[kegler4]

"We have already established that the Secret Service has done the same thing to Clinton protestors when he was President, so there is no unequal or one-sided application here."

You are kidding, aren't you?

I don't care which president did it, if you allow your supporters near enough to see and to talk to but you keep those who oppose you blocks away, that is unequal and one-sided. Period.

From this comment I assume you must approve of what Clinton did. If not, how can you approve of Bush doing the exact same thing?

[Shethink13]

I don't care which president did it, if you allow your supporters near enough to see and to talk to but you keep those who oppose you blocks away, that is unequal and one-sided. Period.

From this comment I assume you must approve of what Clinton did. If not, how can you approve of Bush doing the exact same thing?

We're not talking about Clinton vs. Bush, we're talking about the Secret Service. It's the same Secret Service for both Presidents, and they are treating the supporters/critics of each in the same way.

Look, the Constitution guarantees only the right to free speech, not the right to be heard or listened to. It also doesn't guarantee you the right to usurp the President's bully pulpit in order to get face time on the news.

As much as we may have griped about being pushed back during our protests, we understood that it was the prerogative of the Secret Service and respected their judgment and authority. It never stopped us from continuing our protests because our goal was to speak truth to whoever would listen.