Like Keene’s Robin Hood on Facebook!

February 6, 2013 by Ian
Filed under: Announcement, Robin Hood, Update

Keene’s Robin Hooders have been out on the streets every day, saving cars (maybe even yours) from the king’s men and their annoying parking tickets!

Many grateful Keene inhabitants have expressed their appreciation – some on the Keene Robin Hood facebook page!

Please visit, like and then hover over the “like” button and click “get notifications” to ensure you get the latest from the Merry Men (and women)!

Pingback: Like Keene’s Robin Hood on Facebook! - Unofficial Network
http://www.facebook.com/fst.sqr Fst Sqr

Maryellen McGorry has resigned…

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20130130/NEWS04/130128958
http://www.facebook.com/fst.sqr Fst Sqr

MaryEllen McGorry has finally resigned..
Jeremy C. Green

I find the comparison to Robin Hood to be inapt at best, and unfortunate at worst.

For one thing, a true Robin Hood would be busting open the parking meters, extracting the contents, and distributing the money to the poor. By claiming that preventing parking tickets from being written amounts to “stealing from the rich,” you are implying that the city already owns the money demanded by an unwritten parking ticket. That’s about half a step away from claiming that free-market competition among businesses (i.e., “stealing customers”) amounts to common theft (i.e., stealing property).

In any event, the historical Robin Hood was a racist. He was a an anti-Norman Anglo-Saxon white supremacist. You really want to associate yourself with that kind of bigotry? Personally, I find that sort of ethnic prejudice to be highly offensive.
- MaineShark
  
  Actually, the whole “steal from the rich and give to the poor” thing is a modern invention. The older stories had him stealing from the tax collector, and giving the money back to those who had been forced to pay it.
- Jeremy C. Green
  
  Fine. “Rich.” “Tax collector.” Take your pick. Either way makes no difference to my objection. Robin hood wasn’t preventing taxes from being collected, he was liberating funds that had already been collected. That’s not what the Keeniacs are doing.
  
  And again, he was an ethnic bigot. As an American of Norman descent, I personally find it despicable that anyone would openly identify with “Sir” Robin, who was an admitted anti-Norman racial supremacist.
- MaineShark
  
  “Preventing predation by the governmental revenue agents” is the common theme.
  
  Your claims about what Robin Hood “was” are nonsense. He’s a mythical figure out of a variety of stories, not a real person. There have been hundreds of Robin Hood stories. Some had him portrayed with certain bigotries, I’m sure, given the sentiments at given times. Other modern stories show up having “anti-rich” bigotry (hence the “steal from the right and give to the poor” idea).
  
  If doubt that you could even claim that a /majority/ of Robin Hood stories have any anti-Norman bigotry.
- Jeremy C. Green
  
  Oh, so truth is determined by the majority of stories? By that standard then Pearl Harbor was a complete surprise to FDR. By that standard George Washington chopped down a cherry tree. By that standard federal agents were bouncing around on the moon in the middle of the last century before anyone had ever seen a pocket calculator.
  
  I’m not surprised you find it so easy to reject reality, since your knowledge of Robin Hood is clearly based on the “majority” bowdlerized Disney version. and not the contemporaneous literature. Oh well, i cannot force you to accept truth. I hope your ignorance is as blissful for you as they say.
  
  As for your claim that Robin Hood was nothing more than a mythical figure, I hope that whoever is buried beneath his headstone in West Yorkshire can’t hear you say that.
- MaineShark
  
  Whatever FDR or George Washington did or did not do in their lives, is a matter of objective fact. It’s not determined by anything else other than reality.
  
  “Robin Hood” is a myth. And no, nothing is determined by the “majority.” Being a myth, nothing is determined, at all. You can say, “in Ivanhoe, Robin Hood was portrayed as anti-Norman,” but to make objective statements about a mythological figure is nonsensical, unless those statements are supported by all (or nearly all) of the stories about that figure.
  
  And your imaginings that Robin Hood was real… sorry, but I can’t help you there. Unicorns aren’t real, either, if that might help dispell another myth for you. Perhaps there once was someone by that name (or perhaps not – it’s not at all settled), but that doesn’t make the myth true, any more than some historical king being named “Arthur” would make the King Arthur legends true.
  
  If you can’t even verify for a fact that someone even existed, and there are myriad contradictory stories about that individual, no historical example of which can be considered more authentic than any other, then asserting something as true about the character of that individual, if it only appears in some fraction of those stories, is ridiculous. To accuse others of supporting racism because of your wild assumptions is further insanity.
- Jeremy C. Green
  
  I commend you for your valiant effort to distract the readers of this thread from your all-too-obvious defense of a persona–real or mythical–who displayed offensively racist predilections. Your vain attempts to distract attention away from your apologism for bigotry is made even more futile by your comical distinction between “reality” and “myth” based on nothing but your arbitrary desires. I need merely turn the tables to demonstrate the absurdity of what you might otherwise pass off as logic. After all, I can as well prove that George Washington never existed by observing that, like unicorns, leprechauns aren’t real. Yet you persist in your belief in the reality of George Washington by arbitrarily identifying his life as “fact,” with no more justification than reputable historians have for asserting the reality of Robin Hood as being as factual besides the expectedly greater quantity of historical material about Washington resulting from the lesser time that has passed since Washington than Robin Hood lived.
  
  The massive effort you have put into changing this from a discussion of the PR value of adopting a racist mascot into one about the number of stories that can dance on the head of a pin is just further proof that libertarians are all-too-ready to stick their heads in the sand when anyone points out another reason why the public might get the impression–accurately or not–that libertarians are weak on the race issue.
- MaineShark
  
  Wow. So, since you apparently cannot distinguish fiction from reality, would you like some recommendations for good mental health professionals?
  
  As far as the “PR value,” I don’t imagine that “the public” is going to associate Robin Hood with racism. That’s simply not how the Robin Hood character is viewed by anyone with all their mental hardware properly-tightened…