Cleveland RNC 2016


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 446 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

I currently live in northern Ohio, about a 40 minute highway drive from Cleveland. Given the turmoil of the primary season, and the continued unrest both within and without, I'm curious to see how this event goes down.

I hadn't planned on being anywhere near Cleveland for a couple weeks, to avoid the conflict I'm almost certain will occur, but this story is almost giving a good enough motivation to consider the trip.

Is anyone currently planning to attend, either for promotion or for protest?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Cleave-Land the Realm of Endless Bifurcation?

Never heard of it.


In more seriousness (and not just a reference to Dungeons & Doritos, great as that is), not I. That said, though it's probably just because I'm not involved, I'm surprised at the immediate response of, "officers asking questions" is, "they're trying to shut people down" - to me, it seems like an extremely reasonable thing.

I mean, there is a lot of expressed vitriol in this election (and for good reason), and actually talking to people who have had or may have had connections to others in the past who may be interested in engaging in dangerous activities in the future seems really reasonable. I mean, there's a reason I've had multiple background checks, and though it's nothing to do with a storied past (I'm a volunteer in a number of places; these places require these things), I sometimes have to answer reasonable questions about how and why I've had so many background checks.

That said, I definitely grant that the actual visit may have been to intimidate - I don't know, I wasn't there, and it may well have been exactly like that. Though on the surface, it seems like a potentially legitimate idea, it might not be in the slightest, and if it is not, than it is shameful.

Also, I do have a bias toward trusting law enforcement, in general; so there's that.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Also, I do have a bias toward trusting law enforcement, in general; so there's that.

That is one of the things that can affect peoples' perceptions, quite true.

I tend to be fine with individual officers, but distrustful of the institution. It's an extrapolation of my broader policy on group behaviour, that a person is generally good but people are not. On a "me and you level" humans do well, on an "us v them" level they are at their worst.

To possibly help illustrate why this action by the police might bother some people, imagine if the FBI and police were visiting members of Muslim organizations and asking if they had heard anything about planned terrorist activity. It implies that a) criminal activity is planned, b) that these groups would be a part of it or associate with those who would, and c) can easily seem like an attempt to have a chilling effect on the free exercise of protest rights via an authority figure threatening "we're watching you".

Scarab Sages

They're trying to intimidate the wrong people, is the problem - left-wing protestors have reliably been peaceful to a fault. There are people who have repeatedly demonstrated violent behavior, but they've all been out of the Tea Partier/Trump supporter mold (remember that guy who literally headstomped a liberal counter-protester, then later said that she (the stomped) should apologize to him (the stomper)???).

So WHY are they going after the people they were targeting in the article? They have reason to worry about violence breaking out, yes - but they're targeting the wrong people, and have been consistently.

I, too, always used to think the police were, on the whole, trustworthy. That's changed dramatically in the last few years. It's very upsetting. You SHOULD be able to trust the police, right???


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If those two articles are true...?!? wow. Just wow.

I will not be there, but I do hope that all people there will be safe. This election is a crazy one. ~shakes my head~

Edit - I too am not completely trusting of law enforcement or the government. (Long story.) I respect most officers, but I do know there are more than a few bad apples in the bunch.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cleave-land? What kind of name is that for a planet?

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sharoth wrote:

Edit - I too am not completely trusting of law enforcement or the government. (Long story.) I respect most officers, but I do know there are more than a few bad apples in the bunch.

As none other than Dr. Philip Zimbardo said after the Abu Ghraib disgrace broke out, it's not "bad apples," it's the barrel itself that's making the apples bad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Sharoth wrote:

Edit - I too am not completely trusting of law enforcement or the government. (Long story.) I respect most officers, but I do know there are more than a few bad apples in the bunch.

As none other than Dr. Philip Zimbardo said after the Abu Ghraib disgrace broke out, it's not "bad apples," it's the barrel itself that's making the apples bad.

Remember that the original saying is that "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel".

The whole point is that corruption spreads, not that it's fine because there are just a few bad apples.

Scarab Sages

thejeff wrote:

Remember that the original saying is that "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel".

The whole point is that corruption spreads, not that it's fine because there are just a few bad apples.

But what Dr. Zimbardo is saying is that it ISN'T "a few bad apples," i.e. individual people, but rather the barrel, i.e. the institution, environment, and reigning ideology, itself.

Granted, he was talking about a slightly different scenario at the time, but only slightly - and let's not overlook the increasingly blurred lines between our military and our police.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Tammy's a bad apple.


thejeff wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Sharoth wrote:

Edit - I too am not completely trusting of law enforcement or the government. (Long story.) I respect most officers, but I do know there are more than a few bad apples in the bunch.

As none other than Dr. Philip Zimbardo said after the Abu Ghraib disgrace broke out, it's not "bad apples," it's the barrel itself that's making the apples bad.

Remember that the original saying is that "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel".

The whole point is that corruption spreads, not that it's fine because there are just a few bad apples.

nominally,I would agree with you, but I would argue here that the saying has taken on the latter meaning nowadays.


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Remember that the original saying is that "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel".

The whole point is that corruption spreads, not that it's fine because there are just a few bad apples.

But what Dr. Zimbardo is saying is that it ISN'T "a few bad apples," i.e. individual people, but rather the barrel, i.e. the institution, environment, and reigning ideology, itself.

Granted, he was talking about a slightly different scenario at the time, but only slightly - and let's not overlook the increasingly blurred lines between our military and our police.

Fair enough.

Though that barrel is made up of people.

Still, both variations counter the common use of "few bad apples" to excuse problems.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Tammy's a bad apple.

Tammy's also a real peach. {waggles non-existent eyebrows}

Freehold DM wrote:
thejeff wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Sharoth wrote:

Edit - I too am not completely trusting of law enforcement or the government. (Long story.) I respect most officers, but I do know there are more than a few bad apples in the bunch.

As none other than Dr. Philip Zimbardo said after the Abu Ghraib disgrace broke out, it's not "bad apples," it's the barrel itself that's making the apples bad.

Remember that the original saying is that "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel".

The whole point is that corruption spreads, not that it's fine because there are just a few bad apples.

nominally,I would agree with you, but I would argue here that the saying has taken on the latter meaning nowadays.

Perhaps the saying has been drifted in meaning amongst folk nowadays, but that means those folk are wrong. They are the same folk who felt it was necessary to drift the meaning of words like decimate, to confuse words like accurate with precise, and to invent words like "pro-active." Wrong, wrong, wrong!

And get off my mausoleum lawn, you whipper-snapper!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Demi-Lich H. Ross Perot wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Tammy's a bad apple.

Tammy's also a real peach. {waggles non-existent eyebrows}

Freehold DM wrote:
thejeff wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Sharoth wrote:

Edit - I too am not completely trusting of law enforcement or the government. (Long story.) I respect most officers, but I do know there are more than a few bad apples in the bunch.

As none other than Dr. Philip Zimbardo said after the Abu Ghraib disgrace broke out, it's not "bad apples," it's the barrel itself that's making the apples bad.

Remember that the original saying is that "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel".

The whole point is that corruption spreads, not that it's fine because there are just a few bad apples.

nominally,I would agree with you, but I would argue here that the saying has taken on the latter meaning nowadays.

Perhaps the saying has been drifted in meaning amongst folk nowadays, but that means those folk are wrong. They are the same folk who felt it was necessary to drift the meaning of words like decimate, to confuse words like accurate with precise, and to invent words like "pro-active." Wrong, wrong, wrong!

And get off my mausoleum lawn, you whipper-snapper!

Well, I'm a firm believer that language is descriptive, not perscriptive, but I think it's worth pushing back on this one. It's taken on the latter meaning, but the older analogy is actually more applicable to most of the cases it's used in.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Protest policing in the US mostly uses the Miami Model. This a somewhat complex set of tactics used by police for not just crowd control, but also propaganda (or media relations, or social control or whatever you want to call it.

[Note: Some of this post has previously appeared in the "Trouble in Fergietown" thread.]

Twelve years ago, I was arrested when the Miami Model was used during the 2004 RNC visit to New York City. I was right in the middle of a situation that could very well be described as riotous, and was arrested. The NYPD Brute Squad beat up my friend, impounded hundreds of bicycles, and slapped overly tight zip cuffs on hundreds of us. Then things got weirder. We were held overnight in a huge really filthy bus repair building. In this big place they had built metal chainlink cages topped with coiled razorwire. The next day, a variety of handcuff arrangements, hours spent on a hot bus, mugshots, fingerprints, bologna, and late that night, I finally saw a judge and appointed defense attorney. That was the first time since my arrest that I found out what I was accused of: Two counts of Disorderly Conduct (blocking traffic and failure to disperse), Parading Without a Permit, and Obstruction of Government Administration (a misdemeanor similar to resisting arrest). Over 24 hours after I was detained, I was an indited criminal, released until my next court date. The mayor said that the actions of some protesters were like a "form of terrorism", and 1,800 others would have near identical experiences that week.

However, things didn't actually happen the way the prosecutors claimed. Many people had video taped the arrests and protests. When it came to light that the city was editing video evidence and this was reported in the NY Times, my criminal charges were dropped, as were many of the 1,800 people arrested that week. In fact, about 90% of the cases related to the RNC have been dismissed.

Several lawsuits have been filed against NYC. Two years ago the largest protest related class action settlement in history had been awarded to those arrested. It took over 10 years, and my share was unimpressive, but I finally got paid. As nice as the money is, it leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth knowing that the organizers of the arrests suffered absolutely no consequences, and the tax payers got stuck with the bill.

I don't really know what to tell people who will be in the city during the RNC. [Note: my arrest happened before the RNC officially started, so consider the police response to include the week before the RNC as well.] The police arrest people not based on what they are doing but rather where they happen to be at the moment. In other words, don't think you won't be arrested, just because you are obeying the law. The best advice is to film EVRYTHING! That can mean the difference between being convicted for a crime you didn't commit, or getting a settlement check in 2026.

Also read up on the Miami Model, and understand how and why the police operate. You can look at almost any major protest event in the last dozen years and see the same patterns, so it is not very original at this point.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I had to take my nitroglycerin pills. I actually found myself agreeing with I'm Hiding In Your Closet ;-) .

While there are decent people who are working as police/law enforcement, the problem is that the system itself has become both corrupt and corrupting of those who work in it. One has only to look at the relatively minor things such as police departments factoring revenue generated by issuing traffic tickets in their official budgets, and unofficially coming down hard on officers who don't meet their quotas for issuing traffic citations. Then there are bigger things such as the problem with Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws which effectively give police the power to "legally" rob people who for some reason or other have too much cash on them.

At one point in time I got to know some of the inspectors who work for the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries reasonably well. One of them said that if they were to take the massive list of codes they were responsible for enforcing and throw out everything that wasn't legitimately tied to actual work place safety and reasonable business practice ... that the regulations would be reduced by about 2/3. He also commented that if pressed to testify in a court of law that he would cheerfully state that he did not have a quota system that controlled the number of citations he issued. Then he went on to say that regardless of that, God help him if he didn't get his "numbers" for the month. Last but not least, there was one of the counties in the area which had building codes that were not in agreement with the state building codes. So if a builder working on a house set things up such that he was in compliance with the county level codes he would be penalized by the state if one of their inspectors caught him, and vice versa as well. Thus builders were under the gun to try to complete their projects as rapidly as possible as well as play guessing games with which inspector was going to drop by.

The other potentially big problem is that other considerations aside, the police are necessarily forced into making the simplifying assumption that the one "who done it" is the person they can build the strongest case against in the shortest amount of time. While more often than not this is true, it can and does generate situations where innocent people have been metaphorically ground to hamburger by the justice system simply because they didn't have a strong enough alibi.

Given that you will never know until too late whether or not you are dealing with Officer Friendly or Officer Himmler, the only safe recourse is to have the minimal interaction with the police that is possible. Don't be rude, be reasonably polite, and try to exit the situation as soon as you can without causing perturbations. If you are being arrested the best recourse is simply to submit and plan on doing all your "fighting" in the courts with a good attorney helping you. Realize that even passive resistance to arrest will open you up to the charge of "resisting arrest", and you can still be hammered for that even if all the other charges against you get thrown out.

The only other alternative is to go all out using as much force as possible, essentially exercising the "World War III" option. The problem with that is even if you "win" the initial engagement, you are now most definitely on the police radar and will likely have to spend the rest of your life on the run. Unless you know exactly how to handle such a turn of events and have a large off the books cash reserve, don't expect to be able to run successfully either very far or for very long.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

WTF!
By an odd coincidence, I just realized that I will be in Cleveland during the RNC! Well, while I'm there, I might as well tear shit up, and shut that convention down!

I guess irony can be pretty ironic sometimes!

Also, I'll NEVER get over Macho Grande!

EDIT: Wait, wait wait! I can carry a real AR-15, but not a toy gun, tennis balls, or canned goods? This country is f%#&ing INSANE!

Dark Archive

Oh, it is one of those kind of threads.


NenkotaMoon wrote:
Oh, it is one of those kind of threads.

One of those kind of threads? What is it?


Fergie wrote:
Wait, wait wait! I can carry a real AR-15, but not a toy gun, tennis balls, or canned goods? This country is f!%&ing INSANE!

The Police Officers Union has asked the governor of Ohio to suspend the Ohio open carry law. He's said he doesn't care if that's unconstitutional.

Any bets on how long it will take for the NRA to figure out how to handle the police asking to shut down the 2nd amendment?

Is this the "government tyranny" they've been warning us about?

Liberty's Edge

Fergie wrote:

WTF!

By an odd coincidence, I just realized that I will be in Cleveland during the RNC!

Um... good luck.

Stay off the streets as much as possible. Keep your head down.

Hope you make it home safe.


CrystalSeas wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Wait, wait wait! I can carry a real AR-15, but not a toy gun, tennis balls, or canned goods? This country is f!%&ing INSANE!

The Police Officers Union has asked the governor of Ohio to suspend the Ohio open carry law. He's said he doesn't care if that's unconstitutional.

Any bets on how long it will take for the NRA to figure out how to handle the police asking to shut down the 2nd amendment?

Is this the "government tyranny" they've been warning us about?

Nah. This is the police not wanting to get shot at more than necessary. And not wanting too many excess shootings during the convention.

No guns are allowed at the actual convention itself, of course. It's only the idiots wandering the streets they're worried about.


thejeff wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Wait, wait wait! I can carry a real AR-15, but not a toy gun, tennis balls, or canned goods? This country is f!%&ing INSANE!

The Police Officers Union has asked the governor of Ohio to suspend the Ohio open carry law. He's said he doesn't care if that's unconstitutional.

Any bets on how long it will take for the NRA to figure out how to handle the police asking to shut down the 2nd amendment?

Is this the "government tyranny" they've been warning us about?

Nah. This is the police not wanting to get shot at more than necessary. And not wanting too many excess shootings during the convention.

No guns are allowed at the actual convention itself, of course. It's only the idiots wandering the streets they're worried about.

I'll be waiting with baited(sp? is that the right term?) breath for the protest against government overreach.


Freehold DM wrote:
thejeff wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Wait, wait wait! I can carry a real AR-15, but not a toy gun, tennis balls, or canned goods? This country is f!%&ing INSANE!

The Police Officers Union has asked the governor of Ohio to suspend the Ohio open carry law. He's said he doesn't care if that's unconstitutional.

Any bets on how long it will take for the NRA to figure out how to handle the police asking to shut down the 2nd amendment?

Is this the "government tyranny" they've been warning us about?

Nah. This is the police not wanting to get shot at more than necessary. And not wanting too many excess shootings during the convention.

No guns are allowed at the actual convention itself, of course. It's only the idiots wandering the streets they're worried about.

I'll be waiting with baited(sp? is that the right term?) breath for the protest against government overreach.

"Bated"*, I think.

There's been some. There's a petition about it. I'm sure the Open Carry groups will be protesting outside.

*Is a cat who eats cheese and sits by a mousehole waiting with baited breath?


Freehold DM wrote:
I'll be waiting with baited(sp? is that the right term?) breath for the protest against government overreach.

No, actually. It's "bated". As in 'to restrain'


2 people marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
Fergie wrote:

WTF!

By an odd coincidence, I just realized that I will be in Cleveland during the RNC!
Um... good luck. ...more

Thanks CBDunkerson!

The post about be being there is more of a joke really. I'll be in Cleveland for a brief stopover during a train ride west. I probably won't see much more then the train station itself. I just think it is a very funny coincidence that I will be randomly in the same city as the RNC given my history with the event. I don't recall ever being in Cleveland, and the one time I am, the RNC is in town. Ugh.

EDIT:

Fergie wrote:
NenkotaMoon wrote:
Oh, it is one of those kind of threads.
One of those kind of threads? What is it?

The correct answer is:

"A series of written communication cascading from an initial posting, but that's not important right now."


From the Intercept

"Cleveland also paid $1.5 million to an insurance broker to secure a $10 million policy for liabilities relating to the convention. “Protest insurance” has become common for cities hosting political conventions and is intended to protect the city and its employees, including officers, against any claims and losses arising from its role as RNC host, including its “law enforcement, safety, and security services,” city officials wrote in a call for bids. But the implication of the insurance policy — that the city assumes it will be sued over its handling of protests — doesn’t sit well with civil rights advocates. “These policies go far beyond general slip and fall type coverage,” said Rosnick. “They also indemnify the city for lawsuits related to constitutional violations and other civil liberties concerns.”

Be careful out there everyone, when a city buys insurance against lawsuits, they plan on doing some serious rights violations!


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Armed Black Protesters Cause Cleveland Police To Call For “Temporary Suspension of Second Amendment”

"When various “gun rights” groups, with predominantly pro-Republican agendas and predominantly Caucasian members said they planned to show up, there was still no call from the police. Suddenly, as more and more African American armed protesters began checking in on the streets of Cleveland, the police made the call to the governor."

Hmm. That doesn't remind me of everything I've ever said about gun control or nothing.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Representative Sasse, a republican from Nebraska on what he'll be doing during the national convention.

"I'll probably take my kids on a tour of dumpster fires, any of which enjoy more popularity"


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

LOL

That should keep them occupied for a while then.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
They're trying to intimidate the wrong people, is the problem - left-wing protestors have reliably been peaceful to a fault.

Lol - no: abc cnn npr (Not exactly right-leaning media sources.)

(Note: I'm not saying that Trump supporters haven't done stuff too. I'm not generally their fan either, and I'm not voting for either major candidate this go-round.)


So, it seems the attempt to change the rules of the game have failed:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/18/politics/rnc-procedural-votes-rules-committee /index.html

...just as they should have. As much as I believe Trump to be a dangerous extremist, I can't see how anyone thought that explicitly ignoring voters was a good idea.


Will John Miller be making a speech this week?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I caught the end of Joni Ernst's speech. Two things stuck out:

Joni Ernst wrote:
According to the FBI, ISIS is in all 50 states!

Wait, is this the same FBI that absolved Hillary Clinton of Email-gazi? So the FBI is corrupt when it makes a decision Ernst doesn't like, but trustworthy and honest when it says something that might make Obama look bad?

The second thing that stood out was very close to the end of her speech:

Joni Ernst wrote:
With Hillary Clinton, it's all about HER. It shouldn't be, it should be about YOU! Donald Trump understands, Donald Trump is focused on YOU.

I think she is the first person ever to suggest that Trump is not focused on himself all the time.

Liberty's Edge

That's yuge.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And Melania Trump has been caught plagiarizing Michelle Obama's 2008 speech

Uh oh
Melania said:
From a young age, my parents impressed on me the values that you work hard for what you want in life, that your work is your bond, and you do what you say and keep your promise, that you treat people with respect. They taught and showed me values and morals in their daily lives. That is a lesson that I continue to pass along to our son, and we need to pass those lessons on to the many generations to follow, because we want our children in this nation to know that the only limit to your achievements is the strength of your dreams and your willingness to work for them.

Michelle said:
And Barack and I were raised with so many of the same values: that you work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond and you do what you say you're going to do; that you treat people with dignity and respect, even if you don't know them, and even if you don't agree with them.

And Barack and I set out to build lives guided by these values, and pass them on to the next generation. Because we want our children — and all children in this nation — to know that the only limit to the height of your achievements is the reach of your dreams and your willingness to work for them.


.................Pffaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The most amazing thing about this is that she plagiarized the "values and morals" part of her speech.

I wonder how all of those convention attendees feel now that they know they were cheering and clapping for the words and ideas of Michelle Obama. Considering how the right has demonized her, I bet some wish they could bleach their brains.


Just goes to show you, when you Google "moving speeches to plagiarize" it helps if you go to like page three. :-) just lazy googling is what it is.

But, I'm sure her shoes looked very nice. :-)


Fun video comparison of the speeches.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gisher wrote:

The most amazing thing about this is that she plagiarized the "values and morals" part of her speech.

I wonder how all of those convention attendees feel now that they know they were cheering and clapping for the words and ideas of Michelle Obama. Considering how the right has demonized her, I bet some wish they could bleach their brains.

The way Michelle Obama has been demonized is indefensible. But as for the convention attendees, I doubt that they have any idea the speech was plagiarized, let alone from whom. Head in the sand, and all that.

Plus, it's just the "liberal media" at it again.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

She rickrolled everyone, as well

"If you want someone to fight for your country, I assure you, he is your guy. He will never give up. And most importantly, he will never let you down."


CrystalSeas wrote:

She rickrolled everyone, as well

"If you want someone to fight for your country, I assure you, he is your guy. He will never give up. And most importantly, he will never let you down."

Wait, for real?

The DNC must have a mole on Trump's speech writing team.


bugleyman wrote:
The DNC must have a mole on Trump's speech writing team.

Or the RNC does.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sadly, this won't make a difference to Trump's supporters. Anyone still drinking the Kool-Aid at this point is already a lost cause.


Gisher wrote:

The most amazing thing about this is that she plagiarized the "values and morals" part of her speech.

I wonder how all of those convention attendees feel now that they know they were cheering and clapping for the words and ideas of Michelle Obama. Considering how the right has demonized her, I bet some wish they could bleach their brains.

Meh. Rand Paul was caught in a much bigger plagiarism scandal back in 2013, which would have been a big deal if anyone had liked him to begin with (he was first caught plagiarizing a campaign speech from Wikipedia; subsequently it was found that many of his WSJ op-eds were plagiarized from conservative think-tank journals. That's a potentially bigger deal legally and ethically than what Melania did). But, again, it didn't matter since no one liked Rand Paul to begin with anyways.


CrystalSeas wrote:

She rickrolled everyone, as well

"If you want someone to fight for your country, I assure you, he is your guy. He will never give up. And most importantly, he will never let you down."

If that was on purpose, I think it's pretty cool. :)


Boy, this has been a weird convention.

The RNC is always strange, but man are they ever going for the world record this year.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16

Han no one mentioned The Undertaker entrance yet?

1 to 50 of 446 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Cleveland RNC 2016 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.