THE TACOMIC


9/16/08 - The Passion of Tim Eyman

posted Sep 16, 2008
THE TACOMIC - 9/16/08 - The Passion of Tim Eyman ()
Sizes:   web  |  email  |  print

<< >>
9/12 - Judge orders clarity in title of charter amendment, Seattle Times

9/12 - Red light cameras to disappear? Maybe. And other city stuff., Tacoma News Tribune

9/11 - Sausage Links, e-mails from Eyman edition, Crosscut

9/11 - Eyman wins court battle with county over ballot issue, Seattle PI

6/20 - Photo ~ Electric Elliot's "Darth Eyman", Flickr

11/29/2007 - Interview with Tim Eyman, The Melon

Reference: Tim Eyman, Wikipedia

by NineInchNachos on 9/16/2008 @ 8:04am
Ladies and gentlemen, the art history lesson for the day is Caravaggio's depiction of the crucifixion of Saint Peter.

Caravaggio's depiction of the crucifixion of Saint Peter.

by NineInchNachos on 9/16/2008 @ 9:13am
unrelated, but interesting nevertheless:




Robert M. La Follette

Free Speech in Wartime (Abridged)

delivered 6 Oct 1917 Washington, DC



Mr. President: I rise to a question of personal privilege.

I have no intention of taking the time of the Senate with a review of the events which led to our entrance into the war except in so far as they bear upon the question of personal privilege to which I am addressing myself.

Six Members of the Senate and fifty Members of the House voted against the declaration of war. Immediately there was let loose upon those Senators and Representatives a flood of invective and abuse from newspapers and individuals who had been clamoring for war, unequalled, I believe, in the history of civilized society.

Prior to the declaration of war every man who had venture to oppose our entrance into it had been condemned as a coward or worse, and even the President had by no means been immune from these attacks.

Since the declaration of war, the triumphant war press has pursued those Senators and Representative who voted against war with malicious falsehood and recklessly libelous attacks, going to the extreme limit of charging them with treason against their country.

This campaign of libel and character assassination directed against the Members of Congress who opposed our entrance into the war has been continued down to the present hour, and I have upon my desk newspaper clippings, some of them libels upon me alone, some directed as well against other Senators who voted in opposition to the declaration of war. One of these newspaper reports most widely circulated represents a Federal judge in the State of Texas as saying, in a charge of a grand jury -- I read the article as it appeared in the newspaper and the headline with which it is introduced:

District Judge Would Like to Take Shot at Traditions in Congress

( By Associated Press lease wire)

Houston, Texas, October 1, 1917. Judge Waller T. Burns, of the United States district court, in charging a Federal grand jury at the beginning of the October term today, after calling by name Senators Stone of Missouri, Hardwick of Georgia, Vardaman of Mississippi, Gronna of North Dakota, Gore of Oklahoma, and LaFollette of Wisconsin, said:

“If I had a wish, I would wish that you men had jurisdiction to return bills of indictment against these men. They ought to be tried promptly and fairly, and I believe this court could administer the law fairly; but I have a conviction, as strong as life, that this country should stand them up against an adobe wall tomorrow and give them what they deserve. If any man deserves death, it is a traitor. I wish that I could pay for the ammunition. I would like to attend the execution, and if I were in the firing squad I would not want to be the marksman who had the blank shell.”...

If this newspaper clipping were a single or exceptional instance of lawless defamation, I should not trouble the Senate with a reference to it. But, Mr. President, it is not.

In this mass of newspaper clippings which I have here upon my desk, and which I shall not trouble the Senate to read unless it is desired, and which represent but a small part of the accumulation clipped from the daily press of the country in the last three months, I find other Senators, as well as myself, accused of the highest crimes of which any man can be guilty -- treason and disloyalty -- and, sir, accused not only with no evidence to support the accusation, but without the suggestion that such evidence anywhere exists. It is not claimed that Senators who opposed the declaration of war have since that time acted with any concerted purpose, either regarding war measures or any others. They have voted according to their individual opinions, have often been opposed to each other on bills which have come before the Senate since the declaration of war, and, according to my recollection, have never all voted together since that time upon any singe proposition upon which the Senate has been divided.

I am aware, Mr. President, that in pursuance of this campaign of vilification and attempted intimidation, requests from various individuals and certain organizations have been submitted to the Senate for my expulsion from this body, and that such requests have been referred to and considered by one of the committees of the Senate.

If I alone had been made the victim of these attacks, I should not take one moment of the Senate’s time for their consideration, and I believe that other Senators who have been unjustly and unfairly assailed, as I have been, hold the same attitude upon this that I do. Neither the clamor of the mob nor the voice of power will ever turn me by the breadth of a hair from the course I mark out for myself, guided by such knowledge as I can obtain and controlled and directed by a solemn conviction of right and duty.

But, sir, it is not alone Members of Congress that the war party in this country has sought to intimidate. The mandate seems to have gone forth to the sovereign people of this country that they must be silent while those things are being done by their Government which most vitally concern their well-being, their happiness, and their lives. Today, and for weeks past, honest and law-abiding citizens of this country are being terrorized and outraged in their rights by those sworn to uphold the laws and protect the rights of the people. I have in my possession numerous affidavits establishing the fact that people are being unlawfully arrested, thrown into jail, held incommunicado for days, only to be eventually discharged without ever having been taken into court, because they have committed no crime. Private residences are being invaded, loyal citizens of undoubted integrity and probity arrested, cross-examined, and the most sacred constitutional rights guaranteed to every American citizen are being violated.

It appears to be the purpose of those conducting this campaign to throw the country into a state of terror, to coerce public opinion, to stifle criticism, and suppress discussion of the great issues involved in this war.

I think all men recognize that in time of war the citizen must surrender some rights for the common good which he is entitled to enjoy in time of peace. But, sir, the right to control their own Government according to constitutional forms is not one of the rights that the citizens of this country are called upon to surrender in time of war.

Rather, in time of war, the citizen must be more alert to the preservation of his right to control his Government. He must be most watchful of the encroachment of the military upon the civil power. He must beware of those precedents in support of arbitrary action by administration officials which, excused on the pleas of necessity in war time, become the fixed rule when the necessity has passed and normal conditions have been restored.

More than all, the citizen and his representative in Congress in time of war must maintain his right of free speech.

More than in times of peace it is necessary that the channels for free public discussion of governmental policies shall be open and unclogged. I believe, Mr. President, that I am now touching upon the most important question in this country today -- and that is the right of the citizens of this country and their representatives in Congress to discuss in an orderly way, frankly and publicly and without fear, from the platform and through the press, every important phase of this war; its causes, and manner in which it should be conducted, and the terms upon which peace should be made.

The belief which is becoming widespread in this land that this most fundamental right is being denied to the citizens of this country is a fact, the tremendous significance of which those in authority have not yet begun to appreciate. I am contending, Mr. President, for the great fundamental right of the sovereign people of this country to make their voice heard and have that voice heeded upon the great questions arising out of this war, including not only how the war shall be prosecuted but the conditions upon which it may be terminated with a due regard for the rights and the honor of this Nation and the interests of humanity.

I am contending for this right because the exercise of it is necessary to the welfare, to the existence of this Government, to the successful conduct of this war, and to a peace which shall be enduring and for the best interests of this country.

Suppose success attends the attempt to stifle all discussion of the issues of this war, all discussions of the terms upon which it should be concluded, all discussion of the objects and purposes to be accomplished by it, and concede the demand of the war-mad press and war extremists that they monopolize the right of public utterance upon these questions unchallenged. What think you would be the consequences to this country not only during the war but after the war?

Mr. President, our Government, above all others, is founded on the right of the people freely to discuss all matters pertaining to their Government, in war not less than in peace. It is true, sir, that Members of the House of Representatives are elected for two years, the President for four years, and the Members of the Senate for six years, and during their temporary official terms these officers constitute what is called the Government.

But back of them always is the controlling, sovereign power of the People, and when the people can make their will known, the faithful officer will obey that will. Though the right of the People to express their will by ballot is suspended during the term office of the elected official, nevertheless the duty of the official to obey the popular will shall continue throughout his entire term of office. How can that popular will express itself between elections except by meetings, by speeches, by publications, by petitions, and by addresses to the representatives of the people?

Any man who seeks to set a limit upon those rights, whether in war or peace, aims a blow at the most vital part of our Government. And then, as the time for election approaches and the official is called to account for his stewardship -- not a day, not a wee, not a month, before the election, but a year or more before it, if the people choose -- they must have the right to the freest possible discussion of every question upon which their representative has acted, of the merits of every measure he has supported or opposed, of every vote he has cast, and every speech that he has made.

And before this great fundamental right every other must, if necessary, give way. For in no other manner can representative government be preserved.

by Erik on 9/16/2008 @ 11:22am
Wow. Tacomic ventures into state politics.

You should send it to Eyman. He might like it.

by NineInchNachos on 9/16/2008 @ 11:36am
"Entertaining Tacomic this week, but I don't understand the monkey suit, maybe I'm missing something. "

Comrade marumaruyopparai, Comrade Eyman likes to play dressup in his conservative activism endeavors...

the eyman gorilla

dress up eyman

eyman vader




he's like a barbie doll only of the male gender (if there was ever such a thing).

by NineInchNachos on 9/16/2008 @ 11:41am
the state politics venture has left me with that 'not so fresh feeling'

I feel as though I must push out a Rossi cartoon before returning to the womb like warmth of Tacoma centric cartoons.

pray for me.

by NineInchNachos on 9/16/2008 @ 11:45am


beware the forehead! the foreeeeeeee head of dooom!

by NineInchNachos on 11/15/2008 @ 11:00am
best Eyman interview ever. Courtesy of The Melon:

themelononline.com/2008/11/rebel-an-inte...

by NineInchNachos on 11/15/2008 @ 5:43pm
Tim Eyman T-Shirt


purchase the t-shirt on the melon store!

www.zazzle.com/the_eyman_by_rr_anderson_...

by NineInchNachos on 4/14/2010 @ 2:12pm
"You'd think Eyman would have enough work on his hands getting the restoration of Initiative 960 which required a two-thirds vote by legislators to raise taxes on the November ballot. But no. Now he's filed eight new initiatives seeking to roll back the products of I-960's suspension: higher taxes on candy, gum, beer, soda, bottled water, tobacco and service businesses. He's even targeting a tax banks pay on the money they earn on mortgage loan fees."

Read more: blog.thenewstribune.com/opinion/2010/04/...

by L.S.Erhardt on 4/14/2010 @ 3:59pm
Good for him!

I'm sorry, but the idiots in Olympia have this coming since they ignored the will of the People and suspended 960.

Actually, every legislator who voted "yes" to suspend 960 needs to lose their seat.

by Crenshaw Sepulveda on 4/14/2010 @ 4:51pm
I am fairly certain our fine legislators were just following the law, or the loop holes in the law. So now Eyeman wants to close the loopholes. You can't expect Eyeman to cover everything in one ballot measure, how is the poor guy going to make a living if he can't spin off more of these ballot measures. Win or lose Eyeman will make a buck. I'm just sorry the legislature found no way to specifically tax the profits from ballot measures.

by NineInchNachos on 4/14/2010 @ 4:54pm
everytime i hear "idiots in Olympia" I want to karate chop something in the forehead.

by L.S.Erhardt on 4/14/2010 @ 5:14pm
a karate chop to the head of your state legislator would be appropriate.
Perhaps some sense will be knocked back in.

by fredo on 4/14/2010 @ 9:11pm
"Win or lose Eyeman will make a buck" Crenshaw

Interesting. When liberals take political action it's to advance a social cause. When conservatives take political action it's to line their own pockets. There's a fair and balanced POV.

by Crenshaw Sepulveda on 4/14/2010 @ 9:23pm
Couldn't have said it better myself, fredo. It is a shame but the liberals have to pick up the slack where the christians seem to have fallen down as far as social causes are concerned. Fair and Balanced are my middle names which is quite a mouth full when your name is Crenshaw Sepulveda.

by NineInchNachos on 5/30/2012 @ 1:12pm
goldy nails it 
www.thestranger.com/seattle/fuck-the-vot...

by NineInchNachos on 9/9/2012 @ 11:32am
what a slime ball www.thenewstribune.com/2012/09/08/228815...


by NineInchNachos on 2/27/2013 @ 6:53pm
JUDGEMENT DAY

blog.thenewstribune.com/politics/2013/02...