Wednesday Political Chat

Hi Everyone,

The next political chat will be this Wednesday, at the
Sheesh Mahal Restaurant, located at 1117 Polk St.,
between Post and Sutter, at 7:00PM.

The two topics of discussion will be: 'Government
Involvement in Marriage,' and 'How to Respond to the
Recall Davis Innitiative.'

This is the fourth consecutive get-together of the
Political Chat. I think this is great, and a total of
eight people showed up last Wednesday. Please bring a
friend (or enemy) to this Wednesday's chat and
hopefully we can get at least twelve people gathered,
if not more.

As many of you know, we have been trying different
locations, and discussing various venues. The first
meeting was held in the Richmond District, because
that's where I live, and it was right across the
street from where the LPSF monthly meetings are held.
The second and third meetings were held at Wild
Awakenings, on McAlister, because of it's location to
Market St., BART, etc. Concerns arose about
consistency, since the DAF is held once a month on a
Wednesday at the Sheesh Mahal, and it wouldn't be good
to tell people that the meetings will be held every
Wednesday at a coffee shop, and then, once a month, go
to the Sheesh Mahal for the DAF. Also, it was brought
up that since it is at 7:00PM on a Wednesday, people
may be hungry and want more than a cookie, which
brought up the venue issue.

With all this taken into consideration, and the fact
that I was asked to make the decision on a permanent
place for the Political Chat, I asked the participants
at last week's chat how they felt about the Sheesh
Mahal, and we all agreed. This will solve the
inconsistency issue with the DAF; this will solve the
food issue with those who want more than a cookie; it
will solve the issue of vegetarians; and it is
accessible by MUNI or a short walk from BART. However,
I know that there will be some who may have issues
about this decision, and I hope you share those issues
with us on the e-mail list or at the next discussion.

I didn't want to conflict with the DAF, and it seems
to make sense to me to have it there for the time
being. At least for a few months to see how it works
out.

Hope to see everyone at the Sheesh Mahal this
Wednesday evening, at 7:00PM.

Dave Barker.

Dave-
I looked up the bill that Rob was talking about. If any of this is remotely true, it very frightening. Remember, do you want freedon or safty? you can't have both. It is clear what a lot of Americans value.
John

The link to the site:
http://www.infowars.com/print_patriotact2_analysis.htm

For those of us who look on some of infowars.com's commentaries as a bit
paranoid (I personally don't believe the military industrial complex
orchestrated 9/11 so much as they drafted this legislation years ago and
just waited for a disaster to happen so it could be passed without debate),
here's an analysis that's a little less conspiratorial -- and these
criticisms are from an organization that usually welcomes expanded federal
power (the ACLU):

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12234&c=206

You can even cross-reference with what infowars.com said section-by-section:

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=11835&c=206

And for more general information on the rights PATRIOT I has already taken
away:

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12126&c=207

My fear about SCOTUS justices retiring while Bush is President has far less
to do with what will surely be homophobic or anti-drug nominees (we've
fought those battles before and won) than the knowledge that he will
certainly only put forth those who will quickly roll back all ten amendments
in the Bill of Rights (because it's harder to fight for gay rights or pot
smoking when you live under martial law).

I propose that we continue the Patriot Act discussion at the next chat (the
25th, I believe). We'll use the extra week from Direct Action Forum to do
our homework about PATRIOT I and II. How does that sound to everyone?

Rob