Comments on: ACLU Provides Concrete Evidence Of Bush's Contempt For Free Speech http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/ Reality-based political commentary Thu, 30 Apr 2026 01:36:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Chris Weigant http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/#comment-118 Chris Weigant Sun, 01 Jul 2007 01:19:17 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/#comment-118 micki - I'm pretty sure it's only this one, and that they rewrite it with every administration. The reason I say this is that the last page that is not redacted, there are instructions for how to bill the event differently, whether it is a political campaign event (bill to Republican National Committee) and if it is a public event (bill to White House). While they could have just substituted "Republican" for Democratic" there, I still would venture to guess that the manual is entirely rewritten for each new president. [Note also the use of "young republicans" in the text quoted.] - CW micki -

I'm pretty sure it's only this one, and that they rewrite it with every administration. The reason I say this is that the last page that is not redacted, there are instructions for how to bill the event differently, whether it is a political campaign event (bill to Republican National Committee) and if it is a public event (bill to White House). While they could have just substituted "Republican" for Democratic" there, I still would venture to guess that the manual is entirely rewritten for each new president. [Note also the use of "young republicans" in the text quoted.]

- CW

]]> By: micki http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/#comment-117 micki Sat, 30 Jun 2007 21:37:31 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/#comment-117 In the ACLU article,where you said you were taking from the pages that weren't redacted,it says this is from the White House. What I want to know is; is this a manual for ALL administrations or just this one? In the ACLU article,where you said you were taking from the pages that weren't redacted,it says this is from the White House. What I want to know is; is this a manual for ALL administrations or just this one?

]]> By: Michale http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/#comment-116 Michale Sat, 30 Jun 2007 18:01:35 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/06/29/aclu-provides-concrete-evidence-of-bushs-contempt-for-free-speech/#comment-116 >Right. “Most often” a group of hippies and > peaceniks “want a physical confrontation,” >not the jocks and frat boys who are dispatched >to shout them down. Uhhmmm.. You recall the LA Immigration "riot", right?? In reports of the aftermath, the protesters themselves stated that the actual group that started the fights with police were a splinter faction whose SOLE AIM was to initiate a confrontation in the very manner you scoff at.. Plus I was present at 2 different protests in the early 80s (MX Missile Testing, Vandenberg AFB 82-84) where tens of thousands of protesters were present and they were there to do the exact same thing you scoff at. To initiate a confrontation with us cops.. So, while what is posted by the administration MAY sound paranoid, it IS the reality of the world we live in. Even as far back as 20+ years ago. I am certain it has gotten worse, not better. Sorry CW... After hearing all week about legislating talk radio and forcing the "Fairness" doctrine into the marketplace, after hearing about how Democratic Party Pres Candidates are so afraid of a lobbyist group that they won't appear on a debate co-sponsored by FNC and finally after being heavily censored on several alleged "liberal" web sites simply for asking sincere questions about their posts (granted in, probably an annoying manner), I really cannot get up the gumption to be offended by what the Bush Administration is doing to allegedly limit free speech. This is simply one more instance of the Left being just as bad as the Right... One has to wonder what Clinton's "Presidential Advance Manual" looks like, eh??? Michale..... >Right. “Most often” a group of hippies and
> peaceniks “want a physical confrontation,”
>not the jocks and frat boys who are dispatched
>to shout them down.

Uhhmmm.. You recall the LA Immigration "riot", right?? In reports of the aftermath, the protesters themselves stated that the actual group that started the fights with police were a splinter faction whose SOLE AIM was to initiate a confrontation in the very manner you scoff at..

Plus I was present at 2 different protests in the early 80s (MX Missile Testing, Vandenberg AFB 82-84) where tens of thousands of protesters were
present and they were there to do the exact same thing you scoff at. To initiate a confrontation with us cops..

So, while what is posted by the administration MAY sound paranoid, it IS the reality of the world we live in. Even as far back as 20+ years ago. I am certain it has gotten worse, not better.

Sorry CW...

After hearing all week about legislating talk radio and forcing the "Fairness" doctrine into the marketplace, after hearing about how Democratic Party Pres Candidates are so afraid of a lobbyist group that they won't appear on a debate co-sponsored by FNC and finally after being heavily censored on several alleged "liberal" web sites simply for asking sincere questions about their posts (granted in, probably an annoying manner), I really cannot get up the gumption to be offended by what the Bush Administration is doing to allegedly limit free speech.

This is simply one more instance of the Left being just as bad as the Right...

One has to wonder what Clinton's "Presidential Advance Manual" looks like, eh???

Michale.....

]]>