March 13, 2012

One year ago at the Wisconsin protests: Protesters redirect hopes to the Wisconsin Supreme Court election.

"April 5, keep hope alive, vote Kloppenburg."

I photographed damage
done to the door plates and hinges by the protesters.

And the Smithsonian sends a curator to Madison to select protests signs "to document, in general, occasions when American citizens interact with their government and petition... for change."

And Meade removes another war monument desecration — the "Solidarity" T-shirt on the Heg statue.

I do my "won — duh! — in the rotunda" poem.

27 comments:

leslyn said...

Really Althouse? It's all about you. Get out of your own way.

leslyn said...

Wisconsin Constitution, Article IV, Legislative, in pertinent part:

"SECTION 10. ....The doors of each house shall be kept open except when the public welfare shall require secrecy."

edutcher said...

Oh, thank you, Madame.

I've been waiting for this.

You were so sweet there.

Patrick said...

Good on you and Meade for cleaning up those memorials. In addition to the great reporting, that was a great public service.

I haven't read Article IV, but when attorneys cite portions of statutes and state things like "in relevant part," and use ellipses,I always check to see what they are not citing.

leslyn said...

So go ahead and check, then, Patrick. Do the work.

garage mahal said...

"SECTION 10. ....The doors of each house shall be kept open except when the public welfare shall require secrecy."

LOL!

/WIGOP

Ann Althouse said...

"SECTION 10. ....The doors of each house shall be kept open except when the public welfare shall require secrecy."

Wow! So your implication is: Bending the brass plates of the 100-year-old building and breaking the hinges (and kicking out a wooden panel)... all that was justified, because the doors were supposed to be open?!

If that's your point, please write it out clearly. I want to see the sheer brazenness of it!

Ann Althouse said...

"You were so sweet there."

Thank you. I'm wearing the hat that I left somewhere in Indiana.

leslyn said...

My point is simple and requires no interpretation or inferences.

The doors should have been open, according to the Wisconsin Constitution.

You are deflecting to bent hinges and doorknob plates.

The truly brazen act was locking the doors.

edutcher said...

Ann Althouse said...

"You were so sweet there."

Thank you. I'm wearing the hat that I left somewhere in Indiana.


Sorry about that.

Rusty said...

Couple of things.

First. Meade is pretty damn agile for a guy with hair that grey. It was't the getting up part that was impressive. It was the getting down part.

Second. EVERYBODY should carry a swiss army knife. Not just to cut down radical adornmnets, but because they are just so damn handy. And they have a corkscrew.

leslyn said,"You are deflecting to bent hinges and doorknob plates."


You probably missed this part

"except when the public welfare shall require secrecy."


So the end justifies the means? I need to know.

BESr said...

"except when the public welfare shall require secrecy."

I would put the value of these ideals above the material goods of a few brass plates, hinges and a door panel. "Things" can be fixed or replaced. Ideals, not so much.

I've also have found it interesting that Meade's heroic deeds are often recorded and published. It's always been my contention that true acts of altruism, are best done anonymously. Looking for credit smells of something much less noble.

Ann Althouse said...

"My point is simple and requires no interpretation or inferences."

You posted a Constitutional law provision and made no addition statement about its relevance and now you deny that it was necessary to interpret or infer in order to understand your point.

I'll make an inference. My working theory is that you are dishonest. My backup theory is that you are dumb. Is there a third possibility?

Ann Althouse said...

"I've also have found it interesting that Meade's heroic deeds are often recorded and published. It's always been my contention that true acts of altruism, are best done anonymously. Looking for credit smells of something much less noble."

That's almost a brain teaser. If Meade is doing other good deeds and not claiming credit, if I were to tell you that, I would refute your point and simultaneously concede it.

Ann Althouse said...

"I would put the value of these ideals above the material goods of a few brass plates, hinges and a door panel. "Things" can be fixed or replaced. Ideals, not so much."

I guess you're fine with stuff like the cops breaking into your house without a warrant and going through all your possessions if they suspect that you are committing a serious crime, etc. etc. Think of the argument you are relying on.

Ever heard of the old saying "2 wrongs don't make a right"?

You think you're entitled to do anything in response to something you think is wrong as long as you believe the wrong you are doing isn't as bad as the wrong you are reacting to?

Would you like to live in a community where everyone followed that principle?

Chaos.

shiloh said...

Althouse's one year it's all about me WI protest anniversary is going well. :-P Eagerly looking forward to the second anniversary.

Hey, the WI bruhaha got Norma Desmond an appearance on fixednoise so yes, fond memories for the madame lol.

leslyn said...

@Althouse: I am neither dishonest nor dumb. The constitutional section I quoted is clear and unambiguous. And in fact I did give you a clarification in case you needed it: "The truly brazen act was locking the doors." So. The third possibility is that I am not compelled to reply to you in the way that you desire.

What is interesting to me is, first, your insistence that I interpret a quote that, in my opinion, needs no interpretation; and second, when I did reply with more information about my personal opinion, but apparently not in the words you wish to hear, you attacked my integrity and intelligence.

That's not a logical way to engage in debate; but it is an arrogant one. And mean.

Your reply to BESr was not logical. BESr noted that Constitutional requirements trump acts that are significantly less grave in import than the Constitutional violation. (BESr, correct me if I have summarized wrongly what you wrote.)

Your response was to attack with examples of violations of the Fourth Amendment, as if his only choice was to select which Constitutional violations he was willing to have imposed upon him. Apples and oranges. I think BESr was pretty clear that he preferred no Constitutional violations. You're a law professor. You know better than to use a flawed analogy.

@ Rusty:

"leslyn said,"You are deflecting to bent hinges and doorknob plates." You probably missed this part "except when the public welfare shall require secrecy." So the end justifies the means? I need to know."

I don't know how you got "end justifies the means" out of the quote, but it is not a principle I live by. To reach an end will always require some means. That's obvious. It does not, and should not IMO, include methods and means that are unprincipled. Take Martin Luther King as an example.

Meade said...

"Take Martin Luther King as an example."

Hoowee... talk about a flawed analogy!

Ann Althouse said...

"What is interesting to me is, first, your insistence that I interpret a quote that, in my opinion, needs no interpretation..."

It needs interpretation to be connected to the conversation, otherwise, any reader is left thinking why is she citing that. (Plus, as a legal matter the text requires interpretation, but I wasn't referring to that.)

You reconfirm that you are disingenuous.

"That's not a logical way to engage in debate; but it is an arrogant one. And mean."

Your sniffles are disingenuous.

You haven't seen me get mean yet. I assure you it would hurt far far more than what you've seen here. But I don't think your nonsense here merits such an effort. It's just dumb.

"I don't know how you got "end justifies the means" out of the quote, but it is not a principle I live by. To reach an end will always require some means. That's obvious. It does not, and should not IMO, include methods and means that are unprincipled. Take Martin Luther King as an example."

Oh, yeah, MLK was all about the destruction of property.

shiloh said...

Indeed, Althouse's one year anniversary is going well and surely "we" don't wish to see our blog mistress get really mad lol.

Which of course is kinda a lame, childish threat ie you don't want to see me get totally upset and blow your argument to kingdom come!

Yea, Althouse will hit you soooo hard it will kill your entire family! :-P Right thru your computer monitor lol.

>

Her political blog being one of many on the net of little or no consequence notwithstanding w/many conservative lemmings w/various degrees of passive/aggressive childishness.

Again, no one's going to change the world by blogging so hopefully the participants are somewhat entertaining ...

Ann Althouse said...

And what can one say about notion that the teachers' interest in not paying for a portion of their pension and insurance benefits is as civil-disobedience-justifying as excluding black people from places of public accommodation?

These are the people who chant "Shame! Shame!" They don't think they're talking about themselves, but a lot of people watching them reinterpret the chant thusly.

So I repeat my exclamation: Wow!

Ann Althouse said...

"Yea, Althouse will hit you soooo hard it will kill your entire family! :-P Right thru your computer monitor lol."

Worse that that. I'll use sarcasm. I know all the tricks: dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and satire.

It's quite terrifying. Grown men cry.

Ann Althouse said...

But you'd have to be interesting enough to make it fun, and you really are not.

It's so sad.

shiloh said...

"It's quite terrifying. Grown men cry."

So many different directions to go with that it's way too easy!

Yea, soooo uninteresting that you replied twice as I obviously struck a nerve.

take care

Meade said...

shiloh said...
"take care"

You too, shiloh.
Take affordable care.

Ann Althouse said...

And yet I never respond to poor Shy Low.

leslyn said...

Dear Althouse;

No sniffles. No disingenuousness. No agenda. Think of me like Popeye: "I yam what I yam." People can take what I say and twist it and read into it however they wish, though I would prefer that they didn't. The simplest and most true thing is just to take my words at face value:

The Capitol doors should not have been locked, according to the Wisconsin Constitution.