creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Steve Chapman
Steve Chapman
12 Feb 2012
False Fears About a Nuclear Iran

"The stupidest thing I have ever heard." — Meir Dagan, former head of Israel's intelligence agency,… Read More.

9 Feb 2012
Appease This!

On April 1, 2001, a U.S. spy plane and a Chinese fighter collided over the South China Sea, forcing the … Read More.

5 Feb 2012
The Flaws of Mitt and Newt

Newt Gingrich has an exquisitely sensitive moral antenna, and Mitt Romney's remark suggesting indifference to … Read More.

Bush's Rare Glimpse to Dissent

Share Comment

When President George W. Bush had to duck a pair of shoes thrown at him by an irate Iraqi journalist at a news conference in Baghdad, the depressing part was not just that his administration has managed to alienate many Iraqis. It was also that the president of the United States had to go to Iraq to find himself face to face with anyone who openly rejects his policies.

Here in the land of the free, that is almost unheard of. When Bush ventures into contact with ordinary Americans outside the White House, his aides do their best to keep him from realizing that many of his constituents regard him as a disaster.

It's explicit administration policy, in fact, to keep any expression of discontent from becoming visible to the Great Leader. You don't have to chuck a Rockport to be forcibly exiled from his presence.

Jeffrey and Nicole Rank can attest to that. Four years ago, Bush gave a Fourth of July speech on the grounds of the West Virginia state capitol in Charleston. It was open to the public, and they got tickets to attend. But after being admitted, they took off their outer shirts to display T-shirts with a red circle and a bar over the word "Bush." On the back, Nicole's shirt urged, "Love America, Hate Bush," while her husband's said, "Regime Change Begins at Home."

As soon as these unapproved messages were spotted, workers told them to cover up or leave. Jeffrey Rank said later, "We tried to explain to them that it was well within our right to stand there and wear these T-shirts, just as people around us had the right to wear pro-Bush and Cheney T-shirts." But the cops, showing no interested in inconveniences like freedom of speech, handcuffed and arrested them for trespassing.

This was not an isolated incident. When Bush went to Denver to speak on Social Security at another taxpayer-financed public event, Leslie Weise and Alex Young got their tickets and drove to the museum where Bush would appear. But a Republican operative noticed their car bore a bumper sticker recommending "No More Blood for Oil" and apparently took it as a criticism of Bush.

After they had taken their seats inside, two presidential staffers showed up and unceremoniously escorted them out.

Weise and Young say Secret Service agents later told them they were ejected purely because of that bumper sticker.

The American Civil Liberties Union took both of these cases, and during litigation, managed to get a White House document that shows squashing dissent is standard operating procedure. "Proper ticket distribution is vital to creating a well-balanced crowd and deterring potential protesters from attending events," the President Advance Manual says. "Well-balanced" in this context means including not only who like President Bush but people who love him.

No one objects to efforts to avert disruptions that threaten violence or keep the president from speaking. But White House staffers show control-freak tendencies that go beyond assuring security. The manual says that if someone merely displays a sign, "action needs to be taken immediately to minimize the demonstrator's effect."

What effect would that be? Showing that someone disagrees with George W. Bush — an effect that can't be tolerated. That's why Bush critics have to be removed even if they are quiet and non-disruptive.

It's not enough to keep opponents out of his audiences. The manual also calls for keeping all external protests out of sight. It advises advance workers to get "the local police department to designate a protest area where demonstrators can be placed, preferably not in view of the event site or the motorcade route" . What kind of country would we be if we made the president endure the spectacle of citizens questioning his infallibility?

The ACLU is challenging these tactics in court, and it's already won a victory. The federal government agreed to pay Nicole and Jeff Rank $80,000 for what was done to them, and Charleston city officials apologized.

This comes too late to penetrate the barricades that have surrounded President Bush. But maybe President-elect Barack Obama will take a different approach and accept that occasionally seeing people express dissenting views is just part of the president's job. And not just on visits to Baghdad.

Steve Chapman blogs daily at newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/steve_chapman. To find out more about Steve Chapman, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.


Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment
Sir;... It is amazing to read of the past, even of the Civil War, and find how approachable was Lincoln, Garfield, and Mckinley... I guess that taught them all a lesson; but the lesson they took from it was the wrong one, that they could excuse complete isolation from the will of the people, and hide ensconced behind many layers of security where public opinion could never guide them... Do you think Dick Cheney cares what the people think??? He does not have to...Do you think Mr. Bush has to care what the people think??? Power without recall means he does not have to care... Did Shakespeare say that if you put a beggar in the saddle he would ride the horse to death??? If so this horse is about played out... I know there are some republicans who will vote republican if the candidate is the spawn of the devil found making love to a corpes.... Mr. Bush is not so bad... He was given the support of the government in order to have the strength to negotiate, and he used it to take us to war... He did not seek the consent of the people... The begger did not think he needed it; which is to say, he did not think...But war, even small little international conflicts demand the consent of the whole people because it is the whole people who will suffer their failure... There is no substitute for democracy... There is no substitute for self government... We think we can trust leaders with our power, and such trust is stupid so long as leaders do not follow the will of the people... Changing leaders without forcing them to seek our consent explains our misrule, but it does not justify it... We cannot throw our shoes at our leaders, nor throw our dirty grundles at our presidents no matter how much they deserve it... What is the cause and what is the effect??? Is the government so unstabile because it will not remove failed presidents, or can it not remove failed presidents because it is unstable??? No one dares to rock the boat...Nor will they subject themselves to the abuse they roundly deserve... They are on their own, and so are the people... Thanks....Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Dec 25, 2008 7:25 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Steve Chapman
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Judge Napolitano
Judge Andrew P. NapolitanoUpdated 16 Feb 2012
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 15 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 15 Feb 2012

22 Feb 2009 Detroit as the Prodigal Son

25 Mar 2010 Why Don't More Cops Go to the Videotape?

30 Jan 2011 Should We Ban Walking While Wired?