home

Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally

By Jeralyn, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 05:24:41 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

President Bush came to Denver last week to push his social security privatization plan. Tickets were available through the office of Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.) Among those getting tickets were Alex Young, 25, an Internet technology worker from Denver; Leslie Weise, a Denver lawyer; and Karen Bauer, a Denver marketing coordinator.

After passing security and reaching their seats, they were asked to leave and pushed towards the door. Why? The Secret Service, which is now involved in the investigation of the incident, says they arrived at the rally in a car that had a bumper sticker that said "No More Blood for Oil."

The Secret Service say they weren't involved, it was a Republican volunteer staffer. Daily Kos has the full story, including an email he received from the three who were ejected. Markos says,

...the White House uses taxpayer dollars to finance these propaganda events. THEN, in order to keep out anyone who might be critical, they "outsource" ticketing and security. That way they can label the events "private" and kick out anyone they want in violation of the First Amendment. Who in Congress will step up and call for an investigation?

Attytood has more.

< Calif. Appeals Ct. Overturns Sentence for Failure of Sex Offender to Register | Schiavo Request for Rehearing Denied >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally | 73 comments (73 topical)
    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 02:35:39 AM EST
    Just stopping by to say that I love your site.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 02:43:28 AM EST
    The last commentator obviously missed the crucial point here: that screening list (obviously based on political info) is being used to eject unfavored groups from these taxpayer-funded events. I think getting the word out on more blogs so the papers take notice would be a start towards breaking this "bamboozlegate"! =)

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 03:14:28 AM EST
    That's not a defense, playa-k...you're evading the issue. Would you support a Democratic president prescreening those conservatives who might disagree? Especially when the event was paid for with taxpayer funds?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:45:41 AM EST
    don't even try to explain to pla-ya k he's too stupid

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 05:09:52 AM EST
    Holy Freakin' Christ!! Whatever happened to puncutation, capitalization and spelling? Am I the only one that misses grammar?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 05:56:20 AM EST
    et al - The issue is that they don't want these events to be interrupted, and the resulting security problems. And they think these people will try to do so. But, if these folks arrived by car with the bumper sticker, and had no other issues/previous problems/statements, it appears to me that whoever threw them out over reacted. However, if they had a history, it becomes something else. Free speech is very important to me, but so is the right of other people who wanted to hear what Bush had to say. And yes, during Clinton's terms, several people were arrested, supposedly for just having signs. Bottom line is this. Our country has a history of political violence. In my life time one President has been killed, another seriously wounded and an attempt was made on a third. One presidential nominee candidate was killed. In addition, just watch the demonstrations, read the signs and hear the comments. Hey, just read the comments on the internet. Many are incendiary at worst, very disturbing at best. So the Secret Service and other security people are going to be very protective. And it is hypocritical to claim to not understand why.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#8)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:04:33 AM EST
    In a word, shameful. Bush represents us all, not just his base. He should have the stones to face us all. If a sitting president can't take a little heckling (it seems this folks didn't even get a chance to heckle), he is in the wrong business.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:09:18 AM EST
    Jim, I must say, your "potential for assasination" argument is pretty lame. I am sure all attendees of the event are patted down, screened, etc. They were disallowed entry because of some staffer's opinion of what there beliefs "might be", based on a bumper sticker....ridiculous.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:20:15 AM EST
    kdog, According to several reports, they were not "disallowed" entry, but rather asked to leave after about 20 minutes. Personally I think the guy who asked them to leave was wrong, but I share the doubts of those who think that many of those crying about this here would be singing a very different song if it was Hillary Clinton on stage and her people pushing people out the door. Nevertheless: Have we really reached the point where we feel our elected representatives should not have to face those who disagree with them? (Our representatives certainly think so.) If Bush can't make his case for Social Security reform to those who are opposed to it, he must not believe he has much of a case to begin with. Preaching to the choir is easy. It's preaching to the non-believers that makes the difference. The guy who pushed these people out should be fired. And those on both sides of the aisle should remember their position on this when the tables are turned and see how they feel about it then.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:20:30 AM EST
    Grand Old Politburo.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#12)
    by soccerdad on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:33:17 AM EST
    god forbid bubbleboy hears a discouraging word

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:40:29 AM EST
    when you do not have to face opposition or hear criticism it is much easier to declare everything a success. Jim your argument might have some water if this was an isolated incident, but its not it occurs at numerous events.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:51:52 AM EST
    No wonder Bush is getting nowhere promoting his plan for Social Security. He's preaching to the choir.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#15)
    by nolo on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:52:19 AM EST
    ppj, the Secret Service apparently didn't see a security problem. It was one of the political apparatchiks that threw those people out. So the security angle isn't flying.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 06:55:52 AM EST
    PPJ is right: Based on what facts we know are not in dispute "...whoever threw them out over reacted." At best. Maybe it was criminal to throw them out. That ought to be investigated. PPJ is right again: We all should "watch the demonstrations, read the signs and hear the comments." That's what Democracy's all about. We get to see and hear what the Prez says, repeatedly, and we get to see and hear the demonstrators too. Oh, we don't get to see and hear them? Well, never mind.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:00:23 AM EST
    My perception is that Repubs in the past few elections have taken extraordinary steps to ensure that no dissenting voices are heard. Have we really gone this far in the past, folks? Is this really the same as asking hecklers and protesters to leave an event where audience participation beyond polite applause or refraining from such is uncalled for? It doesn't seem so to me, but I invite reasoned opining to the contrary. Particularly bothersome is this instance, which is not a fundraiser, speech or community breakfast but supposedly a public forum in which to discuss a specific SS reform package advocated by the White House. Is this really the forum where disagreement should be silenced? This to me is a manifestation of the real Bush doctrine which says that "you're either with us or against us". Ya know, many wingnuts out there think that the left is "out to get" Bush to the point of being hypocritical. I disagree and feel that I have judged his policies and statements on their own merit and found them lacking. Damn scary, in fact. When Bush claims he wants "dialog" and cooperation from both sides of the aisle, then tries to hijack the Senate confirmation process to get his own "activist" judges appointed, then touts an entitlement reduction plan, calling it "reform" and hand picking the people who are to be seen uniformly applauding it - as if there was no dissent, something stinks in Denmark. Instead of worrying about how the liberals are threatening you and yours, make sure the path the Pres. is taking you down is the one you want, 'cause there's no place for you if it isn't.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:03:57 AM EST
    By the way, how do you suppose one "over-zealous" operative was able to observe the bumpersticker on the parking lot car, notice where they parked and who got out of it, follow them in a building, notice where they sat and manage to obtain authorization to have SS remove them? I buy that as much as I buy the "one over-zealous interrogator theory".

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:07:09 AM EST
    Mfox, Or the "magic bullet" theory? Or the "those FBI files showed up in the Whitehouse due to a paperwork snafu" theory? Or the "vast right wing conspiracy" theory? Sadly, this is where we are today. The vitriol on both sides of the aisle is running so deep that the hacks hired to man the ticket window decide to deputize themselves.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#20)
    by wishful on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:07:24 AM EST
    The U.S.A. used to be a robust democracy, though as any grand theory put to the test, it had problems that were being continuously addressed. It is now in its death throes. Power given to idiots like the guy who evicted the three citizens from the "town hall" event is yet another symptom of a dying democracy. In a real democracy, one way or another this moron's actions would have been disallowed, even if it was by a patriot who held different views from the evicted three. As GregZ points out, this is not an isolated incident, but the consistent practical implementation of a new regime. Is it too late to revive our higher principles? With this administration, it very well could be.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:12:02 AM EST
    The ones "critical" of GWB's SS plan must ask themselves if they are truly giving the discussion a fair hearing or if they are simply trying to disrupt any progress of any plan put forth by the "hated" GWB. When the latter, they have only themselves to blame when they are ejected from the proceedings. TL, at what point are you going to determine that "Ricky" has transgressed the limits of civilized discourse and ban him from the site?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#22)
    by roy on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:20:09 AM EST
    The ones "critical" of GWB's SS plan must ask themselves if they are truly giving the discussion a fair hearing or if they are simply trying to disrupt any progress of any plan put forth by the "hated" GWB.
    Those who remove people from public events need to evaluate that as well. In this case, they apparently either didn't check or didn't care.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:45:56 AM EST
    W saw how well those rallies in Muremberg went without Jews allowed in, and those were publically funded too!

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:46:33 AM EST
    That should have been "Nuremberg"...sorry.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:56:06 AM EST
    the republican organizers and those booting citizens from these rallies may well be committing a felony (in addition to constitutional torts). it is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 912 for anyone to impersonate a federal officer and act as such. i blogged on it today.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 07:59:43 AM EST
    justpaul...Absolutely right. If the tables were turned, I'd be against it as well. Enough of this "preaching to the choir", and both sides are guilty of this. A sitting president, regardless of party, represents us all and should have the guts to face us all.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:06:15 AM EST
    Otherwise, call it what it is, a republican pep-rally/by invite only, not a "public forum". Our democracy is becoming a joke, and we all share the blame. Both the right and left leaning citizenry allow these 2 self-serving corrupt parties to frame the debates and pit us against each other. I'm tired of saying it, but we need some new parties.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:22:52 AM EST
    kdog, I'll come to your party anyday :)

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#29)
    by roy on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:34:42 AM EST
    I'm tired of saying it, but we need some new parties.
    The Greens, Libertarians, Independences, and Socialists are giving it an honest try. Don't blame the lack of parties, blame the voters who continue to prop up the two-party system.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:37:03 AM EST
    Doc, I have to take issue with your comment that:
    The ones "critical" of GWB's SS plan must ask themselves if they are truly giving the discussion a fair hearing or if they are simply trying to disrupt any progress of any plan put forth by the "hated" GWB. When the latter, they have only themselves to blame when they are ejected from the proceedings.
    Your statement that: I'm not sure if I know more about proposed SS reform or Terri Shiavo's legal battle, but I have to say I've gone out of my way to understand the plan. Doc, are you saying that if I just understood it that I'd be for it? For the nth time, my opposition to Bush results from the Repub. platform which I don't agree with and from Bush's threat to my personal freedom as well as this admin's whole "you're with us or against us" mentality. Bush's ideological supporters are expecting this to be the end of entitlements as we know them, including SS (isn't that right pigwiggle). If he was honest about this and garnered support from people who truly agree with his intended outcome, then I would respectfully disagree. If he was saying that the Gov't doesn't WANT to honor the treasury notes borrowed against SS, then I and possibly many others would say "not so fast." However, I think he's bamboozling folks into thinking he's fixing it so it will still be there in 40 years as we know it and I think this is disingenuous in a way that hurts Americans. When you say that:
    or if they are simply trying to disrupt any progress of any plan put forth by the "hated" GWB. When the latter, they have only themselves to blame when they are ejected from the proceedings.
    is misleading in that the attendees intentions were never established except to the extent that someone had put a bumper sticker on a car they drove in on protesting the war. They were apparently professionals who gave no indication of disruptive behavior. Should they be blamed (or not admitted) for trying to attend a public "debate" about SS reform? Does a bumper sticker about the war label you as anti-Bush's SS plan? Ask yourselves, is this REALLY the handiwork of a lone, overzealous Repug worker? Or part of a bigger policy that seems to be "Don't ask, Don't tell".

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#31)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:38:33 AM EST
    The ones "critical" of GWB's SS plan must ask themselves if they are truly giving the discussion a fair hearing or if they are simply trying to disrupt any progress of any plan put forth by the "hated" GWB. Wow. He has a plan now? What is it, and when was it announced?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:44:51 AM EST
    Wow. He has a plan now?
    the subtlety of the con game. the wingnuts here keep commenting as if there is a plan. there is no PLAN! there is an ideology that "entitlements" have to be eliminated, but we know the hypocrisy of that statement.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:54:47 AM EST
    Point taken roy, there are other options we all ignore. The Dems and Repubs stifling their involvement at every turn doesn't help either. mfox...likewise.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#34)
    by Adept Havelock on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 09:02:18 AM EST
    So the Secret Service and other security people are going to be very protective. And it is hypocritical to claim to not understand why.
    Funny, the AP article clearly stated the following:
    Tom Mazur, a Washington-based spokesman for the U.S. Secret Service, said an inquiry found none of the agents responsible for protecting the president were involved with the group's removal. He said it didn't appear any laws were broken because tickets were issued and a host committee has the right to remove people who might be disruptive.
    How nice. How democratic. We can throw someone out of a taxpayer paid event for merely believing someone "might" be disruptive. Who sets that standard? Why the local party officials of course? Show your loyalty to the party, or be cast out. Funny, i thought the office of the President meant he was President of the nation, not one party. Just another tidbit from radical rethuglicans.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#35)
    by Kitt on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 09:22:54 AM EST
    Apparently I missed a very important post? Grammar and punctuation problems again?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#36)
    by Kitt on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 09:32:24 AM EST
    I disagree with 'justPaul' - I don't think because one simply disagrees (in your example, Hillary Clinton) with the political stance of a speaker they would be asked to leave. I'm sick of this - it is so antithetical to what is 'American' in being able to be part of dissenting views or being able to listen to views that differ for yours regardless of the forum...especially given that involving the president. He is after all president of this country and is therefore accountable whether he thinks so or not.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#37)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 09:47:10 AM EST
    Since the Dems in congress are virtual eunuchs, the people have to speak for themselves.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#38)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 10:16:26 AM EST
    Ace, "No Blood for Oil" represents more than fifty years of our support for tyrants who kept the oil flowing. To deny this is a bit of sociopathy. Why do YOU think we pal'd up to the Saudi's, the Baathists, all the other thugs running the middle east all those years? really, why? geopolitics? sure, the geopolitics of oil. come on, bro, don't be that weak and incapable of self-criticism for your country. it's damaging to all of us as a nation.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#39)
    by soccerdad on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 10:31:12 AM EST
    Michael Klare has written extensively on the influence of oil on US foreign policy. Here is a good summary of Bush and the war for oil. Note he calls it the carter Doctrine, since carter was the first Prez to publicaly link foreign policy to oil, although the history goes back at least 50 years

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#41)
    by roy on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 10:43:19 AM EST
    Ace,
    3. Re SS, if you don't want to take part in the investment accts' don't. Who are you to say no one can?
    If they're potentially doing it as part of a government program, through tax-funded infrastructure, then we all have a say. If you want to play the "who are you to say" angle (which is a fine angle), make SS payments at least partially optional. Those who want to mooch of society in their old age can pay in. Those who want to fund their retirement through investment can just opt out of SS and let capitalism work its magic.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:08:57 AM EST
    Kdog.... I'm tired of saying it, but we need some new parties I agree... how about a 'common sense' party? There seems to be very little of that in Washington. Let's start one & make sure we invite Mfox....LOL

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:14:25 AM EST
    Private events paid for with public funds. A fascist's dream come true. First you get the funds from the State, then you kick out the public sphere in order to have total control, control of both worlds. It's not unlike the game with Halliburton in Iraq. Selective Anarchists is the phrase I use for these bastards.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#44)
    by scarshapedstar on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:27:31 AM EST
    Man, Jim gave up that easy? Maybe Bush dragged him off to the next Potemkin rally to be a "regular guy", like the Kennebunkport Cowboy Who's Afraid Of Horses knows what the f*** that is.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:31:42 AM EST
    So Rallies should allow people in who are there to disrupt, demonstrate, and basicly make asses of themselves? Taxpayer funded or not, I don't really have a problem with this. There is plenty of taxpayer funded sidewalks and parking lots for people to make pointless spectacles of themselves.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:36:32 AM EST
    A great quote (unknown origin) overheard yesterday and somewhat relevant to the mooching off society in one's old age comment. "There are givers and takers in this world. The takers eat better, but the givers sleep better". Does it make me a Pinko Commie to think that those who profit off our labor and determine what percentage of their profits is "our share" and which is "theirs" owe us a litte more for fifty five years of labor than a "thanks and good luck affording your medical bills and keeping your house"? Are we only deserving of a dignified life if we manage to save enough money out of our measly salaries to fund 20 or thirty years of incomeless existence. As always, those who have family, have investment income, or live extraordinarily frugal lives (like pigwiggle :)) Those who don't have support networks, capital or were unable to put enough aside will be picking through your trash cans in a few years. In fact, who feels that the entire labor movement of the early 20th century was a vast left wing conspiracy to sabotage American enterprise??? Don't be shy now, speak up!

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:36:51 AM EST
    kdog- We tend to disagree on most everything, but I do concur that we need more political viewpoints. I agree even more with mfox that we all need more parties in general! Everyone on both sides of the spectrum seem to be getting a bit too uptight anymore.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 12:25:49 PM EST
    BB..that's so funny, me and my arch-conservative brother-in-law/best friend have discussed the need for a new "common sense" party. Potential members lie in waiting in both of the current so-called "parties". Republicans, Democrats...6 rotten eggs in one, a half dozen rotten eggs in the other. mfox....Your getting me misty eyed, I sure do miss the labor movement.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#49)
    by Walter on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 12:32:35 PM EST
    and the stated reason behind invading Mexico would have been what, stockpiles of refried beans?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#50)
    by roy on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 12:38:40 PM EST
    mfox, My "mooching off society" remark was needlessly inflamatory, but I think you got my point.
    ...those who profit off our labor ... owe us a litte more for fifty five years of labor than a "thanks and good luck affording your medical bills and keeping your house"?
    You get more than thanks and good luck. For starters, you get paid for your work. You get schools, roads, police and fire protection, cheap flu shots every year, and more. If you're poor, you get all that at a discount thanks to progressive taxation. That should help you save up for old age. It won't do the work for you, but it'll help. You mentioned living extraordinarily frugally. If there is a realistic degree of frugality (i.e. not selling organs or whoring yourself out) that will let you provide for yourself until age 90, they I think it's your responsibility to be that frugal. If being that frugal still isn't adequate, then talk to me about a hand out. But it's not everyone else's responsibility to correct your mistake of not being frugal enough.
    Are we only deserving of a dignified life if we manage to save enough money...
    Don't we all deserve to keep the money we work for, instead of having it transferred into a pyramid scheme? Or do we deserve to be threatened with imprisonment(*) for not paying in? (*) Might be a lame point. I've got in mind something about "tax evasion", but I don't know how one could withold SS payments without also witholding other taxes.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 12:56:47 PM EST
    Does it make me a Pinko Commie to think that those who profit off our labor and determine what percentage of their profits is "our share" and which is "theirs" owe us a litte more for fifty five years of labor than a "thanks and good luck affording your medical bills and keeping your house"? Of course not. It's your general political philosophy that makes you a Commie Pinko;-) But since you bring it up under those terms: Do you ever consider that without those who risk their capital to start a company that then employs you, you would have no job, no income, and no chance at all of paying for your medical and housing needs now, let alone in the future? If not the person who chooses to employ you, who decides how much your effort is worth, you? The only person in a position to make that determination is the person offering to pay you for your services, because the issue is how much your services are worth to them. And what about all the other worker bees who are coughing up significant portions of their income to fund your future life style? Remember, Social Security is paid for by everyone who works legally and on the books, not just the rich capitalists. What justifiable claim do you have on the salary of the store clerk who sells your grande latte? Are we only deserving of a dignified life if we manage to save enough money out of our measly salaries to fund 20 or thirty years of incomeless existence. Again, of course not, but then I have yet to see anyone suggest otherwise. To begin with, whether you are deserving of a dignified life and whether you have a right to such a life are two very different things. Furthermore, with regard to the issue of Social Security, no one so far (as far as I know) has even proposed that anyone be forced out of the system. The plan the President is suggesting would be voluntary, meaning that if you choose to risk some of your own money in an attempt to better your rate of return over Social Security, you will be allowed to do so. With that comes the fact that if you bet unwisely, you will lose. Such is the basis of the system we live in, and if your real objection is to the underlying system (which your comment quoted above seems to imply) then you should be aware that there are other countries you could choose to live in with other systems, and you could attempt to get the system in our country changed (but don't hold your breath if you do). You might also consider that the plan the President if proposing is intended to give everyone the option of attempting to accumulate the kind of wealth necessary to fund 20-30 years of incomeless living (actually it goes even further since you would not be forced to withdrawl everything from the market at retirement and could conceivably continue making money that way). This is a good deal better than Social Security, which, for many people, will not even fund the dignified life you believe everyone deserves. As for the Labor movement of the early 20th century: I don't think it was a conspiracy; I think it was a good thing that sought to and succeeded in correcting some of the truly egregious problems that existed in the management-labor relationship at that time. But that doesn't mean that everything it did was a good idea, or that many of the things it has done since then were a good idea either. In the meantime, management learned some hard lessons and has in many industries taken a new tone. And this is why labor today is having such a hard time unionizing anyone outside of the government labor force. And then there is always the simple question, if labor unions are such a great deal for the workers, why must the workers be forced to join the unions? If collective bargaining is such a good deal for the average Joe, why does he keep turning away from the unions and why must the unions cut deals to close shops to all nonunion workers? Hope that helps.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 01:21:55 PM EST
    Since Bush didn't win the last election, the parading of his 'programs' to dismantle our programs is OFFICIALLY a Dog and Pony Show. The Secret Service long ago blurred the lines between the RNC and themselves. Oh how I recall the R convention, when the building LEASED by the RNC was used to hold arrested persons who had committed no crimes. The wingers, of course, can't remember which side of their head their ass is on. We haven't had a legal election in FIVE YEARS. As for 'third parties,' WHO are these people? Badnarik and Cobb made a lot of headway by fighting the Ohio election coup, but in CA in 03 the third parties ran to the trough like pigs, unable to resist the call to an unconstitutional election they might have a chance to 'win.' Oops, too bad -- no one won that election, though Austrian Arnie did get installed anyhow. Total vote fraud from Diebold, and now the Diebolders are installing themselves as well. So let's keep attacking the people actually in the government, instead of supporting them in their occasional acts of bravery, 'mkay? That way you can tell your kids how bravely YOU stood back and watched it all fall apart. Before they go off to the Indoctrination Camp of the Children's Guard.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 01:51:03 PM EST
    I still say we should've invaded Baikonur. It's hard to fake a concrete and steel launch pad that's been around for half a century.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#55)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 02:53:16 PM EST
    Fair enough, roy and justpaul. Pinko Commie is not a badge I am ashamed to wear :). Great points. Don't agree with everything and wish I had time to follow-up. Kdog...are you really Canadian? Does that prevent me from joining the kdogocrat (or is it kdogarian) party? Gerry, you're certainly invited, though I wouldn't have thought of you as someone who likes to "enjoy" life!

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 03:10:40 PM EST
    But since you bring it up under those terms: Do you ever consider that without those who risk their capital to start a company that then employs you, you would have no job, no income, and no chance at all of paying for your medical and housing needs now, let alone in the future? And neither would they. This is amateur economics at it's worst. I say we let W live in his bubble. He'll be less effective that way -- if only he were the one running things.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 03:43:54 PM EST
    mfox writes - "Is this really the forum where disagreement should be silenced?" Disagreement is fine, but yelling, shouting, etc., is, at best. a scheme to shut down discussion, not enable it. "Gerry, you're certainly invited, though I wouldn't have thought of you as someone who likes to "enjoy" life!" Isn't it amazing how every generation thinks they discovered, sex, drugs and rock and roll? PIL - Can't you get your time frame right? And no, I'm not going to help you. Marty - Call back when you want to admit that this happens on both sides. Until then, you may stick your comment up your..... Can you guess what?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:00:25 PM EST
    Repugs, Please explain once, coherently, what these accounts will provide us. If they offer such a great ROI, why not roll all of social security into these accounts and pay benefits using the current system? Is it because this allows 3% of social security to be invested in firms with ties to GOP, and does nothing to help social security? Obviously if not enough is being paid into SS, removing an additional percentage makes SS weaker.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#59)
    by Sailor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:10:06 PM EST
    Some anonymous coward wrote "Disagreement is fine, but yelling, shouting, etc., is, at best. a scheme to shut down discussion, not enable it." The people in question did none of that. BTW, the us house, the british parliament and most free gov't bodies regularly shout, yell and are disruptive. It's called freedom of speech, even when (especially when) you don't agree with it. The bush person who did this impersonated a federal officer and should be prosecuted.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:44:54 PM EST
    V2marty writes - "Is it because this allows 3% of social security to be invested in firms with ties to GOP, and does nothing to help social security?" And your proof for that statement is? Oh. You don't have any. Now that is a surprise. NOT. et al - The 4:43PM post was by me. Sorry. Sailor - You know I don't do the anon bit, so accept my note that I just screwed up. Happened before, in '02, or '01... as I noted to Marty, call back when you are willing to fess up that both sides do it. You may ignore the sticking suggestion. allen writes - "And neither would they. This is amateur economics at it's worst." Actually, they would. Have you ever sat down and had someone explain to you how a start up is financed? scar - Sorry to disappoint you. We're having a hardwood floor installed in the kitchen and entrance way, plus new applicanses, lighting, etc., installed in the palatial retirement compound, catfish pond and BBQ stand, so I have been a bit defocused. I'll try to do better.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#61)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:49:16 PM EST
    PPJ, do you see the question mark? That was a question.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 04:57:57 PM EST
    Besides, you are overlooking the crux of the comment. Who will tell me what anyone stands to gain from these accounts, and why not just invest all SS in them if they work so great?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#64)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 08:10:18 PM EST
    V2marty - That is a "Do you still beat your wife?" question.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:32:58 PM EST
    V2Marty asks Who will tell me what anyone stands to gain from these accounts, and why not just invest all SS in them if they work so great? I’m sure you know that Social Security is the world’s biggest pyramid (Ponzi) scheme. I’m not aware of anyone who seriously disagrees with this, but I suppose there are still some people around. We can’t invest all of the money into these accounts, because most of the money coming in is needed to “feed” the pyramid. Currently, about $90 billion is “surplus” and not required to keep the scheme going. Lots of people stand to gain from these accounts. A whole book could be written on the subject. But one quick example. Say a 61 year-old dies, after having paid into SS all his working life. If he has no spouse or minor children, the government keeps all his SS money. The money he spent over 40 years accumulating. If he has a spouse, she will get a $255 burial allowance. The government keeps the rest. That’s bad enough, but it gets worse. Low-income families and people from minority races have a shorter lifespan than white middle- and upper-classe people. So, the effect of the current SS system is to shift revenue from minorities and the poor to the wealthy and semi-wealthy. Although I stand to benefit from this arrangement, I am appalled by it. And amazingly, many of the people that are being screwed by this system, are among those fighting the hardest to keep it. Now you know what is meant by “ignorance is bliss.” Under Bush’s plan, the family of the 61 year-old would get to keep whatever funds were in his account. The amount would be based on many factors, but it would certainly be way more than the $255 of the current system.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:16:28 AM EST
    It's not a Ponzi scheme, any more than any of our treasury bills are part of a Ponzi scheme. Had Al Gore been allowed to take the office he won, the lockbox for ss would already have secured it for the future. Bush lied, and has raped the Republic but good. So now the Ponzi scheme of his fake, unelected government is exposed, but you're flaking for more fake programs to dispossess people of their freedom, just as ENRON did to millions of Americans.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#67)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 04:44:15 AM EST
    "both sides are guilty of this." As usual, the occasional isolated abuse of the Clinton adminstration gets equated with the routine practice of the Bush administration. "Re SS, if you don't want to take part in the investment accts' don't. Who are you to say no one can?" Who am I? Why, I'm a guy who paid extra payroll taxes for the last 22 years, in order that the social security trust fund could buy bonds that are supposed to fund my benefits. In other words, I'm a guy whose pocket you want to pick to pay for your private accounts.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:16:41 AM EST
    So, Paul, if SS isn't a Ponzi scheme, what does it do to generate the revenue to pay its benefits? And why would any individual setting up a similar program for his neighbors, be hauled off to jail?

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:29:57 AM EST
    rea comments Who am I? Why, I'm a guy who paid extra payroll taxes for the last 22 years, in order that the social security trust fund could buy bonds that are supposed to fund my benefits. In other words, I'm a guy whose pocket you want to pick to pay for your private accounts. rea, sounds like you want your deposits and Doctor Ace's, too. I'm sure this isn't what you meant. Could you please explain how Ace's decision is going to impact you.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:42:12 AM EST
    Maybe what we need is an American Association of Working People, or even an American Association of Young People to balance the one-sided propaganda put out by the AARP.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:44:17 AM EST
    PIL - LBJ, a noted Demo Pres who you may remember, made social security subject to the federal income tax and who took it out of the separate account, and placed it inti the general funds budget, thus destroying the "lock box" concept forever and ever. Algore either didn't know, or was funning you. Ace - Now don't be mean to PIL. He is too busy investigating election fraud, racism and war crimes to educate himself about social security and Ponzi schemes.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#72)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 07:06:51 AM EST
    mfox...I'm not Canadian, NYC born and raised. I couldn't live in a place that calls ham bacon.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#73)
    by roy on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:18:28 AM EST
    If anybody's still following this, Kuro5hin has an article supposedly written by one of the ejectees.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 12:40:55 PM EST
    PPJ, I like to criticize Clinton as much as anyone does, but I believe that Social Security funds always went into the general revenue fund. There never was a lockbox, although it was promised as far back as the 1930s. Clinton did boost the taxable portion of Social Security from 20% to 80%.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 02:36:34 PM EST
    Soldier - Clinton had nothing to do with it. It was done by LBJ circa '65-66 to pay for Vietnam. Prior to that it was kept in a separate account. kdog - I knew it.

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 10, 2005 at 11:39:46 PM EST
    Strangenesss see the MSNBC/newsweek story on what seems to be a heavy weirdness descending on dubyas Magical Misleading Tour.... Newsweek/a> The main message of this week’s press conference was the need for a “permanent” solution. Bush said “permanent” or “permanently” no less than 11 times in the White House briefing room. Yet he admitted that private accounts were not part of that permanent fix. That’s an important shift... end of quote soooooooo, he is no longer selling the program as anything....??? Am I wrong? is something out of whack? Call me crazy...

    Re: Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally (none / 0) (#40)
    by marty on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 11:13:42 AM EST
    off topic comment deleted

    Three Ejected from Bush's Denver Rally | 73 comments (73 topical)