In spite of the “police state” rhetoric, I think Philly has still handled the Occupy movement better than other municipalities. This eviction was undertaken so that a long-planned construction project could begin in Dilworth Plaza.
A facebook friend wrote, “This is how Philadelphia police treat non-violent protesters.” Not quite. Police did not just up and drive a horse through a permitted demonstration. Those who disobey orders to disperse are no longer mere protesters. They are then civil disobediencers. Police up the ante at that point. I’m not denouncing the protesters. Good for them–but let’s be honest about what happened.
Prosecutors are offering their first detailed explanation for why they charged Mr. Heicklen, arguing in a brief that his “advocacy of jury nullification, directed as it is to jurors, would be both criminal and without Constitutional protections no matter where it occurred.”
I like Elizabeth Warren. I think she makes a lot of sense a lot of the time, especially on the issue of spending. I don’t want to see her on any sort of ideological hit list. Still, those who have labored even a moment to process such thoughtless sloganeering must have cocked their heads in bewilderment. What social contract is Elizabeth Warren reading?
Even assuming that the “social contract” theory is valid, which I do not, her timing is weird. It sure is odd to imply that everybody BUT the factory owner has paid for the roads, etc. Indeed, the factory owner very likely paid more in taxes for them than did most other people (albeit at possibly a lower rate compared to income, a la Warren Buffet). Why not simply acknowledge that the factory owner is entitled to a share of the road and police service commensurate with the taxes he or she has paid? Doesn’t that satisfy the social contract? Since when was “pay it forward to the next kid” a part of the social contract? Even if “pay it forward to next kid” was a part of the social contract, the factory worker does this not only by employing the next kid, but also by mass-producing a useful good and making it available to the next kid at a competitive price. I do not appreciate this misguided portayal of producers as take-take-takers.
I wish there was some more context to this clip so that I would know exactly what evil she is attempting to remedy with her newly-amended social contract.