Supreme Court rejects case of woman ejected from Bush speech

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

She wasn't trying to force the President to listen to her

They (Bush' team) clearly thought she might try to do so and decided not to take the risk. That was their prerogative, not hers. Every administration, Dem or Rep, deals with these kinds of issues. It is clearly each President's right to do so in his/her own way.

Also, a bumper sticker definitely IS an attempt to express one's views to those who might prefer not to listen. It is usually seen as fairly innocuous but, again, the President had the right to interpret it differently. Someone driving a car with a bumper sticker expressing a controversial view is, by definition, not interested solely in listening quietly.

That reasoning is utter bullshit in the United States of America. You get an F. Re-read the First Amendment.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

attending a speech is free speech ?

Attending a public speech given by an elected President is part of the right to peaceably assemble guaranteed by the First Amendment.

BTW, anyone who thinks that this woman's bumper sticker was an indication that she posed an undue risk of not being "peaceable", thus justifying her ejection, is full of shit.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Attending a public speech given by an elected President is part of the right to peaceably assemble guaranteed by the First Amendment.

The President isn't elected by the general public and never has been. They are elected by the Electoral College (albeit with a little help from their friends on the Supreme Court in the case of that particular President). Since when is a President answerable to a public which, constitutionally, has no direct role in electing him in the first place?

If we were talking about members of the House, or members of the Senate since the passage of the 17th, then I might agree with you, or at least agree that you have a stronger case.

Quote

BTW, anyone who thinks that this woman's bumper sticker was an indication that she posed an undue risk of not being "peaceable", thus justifying her ejection, is full of shit.

The only person who seems to have held this opinion is Bush. And I fully agree that Bush was full of shit.

But there is no constitutional bar, last time I checked, to a President being full of shit. Indeed, the constitution places certain checks and balances on presidential power specifically in anticipation that there may be times when a President is, indeed, full of shit and shouldn't have absolute power.

But the President is still the President, even when he is full of shit.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[skipbelt 0]

peacable assembly isn't near as absolute as freedom of speech !

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

BTW, anyone who thinks that this woman's bumper sticker was an indication that she posed an undue risk of not being "peaceable", thus justifying her ejection, is full of shit.

+1

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

peacable assembly isn't near as absolute as freedom of speech !

They're generally not thought of (or protected) equally, but they're both expressly guaranteed by the First Amendment, and thus they technically have equal force of law behind them.

[skipbelt 0]

yes , and technically she wasn't assembling , just attending !

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

But you're right; when it comes to understanding the SC, I'm generally pretty stupid

No, I think you just allow your political leanings to cloud your opinion.... Ya know, kinda like the SC Justices do.

But to claim that the 5 voted the way they did as a "giveback" is not, as you say, "intellectually honest", IMO.

[skyrider 0]

The audience stacking of the so called public speeches has been out of control for far too long, by both sides!

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

RWCs simply can't hang with facts. Then they spew tripe that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

You mean how you ignore that Obama does it as well, but you only bitch about Bush doing it? Those kind of facts you can't hang with?

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

The reality is that he was all fucked up by Alzheimers disease when he was elected. It got much worse during his second term. Bush 1 was running the show. Anyone who thinks otherwise was not an aware adult during those times.

You have any proof of that? Or are you just making things up?

Bring proof, not fantasy's.

BTW still waiting for you to acknowledge that Obama did pretty much the exact same thing in regards to who sits in his audiences.

[skyrider 0]

Quote

Quote

The reality is that he was all fucked up by Alzheimers disease when he was elected. It got much worse during his second term. Bush 1 was running the show. Anyone who thinks otherwise was not an aware adult during those times.

You have any proof of that? Or are you just making things up?

Bring proof, not fantasy's.

BTW still waiting for you to acknowledge that Obama did pretty much the exact same thing in regards to who sits in his audiences.

Search the Net, the proof is all over it! I am amazed at the ignorance of thinking he doesn't stack audiences! IMO, Obama stacks it more than most...BUT, I have no proof he is worse, only my opinion that it sure as hell, "Looks" that way....

[rushmc 23]

His I dont have proof comment was stated as his opinion AND was addressed only to that he thinks Obama does it more than most.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

His I dont have proof comment was stated as his opinion AND was addressed only to that he thinks Obama does it more than most.

What?

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

His I dont have proof comment was stated as his opinion AND was addressed only to that he thinks Obama does it more than most.

What?

Take a class

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

His I dont have proof comment was stated as his opinion AND was addressed only to that he thinks Obama does it more than most.

What?

Take a class

In what, rushmc-language?

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

His I dont have proof comment was stated as his opinion AND was addressed only to that he thinks Obama does it more than most.

What?

Take a class

In what, rushmc-language?

Common sense would be good start

then the rest would come easy

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[skipbelt 0]

woman ejected must have been one of "these"...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-americans-aren%e2%80%99t-thinking-clearly/

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

woman ejected must have been one of "these"...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-americans-aren%e2%80%99t-thinking-clearly/

Are you living with/under news papers/yellow press/magazines?

Oh no wait: You're just a genius reading a lot, correct? That might explain why you post to yourself that often.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

His I dont have proof comment was stated as his opinion AND was addressed only to that he thinks Obama does it more than most.

What?

Take a class

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That is some of the funniest shit I have ever seen here

[Gravitymaster 0]

and in a related story:

http://blogs.ktla.com/news_custom_eric/2010/10/man-fired-for-wearing-bush-sweatshirt-at-obama-rally.html

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

and in a related story:

Related how? Is there any evidence that Obama, or any of his staff, ordered the man fired? I agree that his union overreacted, and he shouldn't have been fired, but is the president really personally responsible for every single hiring/firing decision made in this country? Or just the ones you disagree with?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Yes, because as we all know the unions have no political ties to the Democratic Party.

I think it's wrong in both cases regardless of who you ascribe blame or responsibility to. I think it's even more egregious that the worker was simply wearing a USS Bush cap and T-shirt to honor his son's service and the Union thugs fired him. I wonder if those who were so upset by the previous story will unleash the same hatred towards the unions?

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Yes, because as we all know the unions have no political ties to the Democratic Party.

I think it's wrong in both cases regardless of who you ascribe blame or responsibility to. I think it's even more egregious that the worker was simply wearing a USS Bush cap and T-shirt to honor his son's service and the Union thugs fired him. I wonder if those who were so upset by the previous story will unleash the same hatred towards the unions?

The woman ejected from Bush's speech was ejected by Bush aides. If your point is that what the union reps did to this guy was just as improper, I'd agree. But you're stre-e-e-etching to find a connection to Obama's staff. Now, if you can find some evidence that the guy was leaned-on because Obama people whispered to the union guys, then yeah, that would be the same thing. But if you ain't got the goods, then all you got is a big, fat guess.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Yes, because as we all know the unions have no political ties to the Democratic Party.

I think it's wrong in both cases regardless of who you ascribe blame or responsibility to. I think it's even more egregious that the worker was simply wearing a USS Bush cap and T-shirt to honor his son's service and the Union thugs fired him. I wonder if those who were so upset by the previous story will unleash the same hatred towards the unions?

The woman ejected from Bush's speech was ejected by Bush aides. If your point is that what the union reps did to this guy was just as improper, I'd agree. But you're stre-e-e-etching to find a connection to Obama's staff. Now, if you can find some evidence that the guy was leaned-on because Obama people whispered to the union guys, then yeah, that would be the same thing. But if you ain't got the goods, then all you got is a big, fat guess.

Yes you are correct. And John Gotti never ordered anyone killed.