Occupy Dayton IS the “Grande Illumination”

Sandy Gudorf is an overpaid tool of corporate America. As the president of the Downtown Dayton Partnership she is paid more than $100K a year to tax property owners and then give tax breaks to new businesses. She also hires cheap contract labor to do the job of cleaning downtown sidewalks as a way to sidestep standard employment practices.

Now, she also wants to limit free speech- because lighting a Christmas tree is now more important than free speech (never mind the separation of church and state). In the Dayton Daily News she claims that because she brings 30K people to the square and it’s a 39-year-old tradition- we shouldn’t be allowed to protest the giant inequities that have developed in our country- thanks to people like her who believe in corporate welfare more than in human welfare and dignity:

Occupy Dayton, the local Wall Street and establishment protest linked with other protests throughout the nation, is being asked to temporarily move from Courthouse Square downtown for the Nov. 25 Grande Illumination.

The request came Thursday from Sandy Gudorf, president of the Downtown Dayton Partnership, the business group that organizes the holiday ceremonial Christmas tree-lighting and festivities. “We respect their right to protest,” she said. “The kickoff of the holiday season isn’t the right place to make a political statement.”

via Occupy Dayton protest must relocate for Grande Illumination.

The question to ask Ms. Gudorf is how exactly she is going to enforce her personal ban on free speech- will people wearing Obama shirts be asked to leave the square? Or if the Klu Klux Klan shows up in their bedsheets? (she’ll quickly learn that arresting the KKK is impossible, it’s already been tested in the courts).

Sticker; get the money out of politics- the 99%

Sticker available from www.stickittothe1percent.com

Gudorf is an idiot. By whining a few weeks before the event, she’s already begun to solidify the movement’s resolve to be there. I plan on being there wearing my sandwich board- and I’ll be damned if she, or any police officer is going to tell me I don’t have a right to be there.

The Occupy Movement’s real motivation is to enlighten the 99% of the wholesale illegal transfer of wealth though government-sponsored policies that have made our country a third world debtor nation on the brink of collapse. The Sandy Gudorfs of the world have helped banks take our homes, our jobs and destroy our standard of living.

In fact, one of the main reasons the “Grande Illumination” has grown in scale over the recent years is because it’s a free event- something nice people can do who can’t afford a Christmas tree or as many presents as they used to give thanks to the wizards of Wall Street and our sold-out politicians.

I urge you to join me in protesting with the Occupy movement on Nov. 25th at Courthouse Square.

As a shameless plug: my ad agency, The Next Wave has produced some stickers to show your support of the movement and is donating 20% of each sale to the local movement. Stickers are 99¢ each and available at: www.stickittothe1percent.com

[UPDATE]

After a few days- Gudorf is now only asking for the tents to go – not the protesters- at least, that’s what I’m interpreting.

That’s an acceptable position – but- the protest can and should still go on.

@Shortwest Rick added this video to the discussion- well worth watching:

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! If you wish to support this blog, please head over and use our services at The Next Wave Printing for all your printing needs. We have 4 Color Business cards starting at just $13.50.

268 Responses

  1. bobby December 31, 2011 / 1:34 pm
    Dan, Would it meet with your approval to use Wikipedia for a definition of the word “condescension”?  
  2. Dan December 31, 2011 / 1:51 pm
    Condescension of an entire culture is met with condescension of that narrow point of view. If I’ve been offensive it’s because I’m offended.
  3. Dan December 31, 2011 / 2:10 pm
    My challenge stands. Prove to me that I am being condescending by demonstrating with a reputable source that an entire culture of nearly 2 billion people are some monolithic force out to destroy America and Christians. Or simply prove to me that you know something of value about Muslims that doesn’t come from a place of fear and contempt by using honored sources. I try not to comment on things I know nothing about… which is true of many of the topics posted on this site… yet people never seem to shy away from spouting nonsense about people and cultures they are truly clueless about.
  4. Gary December 31, 2011 / 7:13 pm
    Well, I guess that Islam, Muhammad and Muslims then are just a bunch of broken up pieces not conforming to one religion at all, then, then, then.  Is Christaianity, Catholicisim broken up religions, not, they are one religion … each in their own rite.
    So my reputable choice to challenge you then, Dan, is Bill O’Rielly!  Musilms are all one religion, so there you go!  I’m tired of research, I went to Antioch and that’s all we did was read, now I listen more … end of reporting …
  5. Pat Offenberger December 31, 2011 / 8:32 pm

    Pat gets indignant, saying “And I can assure you that given a damned good part of Muslims believe in Sharia Law, I don’t see where I feel any need to explore the wonders of their ‘multifaceted face.’ ”

    Are you as upset, Pat, by the Christianists in our country who would impose their own brands of Christianity upon the rest of us?
     

    You know, I don’t recall any “brand of Christianity” in our country that allows a father to kill their child for their sexual orientation. Check and see how tolerant a Muslim father under Sharia Law is towards say their daughter who CHOOSES to have sex out of wedlock. Or even dare to venture outside without covering every possible square inch of flesh.
     
    Or any brand of Christianity in our country that REQUIRES you to subscribe to their teachings under penalty of death.
     
    Comparing Sharia law to what you consider extremism by Christians in America is the old “apples & oranges” deal at best.

  6. David Lauri January 1, 2012 / 10:21 am
    Pat, trying to claim that sharia law has any real chance of coming to pass in the United States is indeed “the old ‘apples & oranges’ deal at best.”  Care to cite any example at all of a Republican candidate praising an American Islamist who endorses the imposition of Sharia law in the United States, similarly to how Ron Paul’s campaign endorsed an American Christianist who advocates an American theocracy?
     
    And you claim that you don’t know of “any ‘brand of Christianity’ in our country that allows a father to kill their child for their sexual orientation.” Let me introduce you to one, none other the Pastor Phillip G. Kayser’s brand of Christianity. Kayser advocates for the recriminalization of homosexuality. He also explains that in his brand of Christianity parents can have their children put to death. See Is the Death Penalty Just? by Phillip G. Kayser (PDF link), page 5:

    Whereas Hebrews 2:2 gives a blanket endorsement of all OldTestament penology as justice, the rest of the New Testament gives specifics. It teaches that homosexuals who come out of the closet are“worthy of death” (Rom. 1:32). It teaches that juvenile delinquents who abuse their parents can in certain circumstances “be put to death”(Mt. 15:3-9).

    and page 6:

    Keep in mind that in the Old Testament the parents couldn’t put their children to death, only the state could. On the other hand, the state couldn’t put them to death unless the parents testified against them. And there are many other checks and balances in Biblical jurisprudence that are outlined in Appendix A. But Christ gives no indication that this commandmen thas been annulled. Instead, he reproves those who would seek to annul it.

    and page 51:

    Crimes against the family structure, which in turn undermine society

    In addition to the restitution crimes above, the following crimes are destructive of the family.

    8. Homosexuality (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:32; 1 Tim. 1:10).

     
    In Pastor Kayser’s ideal world, homosexuality would be a crime punishable by death, and while you’d be right if you wanted to point out that Kayser wouldn’t allow parents to execute their gay kids themselves, I’d counter that Kayser seems to think that parents with unrepentant gay children might want to turn them over to the state, testify against them and let the state execute them.
     
    Sure, in Iran, gay teenagers actually get executed, and that’s a horrible injustice which people should work against, but you’ve shown no evidence that it’s Islamists in the United States whom we should actually fear when it comes to implementing theocracy, while on the other hand I’ve shown you an example of an American Christianist who’d like to implement a “Christian” version of this nightmare here.

  7. Pat Offenberger January 1, 2012 / 3:45 pm
    Come on David [Lauri], what chance is there in our society of a extreme faction of Christianity becoming powerful enough to push their skewed beliefs on our entire country? Slim to none, and Slim left town. We can’t even get universal acceptance of our government partnering with a religious entity in offering social services.
     
    Muslims on the other hand in other countries are pushing to be allowed to live under Sharia law, and in many cases, have populated these countries to the point that they’re damned close to being the majority.
     
    Take how our modern world views the Muslim religion as opposed to other organized religions. Any perceived slight against Islam is seen as a huge attack. But pretty much anything is fair game when it comes to Christians. I shudder to think what the result would be if Islam was mocked as Christianity is in our society. Getting along with those of different cultures is one thing, bending to the point of breaking to satisfy one religion and it’s followers is quite another.
  8. Gary January 1, 2012 / 5:52 pm
    Other good references for different cultures, religions and beliefs: Mya Angelo’s poems; The Cosmos TV show and/or books; Ghandi — we are all one conciousness …
  9. Ice Bandit January 2, 2012 / 1:34 am
     
    …(Pat Offenberger has) shown no evidence that it’s Islamists in the United States whom we should actually fear when it comes to implementing theocracy…(David Lauri)
     
    …you gotta’ have some compassion, dear DL, for the sinkable Molly Norris. or whatever handle she’s sporting these days. It seems the beleaguered Ms. Norris, in observance of press freedoms she felt were endangered by the Great Global Cartoon Conflagration, suggested in a cartoon published in the Seattle Weekly newspaper that there should be event she titled “Everybody Draw Mohammed” day. Now usually, an offended man of the cloth calls the paper’s editor or publisher and asks for a retraction or asks his congregation to boycott advertisers. But those angered at the fey Ms. Norris put her on a hit list, by way of the Islamic dicta known as fatwa. Norris appealed to the FBI, on the grounds that a death sentence issued from a foreign country for an act not illegal in the US might be cause for their concern. So the legacies of J. Edgar Hoover, the same bunch that chased Richard Jewel and Steven Hatfill while allowing Ted Kaczynski to run amuck for 15 years came up with a not so novel solution. And that remedy was to change names and towns while forsaking career, families and friends. Sorta’ a Witness Protection Program for folks who shouldn’t need one. And the aggrieved mean business, DL, as Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh is testament. The plot that killed Van Gogh was at least eight people deep. So the chilling effect on journalists, and the governments lack of interest in protecting citizens, has already established a de-facto sharia counter to the fundamental American freedom of speech and press. At least the Boston Globe was honest about it. When asked why they failed to print any of the cartoons of Mohammed that sparked the uproar, the Beantown scribes said they didn’t want their office blown up. And happy new year to the former Ms. Norris of Seattle, by whatever name in whatever town she calls home these days…
  10. David Lauri January 2, 2012 / 9:14 am
    Great story, Ice, but while it illustrates Islamist extremism, it does not illustrate implementation of theocracy in the United States. The laws of the United States have not been amended to outlaw making illustrations of Mohammed because of this.
  11. Dan January 2, 2012 / 2:50 pm
    You guys seem to be confused about what Shari’ah law actually is… and once again the answer is complex and requires a little bit of acceptance that, like everything in Islam, there is no one, single, easy to digest answer.
     
    A quick lesson:
    Islam has only one primary “primary source”: the Qu’ran. And it is a very short book with very few “commandments” about how a Muslim should live his life, meaning very little information about what laws would constitute Shari’ah law. So what’s a Muslim to do who wants to live his life in a way in most accordance with God’s wishes (ie within Shari’ah law)? This leads to this concept in Islam called hadiths. Hadiths are the “reports” made by religious leaders and people who claim to be relatives of Muhammad’s original followers about the behavior and actions of Muhammad. There are A LOT of hadiths. Hadiths are pretty controversial in Islam… some are accepted by certain groups but disparaged by others. This is why some men wear beards and others don’t and why some women dress in the fashions of the West while others cover themselves completely. There are 5 major schools of thought (probably 100 or more minor ones) in Islam and all follow different sets of hadiths. There are also many differing interpretations of the Quranic text itself. For instance the issue concerning headscarves comes from one line in the Qur’an that states that women should be modest. One interpretation of this has led to the wearing of headscarves… another leads to total coverage, while others dismiss it almost completely.
     
    It is highly unlikely that if another country were to implement Shari’ah law that it would resemble anything like what we’ve come to know of Iran’s version of it. Shari’ah means a lot of different things to a lot of different Muslims… and certainly “obey or die” would be one of those controversial areas that would probably not be repeated under a government with a sensible understanding of this.
     
    also Ice – There were lots of paintings of Muhammad after his death. It was the acceptance of a hadith that led a certain group of Muslims to go back and erase his image from those paintings, leading to what we see today among certain groups of modern Muslims.
     
  12. David Esrati January 2, 2012 / 4:02 pm

    @Dan- you just reminded me of one of my favorite scenes by Dayton native, Martin Sheen, playing President Bartlett on the West Wing TV show:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2_LqOS3uo

    Video (2:15) is of the scene described below:

    “President Bartlet” walked into the large room where most people were standing and talking, but “Dr. Jena Jacobs” who was played by a blond women prettier and younger than the real Dr. Laura (though with the same hair style), remained sitting, the relevance of which you’ll soon see.

    Bartlet saw her and became distracted, leading to this exchange followed by a sermon from Bartlet: “Forgive me Dr. Jabobs, are you an MD?”

    Jacobs: “A PhD.”

    Bartlet: “A PhD?”

    Jacobs: “Yes sir.”

    Bartlet: “Psychology?”

    Jacobs: “No sir.”

    Bartlet: “Theology?”

    Jacobs: “No.”

    Bartlet: “Social work?”

    Jacobs: “I have a PhD in English literature.”

    Bartlet: “I’m asking because on your show people call in for advice and you go by the name ‘Dr. Jacobs’ on your show and I didn’t know if maybe your listeners were confused by that and assumed you had advanced training in psychology, theology or health care.”

    Jacobs: “I don’t believe they are confused, no sir.”

    Bartlet: “Good. I like your show. I like how you call homosexuality ‘an abomination.'”

    Jacobs: “I don’t say homosexuality is an abomination Mr. President. The Bible does.”

    Bartlet: “Yes it does. Leviticus-”

    Jacobs: “18:22.”

    Bartlet launched into an impassioned diatribe which was interspersed with shots of an uncomfortable Jacobs fidgeting: “Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here. I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She’s a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? [silence in the room] While thinking about that can I ask another? My chief-of-staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?

    “Here’s one that’s really important, ’cause we’ve got a lot of sports fans in this town. Touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean, Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side-by-side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you.

    “One last thing. While you may be mistaking this for your monthly meeting of the ignorant tight-ass club, in this building when the President stands, nobody sits.”

    Unlike the real Dr. Laura, this one was silenced and after a long pause she acquiesced and stood up before a proud Bartlet walked out of the room.

  13. Gary January 2, 2012 / 8:18 pm
    There is only one God and HIS rules stand clear among all the other religions … The God of Abraham, and his son Ishmael were the true prophets, not Mahammad, not Buddha, not Luther and not the golden cow either.
    GIVEA  IT A REST DAN!  Damn!
  14. David Lauri January 3, 2012 / 9:20 am
    Pat asks, “[w]hat chance is there in our society of a extreme faction of Christianity becoming powerful enough to push their skewed beliefs on our entire country?”
     
    Have you heard of the Federal Marriage Amendment, Pat?  Because of extreme factions of Christianity in our country, every Republican candidate (except Ron Paul) has signed a pledge supporting amending our Constitution to ban same sex marriage. Ex-Sen. Frothy Mix is even gleeful that such an amendment would make existing same sex marriages invalid.
     
    My denomination, the United Church of Christ, supports marriage equality, and we’re not alone in that.  We’re not campaigning to force anyone who is opposed to homosexuality or same sex marriage to attend same sex weddings, to enter into same sex marriages, or, God forbid, to have gay sex against their will, but we are campaigning for the equal protection and full faith and credit clauses of our Constitution to be applied to equally to all marriages.
     
    So come on, Pat, telling me to worry about Islamists imposing their will on me in the United States is insane when I have real Christianists already doing so.
  15. Dan January 3, 2012 / 9:49 am
    I sense some sarcasm there Gary… but it’s also kind of funny in that Muslims DO worship the God of Abraham and Jesus… Doesn’t matter if you’re Jewish, Christian or Muslim… it is literally the exact same invisible dude they are all praying to.
  16. Gary January 3, 2012 / 12:44 pm
    Never once, growing up, did I ever hear of same sex marriages, and I get ill when I hear about them today … But if same sex marriages is indeed in the Constitution, then maybe it’s ok…  Not really sure what the Bible says about it; but, I think the gays should remain in the closet, and yes I’m kind of a bigot that way, the way I was raised and taught …
    I’m not saying sex is only for procreation … But when an Islam man thinks it’s ok to marry a child, then I say this is totally wrong, and will never get approved by me nor hopefully Congress!  Those creeps need to stay right where they are, in the east.  To me, this kind of behavior is abnormal and sinful, let alone statutory rape!  Abolish it!
  17. Gary January 3, 2012 / 12:52 pm
    Isn’t this post about the Dayton Occupiers?  Did anyone see the latest City Commission Meeting?  There was an Occupier there named Mr. Martinez (and of course Miss Lavendar pronounced his name wrong) and he was nearly rejected from the meeting because he didn’t have his facts correct on Dayton’s crime rate and homicide rate.  It was funny to see the Commissioners refute him big time; but at least Dean wanted to help the Occupiers whom were arrested get out of jail cheaper.
    :-)
  18. KAK January 3, 2012 / 2:30 pm
    Yeah, it would be cool if you went back to talking about us…we’ve been quiet…but we’re coming back. :)

    I hear one of our occupiers and another sympathetic with the cause are going to be doing a show with David Esrati on the Informer…at least that was discussed let me correct myself. I for one can’t wait to see this conversation in action!  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *