Quarantining dissent
How the Secret Service protects Bush from free speech
James Bovard
Sunday, January 4, 2004
When President Bush travels around the United States, the Secret Service visits the location ahead of time and orders local police to set up "free speech zones" or "protest zones," where people opposed to Bush policies (and sometimes sign-carrying supporters) are quarantined. These zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event.
When Bush went to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, "The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us."
The local police, at the Secret Service's behest, set up a "designated free-speech zone" on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush's speech.
The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, but folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president's path. Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for disorderly conduct; the police also confiscated his sign.
Neel later commented, "As far as I'm concerned, the whole country is a free-speech zone. If the Bush administration has its way, anyone who criticizes them will be out of sight and out of mind."
At Neel's trial, police Detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine "people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views" in a so-called free- speech area.
Paul Wolf, one of the top officials in the Allegheny County Police Department, told Salon that the Secret Service "come in and do a site survey, and say, 'Here's a place where the people can be, and we'd like to have any protesters put in a place that is able to be secured.' "
Pennsylvania District Judge Shirley Rowe Trkula threw out the disorderly conduct charge against Neel, declaring, "I believe this is America. Whatever happened to 'I don't agree with you, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'?"
Similar suppressions have occurred during Bush visits to Florida. A recent St. Petersburg Times editorial noted, "At a Bush rally at Legends Field in 2001, three demonstrators -- two of whom were grandmothers -- were arrested for holding up small handwritten protest signs outside the designated zone. And last year, seven protesters were arrested when Bush came to a rally at the USF Sun Dome. They had refused to be cordoned off into a protest zone hundreds of yards from the entrance to the Dome."
One of the arrested protesters was a 62-year-old man holding up a sign, "War is good business. Invest your sons." The seven were charged with trespassing, "obstructing without violence and disorderly conduct."
Police have repressed protesters during several Bush visits to the St. Louis area as well. When Bush visited on Jan. 22, 150 people carrying signs were shunted far away from the main action and effectively quarantined.
Denise Lieberman of the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri commented, "No one could see them from the street. In addition, the media were not allowed to talk to them. The police would not allow any media inside the protest area and wouldn't allow any of the protesters out of the protest zone to talk to the media."
When Bush stopped by a Boeing plant to talk to workers, Christine Mains and her 5-year-old daughter disobeyed orders to move to a small protest area far from the action. Police arrested Mains and took her and her crying daughter away in separate squad cars.
The Justice Department is now prosecuting Brett Bursey, who was arrested for holding a "No War for Oil" sign at a Bush visit to Columbia, S.C. Local police, acting under Secret Service orders, established a "free-speech zone" half a mile from where Bush would speak. Bursey was standing amid hundreds of people carrying signs praising the president. Police told Bursey to remove himself to the "free-speech zone."
Bursey refused and was arrested. Bursey said that he asked the police officer if "it was the content of my sign, and he said, 'Yes, sir, it's the content of your sign that's the problem.' " Bursey stated that he had already moved 200 yards from where Bush was supposed to speak. Bursey later complained, "The problem was, the restricted area kept moving. It was wherever I happened to be standing."
Bursey was charged with trespassing. Five months later, the charge was dropped because South Carolina law prohibits arresting people for trespassing on public property. But the Justice Department -- in the person of U.S. Attorney Strom Thurmond Jr. -- quickly jumped in, charging Bursey with violating a rarely enforced federal law regarding "entering a restricted area around the president of the United States."
If convicted, Bursey faces a six-month trip up the river and a $5,000 fine. Federal Magistrate Bristow Marchant denied Bursey's request for a jury trial because his violation is categorized as a petty offense. Some observers believe that the feds are seeking to set a precedent in a conservative state such as South Carolina that could then be used against protesters nationwide.
Bursey's trial took place on Nov. 12 and 13. His lawyers sought the Secret Service documents they believed would lay out the official policies on restricting critical speech at presidential visits. The Bush administration sought to block all access to the documents, but Marchant ruled that the lawyers could have limited access.
Bursey sought to subpoena Attorney General John Ashcroft and presidential adviser Karl Rove to testify. Bursey lawyer Lewis Pitts declared, "We intend to find out from Mr. Ashcroft why and how the decision to prosecute Mr. Bursey was reached." The magistrate refused, however, to enforce the subpoenas. Secret Service agent Holly Abel testified at the trial that Bursey was told to move to the "free-speech zone" but refused to cooperate.
The feds have offered some bizarre rationales for hog-tying protesters. Secret Service agent Brian Marr explained to National Public Radio, "These individuals may be so involved with trying to shout their support or nonsupport that inadvertently they may walk out into the motorcade route and be injured. And that is really the reason why we set these places up, so we can make sure that they have the right of free speech, but, two, we want to be sure that they are able to go home at the end of the evening and not be injured in any way." Except for having their constitutional rights shredded.
The ACLU, along with several other organizations, is suing the Secret Service for what it charges is a pattern and practice of suppressing protesters at Bush events in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, Texas and elsewhere. The ACLU's Witold Walczak said of the protesters, "The individuals we are talking about didn't pose a security threat; they posed a political threat."
The Secret Service is duty-bound to protect the president. But it is ludicrous to presume that would-be terrorists are lunkheaded enough to carry anti-Bush signs when carrying pro-Bush signs would give them much closer access. And even a policy of removing all people carrying signs -- as has happened in some demonstrations -- is pointless because potential attackers would simply avoid carrying signs. Assuming that terrorists are as unimaginative and predictable as the average federal bureaucrat is not a recipe for presidential longevity.
The Bush administration's anti-protester bias proved embarrassing for two American allies with long traditions of raucous free speech, resulting in some of the most repressive restrictions in memory in free countries.
When Bush visited Australia in October, Sydney Morning Herald columnist Mark Riley observed, "The basic right of freedom of speech will adopt a new interpretation during the Canberra visits this week by George Bush and his Chinese counterpart, Hu Jintao. Protesters will be free to speak as much as they like just as long as they can't be heard."
Demonstrators were shunted to an area away from the Federal Parliament building and prohibited from using any public address system in the area.
For Bush's recent visit to London, the White House demanded that British police ban all protest marches, close down the center of the city and impose a "virtual three-day shutdown of central London in a bid to foil disruption of the visit by anti-war protesters," according to Britain's Evening Standard. But instead of a "free-speech zone," the Bush administration demanded an "exclusion zone" to protect Bush from protesters' messages.
Such unprecedented restrictions did not inhibit Bush from portraying himself as a champion of freedom during his visit. In a speech at Whitehall on Nov. 19, Bush hyped the "forward strategy of freedom" and declared, "We seek the advance of freedom and the peace that freedom brings."
Attempts to suppress protesters become more disturbing in light of the Homeland Security Department's recommendation that local police departments view critics of the war on terrorism as potential terrorists. In a May terrorist advisory, the Homeland Security Department warned local law enforcement agencies to keep an eye on anyone who "expressed dislike of attitudes and decisions of the U.S. government." If police vigorously followed this advice, millions of Americans could be added to the official lists of suspected terrorists.
Protesters have claimed that police have assaulted them during demonstrations in New York, Washington and elsewhere.
One of the most violent government responses to an antiwar protest occurred when local police and the federally funded California Anti-Terrorism Task Force fired rubber bullets and tear gas at peaceful protesters and innocent bystanders at the Port of Oakland, injuring a number of people.
When the police attack sparked a geyser of media criticism, Mike van Winkle, the spokesman for the California Anti-Terrorism Information Center told the Oakland Tribune, "You can make an easy kind of a link that, if you have a protest group protesting a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism, you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest against that is a terrorist act."
Van Winkle justified classifying protesters as terrorists: "I've heard terrorism described as anything that is violent or has an economic impact, and shutting down a port certainly would have some economic impact. Terrorism isn't just bombs going off and killing people."
Such aggressive tactics become more ominous in the light of the Bush administration's advocacy, in its Patriot II draft legislation, of nullifying all judicial consent decrees restricting state and local police from spying on those groups who may oppose government policies.
On May 30, 2002, Ashcroft effectively abolished restrictions on FBI surveillance of Americans' everyday lives first imposed in 1976. One FBI internal newsletter encouraged FBI agents to conduct more interviews with antiwar activists "for plenty of reasons, chief of which it will enhance the paranoia endemic in such circles and will further service to get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox."
The FBI took a shotgun approach toward protesters partly because of the FBI's "belief that dissident speech and association should be prevented because they were incipient steps toward the possible ultimate commission of act which might be criminal," according to a Senate report.
On Nov. 23 news broke that the FBI is actively conducting surveillance of antiwar demonstrators, supposedly to "blunt potential violence by extremist elements," according to a Reuters interview with a federal law enforcement official.
Given the FBI's expansive definition of "potential violence" in the past, this is a net that could catch almost any group or individual who falls into official disfavor.
James Bovard is the author of "Terrorism & Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice, and Peace to Rid the World of Evil." This article is adapted from one that appeared in the Dec. 15 issue of the American Conservative.
Oppose Bush, go to jail
-
Rspaight
- Posts: 4386
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
- Contact:
Oppose Bush, go to jail
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney
-
Rspaight
- Posts: 4386
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
- Contact:
From the AP via Yahoo:
Happy Independence Day, everyone.
Ryan
... Bush told a cheering crowd outside the West Virginia Capitol. An enthusiastic audience estimated by state capitol police at 6,500 people waving American flags chanted, "Four more years."
Regarding Saddam, the deposed Iraqi president, Bush said: "Because we acted, the dictator, the brutal tyrant, is sitting in a prison cell."
Two Bush opponents, taken out of the crowd in restraints by police, said they were told they couldn't be there because they were wearing shirts that said they opposed the president.
Happy Independence Day, everyone.
Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney
-
Rspaight
- Posts: 4386
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
- Contact:
FEMA worker ordered home
Woman, husband wore T-shirts with anti-Bush logo at July Fourth rally
By Paul J. Nyden
Staff Writer
A worker with the Federal Emergency Management Agency who wore an anti-Bush T-shirt at the president’s July Fourth rally in Charleston has been sent home to Texas.
Nicole Rank, who was working for FEMA in West Virginia, and her husband, Jeff, were removed from the Capitol grounds in handcuffs shortly before Bush’s speech. The pair wore T-shirts with the message “Love America, Hate Bush.”
The Ranks were ticketed for trespassing and released. They have been given summonses to appear in court, Charleston Police Lt. C.A. Vincent said Wednesday.
FEMA spokesman Ross Fredenburg would not say Wednesday whether Nicole Rank had been fired.
“All we can say is that our federal coordinating officer, Lou Botta, sent Nicole home,” he said. “We cannot comment further, to protect her privacy. Federal privacy laws prevent us from saying anything.”
Rank was doing environmental work for FEMA, Fredenburg said. “Nicole was deployed here after the Memorial Day flooding. I knew her personally ... We are reservists and work for intermittent periods of time.”
Fredenburg said Jeff Rank did not work for FEMA. He would not say where in Texas the Ranks live.
On Sunday, Charleston Police Sgt. R.E. Parsons said Nicole and Jeff Rank were in a no-trespassing area and refused to leave.
The White House coordinated the president’s visit to the state Capitol. Organizers described it as a presidential visit, not a political rally. State and federal funds were used to pay for the presidential visit.
Dozens of people who attended Sunday’s event wore pro-Bush T-shirts and Bush-Cheney campaign buttons, some of which were sold on the Capitol grounds outside the security screening stations.
U.S. Secret Service officers coordinated security workers, including West Virginia State Police, state park officers and Capitol security officers.
Those who attended Bush’s speech were required to have tickets that were distributed by various employers in the area and by the office of Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.
Those who applied for tickets were required to supply their names, addresses, birth dates, birthplaces and Social Security numbers.
A two-page document given to ticket holders said they were prohibited from bringing certain items to the event, including: weapons, video-recording equipment, food, beverages, umbrellas, signs and banners. T-shirts, political buttons and lapel pins were not on the list of prohibited items.
Robert Bastress, a West Virginia University law professor who specializes in civil liberties, questions whether people like the Ranks can be legally prohibited from wearing anti-Bush shirts or buttons.
“Obviously, you have a right to engage in nondisruptive protest,” he said. “If you were legally there, you cannot be asked to leave because of whatever message is on a button or a T-shirt or a hat.”
He said key questions are “whether the [Bush speech] was a public forum, whether you were lawfully there and what was the manner in which you were engaging in your expression.”
Event organizers could prohibit signs, designating a place where people could carry signs. “But they can’t make those decisions based on what the content of any sign says.”
Bastress also said it makes no difference whether Sunday’s event was an official presidential visit or a political rally.
“That area was open to anybody who had a ticket,” he said. “Once you were lawfully in there, you were entitled to even-handed treatment.”
To contact staff writer Paul J. Nyden, use e-mail or call 348-5164.
Woman, husband wore T-shirts with anti-Bush logo at July Fourth rally
By Paul J. Nyden
Staff Writer
A worker with the Federal Emergency Management Agency who wore an anti-Bush T-shirt at the president’s July Fourth rally in Charleston has been sent home to Texas.
Nicole Rank, who was working for FEMA in West Virginia, and her husband, Jeff, were removed from the Capitol grounds in handcuffs shortly before Bush’s speech. The pair wore T-shirts with the message “Love America, Hate Bush.”
The Ranks were ticketed for trespassing and released. They have been given summonses to appear in court, Charleston Police Lt. C.A. Vincent said Wednesday.
FEMA spokesman Ross Fredenburg would not say Wednesday whether Nicole Rank had been fired.
“All we can say is that our federal coordinating officer, Lou Botta, sent Nicole home,” he said. “We cannot comment further, to protect her privacy. Federal privacy laws prevent us from saying anything.”
Rank was doing environmental work for FEMA, Fredenburg said. “Nicole was deployed here after the Memorial Day flooding. I knew her personally ... We are reservists and work for intermittent periods of time.”
Fredenburg said Jeff Rank did not work for FEMA. He would not say where in Texas the Ranks live.
On Sunday, Charleston Police Sgt. R.E. Parsons said Nicole and Jeff Rank were in a no-trespassing area and refused to leave.
The White House coordinated the president’s visit to the state Capitol. Organizers described it as a presidential visit, not a political rally. State and federal funds were used to pay for the presidential visit.
Dozens of people who attended Sunday’s event wore pro-Bush T-shirts and Bush-Cheney campaign buttons, some of which were sold on the Capitol grounds outside the security screening stations.
U.S. Secret Service officers coordinated security workers, including West Virginia State Police, state park officers and Capitol security officers.
Those who attended Bush’s speech were required to have tickets that were distributed by various employers in the area and by the office of Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.
Those who applied for tickets were required to supply their names, addresses, birth dates, birthplaces and Social Security numbers.
A two-page document given to ticket holders said they were prohibited from bringing certain items to the event, including: weapons, video-recording equipment, food, beverages, umbrellas, signs and banners. T-shirts, political buttons and lapel pins were not on the list of prohibited items.
Robert Bastress, a West Virginia University law professor who specializes in civil liberties, questions whether people like the Ranks can be legally prohibited from wearing anti-Bush shirts or buttons.
“Obviously, you have a right to engage in nondisruptive protest,” he said. “If you were legally there, you cannot be asked to leave because of whatever message is on a button or a T-shirt or a hat.”
He said key questions are “whether the [Bush speech] was a public forum, whether you were lawfully there and what was the manner in which you were engaging in your expression.”
Event organizers could prohibit signs, designating a place where people could carry signs. “But they can’t make those decisions based on what the content of any sign says.”
Bastress also said it makes no difference whether Sunday’s event was an official presidential visit or a political rally.
“That area was open to anybody who had a ticket,” he said. “Once you were lawfully in there, you were entitled to even-handed treatment.”
To contact staff writer Paul J. Nyden, use e-mail or call 348-5164.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney
-
Rspaight
- Posts: 4386
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
- Contact:
Charges Against Texas Couple Dropped
Staff
Charleston
A Texas couple is headed home after proving Americans have the right to say what they want, when they want, even during a Presidential visit. Charleston Municipal Court Judge Carol Bloom dismissed the trespassing charges against Jeff and Nicole Rank Thursday morning.
The couple was charged after wearing anti-Bush T-shirts to the President's 4th of July address at the state capitol. The Rank's lawyer, Harvey Peyton, says the charges were dismissed as a matter of jurisdiction. "Municipalities only have the authority to enforce, in their courts, violations of the municipal code. This citation was a general charge of trespass but the city of Charleston does not have an ordinance that prohibits trespass other than on city property or 'the property of another,' and that does not apply to the common grounds of the state house which, of course, is owned by everybody."
Jeff Rank says he's empowered by the decision. He says, "It reaffirms my belief in our Constitutional rights and it's certainly heartening to find that those are upheld, that the system works." In fact, both say all the controversy was well worth it. Nicole says, "I think we had the right to be where we were and this morning we were proven that we were right in that."
Jeff says he was surprised by all the media coverage and certainly never meant to make an issue of it. "We didn't look to bring it to the forefront. I'm not sorry that we were a focal point for it. I'm not happy about that but I'm not sorry about that, it just is and that's okay. We're willing to accept that in order to uphold our Constitutional rights."
Several supporters joined the Ranks during their hearing. At least two people wore white anti-Bush T-shirts, much like the Ranks did on the 4th of July. Supporter Julian Martin says the two were certainly within their rights. "I'm exercising my support for these brave people for exercising their right to say that they don't like George Bush. You outta be able to say that anywhere, anytime in this country."
The Ranks say their plight wasn't restricted to Charleston. They believe it could've happened anywhere. Even though Nicole lost her job with FEMA over the incident, she says it doesn't change her view of the city. "I've really enjoyed my time here in Charleston. It's a great city. I like the people here and for the most part, we've had just wonderful support from the people in this city and state, in general."
Confirmed John Kerry supporters, the Ranks say they don't intend to stick around for tonight's rally. They say they're anxious to begin their journey back to Texas. For now both Jeff and Nicole are ready to let the situation drop and have no plans to further it with a lawsuit against the city.
Staff
Charleston
A Texas couple is headed home after proving Americans have the right to say what they want, when they want, even during a Presidential visit. Charleston Municipal Court Judge Carol Bloom dismissed the trespassing charges against Jeff and Nicole Rank Thursday morning.
The couple was charged after wearing anti-Bush T-shirts to the President's 4th of July address at the state capitol. The Rank's lawyer, Harvey Peyton, says the charges were dismissed as a matter of jurisdiction. "Municipalities only have the authority to enforce, in their courts, violations of the municipal code. This citation was a general charge of trespass but the city of Charleston does not have an ordinance that prohibits trespass other than on city property or 'the property of another,' and that does not apply to the common grounds of the state house which, of course, is owned by everybody."
Jeff Rank says he's empowered by the decision. He says, "It reaffirms my belief in our Constitutional rights and it's certainly heartening to find that those are upheld, that the system works." In fact, both say all the controversy was well worth it. Nicole says, "I think we had the right to be where we were and this morning we were proven that we were right in that."
Jeff says he was surprised by all the media coverage and certainly never meant to make an issue of it. "We didn't look to bring it to the forefront. I'm not sorry that we were a focal point for it. I'm not happy about that but I'm not sorry about that, it just is and that's okay. We're willing to accept that in order to uphold our Constitutional rights."
Several supporters joined the Ranks during their hearing. At least two people wore white anti-Bush T-shirts, much like the Ranks did on the 4th of July. Supporter Julian Martin says the two were certainly within their rights. "I'm exercising my support for these brave people for exercising their right to say that they don't like George Bush. You outta be able to say that anywhere, anytime in this country."
The Ranks say their plight wasn't restricted to Charleston. They believe it could've happened anywhere. Even though Nicole lost her job with FEMA over the incident, she says it doesn't change her view of the city. "I've really enjoyed my time here in Charleston. It's a great city. I like the people here and for the most part, we've had just wonderful support from the people in this city and state, in general."
Confirmed John Kerry supporters, the Ranks say they don't intend to stick around for tonight's rally. They say they're anxious to begin their journey back to Texas. For now both Jeff and Nicole are ready to let the situation drop and have no plans to further it with a lawsuit against the city.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney
-
Rspaight
- Posts: 4386
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
- Contact:
While Bush has dissenters carted off to jail, Kerry engages and challenges them. Bolding at the bottom showing voters confused by continued GOP distortions. Happily, the article doesn't simply let the inaccuracy stand.
In Canonsburg, Kerry jousts with hecklers
He turns 'porch' taunts into jabs at Bush record
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
By Milan Simonich, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
With a friendly crowd in Canonsburg lobbing softball questions yesterday, Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry could have ignored a pocket of hecklers that tried to disrupt his campaign.
Instead, Kerry pulled the detractors into his Labor Day speech, part of the "front-porch discussions" he's been holding across the country. He told them their shouts and taunts couldn't cover up facts -- namely, that America has had a net loss of 1.6 million jobs under President Bush.
Gasoline prices are up 31 percent since Bush took office, and college tuition has grown more expensive by the year, he said.
At the same time, he said, wages are down by $1,500 for "the average family."
One heckler then shouted, "Yeah, Kerry, you're really average."
Kerry pounced on the comment, replying: "No, I'm privileged, and my tax burden went down. I don't think that's right."
Kerry said Bush, also a man of money and privilege, has worked hard to lessen tax payments for the wealthiest Americans. Otherwise, Kerry said, Bush has presided over an economy that is in disarray.
Income for all Americans fell 9.2 percent in 2001 and 2002, according to the Internal Revenue Service.
In addition, Bush has rung up record budget deficits, and he will be the first president since Herbert Hoover in the Great Depression to have lost more jobs than he created, Kerry said.
"Franklin Roosevelt, Jack Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon all created jobs during their presidencies, even though they had wars to contend with," Kerry said.
The jobs developed under Bush's administration are nothing to shout about, Kerry went on.
He seized on a just-released Bureau of Labor Statistics report that said new jobs in growing industries pay $8,848 a year less than jobs that were lost, either because of shrinking industries or exportation of work to foreign soil.
"If you think that's moving in the right direction, go vote for the other guy," Kerry said to the hecklers.
He added that those who find failure in Bush's resume should vote Democratic in November.
Kerry said his plans for invigorating the economy include spending controls to balance the budget, tax credits for creation of manufacturing jobs and a tuition tax credit to help more people send their children to college.
Kerry's Canonsburg appearance, at the home of Dale and Jody Rhome, was intended to answer questions from average people.
He received few questions from the 95 people packed into the front yard. Most onlookers simply praised Kerry or lamented the country's direction under Bush.
Kerry also said Bush had lost most of the momentum in America's fight against crime.
He said that, as a U.S. senator from Massachusetts, he supported funding in 1994 to put an additional 100,000 police officers on the streets.
But Bush, Kerry said, preferred tax cuts for wealthy people to sustained funding for police operations that made America safer.
Kerry said the Bush administration allowed pharmaceutical companies to improperly obtain new patents on old prescription drugs. Kerry said this tactic prevents certain medications from being sold as generic drugs, keeping prices higher than they should be.
Patricia Romano of Canonsburg told Kerry that she has had 11 throat surgeries and must pay so much for prescription drugs that she had to get a part-time job at age 70.
Hecklers drowned out Romano at one point. That prompted Kerry to say, "While the Bush people were rudely shouting, we had a 70-year-old woman trying to speak" about runaway costs of prescription drugs.
Kerry pledged to have the Justice Department enforce existing patent laws to prevent drug companies from unfairly capitalizing on sick people.
When asked about his timetable for ending U.S. military involvement in Iraq, Kerry said he believes that he can do it in his first term.
Kerry departed Canonsburg to cheers after an hour of talk. Not everybody in town, though, was converted.
Beth Soucie, who stood in a yard filled with Bush signs, said she will stick with the Republican incumbent.
Soucie said she could not support Kerry because he voted against funding that would have outfitted U.S. soldiers in Iraq with body armor. One of those who lacked the equipment, she said, was her son, former Army Sgt. Jared Soucie, who was a military policeman.
Bush's campaign has used the body armor issue in television ads, claiming that Kerry is "wrong on defense."
Jonathan Soltz, coordinator of Pennsylvania Veterans for Kerry, said the senator wanted to pay for soldiers' body armor by rolling back some of Bush's tax cuts. But Bush would not yield on that point, Soltz said.
Kerry's campaign also said Bush, as commander in chief, was at fault for sending U.S. soldiers to Iraq while knowing that the military did not have enough body armor to equip all of its troops.
In Canonsburg, Kerry jousts with hecklers
He turns 'porch' taunts into jabs at Bush record
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
By Milan Simonich, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
With a friendly crowd in Canonsburg lobbing softball questions yesterday, Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry could have ignored a pocket of hecklers that tried to disrupt his campaign.
Instead, Kerry pulled the detractors into his Labor Day speech, part of the "front-porch discussions" he's been holding across the country. He told them their shouts and taunts couldn't cover up facts -- namely, that America has had a net loss of 1.6 million jobs under President Bush.
Gasoline prices are up 31 percent since Bush took office, and college tuition has grown more expensive by the year, he said.
At the same time, he said, wages are down by $1,500 for "the average family."
One heckler then shouted, "Yeah, Kerry, you're really average."
Kerry pounced on the comment, replying: "No, I'm privileged, and my tax burden went down. I don't think that's right."
Kerry said Bush, also a man of money and privilege, has worked hard to lessen tax payments for the wealthiest Americans. Otherwise, Kerry said, Bush has presided over an economy that is in disarray.
Income for all Americans fell 9.2 percent in 2001 and 2002, according to the Internal Revenue Service.
In addition, Bush has rung up record budget deficits, and he will be the first president since Herbert Hoover in the Great Depression to have lost more jobs than he created, Kerry said.
"Franklin Roosevelt, Jack Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon all created jobs during their presidencies, even though they had wars to contend with," Kerry said.
The jobs developed under Bush's administration are nothing to shout about, Kerry went on.
He seized on a just-released Bureau of Labor Statistics report that said new jobs in growing industries pay $8,848 a year less than jobs that were lost, either because of shrinking industries or exportation of work to foreign soil.
"If you think that's moving in the right direction, go vote for the other guy," Kerry said to the hecklers.
He added that those who find failure in Bush's resume should vote Democratic in November.
Kerry said his plans for invigorating the economy include spending controls to balance the budget, tax credits for creation of manufacturing jobs and a tuition tax credit to help more people send their children to college.
Kerry's Canonsburg appearance, at the home of Dale and Jody Rhome, was intended to answer questions from average people.
He received few questions from the 95 people packed into the front yard. Most onlookers simply praised Kerry or lamented the country's direction under Bush.
Kerry also said Bush had lost most of the momentum in America's fight against crime.
He said that, as a U.S. senator from Massachusetts, he supported funding in 1994 to put an additional 100,000 police officers on the streets.
But Bush, Kerry said, preferred tax cuts for wealthy people to sustained funding for police operations that made America safer.
Kerry said the Bush administration allowed pharmaceutical companies to improperly obtain new patents on old prescription drugs. Kerry said this tactic prevents certain medications from being sold as generic drugs, keeping prices higher than they should be.
Patricia Romano of Canonsburg told Kerry that she has had 11 throat surgeries and must pay so much for prescription drugs that she had to get a part-time job at age 70.
Hecklers drowned out Romano at one point. That prompted Kerry to say, "While the Bush people were rudely shouting, we had a 70-year-old woman trying to speak" about runaway costs of prescription drugs.
Kerry pledged to have the Justice Department enforce existing patent laws to prevent drug companies from unfairly capitalizing on sick people.
When asked about his timetable for ending U.S. military involvement in Iraq, Kerry said he believes that he can do it in his first term.
Kerry departed Canonsburg to cheers after an hour of talk. Not everybody in town, though, was converted.
Beth Soucie, who stood in a yard filled with Bush signs, said she will stick with the Republican incumbent.
Soucie said she could not support Kerry because he voted against funding that would have outfitted U.S. soldiers in Iraq with body armor. One of those who lacked the equipment, she said, was her son, former Army Sgt. Jared Soucie, who was a military policeman.
Bush's campaign has used the body armor issue in television ads, claiming that Kerry is "wrong on defense."
Jonathan Soltz, coordinator of Pennsylvania Veterans for Kerry, said the senator wanted to pay for soldiers' body armor by rolling back some of Bush's tax cuts. But Bush would not yield on that point, Soltz said.
Kerry's campaign also said Bush, as commander in chief, was at fault for sending U.S. soldiers to Iraq while knowing that the military did not have enough body armor to equip all of its troops.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney