Three People Ejected from Presidents Denver Appearance Due to Bumper Sticker.

Admiral Ackbar

CAGiversary!
Feedback
25 (100%)
From Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post.

"It is flatly un-American for people to be hauled out of a public event with the president of the United States because of, say, a political bumper sticker on their car.

"But is it too much to ask the White House to say so?

"Apparently.

"The latest incident of audience screening at President Bush's public events is making quite a splash in the media today. Three people at a Bush event in Denver last week were told by a man dressed like a Secret Service agent that they were being ejected because someone spotted a 'No Blood for Oil' bumper sticker on their car in the parking lot."

"Press secretary Scott McClellan, in yesterday's press briefing, was asked about the incident.

"But rather than express any condemnation -- or remorse -- McClellan chose to make an assertion that is not supported by the facts: 'We welcome a diversity of views at the events,' he said.

"Later, McClellan told The Washington Post that it was neither the Secret Service nor a White House aide, but a volunteer who asked the three to leave 'out of concern they might try to disrupt the event.' The White House also blamed a volunteer for a similar incident in North Dakota last month.

"But the energetic screening of dissenters has become an established pattern for Bush events. It started during the campaign, when the events were private and paid for with campaign funds. And it continues to this day, even though the events are now paid for with taxpayer funds."
 
I'd like to know if it was public or private, it says public but a lot of times supposedly "public" events aren't public. Though, considering the amount of people who attempt to disrupt them, it's reasonable that they would try to get rid of them. Doesn't exactly fit with "freedom of speech", but it isn't unreasonable. Personally I would have waited until they became disruptive.
 
Freedom of speech has nothing to do with who gets to hang with the president or any politician for that matter.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Freedom of speech has nothing to do with who gets to hang with the president or any politician for that matter.[/QUOTE]

If it's public than what was done was illegal. If it was private then it was perfectly legal. If a politician is holding a poltical rally on the boston commons, then everyone has the right to be there.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Freedom of speech has nothing to do with who gets to hang with the president or any politician for that matter.[/QUOTE]

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with the Bush Administration.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']If it's public than what was done was illegal. If it was private then it was perfectly legal. If a politician is holding a poltical rally on the boston commons, then everyone has the right to be there.[/QUOTE]


Even the people that would try to kill the president.... :roll:
 
[quote name='David85']Even the people that would try to kill the president.... :roll:[/QUOTE]

It never said anything about someone trying to kill the President. Just because they have a "No Blood for Oil" sticker on their car doesn't mean they came to assassinate the President. They shouldn't have been kicked out until they did something.
 
[quote name='PapiChullo']It never said anything about someone trying to kill the President. Just because they have a "No Blood for Oil" sticker on their car doesn't mean they came to assassinate the President. They shouldn't have been kicked out until they did something.[/QUOTE]


But say they were going to kill him they shouldn't do something until he's dead?
 
[quote name='David85']But say they were going to kill him they shouldn't do something until he's dead?[/QUOTE]

There's a big difference between preventing a serious crime you know for a fact is imminently going to occur and harrassing people for having a bumper sticker.
 
[quote name='David85']But say they were going to kill him they shouldn't do something until he's dead?[/QUOTE]

Talk about coming out of left field. That would work well
"we arrested this guy cause someone told us he didn't like the president"
"why"
"well, only people who don't like the president would try to kill the president, so we thought he might be dangerous"
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Freedom of speech has nothing to do with who gets to hang with the president or any politician for that matter.[/QUOTE]

Let us save this quote for when a democrat or libertarian is president and does the same. This story first broke in North Dakota and didn't play well in this 'red' state.
 
This is sad. We all knew Bush couldn't handle a regular debate. And now despite the Secret Service entourage, he's apparently afraid of even being heckled.

This shows how flimsy his policies are. They can't stand up to the smallest public scrutiny.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']This is sad. We all knew Bush couldn't handle a regular debate. And now despite the Secret Service entourage, he's apparently afraid of even being heckled.

This shows how flimsy his policies are. They can't stand up to the smallest public scrutiny.[/QUOTE]


It means he's strong, and refuses to take any guff from the uninformed. He's very strong in his oppinions, and he's not afraid to show it. He's a Texan, after all.
 
[quote name='evilmax17']
It means he's strong, and refuses to take any guff from the uninformed. He's very strong in his oppinions, and he's not afraid to show it. He's a Texan, after all.
[/QUOTE]

It's the Presidential equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and going "La La La La! I can't hear you!"
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']It's the Presidential equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and going "La La La La! I can't hear you!"[/QUOTE]

Why do I not have a hard time visualizing this?
 
The fact is every president has always picked and choosed the people he allowed around him, but because it's Bush it suddenly a big deal and a violation of rights. :roll:
 
[quote name='Scrubking']The fact is every president has always picked and choosed the people he allowed around him, but because it's Bush it suddenly a big deal and a violation of rights. :roll:[/QUOTE]

Would you care to back that claim up with some evidence that Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan or Carter had people barred from a Presidential speech (not a campaign rally) for something as trivial as a bumper sticker that opposed the President?
 
I'm sure that if you liberals go back and microanalyze past presidents like you obsessively microanalyze Bush you would find similar instances.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']I'm sure that if you liberals go back and microanalyze past presidents like you obsessively microanalyze Bush you would find similar instances.[/QUOTE]

Funny, I don't remember too many presidents who used the tactics of "Big Brother" as a model for maintaining power.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']I'm sure that if you liberals go back and microanalyze past presidents like you obsessively microanalyze Bush you would find similar instances.[/QUOTE]

I'll file that under "Things Scubking Pulled Out of His Ass"
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']I'll file that under "Things Scubking Pulled Out of His Ass"[/QUOTE]

I love how you people go nuts when faced with the truth of your actions.
 
Since these stops are paid with taxpayer money, these events are not private and Bush has no right to eject anyone unless they are disruptive. If he wants to only allow supporters in let him pay for it himself.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']I love how you people go nuts when faced with the truth of your actions.[/QUOTE]

No, we just comment on the ignorance and idiocy of your postings.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']I love how you people go nuts when faced with the truth of your actions.[/QUOTE]

Again, I have to ask, "What truth?" You haven't provided any facts just your wild speculation that all Presidents trample on the Bill of Rights like Dubya does.

Please keep up your feeble attacks. I'm amused.
 
[quote name='ZarathosNY']No, we just comment on the ignorance and idiocy of your postings.[/QUOTE]

Seeing how your definiton of ignorance and idiocy is anything mildly conservative it doesn't really mean shit.
 
Was it a violation of rights to kick the guy out? Probably not.

Was it indicative of the President unwilling to allow any discension? Definetly.

Did Scrubking's comment come from his nether region? You better believe it.

Will he admit it? Never, everything he says is fact... Hmmm, maybe Scrubking is actually Bush? I mean we don't really know who anybody is on here...
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Seeing how your definiton of ignorance and idiocy is anything mildly conservative it doesn't really mean shit.[/QUOTE]


Thanks. You just proved my point :)
 
bread's done
Back
Top