Comments on: Ignoring the Campaign Sign Ordinance
Newest First
By Kr1sstan on 04-22-12 @ 7:41 am
Thank you , Karen for the info ....needs to be shared. I, for one, will be taking this intoaccount when chosing which candidate I want to represent me.
By RussCrowder on 04-23-12 @ 11:59 am
It’s called “Free Speech”. However, if the sign were in Whitefish….If the sign were shaped like an ice cream cone…Karen would have a point.
By Roark on 04-23-12 @ 3:14 pm
It is a violation of property rights for the government to mandate when, where, how big, and for what duration a campaign sign of any kind may be put up. Americans have allowed this assault
on their liberty for too long, mostly for the fact that most individuals are not running for
elective office. But we must not allow some other peoples “good intentions” distort the fact that
these intentions are in strict violation of our rights as free people.
By Edd on 04-25-12 @ 10:59 pm
If each one of the comment providers who promulgate “private property” rights so aggressively were the only ones on the planet, they could have their way, and do whatever they wanted with
their land. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and even though they are reluctant to recognize the
fact, the things they want to do with their land, has an effect of the rest of us. There is good
reason for agreeing to reasonable guidelines which determine what each of us can do with our land,
and what we can say.
By JosephineDoody on 04-26-12 @ 5:00 am
@karen reeves, @Kr1sstan, @edd
There’s a thing called the 1st Amendment. Perhaps you’ve heard of it.
By mitch on 04-26-12 @ 7:51 am
Thank you Karen, I agree. It’s pretty tacky. A glaring sign has never tempted me to vote for anyone. Quite the opposite.
By Edd on 04-26-12 @ 8:31 am
The founders who drafted the Constitution and the amendments there to, had expectations that the citizens could govern themselves responsibly. There was no intention to allow people to say things,
or post things, that violate guidelines which have been agreed to through an acceptable public
process.
By great bear on 04-26-12 @ 9:51 am
are all these signs for county commish? how will they respect the other laws in effect, just a question…
By EnPrime on 04-26-12 @ 10:16 am
I’m willing to bet that those who doth protest too much aren’t even registered to vote.
By Gabby Johnson on 04-26-12 @ 10:52 am
One of the great things about this country is that if you do not like a law, you can run foroffice, get elected and see what you can do about making it right.
Ignoring a law (or crying it’s unconstitutional, at least in your book) tells me as a voter that
that candidate has no respect for the law and has no business making new laws.
By Edd on 04-26-12 @ 12:36 pm
Don’t bet your last penny!!!
By RussCrowder on 04-27-12 @ 3:36 pm
As I recall, Hitler came to power through an, “acceptable public process”.
By Edd on 04-27-12 @ 7:13 pm
If your recollection is really on target, you will also recall that Hitler and his compatriots were also taken down through an equally “acceptable public process”. That’s how the public process works. If
those who wish to Ignore public process, and constantly rail against it, were to prevail, the result
would be the “American Nightmare”, not the American Dream.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.