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)
And you opinion on the shutdown of Boston during the DNC Convention this year is??
EVERYTHING which is stated in this article is going to be imposed on Bostonians during the Convention. It is "well known" (ie. Bostonians and some here on FR have seen the articles). I have NOT seen the media outrage as in this case.
AND, a little less bias and a bit more fact would have lended more credence to the authors report. As it is, it is impossible to tell what is fact and waht is fiction. For example, were there no free speech zones, or is this something the reporter *thought* were there. The careful reader is left to wonder.
"Beelzebubba?"
OMG...I need a new keyboard and monitor!!!
LOL, freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee thinks the President of the United States does not know people hate, disagree with, think he is Hitler, Saddam, OBL, mendacious, devious and sinister??
And if they only could get those signs in front of his face, he would change his policies or resign?
Hilarious and sad.
There is no connection, but if the worst happens, the SS wants a full file of 'steps taken' to cover their asses. It doesn't matter that the steps taken were senseless, only that there are lots of them.
This policy has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with a nice clean photo-op.
It has to do with neither, it's purpose is to look good on paper, just in case.
So9
Well, I do understand the free speech implications here - but the protestors also miss a certain point. They are obsessed with telling Bush what they think of him. Bush really doesn't care. However, if they were more saavy, they would play to the media covering the protest and get their opinions out through the media to a larger audience with the power to vote one way or the other in the upcoming election.
I have been herded into "free speech" zones before - and they have a certain benefit of having the press swarming over them, and I've gotten several interviews as a result. So I think the free speech implications here are not nearly as profound as folks wish to make them out to be, if your goal is to be effective to voters instead of trying to make a point to a politican who could care less.
I don't support Kerry and wouldn't vote for him because he too has no respect for free speech or assembly.
But he's not "our guy". This is your candidate. When he acts like Democrats we're supposed to convey our displeasure
I didn't think you'd address the topic. You had your chance for debate. Consider yourself on ignore for the rest of the thread.
As an aspiring screenwriter, I love special lines in dialogue. That one's good. But, the better one is when the young lady at the publisher's asks Mr. Udall, "How do you write women so well," and he replies, "I think of a man... and I take away reason and accountability."
Good stuff. Um... I forget... what was this thread about?
You say you don't want to elect Clintons.
Who do YOU think would be YOUR perfect candidate?
Do you have a solution or are you just here to complain?
It matters not what he thinks of the protesters, or if their message has any effect on him.
It does matter that he respects the basic rights of the American people of free speech and assembly.
Has Dubya gotten a haircut on Air Force 1 while shutting down an entire airport yet?
A lot of the protestors on the far left have a history of violent protest, whereas there is no such history with FR protestors.
I had an opportunity to "Freep the Creep" my first time I went to the Saturday Freep at the White House. I got there before anyone else, and wasn't sure where to go, so I wandered around the perimeter of the White House with my sign and my costume (Clintonstein) looking for the right spot. Well, lo and behold, as soon as I neared the SW gate, a motorcade started to pull out - a Presidential Movement! I started to reach into my bag for my sign - and then realized that it wasn't such a good idea to be reaching into a bag for something with Slick's limo approaching and armed and nervous Secret Service guards all about. So sometimes it's best to not worry about the president and instead make your point to the media or fellow citizens.
Perhaps you are too unhappy in this oppressive country. Perhaps you might discover another country is freeeee-er?
How did this become a free speech issue?
The constitution says something about "Congress shall pass no law......"
Did congress pass a law I am not aware of?
The first amendment is a restriction on congress not presidential motorcades.
I did address the topic and part of the topic is the journalist who wrote this article and the political bent(hate America leftist) of this paper.
Sorry that you don't like those apples.
Are you typing from jail? A political prison for protestors?
You're getting some amazing reactions on this thread.
You'd think the fact that Komrade Klinton did it would have FReepers expecting something different from our current president.
Apparently not.
They allowed supporters to remain on the street, and arrested or moved dissenters.
The government holds no legitimate power to make such distinctions, especially where dissent is concerned.
To do so is to behave like a monarch or dictator, not the defender of freedom we expect of our president.
So the president isn't allowed to get a clean photo-op?! Now your impinging his free speech. Here's the news, the First Ammendment doesn't garauntee you time, location or audience. No one's speech was impinged, get over yourself.
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.