Frivolity Meets Politics
Anti-Tea Party Mob Storms Bozeman
By Allen M. Jones, 7-03-09
It's all about the t-shirt
For my money, there are few sins so egregious as the taking of yourself too seriously. I mean, really, what’s the point? We’re all going to eventually kick the bucket with an equal amount of kicking and screaming. Might as well enjoy ourselves while we’re here. So I knew I’d met a kindred soul when I ran into Brian Leland yesterday morning in downtown Bozeman. A local master electrician, he’s also the founder and organizer of “The Green Coalition of Gay Loggers for Jesus,” a tongue-in-cheek, don’t-take-yourself-too-seriously counterpart to a Tea Party demonstration being held in Bozeman the morning of July 4.
The Tea Party, a conservative movement initially organized to protest “out of control spending at all levels of government,” will be marching on Bozeman’s Main Street at 10:30 am, closing the thoroughfare to vehicle traffic. The GCGLJ will be holding its own march an hour earlier.
Ironically, the Tea Party (given their position regarding government spending), will have the costs of their demonstration paid for by the city of Bozeman, by the same tax payers whom they would ostensibly like to champion. The GCGLJ, however, is footing their own bill, and more. Soliciting donations and selling T-shirts in order to support the demonstration. As a courtesy to local commerce, they’re also holding their march an hour earlier, avoiding further loss of vehicle access to Main Street.
Leland told me, “I feel it’s a patriotic duty to pay your own way. The Tea Party’s not paying for anything. We’re paying for the city to set up barricades and then, after the Tea Party, take them down, drive them back to city shops. At the end of the day, we’ll be paying for the majority of the costs of the Tea Party event as well. The city’s telling me that Bozeman will end up having to only pay about $400.”
Leland’s initial goal, prior to marching, was to raise $1,100. He has met his goal, and more, and will be donating the overspill to the Gallatin County Food Bank.
Daniel Person of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle wrote, “Organizers of the Tea Party – who have said they do not oppose Leland’s march – do contend that it would set a dangerous precedent to require protestors to pay for a demonstration, since it is a constitutionally protected right.”
Leland’s own position seems to be as much of a reaction against the city of Bozeman as it is to any stance taken by the Tea Party itself. Irked by what he sees as a lack of openness and procedural missteps on the part of the city of Bozeman (the permits for the Tea Party’s event were approved in a meeting that apparently wasn’t publicly noticed), he has written, “…the initiating spark for our event was the Bozeman City Commission’s complete disregard for the Montana Open Meeting Law. When faced with an angry, out-of-town mob looking for a government bailout, commissioners folded like a cheap suitcase and ignored the laws they swore an oath to uphold.”
Since organizing his group, Leland has faced a wide variety of reactions from the community at large, both approving and condemning. Some of the strongest reactions have come from those who don’t see anything at all funny in using Jesus’s name in this particular context. Leland has an answer to this as well: “As to the cries of indignation over the religious reference in our organization’s name, look at an aardvark or a duckbilled platypus and tell me God doesn’t have a sense of humor.”
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Add your comment below
Having failed twice, (miserably), to be elected to office on the county commission, (last time he ran as a "green republican", sound familiar), he pesters the community with any number of sour grapes letters to the editor and stupid, hyperbolic political expressions just like this.
His concern over "complete disregard over open meetings laws" is just so much know it all, nit-picking nonsense. I think that our city commission is erring on the side of free speech and that allowing the tea partiers to party on Main could prove to be the lesser of two evils. Sadly they seem to feel they need to guard themselves from Leland as well.
It's not fair to the Main street merchants or to the community to close the street so that a single anti-social curmudgeon can press his self centered political agenda.
The tea party protesters are almost as crazy as Leland but at least can claim to be able to show up in sufficient numbers to justify closing the street so that they can "express themselves." Though in his application he promised "2000" marchers, the fact is that Leland is just a lone nutcase, even if he sold a few tee shirts to uninformed internet columnists.
You should do your research before you identify yourself with Leland. I can't resist...
"Something is happening here but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones."
Thank you for your comment, but no need to resort to personal insult. A couple of points...
Main Street was going to be closed for the Tea Party prior to the involvement of the GCGLJ. The Main Street merchants whom I know are all irate that a group advocating ostensibly for a free market would take away a measure of their business on one of the most profitable days of the year. They're supporting this tongue-in-cheek political movement more as a reaction to the lack of consideration on the part of the Tea Party as from any position on the behavior of the Bozeman City Commission. I myself take no stance with regard to the Commission's missteps, or lack thereof.
No matter his background or his political opinions, Leland is paying for a substantial portion of the demonstration, raising funds that would otherwise come out of my own pocket as a Bozeman tax payer. For obvious reasons, I approve of that. I also approve of his donations to the community food bank.
I personally find the Tea Party's argument that paying for their own demonstration would be an infringement on free speech to be fatuous and self-serving. You can choose to pay for your own demonstration, or not. Choosing to pay expenses would have supported their position without in any way eroding the right to free assembly. They need to have that pointed out to them.
For these reasons, I am happy to give coverage to this absurdist exercise in political demonstration, regardless of Leland's personal motivations, political aspirations, or background.
Mostly, though, I just like the t-shirt.
Storms?
try and exaggerate a little more, okay NewWest
Leland is abusing and mocking his rights to free speech. There's no reason why a single person should be able to shut down Main Street just to push his own petty political agenda, and pick fights with his political enemies, regardless of his willingness to pay for it.
Without question, the tea partiers are misguided in their own right, but will no doubt turn out in sufficient numbers to justify closing the street. Politically, I could not be more alienated from our local right wing. But they do have speech rights and I am gracious enough to pay for them. Pushing the point that they are hypocrites by refusing to pay for their $1500.00 protest is simply shabby. Yes, they are hypocrites....let's move on.
Leland and the tea partiers represent political fringes. The city commission has just taken the policy of holding both "groups" at arms length and giving them what they want, just to avoid further trouble from any of them. Leland is not a group and has no point to make. He's just wasting the city's time with frivolous nonsense.
Do you really think we should close down Main Street just because you like the stupid T shirt that says nothing?
But being the total idiot you are I can see how your SRM (State Run Media) talking points have clouded your perception.
And your man raised money for a cause -- his intentions were good, after all. Making mockery of the average man's right to free speech is understandable. John W. Public, is just ... so... pedestrian.
Go ahead, poke fun at citizens who are fed up with paying atrocious taxes and seek to exercise their right to assemble and protest. Okay, I will give you that is absurd that the taxpayer footed the bill for the protest -- which is exactly why I question the veracity of the statement. Somehow I think you are twisting things or stretching the truth.
Huxley said it all in his forward to the Brave New World:
"A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers... The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about the truth."
So go ahead, Mr. Jones, snicker all you want. Enjoy your t-shirt and your serfdom.
Hmmm...230 hours. A technical degree I wouldn't understand like what? Ghostbusting, perhaps. As Dan Akyroyd said having been evicted from University premises: "Personally, I liked the University; they gave us money and facilities, we didn't have to produce anything. You've never been out of college. You don't know what it's like out there. I've worked in the private sector--they expect results..."
You are just another over-educated jerk searching for meaning.
Get a life, Mikey.
Iowa or bust, my Friend.
You poor thing, you are actually proud of that.
It couldn't be the huge transfer of billions of dollars to the richest bankers on Wall Street (Goldman Sachs must be hardcore Commie, since 2008 was its best year ever!)?
Is it the government bailouts of Gm and Chrysler? How much money has the guvmint wasted through the department of defense during the last 20 years alone? Uncompetitive bids and massive over payments make having a controlling interest in huge American industry while it recovers makes more sense than just having the money over--and not terribly socialistic either...
Tea-baggers at the Billings Tea Party claimed that they had to drop cable TV because of tax increases. Not sure what tax increases these were, but it might good if they watched less cable TV...
a) He had anything to do with the paranoid nitwits holding "tea-parties" with all of their other wingnut friends, pretending to be "grassroots".
b) He wasn't fundamentally opposed to the positions the tea-baggers hold.
c) The tea-baggers weren't a bunch of mouth-breathing idiots whose sum understanding of politics, policy, and reality could be contained by an unenflated water-balloon.
d) There really was a shadowy, illuminati, Skull and Mason-ring, Marxist, New World Order, Black-Helecopter plot to turn the United States into a socialist, fascist, big business, huge government, uber-dystopia.
In comparison, Leland seems practically inspired.
Take a deep breath, big boy, your guy won. It's only the country that lost. But you weren't backing the country anyway.
Since we are speaking in generalities to attempt to couch our poorly understood ad hominems in a social acceptable manner, I shall reply in the same suit. Right-wingers, being possessed neither of the sense God gave chickens or the intelligence to avoid demonstrating this fact, have a poor grasp of the economic-policies they critique. The acolytes of the religion of the free market incorrectly understand the massive harm their psychotic economic philosophy would inflict on the US should they ever be taken seriously. Aside from their constant attempts to undermine the functional distribution of wealth, by advocating a policy that would cripple the economy by moving all of the money in the economy out of the hands of consumers and into the hands of investors, their lack of understanding of the need to stabilize unstable markets and ensure the stability of the business cycle demonstrates that they care more about the religion of Ayn Rand then the well-being of their nation or its people.
Of course, because I belong to the crypto-Marxist-Fascist-Illuminati-Muslim-Liberal conspiracy, I couldn't possibly care about the well-being of the United States. Your paranoia is laughable.
My guy did win... You know why? Because your guy was a lunatic old-man supported by people so out of touch with reality and good sense that they thought Redneck Barby was a great choice for Vice President.
Real men and women serve their country. The other guys go to school to get 230 semester hours in some vague technical field we plebs don't understand. I'm guessing frisbee physics. The Ghostbusters comment spoke to those who make University the end of their existence rather than a means to an end.
I'm not the one who made this personal -- you did. You called me a snot. I'm probably older than you are.
Your comments about taxidermists, bowling, gas station attendants, and butchers demonstrate the contempt with which you regard the working people of this country. I guess that would be fine except that you want to tell everyone how to live via your big government because you are "na-na-na-na-na" smarter than we are AND you expect them to pay for it with their hard-earned dollars.
By the way, I already made the play words with the Patrick Henry quote. Find another Founder to twist.
I tend to find it hard to take the tea party advocates seriously for a number of reasons, the egocentric combination of swashbuckling bravado and childlike naivete of characters like "hellpig" and "Smashicus" being only one of them. Seriously, what would you think of a protest of the government because you demand your right to cable TV? I know; that was just one kook in the crowd; but, the impression is still there.
Now, look at the underlying serious protest. The tea parties are, by and large, based out of the Republican wing of the political spectrum (come on now; some in the crowd may think they are Democrats; but, the organizers are out of the Republican end of the spectrum and just happy to have those confused little dumplings as faces in the crowd). The protests are allegedly over government spending. Well let's look at it. First, the biggest deficit spender in history, comparatively speaking was Reagan and nobody at the Republican end of the spectrum complained about him. Let's look at more recent history. Most of the recent spending that the tea parties are protesting is actually spending that was set in motion by Bush in the form of Iraq War costs, then the financial bailout was pretty much a done deal by the time Bush and Paulson left. I don't even blame them for the bailout costs, it honestly had to be done or our very currency would have been at risk and we would be in even worse shape and you can imagine how it must gall me to not blame a Republican for anything.
Sure, Obama pushed through the stimulus package to slow the rise in the unemployed and give the economy time to absorb them through more desirable private sector spending; but, 1) his stimulus spending has only been about 60% of the Bush bailout spending that was done deal before he ever got there; 2) Obama's stimulus was meant to keep the working stiffs that you claim to be defending from losing more of their homes; and 3) did you guys really want all those people out of work and looking for shelter.
Yes, Obama is looking to revamp the healthcare system; but, I've got news for you; he really has no choice. This depression is deeper and will last longer than people think or are being told and, again, those working stiffs that you claim to be defending will be in a world of hurt when they haven't had a decent job in two years and their kids get sick. Giving them some sort of coverage outside of increasingly nonexistent employer largesse that the current system no longer supports is the only decent thing to do. Yes, those of us who still have good jobs and solvent investments will pay with our hard-earned dollars. I've done it all my life. I'd like to spend the money on other things; I like toys too; but, when unemployment goes as high as it is and will be, then it just isn't a matter of holding people accountable for not finding work; it's a matter of keeping decent, although often not as bright as I would like, working stiffs and their families afloat. It's common decency extended from one American to another. Yes, I work for a living, probably work longer hours, make more money, and pay more taxes than you would imagine; but, I'll make my money back when times are better and those working stiffs that you claim to be defending can feed their kids again. As for the tea party people, they just don't get it; they're being used by cynical political operatives. Americans are only supposed to be selfish up to a point; then they're supposed to dig in and help hold the Nation together.
Obviously, you do not want the facts to get in the way of your opinion--you are only interested in letting everyone know how much hate you have in your heart. It has worked--we can all see it now. And I'm 'paranoid'? Lighten up, Francis.
P.S. Try 'deflated', sport.
"Is it the government bailouts of Gm and Chrysler? How much money has the guvmint wasted through the department of defense during the last 20 years alone? Uncompetitive bids and massive over payments make having a controlling interest in a huge American industry while it recovers makes more sense than just HANDING the money over--and not terribly socialistic either..."
Handing instead of "having".
If I were to assume anything, I would assume that Navy vet voted for Ron Paul--everyone's favorite outspoken racist.
Its also funny how teabaggers claim "facts" while calling the current government "marxist"...
Your statement puts us somewhere between Complacency and Apathy on the decline meter. You'll wake up one day and say, "Dude, where's my car?" Or not.
The Right sees growing government as the problem;
The Left sees government as solution;
The Apolitical or Apathetic who just don't get what all the fuss is about.
I think the Tytler quote I posted last pretty much sums up the situation.
When it comes to setting public policy, I'll take Smashicus and Hellpig over Frank and Dodd any day. Having destroyed the banking system and the housing market via CRA legislation and their pet GSAs Fannie and Freddie, they are now moving on to the Health Care system because "they have no choice". Good luck with that -- let me know how it works out for you when some bureaucrat tells you the medicine you need is too expensive or you are too old for a hip replacement.