Originally Posted by Mikeyy

That does not answer the question. By what authority do they stage this stuff. And who are they?

Originally Posted by saltwn

What he said.

Originally Posted by cnredd

Far from it...

They shouldn't have anymore "authority" over this event than they use for a play, a concert, or any other event...

You either allow it or you don't...saying "I'll allow some aspects of it, but I'll remove constitutional rights on it." is completely unacceptable...

Originally Posted by saltwn

Here's your quote:

"Army officials at Fort Bragg have relented somewhat and now say a small "pool" of journalists will be allowed to cover Sarah Palin's book-tour visit to the base on Monday. However, the journalists won't be permitted to interview Palin or her supporters who attend her book signing. "

Originally Posted by cnredd

At first, they wanted to prohibit the 1st Amendament 100%, but now believe 50% is good enough...

Originally Posted by saltwn

Sounds to me like they weren't that keen on having reporters in the first place, and want to keep it to a minimum for control.
Which in light of recent events, they have every right to do.
They have every right to do it anyway since they are the military.

Originally Posted by cnredd

And my original response still stands...



There's a difference between "having a right" to do something and having that something being "the right thing to do"...

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

Again, Why the special treatment for her? And by what authority?

Originally Posted by MrLiberty

A political candidate for the second highest office in the land is a good start. I would also surmise that someone invited her to sign her book on the base because she is a political figure. Of course I can understand why the lefties would want to keep her off base, they're afraid they'll see the troops stand and cheer her and that by god can't happen as long as the messiah is in office!

Originally Posted by mytmouse57

It's not "coddling." It's this little thing called due process of law -- which is actually profoundly Amercian, and something our troops have fought and died for on more than one occassion. It's supposed to be difficult to prosecute somebody in this country. You know -- that whole burden of proof is on the state/prosecution thing. It protects us all.
It was/is easy to prosecute people in places like Nazi Germany and Red China. Would you rather live in a society like that?

He'll be put on trial. Given the overwhelming evidence, he'll found guilty and then executed.
That's hardly coddling.

Originally Posted by off the porch

I see cnredd's point. If this was Obama (before presidency) going there to sell his book and the media was limited by the military, the left would be raising the same question.

The difference is that if I posted the OP here from the left side regarding the scenario above, the right would question my patriotism...ask me why I hate my country...tell me that I should respect the military's decision because they are the ones out on the front lines putting everything on the line for us, the American people.