Berkley and the Marines

Last week, the City of Berkley sent a letter the the Marine recruiting office informing the Marines that they were there without the consent of the Council which wanted them to leave town. The Council also reserved the parking space in front of the office for Code Pink, granted Code Pink a perpetual permit to protest, and encouraged them to do so. This covers several issues, many of them troubling.

When approaching a situation such as this I try to look at all of the angles, something that the Berkley City Council did not do.

First there is the letter. This is insultingly rude and shows what a mockery the left's "oppose the war but support the troops" slogan is. While the Council claims that they only took this action in response to President Bush's foreign policies, statements made at the time show that many council members are outright anti-military. That said, the letter was a meaningless resolution and is allowable. This is a free speech issue which everyone should be able to enjoy.

Things get more worrisome from there.

I have noted before that there does not appear to be any facet of modern life that is so innocuous that someone doesn't protest it. Even the Weinermobile draws protests from vegans. The government's job is to be neutral in these protests. No anti-abortion groups have been given as much access to protest Planned Parenthood as Berkley gave to Code Pink. If the precedence stands then other cities could give similar preferential treatment to causes. Not all of these causes are liberal ones. The result is that, even if you support this particular action, you are unlikely to support what it will lead to.

Someone from Berkley might argue that it is the role of government to pick ad choose among various causes. This is authoritarianism. I suggest that they buy this book for some new ideas.

Besides, the Council's actions hurt more than the Marines. Other businesses are on that block and the Code Pink protests close access to all of them. Does the Berkley City Council believe that any business that allows a recruiting station as a neighbor is complicit and should also be punished? They deserve equal protection under the law, also.

Code Pink's protests should be allowed (free speech again) but in such a way that they do not interrupt the recruiting center or the surrounding businesses. Just like anti-abortion protests.

The final issue here is that Berkley is part of the United States. Its members have a duty to support the laws and constitution of the state and nation as well as their own whims. In this case they are trying to withdraw from part of their obligation - to contribute to the national defense. They may not agree with Bush but, as elected officials, they still have to support the government in an official capacity. They cannot pick and choose. Again, the precedent is undesirable by both sides.

In the 1790s, some western counties decided that they did not like the tax on Whiskey and openly rebelled. President George Washington raised and army and put down the rebellion.

I would not suggest that George W. Bush should personally ride into Berkley at the head of troop but the government is justified in taking action. There is talk of cutting federal funds by $5.3 million. That seems fair. They benefit from being part of the United States. They should allow their young people to volunteer to defend it.