Just wondering how long we got before they start shutting down sights like this and talk radio and anyone who says anything against Obama plans. We already know the regular communist news sights will never show anything negetive about him. We had 2 days of the biggest lost in the stock market ever after an presidential election and all these dumbasses talked about was what kind of dog the obama's would have in the white house.

Monday. yep, thats it, I think we got til Monday.

Have you tried to ask Nancy, Barney or Harry yet?

Yea,i heard that piece of sh*t Shummer talking about this the other day,there already getting geared up to get things inacted that they couldnt before.I think of all the politicians out there he is the worst of the bunch,well maybe tied with Fiensteen ...what morons keep voting these ass wipes in

people like rangerdavid

Heh, heh, heh..........
...........and he's a "really strong player" too, DT3 (rangerdavid) is...............

It's not how long we HAVE, it's what are we going to DO about it!?

Don't be so damned defeatist! This is OUR country. FIGHT for it.

Well, it looks like it doesn't even matter what you say, if you're a McCain supporter. A man was arrested for wearing a McCain/Palin T-shirt at a celebration in Philadelphia. The beginning of the end for the 1A? The beginning of the end for the 2A? It's not looking good and both parties are to blame.

Here's the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=...mp;pageId=80405

What about the Missouri "Truth Squads". GOVERNMENT prosecuters going after people who say bad things about Obama - so they can set "history and the record straight". This is liberal lawyer reasoning at its finest.

...nevermind. I guess you'd rather just give up.

Don't worry.... I DON'T GIVE UP!

I'm so glad you finally recognize that

Maybe this is what that Arab Obama wants the 250,000 man force with funding like the military to use them as his thug squad to shut us down or run his 're-education camps'. He already showed his contempt for the US Constitution and will trash it to keep hid DemonRAT leftists in power. This is why they want to shut us down and disarm us.

Free thinking individuals are a threat to socialism or (National Socialism).

Its either going to be REALLY SOON,after inauguration. Or its going to take a couple of years. See the Senatorial Repubs can stop it currently. So the dems are either going to wait another couple of years and hope to get the philabuster proof senate then OR (and this is more likely) they are just going to appoint people to positions in the FCC that can make....."administrative" changes quietly.

Either way they'll start crossing bridge a little to far from home. And there will be trouble.

Yeah.......... Here we have David Turlington the 3rd:
A liberal pissant overmouthed lawyer with an overblown ego in some podunk town in rural North Carolina who is such a "strong player" .............
Stay there in your little good ol' boy fiefdom, sport.........you're likely much better suited to retain your "strong player" status there................ Here, we have you pegged for the assclown that you are............ Give a try to recognizing that...........

Wait a minute!! Is this the "WOOO HOOO! DON'T YOU JUST LOVE HILLARY?" liberal, POS, FLAP EARED CAMEL JOCKEY supporter? I hope you stocked up on the edible chocolate cartridges to feed your candy attorney ass. You are an abomination to your profession and Bill of Rights advocates. WHy don't you return to your hole mr. federal leo! What a laugh that was! Good night turd. back to ignored.

1911

yep, Joe, and you apparently dont do anything but run your mouth. You promised to come see me. Im still watiing.

Talk is cheap. put up or shut up.

I just love it when Joe calls people sport. As far as free speech goes,ask Joe the plumber what happens when you question the messiah.

Do you think its gonna get better or worse now that hes president?

Get off your ass and get POLITICAL! Don't ever give up or you deserve whatever you get! The margin was not that big. They just out orginized us, and too many sunshine patriots sat home and bitched instead of VOTING!

Thats what im talkin about! We need to start now! John MCcain was never our guy,we were just trying to drag him across the finish line. As far as Im concerned he can walk across the aisle and stay there! All do respect to his service and sacrifice,but he doesn't represent Palin style conservatives. She energized our party and now shes being torn apart by turn coat conservatives(closet libs).

Shit...I voted for her not the "Maverick". Lets get our base together and get ready for battle! There are some strong young conservatives like Palin and
Bobby Jindal. Like it was mentioned before, it was close,there are alot of disgruntled conservatives out there.

There are alot of conservatives that voted Obama,and by the time we are ready, they will have seen the error of their ways and be ready to right them.

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

This Fairness Doctrine is the Democrats pay off to the MSM for their Pravda like propaganda in promoting them. Their whole pandering for the promised one just blows out any credibility about objectiveness that free press and journalism is suppose to be about. It blew my mind election night watching ABC and Charlie Gibson awarding states like Pennsylvania to Obama even before there any precinct even reporting. Just unabashed almost cheerleading disgusting. I don't think they affected any voters much in this election because it had such a huge turnout but in a more hoo hum maybe some stupid demoralized people in states where the polls were still open might of not voted.

and WHY is this blatant suppression of free speech called the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. I will give them credit they are creative with the language. The best is Obama's mandatory volunteerism he has lined up for our kids.

My big hope is America will be like the drunk that went home at 2 with a 10 and wakes up at 10 with a 2. This pretty boy could get real ugly real fast I think.

Lets see..........Tinhorn smalltown attorney in tight with local police, judges, local heirarchy.......
Sure, I'm just going to roll right in there at high noon.......... I didn't get to be this old by being stupid, asshole.

If you ever do have the opportunity to meet me, take my word for it, it'll be on my terms.........sport.

Hey, don't worry..........Go ahead and revel in your self-importance (after all, you are the big fish in the little pond)......... I won't forget about you. I'm coming up on my retirement age, and may soon have a little time to travel around a bit..........

I have friends and family in North Carolina..........Hell, who knows when I may get over that way?

I did renege on the one (and only) "promise" I ever made to you.......That was that I was done talking to you.
I'll try and do better, but it's so hard to not respond..........you're just soooooo fucking annoying.

Here you go back on my "Ignore List".

foil hats for everyone! i wouldn't count on anything except another AWB with stricter rules.....and .50's being DD's, we still do have constitutional rights....

As shitty as the situation appeared on the video, I'm kinda glad he was removed. If he wasn't, I don't doubt for one second, that the newspaper the next day would have read "McCain supporter viciously beaten at Obama rally"..............or worse yet, murdered. This is Philly we're talking about.

When my ex moved down there, I went with her to look for apartments for her. Let me tell you, some of the neighborhoods we drove through were CRAZY! They don't call it Killadelphia for nothin'.

What's left of them. The McCain-Feingold Law was a step in the wrong direction, with both parties to blame. The new "assault weapons ban" will also be a step in the wrong direction and both parties will be to blame. I'm not even going to talk about what Bush did. Maybe some are too to worried about the issue, but I would rather them be concerned than complacent. You may not like to believe it, but they will take every chance they can to increase their power, thereby reducing your freedom.



I'm not glad he was removed, he should not be held accountable for the potential actions of others. If they were that worried they could keep an eye out for problems around him. Does that make their job harder? Sure, but that doesn't justify infringing on his 1A rights. Did you see the crowds reaction as he was being unlawfully arested? It's funny how hypocritical people can be when a wrong situation works in their favor. If the revers had happened, there would be cries of oppression and racism. Anyone that is OK with this needs to reevaluate their understanding of the BOR and it's importance.

I agree that he should not have had to leave. That's not the point. The point is, if he remained, there's a 99% chance he would have gotten severely beaten and/or killed.

Dying at an Obama victory party, because you're wearing a McCain/Palin shirt would be dying in vain. To say otherwise is foolish. He would not have ended up a 1st Amendment hero, and nothing would have changed.

Like I said, there's no reason he should have had to leave, willingly or in the back of a cop car. But if you're hinting toward that it would have been better for him to stay, I disagree. Nothing good would have come from it, and nothing would have been accomplished. Surely nothing for the 1A, either.

It would have been fine if he stayed, the police were aware of his presence and could have kept an eye on the situation. The guy would not be a 1A hero if he stayed, but the cops would have respected his 1A rights and that IS a step in the right direction. If they could not have watched over the situation, they could have told him he was in danger and let him make the decision(GASP!). It's not the governments place to infringe on our rights for our "own good". Using that logic, they should stick there nose into every decision we make if the feel we are making the wrong choice. Hello Mr. Obama, thank you for saving us from our second amendment rights! IF bad things happened as a result, blame the people who committed the violence. Hell, blame the police for not providing adequate security before you blame the peaceful citizen exercising his 1A rights. How is he to blame? Why was he arrested? This is the equivalent of arresting an attractive woman who chooses to be in a bad part of town at night. That is to say, it's illegal and ignorant.

It sounds like your hinting toward that I support the .gov protecting us "for our own good". I can assure you, that's not the case.

This is how I look at it; let's say this guy was your friend. Wouldn't you rather the police remove his obviously drunk ass from the situation, as opposed to letting him go on his way in that crowd? I can't count how many times I've pulled drunk friends from situations that they were in, that they wouldn't be in, if they weren't drunk.

There's no way in hell a couple cops would be able to watch over 1 guy in a crowd of who-knows-how-many. They shouldn't have to, either. Even if they did watch over him, X amount of crazed Obamanauts, freshly buzzed from the "victory" would easily get mass amounts of damage done, before a cop even gets to the guy.

As for the last part of your post, talking of blaming those who would have committed the violence, and not the guy.....I'm not sure where you picked up that I thought otherwise.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, friend.

Allowing a drunken person to incite a riot? Turn it around, would you want to have a drunken Obamma supporter crash a McCaine victory rally?

We had a incident in DC years ago, where several Dallas fans went to a bar in Georgetown to watch a Redskins Dallas game. They ended up in the hospital, and sued both the bar and the Redskins fans that kicked their asses. The Judge ruled for the bar and the Redskins fans. He quite properly put the gillt on Dallas fans for inciting to riot, and held THEM guilty and responsible for paying all damages. The decision was based on the fact that any REASONABLE person would have known that their action (cheering for the opposing team in a hometown bar during a hotly contested game) would result in the violent response of those assembled in that place to cheer for their team. The Dallas fans contention that it was a public place and that they had a right to free speach was held to be moot, as their actions were akin to yelling FIRE in a crowed theatre.

PICK YOUR FIGHTS CAREFULLY. Loosing frivilous arguments erodes your veracity.

Just had to bring that up, didn't ya? Probably a liberal judge.

I didn't notice that he was drunk, my fault. Arresting him for a real offense is fine. Yes, if a drunk friend was doing the same thing, I would have pulled him out of the crowd. Only because he was drunk, not because he was wearing a McCain shirt.



That's fine, I can't argue that point, the guy was drunk and not listening to the cops. Otherwise, let him stay.



It was my understanding that you were blaming a sober guy for exercising his 1A rights and being arrested. I now understand that he was drunk and uncooperative, sorry for the misunderstanding.



Yeah, I missed the drunk and uncooperative part the first time I read it. Aside from that, I have no problems with his actions. An Obama supporter should be able to come to a McCain rally and speak his mind without being assaulted as long as he is respectful/peaceful. I'm not a McCain supporter, so the candidate makes no difference to me.




That was an ignorant ruling, IMO. As long as they were not picking fights and were only rooting for their team, it is not their fault if they get beat up. There is this little thing called civility that many seem to be lacking. Any REASONABLE person would have known that their action (cheering for the opposing team in a hometown bar during a hotly contested game) would result in those assembled in that place to cheer for the other team team to give them a hard time. Possibly some lighthearted jokes, maybe a few menacing looks or insults but certainly not assault. It's a game, not a war and people should be mature enough to allow others to cheer for the opposing team without acting like neanderthals or they should stay at home, in their mom's basement.

I couldn't care less about what others think of my opinion, I'm not one to sit down and shut-up if I disagree. In this case, I misread the article and those who think less of me as a result can kiss my ass.

You guys are missing the now deceased principle of the right to free assosiation. We all have the God given right to asssosiate ourselves with those of like mind. If that is in a local bar to cheer the hometeam,or a political gathering to psych yourselves up over the election, then it is allso our right to NOT assosiate with those who are of a different opinion. To stand across the street and protest is our Constitutionalright. To wade into the middle and veheomently disrupt the gathering is to violate the Constitutional right of the gathering to NOT assosiate with YOU!

"The phrase "freedom of association" does not appear in the Constitution (although the First Amendment protects the right to peaceably assemble). Nonetheless, the Court has recognized to separate types of association that are constitutionally protected: (1) intimate association (protected as an aspect of the right of privacy) and (2) expressive association (protected as as an aspect of the First Amendment's protection of free speech)."

Freedom of association - Homosexuals can't joint the Boy Scouts of America. You don't have to join any organization or let anybody into your private organization. You have the right to join a union.

This guy was not joining an association or forcing them to join his so he is not in violation of this right. The only exception would be if the venue was rented by Obama supporters, then they could deny him admission. It would then be a private event, subject to the rules of the organizers. Yes, if you are in a bar and do not agree with someone, don't invite the to join your frat, but that does not give you the right to have them arrested unless you are the bar owner, have asked them to leave and they refused. Again, that is a private place subject to the rules the owner has in place. At that point they are trespassing. Do you not see what kind of problems could arise if the freedom of association worked like you think it does? Hey, Bob was setting right in the middle of my buddies and was saying that he doesn't like pancakes(whatever the case may be), he's infringing on my 1A rights because he was too close when disagreeing.

Right to peacefully assemble - You can assemble and be peaceful, pretty self explanatory.

Now, was the guy being peaceful before the police came or being "vehemently" disruptive? No one knows. Was his shirt causing a disruption? Probably, but at some point others are to blame for taking offense to something that is not offensive. For example, in cases where people call the police because they feel threatened by a person who is legally openly carrying a handgun. Those people are told it is perfectly legal and the legally armed person is not charged with a crime as he did not commit one. That said, the guy didn't listen to the police and he was drunk. If he felt that his rights were being infringed, he could have filed suit at a later date and he obviously was breaking the law by being drunk in public. A lawful arrest, but it has NOTHING to do with the drunks 1A rights. Had he not been drunk and was forced to leave because of a shirt, it would have been unconstitutional. However, in that situation there would not be a problem with the cops asking him to move out of the crowd, as long as he can speak his mind(or say nothing) peacefully.

Don't taunt me! I know what brand of ketchup you use!

So you're aware that I use the blood of stalkers as my ketchup?

Again, I keed.