The point of the article was that people who weren't protesting were allowed to stay.
Those with critical views were forced to leave or face arrest.
W thinks a nice photo-op trumps the 1st Amendment. Can't have those pesky protesters ruining something as important as a re-election campaign. Hey, you gotta have priorities.
Those with critical views were forced to leave or face arrest.
Those who do not remember history, are condemned to be freeeee.....
No, the author takes one isolated example and uses it to create a generalization. The sign that was being held up can easily be said to be offensive or obscene (and surely not within the civilized mores of Wisconsin). Another sign with a legitimate message such as "Repeal the PATRIOT Act" would not have drawn such a response. That is the difference that lefties cannot see, because so many of them are vile, disgusting people with very coarse ways and means.
This was not an official 'protest'; and surely the President has a 'right or two' himself.
Maybe people with signage who want to be up close and personal and in your face; need a 'protest permit'. Would be a good idea; otherwise they may totally block the accessibility/view from those who want to enjoy the visit as it was intended.
Protest signs can be held; and observed and appreciated and even make it on TV!!! without the people holding them; hogging, disrupting and spoiling the whole event for everyone else.