U.S. Citizens Denied Access to a Speech By Their Presdient

Via Jaq, via Oliver Willis....
� IN-FORUM �

This story makes my skin crawl. Not only are the citizens denied tickets, but nobody in charge seems to know anything about a "list". Yeah, right. The Bushies have been controlling access to their man for years, because he can't take criticism. Sad. The one bright spot of this story is that what once would have been reported in only the local news now can travel around the world to millions of people, thanks to dedicated bloggers. Bloggers of the world unite!!


Comments

Eric said…
Point well taken. In my growing disgust of the Bush administration's policies, I sometimes go overboard with generalizations. I agree that it always seems that the "other guy" is wrong in the arena of politics. In this ugly profession, hypocricy knows no bounds. Contradictions abound. What is funny is that eventually entire parties switch sides on issues because they are so interested in attacking the other side they subvert their own principles in order to attack. Lest anyone think that I hold no criticism for the Democratic party, or other politicians besides Bush, let me assert that I have generally been unhappy with every administration since I have been old enough to pay attention. I have an uneasy feeling that this is not going to change with a new president, no matter from which party.
9:36 PM
Eric said…
I had one last thought on this subject (for now): I think it would be/was o.k. for any candidate to control the access of crowds to a campaign rally. In effect, the campaigns are paying for these rallies (I think), and they should be able to decide who is at the gatherings. It is the official "state" visits by a president that I believe should be made available to everyone equally, regardless of their political views. When a president is campaigning for an issue, it is a fuzzy area. I guess the litmus should be who foots the bill for the event. If the event is being paid by the taxpayers, then there should be equal access. If it is being paid by a campaign fund, the let them bring whoever the hell they want.
9:40 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The agony of victory....a.k.a. picking my jaw up off the floor

Allright. I've now had nearly 24 hours (although its taken me a couple of days to complete this post) to calm down, reflect upon and digest the improbable gut wrenching game yesterday in which the heavily favored Colts lost to the Steelers 21-18. I wrote last year of not being as emotionally attached to the Steelers as I have been in the past. I wrote last week of how I thought that I might be spending too much valuable time following the Steelers, especially since I have absolutely no control over the outcome of their games. Let me just say this: yesterday's game was probably in the top five emotionally draining, and ultimately gratifying, experiences of my life. Ouside of my wedding and the birth of my two sons, I can't remember being as nervous, deflated, joyful, stunned and exhilirated as I was yesterday----all withing about a ten minute stretch of seemingly neverending time! What could have been a devestating loss to live with in the offseason (and, forever, for Jerome...
Read more

"The Axis of Evil and the Doctrine of Preemption Three Years On"

Jerod and I attended a lecture by Brookings Institution fellow Michael O'Hanlon last night at Park University in Parkville, MO. The lecture was part of the Jerzy Hauptmann Distinguished Guest Lecture series. As a Park University M.B.A. alum, I received an invitation to the 13th annual lecture in the series. I like going to events like this, especially since I was interested in the content of this particular lecture, of which the title was the title of this post. Dr. O'Hanlon described himself as a Sam Nunn Democrat at the beginning of the lecture. It's always difficult to prevent political feeling from entering into objective analysis, and I don't know how you measure the "objectiveness" of analysis, but I feel that most Brookings scholars are at least "fair", and Dr. O'Hanlon was no exception. His analysis of the doctrine of preemption was focused on the effectiveness of the doctrine, as opposed to any moral righteousness or implications of the...
Read more

Removing a password that was created in a previous version from an Access 2007 database

Earlier this week I was banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how to remove a password from an Access 2007 database (file extension .accdb). The database was created in a previous version of access and subsequently "upgraded" to the Access 2007 format. I believe some type of a wizard was used to perform the "upgrade." The security model is evidently different in Access 2007 than in previous versions. It doesn't appear that you can set/unset database passwords. Instead, in Access 2007, there is an option to Encrypt with Password. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be logically similar to the earlier version password architecture, but there was no way that I could find to easily remove the password that had been created in the earlier version when using the Access 2007 interface. Access security has always been confusing to me, and I need to take the time someday to understand how the security model is supposed to work in Access 2007. An...
Read more