kallend 2,146 #1 October 30, 2004 www.bend.com/news/ar_view%5E3Far_id%5E3D18712.htm... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #2 October 30, 2004 This one is pretty hard to argue, isn't it? Sad. Just.......sad.Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #3 October 30, 2004 And no similar events have occured at Democrats' events? You know you are Tuna and Gravity's exact mirror image- ...exactly the same from the other side.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #4 October 30, 2004 Sorry Kennedy - I'm try to be pretty fair about stuff...but this is out of control. Protestors have traditionally showed up at speech's in the past - on both sides of all issues. None of the offenders in this article did anything wrong. Speaking the word "No" from an ederly woman is criminal tresspassing??? Despite the invitation the RNC sent to her????? Women that had valid invitations to attend the rally were deemed obscene because they had shirts that reflected the rights in our consitution? How would you feel if someone with a pro-gun tshirt saying "Support Gun Ownership" were arrested or kicked out from a Kerry speech? But, it hasn't happened, has it? This is very sad, and indeed, very scarey that the staff of the POTUS would so easily tread on the rights to assembly and freedom of speech._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #5 October 30, 2004 QuoteThis is very sad, and indeed, very scarey that the staff of the POTUS would so easily tread on the rights to assembly and freedom of speech. Who's right to assemble? The Republicans or their protestors. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #6 October 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteThis is very sad, and indeed, very scarey that the staff of the POTUS would so easily tread on the rights to assembly and freedom of speech. Who's right to assemble? The Republicans or their protestors. Both. Just because someone in the audience may have disagreed on ONE point, doesn't mean they were not republicans that were going to vote for GW. However, strong arm, Nazi, aggressive like tactics may have changed their position._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #7 October 30, 2004 While I don't agree with people being tossed for simple t-shirts, you are blowing this so completely out of proportion that I'm laughing right now. QuoteSpeaking the word "No" from an ederly woman is criminal tresspassing??? No, but interupting a speech, being asked to leave, and refusing to do so does constitute criminal tresspass. You only have the right to assemble where you have a right to be. When the rally organizers asked her to leave, she lost her right to be there. This was not open to the public, so any resistance, even saying "no," is enough for a charge. QuoteWomen that had valid invitations to attend the rally were deemed obscene because they had shirts that reflected the rights in our consitution? The women had tickets, not invitations. These were not public assemblies. A group holding an event has the right to throw people out if they don't like something. I don't agree with it, but come on, don't bring up the bogeyman of encroaching on "freedom of speech and assembly." QuoteHow would you feel if someone with a pro-gun tshirt saying "Support Gun Ownership" were arrested or kicked out from a Kerry speech? But, it hasn't happened, has it? Someone with that shirt wouldn't be thrown out by Kerry because they wouldn't be admitted in the first place. Actually, I recall a story of Kerry security people not admitting a ticket holder because they saw his pistol license when he pulled out his ticket. The guy wasn't armed, was wearing the same clothes as everyone else, and was a Kerry supporter. Didn't matter to Kerry's goons though. News for you: neither candidate supports all your rights, and they certainly don't support naive, vastly expanded interpretations of them. Oh, and I was turned away from a Democratic fund-raiser because I was wearing an NRA t-shirt in MD four years ago. I found out that I didn't have to over pay for dinner and sit through his speech to find out what he thought of my rights. That doesn't mean he violated any of my rights. Keep it straight. ps - there's no "e" in scary, unless you speel it "sKerry." witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #8 October 30, 2004 QuoteWhile I don't agree with people being tossed for simple t-shirts, you are blowing this so completely out of proportion that I'm laughing right now. Quote I didn't blow anythin out of proportion. Arresting women for speaking their mind is blowing things out of propotion. An organizer of an event certainly has the right to not admit someone or kick them out. However, bringing up charges for said reasons is just a very sad thing. No where in the article did it mention that any of the women resisted being escorted out or causing a scene afterwards. Show me that they refused to leave once asked and then I will conceed this point to you. QuoteNews for you: neither candidate supports all your rights, and they certainly don't support naive, vastly expanded interpretations of them. You think I feel that either candidate represents me fully? Of course not. Ever since Regan started to villify "liberals" as Bush Sr was starting to run for office this country has borded on extreme partisian behaviors while on the stump. I'm more of a centrist than anything, and neither of these politicians are anywhere close to the center. We have the most liberal Senator and the most conservative, Christian President ever (his rallys even sound like a gospel revival now). Neither of those point of views are anywhere close to my opinions on life. QuoteThat doesn't mean he violated any of my rights. Keep it straight. I will repeat what I said above - that situation is OK because they are the organizer and they are allowed such things. True, you could have made a stink about it and been well within your rights, as long as you left when you were asked to. Quoteps - there's no "e" in scary, unless you speel it "sKerry." Thanks for the lesson. Name calling - its the one thing I've yet to understand about this election. I guess I could start cracking jokes on how Bush was a cheerleader, etc. Honestly, I'd prefer to stick with the issues and not hammer the same talking points into the ground day after day. Because of this mindset we have heard almost exclusivly about the war and economy from both of them. There are plenty more issues that need to be discussed, and one of the major ones (environment) has become an after thought. This entire election and the way both parties have behaved have added to the black eye we already had from the 2000 election._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites penniless 0 #9 October 30, 2004 QuoteAnd no similar events have occured at Democrats' events? You know you are Tuna and Gravity's exact mirror image- ...exactly the same from the other side. To the best of my knowledge (and I have checked) Kerry's rallies are open and Bush's are by invitation to the faithful. So Kerry is apparently open to hearing dissenting views and Bush is not. I am not aware that these schoolteachers had been disruptive in any way, just wearing tee-shirts who's message is pretty hard to disagree with unless you support a "1984" style government. It's interesting to see who immediately jumped in to defend Bush. Is there no limit to how much you will apologize for? Kennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Jib 0 #10 October 30, 2004 QuoteKennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? The part where the Left left out the Second Amendment. Besides, what does that phrase mean? As to Kerry's being open, I don't see many Republicans trying to disturb them. Can you say the same about the left? -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChasingBlueSky 0 #11 October 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteKennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? The part where the Left left out the Second Amendment. Besides, what does that phrase mean? As to Kerry's being open, I don't see many Republicans trying to disturb them. Can you say the same about the left? I don't see the left trying to remove freedom of speech. Therefore they wouldn't have anything to show up and protest about - because they would be allowed to protest!_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gemini 0 #12 October 30, 2004 I'm having a little trouble understanding what the fuss is about... Let's see, this is a private event with restricted access on private property paid for by a political organization and promoted as a rally for the organizations candidate. Were opposing political party members invited? Was dissent incouraged? Did the teachers (and other people at other events) tell the people issuing the tickets what they had planned? Did the teachers go there with the intent of raising a stink? Were the teachers republicans? It sounds to me like it was a private RNC event and they can invite or throw out anyone they want. If you come to my house and attempt to raise hell, I'm damn sure throwing you out. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Hell it's not even a "equal time" issue. If the Dems let protestors raise hell at their private events, it's their own fault. Other political parties don't have to follow their lead. Blue skies, Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,146 #13 October 30, 2004 QuoteI'm having a little trouble understanding what the fuss is about... Let's see, this is a private event with restricted access on private property paid for by a political organization and promoted as a rally for the organizations candidate. Were opposing political party members invited? Was dissent incouraged? Did the teachers (and other people at other events) tell the people issuing the tickets what they had planned? Did the teachers go there with the intent of raising a stink? Were the teachers republicans? It sounds to me like it was a private RNC event and they can invite or throw out anyone they want. If you come to my house and attempt to raise hell, I'm damn sure throwing you out. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Hell it's not even a "equal time" issue. If the Dems let protestors raise hell at their private events, it's their own fault. Other political parties don't have to follow their lead. Let's see what the article said: "Three Medford school teachers were threatened with arrest and escorted from the event after they showed up wearing T-shirts with the slogan "Protect our civil liberties." All three said they applied for and received valid tickets from Republican headquarters in Medford. The women said they did not intend to protest. "I wanted to see if I would be able to make a statement that I feel is important, but not offensive, in a rally for my president," said Janet Voorhies, 48, a teacher in training. “We chose this phrase specifically because we didn't think it would be offensive or degrading or obscene," said Tania Tong, 34, a special education teacher." So these middle aged ladies had valid tickets for the event, and weren't protesting. Just wearing tee-shirts with a message the GOP finds abhorrent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Jib 0 #14 October 30, 2004 QuoteLet's see what the article said: The women said they did not intend to protest. "I wanted to see if I would be able to make a statement that I feel is important, but not offensive, in a rally for my president," said Janet Voorhies, 48, a teacher in training. A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. -- Simon & Garfunkel -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #15 October 30, 2004 There's no problem here. This was a private event for the RNC. They can keep whatever offensive messages they want out of their rally. Clearly they believe "Protect our Civil Liberties" is offensive. Their position is well known. Make of that what you will -- and if you're one of the vile freaks who believe in civil liberties, then find someone who agrees with you to vote for. If you can find one. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #16 October 30, 2004 and in a related photograph . . .quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gemini 0 #17 October 31, 2004 Quoteapplied for and received valid tickets from Republican headquarters in Medford. And the organization revoke the "ladies" tickets because they found the t-shirts objectional at their private event. Quotethey did not intend to protest But they did and they were asked to leave. They are very naive or they are lying. Either way they were out! Quotewe didn't think it would be offensive or degrading or obscene But they didn't ask ahead of time either. They were out. Again you did not address my point professor. Private event, private property... Blue skies, Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites likearock 2 #18 October 31, 2004 I agree that the organizers had a perfect right to exclude those ladies from their gathering. The question remains, however, as to why the Republicans found the slogan "Protect our civil liberties" to be objectionable. Wayne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tunaplanet 0 #19 October 31, 2004 Bush definitely won't be elected now. No way. How could the American people elect him after this horrible tragedy? This is such an earth-shattering event. I think this should be front page news. How could something this major not be splattered all over the tv. I can't believe an atrocity of this magnitude happened! Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites b1jercat 0 #20 October 31, 2004 The women were not true believers and had no business at a masterace rally, don't worry Der Futher is still safe and will lead us to glory. blue skies jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #21 October 31, 2004 QuoteIt's interesting to see who immediately jumped in to defend Bush. Is there no limit to how much you will apologize for? Is there no limit to the amount of things you will blow out of proportion, or how much you will complain when Bush supports do the same? QuoteKennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? Why don't you go ahead and point out where I said I disagree with the womens' t-shirts, or at least where I said I agree with people being tossed for t-shirts. Go ahead. I'll wait.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #22 November 1, 2004 So you meant to say: Bush CAMPAIGN gives a lesson in civics since it was staffers that made it happen. And the lesson was really in politics. The 3 ladies were smart, the Bush campaign was stupid. The women knew they would be ejected and thus would actually be noticed. Had the campaign just sat them in the back, no one would have noticed. Or we would have seen if they really intended not to make a fuss, or lied. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #23 November 1, 2004 I find it interesting that so many people are defending these actions. I can understand you defending them throwing someone out that is being disruptive. But the bottom line is they did nothing but wear a shirt that said "Protect Our Civil Liberties" It's very telling that so many people here, including the Bush supporters, associate the phrase "Protect Our Civil Liberties" with someone opposed to the President. Are you telling us that he does not share that sentiment? I mean, I already feel that way, but it's suprising to hear the Bush supporters stating the same thing, and still supporting him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,146 #24 November 1, 2004 QuoteQuoteapplied for and received valid tickets from Republican headquarters in Medford. And the organization revoke the "ladies" tickets because they found the t-shirts objectional at their private event. ... Apparently they did. So the question is: WHY do Bush campaign workers find the phrase "Protect our civil liberties" to be objectionable and disruptive? And the second question is, since these are private events, why does the campaign go to such lengths to have them covered on TV?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #25 November 1, 2004 QuoteApparently they did. So the question is: WHY do Bush campaign workers find the phrase "Protect our civil liberties" to be objectionable and disruptive? Might have something to do with the fact that so many Kerry supporters claim Bush has some outstandingly horrible record. Personally I don't see his as any worse than Kerry's, just on different topics, but try telling that to a hardcore democrat. Anyone who "wants to make a statement" is likely to be a disruptive element for an event as highly choreographed as an election rally. QuoteAnd the second question is, since these are private events, why does the campaign go to such lengths to have them covered on TV? Gee, might have somethign to do with wanting publicity for the campaign. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
penniless 0 #9 October 30, 2004 QuoteAnd no similar events have occured at Democrats' events? You know you are Tuna and Gravity's exact mirror image- ...exactly the same from the other side. To the best of my knowledge (and I have checked) Kerry's rallies are open and Bush's are by invitation to the faithful. So Kerry is apparently open to hearing dissenting views and Bush is not. I am not aware that these schoolteachers had been disruptive in any way, just wearing tee-shirts who's message is pretty hard to disagree with unless you support a "1984" style government. It's interesting to see who immediately jumped in to defend Bush. Is there no limit to how much you will apologize for? Kennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #10 October 30, 2004 QuoteKennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? The part where the Left left out the Second Amendment. Besides, what does that phrase mean? As to Kerry's being open, I don't see many Republicans trying to disturb them. Can you say the same about the left? -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #11 October 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteKennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? The part where the Left left out the Second Amendment. Besides, what does that phrase mean? As to Kerry's being open, I don't see many Republicans trying to disturb them. Can you say the same about the left? I don't see the left trying to remove freedom of speech. Therefore they wouldn't have anything to show up and protest about - because they would be allowed to protest!_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gemini 0 #12 October 30, 2004 I'm having a little trouble understanding what the fuss is about... Let's see, this is a private event with restricted access on private property paid for by a political organization and promoted as a rally for the organizations candidate. Were opposing political party members invited? Was dissent incouraged? Did the teachers (and other people at other events) tell the people issuing the tickets what they had planned? Did the teachers go there with the intent of raising a stink? Were the teachers republicans? It sounds to me like it was a private RNC event and they can invite or throw out anyone they want. If you come to my house and attempt to raise hell, I'm damn sure throwing you out. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Hell it's not even a "equal time" issue. If the Dems let protestors raise hell at their private events, it's their own fault. Other political parties don't have to follow their lead. Blue skies, Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #13 October 30, 2004 QuoteI'm having a little trouble understanding what the fuss is about... Let's see, this is a private event with restricted access on private property paid for by a political organization and promoted as a rally for the organizations candidate. Were opposing political party members invited? Was dissent incouraged? Did the teachers (and other people at other events) tell the people issuing the tickets what they had planned? Did the teachers go there with the intent of raising a stink? Were the teachers republicans? It sounds to me like it was a private RNC event and they can invite or throw out anyone they want. If you come to my house and attempt to raise hell, I'm damn sure throwing you out. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Hell it's not even a "equal time" issue. If the Dems let protestors raise hell at their private events, it's their own fault. Other political parties don't have to follow their lead. Let's see what the article said: "Three Medford school teachers were threatened with arrest and escorted from the event after they showed up wearing T-shirts with the slogan "Protect our civil liberties." All three said they applied for and received valid tickets from Republican headquarters in Medford. The women said they did not intend to protest. "I wanted to see if I would be able to make a statement that I feel is important, but not offensive, in a rally for my president," said Janet Voorhies, 48, a teacher in training. “We chose this phrase specifically because we didn't think it would be offensive or degrading or obscene," said Tania Tong, 34, a special education teacher." So these middle aged ladies had valid tickets for the event, and weren't protesting. Just wearing tee-shirts with a message the GOP finds abhorrent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #14 October 30, 2004 QuoteLet's see what the article said: The women said they did not intend to protest. "I wanted to see if I would be able to make a statement that I feel is important, but not offensive, in a rally for my president," said Janet Voorhies, 48, a teacher in training. A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. -- Simon & Garfunkel -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #15 October 30, 2004 There's no problem here. This was a private event for the RNC. They can keep whatever offensive messages they want out of their rally. Clearly they believe "Protect our Civil Liberties" is offensive. Their position is well known. Make of that what you will -- and if you're one of the vile freaks who believe in civil liberties, then find someone who agrees with you to vote for. If you can find one. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #16 October 30, 2004 and in a related photograph . . .quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gemini 0 #17 October 31, 2004 Quoteapplied for and received valid tickets from Republican headquarters in Medford. And the organization revoke the "ladies" tickets because they found the t-shirts objectional at their private event. Quotethey did not intend to protest But they did and they were asked to leave. They are very naive or they are lying. Either way they were out! Quotewe didn't think it would be offensive or degrading or obscene But they didn't ask ahead of time either. They were out. Again you did not address my point professor. Private event, private property... Blue skies, Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #18 October 31, 2004 I agree that the organizers had a perfect right to exclude those ladies from their gathering. The question remains, however, as to why the Republicans found the slogan "Protect our civil liberties" to be objectionable. Wayne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #19 October 31, 2004 Bush definitely won't be elected now. No way. How could the American people elect him after this horrible tragedy? This is such an earth-shattering event. I think this should be front page news. How could something this major not be splattered all over the tv. I can't believe an atrocity of this magnitude happened! Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b1jercat 0 #20 October 31, 2004 The women were not true believers and had no business at a masterace rally, don't worry Der Futher is still safe and will lead us to glory. blue skies jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #21 October 31, 2004 QuoteIt's interesting to see who immediately jumped in to defend Bush. Is there no limit to how much you will apologize for? Is there no limit to the amount of things you will blow out of proportion, or how much you will complain when Bush supports do the same? QuoteKennedy, what part of "Protect our civil rights" do you disagree with? Why don't you go ahead and point out where I said I disagree with the womens' t-shirts, or at least where I said I agree with people being tossed for t-shirts. Go ahead. I'll wait.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #22 November 1, 2004 So you meant to say: Bush CAMPAIGN gives a lesson in civics since it was staffers that made it happen. And the lesson was really in politics. The 3 ladies were smart, the Bush campaign was stupid. The women knew they would be ejected and thus would actually be noticed. Had the campaign just sat them in the back, no one would have noticed. Or we would have seen if they really intended not to make a fuss, or lied. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #23 November 1, 2004 I find it interesting that so many people are defending these actions. I can understand you defending them throwing someone out that is being disruptive. But the bottom line is they did nothing but wear a shirt that said "Protect Our Civil Liberties" It's very telling that so many people here, including the Bush supporters, associate the phrase "Protect Our Civil Liberties" with someone opposed to the President. Are you telling us that he does not share that sentiment? I mean, I already feel that way, but it's suprising to hear the Bush supporters stating the same thing, and still supporting him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #24 November 1, 2004 QuoteQuoteapplied for and received valid tickets from Republican headquarters in Medford. And the organization revoke the "ladies" tickets because they found the t-shirts objectional at their private event. ... Apparently they did. So the question is: WHY do Bush campaign workers find the phrase "Protect our civil liberties" to be objectionable and disruptive? And the second question is, since these are private events, why does the campaign go to such lengths to have them covered on TV?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #25 November 1, 2004 QuoteApparently they did. So the question is: WHY do Bush campaign workers find the phrase "Protect our civil liberties" to be objectionable and disruptive? Might have something to do with the fact that so many Kerry supporters claim Bush has some outstandingly horrible record. Personally I don't see his as any worse than Kerry's, just on different topics, but try telling that to a hardcore democrat. Anyone who "wants to make a statement" is likely to be a disruptive element for an event as highly choreographed as an election rally. QuoteAnd the second question is, since these are private events, why does the campaign go to such lengths to have them covered on TV? Gee, might have somethign to do with wanting publicity for the campaign. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
