Running Down Protestors: Bills Sprouting To Stop Civil Disobedience

Will legislation in North Dakota allow motorists to run down
people like this, at the Standing Rock reservation protest site?
Opponents wonder. 

For months, there have been constant demonstrations and protests in North Dakota over the Standing Rock Indian Reservation as people object to oil pipeline construction there.

Other anti-fossil fuel protests have cropped up elsewhere in the nation.

The response from some oil industry-friendly lawmakers is to try and stop the protests, even if doing so is probably unconstitutional.

In North Dakota, a number of people do not agree with the protesters who are fighting the oil pipeline around Standing Rock.   Some lawmakers in the state are fed up with the demonstrations.

Which is their right. Unless they take it to far,

According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune and many other media outlets, a bill sponsored by North Dakota State Rep. Keith Kempernich, a Republican frrom Bowman, would protect drivers from legal trouble if they accidentally hit, injure or kill pedestriaions who are obstruction traffic.

You can see how this can be abused.  Somebody's pissed off that demonstrators are blocking the road. This somebody is a hothead and decides to ram his car into the people on the road.

And there are some hot heads out there, as a video of masked men threatening protesters at a North Dakota hotel demonstrates. 

Kempernich's proposed law would give this hot head cover. "But officer, I panicked. I thought they were out of the way. I didn't mean to run them over!

Case dismissed.

Kempernich comes down solidly on the side of the not-demonstrating motorists. "If you stay off the roadway, this would never be an issue.....Those motorists are going about the lawful, legal exercise of their right to drive down the road....Those people didn't ask to be in this."

The language of the bill does seem to give a lot of cover to people who run down demonstrators on a road, even if Kempenich says the bill is not intended to let people who intentionally run down protesters off the hook.

Says the Star Tribune:

"Under Kempenich's proposed legislation, drivers who negligently injure or klll pedestrians who are 'obstructing vehicular traffic on a public road, street or highway' would not be liable for damages, and  anyone who 'unintentionally kills' or injures a pedestrian who was blocking traffic 'is not guilty of an offense.'"

Yeah, a lot of people might be irritated when demonstrators block off roadways.  Often, though, it's a form of civil disobedience to call attention to a particular cause. (Black Lives Matter protestors last year sometimes blocked highways)

You can argue whether this form of civil disobedience is a good idea or not, but gosh, does Kempernich's bill open up a potential can of worms.! And possibly some injuries and deaths.

It's not just North Dakota.

In Washington State, a state senator named Doug Ericksen, R- Ferndale wants to label a lot of demonstrations "economic terrorism"  and make it illegal,  notes the Seattle Times.  

His proposal would allow felony prosecutions of protesters who purposely break the law through economic disruptions such as blocking traffic or sitting on railroad tracks.

Demonstrators who oppose rail cars with lots of oil tankers have often blocked trains in Washington and elsewhere, so that's part of where this idea came from.

It looks like what Erickson is doing is going after the money that funds demonstrations, thereby cutting off any publicity or changes in public opinion brought on by protests.

Erickson told the Seattle Times his legislation would go after wealthy, liberal donors, like billionaires George Soros and Tom Steyer, or organizations with deep pockets, like the Sierra Club.

Erickson's proposal has little chance of passing, but he ought to be careful what he wishes for. He's a big Trump supporter. What if a pro-Trump crowd blocked traffic? Would they get in trouble under his idea? So far, he hasn't said.

Other states getting in on this are Indiana, where there's a bill that would authorize police to clear demonstrators from roads "by any means necessary."

Now there's a slippery slope. Does that include just opening fire on them and killing all the protesters?

Yes, civil disobedience can be irritating or disruptive. That's the point. However, the United States has a long history of this kind of thing, and despite the short term pain, civil disobedience has almost always created long term gain.

Think the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Womens' liberation in the 1970s. Gay and transgender rights in recent years.

This old cliche is still totally true: The best response to excesses in free speech is more free speech.

Instead of trying to squelch demonstrations, people opposed to all these demonstrations ought to come up with their own arguments as to why their way of thinking is better.

If they do, they might even change minds. What a concept!

Anti-Abortion Lawmakers Are Just Getting Weirder And Weirder

This idiot, Oklahoma State Senator A.J. Griffin, wanted to
pass a law requiring restaurants and public schools to
post anti-abortion propaganda at their expense. 

Some social conservatives are anxious to take away a woman's right to abortion.

Despite U.S. Supreme Court rulings, Republican legislatures enacted at least 60 new abortion restriction laws, says the Center for Reproductive Rights.

So far ten of those laws were ruled unconstitional by courts, but the efforts continue.  

With Roe Vs. Wade still the law of the land, at least for now, I have to admire the, um, creativity of some lawmakers to restrict abortions.  It's getting very, very weird.

In Texas, a proposal has been held up in the courts, at least for now. to require cremation or burial ceremonies for miscarried or aborted fetuses.

Nobody actually wants this law passed except the anti-abortion zealots in the Texas legislature. Even the funeral home and cremation industry, which would stand to gain from this, is icked out by it and is unenthusiastic about the idea.

Of course, some people who have had miscarriages want a cremation or interment, and that's their right.

However, creating this law might actually prevent people who want these ceremonies from actually having them.

Acccording to the Texas Tribune:

"For those in the funeral business, the increased demand for cremations could mean ending their practice of charitably cremating the tissue  from a miscarriage for parents who wished to have a funeral. 

'What had always been pretty much a charitable process is now going to become costing quite a bit of more,' (Texas Funeral Directors Association spokesma Michael) Land said. It's estimated that 10 to 20 percet of pregnacies end in miscarriage."

In other words, Texas lawmakers are so intent on making abortions so excruciating and difficult for women that they think it's worth it to make tragedies like miscarriages excruciating and difficult for parents, too.

Proves that the pro-life crowd is pro-life only until the baby is born. Then it's time to start making life hard.

It's even worse in Oklahoma. (Isn't that often the case?)

According to the Associated Press:

"Oklahoma plans to force hospitals, nursing homes, restaurants and public schools to post signs inside public restrooms directing pregnant women where to receive services as part of an effort to reduce abortions in the state.

Te State Board of Health will consider regulations for the signs on Tuesday. Businesses and other organizations will have to pay an estimated $2.3 million to put up the signs because the Legislature didn't approve any money for them."

The Tuesday referenced in the AP story was last week. We've since learned the Board of Health has approved this ridiculousness. 

 They were probably pissed off because on the same day, the Oklahoma Supreme Court blocked a regulation that would  have required doctors who had admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.

However, we have learned since that the Oklahoma State Senator who introduced the legislation, A. J. Griffin, has since recinded the idea.

Before she did that,  we has the legislature in Oklahoma,  making restaurants and such pay for anti-abortion propaganda that they don't want in their businesses.

I don't think this would have passed  the First Amendment test - the government telling people and businesses what to say or else - but hey, Constitution Smonstitutiion, if it enables you to pander to your most conservative base, right quote, unquote Oklahoma lawmakers?

It appears Griffin backtracked because of the backlash against the cost imposed on businesses by the bill. She now wants to make the anti-abortion propaganda a social media thing, and she theorized it would have a greater reach that way.

But would you want to read anything Griffin or her minions put out on social media?

Nabisco Lovingly Tells Honey Maid Ad Gay Family Critics To Go Pound Sand

Nabisco, makers of tons of stuff, including Honey Maid graham crackers, released a bunch of warm, fuzzy ads last month talking about how families come in all shapes and sizes.

A still from the first Honey Maid ad that raised
the ire of conservatives. 

One of the families consisted of two gay dads and their kids, who of course love each other, AND Honey Maid graham crackers.

(The ad also featured a tattooed rock drummer dad and an interracial family, which I'm sure helped send some extreme conservatives over the deep end.)

But the gay family raised the ire of groups like One Million Moms, who urge boycotts of every company they think promote sin.

I don't think there are one million moms who are members of One Million Moms and I think the few remaining must be dying of starvation because they've pretty much urged that we boycott everything, but that's another story.

This time, One Million Moms said they objected to Honey Maid's use of the word "wholesome" to describe the two gay dads and urged us all to write angry letters to the company.

I'm afraid I didn't write that letter because I was too busy driving to the store to buy Honey Maid graham crackers, so I'm sure One Million Moms will urge people send angry letters to me, too.

And a still from the second ad, which tells
conservative critics, lovingly, to go pound sand.  

But still, One Million Moms was pretty ticked at the makers of this ad.

They said:  "Nabisco should be ashamed of themselves for their latest Honey Maid and Teddy Graham cracker commercial where they normalize sin," wrote the group. "This commercial not only promotes homosexuality, but then calls the advertisement wholesome."

Maybe One Million Moms has a point. No, the two gay dads aren't the problem, and they do seem to be a nice family.

But if the dads feed their kids too many Honey Maid graham crackers and the kids get fat and unhealthy as a result, then that's not particularly wholesome.

However, it looks like the kids get the crackers only as a treat every once in awhile so it's all good.

This past week, Honey Maid acknowledged their conservative critics with a follow up ad, which perfectly, and lovingly, tells One Million Moms to go pound sand. It probably didn't hurt that positive reactions to the original ad outnumbered negative ones by a 10 to one margin, so Nabisco pretty much felt safe with the new ad.

It's a nice follow-up ad that has gone viral, is nice, and probably helped to sell even MORE Honey Maid graham crackers.  So the ad agency is doign their job well, too.

Here's the lovely ad:

It's So Much Fun To Pick On Wacko Politicians, But......

It's so easy and so much fun to pick on politicians who display their breathtaking ignorance for all the public to see.

Mary Helen Sears: Gays and Communist
and Satan, oh my!!  n

Today, let's meet Mary Helen Sears, a candidate for the Michigan seat on the National Republican Committee.

One of her greatest writings is something she came up with last March, called "End of the GOP?" which, among other things, says all the universities are taught by Communist professors and Satan is spreading homosexuality around and the Republican party must purge those awful perverts.

She has all the answers, and all the diagnoses you need to see what's wrong with America today.

Darwin and evolution "which is being taught to our gullible children," gave "rise to Hitler's Third Reich, Mussolini's Italy and Stalin's Russia."

She doesn't explain exactly how Darwin's evolution theory gave rise to these monsters, but if Sears says it, it must be true, right?

Also in Michigan is a nutcase equal to Sears named Dave Agema.

Among Agema's gems: "Have you ever seen a Muslim do anything that contributes positively to the American way of life?

He also seems to think the Russian way of dealing with gay people -- make them shut up and go away, and maybe get beaten up, though that's not officially sanctioned-- is A-OK.

According to Politico:

"Agema suggested in December that gays manipulate the health care system to get free medical care and said a controversial anti-gay law in Russia seems like "common sense" to him."

National conservative leaders like Republican National Commitee Chairman Reince Priebus don't want the likes of Agema and Sears in any party leadership positions.

But as much as I like to laugh at bozos like Agema and Sears, here's the scary part: There are enough super ignorant, rank and file Americans, certainly not a majority, but enough to make a difference, to put the wackos in leadership positions, ones that could have real impacts on our lives.

Someday, I would like to see politics get out of bizarre fantasy land, just for kicks and giggles.