Forums | MacLife

The important thing is, they're not censoring content.

Though one wonders why the ACLU is involved (and whether they'd be fenced off if they were protesting in support of the party).

I wonder how this decade will be viewed in 30 years.
Seriously.

Gurlugon wrote:

resedit wrote:

I wonder how this decade will be viewed in 30 years.
Seriously.

It will be viewed with tearful eyes as a better time

Oh dear.

bedstuy wrote:

I'm confused with this thread title.  They also did this at the 2004 Dem convention in Boston and previous to that.

Yes, and Obama was behind ALL of it!

Freakout Jackson wrote:

bedstuy wrote:

I'm confused with this thread title.  They also did this at the 2004 Dem convention in Boston and previous to that.

Yes, and Obama was behind ALL of it!

I actually would like to know who makes the final and official decision on these things.

Free Speech Zones don't make a lot of sense. They don't make a lot of sense, they promote fascism, and don't allow the voice of dissent to be heard.

Rush Limbaugh has called for "riots" at the Democratic convention so as to re-create the events of 1966 and smear the Dem image. I'm sure this is at least partially an attempt to counter that strategy.

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2008/4/25/91818/4950

Last edited by Kripto (2008-07-01 9:29 am)

However, to be fair, even though the results are going to impact the entire nation, technically a political convention IS a private event, unlike, say, a visit by a sitting President.

A man is in bed with his wife when there is a knock on the door. He rolls over and looks at his clock -- it's half-past three in the morning.
"I'm not getting out of bed at this time", he thinks, and rolls over. Then, a louder knock follows. "Aren't you going to answer that?" says his wife. So, he drags himself out of bed and goes downstairs.
He opens the door and there is man standing at the door. It didn't take the homeowner long to realize the man was drunk. "Hi there," slurs the stranger, "Can you give me a push?"
"No. Get lost, it's half-past three. I was in bed," says the man and slams the door.
He goes back up to bed and tells his wife what happened and she says "Dave, that wasn't very nice of you.
Remember that night we broke down in the pouring rain on the way to pick the kids up from the baby-sitter and you had to knock on that man's door to get us started again? What would have happened if he'd told us to get lost?"
"But the guy was drunk," says the husband.
"It doesn't matter," says the wife. "He needs our help and it would be the Christian thing to help him."
So, the husband gets out of bed again, gets dressed and goes downstairs. He opens the door and, not being able to see the stranger anywhere he shouts: "Hey, do you still want a push?" and he hears a voice cry out "Yeah please."
So, still being unable to see the stranger, he shouts: "Where are you?"
And the stranger replies: "I'm over here, on your swing set."

I think "free speech zones" are one of the most visible "bad ideas" this country has had and allowed in a while. It's a clear and obvious step down the path to totalitarianism, and so few seem to care.

The argument of "it prevents chaos" that I see a lot is such a sham, it's sad that people don't see it. You can't, or rather, shouldn't, be able to lock people up because something bad might happen. It goes against pretty much everything this country, and most of western society, was supposed to stand for.

Heh. "Free Speech Zones" is Orwellian "Newspeak" at its best. "You can have your free speech, but W-A-A-A-Y over there out of the way of the press and anything else of any importance. You're here to protest at the Democratic Convention in Denver? Get on this bus and it will take you the Free Speech Zone just outside of Cheyenne, Wyoming."

It was a bad idea first implemented under Clinton made even worse by Bush.

Hi Neut