BCT Editorial – 1/22/06

This page was last updated on January 23, 2006.

The jeering throng; Editorial; Beaver County Times; January 22, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“When it comes to public events, you can’t believe what you see

“The adage used to be, ‘Believe half of what you see and nothing of what you hear.’”

[RWC] We can expand that adage to include, “and what you read in the press.”

“Now, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, even seeing isn’t believing.

“The court last week rejected an appeal from an anti-war protester who was convicted of violating the boundaries of a ‘restricted area’ established during President Bush’s visit to South Carolina in 2002.

“The Associated Press reported Brett Bursey had urged the justices to hear the appeal of a $500 fine he was assessed for entering an airport hangar in Columbia on Oct. 24, 2002.

“Basically, what the court’s snub means is that anyone who doesn’t agree with the party line as expounded by the president and his men can’t be sure their constitutional rights of assembly and speech are going to be honored. Their right ‘to petition the government for a redress of grievances’ also could be thrown into question.”

[RWC] A following paragraph contradicts this assertion.

“Bursey’s offense was to be carrying a megaphone and a placard reading ‘No more war for oil, don’t invade Iraq’ into the restricted area of a public facility - an airport hangar - when Bush visited South Carolina.

“That got him barred by the Secret Service, which only allowed people with tickets to the presidential event to stay in the restricted area. All others were herded along like sheep.

“A Secret Service agent told Bursey he could protest in a designated demonstration area a half-mile away. When he refused to leave the restricted area, he was arrested.”

[RWC] Now the editorial concedes “constitutional rights of assembly and speech” are honored.

“The banishment of dissenters to the boondocks is in keeping with this administration’s boy-in-the-bubble approach to quasi-public events where only adorers need apply for tickets. In doing so, they have turned dissenters into second-class citizens.

“It also means that what people see on television news and other programs are images of events that have been manipulated to the advantage of the administration. Because of that, it’s time to stop treating Bush’s so-called town-hall meetings and controlled public appearances as news and label them for what they are - propaganda tools aimed at deceiving the public.

“Please remember that the reason you see the cheering crowds at Bush events is because the jeering throng was banished to the boonies - or, like Burney, arrested.”

[RWC] Given the liberal bent of the mainstream media, what’s stopping them from showing us “the jeering throng … banished to the boonies?” What’s stopping Times photographers from showing us “the jeering throng … banished to the boonies?”

“If this keeps up, when it comes to First Amendment rights, we won’t know what we’ve lost until they’re gone.”

[RWC] Here’s the real problem for the Times and the rest of the mainstream media (MSM). They are eager for pictures and stories describing hatred of President Bush. While I’m not entirely comfortable with this process, I understand it.

First, there’s the security issue. Lest we forget, in 1995 Bill Clinton closed off Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House because of security issues. I’m reasonably sure the MSM wouldn’t like the searches required for “free for all” events.

Second, liberals’ idea of free speech is the “right” to shout down opposing views. In increasing cases, liberal dissent is escalating from shouting down opponents to physical attacks on stage. These are the pictures, video, et cetera the MSM wants.

Finally, liberals have a problem when it comes to credibility on this issue. If you remember, the Democrats herded dissenters into a fenced in area during the 2004 convention in Boston. Republicans didn’t during their convention.