Viewpoint-based Exclusionary Determinations
At a Denver pit-stop in 2005, President Bush had several of his volunteers eject two members of an audience that had come to see him speak. The reasoning was that the two citizens disagreed with the President's policies, and arrived in a vehicle bearing a bumper sticker that read "No blood for oil!"
So, clearly, they had to be ejected.
Flash-forward to 2007. The civil suit against the volunteers who tossed the citizens out has ended. The U.S. Government - or, at least, the Bush Administration - won.
Great. Awesome. That's just amazing.
The Italian dictator Bonito Mussolini once said "Fascism rightly should be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Draw your own conclusions.
So, clearly, they had to be ejected.
Flash-forward to 2007. The civil suit against the volunteers who tossed the citizens out has ended. The U.S. Government - or, at least, the Bush Administration - won.
Casper and Klinkerman's lawyers said the government has the same rights as a private corporation when its officials speak."[T]he government has the same rights as a private corporation when its officials speak"???
"The president may constitutionally make viewpoint-based exclusionary determinations in conveying his own message," the attorneys said in the filing. "So in following the instructions of the White House and carrying out its viewpoint-based exclusions, Casper and Klinkerman did not violate any of plaintiffs' constitutional rights."
Great. Awesome. That's just amazing.
The Italian dictator Bonito Mussolini once said "Fascism rightly should be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Draw your own conclusions.
Labels: partisanship
Post a Comment
