Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #1 
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354434/college-republicans-denied-admittance-obama-speech-nathan-harden
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #2 

To be fair it is actually common practice when people are out protesting before a presidential event to keep them out of the event. Disturbing the peace is not tolerated.
Hint to anyone wanting to get into a presidential event to disturb it with a protest statement before security grabs you and removes you----Don't be caught protesting before the event and then get in line wearing clothing that hints at your intent.

You do not have the right to distrupt and disturb the peace. You cannot just stand up in the middle of a movie theatre or a college softball game, or courtroom, or middle of bar or dinner in a restaurant or while on a plane and start yelling your views. You are disturbing the peace and in some cases a safety risk (like on a plane or in a hospital or on a moving vehicle). Protests of events can be done and are allowed a certain distance outside of events (even martin protests, rallies, westboro appearances, gay marriage rallies, etc).

And yes it happened during Bush (and Clinton and Bush sr. too).
Here is a clipping---


The American Conservative
12/15/2003

When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, “The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.” The local police, at the Secret Service’s behest, set up a “designated free-speech zone” on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush’s speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president’s path. Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for disorderly conduct; the police also confiscated his sign. Neel later commented, “As far as I’m concerned, the whole country is a free speech zone. If the Bush administration has its way, anyone who criticizes them will be out of sight and out of mind.”


__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #3 
fhoenix, where does it say they were protesting and disturbing the peace prior to the speech?  
__________________
Susan
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #4 
fhoenix - that's a BS answer.  There is no indication that they were planning to do anything dangerous or disturbing.  This is more about making sure people think everyone loves Obama.
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #5 
How is it a BS answer?
You do not know the intent of these people and the job of secret service and security when the president is speaking is to ensure that they prevent (that means stop before it happens) any disturbances and prevent access by people who are simply there to disrupt or disturb the event.
You do not have the right to disturb the peace. You do not have the right to interrupt events for your personal agenda, If someone shoed up to a boston red sox baseball game with a boston bomber t-shirt they would not be let in. They would disturb the peace.

These people were protesting before the event. Protesting in public is not disturbing the peace if you not disrupting the normal flow of business, not disrupting traffic, not disrupting school, not preventing people from going in and out of a venue or an event, etc. (the martin protests where they disrupted traffic and stopped it was disturbing the peace...the chick-fil-a protests were outside the venue and did not disturb business or flow of traffic--in fact it increased it). History is full of peaceful protests that disturbed the peace and police dogs and fire hosed were used on the protestors. (Vietnam protests, civil rights protests, etc) and then they were arrested. Many protests the police pepper sprayed them and beat them. Back then they didn't get a youtube clip that went viral...they got a face full of mace, a billy club upside the head, a dog nipping at their heels and all while choking on gas and getting knocked back with fire hoses spraying them with water.

When reading an article about an incident from a far right or far left source online it is best to always validate the slanting of the story. That source is not there to simply report the incident they have a motive and are trying to show bias or folly by their political opposites. I try to find a source from both sides of an article to see what actually happened.

The two points I made earlier.
1. This is normal and happened for every president. The liberals complained all the time about how they tried to get into Bush public events and were turned away because of what they were wearing that was negative to the administration. Michael Moore in his Bush movies mentioned how many times anti-Bush people were kept pout of functions. Of course they were not let in. If they disrupt the event they are immediately removed by security. They know this.....so  their goal is to yell out something that will disrupt the event and make news. Yell as much as they can and disrupt the event before security removes them. They become a hero by those that share their views. Make the media coverage of the event be about you disrupting the event first and the event second. Like the peta people that disturb events to make their point. It is part of our self-important society.

2. If you want to disrupt a president speaking at an event DO NOT wear clothing or have signs that are protesting them. Go in with an Obama hope shirt over your Obama Nope shirt. Take off your shirt, then yell your 30 seconds before security grabs you and removes you. If there are many of you it will take time for them to remove you all and you will get in a lot of yelling, make a huge scene that disrupts the event and becomes the headline, and make a great video clip that they will be showing for the next few days on fox news and talking about on rush and beck's the blaze.......and the video clip will go viral on youtube.

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #6 
It does not have to be dangerous to disrupt or disturb.
Neighbors across America get police called on them because they are disturbing the peace with their noise.

if you are protesting before a presidential  event you are not going to be let in. Holding your signs and arguing with people outside shows what is going to happen inside.
If there is a remote possibility that you will try and disrupt the presidental event you are not going to be let in. Period. Happened during Bush sr., during Clinton, during Bush jr., now during Obama, and if Romney were president and two people had on t-shirts that said  "mormon is not a religion it is a cult" and "Mormons or morons" while holding signs saying "we are the 99%" they would not be let in to his event. Security does not care about your views pro or con....they are there to make sure the event is not disturbed.

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #7 
Fhoenix I say BS too.  Those kids held signs and followed all the rules as far as staying at proper distances away etc....  Just a convenient excuse for Obamas, and most liberals, hypocrisy.  They say free speech and free expression,but thats only if you agree with them.  I am sure there are politicians on both sides of the fence that do this but you always act like the repubs are just the same as the dems and it just isnt true.  Alot just never think that way.  Thats why they arent the most politically astute and need to wake up.
__________________
Susan
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #8 

The University of Central Missouri denied Friday that security guards blocked College Republicans from President Obama’s speech at the school this week.
Online reports swirled late Thursday that students wearing “Republican-inspired” attire weren’t allowed into the arena to hear the President for “security reasons.”

Courtney Scott, the state treasurer of the College Republicans, told The College Fix that "it didn't make any sense" as to why they weren't allowed in.
But the school said it reviewed the account and called the reports “unfounded.”
“No one who presented a ticket was turned away prior to all doors being locked in accordance with Secret Service procedures.”

The chairperson of the UCM Young Republicans similarly refuted Scott’s account, telling the Daily News a group of young GOPers staged a protest before the speech and they were too late when they tried to enter the venue where Obama was speaking.

Kailea Bogner, the UCM College Republicans chairperson, added that it wasn’t just College Republicans who were turned away.
The protesters were shown to a live viewing station to watch the speech at the college’s student center instead.
...............................................


The chairperson of the university of Central Missouri Young Republicans threw water on the fire a few of her members was trying to start and ended it.
Spent time protesting and by the time they got into line they had stopped letting people in...including others who were in front of them in line and behind them with "democratic inspired" clothing on.
Next time plan better and have people who are just going to protest and others who are going to get in line and go in.






__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,121
Reply with quote  #9 
Gee, ain't that a shocker.....
__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
B10IS1

Registered:
Posts: 623
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DietCoke
Gee, ain't that a shocker.....
as a side note, have been meaning to ask: are you a Spurgeon fan? " Mere Christianity " is a great read, I pull it out time & again to read.
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #11 
For me it is very difficult understanding the difference between liberal intolerance and conservative intolerance.  Is there a starting point for each, and if so where is it?  Can one be intolerant of intolerance?  What a concept !!!!      Frank
__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 21,999
Reply with quote  #12 
I must admit, I participate in intolerance.  Intolerance of stupidity and intolerance of blind faith are two examples that come to mind.  Not necessarily in that order. and they are not mutually exclusive.  So if there is intolerance directed at me, which there is, that's ok, I will not be hypocritical
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #13 
fhoenix - what happened to the presumption of innocence?  What happened to the benefit of the doubt?  You are perpetuating the whole Tea Party meme where the libs indicted them as racist with no proof at all.  The reality is that Obama only cares about controlling the message and he must suppress all differing opinions to do that.  That is why he so childishly ridicules Fox News - because they won't toe the line for him.
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,121
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
I must admit, I participate in intolerance.  Intolerance of stupidity and intolerance of blind faith are two examples that come to mind. 


I would have to agree with you.  I can't tolerate either of those as well.

But I see it here repeatedly.  Belief in articles written on ultra-conservative websites and in conservative "news sources" that are accepted at face value.  (Liberal sources do it as well.)  Belief in derogatory and inflammatory emails.  Belief in "death panels".  Belief in what Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity spout off about on their shows - without ever checking the facts or asking any questions.  Some of the posters here act like they have been hypnotized - every post contains the same "buzz words" no matter what the issue is.

This thread is a good example.  A conservative news site posts something and everyone reacts to it - before the facts are checked.  When the truth about the situation comes out, it shows the original article to be incorrect.  I just looked at the article and it has not been updated or amended.  They don't want their readers to know the truth.  They want them to hate Obama.  Period. 

This is the stuff that should not be tolerated.  By any of us.  From the right or the left.  We have minds.  We need to use them more to ferret out the truth and stop being spoon-fed the garbage that is often on the internet.

__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #15 
DC - you don't know that the story is incorrect.  That the allegation was denied is hardly news nor is it shocking.  Something happened or the story would not have appeared in the first place.
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #16 
DC whether you believe it or not, that nice panel of Obamas with Obamacare will kill people with their decisions.  Now from there whether you want call it a death panel is your choice or not.  You make chose to ignore facts from things that are already being done, but I am in the medical field and know that deaths will occur as a consequence and history says they will occur as well.  We know how much you libs love to ignore history.
__________________
Susan
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #17 
Obamacare will provide preventive health care to millions of people which will ultimately avoid many unnecessary deaths.  Does this count for anything?
__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,121
Reply with quote  #18 
I'm referring to Sarah Palin's infamous "death panels", which in fact, was only a provision (deleted from final law) that allowed Medicare patients to consult with doctors about end-of-life care planning.  Her comments were provent to be false.

And are you referring to the IPAB panel, while the jury is still out on what exactly it will do, I think you are wrong to think of it as a "death panel". 

From a Forbes article on why it's so difficult to kill the death panel myth -

The myth is also likely to persist because the law calls for the establishment of a 15 person committee– the independent payment advisory board (or IPAB)–which is given the job of recommending cost-saving measures to the Secretary of Health and Human Services if Medicare expenses rise too quickly.  The IPAB will consist of independent healthcare experts who are forbidden, by law, from proposing changes that will affect Medicare coverage or quality.  In other words, they are a far cry from a death panel, with the ACA specifically noting that this group is not allowed to do anything that would “ration” healthcare.  The law also makes sure that the IPAB is not in a position to make policy, but instead to simply make recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, proposals that Congress is specifically empowered to override if it sees fit.

But the limits to the power of the IPAB won’t prevent the death panel myth from persisting.  Indeed, in a recently published study, my colleagues and I show why the death panel myth may even grow with time. (My colleagues, the brains of this study, were the political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler.)  In our study, we tested how fact-checking of the death panel myth influences people’s belief in the existence of such panels.  We discovered that debunking such myths is effective at convincing some people to give up their belief in death panels.  People who had warm feelings toward Sarah Palin, and thus believed her death panel claim, were willing to abandon that belief when faced with non-partisan fact-checking evidence that these death panels did not exist at the time of Palin’s claim.  But the fact-checking only reduced belief in death panels among Palin supporters who otherwise had very little knowledge of politics—people who couldn’t say, for example, how many U.S. Senators there are in each state.  By contrast, as shown in the picture, Palin supporters who also held basic knowledge of U.S. politics were resistant to fact-checking –debunking of the death panel myth not only failed to dissuade them from believing in death panels, but actually caused them to believe more strongly that such panels exist.

Fact-checking backfires among people who have enough basic knowledge of politics to resist evidence that contradicts their beliefs!  It is difficult for people to see the world clearly, when their vision is biased by their pre-existing attitudes.  As I have shown in earlier research, we all—liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans–see the world through partisan eyes.

At the time of Palin’s original death panel claim, the IPAB hadn’t been written into legislation.  Her claim instead was focused on language being proposed in the bill that would require Medicare to pay for end-of-life counseling.  The death panel myth grabbed hold even though the vast majority of Americans are in favor of payment for end-of-life counseling.  Given the much greater controversy likely to surround the IPAB when it is formed later this year, and the psychological resistance people have to abandoning deeply held beliefs, expect a recurrence of the death panel controversy as the ACA unfolds.

The ACA has already survived a Supreme Court challenge and a reelection campaign. Only time will tell whether it survives the death panel controversy.


 

__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 21,999
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Obamacare will provide preventive health care to millions of people which will ultimately avoid many unnecessary deaths.  Does this count for anything?


I think it's just a war on fat people.  more liberal intolerance

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 9,276
Reply with quote  #20 
Preventative health-care for Americans?....That's not the American way!   
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #21 
Stories always appear because anyone can walk up to someone in media that is friendly to their cause and say they were unfairly treated because of their race, religion, sexuality, or political affiliation.
Play the "political card" and whine like a baby------
Wah! Wah!...I was mistreated because I was republican.
Wah! Wah! I did not get the promotion because I was gay.
Wah! Wah! ...I did not get the coaching job because I was black.

Media is entertainment. They will run any story that will sell. They ran stories in UK paper and sites as well as some in usa about sarah palin doing cocaine and having an affair with NBA player Glen Rice back when she was a sportscaster. They had several sources confirm parts and parts were from autobiographies. Does that make it true because they ran with it? They have neighbors telling tales about her. Former aides, former business partners. Former friends of  todds etc....think fox news or Rush was going to touch any of those topics to get to the truth while sarah was the face of the tea party and at the time was still considering running for president in 2012. If it is proven to be fact....you have to address it. Until it is proven to be fact it is someone SELLING their tale to anyone who will listen and getting their 15 minutes of fame.

So if anyone believes somehing actually happened and was obviously denied later because "it was in the news so it had to have some truth to it"......remember that line of thinking when blacks complain about being profiled because of their race in a situation.....and aomething had to have happened for it to have been a news story.

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #22 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61
fhoenix - what happened to the presumption of innocence?  What happened to the benefit of the doubt?  You are perpetuating the whole Tea Party meme where the libs indicted them as racist with no proof at all.  The reality is that Obama only cares about controlling the message and he must suppress all differing opinions to do that.  That is why he so childishly ridicules Fox News - because they won't toe the line for him.


Ask Treyvon Martin about being presumed innocent when he was spotted walking by Zimmerman originally. Ask Zimmerman about being presumed innocent before his trial. Ask Martin was he given the benefit of the doubt by Zimmerman. Ask Zimmerman if he is given benefit of the doubt. Nice words but hardly applied by people. We have our opinions and views and how we see people is how we react to them.

The reality is EVERY president has secret service and security and has had someone go to the media about being left out of the event because they are opposite politics of president and were protesting before the event (in the case with Bush that I posted in this thread earlier they were arrested).

And it is a catch 22. People say this group was not going to disrupt the event so if that is the case the speech would go uninterrupted so didn't matter they were there except to listen to it in public...otherwise they are there to draw attention to themselves and disrupt the event. There is no middle. Either you behave or misbehave. Either you are part of the crowd or try and stand out in the crowd and draw the focus on you.

Obama is not trying to control any message. ANY president can speak to world and national tv audience at any time. He can have a Monday address to the nation and say what he wants with no one else around but the camera crew and secret service. He can say his message at any time without someone there to scream and yell at him for 20 seconds before security get them and excorts them away.
In fact anyone with money can buy a tv spot and say whatever on public access tv or national tv without anyone disrupting it. Anyone can rant and publish the video on youtube. Rush says what he wants on his radio show WITHOUT differing opinions disrupting his show..so does beck. Hannity can say whatever he wants on his show without disrupting and he and o'reilly and maddows and hosts on msnbc and fox news Control their guests....afterall it is their show and network and they can not show an interview if it did not go as they wanted. They are there to entertain their audience and get their message across.......IF you want to get your message across do not try and disrupt someone eles doing their message---go say your message. Otherwise you are there to be a spectacle and get your 15 minutes of fame.

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #23 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Obamacare will provide preventive health care to millions of people which will ultimately avoid many unnecessary deaths.  Does this count for anything?


What evidence do you have to support this very broad claim?
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #24 
DC as I said before you are going to believe what you believe.  I am glad you take the word of political scientists over the word of a medical professional who has dealt with govt medical for over 30 years.  And once again, like I said, you choose to ignore history on socialist medicine.  But you know better right?  What profession are you in?
__________________
Susan
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #25 
Dewey just because insurance covers preventive care doesnt mean people will go.  It still costs time and money.  The ones that ause heathcare before will do it even moreso now.  The ones that didnt use it before, most likely wont now.   Obamacare will not change human nature.  It once again just gives more room for abuse, like everything govt and it wont bring costs down but it willDESTROY QUALITY OF HEALTHCARE, another killing field!
__________________
Susan
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #26 
Susan - you and I are on the same basic page regarding Obama and Clinton.  It's like discussing whether the temperature is 122 or 124 when it should be 75.
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #27 

Liberal and majority of blacks seeing the tea party as racist is no different than seeing a black person and thinking they are a criminal. Perception and what you believe.
Has Nothing to do with reality and everything to do with how the media nad people you trust and listen to portray them.

Tea Party is majority wonderful people with concerns for the country. The reality against their perception from left is 88% of tea party is white, they do have racist elements who make themselves known, there are several tea party offshoots that are not related to original tea party patriots (same as black panthers who are not aligned with new black panthers or Black panthers NY or any of the ones using black panthers in their name as marketing), people like ted nugent who do as much harm as good since he fires up the base but fires off at the others, and the tea party theme song---- "we want out country back"  which beckons to the days of white Christian man and woman married with their son and daughter and dog, she was homemaker and he had the job, white picket fence, women were senn and not heard and in the kitchen, gays were in the closet, Mexicans were across the border, blacks were in their own neighborhoods and schools and were segregated from whites, Indians were on the reservations, political correctness did not exist, only bikers had tattoos and only women & pirates had earings.

The 90% of tea party are good people. The jerkoffs in tea party are the ones who get the liberal media attention. The blacks who act up and are jerks get the media attention. You do not make media by behaving and being a good citizen. Same way those who go Wah! Wah! we are mistreated get attention. Controversy sells. Our self-important society. People clinging to their others who think as they do shouting "we are right you are a tard".  Our Jerry springer and jersey shore society. We sell controvery. We package sex, race differences, sex preferences, and violence and sell it. The show Glee did all of that plus had music. Like a musical version of mtv the real world. Sharpton doesn't sell getting race relations better nor does Rush---they sell the differences and controvery. They sell the outrage and MTV and moies and tv sell the outrageous.


__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #28 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61


What evidence do you have to support this very broad claim?


1  2  3  4  5  6


__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 8,735
Reply with quote  #29 
The first link wouldn't let me in. The second discussed how preventive care helps women, a position I agree with.  What I asked is what evidence is there that Obamacare will provide more preventive care than before.  Are you telling me that only with Obamacare are mammograms now covered?
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #30 
Obamacare makes insurance available to all which will now make mammograms, colonoscopy, contraception, blood tests, etc. available to the poor, often with no co-pay.

Not sure how this old article might be applicable to today but I suspect it still applies to a great deal.

__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: