Conspiracy Theory -- Pass It On:

Berkeley's and the far Left's latest bout of self-marginalization was cunningly planted by Karl Rove, and of course the neocons. On top of the lovely, pointless self-parody from the Berkeley City Council, check out this item, from the same news story:

Code Pink on Wednesday started circulating petitions to put a measure on the November ballot in Berkeley that would make it more difficult to open military recruiting offices near homes, parks, schools, churches libraries or health clinics. The group needs 5,000 signatures to make the ballot.

I mean, that wouldn't be even remotely effective, even if it were enacted and upheld against a preemption challenge -- it's just an attempt to insult the Marines. Karl and the neocons say, "Bwahahaha! Everything is going just as we planned."

Kevin!:
Berkeley's residents are even marginalized within its own city. At the University, the students tend to have zero interest in the crusades and tactics that animate the city. The city, in turn, increasingly dislikes the students.

On the commercial front, Telegraph Avenue has lost city-beloved icons at a fast clip. They've been replaced by the generic chain stores that students might actually spend money at. There's a Chipotle on Telegraph now. Think about that.

The progressive student groups wised up to the irony of supplying Republicans with talking points sometime in 2002-2003. Still waiting on the city.
1.31.2008 12:57pm
Al Maviva (mail):
So Berkeley is looking to bring legal proceedings against the USMC under the city's Human Rights Code? I guess the 9th Circuit must have overturned the Supremacy Clause while we weren't looking.
1.31.2008 1:20pm
Richard Aubrey (mail):
Does Solomon apply to cities?
1.31.2008 1:27pm
alias:
Naming the group "Code Pink" sounds like something Karl Rove, or some other neocon with a wicked sense of humor, would do.
1.31.2008 1:49pm
Hoosier:
"the elderly Code Pink protesters are aggressive, take up parking spaces, block the sidewalk with their yoga moves, smoke in the doorways, and are noisy."

(No comment to follow)
1.31.2008 1:53pm
Bob from Ohio (mail):
I have often read that there is no such thing as an "ex-
Marine" only "former Marines"

Is Councilman Max Anderson an ex-Marine?

I would love to know what he was actually court martialed for?
1.31.2008 2:04pm
guest:
"it's just an attempt to insult the Marines" -- oh, come on. Are there no other plausible motivations?
1.31.2008 2:10pm
Mr. Liberal:
A few points:

(1) Berkeley is already marginalized as much as it will be. Protests against the Marines will not significantly change that. The city has nothing to lose.

(2) There are better, more principled arguments against the actions of Berkeley than trying to appeal to their self-interest. Aren't their any larger principles involved that you could invoke? For example, the idea that Berkeley should be more respectful of the military, because without it, the residents of Berkeley wouldn't have the freedom they do. This isn't an argument against protest, it is an argument against disrespectful protests. I would say trying to run the Marines out of town steps over the line.
1.31.2008 2:19pm
Richard Aubrey (mail):
Mr. Liberal.

Principled arguments require the other side to have principles.
Berkley does have principles, but not the ones which you think your arguments address.

They are anti-military. They are poseurs. They are nutcases elected by, at least, a swing vote number of nutcases.

To expect them to allow some gratitude for those who make their nutcasery possible is absurd. Any attempt will be met by a litany of their oppressions.
1.31.2008 2:35pm
Stacy (mail) (www):
"
(2) There are better, more principled arguments against the actions of Berkeley than trying to appeal to their self-interest. Aren't their any larger principles involved that you could invoke? For example, the idea that Berkeley should be more respectful of the military, because without it, the residents of Berkeley wouldn't have the freedom they do. This isn't an argument against protest, it is an argument against disrespectful protests. I would say trying to run the Marines out of town steps over the line.
"

Realistically, the people we're talking about are too silly to understand your example. But it wouldn't stop them even if they did -- they're free-riding on the fact that the US will not allow California to be overrun by enemy forces just to show Berkeley the error of its ways.
1.31.2008 2:36pm
Dave N (mail):
I think the Marines should move their recruiting station to just outside the Berkeley City Hall--that would really irritate the self-righteous buffoons of the radical left who run that city.

But I would be interested in seeing one prominent Democrat denounce the City of Berkeley for its idiocy. I realize Mr. Liberal did so on this thread, and I applaud him for it. But I am not otherwise holding my breath.
1.31.2008 2:41pm
Eugene Volokh (www):
guest: No, I don't. Tell me why it makes sense to bar military recruiting offices near health clinics.
1.31.2008 2:49pm
rarango (mail):
I suggest letting the Berkeley city council continue in its present course(s) of action--they provide a wonderful glimpse into the mind of the American Moonbat and as such serve as cautionary example.
1.31.2008 3:01pm
BGates:
Who knew they still allowed churches in Berkeley?
1.31.2008 3:13pm
Kevin!:
Berkeley has a ton of very beautiful, very active churches. This is in large part because there are a lot of committed Christian students, often Asian Christian.

Walk down Sproul Plaza and you'll see numerous Christian student groups.

There's also a tradition of radical Christianity that some tap into.
1.31.2008 3:28pm
fishbane (mail):
Berkeley is a wonderful town. I worked there for about five years. Part of what makes it wonderful is the goofiness. If the council didn't pass something absurd every few years, it would lose part of the Berkeley charm.
1.31.2008 4:38pm
Smokey:
Yes, it's charming to watch a city council give aid and comfort to the enemy while our country is at war, isn't it? Those 'goofy' traitors.

When an elected body gives aid and comfort to the enemy, does anyone think that doesn't give a big morale boost to those trying to kill our soldiers?

Actions like Berkeley's surely result in higher casualties among our soldiers -- who certainly know the score:


For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country," when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
But Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!
1.31.2008 4:58pm
Dave Hardy (mail) (www):
I think the Marines should move their recruiting station to just outside the Berkeley City Hall--that would really irritate the self-righteous buffoons of the radical left who run that city.

Not only that, but then the noise from the protests would be inflicted on the city government.
1.31.2008 5:12pm
M. Simon (mail) (www):
<i>"it's just an attempt to insult the Marines" -- oh, come on. Are there no other plausible motivations?</i>

They want to look stupid?
1.31.2008 5:34pm
gab:
"Berkeley's and the far Left's..." Are Berkeley and the far-left synonymous? Better yet, are Berkeley's actions exactly what the "far-left's" actions identical?

I wouldn't think that would always be the case. And trying to conflate the two is intellectually dishonest as well as a tactic that panders to readers of dumb right-wing propaganda.
1.31.2008 5:43pm
NickM (mail) (www):
They didn't want to fall behind Brattleboro, VT in the competition for Most Anti-American City?

Nick
1.31.2008 5:44pm
gab:
Please edit post above (meant to hit preview.) Delete "identical" and replace with "would be?"

Thanks.
1.31.2008 5:46pm
Christian K:

"Berkeley's and the far Left's..." Are Berkeley and the far-left synonymous? Better yet, are Berkeley's actions exactly what the "far-left's" actions would be?



More like Berkeley and the far Right who's actions are similar on the Liberty/Tyranny scale. Both seem to want to dictate their morality to others.
1.31.2008 5:53pm
George Smith (mail):
As the jihadists are so keen to conquer America and impose sharia, why don't we make a deal with them and give them Berkeley? Within the city limits they would have free reign. They could do whatever they liked to whomever they liked. They could impose the Caliphate; whatever. Oh, we would also cooperate in preventing anyone from leaving Berkeley, and would decline to intervene inside the city, so as not to be intruders. Then the good folk (now dhimmis) of Berkleley would no longer have to live in Amerikkka. The ultimate bwahahaha.
1.31.2008 6:23pm
A Law Unto Himself:

More like Berkeley and the far Right who's actions are similar on the Liberty/Tyranny scale. Both seem to want to dictate their morality to others.


Yup, all those right-wing city governments providing designated parking spaces and automatically renewing weekly demonstration permits for Operation Rescue...
1.31.2008 6:24pm
hey (mail):
San Francisco and assorted environs should be gifted to Iran. Solves two problems with one stone, since Iran would instantly provide the US with cassus belli by the inevitable spate of terrorist attacks. It's a win-win!

Either that or a wee bit of eminent domain use by the USMC. They could really use an urban warfare training facility that uses a real urban environment.
1.31.2008 6:54pm
Hoosier:
M. Simon--There you go! See, there are MANY possible motivations.

Another possibility: Perhaps 8/9 of the Council has breakfasted on Crack Loops?
1.31.2008 6:55pm
Casual Peruser:
Isn't this precisely the type of local action that Nozick would have endorsed?
1.31.2008 6:56pm
Hoosier:
"Inruder Alert! Intruder Alert! Stop the humanoids! Stop the Jarheads!"


(Or am I the only Gen-Xer on the boards?)
1.31.2008 6:58pm
Blue:
Senator Clinton, Sistah Soljah 2008 is on line one!
1.31.2008 7:00pm
guest:
Prof Volokh: I'm not sure why it would make sense, but that shouldn't be my burden of proof. That burden (if I should have one) should be only to show that someone could support the law for a reason other than to "insult the Marines." (I expect that kind of silly, fast-one exaggeration at Althouse, it's sad to see it here.) That could be disagreement with how Marines are deployed or tactics used to recruit Marines, neither of which amounts to insulting Marines.
1.31.2008 7:15pm
Trashhauler:
guest wrote: The reason for the council's action "could be disagreement with how Marines are deployed or tactics used to recruit Marines, neither of which amounts to insulting Marines."

Oh, sure. Undoubtedly, the City Council disagrees with stationing Marines in Falloujah, where no one's been shot at in months. They should be redeployed to Afghanistan where they can crawl up and down the mountains, killing Taliban. It seems like an awfully obtuse way to make the point, however.

Similarly, appeals to one's patriotism should be out of bounds for recruiters. Every potential recruit should be supplied with information about how to better his or her life without taking the risk of being shot.
1.31.2008 8:38pm
fred (mail):
"all your base are belong to us!" K.Rove
1.31.2008 9:21pm
Fat Man (mail):
What kind of a moron picks a fight with the United States Marines?
1.31.2008 10:03pm
A. Zarkov (mail):
“On the commercial front, Telegraph Avenue has lost city-beloved icons at a fast clip.”

That’s certainly true. One by one they have fallen like Cody’s Bookstore. I think they fell victim to the Internet book buying. Why pay list price and sales tax when you can order the same thing at a discount with no sales tax? The unpleasantness of walking down Telegraph Avenue didn’t help either. I knew someone who had his arm broken by a bunch of thugs about a block from Cody’s. Telegraph Avenue also had riots following the Rodney King incident in Los Angles. A lot of stores got trashed and never reopened. Today there is little reason to go there. It’s become a bore.
1.31.2008 10:07pm
THJC (mail):
Would it be possible to for Congress todeclare Berkeley outside the military protection of the US?
2.1.2008 5:23am
thirdfinger (mail):
I think this one comes under the heading of "Just cuz they gone to college don't make 'em smart". A corollary to this would be "Just cuz they wuz 'elected' don't make 'em right". What a bunch of dimbulbs. I'm thinking that the Ex-marine doesn't have the term 'Honorable' on his discharge unless it is preceded by the qualifier 'Less Than'.
2.1.2008 7:41am
Eugene Volokh (www):
Guest: Well, you're the one who asked "are there no other plausible motivations?" There is no functional reason, it seems to me, to require recruiting stations to be located far away from health clinics or churches. On the other hand, requiring some separation from various places where vulnerable people are present is pretty routine for, say, porn stores, strip clubs, places that sell liquor, or sex offenders. The only plausible explanation that I can see for the proposed initiative is that Code Pink is trying to insult the Marines by analogizing them to places like that.

So, are there no other plausible motivations? None that I can see.
2.1.2008 12:06pm
Richard Aubrey (mail):
Another question is whether Code Pink and its wannabes would be interested in any other reason. It could be true that there is some--so far unknown--reason wrt the public good for spacing the recruiters away from certain areas. But would Code Pink be interested in that? Only if they thought they could fool people into thinking it was their real reason.
For Code Pink, it is double-plus true that they have no other plausible reason. Not for them.
So, when looking for plausible reasons, the nature of the party involved is relevant.
2.1.2008 12:18pm
fred (mail):
Mr. Volokh --
I humbly disagree with you, they think much higher of porn stores than the Marines.
2.1.2008 11:32pm