Where the Kids Come to Mouth Off

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Fugee
Does this happen at Kerry campaign stops too or is it just Bush?

Kerry just wants prior restraint for someone else's book.

But, he's your guy, so we can't expect you to complain about THAT Constitutional violation, right?

(Partisanship has mooted any intellectual political discussion these days.)

[pony_trekker]

Originally posted by Fugee
What the hell country is this anyway and what happened to free speech?

Well, unfortunately, Kerry is trading badly so get ready for 1984 in 2004.

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I have a whole front yard of grass that I'm looking to kill, if Atticus is looking to rescue more people from evil plants.

Just let casey use the riding mower.

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by dtb
That's almost as good as the time I ran away from home -- well, sort of. I ran behind the curtains (after packing my stuffed animals and some snacks in a suitcase, of course). Not just any old curtains, but big drapes, where I could build a fort. My parents were frantic with worry looking for me, I don't mind telling you.

Who's boss, indeed.

To tie threads together, I had a dream a few nights ago about building a fort made of blankets.

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Your pencil dick.

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I guess you can call it that since I spend so much time using it to write messages on your face.

TM

Speaking of, did anyone happen to see when Tom Brokaw stuttered the word "bukkake" on the news the other night?

Howard Stern had a copy of the tape of Brokaw's story on the Russian Airliner crash, and he mispronounced the name of the location of one of the crash sites. They fixed it before the West Coast feed.

I almost had to pull off the highway, I was laughing so hard. Good stuff.

I've been trying to find a link, but to no avail.

[Fugee]

Originally posted by bilmore
Kerry just wants prior restraint for someone else's book.

But, he's your guy, so we can't expect you to complain about THAT Constitutional violation, right?

(Partisanship has mooted any intellectual political discussion these days.)

Cite please. A brief Google only came up with some conservative blog on the Kerry campaign asking the publisher to pull "Unfit for Command" because of factual inaccuracies. I didn't see anything that mentioned him using the government (or even the courts) to block publication.

Even if he were, I think limitations on commercial speech are a far cry from arresting someone just for their opinion expressed on a t-shirt (and then that person coincidentally gets fired from her federal job) or barring people from a POTUS appearance because of a sticker on a wallet. Do you think this is OK???

I don't give people a free pass because they are on "my side." I think relegating protesters at the Dem convention was terrible. If the Kerry campaign is having local police arrest people with anti-Kerry t-shirts at campaign appearances or banning people with pro-Bush stickers or buttons, please let me know and I'll vent about that too.

IMHO, discussing "free speech zones" and people being arrested at campaign appearances because they are wearing t-shirts critical of the POTUS (or other candidate if it happens with any other candidate) should not be a partisan issue.

[andViolins]

Anyone have Laura Branigan??

aV

[SlaveNoMore]

Fugee
Cite please. A brief Google only came up with some conservative blog on the Kerry campaign asking the publisher to pull "Unfit for Command" because of factual inaccuracies. I didn't see anything that mentioned him using the government (or even the courts) to block publication.

Your Google skills are weak.

http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesui...unfit_pdf.html

Copy of the letter that the Kerry camp sent to the TV networks implicitly threatening them with legal action if they aired the Swift Boat ads.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Fugee
Yeah, this should probably go in the politics forum but I didn't want to discuss it with a million Penske socks.

What the hell country is this anyway and what happened to free speech? The Secret Service had police arrest a couple at presidential visit for "trespass" (even though they had passes to be there) because they wore anti-Bush t-shirts and Bush campaign workers threatened to have a guy arrested because he complained that two teens he was accompanying to a rally were kicked out because one had a Kerry sticker on his wallet.

Does this happen at Kerry campaign stops too or is it just Bush?

The Dems confined protesters to a caged area far from their convention and the GOP is likely to also have "free speech" zones.

I'm the last one to be a First Amendment absolutist, but this is getting rEdiculous.

It's not really politically motivated, Fugee. It's just that opposing ideas confuse the poor President and render him speechless.

[SlaveNoMore]

y taxwonk
It's just that opposing ideas confuse the poor President and render him speechless.

As opposed to Monsieur Kerry, who gets equally as confused, but then says whatever he thinks people want to hear:

from the Miami Herald

• John Kerry had just pumped up a huge crowd in downtown West Palm Beach, promising to make the state a battleground for his quest to oust President Bush, when a local television journalist posed the question that any candidate with Florida ambitions should expect:
  
  What will you do about Cuba?
  
  As the presumptive Democratic nominee, Kerry was ready with the bravado appropriate for a challenger who knows that every answer carries magnified importance in the state that put President Bush into office by just 537 votes.
  
  ''I'm pretty tough on Castro, because I think he's running one of the last vestiges of a Stalinist secret police government in the world,'' Kerry told WPLG-ABC 10 reporter Michael Putney in an interview to be aired at 11:30 this morning.
  
  Then, reaching back eight years to one of the more significant efforts to toughen sanctions on the communist island, Kerry volunteered: ``And I voted for the Helms-Burton legislation to be tough on companies that deal with him.''
  
  It seemed the correct answer in a year in which Democratic strategists think they can make a play for at least a portion of the important Cuban-American vote -- as they did in 1996 when more than three in 10 backed President Clinton's reelection after he signed the sanctions measure written by Sen. Jesse Helms and Rep. Dan Burton.
  
  There is only one problem: Kerry voted against it.
  
  Asked Friday to explain the discrepancy, Kerry aides said the senator cast one of the 22 nays that day in 1996 because he disagreed with some of the final technical aspects. But, said spokesman David Wade, Kerry supported the legislation in its purer form -- and voted for it months earlier.

[Shape Shifter]

Enough.

[Fugee]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Your Google skills are weak.

Bilmore was talking about a book. And you're both avoiding what should not be a partisan issue. If someone was arrested at a Kerry appearance for wearing an anti-Kerry t-shirt I'd be equally appalled.

Are you not shocked that a person can be arrested on public property in the United States for wearing a t-shirt critical of the president? I'm pissed that this happened a month ago and the first I heard of it was last night on the NBC network news. My liberal hometown paper didn't even cover it.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
As opposed to Monsieur Kerry, who gets equally as confused, but then says whatever he thinks people want to hear:

from the Miami Herald

• John Kerry had just pumped up a huge crowd in downtown West Palm Beach, promising to make the state a battleground for his quest to oust President Bush, when a local television journalist posed the question that any candidate with Florida ambitions should expect:
  
  What will you do about Cuba?
  
  As the presumptive Democratic nominee, Kerry was ready with the bravado appropriate for a challenger who knows that every answer carries magnified importance in the state that put President Bush into office by just 537 votes.
  
  ''I'm pretty tough on Castro, because I think he's running one of the last vestiges of a Stalinist secret police government in the world,'' Kerry told WPLG-ABC 10 reporter Michael Putney in an interview to be aired at 11:30 this morning.
  
  Then, reaching back eight years to one of the more significant efforts to toughen sanctions on the communist island, Kerry volunteered: ``And I voted for the Helms-Burton legislation to be tough on companies that deal with him.''
  
  It seemed the correct answer in a year in which Democratic strategists think they can make a play for at least a portion of the important Cuban-American vote -- as they did in 1996 when more than three in 10 backed President Clinton's reelection after he signed the sanctions measure written by Sen. Jesse Helms and Rep. Dan Burton.
  
  There is only one problem: Kerry voted against it.
  
  Asked Friday to explain the discrepancy, Kerry aides said the senator cast one of the 22 nays that day in 1996 because he disagreed with some of the final technical aspects. But, said spokesman David Wade, Kerry supported the legislation in its purer form -- and voted for it months earlier.

All of this is very interesting. However, you don't really address the issue under discussion. Furthermore, you neglect to inform us whether or not Kerry did or didn't vote for an earlier version of the bill.

[Dave]

Did you know that Jenna Jameson has a book out? Can you say "stocking stuffer"?

link here {spree: CNN interview, no full frontal or anything}

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Fugee
Are you not shocked that a person can be arrested on public property in the United States for wearing a t-shirt critical of the president?

Shocked? No. Appalled? Yep. I suppose someone can make some point that Bush is THE most targeted assassination goal in the world, and they're trying to keep out threats, but that would be a weak response. More likely, it's been their experience that some people wearing such messages have attempted to go beyond expression into active disruption, and they're being proactive. But I'm still bothered by it greatly. But, were you in St. Paul when he came? I was. TONS of anti-Bush t-shirts in the crowd inside, and buttons, and expressions of matching sentiment. But no stifling going on that I saw. So, given the huge numbers of public meets Bush is in, I'm guessing we're reading about someone's very infrequent overreaction.

Are you not shocked, or appalled, that Kerry's first reaction to a critical book is to try to bully the publisher into suppression? That, instead of answering, he goes to Bush and cries "shut them up!"?

My point was, our oxen are being gored (ooo, poor word choice) equally. I'll buy your outrage, until you point it in one direction only.

(ETA: yeah, should have taken it to the PB. Sorry.)