Cheney and Free Speech

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Avid_Consumer, Oct 9, 2006.

  1. Oh...... you are right- on -man.......I did totally misread you dude. So which of the three minutemen in the building is your bro.
    #11     Oct 9, 2006
  2. In his recently released book "On the Road with Hillary," Mr. Halley details his eight year stint as Mrs. Clinton's advance man, where one of his most important jobs was stifling protests like those staged by FreeRepublic, using even physical intimidation when he deemed it necessary.

    "Less genteel souls," Halley explained, sometimes referred to his protest-busters as "goon squads" - although he preferred the term "etiquette squads." "I was proud of the fact that not one of them had ever been arrested," he boasts in the book.
    Every now and then, Halley said, even he would have to throw a punch or two.
    During a trip to Moscow while Mrs. Clinton was first lady, the advance man recalled:

    "A photographer blocked my way and, trying to get a picture of Hillary in her limo, pushed me. I hit him square in the face so hard I thought I'd broken my hand. His nose exploded in an eruption of blood and I was able to shove him out of the way and jump into the lead car.

    When it came to his protest busters, Halley says he "never advocated physical confrontation and always insisted that the etiquette squad stay within the boundaries of the law." But in the next breath he confessed, "Sadly, but inevitably, things sometimes got a little frisky, but my recruits knew how to handle themselves.... I had heard rumors that they had been very adamant about defending themselves when set upon by protesters."

    Wow a bloody nose and a gouged eye, sounds bad but surely no one was arrested for expressing their point of view?

    If you ever, ever diss the Clintons while in their presence you'll get arrested. On July 1996, in the public record, Patricia Mendoza was arrested in Chicago for shouting "You suck, and those boys died!" (in reference to the Khobar towers bombing in June 1996) at Bill Clinton in July, 1996. But the Clinton's SS troops claimed it was a death threat. Yeah, right. Can't even express a dislike in front of the president's face.

    After their arrest, the Mendozas spent 14 hours in a Cook County lock-up. Though the Secret Service eventually dropped all charges, the couple, who ran a small electronics business, was soon audited by the Clinton IRS.

    Ralph Grayson, special agent in charge of the Secret Service's Chicago office, said his agency has an "ongoing investigation" into the matter.The Secret Service said Mrs. Mendoza made a "threatening statement" to the president.

    The "town Square test" no fear of arrest, imprisonment or harm. The Mendozas were arrested and I'd call an IRS investigation harm. The Democrats have been suppressing a government report for over a year which discloses misuse by the Clinton Administration of the IRS. American citizens who were audited by the IRS (some of them repeatedly include Gennifer Flowers, Bill O'Reily and multiple conservative organizations).
    #12     Oct 9, 2006
  3. i didn't start this thread to get into the minuteman thing. for obvious reasons i'm hesitant to say any more about my friend here. it does conveniently go to show however that when you generalize the people you're talking to here, you never know what their affiliations are. everyone you disagree with is not necessarily a liberal left moonbat, nor do all people intrinsically side with their party as is so often the case here

    the point was simply to observe cheney's secret service handling of what so far appears to be the arrest of a man peacefully exercising his free speech
    #13     Oct 9, 2006
  4. assuming pabsts post is true, it would appear that free speech in america is threatened regardless of the party in power. reprehensible from both sides

    it seems case-by-case is the prudent way to evaluate these situations, and in this case so far it looks like the secret service acted unlawfully
    #14     Oct 9, 2006
  5. I don't know that he is even radical right...he is just inline with all right wing conventional wisdom. He knows all the talking points and spouts it all nonstop. He either spends all day long listening to AM radio right wing whackos or he just might be Karl Rove incognito.
    #15     Oct 9, 2006
  6. What a complete inversion of reality.

    Right wingers know they are the 'right thinking' people and have a lock on truth.

    #16     Oct 9, 2006
  7. I am literally laughing out loud! Once again the hypocrisy and outright lying of the right is beyond belief.

    Remember the last Prez campaign and the complete control that the PARTY (let's start referring to the repubs as the Party, as in the one and only...just like the commies) insisted on at all the public political appearances and the gestapo tactics they used against anyone who wouldn't swear a fcking oath of allegience.? Just wearing the wrong t-shirt or hat would get you thrown bodily out of these repub love fests.

    Good Chirst almighty.
    #17     Oct 9, 2006
  8. When refering to the repugniklans, please refer to their leader, satan, instead of Christ. Those are satan worshippers and swear them by the name of satan :D
    #18     Oct 9, 2006
  9. these protesters went past their freedom of speech rights. they took over the stage.... this was not a peaceful assembly. they obstucted the speakers free speech rights and therefore they should have been physically removed. i would not have a problem with their protest if they did not swarm the speakers stage, this is unacceptable.
    #19     Oct 9, 2006
  10. i agree, if the campus/students that organized the event wanted a representation of both views, they should have organized a debate, roundtable, etc

    the idea that minutemen are in the wrong in their effort to assist law enforcement, on the grounds that borders are unethical or inhumane, seems misplaced. my question to the protesters would be why have borders at all if you feel that way?

    still, it's the bush administration that should be held to account for the issue.. with all the money flying around for nat security, why are our borders willfully porous?

    nonetheless, the infringements on free speech like this cheney incident, needing to sign paperwork to swear party allegiance in order to participate, etc ... that's a sickening sign of the times
    #20     Oct 9, 2006