The city's response not only aided the point being made, but further drove it home. The TP got exactly what they wanted out of this already and more.
You think 10K covered the Tea Party's tab? Um, no.
If you're an OWS protester, why not just take the simple step to pay the city for the permit? Especially when you have a $600,000 surplus with nothing to spend it on except for a communal kitchen that serves Crab Eggs Benedict to hundreds?
If you really believe that certain city officials didn't have an agenda to protect most of these folks and their illegal behavior and that the same sentiment that motivated it wasn't the reason behind this TP audit response, then there's no prying off the blinders you're wearing. Like Fish, I often wonder why I bother even acknowledging your ridiculous presence. You live in a tiny box with no ability to see outside of it. It's actually kind of sad.
The Tea Party wanted to make an example out of the city of Richmond and how did that work out for them?
P.S. You think I really care what you or Warfish think about me?
Arrest them, fine them and send them on their merry little way... If they show up again, do it again
The police presence is already in place, no terlets to pay for and pay to clean, no extra trash pick up, no bad press from the violence occurring at these rallies, etc...
Yes.And the law is rather clear on this I believe, if they don't pay, and don't get permission, and don't go through the usual Govt. mandated stuff, they can and are evicted or stopped from protesting/marching/etc., right?
They should be evicting the Occupy folks.So I'll ask again, how SHOULD these two very similar issues have been handed by the City in question, whilst maintining equal treatement under the Law and not showing preferential treatment to one group over the other, simply because one group actully obay'd the law?