Between yesterday and today several news outlets, the Strib, MPR and last night's WCCO news, reported the story of a couple dozen protesters who marched yesterday from the Capitol to the Xcel Center for their right to a permit so they can protest the 2008 Republican National Convention.

The group that marched is called the--wait for it--Coalition to March on the RNC and Stop the War.  They have issued several requests for a permit, and have yet to receive one.  Since the beginning, St. Paul police have said they don't issue them until the event is 6 months out.  The protesters' representative from the ACLU has found some kind of loophole in a city ordinance that grants permits any time, if the protest is reoccuring.

But Matt Bostrom, assistant St. Paul police chief, said he can't do anything regarding those claims and "that when applicants gave an estimate for each march between now and September, they wrote "3-100,000" and that he needed a "good faith" estimate."

If they filed a request, and the typical procedure is not to grant one before 6 months out than that is what should happen.  Yet, every story portrays them as some kind of sympathetic group of peaceful protesters who just want their permit--which as a result of some kind of Republican conspiracy--is not being given to them. 

I know I've been hard on Bostrom in the past but I appreciated his comment, "In time they'll find out we're not up to anything subversive."

It's a non-story, and I'm tired of reading the same reports about it.  I hope the next news story doesn't come out until March when they receive their permits, and the next not until August when they admit they were able to do all the planning necessary and didn't need an earlier permit anyway. 

All this begs the question:  How is this a story?  A couple dozen people protest in practically sub-zero temperatures because they disagree with procedural rules set by the city and it makes the news?