PDA

View Full Version : Trio Removed From Bush Social Security Town Hall Over Bumper Sticker



Unassisted
03-30-2005, 07:24 PM
http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=1011220&tw=wn_wire_story

Removel of Three From Bush Visit Probed http://c.lygo.com/s.gif

http://c.lygo.com/s.gifTuesday, March 29, 2005 3:49 p.m. ETBy P. SOLOMON BANDA Associated Press Writer

DENVER (AP) -- The Secret Service is investigating the claims of three people who say they were removed from President Bush's town hall meeting on Social Security last week because of a bumper sticker on their car that read: "No More Blood for Oil."

The three said they had obtained tickets to the event through the office of Rep. Bob Beauprez, R-Colo., had passed through security and were preparing to take their seats when they were approached by what they thought was a Secret Service agent who asked them to leave.

Alex Young, 25, who was among the three removed, said officials told them the next day they were identified as belonging to the "No Blood for Oil" group.

Lon Garner, the agent in charge of the Secret Service office in Denver, said the Secret Service had nothing to do with the three being asked to leave. Garner declined to release further details, citing an ongoing investigation.

"We are very sensitive to the First Amendment and general assembly rights as protected by the Constitution," Garner said.

Brad Woodhouse, a spokesman for Americans United, called the removal of the three people an egregious violation of their First Amendment rights.

"They're screening the people who are allowed to come and then they're profiling them in the parking lot," he said. "It's quite extraordinary, and disappointing."

CbusRed
03-30-2005, 11:24 PM
Im sure thats the ONLY reason they were removed... :rolleyes:

pedro
03-31-2005, 12:58 PM
Im sure thats the ONLY reason they were removed... :rolleyes:


The cases of screening at Bush rally's are well documented and plentiful and every time someone :rolleyes: and blames it on the people who were kicked out. To which I say :rolleyes:

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:10 PM
In my mind, there is a difference between protest and just being disruptive.

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:11 PM
These are taxpayer funded events folks.

Taxpayer funded.

And taxpayers aren't allowed to attend because they have certain bumper stickers on their cars. Regardless of your politics you should think real hard about where you stand on this one.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:11 PM
Also, never trust an article that spells "removal" wrong.

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:11 PM
In my mind, there is a difference between protest and just being disruptive.

They weren't protesting or being disruptive. They were taking their seats.

westofyou
03-31-2005, 01:12 PM
In my mind, there is a difference between protest and just being disruptive.

Right gets to protest while the left is just disrupting.

http://theages.superman.ws/Encyclopaedia/Bizarro1.jpg

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:12 PM
And taxpayers aren't allowed to attend because they have certain bumper stickers on their cars. Regardless of your politics you should think real hard about where you stand on this one.


Like I said, Im sure thats the ONLY reason they were removed.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:13 PM
Right gets to protest while the left is just disrupting.

http://theages.superman.ws/Encyclopaedia/Bizarro1.jpg

Where were all the violent protestors at the DNC last year? They sure were plentiful at the RNC.

westofyou
03-31-2005, 01:13 PM
Like I said, Im sure thats the ONLY reason they were removed.

How bout some proof perfessor?

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:13 PM
They weren't protesting or being disruptive. They were taking their seats.


Oh really? were you there?

westofyou
03-31-2005, 01:14 PM
Oh really? were you there?
Nice Red Herring

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:15 PM
Oh really? were you there?

I read the article, and repeated what it said. What is the basis for your belief?

pedro
03-31-2005, 01:16 PM
In my mind, there is a difference between protest and just being disruptive.

which one are you doing?

Someday you might get kicked out of somewhere you want to be and you won't think you did anything wrong either.

RBA
03-31-2005, 01:18 PM
When you are protecting the life of the President and in these times. IMO, it's probably a good idea to err on the side of caution. Also, IMO, these three were out for some type of attention as they posted soon after on a progressive forum. (They may have posted before the event).

If the secret service wanted them out, they most likely had good cause.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:19 PM
I read the article, and repeated what it said. What is the basis for your belief?

You mean the article with spelling errors in the title?

My basis of belief is knowledge of the operation of the Secret Service. I have two relatives involved. One a cousin who's been in for nearly 20 years, second a 2nd cousin who is in his 5th year.

They have alot more important issues to deal with than someone who simply has a liberal bumper sticker on their car, and is doing nothing else.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:21 PM
You also must realize that the secret service is not politically biased. It does not change for each president. Each member must have the saftey of the president as their #1 priority. not political beliefs.

pedro
03-31-2005, 01:22 PM
When you are protecting the life of the President and in these times. IMO, it's probably a good idea to err on the side of caution. Also, IMO, these three were out for some type of attention as they posted soon after on a progressive forum. (They may have posted before the event).

If the secret service wanted them out, they most likely had good cause.

well, if they passed through security, I don't see why the president had to be protected from them. unless the Bush Admin can't even run security at their own events which seems dubious.

as for the possibility that these people were muckraking.... absolutely possible.

pedro
03-31-2005, 01:25 PM
My belief isn't that the Secret Service is responsible for this stuff, b/c you are right Cbus, they do have more important things to do, and I'm sure they're very professional.

But that doesn't mean that there aren't other folks doing this stuff.

Chip R
03-31-2005, 01:26 PM
You also must realize that the secret service is not politically biased. It does not change for each president. Each member must have the saftey of the president as their #1 priority. not political beliefs.
But don't they act upon the orders of whom they are trying to protect? If W or one of his people saw those people who had the bumper sticker in there couldn't they just tell the SS to get rid of them because they believe they are a risk even though they may have not done anything? Couldn't they just pick anyone out and tell the SS to get rid of them and the SS would have to do it?

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:29 PM
But that doesn't mean that there aren't other folks doing this stuff.

So then what are we discussing? the fact that some moron posed as a SSA and kicked some people out because of a bumper sticker? who cares?

But I assure you, if it was indeed an SSA that kicked them out, it was for solid reason.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:31 PM
But don't they act upon the orders of whom they are trying to protect? If W or one of his people saw those people who had the bumper sticker in there couldn't they just tell the SS to get rid of them because they believe they are a risk even though they may have not done anything? Couldn't they just pick anyone out and tell the SS to get rid of them and the SS would have to do it?

You honestly think W would have innocent people kicked out of a function? knowing damn well it would get out into the media?

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:31 PM
You mean the article with spelling errors in the title?

It's an AP article. I'm pretty sure the AP has nothing to do with the spelling of the title.

If we want to judge credibility based on spelling you'd fail miserably by the way.

Also, the Secret Service had nothing to do with escorting these people from the event. It was a Bush event staff member who did that, but he apparently was dressed in the manner of a Secret Service agent since the three assumed that's what he was.

The three obviously should have asked the guy for some sort of ID, but it's an odd situation so it's easy to see why they didn't think of it.

Again this a taxpayer funded event, and it's an event to explain a policy initiative to citizens. And we're now apparently excluding citizens from being able to see their president explain a policy initiative ... because of a bumper sticker. That's disturbing.

RedFanAlways1966
03-31-2005, 01:32 PM
I just need to hear both sides of the story. I have read one side so far (what is above). And I read a quote from a gentleman who was not there as far as I can tell and is shooting from the hip.

The Secret Service has said that they did not eject the three people. Are they lying? It may have been a extremist nut. Does the possible extremist work for the Bush administration? I don't know. If he does, then the Admin. should fire him.

Too much "I don't knows" here to start throwing accusations around. But such is the political environment that some live in...

I need more before I blame the White House. I hope you do too. If not, subscribe to The National Enquirer. You will enjoy it.

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:33 PM
You honestly think W would have innocent people kicked out of a function? knowing damn well it would get out into the media?

You honestly think he would care?

Chip R
03-31-2005, 01:34 PM
You honestly think W would have innocent people kicked out of a function? knowing damn well it would get out into the media?
I don't know. I'm just asking since you said you have relatives in the SS. And it doesn't have to be W or a Republican either. When Kerry was running for President and he had SS protection, could he or one of his handlers picked out someone who they knew didn't agree with them and kick them out just for that reason justifying it as a "security risk"?

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:34 PM
It's an AP article. I'm pretty sure the AP has nothing to do with the spelling of the title.

If we want to judge credibility based on spelling you'd fail miserably by the way.

Also, the Secret Service had nothing to do with escorting these people from the event. It was a Bush event staff member who did that, but he apparently was dressed in the manner of a Secret Service agent since the three assumed that's what he was.

The three obviously should have asked the guy for some sort of ID, but it's an odd situation so it's easy to see why they didn't think of it.

Again this a taxpayer funded event, and it's an event to explain a policy initiative to citizens. And we're now apparently excluding citizens from being able to see their president explain a policy initiative ... because of a bumper sticker. That's disturbing.


Your awesome "credible" article says nothing about it being a Bush staff member.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:36 PM
I don't know. I'm just asking since you said you have relatives in the SS. And it doesn't have to be W or a Republican either. When Kerry was running for President and he had SS protection, could he or one of his handlers picked out someone who they knew didn't agree with them and kick them out just for that reason justifying it as a "security risk"?

Of course they could, but I cant see any situation as to where they would knowingly abuse their power like that.

pedro
03-31-2005, 01:37 PM
So then what are we discussing? the fact that some moron posed as a SSA and kicked some people out because of a bumper sticker? who cares?

But I assure you, if it was indeed an SSA that kicked them out, it was for solid reason.

I didn't say it wasn't someone who worked for Bush.

Chip R
03-31-2005, 01:38 PM
Of course they could, but I cant see any situation as to where they would knowingly abuse their power like that.
Why not?

westofyou
03-31-2005, 01:39 PM
I didn't say it wasn't someone who worked for Bush.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10969-2005Mar29.html

Initially, the three believed Secret Service agents had grabbed them and ushered them out of the auditorium, Recht said. But he said that Lon Garner, the Secret Service agent in charge of the Denver office, told them the service investigated the matter and found it was a "Republican staffer" who removed them because they had a "No More Blood for Oil" bumper sticker on their car.

Scott McClellan, Bush's press secretary, said it was a volunteer who asked them to leave "out of concern they might try to disrupt the event." He said the White House welcomes a variety of voices into events but discourages people from coming to heckle the president or disrupt town hall forums. "If someone is coming to try to disrupt it, then obviously that person would be asked to leave," he said. "There is plenty of opportunity outside of the event to express their views."

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:39 PM
I didn't say it wasn't someone who worked for Bush.


Ok, so lets all just speculate as to who it was that did it

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:41 PM
Why not?

For the reason I asked before, why would bush kick innocent people out of events, knowing that it would get out into the media, and come back and bite him in the ass?

He has better things to do... trust me.

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:42 PM
This isn't the full text of the article btw.

http://www.kctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3136534


President Bush has visited at least 17 states since the State of the Union to gain support for his plan, meeting with people who are generally supportive.

Some people who have stood up to disrupt Bush while he was talking have been removed. But a group called Americans United to Protect Social Security said there have been at least two additional instances where people who have done nothing wrong have been removed or barred from a Bush event beforehand.

One instance happened in February in Fargo North Dakota, where a "black list" of people banned from getting tickets was obtained and published by the Forum of Fargo-Moorhead. The White House and the Republican Party denied such a list existed and Gov. John Hoeven's staff said nobody was denied tickets.

Brad Woodhouse, a spokesman for Americans United, called the Denver example the most egregious violation.

The entire thing is at the link, it includes a few more details.

This is from the people involved:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/3/29/113651/512


Very rarely does the everyday public get a glimpse of what happens behind the scenes in a normally-secret Bush Administration.

But Monday, March 28, the Secret Service called three everyday people into their offices to discuss why we were kicked out of a presidential event in Denver last week where Bush promoted his plan to privatize Social Security. What they revealed to us and our lawyer was fascinating.

There we were - three people who had personally picked up tickets from Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez's office and went to a presidential event. But as we entered, we were told that we had been "ID'ed" and were warned that any disruption would get us arrested.

After being seated in the audience we were forcibly removed before the President arrived, even though we had not been disruptive. We were shocked when told that this presidential event was a "private event" and were commanded to leave.

More astonishingly, when the Secret Service was contacted the next day they agreed to meet with us this Monday, March 28 to discuss the circumstances surrounding our removal. We had two big questions going into this meeting:

1. How is the Bush Administration "ID'ing" citizens before presidential events?

2. Why was an official taxpayer-funded event called a "private event" - leading to citizens being kicked out?

Most shocking of all, we got answers to both questions.

The Secret Service revealed that we were "ID'ed" when local Republican staffers saw a bumper sticker on the car we drove which said "No More Blood For Oil." Evidently, the free speech expressed on one bumper sticker is cause enough to eject three citizens from a presidential event. (Similarly, someone was ejected from Bush's Social Security privatization event in Arizona the same day simply for wearing a Democratic t-shirt.)

The Secret Service also revealed that ticket distribution and staffing of the Social Security event was run by the local Republican Party. They wanted us to be clear that it was a Republican staffer - not the Secret Service - who kicked us out of the presidential event. But this revealed something else that should be startling to all Americans.

After allowing taxpayers to finance his privatization events (let's call them what they really are after all,) and after using the White House communications apparatus to set them up, Bush is privatizing the ticket distribution and security staffing at his events to the Republican Party. The losers are not just taxpayers, but anyone who values the First Amendment. Under the banner of a "private event" the Republican Party is excluding citizens from seeing their president because of the lone sin of expressing the wrong idea on a bumper sticker or t-shirt. The question for Americans is - will we allow our freedom to be privatized?

Karen Bauer, Leslie Weise. Alexander Young
Denver residents

DunnersGrl44
03-31-2005, 01:42 PM
Ok, so lets all just speculate as to who it was that did it, since we all dont know!!
AND..... here we go again :rolleyes:

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:44 PM
Ok, so lets all just speculate as to who it was that did it, since we all dont know!! SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN!!

Actually, I think it was a john kerry supporter that was acting like a Bush agent, and he kicked these guys out because he wanted to get Bush in trouble!! hahahahahaha those silly libs.

gO pOLITICAL tHREADZ!!!!!!111

That, placed right under WOY's quote of the Washington Post invalidating pretty much everything you're saying, is priceless.

westofyou
03-31-2005, 01:44 PM
For the reason I asked before, why would bush kick innocent people out of events, knowing that it would get out into the media, and come back and bite him in the ass?

He has better things to do... trust me.

Yeah I trust you and your infinite wisdom... was this your first or second election?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10969-2005Mar29.html

This is not the first time people have complained about heavy-handed monitoring of who can attend -- and speak at -- Bush's events promoting his Social Security plan. A newspaper in Fargo, N.D., reported that when Bush came to the city on Feb. 3, more than 40 residents were barred from attending the event.

The president has held Social Security rallies in more than a dozen states this year. The crowds are closely monitored for possible disruptions, and protesters are quickly escorted away.

Protesters often stand out because the crowds are packed with Bush supporters, who have been invited by a local GOP House member or organization. Those onstage at most of the town hall meetings are carefully screened people from the area who agree with the president's Social Security proposal. The participants typically rehearse what they will say with members of the president's advance team and rarely, if ever, say anything critical about his plan for private accounts.

pedro
03-31-2005, 01:45 PM
He has better things to do... trust me.


apparently the people that work for him don't.

basically this is analogous to removing you from Redszone because you might become disruptive.

oh wait.....

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:46 PM
a "republican staffer" could be anything from a senior advisor to a telemarketer. Hell, I guess you could say I am a republican staffer, I worked at 4 different Bush events last year.

so again. I guarantee this guy wasnt under direct order from the president to do this, so what is the issue?

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:47 PM
Keep backtracking Cbus.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:48 PM
Keep backtracking Cbus.

Im not backtracking, I just dont understand the senseless whining.

westofyou
03-31-2005, 01:51 PM
Im not backtracking, I just dont understand the senseless whining.

It's only to drown out the senseless blathering.

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:52 PM
Great thread.

Redsfaithful
03-31-2005, 01:55 PM
edited: Looks like the comment I was referring to has been deleted.

MWM
03-31-2005, 01:56 PM
Like RF said, if they passed through security then they shouldn't be a physical threat to anyone. So I think the real American thing to do would be to wait until they actually make some kind of disruption to remove them. You can't go throwing people out of events because of specualtion that they might be disruptive. Talk about un-American......

RedFanAlways1966
03-31-2005, 01:59 PM
A bit of a tangent (and not implying one side or the other)...

What kind of a person goes to a political event to heckle? Do people think it is okay to heckle if that person is heckling the person that you will not vote for in the election? Does that person(s) heckling embarrass you b/c they are labeled as one of "your kind"?

Should there be stricter laws applied to those who heckle a public event? I would not have a problem with a stricter punishment for people who try to ruin a public event. I know... what is offically a heckler (as compared to that idiot who yells at the D-Rays games)?

Could the three people in this story have called the police and had something done about their wrongful ejection? Do the people running this event have every right to eject those that they feel are disruptive (again... disruptive is a matter of interpretation)? Or does a certain level of heckling (definition?!?!) need to happen before an ejection is appropriate? Who decides these things?

Personally, I'd like to b-slap each heckler. Regardless of their affiliation. They bother me and embarass me. They do things on their own freewill and give their fellow party members a black-eye. They feel that they have the right to do and say as they please. They do not care about others.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 01:59 PM
awesome, someone keeps deleting my posts! I BET IT WAS A REDSFAITHFUL STAFFER!!!!

westofyou
03-31-2005, 02:00 PM
What kind of a person goes to a political event to heckle?

People who feel their voice isn't heard. Where should they go?

MWM
03-31-2005, 02:01 PM
What kind of a person goes to a political event to heckle?

Is there any evidence these people intended to heckle?

Chip R
03-31-2005, 02:01 PM
A bit of a tangent (and not implying one side or the other)...

What kind of a person goes to a political event to heckle? Do people think it is okay to heckle if that person is heckling the person that you will not vote for in the election? Does that person(s) heckling embarrass you b/c they are labeled as one of "your kind"?I agree. I think it would be rude if you wore a Candidate A T-Shirt at an event for Candidate B. That said, we do have freedom of speech in this country where as long as you are following the law you can say what you want. But I think it's in poor taste to heckle.

rdiersin
03-31-2005, 02:01 PM
A bit of a tangent (and not implying one side or the other)...

What kind of a person goes to a political event to heckle? Do people think it is okay to heckle if that person is heckling the person that you will not vote for in the election? Does that person(s) heckling embarrass you b/c they are labeled as one of "your kind"?

Should there be stricter laws applied to those who heckle a public event? I would not have a problem with a stricter punishment for people who try to ruin a public event. I know... what is offically a heckler (as compared to that idiot who yells at the D-Rays games)?

Could the three people in this story have called the police and had something done about their wrongful ejection? Do the people running this event have every right to eject those that they feel are disruptive (again... disruptive is a matter of interpretation)? Or does a certain level of heckling (definition?!?!) need to happen before an ejection is appropriate? Who decides these things?

Personally, I'd like to b-slap each heckler. Regardless of their affiliation. They bother me and embarass me. They do things on their own freewill and give their fellow party members a black-eye. They feel that they have the right to do and say as they please. They do not care about others.


Well said, whether it is the "Blood for oil" people or the college republicans with their flip flops, these people are not there for rational discussion/debate, but to disrupt.

RedFanAlways1966
03-31-2005, 02:01 PM
Like RF said, if they passed through security then they shouldn't be a physical threat to anyone. So I think the real American thing to do would be to wait until they actually make some kind of disruption to remove them. You can't go throwing people out of events because of specualtion that they might be disruptive. Talk about un-American......

Do we blame, in this case, all Republicans? Do we blame President Bush? Do we balme Cbus b/c he is obviously Republican? Do we blame one over-the-top staffer at this event?

Do we wait for more information before passing judgment in this case? :thumbup:

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 02:04 PM
Is there any evidence these people intended to heckle?


any evidence they didnt intend to heckle? or that they werent heckling?

RedFanAlways1966
03-31-2005, 02:04 PM
Is there any evidence these people intended to heckle?

No, no! I want to wait for more information before judging anyone in this matter. I think one or a few "too smart for their own good" Repubs are responsible for this. But those three may have been making comments in the parking lot or elsewhere before the event (in their seats?). I am not sure b/c I do not have the whole story as far as I can tell.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 02:06 PM
Do we blame, in this case, all Republicans? Do we blame President Bush? Do we balme Cbus b/c he is obviously Republican? Do we blame one over-the-top staffer at this event?

Do we wait for more information before passing judgment in this case? :thumbup:


Couldnt have said it better myself.

Reason #6 as to why these threads are pointless. most of the time its an article without enough info, and it leads to pre-judgement.

Really healthy.

pedro
03-31-2005, 02:07 PM
Do we blame, in this case, all Republicans? Do we blame President Bush? Do we balme Cbus b/c he is obviously Republican? Do we blame one over-the-top staffer at this event?

Do we wait for more information before passing judgment in this case? :thumbup:


I blame Bush b/c there is a recurring pattern of this type of activity, it's been widely reported in the press, and he hasn't (apparently) done anything about it.

MWM
03-31-2005, 02:08 PM
any evidence they didnt intend to heckle? or that they werent heckling?

I have no evidence you don't plan on murdering someone. Let's throw you in jail. Same logic. Here in the USA, we don't convict people because we don't have evidence they won't commit a crime.

CbusRed
03-31-2005, 02:10 PM
I have no evidence you don't plan on murdering someone. Let's throw you in jail. Same logic. Here in the USA, we don't convict people because we don't have evidence they won't commit a crime.


exactly. thank you for proving my point.

MWM
03-31-2005, 02:10 PM
Who the hell cares who's to blame. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

Puffy
03-31-2005, 02:41 PM
A bit of a tangent (and not implying one side or the other)...

What kind of a person goes to a political event to heckle? Do people think it is okay to heckle if that person is heckling the person that you will not vote for in the election? Does that person(s) heckling embarrass you b/c they are labeled as one of "your kind"?

Should there be stricter laws applied to those who heckle a public event? I would not have a problem with a stricter punishment for people who try to ruin a public event. I know... what is offically a heckler (as compared to that idiot who yells at the D-Rays games)?

Could the three people in this story have called the police and had something done about their wrongful ejection? Do the people running this event have every right to eject those that they feel are disruptive (again... disruptive is a matter of interpretation)? Or does a certain level of heckling (definition?!?!) need to happen before an ejection is appropriate? Who decides these things?

Personally, I'd like to b-slap each heckler. Regardless of their affiliation. They bother me and embarass me. They do things on their own freewill and give their fellow party members a black-eye. They feel that they have the right to do and say as they please. They do not care about others.

I don't understand people who boo - but I think that might just be me.

And saying that, I agree with the heckling part as well - I don't understand it. Wearing a shirt, carrying a sign, asking for equal time, I get. But heckling is just rude. And I don't think it accomplishes anything.

As for this particular event - we don't have all the facts, that I agree with. But this is not a new technique employed by the Bush people, so I tend (as of this moment) to lean with the 3 people's stories side.

traderumor
04-01-2005, 01:38 PM
Perhaps its things like this going on around the country that have folks antsy?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/01/buchanan.attacked.ap/index.html


Inside Politics
Pat Buchanan doused with salad dressing

Friday, April 1, 2005 Posted: 9:48 AM EST (1448 GMT)

vert.buchanan.ap.jpg
Pat Buchanan cut short an appearance Thursday after a student threw salad dressing on him.

KALAMAZOO, Michigan (AP) -- Commentator and former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan cut short an appearance after an opponent of his conservative views doused him with salad dressing.

"Stop the bigotry!" the demonstrator shouted as he hurled the liquid Thursday night during the program at Western Michigan University. The incident came just two days after another noted conservative, William Kristol, was struck by a pie during an appearance at a college in Indiana.

After he was hit, Buchanan cut short his question-and-answer session with the audience, saying, "Thank you all for coming, but I'm going to have to get my hair washed."

The demonstrator, identified by authorities as a 24-year-old student at Kalamazoo Valley Community College, was arrested and faces a misdemeanor charge of disturbing the peace. He was released on a $100 cash bond, pending his April 14 arraignment.

"He could have faced a felony assault charge, but Pat Buchanan decided to not press that charge," university spokesman Matt Kurz said.

Buchanan's visit had evoked controversy on campus because it fell on the birthday of the late Mexican-American labor leader Cesar Chavez. Buchanan favors tighter controls on immigration.

Kristol, editor of the influential conservative magazine The Weekly Standard and former chief of staff to Vice President Quayle, was splattered by a student during a speech Tuesday at Earlham College in Richmond, Indiana.

Members of the audience at the Quaker college jeered the student, then applauded as Kristol wiped the pie from his face and said, "Just let me finish this point." Kristol then completed his speech and took questions from the audience.

The student, who was not immediately identified, was suspended and could face expulsion following a disciplinary review, Earlham Provost Len Clark said Wednesday.

Clark also issued a written apology complimenting Kristol for his "graciousness."

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

CbusRed
04-01-2005, 01:41 PM
Yeah, I saw a clip of 2 morons trying to hit ann coulter in the face with pies as she spoke, funny thing is, they both missed, from nearly point blank.


Maybe if they would have been playing sports instead of smoking reefer and hugging trees in high school, they wouldnt have missed. :D

RedFanAlways1966
04-01-2005, 02:23 PM
My guess... if someone hit one of these rabblerousers with a pie or salad dressing, they'd be running to their local ambulance-chaser looking to sue for millions of dollars.

I'd like to see him sit in jail for a weekend or two. Then it will take 8, rather than 6, years to complete his 2-year Community College degree. Put him in a cell w/ Sweet Bubba. Put Sweet Bubba's fav salad dressing on rabblerouser's naked body and let the punishment begin. :devil: ;)

CbusRed
04-01-2005, 02:26 PM
My guess... if someone hit one of these rabblerousers with a pie or salad dressing, they'd be running to their local ambulance-chaser looking to sue for millions of dollars.

I'd like to see him sit in jail for a weekend or two. Then it will take 8, rather than 6, years to complete his 2-year Community College degree. Put him in a cell w/ Sweet Bubba. Put Sweet Bubba's fav salad dressing on rabblerouser's naked body and let the punishment begin. :devil: ;)


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:



This post absolutley made my day... possibly my weekend! :laugh:

TRF
04-01-2005, 08:16 PM
Before i start... I lean conservative on economics, liberal on some social issues, conservative on others.

Just wanted to let you know where i stand.

So Cbus, if i borrow my cousin's car which has a bumpersticker on it that say don't blam me, i voted for Kerry, I am dressed appropriately for the event, walk in alone, am polite, do nothing out of the ordinary, i should be ejected right?

The minute, the very minute we are excluded from events because of thoughts or ideas, and not actions, we are at the beginnings of a police state.

and yes that can happen. the more slowly it happens the less likely you are to notice it too.

GAC
04-01-2005, 08:48 PM
The cases of screening at Bush rally's are well documented and plentiful and every time someone :rolleyes: and blames it on the people who were kicked out. To which I say :rolleyes:

Both parties screen and have well scripted rallys.