The Washington Post just reported that the District government has fined an anti-war group $10,000 over its posters. Apparently, the group, ANSWER, violated city law when it glued its yellow-and-black signs to “traffic control boxes” which I think are the bases of traffic lights.
The fines stem in part from ANSWER’s refusal to remove the sticky posters.
I know we need a way to pay for rising baseball-stadium costs, but this is ridiculous. As far as protest signs go, these are pretty decent though not quite Borf worthy. And the fine of $10,000—-a price that would more than cover a decent used Corolla—-is plain over the top.
The problem is, well, ANSWER’s response strategy. They’re smellin’ conspiracy, writing on their Web site:
“This is part of a systematic effort to disrupt the organizing for the September 15 Mass March that is timed to coincide with the report of General Petraeus and the debate in Congress on the Iraq war. Iraq war veterans and their families will lead this dramatic march from the White House to the Congress on September 15. The last thing the government wants is to see the streets of Washington DC fill up with throngs of anti-war protesters right in the middle of the debate. But we will not be stopped.”
Do they really think George Bush is behind this? Please. Most of Congress hates the war. And I’d guess that the 90 or so percent of District residents that voted for Kerry don’t like the war either.
So who thinks the signs should stay? And what should ANSWER’s PR strategy should be?