uhmump95 Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:Blah, that man looks like he knows what he's doing and I'm sure he gave the sign to his little girl.  I doubt the 3 year old woke up and said, "Daddy, let's go to the Edwrards rally with our Bush sign!!"  If she did, then please swap her for Bush on the ticket and I'd vote for her.

Blah???

None of what you just posted matters. Have you ever heard of keeping your hands to yourself? It is a concept that used to be taught in preschool.

I remember that one, but I remember my mother always telling me to use common sense.

Chalk one up for the squid!!!!

:roflol: I love it, liberals excusing assinine behavior. If the shoe was on the other foot, you would be screaming.

RebelKev Wrote:

TJRocket Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

Here is a pic of the incident from the original post in the thread.

There has been some speculation that the man with the Marshall hat is actually the Bush supporters son. The Bush supporter was being interviewed on Glenn Beck's program just a few minutes ago. He stated that he was at two other Pro Kerry rallies where he was verbally and physically assaulted. My question for that man would be, if you know the type of behavior that goes on there, why would you bring your three year old daughter?

His T-Shirt, from what I can see, says IUPA* for K...can't read the rest. Bush's name does not start with a K.

The specualtion is that the guy with the hat, the "union employee" is the other guy's son. The specualtion is that perhaps the incident was staged, for the cameras.

TJRocket Wrote:The specualtion is that the guy with the hat, the "union employee" is the other guy's son. The specualtion is that perhaps the incident was staged, for the cameras.

Republican retribution for the CBS/60 minutes/Dan Rather/MemoGate.

GrayBeard Wrote:

uhmump95 Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:Blah, that man looks like he knows what he's doing and I'm sure he gave the sign to his little girl.  I doubt the 3 year old woke up and said, "Daddy, let's go to the Edwrards rally with our Bush sign!!"  If she did, then please swap her for Bush on the ticket and I'd vote for her.

Blah???

None of what you just posted matters. Have you ever heard of keeping your hands to yourself? It is a concept that used to be taught in preschool.

I remember that one, but I remember my mother always telling me to use common sense.

Chalk one up for the squid!!!!

:roflol: I love it, liberals excusing assinine behavior. If the shoe was on the other foot, you would be screaming.

nope, just like the people who got into the GOP convention just to yell are morons with no common sense and deserved to be dragged out and maybe roughed up a bit. Both sides have morons for supporters and sadly, that's all we see on the news because morons make great news stories.

Link please.

fsquid Wrote:nope, just like the people who got into the GOP convention just to yell are morons with no common sense. Both sides have morons for supporters and sadly, that's all we see on the news because morons make great news stories.

Having people removed for being disruptive is one thing, but attacking someone is a completely different story.

For the Record, I have already stated that going to a rally to protest is pointless and an excercise in futility, but I don't support attacking the people in any circumstance.

He deserves to be roughed up for practicing his 1st amendment right in a public area? You are going to have to do better than that. ....and yes, it IS different than infiltrating a convention center rented by a political party.

TJRocket Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

TJRocket Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

Here is a pic of the incident from the original post in the thread.

There has been some speculation that the man with the Marshall hat is actually the Bush supporters son. The Bush supporter was being interviewed on Glenn Beck's program just a few minutes ago. He stated that he was at two other Pro Kerry rallies where he was verbally and physically assaulted. My question for that man would be, if you know the type of behavior that goes on there, why would you bring your three year old daughter?

His T-Shirt, from what I can see, says IUPA* for K...can't read the rest. Bush's name does not start with a K.

The specualtion is that the guy with the hat, the "union employee" is the other guy's son. The specualtion is that perhaps the incident was staged, for the cameras.

Oh great, another right-wing conspiracy. :rolleyes:

I don't support attacking either. I'm just saying that the father is a moron for bringing his little girl with him. An adult is disciplined enough to stand with the sign quietly and whatnot. A 3 year old is not disciplined to do that, I couldn't even sit still through dinner at 3.

RebelKev Wrote:He deserves to be roughed up for practicing his 1st amendment right in a public area? You are going to have to do better than that. ....and yes, it IS different than infiltrating a convention center rented by a political party.

Is a taramac a "public" area? I believe that it is private property since I think Edwards landed at an air center instead of the airport there.

uhmump95 Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote: How about those with different beliefs from yourself?

If you ask me, your president is all for this one.

Correct. He attacks those who don't share the belief that the United States of America should continue to exist.

Socre one for you.

Quote:I'm just saying that the father is a moron for bringing his little girl with him.

Yeah, don't expose your daughter to the wonders of the American system. Had there not been a maniac in the crowd, daddy could've said "See honey, that's why this country is so great. We got to stand there and dissent peacefully."

Well, one good thing is that the little girl probably won't be voting for Democrats when she comes of age.

fsquid Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:He deserves to be roughed up for practicing his 1st amendment right in a public area? You are going to have to do better than that. ....and yes, it IS different than infiltrating a convention center rented by a political party.

Is a taramac a "public" area? I believe that it is private property since I think Edwards landed at an air center instead of the airport there.

Soooo, did they get permission from the FBO? I doubt it. He deserved to be there just as they did.

I bet they did get permission from the local airline commission. Are bystanders usually allowed on a taramac??

fsquid Wrote:I bet they did get permission from the local airline commission. Are bystanders usually allowed on a taramac??

I doubt they did. That's why Rick was asking for a link to your accusations. If that was the case, they wouldn't have even been let in.

my accusations?? How do I have link to the fact that this father is a moron?

fsquid Wrote:Why did the girl have a Bush Cheney sign at an Edwards campaign stop? That doesn't make sense to me.

Because it's a free country, and people should be allowed to hold a sign up quietly if they want...
Using your logic, one could argue that there should have been no protesters in NYC during the Republican Convention.

Listen...I come from an entire family of Democrats - people who think every Republican hates the middle class - but that's not who I'm talking about. I'm talking about these people who go to campaign events or hold demonstrations and think they have a monopoly on free speech and rights to protest.

And to say that's who Democrats have become is very fair. If moveon.org, Terry McAuliffe, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Al Gore, and Tom Harkin are allowed to essentially represent the Democratic Party, then it's fair to say their views represent what the Democratic Party has become.

But this little girl thing is basically the straw that broke the camel's back. This article earlier in the week is what really set me off:

<a href='http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/13/opinion/lynch/main643067.shtml' target='_blank'>How low can you go?</a>

[QUOTE]
(As a sign of how desperate Democrats have become, this week one media consultant said wistfully that maybe one more hurricane in Florida might turn those right direction-wrong track numbers around and give Kerry a fighting chance in the not-so-sunny state. But then all the federal aid and the name Jeb Bush came to mind and the Democrat got wistful. "He’s really been doing a very good job dealing with that hurricane stuff. That can’t be good for us. Sigh…")
[QUOTE]

If this is what it's come to, then we're all in big trouble. I don't care if Bush was 30 points behind - I would NEVER, EVER wish for a hurricane just to help his Presidential campaign.

It's part of the problem I have with people on the Iraq issue - every time something goes wrong, it's spun into an attack on the President.
Example:

[QUOTE]
In a 1,500-page report, the head of the Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, will find Saddam was importing banned materials, working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of U.N. agreements and maintaining a dual-use industrial sector that could produce weapons.

Duelfer also says Iraq only had small research and development programs for chemical and biological weapons.

As Duelfer puts the finishing touches on his report, he concludes Saddam had intentions of restarting weapons programs at some point, after suspicion and inspections from the international community waned.
[QUOTE]

No WMDs is unfortunate, but not the most important part of the story IMO. More important was Hussein's purchase of banned materials with the intent of restarting his weapons programs - a textbook case for preemption, given his history with the U.S..

But of course, the Neon Headline is "NO WMDs".

Look...if the WMD thing is enough for you to vote for Kerry, fine. But constantly using it for vain political purposes will not help our soldiers and our efforts in Iraq.

And it in no way, shape or form makes Kerry a more attractive candidate. The vicissitudes of his Iraq positions suggest a man indecisive at best, borderline dementia at worst.

Anyway...this elections isn't important enough for me to attack small children or wish for Hurricanes to strike fellow citizens.

fsquid Wrote:my accusations?? How do I have link to the fact that this father is a moron?

You are trying to back up your claim that he shouldn't have been there. To that I ask, why? and where's your proof that it was a private event at a general aviation fixed-based operator?

Quote: Because it's a free country, and people should be allowed to hold a sign up quietly if they want...
Using your logic, one could argue that there should have been no protesters in NYC during the Republican Convention.

Was she holding it up quietly?? Do you know for a fact that she wasn't waving it around??

Protesters in NYC is fine, protestors inside their event is wrong. A protestor in Huntington is ok, a protestor inside a Edwards campaign stop is wrong.

TJRocket Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

TJRocket Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

Here is a pic of the incident from the original post in the thread.

There has been some speculation that the man with the Marshall hat is actually the Bush supporters son. The Bush supporter was being interviewed on Glenn Beck's program just a few minutes ago. He stated that he was at two other Pro Kerry rallies where he was verbally and physically assaulted. My question for that man would be, if you know the type of behavior that goes on there, why would you bring your three year old daughter?

His T-Shirt, from what I can see, says IUPA* for K...can't read the rest. Bush's name does not start with a K.

The specualtion is that the guy with the hat, the "union employee" is the other guy's son. The specualtion is that perhaps the incident was staged, for the cameras.

The guy was just on Glenn Beck answering that one. He does have a son, but it's not that guy. Do you think a 3-year old would by crying and scared if that were her brother?
*name calling is a no no* But that's what happens when moveon.org is your primary information source.

RebelKev Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:my accusations?? How do I have link to the fact that this father is a moron?

You are trying to back up your claim that he shouldn't have been there. To that I ask, why? and where's your proof that it was a private event at a general aviation fixed-based operator?

and where is your proof that these two were "silently" protesting?