Pledging Fealty to Lord Cheney

[Chump]

First they arrest dissenters whom wear t-shirts, now they won't allow anyone to listen to speeches by our elected leaders without swearing an oath...

WTF?!

Some Democrats seeking Cheney tickets had to sign oath

By RICHARD BENKE
Associated Press Writer

RIO RANCHO, N.M. (AP) -- Some Democrats who signed up to hear Vice President Dick Cheney speak here Saturday were refused tickets unless they signed a pledge to endorse President Bush.

The measure was a security step designed to avoid a disruption, which Bush campaign spokesman Dan Foley alleged Democrats were planning. Democratic Party officials denied it.

Several Democrats, at least, encountered the screening measures Thursday after calling from a line that self-identified as ACT, America Coming Together, an activist group that supports Kerry, Foley said. Others attempted to give false names and were denied tickets, he said.

Two men who had sought tickets reported they were required to give name, address, phone number, e-mail address and driver's license number, then were presented the pledge of endorsement when they arrived to pick up the tickets Thursday.

One of them, John Wade of Albuquerque, said he signed the pledge because he wanted the tickets but then changed his mind.

"I got to thinking this is not right," Wade said. "They're excluding people -- that's what has me so upset."

He returned the tickets and campaign workers returned his pledge.

Vietnam veteran Michael Ortiz y Pino said he refused to sign the pledge and was refused tickets.

Ortiz y Pino said he was asked if he associated with veterans, pro-life, gun rights or teacher groups.

Neither man wanted to give driver's license numbers but did so.

"I said why do you need that?" Ortiz y Pino said.

A campaign worker, he said, replied: "Secret Service stuff."

Kerry campaign spokesman Ruben Pulido Jr. said there had been no plan by the campaign to disrupt Cheney's event.

"I think that every American should have the right to see their vice president and hear from him firsthand what he plans to do for our country," Pulido said.

He also said the Kerry campaign had not attempted to screen Bush supporters out of Kerry's appearance at the National Hispanic Cultural Center in Albuquerque on July 9.

On that occasion, about a dozen Bush supporters wearing flip-flop beach sandals began chanting "Viva Bush" and waved their flip-flops over their heads. They contend Kerry has flip-flopped on the war.

The incident ended peacefully.

For Saturday's event, Foley, a New Mexico legislator, said the Cheney campaign didn't want supporters denied places that might be taken by detractors.

Some Democrats who are Bush supporters were welcomed without signing anything, he said.

The endorsement pledges, he said, were for screening purposes, not for any advertisement listing names of Democrats who support Bush.

Foley asked of the Kerry-Edwards campaign: "How many tickets did you give to Bush-Cheney supporters from New Mexico to hear Senator Kerry's speech tonight at the Democratic National Convention?"

Asked if Cheney might discuss a terrorism warning issued Thursday for New Mexico, Foley said he did not know.

Richard Fox, a political science instructor at a local community college, said attempts to screen political events is commonplace.

But he said: "This pledge or this 'loyalty oath' -- quote-unquote -- to me is unheard of."

http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2004/07/30/news/wyoming/63b4fcb928fe8e6987256ee10054e715.txt

[Baqui99]

Rio Rancho, New Mexico? Weren't Richard Roma, Sheldon Lavigne, et al trying to pitch real estate out there in Glengarry Glenross?

Anyways, this isn't really a surprise, given the increasing unrest on both sides.

[Chump]

Originally posted by Baqui99
Rio Rancho, New Mexico? Weren't Richard Roma, Sheldon Lavigne, et al trying to pitch real estate out there in Glengarry Glenross?

Anyways, this isn't really a surprise, given the increasing unrest on both sides.

havent seen that movie

but Rio Rancho is a burb, north of Albuquerque

[Baqui99]

Originally posted by Chump
havent seen that movie

but Rio Rancho is a burb, north of Albuquerque

So what happens if you break your oath and start a commotion? Do you get arrested?

[RocketMan Tex]

Originally posted by Baqui99
So what happens if you break your oath and start a commotion? Do you get arrested?

They put the orange jumpsuit on you, declare you an "enemy combatant", and give you a one way ticket to Gitmo.

[4chuckie]

This is not that unusual for either party.

Bush and Kerry has been in Ohio alot and generally what they do is give all the tickets to their respective campaign HQ to pass out. They first give tickets to the donors (obviously), then they screen everone else who is to receive tickets. They're not going to hand out 1000 tickets randomly and hope all their supporters end up with the tickets.

Again it happens with both parties this is not a Cheney or GOP thing. The last thing a politician wants is to have their rally interrupted.

And to be honest this election has everyone so fired up that I would think a vocal opponent to the candidate in the crowd would probably be physically abused.

[Rocket104]

Originally posted by 4chuckie
Again it happens with both parties this is not a Cheney or GOP thing. The last thing a politician wants is to have their rally interrupted.

Please cite an instance where the Democrats/Kerry has forced entrants to a rally to sign a loyalty pledge.

[Mulder]

Originally posted by 4chuckie
And to be honest this election has everyone so fired up that I would think a vocal opponent to the candidate in the crowd would probably be physically abused.

I went to a rally for Kerry here and there were Republicans in the audience that were banging flip flops together. They weren't attacked verbally or physically. They were just drowned out when Kerry spoke and the audience responded positively. eventually, they just gave up and walked away.

[Baqui99]

Originally posted by RocketMan Tex
They put the orange jumpsuit on you, declare you an "enemy combatant", and give you a one way ticket to Gitmo.

You left out the full body cavity search. :)

[Deckard]

I earnestly await our dear giddy's response!
Oh, which brand of spin-cycle shall we see?
Yet another incident that's alarming to me.

We have a pair of radicals, in the White House ensconced.
Oh, what on earth are they going to do next?
Just thinking about it has me quite vexed.

Their radical fellows in the Congress applaud,
Every dissembling support of their fraud.
The fraud being unity, when division they preach.
Everywhere their $200 million can reach.

Now which brand of spin-cycle shall we see,
For the next incident that's alarming to me?
There will be more, that's a certainty,
And it's very, very alarming to me.

[4chuckie]

Originally posted by Rocket104
Please cite an instance where the Democrats/Kerry has forced entrants to a rally to sign a loyalty pledge.

I didn't say there was a document to sign, just the fact it happens (screening) on both parties. The document is new to me but the same process happens everywhere (meaning it's easy for liberals to see kerry and easy for conservatives to see Bush at the rallies).

[mc mark]

No matter what side you fall on.

When did it become practice in America to stop people from attending speeches made by our politicians or government?

When did we start letting one type of people in and not the other?

When did we start saying, "you can but you can't"?

I can't believe that America has become a place where discourse is stifled and frowned upon!


Unbelievable!

[mc mark]

And another thing! :)

Doesn't it say something when we have our elected officials cordoned off by three blocks of police and secret service everywhere they go to stop them from seeing people who disagree? When we can’t even see what they have to say? When people are arrested for disagreeing?

WTF indeed!

[ROXRAN]

I think it's allowable, but based on factors which deem security as a concern while still acheiving a balance in proportion to the allowable merits of discourse in a setting which is magnified based on multiple criteria...

[DonnyMost]

Originally posted by ROXRAN
I think it's allowable, but based on factors which deem security as a concern while still acheiving a balance in proportion to the allowable merits of discourse in a setting which is magnified based on multiple criteria...

does this make sense to anyone?

[mc mark]

Originally posted by DonnyMost
does this make sense to anyone?

sadly. yes...

[outlaw]

Originally posted by ROXRAN
I think it's allowable, but based on factors which deem security as a concern..

this has nothing to do with security.
do you really think a potential assassin is gonna be wearing a Kerry-Edwards t-shirt to a GOP rally?

[andymoon]

Originally posted by outlaw
this has nothing to do with security.
do you really think a potential assassin is gonna be wearing a Kerry-Edwards t-shirt to a GOP rally?

I'm thinking that the assassin would look something like John Malkovich in "Line of Fire." Business suit, eyeglasses, fat campaign contribution and a front row seat.

[ROXRAN]

Originally posted by andymoon
I'm thinking that the assassin would look something like John Malkovich in "Line of Fire." Business suit, eyeglasses, fat campaign contribution and a front row seat.

funny...:D

[nyrocket]

Gestapo tactics! GESTAPO TACTICS!

[jiggadi]

Whats going to come next from these old hoodlums? Ethnic cleansing?

[mrpaige]

Originally posted by Baqui99
Rio Rancho, New Mexico? Weren't Richard Roma, Sheldon Lavigne, et al trying to pitch real estate out there in Glengarry Glenross?

I understand those who refused to sign the loyalty oath were also not allowed to drink any coffee since the coffee is only for closers.

Mitch and Murray paid good money for those leads.

LEVENE
When we were at Rio Rancho, who was top
man? A month...? Two months...?
Eight months in twelve for three
years in a row. You know what that
means? You know what that means?
Is that luck? Is that some, some,
some purloined leads? That's skill.
That's talent, that's, that's...

ROMA
...yes...

LEVENE
...and you don't remember. 'Cause
you weren't around. That's cold
calling. Walk up to the door. I
don't even know their name. I'm
selling something they don't even
want. You talk about soft sell...
before we had a name for it...before
we called it anything, we did it.

[rimrocker]

Another incident on the Veep's swing through the SW...
_______________

Bush camp solicits race of Star staffer
By C.J. Karamargin
ARIZONA DAILY STAR

President Bush's re-election campaign insisted on knowing the race of an Arizona Daily Star journalist assigned to photograph Vice President Dick Cheney.

The Star refused to provide the information.

Cheney is scheduled to appear at a rally this afternoon at the Pima County Fairgrounds.

A rally organizer for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign asked Teri Hayt, the Star's managing editor, to disclose the journalist's race on Friday. After Hayt refused, the organizer called back and said the journalist probably would be allowed to photograph the vice president.

"It was such an outrageous request, I was personally insulted," Hayt said later.

Danny Diaz, a spokesman for the president's re-election campaign, said the information was needed for security purposes.

"All the information requested of staff, volunteers and participants for the event has been done so to ensure the safety of all those involved, including the vice president of the United States," he said.

Diaz repeated that answer when asked if it is the practice of the White House to ask for racial information or if the photographer, Mamta Popat, was singled out because of her name. He referred those questions to the U.S. Secret Service, which did not respond to a call from the Star Friday afternoon.

Hayt declined to speculate on whether Popat was racially profiled, but said she is deeply concerned.

"One has to wonder what they were going to do with that information," Hayt said. "Because she has Indian ancestry, were they going to deny her access? I don't know."

Journalists covering the president or vice president must undergo a background check and are required to provide their name, date of birth and Social Security number. The Star provided that information Thursday for Popat and this reporter.

"That's all anybody has been asked to provide," said Hayt, adding that this is the first time in her 26-year career that a journalist's race was made an issue.

Organizer Christine Walton asked for Popat's race in telephone conversations with two other Star editors before she spoke to Hayt. They also refused to provide the information. Walton told Hayt that Popat's race was necessary to allow the Secret Service to distinguish her from someone else who might have the same name.

"It was a very lame excuse," Hayt said.

Popat, a photographer with six years' experience, was on assignment Friday and unaware of the controversy. But she said she was glad the Star refused. "My race shouldn't have anything to do with my job," she said.

Tickets are required for the public to attend the rally, which begins at 12:50 p.m. All tickets were distributed by Friday.

http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/printDS/32301.php

[Rocketman95]

Disgusting.

[Mulder]

"Kumar - Is that like with 5 O's or 3 U's or something?"

[Baqui99]

Originally posted by mrpaige
I understand those who refused to sign the loyalty oath were also not allowed to drink any coffee since the coffee is only for closers.

Mitch and Murray paid good money for those leads.

LEVENE
When we were at Rio Rancho, who was top
man? A month...? Two months...?
Eight months in twelve for three
years in a row. You know what that
means? You know what that means?
Is that luck? Is that some, some,
some purloined leads? That's skill.
That's talent, that's, that's...

ROMA
...yes...

LEVENE
...and you don't remember. 'Cause
you weren't around. That's cold
calling. Walk up to the door. I
don't even know their name. I'm
selling something they don't even
want. You talk about soft sell...
before we had a name for it...before
we called it anything, we did it.

Pure greatness...

[IROC it]

Originally posted by rimrocker
the Veep

Cool nickname. :D

[mc mark]

Quite a different scene at an Edwards rally this morning!

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040803/capt.lawh10708031643.democrats_edwards_lawh107.jpg

Supporters of President Bush stand across the street from a rally for Vice Presidential nominee John Edwards in Baton Rogue, La. Tuesday morning Aug. 3, 2004. Edwards started the day with a morning rally in Baton Rouge which started a three-stop trip through Louisiana.

[IROC it]

Originally posted by mc mark
Quite a different scene at an Edwards rally this morning!

Power to the People! ;)

[mc mark]

Originally posted by IROC it
Power to the People! ;)

And look! They're not getting arrested or told to remove their signs! Imagine that!

:D

[RocketMan Tex]

Originally posted by IROC it
Power to the People! ;)

Power to freedom of speech, something the Bush Administration apparently does not believe in.

[FranchiseBlade]

This was disgusting. I can't believe they asked for the race of somebody.

This clearly isn't something that both sides are equally guilty of. Bush's campaign stops won't allow people who might disagree anywhere near them, and then try and signal out the race of someone to take photos of the VP.

Meanwhile Democrats openly have protest minded individuals, and even address them in their speeches.

Look at this and ask yourself about who's uniting and who's dividing. Ask yourself who is exemplifying freedom on their campaign stops, and who is excluding, and running away from it.

The attitudes are becoming more and more clear.

[aghast]

Originally posted by Baqui99
Rio Rancho, New Mexico? Weren't Richard Roma, Sheldon Lavigne, et al trying to pitch real estate out there in Glengarry Glenross?

In this election, I want Kerry/Edwards to get the Caddy, Nader to get the steak knives, and Bush/Cheney to get third prize.

All train compartments smell vaguely of s--t. It gets so you don't mind it. That's the worst thing that I can confess. You know how long it took me to get there? A long time. When you die you're going to regret the things you don't do. You think you're queer? I'm going to tell you something: we're all queer. You think you're a thief? So what? You get befuddled by a middle-class morality? Get shut of it. Shut it out. You cheated on your wife? You did it, live with it. You f--- little girls, so be it. There's an absolute morality? Maybe. And then what? If you think there is, then be that thing. Bad people go to hell? I don't think so. If you think that, act that way. A hell exists on earth? Yes. I won't live in it. That's me. You ever take a dump made you feel like you'd just slept for twelve hours?

3000 years of philosophy, distilled into one paragraph.

Davids Mamet & Rabe: my dramatic heroes.

==========

Is anybody really surprised that these loyalty oaths exist? Compared to the arrest of dissenters during public speeches, this seems sadly trifling in comparison.

[glynch]

When did it become practice in America to stop people from attending speeches made by our politicians or government?

What are you belly aching about? Doncha know there is a war on terror going on? Be a patriot.

Don't you know everything changed on 9/11? Why do you hate America and want Bin Laden to win?

If you don't like it here, why don't you move to N. Korea?

I guess you are against US national security.

Besides if we need the freedom to go to politicians' speechs, Bush Ashcroft will grant it to us if appropriate. .:rolleyes:

[mc mark]

I was wondering if anyone was going to address my questions!

;)

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Deckard
I earnestly await our dear giddy's response!
The un-spin: "Richard Fox, a political science instructor at a local community college, said attempts to screen political events is commonplace."

The "pledge" is just theatrical reinforcement.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by giddyup
The un-spin: "Richard Fox, a political science instructor at a local community college, said attempts to screen political events is commonplace."

The "pledge" is just theatrical reinforcement.

What about asking the race of a photographer? Is that commonplace?

[giddyup]

<b>Originally posted by mc mark

No matter what side you fall on.

When did it become practice in America to stop people from attending speeches made by our politicians or government?</b>

There are very few places that I know of when you can go whenever you want and behave in any way you choose.

<b>When did we start letting one type of people in and not the other?</B>

When the latter type started misbehaving?

<b>When did we start saying, "you can but you can't"?</b>

We always have said that-- under some circumstances.

<b>I can't believe that America has become a place where discourse is stifled and frowned upon!</b>

Can we have some order please?!

[mc mark]

giddy I don't believe in your America!

But I will fight to the death to defend it and what you believe.

Would you do the same for me?

[giddyup]

Originally posted by mc mark
giddy I don't believe in your America!

But I will fight to the death to defend it and what you believe.

Would you do the same for me?
You don't believe it reality? Can you dispute any of my comments? You make me feel like a dog...

[glynch]

McMark, the early days of fascism in Germany as the frightened population gradually gave up their freedoms to Hitler is a history that needs to urgently studied.

I hope I get a chance to sign one of those stupid statments so I can go protest these guys.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by giddyup
You don't believe it reality? Can you dispute any of my comments? You make me feel like a dog...

Giddy I apologize. Didn’t mean to sound harsh or make you feel bad.

The point I’m trying to make (and what this thread is trying to make) is that we live in America! A country that was founded on discourse, disagreement and discussion. Hell we even fought a civil war over differing opinions. This is what makes America the greatest country in the world. We are obligated to express our opinions.

Now we have an administration that is doing all it can to avoid differing opinions. One that won’t allow their own citizens to question them. It is not the America I know and love. And I think deep down you feel the same way.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by mc mark
Giddy I apologize. Didn’t mean to sound harsh or make you feel bad.

The point I’m trying to make (and what this thread is trying to make) is that we live in America! A country that was founded on discourse, disagreement and discussion. Hell we even fought a civil war over differing opinions. This is what makes America the greatest country in the world. We are obligated to express our opinions.

Now we have an administration that is doing all it can to avoid differing opinions. One that won’t allow their own citizens to question them. It is not the America I know and love. And I think deep down you feel the same way.
I was kidding about the dog thing. I do think you think of me that way sometime, but I don't take it seriously because I know myself better than someone who has never met me.

When will this BBS get shut down? It is a ripe field of criticism and discouse much of which is aimed at Bush.

I think too many mountains are being made out of molehills.

BTW, an you dispute any of my assertions above?

[mc mark]

God! I extend an olive branch and try to be civil and this is the response?

As to you question...

BTW, an you dispute any of my assertions above?

yes...

[giddyup]

Originally posted by mc mark
God! I extend an olive branch and try to be civil and this is the response?

As to you question...



yes...

How in the world was I uncivil?

I'd like to see some substantiation of your denial of my assertions.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by giddyup
How in the world was I uncivil?

I'd like to see some substantiation of your denial of my assertions.

Guess I'm being sensitive today! ;)


Oh giddy!

1 entry found for assertions.
as·ser·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-sûrshn)
n.

The act of asserting.
Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof.



:D

[giddyup]

Originally posted by mc mark

The act of asserting.
Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof.

Assertion: Hakeem Olajuwon was The Man in the pivot.

Valid? Invalid? Lie? Truth? Beyond being an assertion, what is it?

Still would like for you to unsubstantiate the things I said. I know you can. There's enough potential in word play alone to turn some of those things around on me, but I know too that those "assertions" are grounded in a helluva lot of truth.

[Baqui99]

Originally posted by aghast
In this election, I want Kerry/Edwards to get the Caddy, Nader to get the steak knives, and Bush/Cheney to get third prize.


Third place is: you're fired. If you don't like it, leave.

Still can't believe how Roma smooth talked his way into closing that weirdo in the restaurant.

[mc mark]

I guess we just see things differently! And that's okay! Again, that's what makes America great. And I will try to be more respectful in the future.

Cheney would be eaten alive if he were to venture into the D&D and that's the difference. He and Jr do everything within their power to avoid decent or people with differing opinions.




Oh, and "Hakeem Olajuwon was The Man in the pivot"

That's a fact jack! :D

[aghast]

Originally posted by Baqui99
Third place is: you're fired. If you don't like it, leave.

Still can't believe how Roma smooth talked his way into closing that weirdo in the restaurant.

Easy. He hit on 'em. Spotted his weakness, a repressed sexuality, and went in for the kill. Soft sell indeed. (By the way, the Alec Baldwin "What's your name?" "F=== you, that's my name" character wasn't even in the play version. Supposedly, Mamet wrote the part into the movie's screenplay specifically with Baldwin in mind.)

===

I know I'm becoming a broken record on this. It really frightens me that civil liberties have been, and more to the point can be, revoked so easily, almost always with war as the justification. We fought a Civil War over our opinions, yes. But we also suspended habeas corpus to do so. WW1 was supposed to end all wars; we jailed dissenters (including one Congressman) in order to best fight it. Japanese Americans were forced into internment centers in WW2.

I was in the Barnes & Noble today, and saw that Michelle Malkin just came out with a book that argued that putting the Japanese Americans, US citizens mind you, into concentration camps was a good thing, that it's a good example of why we need to racially profile now against Arabs. I really do feel we're headed back into the troughs of the civil liberties curve. If I see that book hit the best seller lists, I think my fears will be confirmed.

I walked by the Citigroup building today (to get to B&N) and that entire block was virtually a police state. Officers were standing ten feet apart from each other, all down the street. Barricades were up, exits were closed, all bags were checked by security guards upon entry. The public atrium was closed down. Undercover officers were walking around with barely-noticeable earpieces, keeping tabs. Scary stuff.

I'm not trying to write that the police making a show of force against a possible terrorist threat is a bad thing, it just reminded me of the force that could and likely would be marshalled if another terrorist incident occurred. If something else hits the fan, I don't think loyalty pledges will be all we have to concern ourselves with. (Of course, already American citizens [the scum of the earth, probably, but still American citizens] have been held as "enemy combatants" and had their rights as American citizens summarily and arbitrarily revoked.) Whirlwind's coming, and we are certainly not a nation that learns from its past mistakes.

[mc mark]

N.M. GOP to Continue Asking for Pledge

By RICHARD BENKE, Associated Press Writer

RIO RANCHO, N.M. - Republicans in New Mexico say they will keep asking some people who want to attend Bush-Cheney campaign events to sign an endorsement pledge before receiving tickets.

"If we feel our event will get disrupted again, we will use the same method to make sure it's a positive event," Republican Party spokesman Yier Shi said Thursday, defining positive as "without interruption, without debate — just (without) disruption, period."

Notice the spelling and wording of the pledge. :)

Shi said the GOP campaign plans to correct errors and omissions in the pledge:

"I ... herby (sic) endorse George W. Bush for reelection of the United States."

Besides correcting the spelling of hereby, it will make clear what office Bush is running for, Shi said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1963&e=18&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_el_pr/loyalty_oath_2&sid=96378798

[Rocketman95]

They don't love America. They clearly believe that they're the President and Vice-President of those who support them, not of everyone.

[rimrocker]

The rimrocker family is going to see Kerry and Edwards in Las Vegas, NM on Saturday. We'll go do a short hike in the beautiful Santa Fe National Forest and wind up in Little Vegas in time for the 5 pm speeches. All we had to do was go by local Dem offices and ask for tickets. We didn't know the people working and they didn't know us. Still, they didn't require ID or some silly pledge. We just got the tickets. I'll report on the security and stuff when we get back.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by rimrocker
All we had to do was go by local Dem offices and ask for tickets. We didn't know the people working and they didn't know us. Still, they didn't require ID or some silly pledge. We just got the tickets. I'll report on the security and stuff when we get back.
Is it possible that this is because the opponents of Kerry/Edwards are offering no more disruption than clapping together a pair of rubber thongs?

There's disruption and then there's Disruption.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by giddyup
Is it possible that this is because the opponents of Kerry/Edwards are offering no more disruption than clapping together a pair of rubber thongs?

There's disruption and then there's Disruption.

Yeah, wearing a T shirt is really disrupting.

[mc mark]

And they're doing a lot more than "clapping together a pair of rubber thongs." More power to em!

-----

Kerry campaign train gets whistles at stop

SEDALIA, United States (AFP) - Democratic presidential contender John Kerry and running mate John Edwards ran into a group of Republicans whose whistles and shouts drowned out a cheering crowd of supporters when their "Believe in America" train made a brief stop here overnight.

With signs proclaiming "Four more years" and "Flush the Johns", supporters of President George W. Bush in the November 2 elections were seen and heard above several hundred "Kerry-Edwards" followers at the station, as the Democratic hopefuls and their wives appeared at the rear of the train.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1506&ncid=696&e=5&u=/afp/20040806/ts_alt_afp/us_vote_kerry

[giddyup]

As I've stated before: there were people at those events who were also wearing T-shirts and they were NOT arrested. The problem was the T-shirt said "HATE BUSH" as I recall. That plus "trespassing."

I have no problem with anyone who disrupts a political event being removed from that event regardless of their party affiliation. Rallies are times of support. Every side deserves that opportunity.

[Rocketman95]

Yeah, Republicans are always so civil. Like when Victor Morales came to San Marcos in 1996 and he was greeted by the College Republicans (I know this because my roommate at the time was a member until this incident) to chants of "Go Home Dirty Spic". Nice, civil racists. Now t-shirt wearing...that's horrible.

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by giddyup
Is it possible that this is because the opponents of Kerry/Edwards are offering no more disruption than clapping together a pair of rubber thongs?

There's disruption and then there's Disruption.

No.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Rocketman95
Yeah, Republicans are always so civil. Like when Victor Morales came to San Marcos in 1996 and he was greeted by the College Republicans (I know this because my roommate at the time was a member until this incident) to chants of "Go Home Dirty Spic". Nice, civil racists. Now t-shirt wearing...that's horrible.
I never said that all Republicans were civil. I stated that if they weren't, their disruptions should be likewise shut down. I'm not familiar with the event you talk about but you have just tried to taint all Republicans because of the acts of one or a few. Also, don't forget that that was a bunch of college kids-- who are very prone to doing stupid stuff.

Again, you keep ignoring the HATE message on the T-shirt. That plus the fact that they apparently "trespassed" is the reason they were detained not that they were wearing T-shirts.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by rimrocker
No.
On what basis do you say that?

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by giddyup

Again, you keep ignoring the HATE message on the T-shirt.

I thought Republicans were against political correctness.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by rimrocker
I thought Republicans were against political correctness.
They are, but it's another thing to show up at a presidential event with such a targeted hateful message. You have to admit that, don't you?

I saw three hate T-shirts yesterday and those folks were tromping around with impunity.

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by giddyup
On what basis do you say that?

Because you set up a false dichotomy in your original post. There is a troupe of Repubs who will follow Kerry and Edwards around from now until Nov. 2 and do what they can to disrupt things and try to get the candidates to react in a way that looks uncool when the soundbite is played. Recently, some young Repubs blasted airhorns everytime Kerry tried to talk. The local constabulary took care of it after a while, but this is the Junior High kind of stuff that will be with us for the duration. A little beyond just waving flip-flops.

Dems don't like exclusionary policies regardless of who's being excluded and we don't like loyalty oaths and we think that all citizens should be able to participate in all aspects of civic life. Hence, drop by your local NM Dem office wearing your "W '04" button with a Bush-Cheney bumper sticker plastered across your forehead and you'll get a ticket to go see Kerry and Edwards. If the opposite were to occur, there'd be no way I'd get into a Bush rally. That's one of the big philosophical differences in this election.

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by giddyup
They are, but it's another thing to show up at a presidential event with such a targeted hateful message. You have to admit that, don't you?

I saw three hate T-shirts yesterday and those folks were tromping around with impunity.

No, I don't have to admit that. The President is the penultimate public figure in this country and as such can expect to have people that love him and people that can't stand him. If you can't deal with that, maybe you ought not to be President because regardless of what people may think of you, you still have to be their President too.

I'm glad people were walking around with impunity because I would greatly fear for this country if they were not. It's a thing called free speech, which is a little-known add-on to the Constitution.

And by the way, I don't seem to remeber such an outcry from the right when Clinton was President and all sorts of bumper stickers and t-shirts pushing Clinton hate were in vogue. (Neither do I remember the left saying there shouldn't be such things.) I suspect that if Clinton had tried some of the tactics B-C use, the reaction from the right would have been mighty.

[giddyup]

<b>Originally posted by rimrocker

No, I don't have to admit that. The President is the penultimate public figure in this country and as such can expect to have people that love him and people that can't stand him. If you can't deal with that, maybe you ought not to be President because regardless of what people may think of you, you still have to be their President too.</b>

Who is the ultimate public figure in this country? Is it still Clinton?
I'm sure Bush knows that he has Americans who are not fans. I believe these actions are undertaken by the people charged with protecting the president regardless of who is the president. I hear he's a big fan of the Will Farrell impersonations. Isn't that dealing with it?

<b>I'm glad people were walking around with impunity because I would greatly fear for this country if they were not. It's a thing called free speech, which is a little-known add-on to the Constitution. </b>

You can still thank Bush for that. Free Speech does not also Guarantee Audience.

<b>And by the way, I don't seem to remeber such an outcry from the right when Clinton was President and all sorts of bumper stickers and t-shirts pushing Clinton hate were in vogue. (Neither do I remember the left saying there shouldn't be such things.) I suspect that if Clinton had tried some of the tactics B-C use, the reaction from the right would have been mighty.</b>

You keep trying to overlook some important differences. The secret service is not going around arresting everyone across the land who has a HATE BUSH t-shirt. They arrested these two folks for trespassing in the vicinity of the president with these HATE BUSH t-shirts. It's also a security thing in this time of threat and war-- no matter how dumb you think that is.

[Chump]

Originally posted by giddyup
<b>Originally posted by rimrocker

They arrested these two folks for trespassing in the vicinity of the president with these HATE BUSH t-shirts. It's also a security thing in this time of threat and war-- no matter how dumb you think that is.


explain this to me

person A, sitting listening to Bush speech quietly with a Pro-Bush shirt

person B, sitting listening to Bush speech quietly with anti-Bush shirt

person B is arrested and charged with tresspassing

what is different? the t-shirt.

how can you defend these actions? seriously, how can you not be outraged? fundamental liberties are being taken away from good, honest Americans everyday!

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Chump
explain this to me

person A, sitting listening to Bush speech quietly with a Pro-Bush shirt

person B, sitting listening to Bush speech quietly with anti-Bush shirt

person B is arrested and charged with tresspassing

what is different? the t-shirt.

how can you defend these actions? seriously, how can you not be outraged? fundamental liberties are being taken away from good, honest Americans everyday!
The problem these people experienced is two-fold: 1. Their t-shirt said "HATE BUSH." It wasn't just an antii-Bush t-shirt.

2. As I recall, the left the Free Speech Zone to try and be disruptive to the event.

Are you all really that interested in protecting hate-speech? How about a little civility. There are also security issues that the Secret Service is responsible for.

[rimrocker]

Giddy, I think we are two souls who will never quite get in synch.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by rimrocker
Giddy, I think we are two souls who will never quite get in synch.

ya think?? :D

[mc mark]

giddy the T shirt said "Love America, Hate Bush." Don't you think that sentiment is a little different than if it just said "Hate Bush"?

[bnb]

Originally posted by giddyup
How about a little civility. There are also security issues that the Secret Service is responsible for.

it's an interesting balance between civility and civil liberties. At some point even the Bushies should be allowed to have their pep rallies without constant protest -- yet -- we SHOULD be allowed to protest.

My impression, however, is that the Bushies do trample civil liberties with abandon. And the whole - what race? bit was offensive. So i'll side with the haters here!

Though i much prefer protests that involve the removal of clothes by pretty women.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by rimrocker
Giddy, I think we are two souls who will never quite get in synch.
This proves the thesis in my LIBERALS vs. CONSERVATIVES thread. Thank you.

I see no such problem with our souls or any human relationship we might potentially encounter (neighbors, friend, etc.) This is too bad-- coming from you not from me I want to reiterate.

I have several friends who make you look moderate, yet you make such a conclusion based on scant evidence. I would never make such a decision based on such flimsy and/or meaningless evidence.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by mc mark
giddy the T shirt said "Love America, Hate Bush." Don't you think that sentiment is a little different than if it just said "Hate Bush"?
Thanks for the reminder. It is a tad softer, but if I am in charge of protecting the president, it doesn't matter much.

[Chump]

Originally posted by giddyup
Are you all really that interested in protecting hate-speech? How about a little civility. There are also security issues that the Secret Service is responsible for.


Yes, I am VERY interesting in protecting hate-speech, love-speech, crazy-speech , any speech!

[mc mark]

http://www362.pair.com/luckypig/A004.jpg

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Chump
Yes, I am VERY interesting in protecting hate-speech, love-speech, crazy-speech , any speech!
Why are you still here then? People have been banned from this place for much less serious offenses....

I await your reply.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by MadMax
ya think?? :D
I certainly don't. See my reply above.

Now who is promoting this Two Americas idea: me or rimrocker?

[Chump]

Originally posted by giddyup
Why are you still here then? People have been banned from this place for much less serious offenses....

I await your reply.


:confused:

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by giddyup
This proves the thesis in my LIBERALS vs. CONSERVATIVES thread. Thank you.

I see no such problem with our souls or any human relationship we might potentially encounter (neighbors, friend, etc.) This is too bad-- coming from you not from me I want to reiterate.

I have several friends who make you look moderate, yet you make such a conclusion based on scant evidence. I would never make such a decision based on such flimsy and/or meaningless evidence.

I said that because I can never really figure out exactly what you're talking about... it has nothing to do with our political philosophy...

[giddyup]

Originally posted by rimrocker
I said that because I can never really figure out exactly what you're talking about... it has nothing to do with our political philosophy...
Pshaw! Don't hit anything if you back-pedal too quickly! ;)

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Chump
:confused:
This question will make a helluva thread, don't you think? You want to do it or shall I?

[Chump]

Originally posted by giddyup
This question will make a helluva thread, don't you think? You want to do it or shall I?

What did you mean by


Why are you still here then? People have been banned from this place for much less serious offenses....



maybe I am just being dense and not seeing the relation to my reply and this post, this BBS is a private entity and the owners can ban or censor any speech they wish, that is entirely seperate from the topic at hand...or was this directed personally at me for something I said?

I believe that the best test we have on how well we have freedom of speech is how well we protect speech we don't like or agree with

making people swear oaths and arresting people who wear shirts that disagree with you I think crosses the line

as for starting a new thread, isn't this thread already dealing with this issue what the 'line' should be?

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Chump
What did you mean by
Clutch and his admins occsioinally curtail "free speech" by banning someone. If that is so egregious, is it not inconsistent for you to continue to patronize this place and I certainly want to see your contribution records! :D

[Chump]

Originally posted by giddyup
Clutch and his admins occsioinally curtail "free speech" by banning someone. If that is so egregious, is it not inconsistent for you to continue to patronize this place and I certainly want to see your contribution records! :D

i think you put too much of whiskey in your coffee this morning

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Chump
i think you put too much of whiskey in your coffee this morning
Why don't you just try answering the question. Is it hypocrisy for a free-speecher such as yourself to keep showing up here where free speech is occasionally squelched.

[Chump]

Originally posted by giddyup
Why don't you just try answering the question. Is it hypocrisy for a free-speecher such as yourself to keep showing up here where free speech is occasionally squelched.

I have no expectation of free speech here since it is a private BBS

The couple was arrested at a July 4th "Presidential Appearance" not a political rally or speech -no tickets were issued

the police and secret service had ZERO right to arrest someone for just wearing an anti-bush t-shirt

the city council of Charleston says you are wrong

""If Nicole and Jeff Rank did nothing other than peaceably exercise their right of free speech and expression as guaranteed by our Constitutions, they should not have been arrested or charged with a crime," the resolution states."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/20/protest.apology.ap/

by continuing this argument, I take it you are in favor or limiting free speech to only speech you agree with then?

[bnb]

i don't think Clutch cares what you wear when you attend his site.

Though he would probably prefer not to know...

[giddyup]

I notice that that resolution is conditionally prefaced by a Big If. What was the story? What happened to the trespassing charges? Were they really arrested for wearing a t-shirt or was it just a comlicating factor of their trespassing?

I'm surprised that you have no expectaton of free speech here.

[rimrocker]

Rethugs against "hope." Great.
_______________

Kerry, Edwards Swap One-Liners with Hecklers

Fri Aug 6, 4:11 AM ET


SEDALIA, Mo. (Reuters) - From the platform of the same train car from which U.S. President Harry Truman gave Republicans "hell" in 1948, John Kerry (news - web sites) and John Edwards (news - web sites) caught fresh jeers.

"Four more years," chanted dozens of backers of President Bush (news - web sites) as the Democratic ticket emerged from their train late on Thursday and waved to hundreds of supporters.

"Flush the Johns," one man shouted.

Fans of presidential nominee Kerry and running mate Edwards outnumbered taunters, yet the scene was reminiscent of a rowdy hockey crowd.

As Bush backers again chanted, "Four more years," Kerry drew cheers by predicting the end of the Bush presidency on election day. "Let them chant because they have only three more months to chant," Kerry said.

"Harry Truman came through here in 1948," Kerry said. "And when Harry was talking, people would say, 'Give 'em hell Harry,' and Harry would say, 'I just tell them the truth and they think it's hell."'

Edwards maintained a smile but at one point asked: "I just want to say to those folks who don't want to hear from us: My children are on this train. Show them some good Missouri manners."

As the train pulled away, Edwards gushed: "That was great. That was fun. When they were booing 'hope' and 'optimism,' I knew it was an interesting crowd."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&u=/nm/20040806/pl_nm/campaign_kerry_rowdy_dc_5&printer=1

[rimrocker]

...

Still, the openly skeptical laughter that greeted some of his answers to their questions was a stark contrast to the fawning crowds Bush usually faces on the campaign trail.

A lone heckler was escorted out of the hall by security after interrupting the president's opening speech with shouts of "Shame on you, Mr. Bush!" and calling him a liar.

...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040806/pl_nm/campaign_bush_dc&ncid=2043

[mc mark]

He also said this in the article.

He added: "This is a dangerous time. I wish it wasn't this way. Now, I wish I wasn't the war president. Who in the heck wants to be a war president?"

FLIP FLOPPER!!!

:D

But to be fair, Jr finally faced a skeptical crowd. Good for him