- Illustration by Marcus Kiser for CL
- King of all he surveys
Pat McCrory seems to think he’s still mayor of Charlotte. McCrory, a GOP gubernatorial candidate who is waiting till 2012 to announce his candidacy so the hosts for his speeches can continue to pay his food and travel bills, has found a new, super-critical issue to run on: the Occupy protesters.
The former mayor says Charlotte and N.C. officials (including, of course, Gov. Perdue) are setting a dangerous precedent by “allowing” Occupy Charlotte and Occupy Raleigh protesters to set up shop on city- and state-owned land. McCrory says he’s concerned about what will happen when the Democratic convention comes to Charlotte next year.
“Where do they draw the line?” McCrory asked, according to Tim Funk at the Charlotte Observer. “If they let one, do they let 10 — or 1,000? . . . That’s not good for the economy, for public safety, and it’s surely not sanitary for our city. . . . They [Occupy Charlotte] do not have a right to occupy” city-owned property. The former mayor who thinks he’s still mayor says, “the city council should create an ordinance to deal with it — today.” Jawohl, Mein Herr, they’ll get right on it.
Here’s a wake-up call, Pat: It’s public land. That means that, as BlueNC’s James Protzman points out, the land “is owned by We the People. Only in Pat McCrory’s upside down world would owners of property be banned by Republican brownshirts from occupying their own land.”
In a fine essay on Huffington Post, Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman notes that the Occupy movement “is revealing distortions in our current understanding of the First Amendment. In recent decisions, the Supreme Court has protected Wall Street’s constitutional right to pour millions into political campaigns. But as presently construed, the First Amendment isn’t an obstacle when it comes to silencing the Occupiers.”
Here’s the headline from Protzman’s piece, which pretty much sums up this writer’s view, also: “The arrogance of the ruling elite: McCrory the one percenter.”
This article appears in Oct 18-24, 2011.
First ammendment protects speech yes. Theese people are not speaking, they occupying. Say what you have to say and go home! Come back each day, every day, say it over and over if you want, just don’t live there and take up tax payers resources. Good Lord. Sorry with McCrory on this one.
Why is it that a protest can’t be legitimate at 2am or 4am? Have you read the first amendment recently? It says “Congress shall make NO LAW” and includes the right to peaceably assemble. “No law” means just that. You can’t dictate what time, what words or lack of words. This has become a brilliant exercise in first amendment rights and a true test of our constitution. This is patriotism at its finest.
They do issue parade permits though? Isn’t a parade a peacable assembly? Can they require you to clean up afterwards? Put up a bond?
Just as with the second amendment the SCOTUS has broadly defined the right but allowed the states to further refine the intent of the law without denying the right.