GOP has journalist arrested - Constitutional Conservatives??

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mcrain, Feb 1, 2012.

  1. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #1
    I have heard Republicans talk about President Obama repeatedly ignoring the Constitution, but they can't really explain what, if anything, has been done that is a violation. On the other hand, they pull this kind of stuff to bar a journalist because they didn't like their last documentary.

    Feel free to Godwin this, or make comparisons to the Soviet Union, North Korea or any other oppressive regime.

    I'm truly shocked and repulsed. This is a disgusting and unAmerican act, far, far worse than someone legally exercising their first amendment rights, even if done in a controversial way (like burning a flag).
     
  2. eawmp1 macrumors 601

    eawmp1

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    FL
  3. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    The GOP knows damn well that if the public sees what they're doing, they're toast.
     
  4. mcrain thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #4
    Except the hearing was being televised by CSPAN. This was nothing more than retribution against an academy award winning documentary filmmaker because they didn't like him.
     
  5. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #5
    CSPAN filmed it so its not as if its being blacked out like many of the democratic committee meetings around the time bailout money was being allocated. The house simply doesn't want a Michael Moore getting in the way and being an ass clown.
     
  6. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6
    You need to remember CSPAN also has other rules it is required to follow that other groups are not.

    For example CSPAN is not allowed to show congressmen sleeping, picking their nose or doing anything really embarassing.
     
  7. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    It doesn't matter. The bottom line is, they did not have the right to do that. I hope he sues the hell out of them. BTW- this was not a "Michael Moore" type of guy. Stop pulling BS out of your ass.
     
  8. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #8
    The media have a constitutional right to be "ass clowns". That's part of what "free speech" means. Fox News has even won court rulings that establish the right of the media to lie.
     
  9. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #9
    It sounds to me like they do have the right to do it (they voted the idea down) since they have majority in the house. Random media isn't allowed wherever they want. If you are advocating that type of transparency I expect a camera crew with Obama at every moment of his day to tape their own documentary, including access to whatever committees they want. The dems have plenty of private committee meetings I am sure the conservative media would like to be part of. Also if hes not a "Michael Moore" type of guy I am wondering why he showed up with a camera crew when it had not been approved. "look at me I am a martyr".

    ----------

    Shall we allow camera crews to enter all areas of government then? I would love to do some taping at some high tech military facilities.
     
  10. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #10
    Nobody has suggested allowing access to "all areas of government". And surely a house subcommittee on Energy and the Environment is not something we'd consider top secret? Let's look at this quote again:

    Lets step away from our own political positions and ask ourselves - does this not sound reasonable? If so, why were they chucked out of the committee by security? And arrested? Without comment by the people who did it?
     
  11. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    Where do you draw the line? Can I go film for YouTube? Maybe we should allow anyone with a camera in and see if there are any disruptions. Maybe get a few lighting techs to make sure we get the best shots. "Excuse me representative, could we get you to say that again? And this time with a little more pizzazz."

    Not to mention the only reason the dems give a crap is they may have missed a few chances to grandstand for the next doc
    Oh did we forget to mention this isn't the first time he has been arrested by government officials?
     
  12. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #12
    And you are adding in crap. If they did any of that they would be tossed out. They were allowed only other conditions they were not disruptive. Zombie yu are trying get to make stuff for your case and way outside the set up. The line is drawn at being disruptive plan and simple. You case is falling apart.
     
  13. Sydde, Feb 1, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 2, 2012

    Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #13
    I always took the name to be a dig at a group in the US (where ZA used to live) called the "Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now" (ACORN), the "Zombie" part depicting that group as being stupid.
     
  14. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #14
    No the line was drawn at CSPAN only, ABC and josh fox were not allowed to film, Josh Fox unlawfully entered the building and was arrested (he is a repeat offender)

    ----------

    Its not actually supposed to mean anything. I had it before the big ACORN ordeal. :p
     
  15. 184550 Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #15
    The major scandal that finally took down ACORN didn't begin until September 2009. Roughly seven months after ZA registered. Unless of course his user name refers to the minor scandals in 2008 and 2009.

    EDIT:

    I see ZA just debunked that theory.
     
  16. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #16
    It's impossible to argue the point without more information. Of course, the representatives who caused the crew to be arrested aren't talking, so how can we judge whether it was justified or not?

    As for where to draw the line, it depends. There has never been any rule that CSPAN has a monopoly - and even C-SPAN has been barred from covering things in the past. The chairman can allow uncredentialled media to film at his discretion. Whether first amendment rights were violated is perhaps debatable, but the arrest was the result of pure rancor.

    Wonderfully constructive, that.

    Yes, for protesting against something. For shame.
     
  17. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #17
    You're damn right anyone should be allowed to film. We pay these people huge amounts of money to represent us. They work for us, they don't rule us. We have an absolute right to know what they do with regard to our laws. That goes for Obama as well. No one gets a pass because of party affiliation.

    I can't believe you would even defend this action. We elected these people, we pay them, we have the absolute right to film what they do when it comes to making laws.
     
  18. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #18
    What? People in PRSI taking a report from the news seriously and getting upset about it? Why I never.

    I mean look at the beginning paragraph. "Sources claimed ABC was denied access, ABC later stated they never sent a crew". Very reliable those sources are.

    He was denied access and he came with cameras anyway. They asked him to quit filming and he wouldn't. They arrested him most likely for not adhering to a police order. Furthermore he doesn't have correct credentials to film. You want someone to film it, edit it and make it into something that didn't happen? That'd sell a good documentary. CSPAN was there filming so they aren't hiding anything. In fact I'd bet other news crews were there just without cameras, probably how this was reported.

    Talk about sensationalism. You guys bitch and complain about everything.
     
  19. mikeyredk macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    #19
    renewed I agree what you saying if he was denied access then he should not be allowed to video tape the session. My question is why was he denied?

    Though I still agree with the reporter that he video tape the session even if he was not allowed protesting the decision.
     
  20. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    Excuse me, but- we pay these idiots. They work for us. since when can we now not film them?
     
  21. MorphingDragon, Feb 1, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2012

    MorphingDragon macrumors 603

    MorphingDragon

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    The World Inbetween
    #21
    I think when one or more of your political representatives meet with another politician you have a right to an uncensored and unobtrusive viewing. CPSAN does not meet this, and there was no need to arrest the man. Confiscating his equipment would have been adequate failing the first part.
     
  22. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #22
    You guys are arguing two different points.

    First there is no blanket agreement for film crews to film hearings. You want to open this up? Complain to your Congressman. The agreement giving C-SPAN access did not open the doors to anyone with a camera crew.

    Some of us here were adults when this changed and remember it clearly.

    Second, If you want access with a camera crew, you have to request it. These requests are not granted if C-SPAN already has a camera crew present. Period. This documentary crew was denied access, continued to enter the premises and were, predictably arrested - for the publicity. Period.

    The C-SPAN live feed is available to any a credited news organization, and archives of all footage shot are available to anyone.

    No one was singled out to have their First Amendment rights violated - they staged a publicity stunt and were successful in fooling you to take a swipe at the GOP.
     
  23. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #23
    Oh horse s***. These people work for us, they do not rule us. We have a right to have whomever film them while on the job. We absolutely have a right to know what they're doing.
     
  24. mcrain thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #24
    You may want to go back and read the cited link. The policy in that very same committe before the Ferenheit 451 crowd took over was to allow camera crews to film even when CSPAN was there. This film crew was singled out because of their prior work.

    That is censorship and it is wrong.

    This was NOT a private meeting, this was a public meeting. The GOP's efforts to protect the oil and gas industry are something we need to be aware of to prevent rampant censorship, oppression and eventual dictatorship being embraced by a public brainwashed by fear and hatred.
     
  25. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #25
    Was it James O'Keefe then?
     

Share This Page