President George Bush will be the speaker at this year’s Independence Day naturalization ceremony at Monticello. Such events take place around the country, and the annual event at Monticello is for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. Charlottesville’s is always a big deal, not just because of the always-excellent speakers (Sam Waterston, actor and Unity08 founder, spoke last year), but because of its great location. The event is free, though probably tough to get into this year. It’s always stunningly hot, even at its 10am start time, so prepare accordingly if you intend to go.
June 4? Wow, I know sometimes Dudya does stuff wrong but did someone forget to tell him that America’s Birthday is on July 4th.
Oops. That one’s all my fault. :) I just this week got used to the idea that the current month is June, rather than May…now I’ll never move onto July.
I’ve got it fixed now.
Ken Burns was the original featured speaker. Has he been bumped?
Would it be rude to get up and leave before “W” reads the speach his writers prepared for him?
Brian, that’s what writers do — write speeches. That’s what they are hired for. Hopefully though, they’ve been given a list of words that President Bush can’t pronounce by now. :)
Make plans to unwelcome him now!
Dress Republican.
Bring your vocal chords.
Get there early.
http://charlottesvillepeace.org/node/1615
No, don’t. I’m all in favor of protesting this President, but don’t lose sight of the fact that this is a naturalization ceremony. If Bush does something political somewhere else that day, by all means. But that ceremony belongs to these new citizens. Don’t take it away from them.
One important thing that separates Americans from most other nations is the right to free speech and to complain publicly about the government without fear of execution. What better way to show these new citizens that they are in a free country than by protesting the President to his face? In many of their home countries, such actions would result in imprisonment or worse. Nobody’s protesting the new citizens or the act of naturalization. Let’s give these new citizens credit for being aware of the social, political, and economic issues that drive so many people to such protests.
Well said Dan!
I agree with Dan. There is a time and a place for protest, and this event is neither. You are suggesting disrupting a naturalization ceremony. You rationalize it by suggesting that the folks being honored will understand. That’s a big assumption. Becoming a naturalized citizen is much tougher than having it handed it to you by birth. I doubt that the new citizens will appreciate having their recognition disrupted because you don’t like the speaker. But then again who cares about them. YOU have the right to protest whenever and wherever YOU see fit. What a country.
I’ve joined a few protests against President Bush in my time. I’m also been no stranger to the naturalization ceremonies at Monticello. And I’ve got to agree that protesting at the ceremony itself would be a damned shame. Do it at the airport. Do it at the foot of the mountain, or the entrance to Monticello. But protesting at the ceremony itself would make you no better than Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church, who protest the funerals of gay men and women and members of the military who were killed in Afghanistan or Iraq. Phelps has the right to protest at these solemn, intensely personal ceremonies. But the difference between Phelps and the rest of us is that we have the good sense not to do that.
Don’t we?
If you’re planning on attending the ceremony (a wonderfully moving way to celebrate Independence Day) and feel moved to make clear your disapproval of George Bush, how about sitting on your hands? Welcome the President with your silence. Applaud the wonderful Charlottesville Municipal Band. Applaud the new citizens. Applaud the judge who administers the oath of citizenship. Just meet George Bush with long, awkward silence.
No disrespect to the event. No disrespect to the new citizens. No disrespect to the office of the Presidency. But, that silence would be a powerful message for Charlottesville to send to George Bush.
I know two people who have gone through the naturalization ceremony and from what I know from those two people and having attended the ceremony myself, protesting the President would be one of the highest disrespect to those becoming citizens that I can think of.
Yes, this is a free country and yes, we have freedom of speech. But, the ceremony is never about the speaker, no matter how big or small they may be. It’s about welcoming these new citizens to our country.
To me, protesting Bush would be like going to someone’s wedding an protesting the minister because you disagree with their religion.
There’s a time and a place for such actions and a naturalization ceremony is not either.
IF a war criminal was featured at my “naturalization” gig I’d want him protested.
If Fred Phelps was featured at my funeral I’d want him protested.
When your idea of free speech is silence, the fascism has penetrated your brain.
It’s not a “naturalization gig.” It is one of the most important events in these people’s lives. It is a ceremony that celebrates a major accomplishment. You’re not from Charlottesville and I doubt you’ve ever seen much less been involved in this naturalization ceremony. In any case, you are showing a massive disrespect to these citizens-to-be. The Fred Phelps comparison is a good one. If you or anyone associated with you interrupts this ceremony, you will be no better than he is.
they hold naturalization cermonies all over this country including in charlottesville where i live, and the ceremonies mean different things to everyone involved
you can’t speak for the people involved in this one any more than you can for me
your concern has been expected, heard, appreciated, and noted
it does not rise to the level of outweighing the need to stand up to fascism while we can
many a good german obligingly shut up out of respect for many a solemn ceremony, often for quite touching reasons that did not measure up to the gravity of the moment
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
THE CONSTITUTION’S CHIEF DOMESTIC ENEMY IS BUSH
JEFFERSON GAVE US THE DEFENSE
IT’S CALLED IMPEACHMENT
DEFENDING THE CONSTITION
MEANS IMPEACHING BUSH
HERE’S WHY:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/bush
I think it will be really, really hard to get into this event. It is likely to be televised and I imagine that W will ensure a partisan crowd at the actual event. Any protest will need to happen before or after, as in lots of sign-wielding people booing at the entrance to Monticello.
Has the board of CCPJ actually approved such a protest? Puttting CCPJ’s website after one of your comments makes it appear as if they have David and that concerns me in case they have not. I understand wanting to protest but I have to say I agree that the people who are being naturalized come first and it is definitely not a “gig” for them. I notice you did not refer to your own funeral as a “gig”, why less respect for these folks, some of whom will surely have come from war torn and trauma inducing countries who might be very upset by any discord at the ceremony. For instance, we have Rwanda massacre survivors living in C’ville with the scars to show for it, do you really think they would not be upset by angry shouting at this event? (I don’t know if any of these are at this particular naturalization, but to make these folks into real people for you I mention that.)
David, if President Bush was going to be here to speak at a funeral for soldiers who died in the line of duty, would you hold a protest at the funeral? What if he was speaking at the funeral of somebody who had died from AIDS?
I’m saddened to see that my suggestion for welcoming George Bush with public silence causes David Swanson to suggest that I’ve been infected with fascism. Silence (not “doing nothing”, but intentional silence) is a powerful tool. While outrage may make shouting a more instinctive response, that doesn’t mean it’s the best response.
I continue to believe that silence would make a louder and more persuasive statement at this event. If you feel a need to emphasize that your silence is an intentional, political act, turn your back.
The first time that I attended an Independence Day naturalization ceremony was in the early 1990s, when Carl Sagan was the speaker. When it came time for the Pledge of Allegiance, Dr. Sagan chose not to participate. Right there on the stage, on the 4th of July, all alone in front of all of those people. He sat in silence. It was quite a moment. He later explained that he’d be happy to pledge his allegiance to the Constitution, but wasn’t going to recite a pledge to a flag. It was a quiet, dramatic moment that, I suspect, will not be forgotten by anybody in attendance that day.
Yelling, shouting and histrionics will spoil a special day for people. Don’t let your legitimate, righteous indignation blind you to the importance of kindness to your fellow citizens.
Remember too that the naturalization ceremony is an official court proceeding. Protesting while court is in session is likely to cause swift removal.
I Love the July 4 event at Monticello but will stay away this year in protest, perhaps protesting at the base of the mountain if he is coming via motorcade (he may chopper in).
I wish Mr. Jordan and their Board had the guts to say no and stick with ken burns (who apprently ‘deferred’ when little mountain asked him to), disinviting Mr. Bush who has purposefully worked hard, and sadly effectively, to limit our freedoms and liberties, and keeping him away from our Independence Day celebration.
Swanson, I apologize for getting wrong your place of abode. I saw “Washington director” or something along those lines at your website link, and I made that conclusion.
But that being said, calling people who don’t agree with your methods Nazis is a really good way to turn them off of your cause. This is why I disapprove of environmental terrorism. Environmental radicals like those do little good, except for those they are against who can easily use them as scapegoats to denigrate the entire movement, including those that are effecting real change through political activism and grassroots organization.
That is what you are doing here. We know that Bush doesn’t give a rats ass about what you have to say, and if you make a spectacle of yourself at this ceremony, you are going to turn fair and open minded people against your cause. As nearly everyone here has said, if you learn how to protest at appropriate times (and there surely are many of those), your protesting will be far more effective.
You’re right, I can’t speak for you, and I can’t speak for those being naturalized. But if you make a scene, you are not giving them a choice. If I were a betting man, I would bet that a fair number of those being naturalized are not fans of the President. But certainly there will also be those who love him. That is up to each and every one of them to decide individually. In fact, that is one of the virtues that will be celebrated that day. Some of the new citizens may not have been able to enjoy those things where they come from.
I know its easy to be angry at the President. But be sure to do so constructively, and that anger will be far more productive.
And stop comparing people to Nazis. It’s really unbecoming.
I call Bush a fascist because he is one and because it is important to recognize it and resist it. You call me a terrorist because you are acting as an amateur PR agent / pundit, which is a position grounded in fear (and which loves to equate free speech with terrorism), rather than as a human being recognizing the duty to oppose rising fascism. Yes, of course, I would oppose it in any location, because the solemnity of no occasion can outweigh the importance of opposing it, although if Bush were to show his face at the funerals of the soldiers he’s murdered he wouldn’t be Bush, now would he? I wholeheartedly second the proposal that this year’s speaker follow Sagan’s example and remain silent - not just for the flag obedience nonsense but throughout the event - indeed throughout the next 7 months. The Board of Monticello does not strike me as the sort of institution likely to develop a spine on its own, but look to the example of Arizona where Bush was recently scheduled to speak at a big event with McCain. The tickets weren’t selling, and the protest plans were growing. The protesters were going to be in the majority. So, they canceled the event. Charlottesville, too, can be a Bush-free zone, which is of course the only honest demand that could be made by people putting on the charade of concern for naturalized citizens without objecting to the presence at the ceremony of the destroyer of the document to which they are all forced to swear defense.
Bush Fulfills His Grandfather’s Dream
By David Swanson
(Originally published in July 2007, and to be published every summer until the right to do so is gone.)
It’s remarkably common for a grandson to take up his grandfather’s major project. This occurred to me when I read recently of Thor Heyerdahl’s grandson taking up his mission to cross the Pacific on a raft. But what really struck me was the BBC story aired on July 23rd, 2007, documenting President George W. Bush’s grandfather’s involvement in a 1933 plot to overthrow the U.S. government and install a fascist dictatorship. I knew the story, but had not considered the possibility that the grandson was trying to accomplish what his grandfather had failed to achieve.
Read more…
http://davidswanson.org/node/1337
No David, some people actually do have concern for other people. It is not a “charade”. You are not the only person who wishes Bush would not come here nor that wishes Bush would be silent nor that he would be arrested once he leaves office or before as a war criminal. What we believe does not give us the right to impose ourselves on other people’s sacred occasions no matter what, no matter where. I don’t think anyone actually called you a terrorist, but I do think the Phelps analogy is apt. You are perserverating on one issue and will not consider context nor the feelings of folks who have nothing to do with the cause of your issue.
David,
I don’t think you or others like you will be able to get in. I applaud what you are trying to do, though, and agree with your ideals wholeheartedly. Unlike everyone else on this blog, seemingly, I think you should go ahead and do whatever you want to do. Life is frequently about a “great story” and those receiving citizenship will receive their citizenship regardless….and they may have a great story to go with it. For some it will be a story of moral indignation while for others it will be something to laugh about and tell their grandkids about. Why deny either group?
Thanks
But it seems that whether you agree with protesting it or not, if you’re on this blog you consider opposing fascism to be a pretty trivial affair.
I want people to have good stories. And I want people to enjoy their naturalization.
How do I explain that something else is FAR more important here?
Holy crap! A friend of mine is becoming a US citizen at that ceremony, but I had no idea George W. would be present. I may have to alter my July 4 plans so I can go protest (somewhere other than the ceremony). Any word if Mr. Bush will be making an appearance anywhere else in town?
1. Isn’t immigration about the only issue most anti-Bushers agree with him on?
2. The most heartwarming free speech moment would be if one of the new citizens held up a small sign of support for detainee’s rights or a peace sign or something. That would be a lot more effective than the same old chants from protesters oblivious to #1. And I speak as a protester myself.
Something similar happened during the Vietnam War. The president invited some teenagers to White House to accept some award and one of the made a very respectful protest against the war. I forget the details. It was a clarion of the shift in the public mood about the war.
Bush is already at 73% unpopularity (L.A. Times/Bloomberg, June 19-23).
Wow.
Do you support what Fred Phelps is doing? If not, please explain, because you say that you’re willing to do precisely what he’s doing. And, if so, how is it that you’re any better than him?
>>>There is a time and a place for protest
Exactly — Have your protest, but have it over there, within the established protest zone, where no one will have to look at you, where you won’t bother anybody. Don’t be disruptive or rude. Do not fail to get a permit. Try to keep the noise down.
Let’s put the “civil” back in “civil disobedience”!
Would you picket a funeral, too, Elizabeth?
“Have your protest, but have it over there, within the established protest zone, where no one will have to look at you, where you won’t bother anybody. Don’t be disruptive or rude. Do not fail to get a permit. Try to keep the noise down.”
Now THAT would make Mussolini proud. :-)
Oh, and if you do NOT fall in line, we’ll recruit some moron to accuse you of supporting the murder of gay people and mocking their corpses.
I don’t know whether I would or not, but plenty of people other than Fred Phelps do.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302007/news/regionalnews/_funeral__mass_protest_at_shut.htm
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE0D6163CF931A15754C0A964958260
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Ferry_hijacked_to_protest_slogans_in_assassinated_Turkish-Armenian_journalist’s_funeral
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6531091
Elizabeth, Elizabeth, you miss the point. The highest priority in life is politeness and failure to disturb solemnity. ALL of those various issues pale in comparison to this ultimate duty. Therefore each and every one of these various protesters is the equivalent of a gay-hating murderous bigot. It’s a question of getting our priorities straightened out. Now sit up straight and type quietly. God bless.
David, this is a pretty simple question, and I’m surprised that you won’t answer it, if you have the courage of your convictions. Would you or would you not protest a Charlottesville-area funeral if President Bush was speaking there?
And, really, if you can’t support your position without calling me a “moron” and accuse me of being “recruited” by President Bush (?!), then you’ve probably already lost this one, David.
Right David, we were all recruited by President Bush just to pick on you. Never mind that I have had an Impeach Bush bumpersticker on my car since the war started in Iraq and before you ever started your blog and your Re-eject Bush stuff, I guess that was all just a ruse to lure you into thinking I wasn’t one of Bush’s tools, eh? And anyone who disagrees with you is a moron? Well that works well if you want to keep yourself from hearing anything anyone has to say to you that you might not want to hear. Worked real well over at Shakesville too huh? We all want our civil rights back, we all want our country back, you are not the only one and you are not our leader, get over it.
On reflection, David, I think you and I both know that you’re not going to answer my question, so I’ll just go ahead and explain why both potential responses are wrong.
If you would picket a funeral, then you are a horrible human being with whom virtually nobody (other than the Westboro Baptist Church) would sympathize. I hardly need go into detail here.
If you admit that such a thing is beyond the pale, then clearly all of us here agree with you in kind, though not necessarily degree. For all of us here, that’s cause for discussion. For you, that’s cause for condemnation and wild accusations. For our minor sin, you’ve taken a big group of people who do not like President Bush, in one of the most liberal towns in the country, who believe strongly in and have actually participated in protests against him, and labelled us Nazis, morons, and accused us of secretly being enlisted by President Bush to support his agenda. Taking a group of people who agree with 90% of what you believe and saying such beastly things about them—us—shows a stunning inability to discern who are and are not your ideological allies.
On a related note, I watched “Inherit the Wind” for the first time last night, the fictionalized account of the Scopes monkey trial. What comes to mind so strongly for me now is the subplot between Rev. Jeremiah Brown and his daughter, Rachel. The daughter is engaged to the accused Scopes (played by Dick York), who is charged with the crime of teaching evolution to his students. Reverend Brown believes with all of his heart that evolution is the work of the devil, and thinks that it is his duty as a servant of God to speak out against evolution and its supporters. While preaching before the townspeople at an impromptu prayer gathering, he lets loose a fiery condemnation, in which he damns both his future son-in-law and his daughter to hell for their beliefs. Rachel collapses in grief and terror. The reverend believed, as you believe, that he must never, ever restrict his expression of opposition to that which is wrong, no matter the target, no matter the venue. Because of that belief, he loses both his daughter and the support of the town.
You just got to this town, David, and you’re already losing us.
It seems like some useful distinctions are being lost. What *is* the correct time and place for protest? Should government, business interests, or community mores have a say in determining the correct time and place? (And what if what you are protesting *is* government, business, or mores)?
Where can protest be the most effective? Is there no meaningful difference (e.g., public vs private) between a naturalization ceremony and a funeral in the context of protesting the government?
First amendment rights have often been secured by people who exceed the boundaries of taste and comfort. The ACLU has defended the Phelps family’s right to protest at funerals (http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/26265prs20060721.html). I don’t imagine it’s because ACLU members tend to agree with the Phelps’s methods or philosophy.
My, what a lively discussion! I gotta say, when I noted that I thought this ceremony would be the ideal place to protest Bush, it never even entered my mind to do so at the actual ceremony. For one thing, that WOULD be disrespectful of those being sworn in. For another, people who protest within Bush events (particularly political ones, and every event Bush attends is a de facto political event) tend to have rather unpleasant encounters with the authorities or Bush’s own “Republican” Guard.
I just assumed any such protest would be outside of Monticello. I seriously doubt any protests in the event area would have the intended impact and would likely backfire. But as I stated above, let’s give these new citizens credit for being aware of the current political situation in the United States!
I think that all anyone is saying here is that simply having the right to do something doesn’t make it a good idea. Individual citizens have the right to protest, but they also have to exercise good judgment about the time and place. I would want to ask someone like Fred Phelps what he hopes to accomplish by his method of protest; he might say that he’s trying to get his message out in order to bring more people around to his way of thinking (I really have no idea what he would say, I’m just guessing). I would then point out (not that I think you can have a rational conversation with Fred Phelps) that his method of protest seems instead to turn off more people than it converts, and if he really wanted to bring people around, he should use a different strategy. I suspect that Fred Phelps really doesn’t care about converting people to his message and just wants attention and to fuel his own sense of self-righteous indignation and moral outrage.
I kind of think David Swanson is in the same category.
So, I think no one in this conversation is saying Swanson et al don’t have the right to protest at the ceremony; I think rather some people are saying protest at the ceremony isn’t going to convince anyone (who doesn’t already think so) that Bush is a war criminal, therefore it’s ineffective for that purpose, and that it’s really rude to the citizens-to-be and their families. So long as there’s no pretense that protest at the ceremony is actually shifting anyone’s opinions and so long as we realize that instead it’s just making the protesters themselves feel better, then I don’t think there’s any real argument here.
For me, this whole approach (disrupt the naturalization ceremony, protest at funerals) is what I’m sick of in American politics. “I hate you and what you stand for so much that I’m going to stand here and scream at the top of my lungs and stick my fingers in my ears when you talk and by the way you are the devil and you are going to hell.” It’s what I’m hoping that Obama AND/OR McCain can shift us away from, towards a model in which people on opposing sides can actually talk to one another.
Elizabeth, I don’t believe that anybody has claimed that there is or ought to be a legal restriction on protest at this event, or even that legal, business, or community standards come into play. The scope of this discussion is what is appropriate, and what each of us, individually, believe is appropriate. I quite agree with Big Al, that any vocal protest at the event itself would backfire, and badly, on the protestors. (Those who know me, and clearly David is not a member of that group, may recall Schleifer v. City of Charlottesville and Microsystems v. Scandinavian Online, both free expression cases. I was a plaintiff in the former and a defendant in the latter. I’m no shrinking violent on free expression matters.)
Incidentally, it’s not just the ACLU who has defended the Phelps—Charlottesville’s own Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression has defended Shirley Phelps-Roper, Fred Phelps’ daughter.
I didn’t know that about the TJ Center, interesting!
I just think “appropriate” is not quite the right word when talking about protesting war and injustice. Appropriate, yes, in terms of what would be effective in getting the message across (I don’t say *convince* anyone; public protest is also successful if it puts heart in the people who agree with the cause). But “appropriate” is also the catchword to describe what is convenient, or obedient, or tasteful, or conforming. When I think of the great touchstones of civil disobedience and protest throughout history, “appropriate” is not the first word that comes to mind.
No, but it does remain a perfectly fitting word. Look at how hard Dr. King worked to stage protests that could not be seen as inappropriate. He didn’t picket funerals or citizenship ceremonies. His supporters walked down public streets, they quietly asked to be served at lunch counters or to sit with others on buses. Ghandi simply walked to the sea to collect salt, or fasted for six days.
An effect protest shouldn’t expand or empower the opposition, but should instead break it down and weaken it.
Okay folks, listen up… if you want to really protest, how about holding the Monticello Foundation accountable for inflicting this disruption on the citizenry and environs of Charlottesville? A bonafide patriot, Ken Burns, was scheduled to welcome new Americans on the sacred ground of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. At the last minute, all are informed that instead, a war criminal and scofflaw of our Constitution has “decided” to take Monticello up on their “standing invitation to a sitting president.” Our law enforcement, residents, and visitors will all have to pay a price, like they’re not paying enough already to GWB’s oil baron associates and the Pentagon, for this fiasco. Write to Dan Jordan and his Board of Directors and let them know how shameful their actions are to Mr. Jefferson’s legacy. And let them know that Poplar Forest will now be the untainted venue of choice for pilgrims of democracy.
I agree with Gary’s post. Monticello owes our new citizens an apology for subjecting them to Our National Embarrassment.
This is one of the few years I’ve been able to attend this very nice ceremony, and I was looking forward to it. Now I’ll be staying home.
YES I WOULD PROTEST BUSH AT A FUNERAL.
Y E S
David,
That last one sounds very green-eggs-and-ham-ish, and I am hopeful that you can complete the rest of the poem (I will protest in a bar, I will protest near and far, etc…). I’m a bit worried about rhyming with funeral, though.
The fact is that David has the right to protest where he will. If Hitler were speaking at Monticello, I think we would all protest. I place Bush in the same category.
No, I have not labeled anyne a Nazi or accused anyone of working for Bush. Here’s what I think is moronic:
Making the ultimate sin risking impoliteness or disturbance of people’s day.
Even if it’s to save lives or preserve freedoms, if you commit the ultimate sin, then you are the equivalent of whoever the most offenseive person is who’s also done that.
But even he is not sinful because he’s a hate-spewing bigot but - worse - because he is impolite.
When Bush speaks at a college graduation now, the professors lead the protests. They don’t hate the poor students or want to scare their daughters to death. They are thoughtfully refusing to be good germans.
If Bush had reduced Medicare payments by 2 percent I’d be with you. He’s instituted tyranny in a once free nation, destroyed international law, slaughtered over a million people in Iraq alone. People. Yes, human beings, with names, faces, tatses, clothing, mothers, cousins, friends, aunts, hopes, plans, stories, personalities. He’s threatening to attack Iran. There’s widespread belief that such an act would make all of his crimes thus far look like child’s play.
And you want politeness as your TOP PRIORITY? And for my own good? Thanks, but no thanks.
This guy doesn’t read newspapers or mingle with the public. Would you suggest I send him Hallmark card?
Andrew (and Gary, and Elizabeth, and everyone else)
DON’T stay home. We need you there!
writing to jordan and board and letters to editors and opeds and calls to shows would be good
maybe waldo will start a fast on jordan’s front lawn?
seriously, serious proposals for actions are welcome.
anybody got any?
while it’s no more true that i just got to this town than that i said any number of things alleged in this blog, i do admit to having no idea who jordan is. i’m sure he’s sick or his daughter’s sick or there’s some good reason not to protest him. but may i point out that a lot of people died in a war for independence to win what we are blissfully, if haughtily, pissing away?
what i want to fight is the situation in which becoming a citizen of this place is so easily and immediately associated with attending a funeral
Cynic,
See you there!
I’m losing my civil rights on Tuesday as are everyone else in this state with any psychiatric history at all. Want to protest that? It’s happening right here in our state. It’s going to end up killing more people than are already killed in our mental health system, more people like myself with kidney failure from fear of coercion, more people traumatized for life by seclusion and restraint and beatings and rapes in our wonderful state hospitals and private hospitals. UVA psych. unit has requested a restraint chair like Gitmo. Want to protest outside UVA with me? Anyone? I didn’t think so. You can’t be with people if you don’t even know who they are and what their situation is and what they are dealing with. But go ahead and protest, it is your right as it is my right to tilt at windmills hoping anyone will care about thousands of Virginians losing access to voluntary care to be replaced by probationary type monitoring and being placed in fear of losing everything on the whim or rumor or hearsay of anyone in their lives.
Medicare cuts are the least of my problems right now, my people are being terrorized right here at home in this state and in this town.
I would protest at a wake
I would protest with a cake
I would protest at a marriage
I would protest in a carriage
I would protest in a church
I would protest on a perch
I would protest in a court
I would protest with a snort
Where won’t you protest?
That’s what I want to know.
I’ll only refrain when
I’m in Guantanamo
Alison,
Now you’re talking!!!
Make a fact sheet / flyer
Pick a time and place
We can spread the word and tell the media.
David
write me at david@davidswanson.org
No, David. It’s your right to protest. It’s my right to:
1. Believe that this is a day that’s important day for new citizens.
2. Protest when and where I believe it to be appropriate.
3. Think that you’re an a**hole for choosing a setting that’s inappropriate.
We all pick our battles. This ain’t it.
You might be onto something. If all the silent types stay home out of disgust for Bush, and all the vocal types show up out of disgust for Bush, we might see some dawn’s early light o’er the land of the free.
I’m concerned mostly about the to-be-naturalized citizens. All three of the people I know who became citizens on one 7/4 or another would be appalled that Bush is being inflicted on them. I wonder how many would-bes decide to do it another day. That would be the coolest protest of all, really….
Elizabeth,
I have a cousin who was naturalized years ago (and quite upset that it didn’t turn him white as he’d expected) and he took the further americanization step of joining the army, served out his contract (including in Iraq), settled down with his wife and two beautiful little girls, and WHAM BAM: ordered out of reserve and back to Iraq for 18 more months. And politeness is our highest calling? In fact, there may be Iraq veterans among those being naturalized on Friday. I cannot imagine that many of them will not be disgusted by the presence of Bush.
David
wouldn’t it been easier just to go up to DC and protest at the White House? Oh yeah, gas prices, my bad.
David Swanson seems to have found a straw man. He offers the insinuation that somebody has suggested that “politemess is the highest calling”. The only problem is that there’s been no such suggestion made. I don’t find a single reference to “politeness”, except on the part of David Swanson. Perhaps he’s conflating “politeness” with calls for kindness. There’s a difference, but I suspect that he knows that.
I think of the horrors that this war in Iraq has inflicted upon American soldiers and their families and innocent Iraqi citizens and their families, many of whom were “collateral damage”. That is, they weren’t the focus and the intended victims of George Bush’s ill-begotten war, they were just minor obstacles that got in the way of Bush’s ideological crusade. I hope those who oppose this war are mindful of the possibility of inflicting “collateral damage”, in their single-minded effort to stop the war and seek revenge upon its perpetrators. Anger and hate can damage the one who harbors such feelings more than it does those to whom it is directed.
Peace.
when I heard bush was coming on the 4th I wondered if there was a protest being organized that I could join… but I was thinking something along the lines of standing along the road to monticello or rt 20 (of course, to avoid it, they might go through palmyra or something).
but, it didn’t occur to me that a protest would be organized at the ceremony. If people do go for the purpose of protesting, then I think something along the line of Harry Landers’ suggestion–perhaps standing up and turning so one’s back when he speaks–would be a powerful statement that you are rejecting the president and his mssg while not disrupting an important ceremony for immigrants.
The point of avoiding disrupting the ceremony is: first, new citizens will be able to vote. don’t turn them into republicans by making them angry at your disruption of THEIR celebration (it’s not bush’s event, after all) and second, just simple respect for the new citizens–THEY didn’t pick bush to speak for them, so why ruin it for them when it’s not their fault?
And, who knows–maybe the new citizens themselves will be disapproving of bush and avoid applauding him. people can surprise you sometimes.
Karl Rove’s concept of the ‘permanent campaign’ does seem to have found a loving home among those who hate him most.
In other news, everyone attending the naturalization ceremony with Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) (as evidenced by their pink shirts, oversized mannequins, or bold rage-against-the-machine-faces covered with scarves) will be issued an official Ralph Nader tinfoil hat and Rush Limbaugh Club Gitmo survival kits for the inevitable Secret Service police visit to their home later that night to swift them away to Area 51 where they will undergo alien brain transplants so as to convert them to be subservient serfs of the Bush Administration…
Jokes. On. Stilts. The whole lot of ya…
Sincerely,
Secret Undercover Agent for the Society for the Advancement of the Bush Legacy
Poor George Bush. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth.
He can’t even go to a baseball game without getting booed now. An all-American, Star Spangled Banner-singing baseball game! The BBC covered it pretty well, with a tape of the loud booing as GW Bush threw out the first pitch for the Nationals, but I’m not sure John Stewart and the rest of the serious media here did.
There is something called Goodwin’s Law in internet discussions and I will now fulfill it. There once was a world leader who when a once-promising war became unpopular did not appear in public for three years, instead relying on his propaganda minister to face the crowds. Nah, I won’t say it.
As a sometime protester, I’m sympathetic to funeral-protester Swanson, but like I said I’d rather one of the new citizens exercise some newly-endorsed free speech.
And Bush is pretty good on immigration. On the other hand, anyone from his administration will be nervous about traveling overseas after Jan. 2009, as they might get hit with a Eurocourt arrest warrant for war crimes. You don’t see Henry Kissinger taking a lot of foreign trips these days.
“He’s instituted tyranny in a once free nation, destroyed international law, slaughtered over a million people in Iraq alone.” He couldn’t have done so without Congress’ passing of bills, resolutions and funding packages. Why not protest the REAL culprits, the fat cats we call legislators? Because we don’t want to cut off our pork.
I’m always amused with bored people looking for a protest. For some reason, they are never satisfied unless they can stir up a pack. That way, they can make a lot of noise behaving like obnoxious teenagers rebelling against their parents and celebrate later with a beer on the downtown mall with one eye on the news to see if they’re in it. They can’t make hay following suggestions such as those proposed by Mr. Landers.
watch bush booed at baseball game
what a sacrilege!
they should all be ashamed!
and in War Time!
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/32339
Write to Dan Jordan and his Board of Directors and let them know how shameful their actions are to Mr. Jefferson’s legacy.
That’s what I did. I imagine if Jordon got hundreds of emails and letters protesting a criminal coming to Monticello, it may give them pause. At the very least it would show them how pissed off local citizens are about this.
Closing down 53 with a mass march would be another option-lots of press coverage for sure. Letters to the editor protesting this shameful action on the part of Monticello would be another option.
Protest Congress Members? Who’d have ever thought of it? Or spent the past seven years doing it?
http://afterdowningstreet.org
The beer’s on me.
Jan,
Good ideas!
Jefferson once said The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It says “certain occasions” not all occasions and that is the difference that many here are speaking to.
I was curious how this debate would go here and was met with more humanity than imagined. Many here are very anti Bush and yet have balanced that with compassion for the people this event is really about- the new citizens.
This is the Charlottesville I love- people of passionate opinions who understand that sometimes actions need to consider others more important then yourself. Standing at the ceremony and turning your back on the President would accomplish both goals of protesting the Administration and respect for our new fellow citizens.
It in many ways reminds me of the ceremony and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier where protesting would be disrespect to the dead and their families. This is about the birth of new citizens and screaming at the top of your lungs at this time in at this place seems more narcissistic than patriotic. A chance to show their Bush hating peers how “hardcore” they were by screaming at immigrant families and their children. But now that arrest record for protesting the President at Monticello can be worn like a shiny new badge.
Quite a discussion. The only fascists I see are David Swanson and the CCPJ, assuming it approves his statements and intentions.
Did it occur to you that Monticello is private property, not a public square, and that (if admitted) you are a guest? You’re free to do what you want on your property, but not on someone else’s, unless you have their OK to do so.
Funny that a supposed advocate of “peace” wants to disrupt a peaceful event on the private property that belonged to one of America’s greatest thinkers, and advocates of property rights.
It doesn’t matter what a President does or who they are. No one is ever happy and all they do is complain. Whether it is MCcain or Obama..it wont matter. The same complaints will continue..the beat goes on..JC
I love how all of you anti-Bush people fight over the best way to protest the man. Should we ruin the naturalization ceremony… should we sit on our hands… should we protest at the foot of the mountain… should we write letters??? What should we do?
Here’s an idea: respect the President. Come to terms with the idea that maybe, just maybe, he has been acting earnestly in our nation’s best interest. That Iraq might just be a war that was justified. That he is NOT a war criminal. That he has policies that you absolutely disagree with, but that he is our president, elected by this country (and by this state) twice. Maybe some of his policies are right… maybe they are what is best for the country. I think that many of you are more close-minded than you would like to think. I think that so many of you hate the guy because he sticks to what he believes in, and you happen to disagree with it… so you figure out ways to demonize the guy, call him a war criminal, etc … and so you actually consider protesting at a naturalization ceremony on the 4th of July. What is wrong with you people?
I will be there supporting our new citizens, our country and our President. This should be a proud day for Charlottesville to have our President here. I realize that I am the minority here :)
senor rojo—what is wrong with us? Being in touch with reality, that’s what. It’s a dreadful affliction, luckily big pharma is busy coming up with cures for it……….Google F-ckitol but put in the “u” and you’ll find a youtube on the drug you may already be on and apparently want all of us to take. :)
Got a link to a blog discussing this subject.. it was talked about on WCHV this morning. Worth checking out-
http://welcometocvillepresidentbush.blogspot.com/
HAHA, pretty funny video, but no, I assure you I’m on no such pill. I am in touch with reality, as best as I can hope to be I suppose. I just worry for people when they seriously consider protesting a naturalization ceremony on the 4th of July… that that would even get serious consideration. It’s laughable. I know how tough life can be, how war sucks, how medicines cost a lot, how much gas prices are… I am not on “F*kitol” (haha!)… But I don’t think that our president’s approaches to these problems are worthy of the hate he receives. I don’t think he caused these problems. I think you may simply disagree with his ideas… but that is no reason to seriously think about ways to protest on the 4th of July … Yes, you have the right to do it… but should you? Absolutely not.
This Democrat hereby proposes that we all show up at David Swanson’s house with signs and megaphones to protest his intent to ruin the naturalization ceremony.
To best defend our Constitution, you should not hate anyone. Nor should you respect the authority of a tyrant.
Should a war criminal be permitted to speak on the Fourth of July at Thomas Jefferson’s home, Monticello?
Right Now, Wherever You Are: The Thomas Jefferson Foundation, a private nonprofit, owns and operates Monticello with a professed mission of preservation and education. Call Monticello right now and ask them to uninvite Bush: (434) 984-9822. Then let the Daily Progress newspaper in Charlottesville know that you’ve done that: enewstips@dailyprogress.com
In Charlottesville on July 4th: Join us for a colorful nonviolent exercise of our First Amendment rights at 8:30 a.m. at the first parking lot on the right on Rt. 53 just east of Rt. 20. Or attend the event at Monticello, open to the public.
PRINT FLYER.
The Unitary Executive is scheduled to disgrace the grounds of Thomas Jefferson’s house, Monticello, in Charlottesville, Va. During a July 4 naturalization ceremony, immigrants will swear to “support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic” at an event besmirched by the presence of the Constitution’s leading domestic enemy. Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence from King George faulted him for harassment by his troops, elevating the military above civilian power, denying people a fair trial by jury by transporting them overseas to be tried on false accusations, and other abuses that have been matched by our current King George. He has claimed the power to ignore laws, to rewrite laws, to adhere to secret laws, to discard habeas corpus, to spy without warrant, to detain without charge, to torture, to murder, and to lie the nation into wars of conquest. All citizens, old and new, have a duty to support and defend the Constitution, a document that requires the impeachment of a president as criminal and abusive as the current one.
Learn more about impeaching Bush: http://afterdowningstreet.org/bush
For information on the protest, including housing if coming from out of town, call 434-961-6278.
Please bring posters, signs, costumes, banners, props.
I’m sure the inevitable protests will represent our fair city (and Mr. Jefferson’s University, for that matter) quite accurately: as a bunch of whiny brats who know the world revolves around them and their undeniably correct opinions.
Josh- you pretty-much covered it.
hahaha! i’m laughing… you know, as a conservative, it probably helps my cause if this wacko does what he says he’ll do… he makes the rest of you (relatively) sane liberals out there seem like nutcases. I don’t think most of you are, but it certainly helps my cause.
Amen to what Josh and Bob said.
I like the idea of protesting in front of David Swanson’s house on July 4th. Maybe his neighbors will tell him he’s not welcome.
Jackson I would be glad to help you with your protest. Since Mr. Swanson has ignored the fact that the President has not been convicted of anything (war crimes) a protest at his home seems like the right thing to do. Swanson has set himself above the law and acted as judge and jury not allowing the President due process. Mr. Swanson would ask us to continue the lesson of Guantanamo Bay. Restore Justice and Peace by ignoring both!
Sic semper tyrannus, indeed
I wonder if any Iraqis are getting naturalized? Seems like we haven’t let hardly any of them come over even though the ones that have helped our guys are often persecuted and killed. Kind of like back in Vietnam.
What is this? Salem in the 1600’s or that awful Big Brother reality show? People are seriously suggesting protesting at a resident’s home because he wants to protest the President? How warped and ridiculous is that? You’re persuading me David’s right with your ridiculous responses. David Swanson is not the one who has ruined our country’s reputation in the world and allowed tainted food and bad drugs into our homes and stopped regulation of workplace injuries or the one who let folks die in Katrina, just to mention a few of the horrible things this President is responsible for.
Thanks Allison.
You (and the brownshirts) are all welcome at my house anytime - I’ll give you one of those post-action beers ahead of time.
Make mine a cold water please–kidney diet :).
It is possible to respect the office without respecting the person who holds it. However the ideas you espouse have been considered and debunked by many, many completely rational people. Looks like you’re one of the 26% who still have a positive opinion of Shrub. You’re entitled to that, just as others are entitled to consider him the most reprehensible, ineffective, and damaging president to ever hold the office.
Senor Rojo writes, “you know, as a conservative, it probably helps my cause if this wacko does what he says he’ll do… he makes the rest of you (relatively) sane liberals out there seem like nutcases. I don’t think most of you are, but it certainly helps my cause.”
That tells me pretty much all I need to know about Senor Rojo and where his priorities are. He acknowledges that most liberals are relatively sane and are not wackos, but he’s so partisan (my team above all others!) that he openly prefers it if ALL liberals are damaged by the actions of the few extremists. That “helps my cause,” he says. Ergo, his cause is NOT the cause of true cooperation and constructive engagement among people who have different opinions but share a similar goal (i.e., the nation’s best interest). All he cares about is his team winning.
I’m so sick of people like this on ALL sides of every issue.
“elected by this country (and by this state) twice”
Elected twice? When was the first time? :)
Sacrilege at Monticello
A Letter to the Charlottesville Daily Progress
By Ray McGovern, http://afterdowningstreet.org
I write as a Virginian, the father of four graduates of Mr. Jefferson’s university and of another who is an alumnus of the university Mr. Jefferson himself attended.
I have just spoken with Emily of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation to register our family’s dismay that President George W. Bush has been invited to speak at Monticello on July 4th. I cannot imagine a greater insult to Mr. Jefferson, who played such a huge role in securing for us the freedoms we enjoy as citizens of this great Commonwealth and country. George W. Bush at Monticello? Desecration of what until now has been hallowed ground.
Emily explained that the Foundation had decided that it could invite the office of the president, without appearing to invite the present incumbent. That distinction is one worthy of the lawyers whom the Bush administration hired to justify torture, ignoring the dictum of another Virginian, Patrick Henry, that practices like the rack and screw must be left behind in the Old World.
Those who invited the president to Charlottesville to help celebrate the Declaration of Independence, which asserted basic freedoms that Mr. Bush has now curtailed, dishonor Mr. Jefferson in a most offensive way, scandalize our children and grandchildren, and desecrate Monticello itself.
A shameful day for the Commonwealth.
Raymond L. McGovern
Arlington, Virginia
***
Ray McGovern, Co-Founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, spent 27 years in the CIA with duties including presentation of presidential daily brief.
“…Desecration of what until now has been hallowed ground.” Interesting snippet from Mr. McGovern’s letter that David Swanson referenced. Doesn’t Mr. McGovern think that slavery prevents that plantation from being considered hallowed ground in the cause of freedom or does he find justification for it?
Dear Mr. Swanson, I’m not trying to limit your speech here but do you think that posting your entire site here bit by bit is the way to go? Hey I got it, you have a website and hate Bush the the passionate heat of a thousands suns. I’ve always thought cvillenews is better when there is conversation not a lecture. People tend not to hear the meaning in your words when you are yelling in their ears and calling them names.
You think that calling people like Waldo, the Landers or others ‘brown shirts” is the way to bring more Justice and Peace? I could see where you might “godwin” the thread and call some here a nazi but Waldo? That just shows an epic lack of judgment.
I don’t hate anybody - sorry to disappoint or bewilder as the case may be.
If Nazis offend you, what have you done today to get Bush impeached or prosecuted?
You don’t hate anybody but you called Waldo and others “brown shirts”? Is that a term of endearment? I think that causal use of Nazi terms in the wrong way is a type of hate speech. Please spend a moment and visit Wikipedia and look up Godwin’s law.
I don’t think your actions show that you are a man of peace or care what others may say or think. You really trying to tell me you don’t HATE President Bush. Nothing you have said here leads me to any other conclusion. You sorry to bewilder me? I pretty sure that condescension and self-righteousness aren’t the pathway to more peace and justice either.
David Swanson I am a Republican. I frequent this site and while I regularly disagree with many on here, I do have respect for their opinions. I have never heard of you before. It takes some pretty big balls to come on here and attack the owner of this site and the many dedicated readers who have participated since the early “phpnuke” days.
I think that your way of going about this may reflect unfavorably on the democratic party and I honestly don’t want to see that. And yes, that is coming from a Republican. Your fist pounding appears to have no value with the readers of this site. Go find another sandbox to bury your turds in….
C-ville Eye, while the legislative branch may be complicit in the deaths of thousands upon thousands of innocents, the legislative branch did not execute state-sponsored torture. This alone is despicable enough to warrant anyone’s disapproval, regardless of political affiliation; I certainly cannot agree with Mr. Red that torture is remotely in our national interest. It does not fit with the ideals formed by our founding fathers and built upon by generation upon generation of Americans. Bush does not believe in human rights, period. He may believe in the rights of Americans, but I really don’t think so.
Bob, I somehow think that David is a bit left of the Democratic party, so don’t see how his actions will reflect on them.
I reiterate the point of all my comments: that protesting a 4th of July naturalization ceremony is a terrible thing to do, whether you agree with the president or not. I mentioned that such an extremist’s protest would be good for my side simply because that statement is true. People WILL view that protest as being representative of liberals… the fact that so many on this blog thought one protest or another on the 4th of July (whether at the ceremony, at the foot of the mtn, at the airport) was appropriate tells me that it would in fact be representative of at least some liberals. Casual viewers would see that and think less of liberals. If anything, take what I say as kind advice… extremism never plays well when it disturbs normal people trying to enjoy their 4th of July. I never said I preferred it that way just to help my cause.
However, I would prefer to win the debate on the merits, and I believe the conservative viewpoint does win the debate when you strip the debate of all the name-calling and useless rhetoric… calling someone a war criminal, is name calling and useless rhetoric. Saying that the President did not win the election in 2000 and 2004 is useless rhetoric. Putting words into my mouth that torture is in our national interest is useless rhetoric. Same with the terms “Nazi” and “Brownshirt,” whatever that means.
If you don’t like specific policies, fine. Work to change them. Debate the merits. But calling the sitting president a war criminal is a