Verified answer

How is that doing anything to prohibit free speech? Free speech does not mean you have a right to disrupt gatherings, it means you have a right to voice your opinion. Your rights end when they start infringing on others'.

This comes under The Secret Service protecting the President. That's why they have what is known as "Free Sppech Zones" at Presidential appearances. It's an area set aside for protesters.

I'm all for free speech, but I'm also in favor of the Secret Service protecting the President and other government officials. What would it be like if every idiot in the country could get up in the President's face at every appearence he make. By the way, this procedure pertains to every president, be he Republican or Democrat.

Freedom of Speech is not a guarantee that people have to listen to you.

Having specific regulations for demonstrations near or around the President is entirely reasonable.

If the President doesn't want to "hear" protesters, he has every right to not listen to their "speeches" while doing aspects of the job of President or while at home during much needed times of rest. If they wish to actually "talk or raise a concern they have with him or the administration or any other concern, they can follow the proper channels and write formal letters to the White House, their Representatives and bring the issue to light....they can write their Governor, and contact the newspapers, and if what they have to say is credible it will be printed, since the MSM "loves" to get their hands on anything truly harmful or biased towards President Bush.

These protesters are protesting to cause a scene. To make a headline, and if they do so, they have to follow the rules. We didn't agree with the President when it came to Amnesty....and we killed the bill. By Petition to the President, by contacting media, by public broadcast, blogs and by calling our State and Federal Congressional leaders.

And once again...just because they have the right to speak...doesn't negate the right of the person they are speaking "at" not to listen to them.

Who would even think for a second that they have any interest in that? To be accurate though No politicians in power really like free speech, especially when it is critical. While I may be a Dem I have personally been persecuted with extreme prejudice by a local government that was 100% Democratic, for critical (but accurate and embarrassing) public speech. I do understand and appreciate your point though.

It's not just the republicans. At the 2004 Democrat Party Convention anti-war shirts or pins were confiscated. A wire fence enclosed area was set up nearby for anti-war protestors. Both the Republican and Democrat Parties represent the interests of the Corporate elite that funds their campaigns.

We have had tens of thousands in the Streets in San Francisco on many occasions and I, and many others, have called and e-mailed Representative Pelosi asking her to stop funding the military occupation of Iraq. We have Free Speech but we are ignored. Cindy Sheehan for Congress!

The rules of the current administration don't hold a candle stick to the Clinton administration with respect to who can or can't be at a speech or event, that includes being with in ear shot of the two love birds.... That would be Hillary and Bill. All presidents have their own rules about what should happen at a rally, fund raiser or simple speech. I would suggest you hold all, and I mean every politician we elect to a standard audience rather than single out Bush.

Free speech doesn't mean there can't be time, place and manner restrictions to allow the president to conduct an ordered speech or press conference. Every president, democrat and republican alike, restricts when and where protesters can get near them.

Since when has the Republican party been trying to protect free speech? I haven't even heard them claim that, and I wouldn't be surprised if a substantial percentage of them would not see it as part of the platform. Newt Gingrich, among others, has publicly called for the need to reevaluate and limit free speech, and I didn't hear any protests from the neocon minions.

Easy: Not produced by the Republican Party. Next.

Free speech is not an issue, it is a right - and it is not partisan.

Seems to me that the document is intended to serve the same purpose as a fly-swatter.