Congress Bans Banner Towers

[Timebuilder]

Why do we worry about blame? That's easy.

If we don't worry about being blamed for not acting quicky enough or most effectively (Mrs. Clinton has already come out against the administration's handling of the terror attacks) then the media and the opposition will have a field day lambasting our efforts. Therefore, we must make every effort possible to inform and prepare the population.

Why is that possibility of being blamed a problem?

Imagine Dashle or Gephart or Madame Clinton as president, attempting to mollify and coddle and placate the evil in the world, in a Carter-esq show of weakness and unwillingness to defend the United States.

How would you feel about Osama making a "state visit" to the White House?

I find the image nauseating.

 

[rightrudder]

I'm not a simmering son, Timebuilder... I won't make any assumptions of who or what you are either.

But back to another example of yours, yelling fire in a crowded theater is not protected speech. I agree with you there and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that there are some limits on free speech, the fire example is taken directly from a ruling by the court.

But, the difference here is theater patrons are not gagged prior to entering the theater, just in case one of them might yell out.

They are punished if in fact, their actions or words result in harm.

Restricting speech in a preemptive manner is a serious threat to our civil liberties.

 

[Timebuilder]

You're right.

I'm making an assumption that you are perhaps more than 18 years younger than myself, and could be, by American tradition, addressed as "son". Judging by my own age, I am probably right.

No offense intended.

This is only a guess about the motives for banning the banner tows, and this thread is only a discussion.

Under normal circumstances, you might be right about "preemptive" barring of speech, but these are different times. And indeed, the supporters of our enemies have a very loud voice without our adding to it. Can you hear it? It has a French accent.

 

[rightrudder]

Timebuilder,

You are right unless you are eligible for the AARP...and if i've recently had my gender reclassified

I know we are no longer in "normal" circumstances, but the truth is that this may actually be what normal has become and will remain.

Our country has had a great history of permitting people to disagree, even with their own government. It would be a tragedy if we should lose that opportunity.

I'm afraid that we are headed down a slippery slope when we consider a persons words or thoughts to be dangerous.

 

[Timebuilder]

I DO get those darn AARP mailings. Most folks don't know that we are using our own tax dollars to fund this organization that lobbies congress for the retired! This may not be in YOUR best interest, or mine.

I had a 90% chance on the gender issue. My bad.

Actually, threats have been unprotected speech for a long time. What once was considered mere political rhetoric is now more threatening, becuase it can generate terror.