Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

When King George travels, liberties suffer
The Capital Times ^ | May 13, 2004 | John Nichols

Posted on 05/14/2004 8:20:31 AM PDT by freeeee

The King made a royal visit to Wisconsin last week, and as is common when monarchs travel, individual liberties were suspended.

King George Bush's bus trip across western Wisconsin closed schools and roads, prevented residents from moving freely in their own communities, and prevented citizens from exercising their free speech rights.

All in all, it was a typical George W. Bush visit.

But there's a slight twist.

People in western Wisconsin, who hold to the refreshingly naive notion that they live in a republic as opposed to an imperial realm, are objecting.

"There's a pattern of harassment of free speech here that really concerns me," says Guy Wolf, the student services coordinator at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. "If they're going to call it a presidential visit, then it should be a presidential visit - where we can hear from him and he can hear from us. But that's not what happened here, not at all."

Wolf and other La Crosse area residents who wanted to let the president know their feelings about critical issues came face to face with the reality that, when King George travels, he is not actually interested in a two-way conversation.

Along the route of the Bush bus trip from Dubuque to La Crosse, the Bush team created a "no-free-speech" zone that excluded any expressions of the dissent that is the lifeblood of democracy. In Platteville, peace activist Frank Van Den Bosch was arrested for holding up a sign that was critical of the president. The sign's "dangerous" message, "FUGW," was incomprehensible to children and, no doubt, to many adults. Yet, it was still determined sufficiently unsettling to the royal procession that Van Den Bosch was slapped with a disorderly conduct ticket.

Up the road in La Crosse, the clampdown on civil liberties was even more sweeping. Wolf and hundreds of other Wisconsinites and Minnesotans who sought to express dissents were videotaped by authorities, told they could not make noise, ordered not to display certain signs and forced to stand out of eyesight of Bush and his entourage. Again and again, they were told that if they expressed themselves in ways that were entirely protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, they would be "subject to arrest."

"Everyone understood the need for basic security for the president, but none of us could understand why we had to give up our free speech rights," explained Wolf.

La Crosse Mayor John Medinger shares that concern. The Bush-Cheney campaign leased a portion of a local park where the royal rally was held. Yet, Wisconsinites who wanted to protest Bush's visit were told they could not use a sound system in a completely different section of the park.

"I want to find out why the whole park was used when only a portion was leased," Medinger told the La Crosse Tribune. "So when demonstrators were told they couldn't have (sound) systems, the question is why."

The Bush-Cheney campaign paid a $100 fee to use one part of the park, but disrupted much of the city. Medinger is now assessing the full cost of the royal visit and hopes to deliver a bill to the campaign, which State Elections Board attorney George Dunst says the Bush campaign should pay. Other communities, including Prairie du Chien, are looking at following Medinger's lead.

But the challenge should not just be a financial one. The Bush visit attacked First Amendment rights up and down the Mississippi. A lot of people are owed apologies.

In a monarchy, of course, the King never apologizes. But in a democracy, the president is supposed to be accountable to the people.

By pressing demands that the charges against Frank Van Den Bosch be dropped and that the White House and the Bush-Cheney campaign apologize for participating in an anti-democratic endeavor, residents of western Wisconsin can, and should, take up the cause of this country's founders. It is time once more to challenge a King named George.

Caption: President Bush waves to crowds from his campaign bus as he passes through Prairie du Chien last Friday. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: allbushsfault; bakedzot; baronvonzothausen; bbqzot; brainddonor; bustour; du; feelingzotty; freeassembly; freespeech; gotzot; ismellozone; jfk04; kinggeorge; kittenchow; kittylitter; lacrosse; moosebitmysister; protest; roastzot; takeittodu; vikingsrule; waaaaaaaahhhh; whineandcheese; zot; zotaugratin; zotbot; zotfest; zotsky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 421-438 next last
To: Protagoras

I'm not speculating at all, I am being logical. Having been part of the 3AM world when I was younger I've known people that would swear on a stack of Bibles they were just standing on the street corner "doin' nuttin'" when they were arrested... never mind the stereo in their hands and the audible alarm blaring from the house behind them. When a "reporter" clearly has an axe to grind I take his account with many grains of salt.

Whether or not someone should be allowed to do what such thing? Arrest somebody? If they're suspected of committing a crime yes.


161 posted on 05/14/2004 9:57:47 AM PDT by discostu (Brick urgently required, must be thick and well kept)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: All

I have to step out for a bit. Please feel free to yell at me while I'm gone. I'll answer your flames later today.


162 posted on 05/14/2004 10:00:29 AM PDT by freeeee ("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
I'm glad my point has been well taken by someone.

The thinking that spawns these types of speech restrictions (i.e. don't criticize the powers-that-be) is the same type that came up with the anti-free speech provisions of McCain & Feingold's campaign finance legislation.

You remember -- the one Congress was going to stop. No, wait. I meant the President. Whoops. I meant the Supreme Court. Hey, wait a second.........

163 posted on 05/14/2004 10:02:11 AM PDT by gdani (letting the marketplace decide = conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: discostu
Stick to the article or you are you are speculating. The article is all we have to comment on without fantasies.

But since you need to cling to that in order to avoid the real question, let's say the guy was a murderer. Go all the way with the fantasy.

Now the real question, do you support the right to hold up rude signs in protest of things or not?

I reserve the right to hold up rude signs about HILLERY CLINTON. Or ABORTION. or GUN CONTROL, etc, etc, etc.

164 posted on 05/14/2004 10:02:52 AM PDT by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
I have to step out for a bit. Please feel free to yell at me while I'm gone. I'll answer your flames later today

Whatever, as you intentionally go into victim mode, begging for symapthy.

165 posted on 05/14/2004 10:03:11 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: freeeee

freeeee wrote:



The criteria used for screening is not threat level. It is the content of political speech.

Our government has no legitimate authority to limit dissent to small areas, while allowing supporters access to better venues.





How do you KNOW it's not threat level? Have you had lunch with the Secret Service lately?

Now me? Personally? I think he has the right not to be bothered by a bunch of immature morons screaming obscenities and threats into bull-horns and hiding behind the Constitution in order to justify it.

But that's just me.

Maybe if the Left learned some basic manners and conducted themselves as adults, the grow-ups would allow them closer.

Ever consider THAT?

Yo started this about how it wasn't a "Free Country" any more.

You've been on here for quite some time insulting people and hurling accusation and invective and taking shots at the government. Is anybody stopping you? Has your computer exploded? Has your modem died? Any knocks at your door telling you to stop what you're posting? How about mysterious e-mail with sinister innuendo?

Yep. You just like whining and you don't have enough to do.


166 posted on 05/14/2004 10:04:03 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: gdani
the anti-free speech provisions of McCain & Feingold's campaign finance legislation. You remember -- the one Congress was going to stop. No, wait. I meant the President. Whoops. I meant the Supreme Court. Hey, wait a second.........

BTTT

167 posted on 05/14/2004 10:04:20 AM PDT by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
I haven't heard yet that Bush send out a goon-squad to smack people around and tear up thier signs.

No, but I have heard about people being arrested or forced to go to some "free speech zone" a goodly distance away. I expect better of President Bush.

168 posted on 05/14/2004 10:05:21 AM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
Yep. You just like whining and you don't have enough to do.

Please adhere to that when Hillary runs for President. Remember, you will only be whining.

When Billy boy was getting windys in the Oval office I'm sure you didn't say anything so you couldn't be accused of whining.

169 posted on 05/14/2004 10:07:06 AM PDT by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Cute little article...sarcastic as hell...but cute.

Reminds me of when King william of Monica visited Atlanta and totally screwed up rush hour on several occasions during his "reign".

And, wasn't there a time when King william of Monicaheld up air traffic for about two hours, to get a freakin' HAIRCUT?

Oh, Oh, and how about King william of Monica having a couple "detained" by the Secret Service for shouting "clinton, you suck" at some rally? So tolerent of disention, this King william of Monica.

Seems I remember King James of Plains screwing up traffic a few times too.

The author was obviously one of those kids who studied under the liberals' education plan, where adding a condom to a cucumber overshadowed Civics class, or he would understand Presidential security like the adults of the world do.
170 posted on 05/14/2004 10:07:29 AM PDT by FrankR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeeee

Getting too hot? Don't let the door hit you in the butt!


171 posted on 05/14/2004 10:08:49 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
I noticed you didn't respond to tiamat's questions and points? Did you also notice I'm answering the posts of about a dozen people? I have answered taimat as much as possible. Keep reading.

"YOU remind me of John efFIn Kerry, lots of whining but no real substance. Just a lot of bitching. Whats the matter couldn't get an audience with Hillary?"

"You want "no substance"? FReepers screamed their heads off at the same exact treatment BY HILLARY! Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's all just fine and dandy.

I noticed you're answering. You answered Tiamat's post directly but didn't respond to her assertions. I think most of us get your point but the venomous attitude is off-putting. You're all rabid and unable to see anyone else's point...kinda like a liberal.

172 posted on 05/14/2004 10:09:51 AM PDT by subterfuge (Liberalism is, as liberalism does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras

Actually, I don't whine.
I write letters. I call my Senators and Congress Critters. I sign Petitions.

I DO sometimes end up SCREAMING at my TV.

But most importantly, I VOTE!



173 posted on 05/14/2004 10:11:01 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
No president in the last 10 years has any respect for free speech or assembly.

The 1st ammendment does not give protestors license to spray spittle in the Presidents face.

There have always been limits on rights. You can't yell fire in a theater, you can't have a whiney liberals meeting in the middle of Interstate 40.

Get over it.

174 posted on 05/14/2004 10:14:39 AM PDT by TC Rider (The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: jimt

Okay, I hear that.

What do we know about previous administrations? Say before JFK?

Was it possible for protesters to get close? What about in the late 1890's? Or the early 20th century? It wasn't all sweetness and light THEN either!


175 posted on 05/14/2004 10:17:13 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: jimt

Hmmmm.... occurs to me too, and in the interests of fairness I should tell you: Part of my problem is this particular poster, who seems to show up simply to stir the pot and cause trouble.



As far as I am concerned, he would be better off at LP.


176 posted on 05/14/2004 10:19:37 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
Actually, I don't whine.

So criticizing Bush or government is whining, but criticizing Clinton or liberals is not?

But most importantly, I VOTE!

If Clinton was running against Gore who would you vote for?

177 posted on 05/14/2004 10:24:22 AM PDT by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: GOPrincess; freee
Apparently he's never heard of what it's like when either of the Clintons traveled

The point is not whether the Democrats do it or the Republicans do it, it's the point that it shouldn't be done. Of course from the partisan standpoint ('well they did it too') I've seen on this thread, I imagine that's going to be a hard concept to grasp. freee, thanks for posting. Good article

178 posted on 05/14/2004 10:25:12 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
Part of my problem is this particular poster, who seems to show up simply to stir the pot and cause trouble.

Please stop whining.

179 posted on 05/14/2004 10:25:41 AM PDT by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
What do we know about previous administrations? Say before JFK?

I don't know about those, but I believe from LBJ on there was a greater tolerance of protestors. And I don't remember freeways being shut down by motorcades until Slick was in, but I could be wrong.

180 posted on 05/14/2004 10:26:38 AM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 421-438 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson