Probably, but t-shirt slogans and bumper stickers have been held to be
protected speech under the 1st Amendment, so he shouldn't have to,
especially in a publicly funded event!
Kendall
An unreasonable man (but my wife says that's redundant!)
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
-----Original Message-----
From: Kathleen Salkin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 4:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: article...
Could he have got in undercover? ;)
Kat
On 7 Apr 2006, at 18:57, Kendall David Corbett wrote:
At least the guy was let in to the venue. There's been more than one
instance reported where people wearing anti-Bush T-shirts were prevented
from entering places where The Shrub was speaking by people who appeared
to be Secret Service. And these were events funded by taxpayer dollars!
The link refers to an incident in Denver.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10420-2005Apr22.html
Anthony, I remember hearing about similar occurrences in Fargo. Do
remember anything about those?
Kendall
An unreasonable man (but my wife says that's redundant!)
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
-----Original Message-----
From: Kathleen Salkin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 3:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: article...
Did you hear about Bush's trip to NC yesterday? He was criticised by
an attendee but that guy was soundly booed. What'd you expect in the
South?
Kat
On 7 Apr 2006, at 18:00, Linda Walker wrote:
Bush seems very good at covering his tracks but I have to have hope
so I am hopeful Americans wake up and that the Democrats in office
find their backbone.
At 12:14 PM 4/7/2006, you wrote:
> ...and in order for Congress to impeach Bush, the Democrats would need
> to be in control, which isn't likely unless some real bombshells come
> out of the Libby trial, which will be delayed until after the 2006
> elections, IMHO.=20
>
> Kendall=20
>
> An unreasonable man (but my wife says that's redundant!)
>
> The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
> progress depends on the unreasonable man.
>
> -George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kathleen Salkin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]=20
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 3:43 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: article...
>
> I don't like him any more than you do, Anthony, and I would love to
> =20
> see him get impeached but to be scrupulously fair, I need to see =20
> evidence.
>
> I also think what they did to Bill Clinton was horrible and I think
> =20
> turnabout would be fair play, but I don't see it happening. He's
> too =20
> wily.
>
> Kat
>
> On 6 Apr 2006, at 18:39, Anthony Arnold wrote:
>
> I have given up on hope that Bush and Chaney are going to be
> removed, =20
> so we
> better live through the next 3 years and promise ourselves that the
> =20
> mistakes
> made won't be repeated. Being in a red state where majority =20
> appreciate what
> Bush and Chaney are doing for everyone of us, I'm just amazed that =20
> people
> aren't willing to smell the roses.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony
> Visit my website at www.anthonyarnold.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cerebral Palsy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On =20
> Behalf Of
> Kathleen Salkin
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 5:06 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: article...
>
> If this is true, this is shocking...but before going all half-cocked,
> do consider the source. This guy is under criminal investigation and
> is probably naming names to cut a deal. Until I see an indictment
> for Bush come out, I'm going to be sceptical.
>
> I loathe Bush, but he is innocent until proven guilty.
>
> Kat
>
>
> On 6 Apr 2006, at 17:03, Mike Collis wrote:
>
> I was willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt...
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12187153/ but if this is true, it raises
> danger
> signals...
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
|
