JOHNSON: Bum's rush stirs free-speech issue

By Bill Johnson, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Are we getting the picture yet? Still, no?

Maybe you just haven't seen the video of Carol Kreck getting booted out of the John McCain town hall event on Monday at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts.

My most depressingly favorite line in the entire clip is this one:

"No, HE'S saying you're trespassing on city property."

It is uttered by a tall, dark-haired police sergeant who is escorting the 60-year-old former newspaper reporter-turned librarian from the DCPA atrium, his palms held up in 'Who, me?' style, after pointing to an anonymous man in a tan, off-the-rack sport coat, as if he were a mere bystander in all of it.

If you are planning to be anywhere near the city center come next month when the convention comes to town, viewing the Carol Kreck video ought to be Job No. 1.

It is Exhibit K - maybe M, I forget - of what I have been shouting about for weeks now:

Dissent, no matter how softly murmured, no matter how small it is printed on a poster or bumper sticker, will only get you ticketed, or worse, arrested and in need of bail money when national political figures come to town.

Rely on the First Amendment at your peril.

"McCain=Bush," was all that Carol Kreck's sign said. And they came for her even before they went for the man wearing a ridiculous pea pod costume plastered with photos of the president and Sen. McCain.

Turns out, she didn't even make the sign. It was handed to her, she said, when she arrived at a McCain protest being put on by the liberal group ProgressNowAction. Of course, someone - presumably someone with the group - videotaped Kreck's confrontation with police, and by late Tuesday afternoon it had drawn more than 60,000 hits on YouTube. Welcome to modern guerrilla politics.

"It was all kind of larky," acknowledged Kreck, a former Denver Post reporter, of her being there at all.

"Since I only work part time at the library, I thought (attending the news conference) was something I could do to be helpful."

Still, she is, as the video shows, an itty-bitty little thing, so near deafness that a machine on her end of the phone line must translate what you have just said. All of it belies her still-burning, newspaper-instilled feistiness.

She never planned to attend McCain's town hall meeting inside one of the theaters. With the outside protest/news conference over, she was about to head off to the library when others there began insisting she attend.

But what if she did and asked a question someone already had posed, one that she couldn't hear? Still, she decided to stay, to chat awhile longer with the others.

The security men had shunted them, their stacks of peas, costumes and whatnot over to a far wall next to the theater where the candidate was speaking. She was still holding the sign, which the security men repeatedly reminded her and the others they could not carry inside.

"Through the theater windows, though, I could see the police officers inside, who were looking back," Carol Kreck said. "I remember thinking, 'I hope they are not there to arrest people for holding the signs, which would be a huge constitutional violation.' "

Soon, the officers walked out.

"Being an old reporter," she recalled, "I asked the question: 'Could you, would you, arrest someone just for holding a sign? Could you violate the First Amendment that way?' "

They told her, once again, she would have to put the sign down before going in. The feistiness then went into overdrive.

What of the McCain signs, T-shirts and buttons, she asked them? Isn't that speech, too?

"I wasn't aggressive about it," she said. "But for them, that was it. They told me to come with them. I guess they changed their minds on the rules right there."

They told her it was private property. It isn't, Carol Kreck reminded them.

"They started writing the trespassing ticket."

Pointing to the man in the tan sport coat, she asked the officers whom they worked for, the city and its citizens or the Republican Party. That is when they began escorting her to the street.

"Do you know they followed me all the way down the steps?" she said, still not believing it. "I started laughing, it was so absurd."

She is due in court July 23 when she will be told when her first hearing will be. Carol Kreck insists she will not fold and pay any fine, which she says could be anywhere from $50 to $100.

"I can't imagine a judge for one minute who will not throw this case out."

She has hired an attorney and hints that her legal fight will not end with the criminal charge.

"If the security men or the Secret Service asked Denver police to do something illegal, it is an issue, an argument, a court should address."

We are saying our goodbyes through the machine when she begins laughing.

"I don't understand. Why should all the people there who voted for George Bush be so upset by a sign I didn't even make that compares John McCain to him?

"I didn't ask for any of this," Carol Kreck said, "but like dropping a stone in a pond, that idea is so much bigger now than if they had just left me alone in the first place."

• July 8, 2008

  9:58 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  arby writes:

  The problem as I see it is that too many stones have been dropped in the pond lately. We the people need to take our rights back and the police need to be on our side not the Govts. side. I don't mean slack off on crooks or evil doers. No way! But use common sense and reasonable judgement with peaceful protestors. I know the arguement will be it may become violent. Well that's what they are trained to stop if it begins to errupt until then be cool and maybe the protestors will be cool too. It might work?

• July 9, 2008

  7:29 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  sheepherder writes:

  The cops were on the side of the first amendment. No signs were allowed, levae it outside! Was there a mass arrest...no. Did she even get arrested, no. Have your free speech, but abide by the rules people. And David Lane is a moron just trying to get his name in the paper AGAIN. Lawyer...that says it all.

• July 9, 2008

  7:31 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Art writes:

  She is obviously a very dangerous person. When little old ladies are carrying signs that the government does not like they can be the most dangerous type of activists. What will this cost the city of Denver to prosecute? Thousands of dollars at least. I hope she takes this as far as she can and refuses to pay any "fines". I would like to see the court packed on the day she appears, of course they will probably close the court and seal all records so no one can know what takes place. What a waste of taxpayers dollars not to mention of course the violation of the first amendment.

• July 9, 2008

  7:51 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  anarchist writes:

  I am certain Mr. Johnson decried the event where muslim women were not allowed to sit in area at an Obama rally.

• July 9, 2008

  8:42 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  eclark writes:

  What Mr. Johnson failed to inform his readers about is that little old Carol Kreck is a member of Progress Now network complete with her very own webpage. It's embarrassing for a so called reporter not to even questions her real motives(someone just handed her the sign)? At least you can give us all the facts right?

• July 9, 2008

  10:45 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Ted_in_Vegas writes:

  Sammy, sammy, sammy. There's a big difference between free speech and disruptive behavior. She's free to say whatever she wants, but, as the Supreme Court has pointed out time and again, free speech has limits.

  That townhall meeting was paid for by McCain's campaign, I assume. They didn't pay for it so that she could have a platform, but so that McCain could. Kreck could have been outside with her sign, where the access was free and therefore the speech would be too, but instead she chose to invade someone else's space. How very mean of her.

  BTW - I don't see Obama taking questions from his audiences, not even friendly questions. I wonder if he could handle it or if he's as shallow as my dog's water dish. At least McCain is willing to take questions from respectable people.

• July 9, 2008

  10:57 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Konyok writes:

  Carol and her buddies got the "money shot" on YouTube, meanwhile, in the town hall meeting, McCain accepted and politely answered a question pondering why he didn't sponsor a bill of impeachment against Bush.
  (Never mind that impeachment originates in the House of Representatives, it's the thought that counts.)

• July 9, 2008

  11:13 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  Hey, Ted_in_Vegas, are you sure about that "Kreck could have been outside with her sign, where the access was free and therefore the speech would be too" comment? Because outside is exactly where Carol was standing when she was threatened with arrest. She was ejected from the DPAC and ticketed by the police over an hour before McCain even arrived on the scene. She wasn't demonstrating, chanting slogans, or being disruptive in any way. She, like the rest of us, was standing quietly in line on the plaza, waiting to get in the ballroom.

• July 9, 2008

  12:10 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Ted_in_Vegas writes:

  Sorry, nbcouch, I missed that.

  So, you are saying that she was attempting to enter a private event with a disruptive sign - which was not approved by the even sponsors - when stopped?

• July 9, 2008

  12:17 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  nbcouch, the article states that Kreck was attempting to enter the building when she was ticketed. I was an invited participant and even I could not bring in a sign or banner. EVERYONE was told at the door that signs were not permitted in the ballroom.

  Too bad Kreck didn't just put down her sign and come inside to listen to a truly patriotic person. I wasn't sure about Sen. McCain when I went into the town hall, but now I'm a supporter. He did a fantastic job of answering questions from openly hostile people and I now have tremendous respect for his abilities to lead this country.

  This was a ridiculous article. Why should Kreck be allowed to carry in a sign, when the rules stated that no one could do so?

  I'm volunteering right now to testify against Kreck and any other "pea" people because I believe the Denver Police and Secret Service did a tremendous job on Monday.

• July 9, 2008

  12:27 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Marshdale writes:

  anarchist; Can you point to me the where you got the information about Obama and the Muslim women? I'm just curious.

• July 9, 2008

  12:32 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Marshdale writes:

  sulin: I'm not sure if you read the whole article, but she can't hear. If it was anounced verbally no signs were allowed she would not have heard it. If there were signs posted stating this, she should have read them.

• July 9, 2008

  12:40 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  No, she was not attempting to enter the building. None of us were. As I said, we were standing quietly in line, waiting. They had not opened the doors yet, and were probably a good hour or more away from doing so at that time.

  When we walked up onto the plaza outside the Seawell Ballroom, several McCain people spotted us with our signs and told us, quite politely, that we could not bring them inside. As far as "rules" go, that was our ONLY exposure to them, and we were perfectly willing to comply, but with nowhere to put the signs, we stood there in line holding them. Again, we were not demonstrating, protesting, waving the signs or shouting slogans. My expectation was that we would drop the signs off at the door before entering.

  After standing in the queue for about 30 minutes we were approached by a DCPA official (the man in the light-colored jacket in the video), flanked by two Denver Police officers, who told us to relinquish the signs right then and there or be arrested. He informed us that he was making this demand at the request of the Secret Service. That's on the video too.

  Once again, this was at least an hour before anybody was let into the ballroom where the town hall meeting was to be held. I'm pretty sure McCain himself hadn't even arrived in Denver yet, much less made his way to the DPAC. I believe Carol felt she was within her rights to stand there in line, on the plaza outside the ballroom, peacefully holding her sign. (So do I.) She very calmly objected to the ultimatum the DCPA man delivered, and when she continued to refuse to give up the sign, she was led off by the police to 14th Street where she was ticketed for trespassing.

  As an aside, there is a lot of confusion out there about the ownership of the DPAC campus where all this took place. It most assuredly is owned in its entirety by the City and County of Denver. In other words, this all took place on public property.

• July 9, 2008

  12:46 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  Marshdale, yes I read the entire article. It actually stated that "the security men repeatedly reminded her and others they could not carry inside". In another paragraph it states, "They told her once again, she would have to put the sign down before going in. The feistiness then went into overdrive. What of the McCain signs, T-shirts and buttons, she asked them? Isn't that speech too?"

  It seems to me that Kreck was given plenty of one-on-one notice and since she responded to the security detail with a question, it seems obvious that she heard and understood what was being said.

  Also, I think it's important to note that we were told no signs at all. There were no pro-McCain signs/banners allowed inside either.

• July 9, 2008

  12:50 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  One more note - this was a PUBLIC event, not a private one. Anybody could walk in off the street, as we did, and attend the meeting. That fact was well publicized ahead of time, and acknowledged by the McCain people in press reports on Monday.

• July 9, 2008

  1:06 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Ted_in_Vegas writes:

  nbcouch: By your definition, Denver Bronco games are public events too! Does that mean Ms. Kreck could've carried her sign in there too. (Don't try it, you'll get the same result.)

  Just because the event is open to the public does not mean the host of the event HAS to allow any and everything in...

• July 9, 2008

  1:11 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  nbcouch, you're correct. It was a public event and I've really been giving what you've said a lot of thought. I do have some questions, however.

  Why was Kreck singled out? Did you or the others with you get ticketed as well? How about the pea man? What about the official-looking guy handing out McSame fliers?

  I'm just curious why so many people who were obviously not McCain supporters made it into the event unscathed by the Secret Service?

  Which brings up a point: it was the Secret Service who were uncomfortable with Kreck. I am obviously not an Obama supporter, but if the Secret Service did not feel comfortable about having asomeone around him, I would want them ticketed as well.

• July 9, 2008

  1:21 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  No, Ted, you need a ticket to go to a Broncos game. There were no tickets or invitations required on Monday.

  At any rate, that's quite irrelevant to what happened Monday morning. Nobody is saying Carol or anyone else should have been able to enter the building with a sign. Entering the building was never an issue, since we never attempted to enter the building, as I've already said.

  Rather, the fact that this was a public event held on public property relates to the issue of free speech. If a government agency (the Secret Service) can arbitrarily sanction political expression at an event that is open to the public and is being held on government-owned property - and where security is NOT an issue, given the timing - then what IS protected speech under the First Amendment?

  I think this could become a very interesting legal case, and I hope Carol pursues it.

• July 9, 2008

  1:40 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  >> Why was Kreck singled out?

  She wasn't. I was the "nut" in the pea pod costume (I've been called far worse over the last couple of days), and before Carol had her tête-à-tête with the DCPA guy, he told me I'd have to remove the costume or face arrest.

  I wasn't given the option of taking a ticket for trespass, so rather than go to jail, I took the thing off.

  You see, prior to getting in line for the town hall thing, we had held a small press conference down at 14th and Curtis. The theme was "McCain and Bush are peas in a pod." Street theater.

  >> I'm just curious why so many people who were obviously not McCain supporters made it into the event unscathed by the Secret Service?

  We DIDN'T make it into the event! We were allowed to stand in the queue for the event for about thirty minutes. Obviously the Secret Service have very different standards from the McCain people, who didn't hassle us at all.

  At any rate, why should the Secret Service or anyone else care if people with opposing viewpoints want to attend a McCain town hall event, especially one that has been announced in advance as open to the public? Is there a problem with allowing dissent in what is purportedly an open forum? Is dissent by default now considered a security threat?

• July 9, 2008

  1:51 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  nbcouch, now I'm really confused! In one of your first posts you stated that you and Kreck were standing in line waiting to go into the event. "...we were perfectly willing to comply, but with nowhere to put the signs, we stood there in line holding them." You also said, "My expectation was that we would drop the signs off at the door before entering."

  Now you're saying that you/Kreck never intended to enter the building.

  I have to wonder what's really going here?

• July 9, 2008

  1:58 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  >> Now you're saying that you/Kreck never intended to enter the building

  No, I didn't. I said we never ATTEMPTED to enter the building. We never got that chance.

• July 9, 2008

  2:08 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  I obviously cannot speak to why the Secret Service asked you to remove your costume or wanted Kreck to leave. (We thought you were funny btw).

  However, had you done what so many other Obama supporters did and just left your signs and went into the Town Hall you probably would've gotten an opportunity to speak. Quite to my dismay, Sen. McCain did a great job of letting Obama supporters ask more questions than any of the rest of us. It was quite informative and full of energy. It was clearly a room filled with dissenters. It's too bad that you chose not to participate.

• July 9, 2008

  2:17 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  I really had no choice. They weren't going to let me in carrying the costume, and I had no place to put it, so I went back down to the street, put it back on for a photo op, did a little more sign waving in the rain, and then called it a day. I'm glad to hear the meeting went well, and I'm glad you enjoyed the costume.

  I can't speak for Carol Kreck, but I'd guess she was motivated to stand on principle, and for that I applaud her. That's a true patriot, one who stood up and took one for the Constitution.

• July 9, 2008

  2:39 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  nbcouch, this is why I get so confused about Democrats. You applaud Kreck for standing up for the Constitution because she held a sign and, seemingly, agitated the Secret Service enough to ticket her, but you won't consider voting for a proven patriot like John McCain.

  This guy has spent years in the service of his country and has visibly and honorably defended the Constitution with his life. I could understand your being upset at Sen. McCain if he had actually asked the Secret Service to have you remove your costume, but by your own admission he probably wasn't even in town yet.

  You seem like a highly motivated, educated guy. I'm just curious if you would even consider voting for McCain since you're so impressed by true patriotism.

• July 9, 2008

  3:04 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sheepherder writes:

  Krek had the ticket coming! If asked to put the sign down, put it down!

• July 9, 2008

  3:21 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  280Pagoda writes:

  The first and fourteenth amendments are in place to protect free speech. The founding fathers thought that the only way for a Democracy to survive if not thrive is to have an open conversation between citizens to help find the best solution to any problem. This isn't some esoteric distant and irrelevant bureaucratic rule, this is the oxygen a Democracy needs to breath to survive.

  It doesn't matter what group she does or does not belong to. What matters is free speech. She wasn't disrespectful, or threatening, just communicating.

  This unfortunately is the age in which we live. All of us need to be worried about this. When one women is not free, no man or woman is free. This is a foundational issue, and the reason McCain was fighting in Vietnam, and so many have taken arms to defend this shot heard 'round the world.

  No matter what she says, she, and all of us have a right to say it. This is a wrong we need to pay attention to and right. This is a clear and present danger to our freedom, and we should pay close attention to how Denver, and the presidential candidates address it. Vote accordingly.

• July 9, 2008

  3:32 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Ted_in_Vegas writes:

  ???You were in line to go in but never attempted to enter???

  ???What is the definition of "is"???

  Quite the parsing there, Mr. Pea./nbcouch! WOW! If you were in line to go in, weren't you attempting to enter? Just because you were stopped before you were successful doesn't mean you didn't make the attempt.

  I just love how people how create distractions around serious-minded security personnel (Secret Service) can't understand why the security personnel want them to stop the distraction. Here's a little lesson in strategy and tactics; distractions are very useful when making an attack.

  The security people see the distraction and realize that an assailant could be using that distraction, even without the distractor's knowledge, and want to end the distraction so as to better safeguard their ward. DUH! That is a legitimate government interest.

  That is also something to consider about all of the protestors coming to Denver for the DNC convention; even if they don't know it, violating the rules of peaceful demonstration may create a security problem that others may wish to take advantage of.

  Please, for the sake of my favorite city, do not create security problems. I like my Mile High City the way it is!

• July 9, 2008

  4:39 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  >> I'm just curious if you would even consider voting for McCain since you're so impressed by true patriotism

  There was a time when I might have considered it, yes. I might have voted for the old independent John McCain, but that's not the McCain I see today. Barack is the better candidate at any rate.

• July 9, 2008

  4:53 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  >> Quite the parsing there, Mr. Pea./nbcouch! WOW! If you were in line to go in, weren't you attempting to enter?

  Ted, are you always this thick? Let's review. We got in line to go in and stood in the same spot on the plaza for about 30 minutes. The line didn't move, so we didn't move. There were maybe 30 or 40 people ahead of us in line.

  Are you with me so far?

  Now that's what I call "waiting." "Attempting to enter" would be something like walking up to the door and trying to go through it. This we did not do, Carol because they had run her off, and me for reasons I'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED.

  Got it? Good!

  Now somebody please explain to me why this is such a significant point of contention.

• July 9, 2008

  5:18 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  >> This unfortunately is the age in which we live. All of us need to be worried about this.

  You're quite right, 280Pagoda. We live in a time when the highest elected officials in the land regularly trample and clearly have little if any respect for the Constitution. At the same time, many or maybe even most of us see nothing wrong with this, as long as it doesn't affect us directly. But this is the old "death by a thousand cuts" problem. The police state doesn't necessarily come into being all at once. It can happen by a slow process of erosion, of our rights and of our awareness.

• July 9, 2008

  6:13 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  You are absolutely correct, nbcouch. A police state usually occurs slowly and I, for one, do not want to live in such a country.

  That being said, I really wonder what happened Monday morning. I was there in line at 8:15 and watched and listened as many people with many different views and opinions waited in line. It was quiet and respectful (until about 10 am when they said it would be another thirty minutes before we could enter).

  I have a difficult time believing that suddenly the Secret Service were moved into action because some little old lady was standing in line peacefully holding a sign. I could understand them asking you to remove your costume for some type of security reason, maybe. Honestly, after being there for nearly two and half hours (and I actually watched the Secret Service briefing the police) I cannot believe Kreck just stood there doing nothing and then was ticketed. Even the YouTube video looks dubious. It's all cut up and shows nothing of what precipitated her ticketing.

  I do not want to live in a police state and as a Republican Christian I can tell you it feels more and more likely; however, I do not believe that Monday's events come close to that.

• July 9, 2008

  7:16 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  If you were there that long you must have been at or near the front of the line. You must have noticed the attention we attracted from the press in the few minutes we were there. Maybe that's what got the attention of the Secret Service. You also would have noticed, surely, if we had created any sort of disturbance, which we did not.

  I don't know what caused them to come down on us, but I do know we did nothing to provoke anyone, and I don't think we deserved the treatment we got. That said, it wasn't like they sent the shock troops in to bust heads. It was all handled relatively politely.

  Just one of those thousand cuts...

• July 9, 2008

  8:34 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  FINALLY! I finally think I've figured out what happened and when. You said you attracted the attention of the press and then the Secret Service asked Kreck to leave.

  Well, the press began entering the building and going through security at approx. 10 a.m. and finished around 10:20-10:25 a.m. It was then that you think you were brought to the attention of the Secret Service.

  Exactly! We were starting to enter the building then and I figure they were probably getting a little antsy because Kreck had been told numerous times about her sign. There was actually a trash can nearby that could have been used to dispose of the sign and I imagine that because Kreck insisted on carrying the sign and people were beginning to go inside, that's what concerned the Secret Service.

  It had nothing to do with what was written on the sign, it was simply the fact that we were heading inside and had been told what we could and could not take inside (no bottles of water, no fruit, no knives, no signs or banners). If you and Kreck were simply standing there in line and were attempting to go inside, then it makes absolute sense that the Secret Service were on alert because Kreck would not comply with repeated requests about the sign. Which, as you stated, was not a problem until the line actually began to move toward the security area, leading into the ballroom.

  Whew! Thanks for the information because this just wasn't make sense to me at all.

• July 9, 2008

  9:57 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  Well, let's be clear on this point: NOBODY said ANYTHING to us about the signs between the time when we first got in line and the point when the DCPA guy walked up with the cops and threatened to have us arrested. Nor was it the case that Carol was given multiple warnings about her sign. During the conversation she had with the DCPA and the police they did tell her more than once to give up the sign, but that was all part of that single encounter they had with her.

  And let's also be clear on this: NOBODY said ANYTHING to me about the costume (I wasn't holding a sign while in line) at ANY point prior to the DCPA guy delivering their ultimatum. That was the FIRST time I was made aware that the costume wasn't allowed inside. Keep in mind too that the encounter between Carol and DCPA/cops occurred AFTER they went after me, and AFTER I had removed the costume. The video verifies this. You can see me standing there with it under my arm as Carol is being led off.

  I wasn't aware that they were starting to let people in the ballroom while we were still in line. I don't think any of us were.

• July 10, 2008

  12:43 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  sulin writes:

  If what you're saying about Kreck not receiving any prior warnings re: her sign is true then you should probably notify Bill Johnson. The article says "She was still holding the sign which the security men repeatedly reminded her and the others they could not carry inside." And later in the article Mr. Johnson writes, "They told her, once again, she would have to put the sign down before going in."

  So, between the article and what I actually heard and saw that day, Kreck and others had to know what was expected of them if they wanted to enter the building.

  Also, Mr. Johnson wrote, "And they came for her even before they went for the man wearing a ridiculous pea pod costume..."

  The line was moving at a pretty quick pace (I know this because even after I entered, I was observing how many people were coming into the ballroom), so perhaps you and others were more interested in causing a stir than actually joining the event.

  I'm sure you're as tired of this discussion as I am; however, I am more tired of liberals grabbing headlines and making up things just to get attention. A great example of this, in addition to this article, is how the YouTube video is titled: John McCain Kicks Librarian Out of Town Hall Event.

  Just as I want honesty in government, I'd like to have some honesty about this encounter.

• July 10, 2008

  6:32 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  jmusic writes:

  sheeprider-

  Bareback too...what does that say?

• July 10, 2008

  7:47 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  >> between the article and what I actually heard and saw that day, Kreck and others had to know what was expected of them if they wanted to enter the building

  I've already explained this to you, in very plain language. We DID know what was expected regarding the signs - that we would have to ditch them - if we wanted to enter the building. But we were NOT entering the building when we were approached and threatened with arrest! We were standing in line, standing still, NOT MOVING TOWARD THE BUILDING, NOT ENTERING THE BUILDING, when this happened.

  Everything I've told you here is true. If it conflicts with Bill Johnson's account, then Bill Johnson, who wasn't there, got it wrong. If you'd prefer not to believe my account, that's certainly your prerogative.

• July 10, 2008

  8 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  anarchist writes:

  Marshdale, it was in this newspaper, on television, as well as obama making an apology to them, try a search of this newspapers archives.

• July 10, 2008

  12:08 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  freedomfighter1 writes:

  Well this just goes to show you what Mcsame thinks of our rights. If I were running for president, I would be fighting for peoples' rights, not taking them away. Way to go McSame!

• July 10, 2008

  12:51 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  nbcouch writes:

  freedomfighter1, to the best of my knowledge, John McCain and his campaign staff had nothing to do with this incident. If you want to blame someone, blame the Secret Service. If you read all the comments here, you'll find it was the Secret Service who directed the the actions taken against us.