RC K9 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 supported by both sides of the isle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 .........still waiting for late April Fools joke to be posted. :no: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrs.cos Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 supported by both sides of the isle... IBFoxNews fair and balanced haters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Spam Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Fox news, lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey2721 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 so cause its covered by fox news makes it not a big deal you just lost your free speech? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macpyro2 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 so cause its covered by fox news makes it not a big deal you just lost your free speech? No shit, Its a law that can and will be used. No matter who told you it still effects you and your freedom's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrs.cos Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 You missed my point of people who would use Fox news being the reporter of the story to be a bad thing and that it was not true somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewhop Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Found this.... Didnt watch video. It's important to note — contrary to some reports — that H.R. 347 doesn't create any new crimes, or directly apply to the Occupy protests. The bill slightly rewrites a short trespass law, originally passed in 1971 and amended a couple of times since, that covers areas subject to heightened Secret Service security measures. These restricted areas include locations where individuals under Secret Service protection are temporarily located, and certain large special events like a presidential inauguration. They can also include large public events like the Super Bowl and the presidential nominating conventions (troublingly, the Department of Homeland Security has significant discretion in designating what qualifies as one of these special events). The original statute, unchanged by H.R. 347,made certain conduct with respect to these restricted areas a crime, including simple trespass, actions in or near the restricted area that would "disrupt the orderly conduct of Government," and blocking the entrance or exit to the restricted area. H.R. 347 did make one noteworthy change, which may make it easier for the Secret Service to overuse or misuse the statute to arrest lawful protesters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewhop Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 I also dont want a group of people "secret service agents" who cant keep there dicks in there pants deciding at what point I am not allowed to speak freely anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco-REX Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 So the Nobles don't want to have to see unhappy commoners when they are out and about in public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrs.cos Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 So the Nobles don't want to have to see unhappy commoners when they are out and about in public. Eggzacry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted April 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 So the Nobles don't want to have to see unhappy commoners when they are out and about in public. Otherwise you get this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvKIWjnEPNY 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorne Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Faux news, lol Fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowgli1647545497 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 lol @ fox news. same group that supports corporations being people, and cash = free speech (SuperPACs anyone?). fox news...... :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evan9381 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Opened video, saw fox "news", closed video Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey2721 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 remind me to post anything news wise with fox news attached for now on. it sure gets the idiots to scurry like roaches with the light on. one news agency is no different then another. there is no true news agency. they are all paid for by one side or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evan9381 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 remind me to post anything news wise with fox news attached for now on. it sure gets the idiots to scurry like roaches with the light on. one news agency is no different then another. there is no true news agency. they are all paid for by one side or the other. sure, but i'd rather listen to MSNBC with views that i prefer over fox "news" with shit i dont want to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted April 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 I can find non-fox stories if that is preferred like... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/jeanine-molloff/trespass-bill_b_1328205.html Or should I just let everyone put on their big boy pants and hunt for themselves? Fox news, msnbc, npr, wtf does it matter? Yeah they all put their twist on things, but the fundamentals of the story remain the same...or do they not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 sure, but i'd rather listen to MSNBC with views that i prefer over fox "news" with shit i dont want to hear. Oh sweet Jesus, Olberman was completely un-biased and non-opinionated too. Either way the bread is sliced, the Constitutional Rights of this country will continue to be interpreted in a form the government sees fit. Sickens me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evan9381 Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Didnt say KO wasnt biased. He was/is heavy left...thats why i liked him on msnbc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Didnt say KO wasnt biased. He was/is heavy left...thats why i liked him on msnbc MSNBC is infested with the left. *Rachael Maddow* *Chris Matthews* To each their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustlestiltskin Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 (edited) Stop complaining in this thread or you all will be infracted for Post whoring. Thank you and god bless. Edited April 24, 2012 by Rustlestiltskin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Thank you and god bless. Better watch out, someone will be offended by that statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stangsn95gt Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Stop complaining in this thread of you will be infracted for Post whoring. Thank you and god bless. Reported Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 So the Nobles don't want to have to see unhappy commoners when they are out and about in public. We must now before the lords of the land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.