Stupid Protestors

Here’s a stupid media story. Since it has to do with Clinton and not Bush, I think both sides can relate. Bill Clinton gave a speech. Two students made rude comments. The headline talks about the hecklers. Why do we give so much play to such … people. Protesting is good only to the extent that the protestors are right. Most of the time they are just making noise.

People came to hear the former president of the United States, not a couple of clowns you could find hanging around any Seven-Eleven. 1800 cheered. Two shouted. A little perspective would be good when reporting such things.

Posted by Jack at March 6, 2006 11:04 PM
Comments
Comment #131760

Jack-

What do you expect? Good manners, civility, reasoned argument? In today’s society that has forgotten what disagreement is all about? The only thing that suprises me is that they were actually taken out. I don’t know much about the politics of the school where Clinton was speaking, but, if it is typical, it would probably be one where any viewpoint except conservative would be welcome.

However, since the 1800 students cheered, obviously the protestors were in the minority.

BTW, I agree with Clinton on the port issue.

Posted by: John Back at March 6, 2006 11:22 PM
Comment #131764

It is telling that Democrats would allow two protesters to heckle. As opposed to Republicans who have squads posing as Secret Service Agents checking cars for anti-Bush Stickers and forcing people to leave government-funded events for wearing a Kerry Pin.

Posted by: Aldous at March 6, 2006 11:36 PM
Comment #131772

The protesters were immediatley taken and escorted out of the speech. They didn’t even get a chance to throw a pie.

Posted by: andy at March 6, 2006 11:50 PM
Comment #131781

They were removed AFTER they did something. Since when does a sticker on your car outside justify removal?

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 12:10 AM
Comment #131782

andy
To bad, that would have been funny, see Clinton with pie on his face. He has egg all over it, a pie might have been a good change.

Seriously, folks today would rather call someone an ignorant fool than to say I disagree and then explain why in a civil manner. Reckon it has something to do with the delcine in morales and respect for others.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 7, 2006 12:11 AM
Comment #131783

Aldous
I’m calling your bluff.
Prove that Kerry folks were not allowed in where Bush was speaking.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 7, 2006 12:12 AM
Comment #131784

Different person, but same subject. Protestors, or hecklers. I’m talking about Cindy Sheehan.
Just a question, is it true her son, which she is upset about, actually had not been with his mom since he was seven? I don’t know if that is true or not. I read it from a respectible newsletter. That she lost total custody of him at 7, and he lived with his father until he joined the service.
If this is true, I just think it needs to be put out there. It is just a little hypocritical. I’m not saying she loves him less, but it’s the impression of a very close family that apparantly wasn’t there.

Posted by: Linda Reeves at March 7, 2006 12:13 AM
Comment #131792

I particulary liked the story of the Veteran getting booted out of a Bush Event… paid for by public funds too…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10420-2005Apr22.html

________________________________________________
We are Denver residents who were kicked out of the President’s Town Hall Conversation on privatizing social security on March 21, 2005. We’ve created this site to provide resources and information about this important issue.
Why did this happen to us? It’s not that we weren’t invited, we all had tickets to the event. No, the reason this mystery man and his cohorts physically removed us was because of the bumper sticker on the car we drove in. Shocked? Outraged? Afraid that this is happening in America? All Americans value Free Speech and should be appalled by this.

The White House insists that a “volunteer” is at fault, but the Secret Service has revealed that the person who kicked us out in Denver was an official “host committee staffer.” Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez (who gave us our tickets) also said that “the White House does the deal. They literally come in and take over.”

When eerily similar incidents occur in Colorado, Arizona, and North Dakota, citizens can only wonder – is this a coincidence? Or is there a concerted effort by someone to train event staffers at President Bush’s taxpayer-funded events to screen people based on their viewpoints and exclude them in clear violation of the First Amendment?

Thanks for visiting the site and supporting First Amendment Rights.

Alex & Leslie.
__________________________________________________

On July 4, Jeff and Nicole Rank went to hear George W. Bush speak in Charleston, West Virginia. Tickets in hand, they found seats ten or 15 rows from the stage. There they sat, quietly, wearing t-shirts that read love America, hate bush and regime change starts at home. Forty-five minutes before the president took the podium, event staffers approached the couple and said, “You need to either take those shirts off or leave.” According to The San Antonio Express-News, Jeff Rank replied, “People around us have Bush-Cheney t-shirts, pro-Bush t-shirts. Why can’t we express our views?” The staffers left, but a few minutes later, two police officers arrived and told the couple to “cover up, take them [the t-shirts] off or leave completely.” The Ranks refused, at which point they were handcuffed, expelled from the event, and briefly thrown in prison. With the Ranks safely off the premises, Bush addressed the crowd, declaring that “on the Fourth of July, we confirm our love of freedom, the freedom for people to speak their minds, the freedom for people to worship as they so choose. Free thought and free expression, that’s what we believe.” Two days later, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Nicole Rank’s employer, told her that, as a result of the incident, she was being dismissed from her assignment in West Virginia.
__________________________________________________

DENVER, Nov. 21 - Two people who say they were ejected from a taxpayer-financed appearance by President Bush in March because of an antiwar bumper sticker filed a federal lawsuit here on Monday, charging that event staff members and federal employees broke the law.

The suit, filed in Federal District Court by lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union, could transform what had been a public-relations thorn for the Bush administration into a legal thicket. A.C.L.U. lawyers said they would pursue in particular the question of who gave orders to workers at the event, held March 21 at the Wings Over the Rockies Air and Space Museum in Denver.
__________________________________________________

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 12:48 AM
Comment #131793

http://www.unknownnews.org/0505170429AliceandChristine.html

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 12:51 AM
Comment #131797

queue the horror movie music

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 12:58 AM
Comment #131798

Very likely not in this case, but, often, the truthful voice is a very lonely voice in the beginnning. Our Constitution and forefathers recognized this and sought to protect the speech that may be first to speak the truth to power.

Are we not now so overpopulated, with so many dissenting voices, that to permit them all to speak at public gatherings would result in no one being heard, and the truth, if there is any to be spoke, lost in the din? Are we not now of necessity by our numbers, turning our backs on the principles of freedom and liberty which were the cornerstone principles of our great nation?

We are seeking to imprison whistleblowers, we now have public and private police to silence or eject dissenting voices at public gatherings, we are turning over our rights to privacy and freedom from government intrusion to administrations who tell us to be afraid and such intrusion is for our own safety. We are even now throwing journalists into prison for protecting some of the very channels through which the truth can be spoken without fear of government retribution. All these, and more are examples of a steady erosion of the shores that once defined a free America, a nation of liberty for all. America is becoming a very small place indeed in these modern times.

Democracy is a very messy and complex form of government when truly practiced. But, it is the one form of government that holds that all citizens are equal in the eyes of the law. When the law grants that some citizens are more equal than others, democracy remains in name and hollow facade only.

Posted by: David R. Remer at March 7, 2006 1:02 AM
Comment #131800

High School Students Threatened At Bush Campaign Event: “A Sniper” Could “Take Him Out”

John Sachs, an 18-year old high school senior went to see Bush in Clive, IA. Sachs got a ticket to the event from school and wanted to ask the president about whether there would be a draft, about the war in Iraq, Social Security and Medicare. At the event, a campaign staffer pulled Sachs aside and made him remove his button that read: ‘Bush-Cheney ‘04: Leave No Billionaire Behind.’ “The staffer quizzed him about whether he was a Bush supporter, asked him why he was there and what questions he would be asking the president. ‘Then he came back and said, ‘If you protest, it won’t be me taking you out. It will be a sniper,’ Sachs said. ‘He said it in such a serious tone it scared the crap out of me.’” [Des Moines Register, 10/16/04]

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 1:05 AM
Comment #131802

America is not actually a democracy. It’s a representative republic. Still though, I agree that all people should have a voice. If those people were to shout an idea that would be helpful to the country, that’s one thing. But to stand up and scream “War Criminal!!!” to a former POTUS warrants being yanked from the area.

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 1:07 AM
Comment #131803

Tim Walz, a 23 year National Guard veteran wanted to hear his commander-in-chief. He was allowed into the quarry event after the two young men he was escorting were told to leave the event because one of the young men had a Kerry sticker in his wallet. When Walz objected he was first told to leave as well. Then, a Bush official asked if he supported the President. When he said he did not, the Bush official told him he had to leave as well and he was threatened with arrest. When he informed the official that he had just returned from overseas, the official begrudgingly allowed him to stay with the admonition that the Secret Service would be watching him. [Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, 8/13/04]

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 1:08 AM
Comment #131804

A school teacher’s ticket is torn up and she is barred from entry into Bush event for wearing Kerry-Edwards sticker on blouse. “But Ralph Soffredine, a Traverse City commissioner, school board member and former police chief who worked security at the front gate, said it is part of the Bush campaign policy.” The fifty-five year old wanted the experience of seeing a president and hearing him speak, but instead left wondering this is truly a democracy. [Traverse City Record-Eagle, 8/17/04]

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 1:10 AM
Comment #131805

Are the republicans so sure of themselves that
they don’t forsee a time in the future when there
might be a Democratic president? Or are they so
drunk with power that they don’t care? Or are
they trying to ensure a time when there will
not be another possibility? What goes around
comes around.

Posted by: psjohn at March 7, 2006 1:11 AM
Comment #131806

Aldous,

So these kids didn’t have anti-Clinton bumper stickers or wear the pins. Even if I believed the kid who talked about the “sniper” threat(I don’t), he would have to know that a gun is not going to go off around a President just because some idiot heckles him.

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 1:12 AM
Comment #131807

Aldous and psjohn,

The reason the Dems don’t have to screen people at their events is because Republicans are above the idiocy of shouting people down. It’s always leftists who employ these childish tactics. Hillary Clinton never has to worry about right wingers heckling her, that’s a left-wing thing.

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 1:16 AM
Comment #131808

Duano:

I take it you also don’t believe that Veteran denied his seat or the Teachers or the Family of 3? I could keep posting this crap all night. There are so many of them its scary.

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 1:17 AM
Comment #131810

Duano:

Better read Jack’s original post. Those are REPUBLICANS heckling Clinton. Take note they got the chance to do it as opposed to a screening procedure on whether they were Clinton Supoorters or not.

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 1:20 AM
Comment #131821

“Protesting is good only to the extent that the protestors are right.”

First Amendment — Freedom of Speech is a very good thing.
Very Democratic and American.
Not stupid — but fearless and wise.
Which is exactly why it was/is the First.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 7, 2006 2:57 AM
Comment #131822

Aldous,
I didn’t see anything in the original post that said the protesters were Republicans, and it’s usually your college educated liberal pinheads that shout things like that, so I have to assume they were liberals, just like the jackasses that heckled Hillary a few months ago. The link Jack posted said the protesters identities were withheld, so where are you getting that they are Reps?

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 2:59 AM
Comment #131825

Aldous,

I double-checked the original post and the link and haven’t found the word “Republican” anywhere. If you can make that up how do I know you didn’t just make up your horror stories about people being thrown out of Bush events?

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 3:07 AM
Comment #131826

Duano:

Its called Google. I suggest you use it sometime. You can’t expect to depend on GOP Talking Point Memos 24/7. The Information is out there. Look for it.

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 3:36 AM
Comment #131828

Here is a fuller account as written in that rag, the washington post:

Three Were Told to Leave Bush Town Meeting

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 30, 2005; Page A04

Three Denver residents yesterday charged that they were forcibly removed from one of President Bush’s town meetings on Social Security because they displayed a bumper sticker on their car condemning the administration’s Middle East policies.

The three, all self-described progressives who oppose Bush’s Social Security plan, said an unidentified official at an event in Denver last week forced them to leave before the president started to speak, even though they had done nothing disruptive, said their attorney, Dan Recht.

Initially, the three believed Secret Service agents had grabbed them and ushered them out of the auditorium, Recht said. But he said that Lon Garner, the Secret Service agent in charge of the Denver office, told them the service investigated the matter and found it was a “Republican staffer” who removed them because they had a “No More Blood for Oil” bumper sticker on their car.

Garner said yesterday that he was told by headquarters not to comment on the matter, and referred calls to Washington.

Jim Mackin, a spokesman for the Secret Service here, said he could not discuss the allegations that a Republican staff member was involved. “We will continue to look into it,” he said. Mackin said a preliminary inquiry found that the Secret Service was not involved in the incident, which was first reported by the Associated Press.

Scott McClellan, Bush’s press secretary, said it was a volunteer who asked them to leave “out of concern they might try to disrupt the event.” He said the White House welcomes a variety of voices into events but discourages people from coming to heckle the president or disrupt town hall forums. “If someone is coming to try to disrupt it, then obviously that person would be asked to leave,” he said. “There is plenty of opportunity outside of the event to express their views.”

This is not the first time people have complained about heavy-handed monitoring of who can attend — and speak at — Bush’s events promoting his Social Security plan. A newspaper in Fargo, N.D., reported that when Bush came to the city on Feb. 3, more than 40 residents were barred from attending the event.

The president has held Social Security rallies in more than a dozen states this year. The crowds are closely monitored for possible disruptions, and protesters are quickly escorted away.

Protesters often stand out because the crowds are packed with Bush supporters, who have been invited by a local GOP House member or organization. Those onstage at most of the town hall meetings are carefully screened people from the area who agree with the president’s Social Security proposal. The participants typically rehearse what they will say with members of the president’s advance team and rarely, if ever, say anything critical about his plan for private accounts.

In this case, Alex Young, 25; Karen Bauer, 38; and Leslie Weise, 39, said they were forced out even though they said nothing and did not sport T-shirts or signs criticizing the president or his policies. Young told the Associated Press that the three wore T-shirts under their business attire that read “Stop the Lies” and had discussed exposing them during Bush’s visit, but decided not to. Recht, who is representing the three pro bono, said his clients consider themselves progressives.

The three were invited to the event by Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.). Jordan Stoick, spokesman for Beauprez, said the congressman’s office distributed the tickets at the behest of the White House to constituents, including many Democrats. He said Beauprez is “definitely” concerned about the charges but is declining to comment on whether he believes them to be true. “He strongly supports free speech,” Stoick said.

As described by Recht, a man in a blue suit told the three they had to leave and “in a physical, forcible way” escorted them out, refusing to explain why. Mackin said local law enforcement is in charge of policing civil disobedience at such events, although the Bush advance team is often seen asking disruptive people to leave.

“They believe their constitutional rights were violated, as do I, and that’s the stuff lawsuits are made of,” Recht said. “When you are punished by not being allowed to listen to your president speak because of speech you have on your bumper sticker, that is a classic First Amendment issue.” Recht said he has not decided whether to file a lawsuit

Posted by: Aldous at March 7, 2006 3:52 AM
Comment #131829

Aldous,

I googled it and still haven’t found anything that says the hecklers were Republicans. Nice try, though.

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 3:59 AM
Comment #131833

“Aldous and psjohn,

The reason the Dems don’t have to screen people at their events is because Republicans are above the idiocy of shouting people down. It’s always leftists who employ these childish tactics. Hillary Clinton never has to worry about right wingers heckling her, that’s a left-wing thing.

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 01:16 AM”


Trying stepping out of the ten foot sqaure in front of the televison or radio and try thinking with what brains you have left in a head not yet completely sucked dry by the rightwing cult machine.

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at March 7, 2006 5:51 AM
Comment #131834

expatUSA_Indonesia,

Nice logical, well thought out statement. Now I challenge you to find one, just one instance of right wingers shouting down a liberal speaker at a function. Heckling is not part of our repitoire, we tend to rely on rational thought and intelligent argument.

Posted by: Duano at March 7, 2006 6:16 AM
Comment #131835

Hmm, I wonder how many articles I can Google on how many anti-Clinton’ites were tossed out of HIS events?

Posted by: Tanya at March 7, 2006 6:18 AM
Comment #131837


‘It’s true because I can ‘Google’ it.’

Give me a break…

Posted by: bug at March 7, 2006 7:34 AM
Comment #131838

Speaking of protests, an Iranian in an SUV tried to run down students at UNC Chapel Hill with intent to kill. A group of Republicans there are protesting that the incident is not being treated as terrorism.

I assume this means we wont be hearing from Republicans how there have been no terrorist attacks on US soil since we took the fight to them.

Posted by: Schwamp at March 7, 2006 8:29 AM
Comment #131840

Duano,

Heckling is not part of our repitoire, we tend to rely on rational thought and intelligent argument.

You have obviously never walked or driven by an abortion clinic. Either that, or you just choose to ignore such examples. Here are a few more:

* I was a juror a few years ago on a disorderly conduct case where a bunch of right-wing religious folks were protesting/heckling at a Lutheran convention because the Lutherans were considering ordaining gay ministers.

* Gay pride parades get tons of hecklers and protesters.

* When I was at Purdue University, there was this religous zealot who stood on the lawn between buildings and yelled at people that they were going to hell for being immodestly dressed.

* I grew up in Speedway, Indiana, just a few blocks away from the Indy 500. Every year, as the “night-before” party raged in the streets, religious groups would gather to heckle the passers-by for their evil ways.

I haven’t found most religious zealots to be “college educated liberal pinheads”.

Posted by: Rob Cottrell at March 7, 2006 8:39 AM
Comment #131843

John Back,

Did I hear that President Clinton is representing the UAE and counciling them on how to get this agreement passed?

Also, that Senator Clinton did not know?

Not surprising…

Posted by: Cliff at March 7, 2006 9:01 AM
Comment #131845

Was one of them Reverend Phelps. (very religous) He is anti-gay full tilt reverend… He has been appearing at funerals for soldiers as well as dead miners in WV protesting gay people. Saying these people needed to die as punishment from god…

I am sure all you lefties right now are going typical right wing nut… WRONG!

He was actually invited to attend Clinton’s inauguration because of the support he showed Clinton. Ran for office as a democrat and is still this day a democrat… Look him up…

His group typically shows up at the events you listed. Are you sure it was a right wing nut or a delusional lefty man who sent followers to Iraq to protest the war. He thought Saddam was a great man as do some of you….

Posted by: Ron at March 7, 2006 9:21 AM
Comment #131846

“Are the republicans so sure of themselves that
they don’t forsee a time in the future when there
might be a Democratic president? Or are they so
drunk with power that they don’t care? Or are
they trying to ensure a time when there will
not be another possibility? What goes around
comes around.

Posted by: psjohn”

So very true PS.
But I must remind you that the Dems are guilty of the exact same thinking, especially during the 90s, and look where they are now.
What goes around HAS come around for the Dems.

Posted by: kctim at March 7, 2006 9:40 AM
Comment #131850

If I wanted to go and hear the President speak, I don’t think I would be wearing a t-shirt that was the sitting President…

People seem to forget that you should respect the office of the President of the United States even if you don’t repsect the man holding the office.

I’m sure that there are numerous incidents where people who are Republicans tried to get into a Clinton or Kerry event, only been told to leave by the Security personnel….

If you don’t like the President’s policies then send him a letter or contact your Congressman or Senator…Remember the greatest weapon you possess is the right to vote….

As for Cindy Sheehan, I think she has taken things way too far. I even read reports that she was pro-war until her boy was killed, then she snapped.

Maybe someone should have her sit down with some of the Iraqi women who have been repeatedly raped and tortured by Saddam’s regime. Make her look at the thousands of pictures of tortured and killed men, women and children in Iraq.

Posted by: Jim at March 7, 2006 10:02 AM
Comment #131853

Duano,

There is a danger of making “never” claims. Smart debaters know better.

http://wc.arizona.edu/papers/98/36/01_2.html

“Small groups in the crowd constantly heckled Moore during his speech, and he took it lightheartedly at first, using it as an opportunity to sarcastically respond to their political views, until it became so disruptive he told them directly to stop”

Posted by: Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout at March 7, 2006 10:28 AM
Comment #131857

I have to ask, if you are having a party, and it sounds like most of the events listed by Aldous were campaign stops (a party of sorts), and you had some obnoxious or potentially obnoxious folks in attendance, wouldn’t you kick them out of your party so the party atmosphere would be maintained? That is what it sounded like in most of the articles I read.

Posted by: SWMichiganBill at March 7, 2006 10:47 AM
Comment #131860

“until it became so disruptive he told them directly to stop”

Stop exercising their 1st Amendment rights?
I thought libs like moore believed in that?

Yet another example of liberal thinking:
Rights are to be cherished, as long as they agree with the liberal agenda.

Posted by: kctim at March 7, 2006 10:49 AM
Comment #131862

To hecklers in general and those that support them; When lacking in fact, proof, class or an alternate solution, just make noise and behave obnoxiously and you will win us all over to your point of view every time.

Posted by: scolex at March 7, 2006 10:52 AM
Comment #131872

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Oh, my God…I have tears running from my eyes.

My, how humble we have become…

Read the following about a protest…(emphasis mine)


(AP) Cindy Sheehan, who drew international attention when she camped outside President Bush’s ranch to protest the Iraq war, was arrested Monday along with three other women during a demonstration demanding the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

The march to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations by about a dozen
U.S. and Iraqi anti-war activists followed a news conference at U.N. headquarters

FOUR women arrested???

A DOZEN protestors???

WOW!!! WHAT A DEMONSTRATION!!! That must have backed up traffic for…INCHES!!!!

I guess that this just shows what happens when you stop being the “darling” of one political cause or another.

Where’s George Soros when you really need him?
Where’s all the MoveOn.org people to back her up?
Where’s Michael Moore and his camera?

No where to be found.

And Cindy Sheehan is dumped on the political trash heap…absolutely no political value any more.

Sad, actually.


Posted by: Jim T at March 7, 2006 11:13 AM
Comment #131874

“The reason the Dems don’t have to screen people at their events is because Republicans are above the idiocy of shouting people down. It’s always leftists who employ these childish tactics.”

“and it’s usually your college educated liberal pinheads that shout things like that, so I have to assume they were liberals,”

“Heckling is not part of our repitoire, we tend to rely on rational thought and intelligent argument.”

Meanwhile, the GOP has been hiring Ann (Man) Coulter to speak at their official fundraisers and numerous other events.
I guess if you pay an insane, college-educated Neocon pinhead a huge wad of cash to spew hatred, and heckle, and promote violence toward everyone on the left, that’s considered highly dignified, rational and intelligent.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 7, 2006 11:30 AM
Comment #131877

Jack,

Heckling and dissent has been around for millenia.

What has changed is our collective attitude that what we have to say is more important than what anyone else is saying.

kctim,

“But I must remind you that the Dems are guilty of the exact same thinking, especially during the 90s, and look where they are now.
What goes around HAS come around for the Dems.”

And, sooner or later it will come around again for the Republicans.
This attitude has been pushed by hacks like Hannity, and Limbaugh, and Savage, and Coulter, whose very existence depends on the polarity that they themselves helped create.

Have we become so arrogant in our messages that no dissention, including even silent protests, like wearing t-shirts, is allowed?

Posted by: Rocky at March 7, 2006 11:37 AM
Comment #131878

Can anyone tell me the last time a protest changed anything? Was it the civil rights era? I can’t remember.

Posted by: Tyler at March 7, 2006 11:39 AM
Comment #131886

No one should be promoting HATE anywhere. I for one am glad that Jeff and Nicole Rank were asked or forced to leave. You may not like what the president stands for or his policies but wearing a shirt that says you HATE him in as unAmerican as terrorism.

Posted by: Natallie at March 7, 2006 12:04 PM
Comment #131890

Natallie,

“You may not like what the president stands for or his policies but wearing a shirt that says you HATE him in as unAmerican as terrorism.”

Oh please!

Bush isn’t King yet.
You folks forget that he works for us, not the other way around. He has proved to be fallible, let’s not make him a God quite yet.

Posted by: Rocky at March 7, 2006 12:24 PM
Comment #131897

Meanwhile, the GOP has been hiring Ann (Man) Coulter to speak at their official fundraisers and numerous other events.
I guess if you pay an insane, college-educated Neocon pinhead a huge wad of cash to spew hatred, and heckle, and promote violence toward everyone on the left, that’s considered highly dignified, rational and intelligent.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 7, 2006 11:30 AM

I’m glad you said GOP and not Conservatives. There is a difference.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 7, 2006 12:44 PM
Comment #131915

Ron Brown:
“I’m glad you said GOP and not Conservatives. There is a difference.”

Huge difference Ron, huge. Like Night and Day, actually.
IMO, the Neocon’s ideologies are neither conservative or liberal — instead, they appear to be the very worst aspects that have come from both, but insanely magnified a gazillion times. While the good things which either liberals or conservatives are capable of: civility, respect, honesty, trustworthiness, reason and true principles, seem to be missing.

But to return to the article topic, I find that true Liberals and Conservatives tend to be able to have forthright conversations and even make a few jokes at the others expense without it always getting ugly and mean. And like grown-ups, we can manage not to constantly get our undies in a giant bundle over a little heckling, or t-shirt slogans, or bumper stickers, etc.
Instead, though we undoubtedly argue passionately with each other, we can still find a way to live and let live over our differences of opinion without wanting to constantly insult, harm, shout down, or totally silence each other.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 7, 2006 1:53 PM
Comment #131916

Jack,

Isn’t it hilarious that liberals complain about division of the country but when you try to make a valid … even a pro-Clinton point which both sides could easily support, you still get hammered. And who’s responsible for the division of the country again?? Which side has the activist ex-presidents? Which side plays politics to the Nth degree during wartime, even to the point of shaming our troops?


Aldous,

Yes, Bush has stifled all dissent. I haven’t seen a single word of anti-Bushisms either here on the internet, on polls, on print, on TV, or at universities, or anywhere.

P.S. My dog is launching for Mars using propulsion created by tail wags in about 10 seconds.

Bush even stifled dissent at his SOTU speech … of course he stifled support too … I’ll have to let you mull that one over.


Posted by: Ken Cooper at March 7, 2006 1:54 PM
Comment #131928

Duano:

Heckling is not part of our repitoire, we tend to rely on rational thought and intelligent argument.

Obviously. Just look at the facts:

At UC San Diego, a dozen or so College Republicans heckled Kerry’s speech, clapping their sandals together to symbolize the senator’s flip-flops on the issue. Kerry stopped his speech a few times to acknowledge them. “Because they are here and open-minded, they’re going to learn a lot today,” Kerry said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/03/30/state1829EST0131.DTL
BEGALA: Let me correct your history; 1993, I was with President Bill Clinton in that House chamber when he addressed a joint session of Congress. And Republicans heckled him when he cited Congressional Office Budget statistics about the deficit.

The difference was, Clinton was smart enough and clever enough to ad lib. And he turned to them. He said, well, let me tell you something, my fellow Republicans. And the whole place fell apart. The Republicans fell in love with him. And the president should have responded with a little charm, a little wit.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0502/03/cf.01.html

Seems like heckling’s only part of the repetoire employed by the GOP from colleges all the way up to congress. If it’s really not in the republican playbook, then I have to say, they sure aren’t above borrowing from the playbooks of others whenever it suits them.

Posted by: Jarandhel at March 7, 2006 3:00 PM
Comment #131930

“And, sooner or later it will come around again for the Republicans”

I agree Rocky. But do you think for one second that either side will learn anything from it? No way.
As soon as the left gets back in power, they will go back to thinking everything is peaches and cream and the right will start sounding like the left does today.

And as soon as the right gets their own version of sheehan, the left will crucify her.

Posted by: kctim at March 7, 2006 3:18 PM
Comment #131937

I want to refer anyone who is interested to Rep. John Conyer’s proposal to initiate a congressional investigation into whether Bush has committed impeachable offenses. Give your support to this proposed investigation. Regards

Posted by: Charles Ross at March 7, 2006 3:43 PM
Comment #131957

It is like watching a movie and have some clown talk loudly.

Some people give too much respect to protestors. It depends on what they are saying. Loud protests were the method of dicators.

In America, people have the the right to talk, but we have the right to ridicule them and eject them from private events. We also have no responsiblity to facilitate them.

Posted by: Jack at March 7, 2006 5:33 PM
Comment #131958

well looks like mr hugo chavez DICTATOR of venezuela is found a new friend ms cindy sheehan. you know mr chavez the man who has vowed to bring down the u.s. goverment, and by the way venezulla is the sole owner of citgo oil!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 5:34 PM
Comment #131959

If Conyers supports it, you know it will go nowhere. The man couldn’t pour pee out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.

Posted by: Jack at March 7, 2006 5:35 PM
Comment #131962

Is this the same Rep. Conyers who will face ethics probes of his own for misusing govt. reimbursed staff and whose wife has a minor anger issue in public bars?

Posted by: Scott at March 7, 2006 5:46 PM
Comment #131967

Jack: “If Conyers supports it, you know it will go nowhere. The man couldn’t pour pee out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.”

ROTFLMAO!!! OMG Jack…do you happen to live here in Michigan? We could have a great time chatting over coffee! It’s almost scary how much we think alike, you just happen to be MUCH better at writing it than I do! LOL

Posted by: Tanya at March 7, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #131970

or ms pelosi who while bashing the other side as the most corrupt that ever lived! took several trips paid by outsides sources to the amount of almost $20,000 dollars, while a independent firm crunched the numbers and found the dems took 3,466 paid junkets. while (too high) the reps took 2,660 paid junkets. that ms pelosi ? about the pot calling the kettle black?

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 6:07 PM
Comment #131976

Clinton should just have fake newscasts and townhalls filled only with pre-screened people who love him. Oh wait, he doesn’t have to do that. Four more years! If the Bush administration has shown anything it’s that we need this man back.

Posted by: Max at March 7, 2006 6:33 PM
Comment #131979

forgive me jack, tanya what kind of coffee? joke! dry humor! slapstick!!!!!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 6:51 PM
Comment #131980

MAX. think he is up to it these days?

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 6:55 PM
Comment #131981

“well looks like mr hugo chavez DICTATOR of venezuela”

The kind of dictator who gets elected?

“Election officials said 58 percent of Venezuelans voted Sunday to keep Chavez in office for the remaining two years of his term.”

Wow. If the President’s 51% is a mandate, obviously 58% is a dictatorship.

Posted by: Arr-squared at March 7, 2006 7:17 PM
Comment #131982

yea they voted the nazis in power in 1932 you also want to defend them?

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 7:44 PM
Comment #131983

“If Conyers supports it, you know it will go nowhere. The man couldn’t pour pee out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.”

:^) Neocon’s can’t stand Democrats like Conyers — the kind that are completely unafraid to stand up and speak out against them. They prefer the likes of Tom Delay, Randy Cunningham, Bill Frist, Bob Ney — you know those who have a more, shall we say… entrepreneurial spirit about their positions, and who are good soldiers who always march(ed) in lockstep with Bushco.

“Is this the same Rep. Conyers who will face ethics probes of his own for misusing govt. reimbursed staff and whose wife has a minor anger issue in public bars?”

Oh, you mean those allegations made by former employees who couldn’t cut it while working for him, and thus were let go? Yeah, they claimed that Conyers made them run errands they didn’t want to do. Horrible!!!
So much more outrageous than say, Santorum violating Senate rules to obtain his home mortgage.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 7, 2006 7:50 PM
Comment #131984

Guess so Arr-
Saddam got 99%!

I doubt Saddam had a mandate in 1979. Can’t find the actual voter tallies. -Google didn’t have it.

Anyone who believes Bush can become a dictator in our great nation has a screw loose.

Posted by: bug at March 7, 2006 7:54 PM
Comment #131986

oct 16 2002 saddam gets. 100% of the vote…….

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #131987

You sure Rodney? I thought it was 99% to show it was legit and wasn’t influenced in any way.???

Posted by: bug at March 7, 2006 8:09 PM
Comment #131990

Adrienne

There is a little dog called Rudy that is not afraid to bark and growl at me when I walk by his front door every day. He even stands up on his hind legs sometimes, shows his teeth and scratches the door. I would not own a dog like that, but if I did maybe I would call it Conyers.

Posted by: Jack at March 7, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #131992

bug it could have been! i took the info off the web and it was anywheres from %99to %100 i thought i would give saddam the benefit because of his GIANT EGO! also you did not want to step on his toe then!!!!!!!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 8:34 PM
Comment #131997

“yea they voted the nazis in power in 1932 you also want to defend them?”

Classic conservative goalpost-moving. “His [Chavez’] election was reported to have been free and fair by independent observing bodies such as the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Carter Centre.”

The US is a member of the OAS, which certified Chavez’ elections as free and fair. So obviously, he’s a dictator, cause the US stipulated that he was freely elected.

Do you guys even try?

Posted by: Arr-squared at March 7, 2006 8:50 PM
Comment #131999

Carter is a crackpot.

What was the other recent election he announced was fair and without fraud where they found ballot boxes with the votes still in them in the dump?

I’m sure you know the answer off the top of your head.

Posted by: bug at March 7, 2006 9:00 PM
Comment #132000

adrienne, randy got 8 years so deserved, pelosi and other dems got a little slap on the wrist. wrong is wrong i dont care what side your on both sides need to clean it up! i will agree on that

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 9:08 PM
Comment #132001

the same carter that used a funeral as a bully pulpit!! arr poeple change and chavez is a rat the nazi started out as the good guys also like a chicken in every pot the germans were starving. then what happend! come on you are a very smart guy why would support chavez over your own country?

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 9:17 PM
Comment #132002

arr lord chamberlain prime minister. said hitler was all right. he was a ass just like carter

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 9:29 PM
Comment #132003

bug i have to leave shut that smart mouth up thanks rodney

Posted by: rodney brown at March 7, 2006 9:34 PM
Comment #132005

Rodney,
May not be possible ….see ya!
Bug

Posted by: bug at March 7, 2006 9:54 PM
Comment #132017

Yes, Bush has stifled all dissent. I haven’t seen a single word of anti-Bushisms either here on the internet, on polls, on print, on TV, or at universities, or anywhere.

P.S. My dog is launching for Mars using propulsion created by tail wags in about 10 seconds.

Bush even stifled dissent at his SOTU speech … of course he stifled support too … I’ll have to let you mull that one over.


Posted by: Ken Cooper at March 7, 2006 01:54 PM

Go to the Blue side Ken. You’ll see all kinds of anti Bush talk.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 7, 2006 11:47 PM
Comment #132032

Jack:
“There is a little dog called Rudy that is not afraid to bark and growl at me when I walk by his front door every day. He even stands up on his hind legs sometimes, shows his teeth and scratches the door. I would not own a dog like that,”

Oh, I would. All dogs, just like humans, need to feel they have a purpose in life. Rudy is just being a good watchdog for his people, and since he sees you everyday, but never gets to meet you, he considers you an unknown menace to his official security detail. Incidentally, this is also why most dogs also tend to really despise the mailman — he or she comes to the door everyday, but never to visit. Very suspicious and threatening behavior from a dogs point of view.
Btw, don’t you know that little dogs can often be twice as protective and potentially vicious as bigger dogs? It’s the truth.
I used to have a little dog named Annie Lou — a Jack Russell Terrier/Beagle Mutt (super cute and smart) that I rescued from the Pound. Best watchdog I ever had. She used to scare the crap out of all the bigger dogs in the neighborhood with her outsized personality and assertiveness. She also did the same to any stranger she thought came too close to me or my husband, she was that fiercely protective of us.

“but if I did maybe I would call it Conyers.”

Oooh. That’s telling them Dems! I’m sure they’d be simply crushed.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 8, 2006 12:46 AM
Comment #132035

my neighbor left his jack russell in the garage one day to go to work. he came home that night the dog was in the back yard. he the dog ate and clawed his way through 2 inches of stucco and chicken wire! talk about tenacious!!!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 8, 2006 1:12 AM
Comment #132038

ie dont mess with JACK!!!!!!!!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 8, 2006 2:08 AM
Comment #132080

“Stop exercising their 1st Amendment rights?
I thought libs like moore believed in that?

Yet another example of liberal thinking:
Rights are to be cherished, as long as they agree with the liberal agenda.”

kctim, if you were smarter than a sack of wet mice, you’d know that the first amendment forbids the government to pass laws against free speech. How does Moore asking disruptive people to leave, passing laws against their right to speak? Or are you just saying that hecklers (in this case) have more of a right to be heard than Moore?

This is all a poorly crafted dodge anyway aimed at disrailing a rebuke against some dumbass who absurdly claimed republicans don’t heckle.

You can’t take the moral highground when you’re holding a shovel. Stay on task.

Posted by: Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout at March 8, 2006 9:55 AM
Comment #132088

“kctim, if you were smarter than a sack of wet mice, you’d know that the first amendment forbids the government to pass laws against free speech.”

reely/ id nevur thunk dat.

“How does Moore asking disruptive people to leave, passing laws against their right to speak?”

Lets see. moore says he believes in free speech. People exercise that right, but moore does not agree with what they are saying so he throws a fit and wants it to stop. So in essence, he is saying he believes in free speech, as long as it fits his liberal agenda.
I didn’t say he wanted the govt the pass laws to violate free speech. I said he only believes in free speech when he agrees with the message.

“Or are you just saying that hecklers (in this case) have more of a right to be heard than Moore?”

What was the latest whining done by the left concerning protesters? Oh, thats right, sheehan.
Does she have more of a right to be heard than the President of the United States? For some reason, I bet you think its different don’t you.

“You can’t take the moral highground when you’re holding a shovel”

I have no morals and I hold the shovel because I enjoy participating in debates over on the blue side of this blog.

“Stay on task”

OK! Yes ma’am.
Where’s the outrage from the left, you know, the champions of free speech, over these guys being silenced?

Posted by: kctim at March 8, 2006 10:22 AM
Comment #132090

Duano,

Right wingers are killing people in the name of defending the sanctity of life, creating prayer in school scenarios that EXCLUDE other kids ‘believing differently’, removing and excluding people for expressing contrary opinions using and law enforcement officials to accomplish these goals (aldous has done a magnificent job of backing this up with hard evidence!) …and say, most rediculously, that it is Dems who heckle? …perhaps you can see why? HOW ELSE TO EVEN TRY TO GET HEARD!

You also took a shot at “college educated liberal pinheads.” Such sentiment is part of the REALLY silly attack the right keeps making on the educated. It is much like the attacks on the legal profession that I have continually refuted and demonstrated to be the result of misguided paranoia. Please, don’t just take these shots. I’m not saying stop the shots, I also actually get a kick out sarcasm and enjoy it when I disprove anothers argument with a sarcastic tone, but in order to disprove ANYTHING you have to either offer new facts or new analysis. YOu only take the shots with NO back up. Aldous has backed up his point most admirably. GOOD ON YA, Aldous. Keep it up.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at March 8, 2006 10:26 AM
Comment #132135

Is there any evidence at all that Chavez has done any of the things Hitler or Hussein did?

You call him a dictator - please provide some evidence that he’s done anything dictatorial. Then we can look at it and talk about it.

I’m not “taking his side,” I’m just saying that, whatever he may be, a dictator does not appear to be one of them.

“bug i have to leave shut that smart mouth up thanks rodney”

Now that’s intelligent discourse. “Shut my smart mouth up.” For disagreeing with you and demonstrating that you’re wrong.

Go ahead and shut me up with another marginally-literate post, devoid of facts.

Posted by: Arr-squared at March 8, 2006 12:52 PM
Comment #132139

RGF
Right wingers are killing people in the name of defending the sanctity of life,

Wooooow there. Who’s been killed in the name of defending the sanctity of life? When did this start?
And who the hell are the ones in favor of killing innocent babies just so they don’t take the responsibility if their actions?


creating prayer in school scenarios that EXCLUDE other kids ‘believing differently’

As far s I’m concerned any student can pray to who ever they wish. Or not pray to who ever they wish.
I haven’t heard that any of the students that pray around the flag polls tell anyone they can’t join in.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 8, 2006 12:59 PM
Comment #132179

arr sorry about the poor choice off words. i think lately all of us have used some poor choice of words. i also dont think my post were illiterate and devoid of facts, if you do thats fine, someday i really hope that we can have a open talk about mr chavez or anything else we decide to talk about. but right now i think the atmosphere is very hot and all that leads to is a scenario of poor will and judgement. i once told rgf we dont agree all the time but i admire his compassion for his convictions and if i ever needed a counselor of law he would be my first choice. you might think this is a cop out i dont my opinion is that cooler heads need to prevail thank you rodney brown

Posted by: RODNEY BROWN at March 8, 2006 2:45 PM
Comment #132187

kctim, you said Moore was keeping the hecklers from exercising their first amendment rights by expelling them from one of his rallies. You directly referenced the Bill of Rights and accused Moore of violating it. You can’t pretend you didn’t say it.

But I honestly don’t think you have a grasp on what the first amendment is. It outlines what the government cannot legislate against. By definition, Moore cannot control anyone’s first amendment expression. If he held any public office or otherwise acted illegally by abusing local police to have them arrested, then yes, that could possibly be a first amendment violation. Neither of those things happened here.

Bush can. Bush’s removal of someone attending his rally for wearing a t-shirt he disagreed with is government control of expression. Moore, despite his huge ego, does not have that power (although you seem so willing to grant it to him). Had a protestor/heckler stood up, screamed at the president, hurling fists and threats, then most certainly they should be removed. Then it becomes a safety issue. No one disagrees with that.

Bush has the right and power to tell people to behave. He cannot tell them they have no right to attend based upon their beliefs. Private citizens can. The Supreme Court has upheld that dozens of time. How else do you think Boy Scouts can keep out gays?

This really isn’t that difficult to grasp.

Posted by: Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout at March 8, 2006 3:20 PM
Comment #132196

Yeah, Rodney, it’s a copout. Did anyone get hot regarding Chavez besides you and bug?

Posted by: Arr-squared at March 8, 2006 3:45 PM
Comment #132206

arr, ohy it hurts me

Posted by: RODNEY BROWN at March 8, 2006 4:28 PM
Comment #132234

Ah Sarah
It definetly is not hard to grasp at all.
Now we have Bush personally asking for the removal of sheehan. Whats going to be next? Him actually hitting her? Sheesh.
moore says he believes in freedom of speech, but yet he acts against those who practice it.
No, he doesn’t make laws to deny freedom of speech, duh. But if he truly was for it, he would allow those who disagree with him to have their say. He is a hypocritical liberal.

Personally, I think events have standards of conduct rules and the events have the right to do as they please.
If morons want to waste time heckling the sensitive moore, then they know they will get shut down.
If morons want to wear political attire to the Presidents speech, then they know they will be asked to leave.

Protestors ARE stupid. They don’t care about fairness, laws, rules or use common sense. All they want is a venue to get their message out.
What makes this so dumb is how they will bitch and whine when people on the other side do the same thing.

Posted by: kctim at March 8, 2006 6:07 PM
Comment #132240

kctim,

“No, he doesn’t make laws to deny freedom of speech, duh. But if he truly was for it, he would allow those who disagree with him to have their say. He is a hypocritical liberal.”

At what point does heckling become harassment and therefore denial of someone else’s freedom of speech?

I would think that too much has been made of this t-shirt thing, and I would see it as a silent protest. By removing her from the SOTU address, Sheehan’s 15 minutes are now up to an hour.

Posted by: Rocky at March 8, 2006 6:29 PM
Comment #132242

Ron Brown,

There have been a small number of actual murders of abortion doctors, threats to murder doctors and bombings of clinics in the last few years. The problem is not rampant yet, but the sentiment that supports it IS.

As for my prayer in school comment, it came from the underlying facts of the Santa Fe School district case in a little town south of Houston called Santa Fe, TX. The case went through many iterations in a rather stubborn and prolonged effort to get prayer time into the public school.
-They tried to vote in in, as though it was legally possible for the majority to vote out the constitutional rights of the minority.

-They tried different times during the day, but were always exclusive of the students they believed didn’t belong.

-They tried setting up different homeroom scenarios but were always catagorizing and separatign students.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at March 8, 2006 6:34 PM
Comment #132300

No one that is a true conservative would ever approve of murdering the murder doctors. They would never approve of the bombing of the murder mills either. Both are as wrong as murdering the unborn.
All I have to say about the Santa Fe School district is they’re wrong. It’s also wrong for a school district to ban anything that has to do with Christianity and allow other religious practises in the schools. An this has happened.
In fact the Philadelphia School System is being sued for that very thing right now.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 8, 2006 10:39 PM
Comment #132379

Rocky
“At what point does heckling become harassment and therefore denial of someone else’s freedom of speech?”

IMO, heckling is harassment. Neither sheehan or the two jokers here, were denied their 1st Amendment rights in any way. By showing up with the intention to disrupt the event, both sides were attempting to deny the respective speakers, their 1st Amend rights.
If the speaker is a supposed champion of 1st Amend rights and then prevent others from speaking their words, I believe they are being hypocritical.

As with many things Rocky, we are in agreement. You are just better at dealing with the label game and I, yet again, have fallen for it. Sheesh, when will I learn. Kind of just becomes meaningless babble doesn’t it.
Anyway, excellent points there my friend.

Posted by: kctim at March 9, 2006 9:29 AM
Comment #132428

It doesn’t matter whether a Republican OR a Democrat holds the office of President. It is a matter of protecting the President - the job of the Secret Service.

Posted by: Cathy at March 9, 2006 12:45 PM
Comment #132431

Cathy,

“It doesn’t matter whether a Republican OR a Democrat holds the office of President. It is a matter of protecting the President - the job of the Secret Service.”

By “protecting” the Presidentcy from protesters are we not creating an alternate reality where he doesn’t feel the need to answer his critics?

This is one of the most secretive Presidents in American history, and one that has forwarded “American” ambitions to the point that our motives are being questioned, not just at home, but around the world.

Bush knew the job was dangerous when he took it, and to stifle all protests to “protect” the President, only insulates him further from reality.

Posted by: Rocky at March 9, 2006 1:04 PM
Comment #132457

Dear Rocky,

You’re still looking at specific Presidents while I’m am discussing the “Presidency”. Anything or anyone who could pose a potential threat is removed from the President, or the President is removed from them. Unfortunately, we can no longer accept mere words as idle threats. Look at the 2 boys that were spouting off about killing everyone…if someone would have removed them, Columbine wouldn’t have happened.

Again, this “protection” I talk about is not setup by Bush anymore than it would setup by Clinton, Reagan or any other President. It IS a function of the Secret Service. I wouldn’t want their job…would you?

Regards,
Cathy

Posted by: Cathy at March 9, 2006 3:21 PM
Comment #132465

Dear Cathy,

I am also speaking about “The Presidentcy”. I am only being specific about Bush because he is the current resident of the White House.
In the last few decades as our government has become more and more secretive, the Presidents have become more and more insulated from those they serve, us.
This President, has told us that “he knows what he is doing”, when clearly that hasn’t always been the case.
Mr. Bush has been “protected” by the Secret Service, from the protesters, to the extent that no dissidents are allowed into anywhere he speaks, yet this same Secret Service allowed him to fly into one the worlds most dangerous places for an American President at this time, ie: Pakistan.

Don’t you find it ironic that the Secret Service is more afraid of the population of America, than it is of Pakistan?

Posted by: Rocky at March 9, 2006 3:49 PM
Comment #132469

Unfortunately Rocky, this is how the world has become since 9/11 - we can’t take anything for granted. Since the Secret Service has nothing to do with foreign nations, unless a member of our government is in that nation, we can’t fault them for Pakistan.

I guess we’ll have to see how we fair with the “next” President…

Posted by: cathy at March 9, 2006 4:04 PM
Comment #132489

Cathy,

“Unfortunately Rocky, this is how the world has become since 9/11 - we can’t take anything for granted.”

This is where we differ. I refuse to alter my life to live in fear of the unknown, and I refuse to spy on my neighbors.

There have always been bad guys just over the horizon. Sept, 11, (I refuse to use the acronym), just brought America into the real world.

Our government has been entirely too secretive, and as a result has been attempting to scare the bejeezus out of the populus with boogymen that are out to harm our way of life, because they “hate what we stand for”.

What a load of crap!

Protest is germane to American history. To stifle it, or to make it wrong is to go against all that is American.

Posted by: Rocky at March 9, 2006 5:00 PM
Comment #132503

Well, you’re getting pretty angry, Rocky. I think you’re using this issue to hang the hook on your real problem - George Bush/Republicans/Conservatives.

I choose not to argue; it’s not productive and just gives one a stomach ache. You have the right to your opinion and I still stand on mine.

I think this should close our conversation…

Posted by: Cathy at March 9, 2006 5:38 PM
Comment #132506

Cathy
Im not trying to speak for Rocky in any way, this is my opinion.
I believe you are mistaken about what his real problem is.
I think, come 08 and on, when the Dems take back the White House, Rocky will stay consistent.
I have went back and forth with him for 2, maybe 3 years now on here and have come to the opinion that it is more than party with him.
Again, just my opinion.

Posted by: kctim at March 9, 2006 5:52 PM
Comment #132511

kctim,

Thanks.

Cathy,

I’ve been around, and while I love my country, I don’t trust my government.
You’re right, I am entitled to my own opinion, as you are to yours.

“Well, you’re getting pretty angry, Rocky. I think you’re using this issue to hang the hook on your real problem - George Bush/Republicans/Conservatives.”

I wouldn’t have voted for Kerry or Gore either.

My real problem is that America, the country that was fathered by statesmen like Jefferson, Franklin, and Adams, has only bozos like Bush, or Kerry to vote for.
It doesn’t matter, Republican or Democrat, these parties seem only exist to put warm bodies into office, because they certainly don’t represent the American people.


Posted by: Rocky at March 9, 2006 6:11 PM
Comment #132587

My real problem is that America, the country that was fathered by statesmen like Jefferson, Franklin, and Adams, has only bozos like Bush, or Kerry to vote for.
It doesn’t matter, Republican or Democrat, these parties seem only exist to put warm bodies into office, because they certainly don’t represent the American people.


Posted by: Rocky at March 9, 2006 06:11 PM

The world must be coming to an end. I agree with Rocky on something.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 10, 2006 12:46 AM
Comment #132593

Ron,

“The world must be coming to an end. I agree with Rocky on something.”

You do realize that it is one of the signs of the apocalypse, right?

Posted by: Rocky at March 10, 2006 1:31 AM
Comment #132638

Hi Rocky & Ron,

Well, I came back anyway. My original point was the purpose of the Secret Service and the office of the Presidency, but it has escalated to a broader scale.

I voted for Bush, I believed in him…but even I agree that he has done some bizarre things. You know when Clinton was in office, I detested him for his lack of character & morals. But now that he’s a “civilian” again - he’s easier to swallow (absolutely no pun intended).

I, too, long for the days of gentlemen being gentlemen and the same with ladies. I’m quite tired of candidate’s distortion about their opponents. I come from Minnesota where a great statesmen, a Democrat, was our senator for many, many years - Hubert H Humphrey. He had his failings as do you & I, but he was so in touch with the people. Years ago, my little brother (age 8) caught the biggest fish in a fishing contest in our little town of 3000. HHH saw it in our little paper and sent my brother a handwritten not of congratulations - a rare thing for the Senators of today.

With all that said, I am very concerned about our future. Not only the leadership, but the trend of removing absolutes. What used to be wrong, now is right and vice-versa. There are signs of the end everyday…the bad weather patterns, floods, plagues, and the like.

The Bible states that these are but labor pains waiting for the huge Apocalypse to come. We need to be on the same page, despite our polictical or personal views. At the end, they just don’t matter…the only thing that matters is, “Are we in a right relationship with Christ”. Everything and everyone is temporary - a mere speck of dust in relation to eternity, yet we are so important to God that He knows the number of hairs on our head.

Yes, I agree things are aren’t great, but I am thankful for our country. As far as I know no one has been perfect for about 2000 years.

Thanks for listening,
Cathy

Posted by: Cathy at March 10, 2006 11:18 AM
Comment #132739

Spoiled brat repugs. should have kicked thier ass

Posted by: Mike Sackman at March 10, 2006 8:01 PM
Comment #132957

“Spoiled brat repugs. should have kicked thier ass”

Ah, highschool.
Instead of whining about what you “should” have done, why not try to figure out “why” you didn’t?
I know its hard to blame others for your problems when you do that, but it would be more constructive.

Posted by: kctim at March 12, 2006 11:42 AM
Comment #132968

Cathy,

“With all that said, I am very concerned about our future. Not only the leadership, but the trend of removing absolutes. What used to be wrong, now is right and vice-versa. There are signs of the end everyday…the bad weather patterns, floods, plagues, and the like.”

Sorry, I cannot concur with your theory of absolutes.

In the latter part of the last century, the U.S. supported a dizzying array of evil guys, to fight what was percieved as the “greater evil”. These bad guys were themselves on a sliding scale of evil, and we allowed these guys to persecute their populations in the name of world freedom from communism.

Well, the chickens have come home to roost, so to speak.
While America may not be directly responsible for the evil perpetrated on the populations of the Middle East, Africa, Latin and South America and Southeast Asia, we did, with a nod and a wink, allow this evil to happen, while supporting these regiemes.

So the question is, who is more evil, those that perpetrate the evil or those that look the other way and allow it to happen under the guise of freedom?

Posted by: Rocky at March 12, 2006 1:25 PM
Post a comment