repairable. Considering the alternative form of government our enemies would prefer us to have, in the past, and in the present,the moral superiority of our government becomes clear compared to both Socialism, and Islamic Fundamentalism.

Anyhow, about the kids, the story stated "Patterson said the Scouts were given verbal permission by the city election commission twice and at the polling stations as well. A promotion for the polling place collections was still up yesterday on the Veterans’ Services Department section of the city’s Web site.". Your statement that the kids placed those boxes in the polling places is incorrect. This was a case of the "right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing." The problem arises when the city refused to remedy their mistake.

Again, you apply "free world" standards, at least the standards according to you, as if we had one world government which makes binding decisions over all of the world's affairs. This might come as news to you, but this does not exist. The United States is its own country, with its own general standards. While similar to our counterparts across the pond, they will not be the same.

Going back to political spectrum, if you are a Conservative, at least by American standards, since this is an American story, you would be a fake one. If you are a Socialist, then most of your statements are consistent with that point of view.

I freely admit, for the most part, that I am a Conservative. Not 100%, I am afraid, but for the most part.

You invited me to put a foot in a mouth. I accept, but it would not be my mouth.

Anonymous said...

"Your statement that the kids placed those boxes in the polling places is incorrect."

From the article:
"The boxes were set up inside the 33 polling stations around the city to collect donations for soldiers serving overseas in the war in Iraq.... Weinerman said the scouts were never given permission to set up the boxes inside the 150-foot boundary."

It reads pretty straight-forward in the article. You did read the article?

I'd explain it, but I'd be wasting my time.

"You invited me to put a foot in a mouth. I accept, but it would not be my mouth."


(Besides, it's a bit late, your breath smells of double-barrel foot-cheese after your further musings about 'political spectrum')