From: "Gary Britt" 


"Randy H"  wrote in message
news:411e769e$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:411e348b{at}w3.nls.net...
> >
> > "Randy H"  wrote in message
> > news:411e1bba$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > > Reading some of the quotes is interseting, too:
> > >
> > > I wanted them to see that the president was supposed to be working for
> all
> > > Americans.
> >
> > At campaign rallies the President is not acting in his official capacity
> as
> > President, but as a CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE.
> >
> So what?

Because its a non-governmental function, a private event, and the hosts of
ANY private function have the right to admit and deny admittance to anyone
they choose.  If an elected official comes to a private party held at a
local restaurant, others not part of the party do not have any right
whatsoever to crash the party because they want to see the public official.
This is pretty simple really.  Only those who choose NOT to want to
understand feign an inability to understand the free association rights
that all citizens have.  INCLUDING citizens who hold elective office and
citizens who through parties to honor someone who holds elective office.



> >
> > > Even if I didn't agree with his policies, I could still show my
> > > children how elections and politics work.
> >
> > He could have shown them this by taking them to a Kerry campaign rally,
so
> > this sounds like a completely made up story, or an ass who was hoping
> > something like this would happen so he could get on the news.
> >
> >
>
> How do you know that he didn't/hasn't? You don't. Red Herring.
>

Yes I do.  The asshole who wrote the letter didn't say he took them to a
Kerry rally and for this ass that means he didn't.

> > >
>>President, any rational person any merely polite person
> > wouldn't have worn a Kerry pin.  What an ass.  If this incident
happened,
> > I'd say he got exactly what he was hoping to cause to happen.
> >
>
> Speculation on your part-and pretty poor at that.
>

Not at all.  It isn't speculation to say that if his motives were innocent
and what he "wanted" was for his daughters to get a gander at the
President then he would have been polite enough and have the common manners
enough not to wear a Kerry pin to the event.  Since he choose to wear that
Kerry pin, clearly his intentions and motives were OTHER THAN trying to get
his daughters to have a look at the President.  Only an idiot would look at
these facts and conclude otherwise.

> >
> > >
> > > in America we have the right to free speech. We have the
> > > First Amendment, but that was blatantly violated.
> > >
>
> So you approve of the campaign worker's bhevaior. Figues-seems you and he
> are
> cut from the same cloth.
>

I approve of everyone's constitutional right to free association which
means the government can not tell them with whom they must associate or
with whom they can not associate.  This guy is complaining that the
campaign workers exercised their constitutional right to free association
by choosing to deny him admittance.  He got what he asked for.  He was a
trouble maker who thought so little of his daughters that he was willing to
use them as props for his own psychosis.


>
> Then where are the terms and conditons of this private event?

Please post the terms and conditions of the last dinner party you went to?
A rule requiring terms and conditions would violate private persons rights
to free association.  The host of a party has the right to admit and deny
admittance to any person they choose for any whimsical reason they may
choose.  You have the right to not associate with a person because of how
they dress, how their breath smells, because they comb their hair to the
right and you only want to talk to people who come their hair to the left
or for no reason whatsoever.  Anything else would be an abridgement of the
right of free association.


Gary

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5