| |
  
|
||||||||||
Ron Paul Supporter Forced To Remove Campaign Sign
Submitted by Pennycat on Mon, 08/27/2007 - 00:07
Just when you thought you had heard the worse abuse of constitutional liberty.... » |
|
|||||||||
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
What's Your Real Agenda?
You speak about caring about the Constitution - but your remarks prove otherwise.
By stepping back and looking at the law reasonably, it makes sense. Before the law went into effect there were political signs littering the landscape for months after elections. With the $50 deposit (not a fee as repoted) the campaigns are more likely to clean up the mess in the community they make before the elections.
Unfortunately, from your comments, it sounds like your motivations are more about getting publicity than protecting the constitution. As for me, I really DO care about the constitution and find it reprehensible that you ae using this saced document as a publicty tool.
Dear Sir
I care about the constitution and I care about getting Ron Paul elected. The sign is back up because the ACLU sent the City of Clermont a letter explaining the unconstitutionality of their ordinance (not a law).
The city has informed the ACLU that it will not enforce the ordinance for the time being and will reassess the ordinance.
I am truly sorry if I have offended anyone, it is not my intent and if you would like to speak with me I have posted my contact information.
Please keep in mind, this is private property we are talking about and any regulation (fee, permit, deposit) is truly a restriction on free political speech. I did not make up the word "fee" it is the exact word used by the code enforcement officer in her letter to me.
Thank you
"If I give government the right to control you, I give them the right to control me"
"If I give government the right to control you, I give them the right to control me"
Clarify
Hello Mr. Orr,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. Let me clarify. On the issue you raised - private property rights - I personally agree with you. What troubled me is not the issue, but rather your statement, and I quote - "I want to be very careful to fight the fight that will get me the most media coverage".
To me, as a reader reading your words, you sound as though your real agenda is not your value of the constitution but rather your desire for media coverage.
I fully undestand your opposition to "restictions on free political speech", you don't need to try to convince me. I simply find it distasteful to use an issue this important as a tool for media coverage. It just lumps Mr. Paul in with all of the rest of the politicians who manipulate the media. I had hoped for a higher standard from his supporters.
I still feel that this should be addressed in the proper political, constitutional way. Get it on the city council's agenda, let them vote. If we don't agree with the vote then campaign for other council members that are aligned with our views.
How sad that we have replaced the beautiful system our founders set in place with tactics like media manipulation and ACLU lawsuits. I would prefer for the good citizens of Clermont to resolve this issue without bringing in outside lawyers from the ACLU. I also trust the good citizens of Clermont more than the ACLU.
Also, thank you for your apology - but none needed. I am not offended. I am just disappointed. I desire for you to have the right to campaign for your candidate, but I also love my community. I feel that this issue could have been resolved without involving the media. It makes the city and the campaign both look bad.
Respectfully,
James L.
Thank you
I very well may have overreacted but please keep this in mind.
I wrote emails and called Wayne Saunders, Hal Turville, Jim Hitt, Betty Mcminamen, Jim Purvis, Ray Goodgame, Jack Hogan Etc......
and none of them would so much as respond to me with exception to Jim Purvis who essentially just said that the way it is is the way it is. I did not contact media or the ACLU until I felt that I did not have a choice. I would have no idea how to petition the local people, If I cannot even put up a yard sign how can I really let others know of my plight?
I am no expert on local government and everyone just kept referring me back to Betty who was very hostile to me (and I was always polite).
I will be honest, I did not know who to turn to, so I went to the media and the institute for justice IJ.com. The institute for justice was not able to take up the case in a timely manner so I called a contact in the ACLU. Keep in mind, I warned Clermont that I would do this and they did not take me seriously.
So, I do agree with you on many points but I feel that if Clermont did not want this then they had their opportunity to avoid it. I could be wrong, but I am 24 years old and I still have a lot to learn.
I just want government to have more respect for the private citizen and less respect for meetings and titles and bureaucracies.
God Bless you
God Bless Ron Paul
God Bless America
Bryan J. Orr
(P.S. - it sounds like you live in my town call me anytime (352) 536-5718)
"If I give government the right to control you, I give them the right to control me"
"If I give government the right to control you, I give them the right to control me"
Don't worry about it...
It is an obvious misapplication of the law. Most likely being applied discrimatorily against Ron Paul for President.
That is evident because the $50 fee is a deposit for taking responsibility for signs around town on public/city property.
Regards,
David Merrill.
The sign is back up in Mr.
The sign is back up in Mr. Orr's yard today even though the ordinance is still in effect and is the current law. Does Ron Paul approve of his followers to intentionally break existing law? If so - then I don't believe I can support him.
If Mr. Orr disagrees with the law - he should go through the proper "constitutional" process to change the law - but not willfully disobey it. I believe his quest for publicity will ultimately hurt Paul's campaign.
Its stupid to judge a candidate on their supporters
Im about 99.9% sure that every political person that has ever existed has had at least one supporter break a law in some form or other. So by going with your logic, you would support no one then? Don't they call that anarchy?
I Agree
I Agree - I would never judge Mr Paul because of the actions of one over-zealous supporter. I am fully aware that every candidate has supporters that may act against his personal principles. That is why I asked the question if anyone knows if Mr Paul would approve of violating the law over convictions. Does anyone know his stance on an issue such as this? Thank you.
Its stupid to judge a candidate on their supporters
*edit* sorry double post
Hello All!!
Hey, I'm the guy in the news piece and I really appreciate all the support.
I was wondering one thing, my sign says "Paid for by Ron Paul election committee"
But it was not because I had to pay for it. Do any of you know of a nice 2'x2' sign that does not say that?
I want to be very careful to fight the fight that will get me the most media coverage and if I break the size regulation then the media may be less sympathetic.
If you want to e-mail or call any media here is my contact info:
Bryan Orr
(352) 536-5718
1108 West Minnehaha Ave Clermont Fl
bryan@kalos-services.com
Thanks!
"If I give government the right to control you, I give them the right to control me"
"If I give government the right to control you, I give them the right to control me"
Nice job
That was really awesome, you're news report reached far more people than your sign would have just sitting there in your front lawn.
I noticed one thing, the ordinance says "temporary" I would make it a "Permanent" sign (you do that by affixing it to your mailbox pole.
I don't think these say "paid for by Ron Paul" but you would have to ask the seller - these are waterproof
http://cgi.ebay.com/25-Ron-Paul-for-President-Campaign-Elect...
taking responsibility
If you pay the $50 deposit, you declare your private property public - effectively. That is how I gist it anyway. You said that you would be taking responsibility for all the signs around Miami - left on the public property.
But your home is private property - at least outside the scope of METRO organization. Let's just say for now you are under the good faith impression your home is private property belonging to you.
Since the City of Miami/DADE - METRO is under UN combinatorial mathematics, the correct method of handling the notices is Refusal for Cause. However you probably have no experience in the admiralty so I suggest you get your reporter friends interested in the other candidates.
Are the other supporters of other Presidential candidates allowed to put signs up on their property? Is Hillary or Rudi allowed on private property?
Great job stumbling onto a wonderful promotional device!! Good work. You complying for the sake of not stirring up a mess is precisely the best and most effective method of making the most of this publicity.
Regards,
David Merrill.
__________
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapt...
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapt...
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapt...
I mean does this apply to a
I mean does this apply to a for sale also?
No, the ordinance clearly
No, the ordinance clearly said political signs posted by/for political campaigns.
Maybe we should try to help
Maybe we should try to help our brother out and call the city manager and ask him about this city ordinace that sounds like it only applies to signs posted on public property. What do all of you think?
Wayne Saunders, City Manager
Location:
685 W. Montrose Street – 3rd floor
Clermont, FL. 34711
Phone:
(352) 394-4081 ext. 314
Fax:
(352) 394-4087
My impression is that the
My impression is that the ordinance sounds like it applies to ALL signs everywhere if PLACED BY THE POLITICIAN OR HIS DELEGATE. Since this supporter is not doing this because the politician requested him to (and this is a sign he bought and paid for with his own money and not as part of a campaign), it sounds as if the ordinance is inapplicable.
I would pay the 50$ and the 250$
And every time the fine went up the sign would get bigger. and I would call in the Ron Paul support (ie kooks) LOL to donate if it got to large of a sum but the sign would get huge. I would drive them CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He needs a 3'x8' rEVOLution
He needs a 3'x8' rEVOLution banner to start with. $50 sounds like cheap advertising, but I can't believe he would ever have to pay. It has potential as a national story.
Famous Quote from Justice William O. Douglas
"The Constitution is not neutral.
It was designed to take the government
off the backs of people."
Famous Quote from Justice William O. Douglas
"The Constitution is not neutral.
It was designed to take the government
off the backs of people."