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.
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
Quite a different scene at an Edwards rally this morning! 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.
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.
In this election, I want Kerry/Edwards to get the Caddy, Nader to get the steak knives, and Bush/Cheney to get third prize. 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.
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. .
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.
<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?!
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?
