Occupy COMO must move out by Monday

Thursday, November 17, 2011 | 9:09 p.m. CST; updated 12:58 p.m. CST, Friday, November 18, 2011
A group of Occupy COMO protestors meet up and talk about Monday's possible eviction on Thursday night in front of City Hall. Mary Mosley, one of the protestors, said she hopes that the eviction will be resolved easily. Mosley said, "I think it's a big coincidence that the mayors of the big cities decided that the occupy protestors are nuisance all at the same day."

*CORRECTION: Sections 24-2 and 24-3 of the City Code of Ordinances address obstructing streets and sidewalks. The original version of this story cited the incorrect ordinance.

COLUMBIA — Lettering on the umbrella on top of a tent in Liberty Plaza reads "Can not evict". No one sleeps in the tent; it's an artistic form of protest, members of the Occupy COMO movement say. The tent, though, is one of the reasons the group must clear all belongings from the plaza by Monday.

The occupiers, who have been staying in the plaza outside City Hall since late September, have sleeping bags, plastic containers, a fern and a tent that might violate a city ordinance.


Related Media

Related Articles

John Glascock, director of Public Works, visited the group Thursday morning to tell demonstrators they have until Monday to move out.

In a phone interview, Glascock said the group could still demonstrate, but stored belongings must be removed. The group is also responsible for cleaning up the plaza, Glascock said.

"We can't have all the debris laying in front of City Hall any longer," Glascock said.

*Section 24-2 of the City Code of Ordinances addresses obstructing streets and sidewalks. And according to Section 24-3 of the code, objects placed on sidewalks or in other public places can be taken by the police.

David Dollens, a member of Occupy COMO, said the tent is not representative of the movement. He said he warned the people who put up the tent late Wednesday night that the structure might lead to a response from the city.

"I told them it was stupid," Dollens said. He said he believes the city has the right to remove debris.

For now, the group has voted to leave the tent up.

On Thursday night, the group held a "General Assembly" meeting to discuss the impending eviction and their next step. Options included talking to an attorney about the legality of the eviction and attempting to get arrested as a form of civil disobedience.

Monta Welch, a member of Occupy COMO, said she was not comfortable with the idea of intentional arrest. "It would be the very last straw," Welch said.

James Ginns, a member of the movement, was there at around 8:30 a.m. when Glascock arrived. Ginns said Glascock told the group they had become a permanent encampment.

Occupy protests around the nation celebrated the two-month anniversary of the movement on Thursday with a national "day of action," according to The New York Times. In Columbia, Occupy COMO saw a number of people who held signs on the corner of Broadway and Eighth Street.

Recently, governments and police have acted against Occupy movements. Police cleared Occupy Wall Street out of New York's Zucotti Park on Tuesday. Police have arrested and evicted protestors in several cities.

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Sally Willis November 18, 2011 | 8:10 a.m.

How do the rich expect to stay rich if the poor can't afford to buy their products? I don't think these protests solve anything. To be frank the rich don't care if you sit outside until you freeze to death while they toast their Champaign glasses to us. I'm not that smart and I can admit that, but I believe the best way to get this ball rolling would be to hit the wealthy the only place they would feel it and that's their wallet! I again am not that smart and have no clue how to do that but there are some really smart people here so what do we need to do without hurting those of us who are already poor?

(Report Comment)
Gregg Bush November 18, 2011 | 9:08 a.m.

Those are belongings -
Not trash or debris. Please read
The First Amendment.

(Report Comment)
mike mentor November 18, 2011 | 9:26 a.m.

"OCCUPY" a desk !!!

(Report Comment)
Gary Straub November 18, 2011 | 9:40 a.m.

The movement isn't about sticking it to the rich it is about getting the voice of the people back. Corporations can't vote but they have the voice and a very loud one. So, I believe, like protests around the world, people need to know they are relevant. There are many legitimate issues that are not being addressed and it has become next to impossible to get a politician to listen to the concerns of the people when it conflicts with the demands of the 1%. WE can't have clean air or water because it costs too much. They can't build new refineries because it costs too much to make them cleaner. We can't have consumer protection programs because they eat into profiteering, etc.. WE need to cut social security because it costs too much, or eliminate the postal service because it it is losing money. While the truth is they want to down size these programs because they spent all the money and don't want to pay it back. Our so-called representatives have robbed (borrowed) so much of the money from every profitable program to the point that there is not enough money to pay their debt. Funny, though, they always have enough to fund unwanted wars, or bail out big business, or to have the largest prison system in the world, or to give allowances to countries that they deem are necessary for our strategic interests. Which means that we have a strategy, what that is has not been discussed with the 99% and never will because it is complicated. I believe that there are only a handful of politicians who have even read the constitution since they apparently don't know what the first three words of it are. People just want their voice back, and it seems that the right to protest is the only way left.

(Report Comment)
Sally Willis November 18, 2011 | 9:49 a.m.

Okay but what I don't understand is why the poor keep being "raped" by taxes and the wealthy keep getting break after break. Small private businesses pay more in taxes than multi million dollar businesses. There is no middle class anymore and the rich just keep getting richer and getting breaks.

(Report Comment)
Gary Straub November 18, 2011 | 11:04 a.m.

Sally you are right and that is a main theme of the protest. There is an excellent article about even another point of view about the protests, here is an excerpt:
Imagine how an Egyptian, Syrian or Bahraini, or even an Iranian or Chinese, perceives how local U.S. authorities are dealing with the Occupy Wall Street movement. Batons, riot gear, police cordons, limited media access, clearance of public areas — this sounds eerily reminiscent of the crackdown against the Arab Spring protesters, writes Stephan Richter, president of The Globalist Research Center.

The full article can be viewed here:

(Report Comment)
Gregg Bush November 18, 2011 | 11:25 a.m.

A celebration
Of peaceful populism,
Except in our town.

(Report Comment)
frank christian November 18, 2011 | 12:13 p.m.

Gary Straub - I don't know what you think you just wrote. Imo, most would believe that you poured more immeasurable evidence on the case that "liberals should never be entrusted with public funds". You write "it is about getting the voice of the people back." Those people, last Tuesday after a young lady had just complained that they needed more reporting on the movement, surrounded a Fox Bus reporter and successfully disrupted his report by chanting "Fox news lies!" Do you agree with them that freedom of speech can be limited when deemed necessary by the few?

Is it so difficult to stay within the bounds of truth with you sage postings? The air I breathe is fine. The Democrat passed Clean Air Act provided 15B$ cleaner air. The money has long been spent. Lawyers got 2/3 of it and nothing has been "cleaned up". No refineries have been built because the Democrat passed regulations have made any profit from them impossible to achieve. Consumer Protection Programs? "By Julie Vorman
10:54 pm, July 15, 2010 Updated: 5:11 pm, June 9, 2011

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will spring to life with an annual budget of up to $550 million — an amount that dwarfs yearly spending by other consumer-focused agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Product Safety Commission." Why couldn't you address the Social Security situation as needed Reform? No one has suggested "cutting" SS.

"Our so-called representatives have robbed (borrowed) so much of the money from every profitable program to the point that there is not enough money to pay their debt." You would be more more accurate to refer to these so-called reps. as Democrats. While R's controlled Congress they vowed to stay out of SS and did so until the unwanted, but necessary wars made the promise impossible to keep and they so announced that. If allowed control of Congress again, SS will be off limits for Congressional spending revenue again.

"Which means that we have a strategy, what that is has not been discussed with the 99% and never will because it is complicated". The "strategy" is discussed every day. You are too busy compiling false lists of complaints to listen. How about, "it took less than 11 months to increase our nat'l debt from 14T$ to 15T$." If you are aware that this path lead only by Obama and Democrats will destroy us as a Nation, you should say so. If you are of those that believe our economy should be destroyed as only way to rebuild one "more perfect" in it's place, you should admit that as well.

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 18, 2011 | 1:01 p.m.

First amendment rights, my butt. The Constitution doesn't say jack about state or local governments not being able to do this kind of thing. Every single Occupy encampment has been raided and liquidated via application of long-standing, up-to-now unchallenged local ordinances. Just like here.

The problem is still the absurd inequity of income and wealth distribution, and malfeasance of the financial industry. The Occupy movements are merely a symptom of this problem. Occupy will change, but it won't go away until the problem is corrected.

The problem *will* be corrected, because what's going on simply isn't sustainable.

(Report Comment)
Jack Hamm November 18, 2011 | 1:42 p.m.


The Supreme Court disagrees with you. Please see Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925).

Just because local governments have been using these laws to deter the Occupy movements does not mean that they will not lose when challenged in court and pay our hefty settlements.

Personally I don't think the Occupy Columbia people are causing any harm and I urge the City Management to avoid doing anything that could cost the tax payers of this town down the line in a civil lawsuit.

(Report Comment)
Gregg Bush November 18, 2011 | 1:47 p.m.

The Constitution
Doesn't provide enforcement.
We the People must.

The unitary
Executive's fiat trumps

And is excused by
Tyrants and their lickspittle -

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 18, 2011 | 1:52 p.m.

Then occupy the courts.

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 18, 2011 | 1:59 p.m.

For the record, I support the Occupy movement. I've been out there myself.

But, the nationwide domestic military liquidation of Occupy encampments happens years faster than court battles over whether the liquidation is legal or not. What then, in the meantime?

The tension between long-standing local "nuisance" ordinances and rights granted by the US Constitution is going to be a huge minefield for everyone involved. I see that as a good thing, BTW.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro November 18, 2011 | 2:29 p.m.

Nonparticipants have rights too.
When this globally-organized social/political computer connected revolution of anti-capitalistic Marxists, Communists, SDS, envious, anarchistic, idealistic, student loan debtors, pot smoking, drug dropping, anti-establishment congregating squatters begin to interfere with people who are trying to conduct business as usual, the police have the right to protect all parties by dispersing a crowd which does not respect private and public property.
Let them occupy a church pew on Sundays until they realize that money is not everything.

(Report Comment)
mike mentor November 18, 2011 | 2:39 p.m.

The problem is these streets, sidewalks, and parks belong to all of us. What about those business' that have been disrupted in New York? Don't those small business owners have a legitimate gripe if people are allowed to camp out in front of their store fronts making it impossible for them to do business? Take it a step further... If I am going to open a pizza by the slice place and there is one already on the block, why not have my friends and family "occupy" the 10 feet around the door of the other pizza place. I wonder how many weeks or months it would take to put them out of business by blocking their customers? Is it not a right of mine in the constitution to assemble and protest anywhere I want for as long as I want?

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield November 18, 2011 | 2:41 p.m.

"Okay but what I don't understand is why the poor keep being 'raped' by taxes and the wealthy keep getting break after break."

The poor and middle class get their fair share of breaks, too. That's why the vast majority of the ~47% of taxpayers with no federal liability make less than $59K:

"The rich just keep getting richer and getting breaks."

According to a 2007 Treasury Department report: "Roughly half of taxpayers who began in the bottom income quintile in 1996 moved up to a higher income group by 2005. Among those with the very highest incomes in 1996 — the top 1/100 of 1 percent — only 25 percent remained in this group in 2005. Moreover, the median real income of these top taxpayers declined over the study period." Translation: There are lots of people who move up and lots of people who drop down.

(Report Comment)
mike mentor November 18, 2011 | 2:46 p.m.

1. I promise I didn't read Ray's post before making mine....

2. I think the occupy folks would find many friends if they could focus on the representation issue. There is a problem when the elected officials who are supposed to be representing us are in fact representing the interests of a very few with big pockets. You might even find some tea partiers to join in your soiree. But, by letting all the counter culture anarchists and entitlement babies join in griping about their student loan debt that could just be paid off by all these fat cat business'you lose the respect and interest of "normal" folks...

(Report Comment)
frank christian November 18, 2011 | 3:09 p.m.

"What about those business' that have been disrupted in New York?" Recent TV program, a New York gentleman told that he had opened an new restaurant last June and hired 100 people to staff it. Now the protesters have moved in next to him and their actions and noise have destroyed his business. He was wondering whether try to hang on until they leave or shut down and lay off those employee whom only just found work. The protesters are ones needed to be shut down. Yet some give us, "The problem is still the absurd inequity of income and wealth distribution, and malfeasance of the financial industry." A bunch of crap, but if really is a problem it has been instigated by those this few rabidly support, Democrats.

(Report Comment)
frank christian November 18, 2011 | 3:41 p.m.

"The tension between long-standing local "nuisance" ordinances and rights granted by the US Constitution is going to be a huge minefield for everyone involved. I see that as a good thing, BTW."

One protest defender here is concerned about our inability to be provided "clean air". Then this defender refers to local ordinances dealing with health, safety, and clean air, as nuisance laws. How come the difference? They both use the same subject differently because it fits their agenda at the moment. I would ask those that are defending and promoting the chaos and expenditure of law enforcement "enjoyed" because of Occupy and see a minefield of lawsuits (aclu will see to that) as a "good thing", would you prefer to see our economy destroyed so a more perfect one can be installed?

(Report Comment)
Tony Robertson November 18, 2011 | 3:46 p.m.

In my impetuous youth, I have personally been told to leave a public use area before, when my presence there was contrary to the law or city ordinance. I never thought to throw a hissy-fit about my First Amendment rights, or chant, or write creative haikus in protest, though.

My favorite comment regarding the various "occupations": Watching one especially articulate and erudite young gentleman bemoan this supposed neo-Kristallnacht on NBC News, my Dad says, "Good Lord, how would you like to have a pup out of him?"

(Report Comment)
Richard Saunders November 18, 2011 | 3:50 p.m.

Divide and conquer is working well here, I see. The 1% and their sponsored "social movements" do a wonderful job of keeping the 99% angry and clueless.

Soros and the Koch brothers thank you for your tireless efforts at being powerless, outraged minions.

Why? Because all they're striving for is larger, more forceful government that cements their hold upon society.

(Report Comment)
Tony Robertson November 18, 2011 | 4:07 p.m.

For the record, were the Koch Bros or Soros to "occupy" public space contrary to law or ordinance, I would favor their ouster, also. Probably the post-eviction power-washing, too.

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 18, 2011 | 5:36 p.m.

"There are lots of people who move up and lots of people who drop down."

The two sources for most of the information presented by various people here are found:

Boston Fed Report:

"Overall, the evidence indicates that over the 1969-to-2006 time span, family income mobility across the distribution decreased, families’ later-year incomes increasingly depended on their starting place, and the distribution of families’ lifetime incomes became less equal."

CBO Report:

Funny how even the government and Fed haters all use government and Fed data to make their case.

The percentage of the population that moved from quintile to quintile were largely those near the borders of the quintiles anyway. The percentage of the population that moved more than a single quintile is extremely low, roughly as low as it's ever been.

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 18, 2011 | 5:43 p.m.

Furthermore, the "It's my public space, too" arguments presented above are exactly why I say this is such a minefield. How ironic is it that this general argument is used to allow domestic military forces to evict the original occupiers, occupy the spaces themselves, and deprive *everyone* the right to use those spaces?

The issue is gonna suck up judicial resources for years to come.

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 18, 2011 | 6:19 p.m.

Back to the top, now: @Sally asks: "How do the rich expect to stay rich if the poor can't afford to buy their products?"

Her question cuts to the chase of the current financial crisis. Real wealth production in this country has been seriously hollowed out. We just don't make much of real or lasting value anymore.

The primary source of income growth and wealth expansion in this country is from expansion of public and private debt.

At the same time, private debt becomes less and less repayable because overall employment is still decreasing. The 2008 financial meltdown was primarily due to unpayable private debt, but was amplified by magnitudes due to massive derivatives leveraged against those unpayable debts. And, of course, there's a huge push to stop the expansion of public debt.

Almost all of this income growth, which is almost all public and private debt expansion, is going to the top fraction of a percent.

Cutting government spending will hit the richest the hardest, for the exact same reason that the rich get hit with the lion's share of the nation's tax bill. That's just where all the action is. Failing to increase overall employment will also make the private debt worth less and less as time goes on.

I sincerely and honestly hope the StuporCommittee fails (they've got 5 more days), and the "Doomsday" cuts go into effect. Fat chance of that, of course; even if they fail, the legislature still has another year to override the current legislation. But, if it were to happen, it would crush the fortunes of the wealthy the most. The rest of us just don't have that much to lose anymore.

(Report Comment)
Tony Robertson November 18, 2011 | 7:32 p.m.

Derrick Fogle: It may take "domestic military forces" to evict your duplicate posts. They will then power-wash the Missourian website. Fascist pigs. Fighting the Man can be such a Sisyphean task.

I never thought of that phrase before, either - how I was forcibly evicted from a city park one night by "domestic military forces." Little did they know, they had stoked the embers of a previously latent populist insurgency. The seeds of such were planted firmly in the soil of the Town & Country Supermarket parking lot. Unfortunately, the momentum of our town's "99%" withered, as we discovered that JB's Package had promptly closed at the state-mandated 1 a.m.

Speaking truth to power would have to wait until after both the morning milking, and church service, the next day.

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield November 18, 2011 | 8:21 p.m.

Derrick, I'm one of those people who moved up, and it wasn't from the fringe of one bracket to the fringe of the next. In 1993, I was making $4.75/hour. By 1998, I was making $30,000. Why the jump? Because I graduated college, which is the primary way that most people move up -- or at least those who prefer not to wallow in pity and blame "the rich."

By 2000, I was making $70,000. Why the jump? Because I'd made enough of a name for myself in my profession that another company recruited me.

By 2005, I was making $200,000. Why the jump? Because I started my own business.

I'm just one example of the taxpayers who began in the bottom income quintile in 1996 moved up to a higher income group by 2005.

The opportunities are there for those willing to stake their claim in life. If those opportunities were gone, you wouldn't have millions of people coming to this country legally and illegally each year.

(Report Comment)
Tony Robertson November 18, 2011 | 9:35 p.m.

Mr. Bearfield: Shame on you. You should immediately cease your greedy endeavors, and pitch a tent in a public space somewhere, and stand with the "99%". Maybe compose a confessional haiku, as an act of absolution, and beg the forgiveness or your enlightened "progressive" brethren for your naked capitalistic hedonism.

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield November 18, 2011 | 9:58 p.m.

The protesters don't realize that they're actually the 1%, or maybe closer to 0.001%. Everyone else is busy going and doing, and those who aren't are confident that they'll get their gubment checks either way.

The engineering or pre-med student walking past the protesters probably won't give them any more thought than most of do to those cool kids from high school who wind up balding and living over their parents' garage long after the rest of us have settled into successful careers and homes.

Today's protesters would do well to learn from that handful of aged hippies in this town who won't admit that that era is long gone and that everyone else moved on. No wonder people mock them.

(Report Comment)
frank christian November 18, 2011 | 10:03 p.m.

D. Fogle - "The issue is gonna suck up judicial resources for years to come." And as previously posted, you see this as a good thing, right?

Question to you, posed again. Is the collapse of our economy necessary to achieve the changes you require?

My congratulations and admiration to efforts of Mr. Bearfield. I was taught to appreciate and try to duplicate efforts like those. Since then, ours have been and are being taught to despise them. Right, Mr Fogle?

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith November 18, 2011 | 10:24 p.m.

We protesters
Harbor profound and
Brilliant thoughts
But we are unable
To articulate them
Because we're too busy whining.

[As they used to say at the close of every Bob & Ray radio show, "Be sure to write when you find work."]

(Report Comment)
frank christian November 18, 2011 | 10:54 p.m.

Ellis - I remember and once got the chance to see Hank the Cowhand at radio KFRU, but I never heard of Bob and Ray. (Iowa State is in overtime with Okla. State, but who cares, they are in the big 12) (Iowa St won!) Back to the point, who the hell are Bob & Ray?

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith November 19, 2011 | 6:02 a.m.

@ Frank Christian:

First, good for the Cyclones (see below). That's at least two overtime wins this season (they beat Iowa in triple overtime). ISU is my daughter's alma mammy: Kow Kollege, Plow Tech.

Prairie Home Companion, Bob & Ray, and The Red Green Show are/were low key comedy (some might say "just plain "low comedy") shows that would not appeal to some people but nevertheless garner loyal audiences. Each show relies on a fair amount of repetition. So did the old radio/TV show, Fibber McGee & Molly (every episode included someone opening the door of Fibber's infamous closet - with everything imaginable falling out of the closet).

I may have posted this before, but how did Iowa State University of Science & Technology sports teams get the name "Cyclones? They frequently don't play football or basketball like cyclones. Originally, ISU teams were called "Cardinals" and their uniforms were solid red.

Many years ago Northwestern University - which was then a feared football power, would start their seasons by playing Iowa State College (its name then). Outcomes of those games were foreordained. However, one year ISU soundly thrashed Northwestern, and a Chicago newspaper (I think it was the Trib) ran the headline, "Wildcats flattened By Iowa Cyclone." The name stuck.

PS: The Red Green show makes the old Hee-Haw show look positively intellectual!

(Report Comment)
Gregg Bush November 19, 2011 | 8:32 a.m.

I've never heard a
Protester whine, then again
I listen to them.

The only whining
I hear is from the haters
Just bellyaching.

Or is it complaints
About whining or griping
About the complaints.

The ringers in the
Rigged game use ridicule to
Drown out honest men.

(Report Comment)
Tony Robertson November 19, 2011 | 9:12 a.m.

Speaking of ridicule, here's some from a mad genius:

With Apologies to Allan Sherman
Hello Faddah
Hello Mama
I'm Occupying
Camp Obama
I'm protesting
Wall Street grabbings
And trying to avoid the hobo stabbings

On my iPhone
With my last tweet
I down-twinkled
Jews on Wall Street
Please don't worry
About psychosis
'Cause my Guy Fawkes mask repels tuberculosis

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith November 19, 2011 | 9:54 a.m.

@ Tony Robertson:

Iowahawk is hard to beat. Since there's no home game this Saturday in Iowa City he'll probably be over in one of the Amana Colonies restaurants eating bratwurst and drinking rhubarb wine.

Since you are quoting someone else, I doubt your post will come under scrutiny (Jews on Wall Street). I can tell you that in any post where you are not quoting someone else don't use the word "Rednecks." :)

Love that rhubarb wine! Especially the very dry version:; it curls your toes when it hits your tummy.

(Report Comment)
Derrick Fogle November 19, 2011 | 10:48 a.m.

Thanks, Missourian staff, for taking care of the double-post.

Funny someone who accuses others of being fixated on money needs to brag about how much they make. Sure, sometimes I'd like more money, but... I'm happy with my choices. When all is said and done, I help other people for a living. I find it very personally rewarding.

My concerns regarding inequality and malfeasance of the financial industry aren't driven by the belief that I'm not getting enough. They are driven by empirical evidence that it's economically damaging to our country as a whole. I believe I've laid that out fairly well: Our economy is in the worse shape it's been since the Great Depression, inequality is the highest it's been since the Great Depression. So few people gathering so much of the supposed wealth leaves the rest of the economy without the resources it needs to function well.

People being stuck at the 5-year-old maturity level of name calling and bragging isn't gonna help. In fact, it's one reason why I think economic collapse is plausible. It's certainly not required, but we've been hollowing our our own economy for about 40 years now, and piling all the weight on top. The Occupy movements are merely the first really visible cracks in a foundation that is no longer strong enough to support the weight on top.

If we don't take some of the weight off the top, and use the material to strengthen the foundation, it's going to collapse. It doesn't *have* to happen, but it does require those at the top who control all the weight to voluntarily pass it back down and help stabilize the foundation.

The "Billionaires for higher taxes" group understands this to some extent. Whether enough people realize this fast enough to repair our economy's foundation before it does collapses, is yet to be determined. From my POV, it isn't looking good right now.

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield November 19, 2011 | 11:13 a.m.

It's clear that a lot of people aren't happy with their financial choices, regardless of whether they want to admit it or even realize it. For example, don't show up at a protest with a device whose service costs $70/month before taxes and then complain to a reporter that your student loans cost too much or that you can't afford health insurance. That shows you don't know how to prioritize spending.

It's disturbing how some of the protesters are now making anti-semitic remarks, loudly and publicly. That's the worst name-calling.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.