Rosie vs. Elizabeth Hasselbach
05-25-07, 12:18 PM
#51
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida, one time home of the space shuttle
Posts: 3,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our government is made up of politicians. Humans, plain and simple. Some are good, some are corrupt. Some are there because they truly want to bring about positive change, so are there to further advance their own agendas. They are not America, WE are America. If we dont speak up against the wrongs and injustices, we will remain sheep blindly following the powerful. Can you imagine the wrongs that would have never been righted because a few were afraid of being persecuted out of speaking up and being labeled UNAMERICAN?
Last edited by magiccmom; 05-25-07 at 12:30 PM.
05-25-07, 12:25 PM
#52
DVD Talk Hero
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,295
Likes: 0
Received 49 Likes
on
38 Posts
Originally Posted by An4h0ny
not sure if that was sarcasm or not...
but if it wasn't
mmmm... no, sorry but that's just incorrect. it's all written down by the way.
Everybody deserves all freedoms, unless they are breaking the law or violating the freedoms of someone else to a degree that they are preventing others from expressing themselves freely, as guaranteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. I think people who say other people don't deserve certain parts of freedom should have all of their liberties stripped so they could regain a real connection to them and appreciate just how valuable they are. If someone thinks only THEY should have certain freedoms and other should be denied them, then they prove their own limited capacity for reasoned thought. you can live your whole life frightened of others' thoughts and opinions, but that doesn't negate what other people think or make it any less valid. it just means you don't agree.
Article III
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
doesn't say I have to love any person of political ideal placed upon me by a human being. I honor the ideals of the country instead of listening to what people tell me. you're making the mistake of trying to say YOUR IDEAL is what should be revered and 'loved'. that's not what the USA was founded on.
i also like this one
Article VI
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
*edit* haha.. sorry m.mom. just being honest!
she's hawt.
but if it wasn't
mmmm... no, sorry but that's just incorrect. it's all written down by the way.
Everybody deserves all freedoms, unless they are breaking the law or violating the freedoms of someone else to a degree that they are preventing others from expressing themselves freely, as guaranteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. I think people who say other people don't deserve certain parts of freedom should have all of their liberties stripped so they could regain a real connection to them and appreciate just how valuable they are. If someone thinks only THEY should have certain freedoms and other should be denied them, then they prove their own limited capacity for reasoned thought. you can live your whole life frightened of others' thoughts and opinions, but that doesn't negate what other people think or make it any less valid. it just means you don't agree.Article III
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
doesn't say I have to love any person of political ideal placed upon me by a human being. I honor the ideals of the country instead of listening to what people tell me. you're making the mistake of trying to say YOUR IDEAL is what should be revered and 'loved'. that's not what the USA was founded on.
i also like this one
Article VI
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
*edit* haha.. sorry m.mom. just being honest!
she's hawt.
05-25-07, 12:32 PM
#53
Originally Posted by dolphinboy
Rosie O'Fat? Clever.
As the other poster mentioned, most of what you're doing is just run of the mill, standard right wing baiting. Rush should be right about 1/2 as many times as Rosie, same with Hannity, but that's all cool...they're "political experts." Or they play them on tv and radio.
Personally, I find Rosie offensive. I mean, that is, I just don't like her or how she behaves. But she's just a target for the right now, as if you haven't messed things up enough in the world, so you look to the View to find a scapegoat. The View...seriously, who watches that? How is it relevent other than the lazy media making Rosie into a Paris Hilton type attraction? Ignore her, at least if you want to talk seriously about politics. She gives her opinion on a talk show for women that sucks.
The only thing that bugs me about this is again how the right manipulates the dialogue. Rosie, among many wrong things (wish is still better than Limbaugh when it comes to being truthful and offensive), said that isn't it possible that the Iraqi peope might see us as terrorists? Well, they have a completely different culture, even if they did want Saddam gone they expected their electricity to be back 3 years ago, the expected if the US was going to depose Saddam that we'd make sure in doing so we didn't allow terrorists from other countries to set up camp in their country, so we could have the death and carnage in their country, so as to not have it here, and, honestly, they probably expected that we'd do something, have some kind of plan before the war to prevent a civil war or that we'd get out after we'd given them freedom from Saddam and the right to have their own civil war if that's what they wanted to do after finally being given some hope. Shouldn't we at least think with that many dead Iraqi civilians, who don't see enough or know enough to possibly view us as terrorists...even though we clearly aren't terrorists...certainly not like the one's who attacked us?
It's like watching the Republican debate, you either say, "kill 'em all" or you're laughed at. Nuance is not allowed in the discussion any longer.
We should be able to look at the foreign policy that we have and try and find and understand these people, so that we can do something to address the root cause (well, it's mostly religion, but that's for another debate), because we can't win this by simply being at war all the time. That doesn't mean the US is to blame, or the Americans are bad, or that our troops are not heroes. It does possibly mean that our government has failed us and we might want to make sure better, more responsible people are there, who can still fight back against those already set on killing AND try and have a relationship with the rest of the world that isn't only about how we can show our dominance and take advantage of other, poorer countries resources. Certainly, that should be part of the discussion. But Republican want to talk about Rosie instead and the rest of the country is more interested in Britney Spears.
As the other poster mentioned, most of what you're doing is just run of the mill, standard right wing baiting. Rush should be right about 1/2 as many times as Rosie, same with Hannity, but that's all cool...they're "political experts." Or they play them on tv and radio.
Personally, I find Rosie offensive. I mean, that is, I just don't like her or how she behaves. But she's just a target for the right now, as if you haven't messed things up enough in the world, so you look to the View to find a scapegoat. The View...seriously, who watches that? How is it relevent other than the lazy media making Rosie into a Paris Hilton type attraction? Ignore her, at least if you want to talk seriously about politics. She gives her opinion on a talk show for women that sucks.
The only thing that bugs me about this is again how the right manipulates the dialogue. Rosie, among many wrong things (wish is still better than Limbaugh when it comes to being truthful and offensive), said that isn't it possible that the Iraqi peope might see us as terrorists? Well, they have a completely different culture, even if they did want Saddam gone they expected their electricity to be back 3 years ago, the expected if the US was going to depose Saddam that we'd make sure in doing so we didn't allow terrorists from other countries to set up camp in their country, so we could have the death and carnage in their country, so as to not have it here, and, honestly, they probably expected that we'd do something, have some kind of plan before the war to prevent a civil war or that we'd get out after we'd given them freedom from Saddam and the right to have their own civil war if that's what they wanted to do after finally being given some hope. Shouldn't we at least think with that many dead Iraqi civilians, who don't see enough or know enough to possibly view us as terrorists...even though we clearly aren't terrorists...certainly not like the one's who attacked us?
It's like watching the Republican debate, you either say, "kill 'em all" or you're laughed at. Nuance is not allowed in the discussion any longer.
We should be able to look at the foreign policy that we have and try and find and understand these people, so that we can do something to address the root cause (well, it's mostly religion, but that's for another debate), because we can't win this by simply being at war all the time. That doesn't mean the US is to blame, or the Americans are bad, or that our troops are not heroes. It does possibly mean that our government has failed us and we might want to make sure better, more responsible people are there, who can still fight back against those already set on killing AND try and have a relationship with the rest of the world that isn't only about how we can show our dominance and take advantage of other, poorer countries resources. Certainly, that should be part of the discussion. But Republican want to talk about Rosie instead and the rest of the country is more interested in Britney Spears.
05-25-07, 12:42 PM
#55
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My biggest beef about what Rosie did is the following...
-Even insinuating comparing our troops to terrorists. Besides the ridiculous amount of dead she mentioned.
-Books the 9/11 so-called "truthers" on and then when they are supposed to appear. She happens to have to take the day off. Have the courage to fight and appear with those you promote.
-Gets upset that Elizabeth had someone coach her to help debate Rosie. Yet, her "chief writer" (which means their is more than one) was thrown of the set for defacing a picture of Elizabeth. So she gets mad someone is helping Elizabeth and yet she has multiple writers.
Hypocrit.
And for those looking for equal time for showing pics of Elizabeth. Here you go...
-Even insinuating comparing our troops to terrorists. Besides the ridiculous amount of dead she mentioned.
-Books the 9/11 so-called "truthers" on and then when they are supposed to appear. She happens to have to take the day off. Have the courage to fight and appear with those you promote.
-Gets upset that Elizabeth had someone coach her to help debate Rosie. Yet, her "chief writer" (which means their is more than one) was thrown of the set for defacing a picture of Elizabeth. So she gets mad someone is helping Elizabeth and yet she has multiple writers.
Hypocrit.And for those looking for equal time for showing pics of Elizabeth. Here you go...
05-25-07, 12:50 PM
#56
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I say fuck them both. Elizabeth is a fucking mannequin who spews the republican party line and Rosie has been a **** ever since she blindsided Tom Selleck. And I'm not even an NRA or Republican supporter.
05-25-07, 12:57 PM
#57
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Michael Ballack
Rosie has been a **** ever since she blindsided Tom Selleck. And I'm not even an NRA or Republican supporter.
05-25-07, 01:05 PM
#58
Originally Posted by Michael Ballack
I say fuck them both. Elizabeth is a fucking mannequin who spews the republican party line and Rosie has been a **** ever since she blindsided Tom Selleck. And I'm not even an NRA or Republican supporter.
05-25-07, 01:13 PM
#59
DVD Talk Legend
Where's the video of it? I only saw the snub clip.
Edit: OK. Was this it? Ha. My first embed video!!!
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xht0HcPryWA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xht0HcPryWA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
Love the split screen halfway thru. Is that used often?
Edit: OK. Was this it? Ha. My first embed video!!!
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xht0HcPryWA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xht0HcPryWA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
Love the split screen halfway thru. Is that used often?
Last edited by Ranger; 05-25-07 at 02:10 PM.
05-25-07, 02:06 PM
#62
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Not true. The principle was built out of a LOVE for one's country and a desire to make it better, not hate it and trash it. Those type of people don't deserve those types of freedoms.
Rosie is a liberal target. Picked out by the right wing to sling mud upon. Go ahead. As a liberal, I thank you. You could be targeting someone that actually matters.
05-25-07, 02:10 PM
#63
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Work. Or commuting. Certainly not at home.
Posts: 17,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Not true. The principle was built out of a LOVE for one's country and a desire to make it better, not hate it and trash it. Those type of people don't deserve those types of freedoms.
05-25-07, 02:36 PM
#64
Originally Posted by Ayre
Go ahead. As a socialist, I thank you. You could be targeting someone that actually matters.
), true liberals are supporters of liberty, like our Founding Fathers. Liberals desire the least amount of government possible, which in a truly enlightended and moral society is none.
Last edited by aktick; 05-25-07 at 02:40 PM.
05-25-07, 02:57 PM
#67
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by aktick
Rosie has a kid(s)? How'd that happen?
Looks like she's outta there....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18868354/
05-25-07, 02:57 PM
#68
Needs to contact a mod about multiple accounts
Originally Posted by aktick
Rosie has a kid(s)? How'd that happen?
05-25-07, 03:01 PM
#69
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Honestly, since I don't ever watch the View I only really know Elisabeth from Survivor, but I happened to catch this Wednesday morning. No matter who's opinion is right/wrong, Donald Trump is right about one thing...Rosie is a bully. When Elisabeth didn't back down, Rosie didn't seem to know what to do so she resorted to name calling.
05-25-07, 03:09 PM
#70
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Septemberbaby
Looks like she's outta there....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18868354/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18868354/
As for her longterm future, her stint on The View has shown 2 things: she can still bring big ratings and she's grown nearly impossible to work with. I wonder which fact will hold sway.
Last edited by adamblast; 05-25-07 at 03:12 PM.
05-25-07, 03:11 PM
#71
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All thru grammer school I have seen what Rosie is doing.
She talks loud to give the illusion that she is right and then since there is 2-sides to every argument picks the weakest one on the opposition point of view and pressures that person to stick up for her. Since she knows Elizabeth won't agree with her at least defend her comments just so it looks like Rosie is right. What Rosie wanted was for Elizabeth to stick up for her comments to the conservative crowd, because they do watch the View also. This way Rosie doesn't come accross as some anti-American.
I seen bullies mostly girls do what Rosie is doing on The View in my life.
Anybody else see this in their life?
She talks loud to give the illusion that she is right and then since there is 2-sides to every argument picks the weakest one on the opposition point of view and pressures that person to stick up for her. Since she knows Elizabeth won't agree with her at least defend her comments just so it looks like Rosie is right. What Rosie wanted was for Elizabeth to stick up for her comments to the conservative crowd, because they do watch the View also. This way Rosie doesn't come accross as some anti-American.
I seen bullies mostly girls do what Rosie is doing on The View in my life.
Anybody else see this in their life?
05-25-07, 03:13 PM
#73
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 2nd City
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, wow, wow -- I kept going for the "Quote" button, but just couldn't make a decision who was making the most ridiculous "argument".
Some observations, in no particular order:
1. Rosie did not say that the government planned 9/11, she said that WTC Building 7 looked as though it fell from a controlled demolition. It wasn't hit by a plane and took almost 8 hours to collapse. If you look at the film of the building falling, it looks exactly like a controlled demolition -- I'm not saying that I believe it was, because I don't, I'm saying that there could be an argument for it either way. It's not like she's saying that Air Force missiles hit The Pentagon or something equally ridiculous.
2. It is NOT anti-American to speak out against the policies of an elected official. Just because GWB (and some in here, obviously) believes that he should have the powers of a 15th century king, doesn't make it so.
3. Rosie did not call the troops terrorists. To me, the implication of her statement was that either a) the Iraqis would look upon us as terrorists for invading their country or b) she felt that the current administration was acting like terrorists -- you know, with the whole invading another nation that had done NOTHING to us thing. Rosie O'Donnell has never had anything but support for the troops and that they come home safely. She has donated time and lots and lots of money to veterans' hospitals and organizations, because apparently, our government can't see to it that our troops are cared for after they come home injured and limbless from fighting this shitty, useless war. Hasselbeck -- who is supposedly Rosie's friend -- knew damned well what Rosie meant with her "terrorists" comments. The problem in this for Elisabeth is that if she had admitted to Rosie and the audience that she knew Rosie wasn't calling the actual troops terrorists, she would have also had to admit that the implication of Rosie's statement was that it was Elisabeth's precious administration acting like terrorists, invading a sovereign nation without just cause. In my experience, that's where most conservatives end up in an argument like this: "I don't like what you're saying, but I can't defend what I believe, so I'll just ignore you and then I win."
The is directly from the transcripts of The View for May 17th:
O’DONNELL: …… I just want to say something. 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?
HASSELBECK: Who are the terrorists?
O’DONNELL: 655,000 Iraqis — I’m saying you have to look, we invaded –
HASSELBECK: Wait, who are you calling terrorists now? Americans?
O’DONNELL: I’m saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?
HASSELBECK: Are we killing their citizens or are their people also killing their citizens?
O’DONNELL: We’re invading a sovereign nation, occupying a country against the U.N.
See that bolded quote above? I think the question Rosie asked of Elisabeth was pretty simple. Problem again for Elisabeth: the obvious answer to Rosie's question is "terrorists".
4. Support for the belief that 655,00 Iraqis have died because of the US led invasion of Iraq (does no one use Google anymore?):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101001442.html
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/10/11/iraq.deaths/
5. Quoting An4h0ny again, "being able to say publicly "I hate America" and not have other Americans label you as an enemy of the country or try to throw you in jail is the exact principle that the United States of America was founded on." TRUE. Again, it's called "Freedom of Speech" and I don't think that the phrase needs much of a definition. There are no written caveats in there either. "Freedom of Speech" certainly does NOT mean that certain "types of people" don't get to exercise the right just because they may not be using it to express LOVE for their country.
I'm sick and tired of people jumping on the bandwagon every time there's a Rosie O'Donnell Incident just because she's a "fat, loud-mouthed liberal lesbian" that you don't want to fuck. I mean, Jesus Christ, grow up!
Hasselbeck is an idiot. She's a parrot of the republican party (and Fox News) and has the "opinions" of someone who doesn't do much to really inform themselves and shouldn't be on the show at all.
Elisabeth reminds me of a Chiuaua that has just discovered it can bark. It's cute for awhile and then it just gets annoying. Rosie's gone in three weeks and Elisabeth will continue blathering on, exerising her "freedom of speech" right to the best of her ability.
That's just sad.
ETA: Good! I'm glad Rosie's left "The View" -- saves me some TiVo space!
Some observations, in no particular order:
1. Rosie did not say that the government planned 9/11, she said that WTC Building 7 looked as though it fell from a controlled demolition. It wasn't hit by a plane and took almost 8 hours to collapse. If you look at the film of the building falling, it looks exactly like a controlled demolition -- I'm not saying that I believe it was, because I don't, I'm saying that there could be an argument for it either way. It's not like she's saying that Air Force missiles hit The Pentagon or something equally ridiculous.
2. It is NOT anti-American to speak out against the policies of an elected official. Just because GWB (and some in here, obviously) believes that he should have the powers of a 15th century king, doesn't make it so.
3. Rosie did not call the troops terrorists. To me, the implication of her statement was that either a) the Iraqis would look upon us as terrorists for invading their country or b) she felt that the current administration was acting like terrorists -- you know, with the whole invading another nation that had done NOTHING to us thing. Rosie O'Donnell has never had anything but support for the troops and that they come home safely. She has donated time and lots and lots of money to veterans' hospitals and organizations, because apparently, our government can't see to it that our troops are cared for after they come home injured and limbless from fighting this shitty, useless war. Hasselbeck -- who is supposedly Rosie's friend -- knew damned well what Rosie meant with her "terrorists" comments. The problem in this for Elisabeth is that if she had admitted to Rosie and the audience that she knew Rosie wasn't calling the actual troops terrorists, she would have also had to admit that the implication of Rosie's statement was that it was Elisabeth's precious administration acting like terrorists, invading a sovereign nation without just cause. In my experience, that's where most conservatives end up in an argument like this: "I don't like what you're saying, but I can't defend what I believe, so I'll just ignore you and then I win."
The is directly from the transcripts of The View for May 17th:
O’DONNELL: …… I just want to say something. 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?
HASSELBECK: Who are the terrorists?
O’DONNELL: 655,000 Iraqis — I’m saying you have to look, we invaded –
HASSELBECK: Wait, who are you calling terrorists now? Americans?
O’DONNELL: I’m saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?
HASSELBECK: Are we killing their citizens or are their people also killing their citizens?
O’DONNELL: We’re invading a sovereign nation, occupying a country against the U.N.
See that bolded quote above? I think the question Rosie asked of Elisabeth was pretty simple. Problem again for Elisabeth: the obvious answer to Rosie's question is "terrorists".
4. Support for the belief that 655,00 Iraqis have died because of the US led invasion of Iraq (does no one use Google anymore?):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101001442.html
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/10/11/iraq.deaths/
5. Quoting An4h0ny again, "being able to say publicly "I hate America" and not have other Americans label you as an enemy of the country or try to throw you in jail is the exact principle that the United States of America was founded on." TRUE. Again, it's called "Freedom of Speech" and I don't think that the phrase needs much of a definition. There are no written caveats in there either. "Freedom of Speech" certainly does NOT mean that certain "types of people" don't get to exercise the right just because they may not be using it to express LOVE for their country.
I'm sick and tired of people jumping on the bandwagon every time there's a Rosie O'Donnell Incident just because she's a "fat, loud-mouthed liberal lesbian" that you don't want to fuck. I mean, Jesus Christ, grow up!
Hasselbeck is an idiot. She's a parrot of the republican party (and Fox News) and has the "opinions" of someone who doesn't do much to really inform themselves and shouldn't be on the show at all.
Elisabeth reminds me of a Chiuaua that has just discovered it can bark. It's cute for awhile and then it just gets annoying. Rosie's gone in three weeks and Elisabeth will continue blathering on, exerising her "freedom of speech" right to the best of her ability.
That's just sad.
ETA: Good! I'm glad Rosie's left "The View" -- saves me some TiVo space!
Last edited by SMB-IL; 05-25-07 at 03:17 PM.
05-25-07, 03:30 PM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SMB-IL
Hasselbeck is an idiot. She's a parrot of the republican party (and Fox News) and has the "opinions" of someone who doesn't do much to really inform themselves and shouldn't be on the show at all.
05-25-07, 03:59 PM
#75
DVD Talk Hero
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,295
Likes: 0
Received 49 Likes
on
38 Posts
Originally Posted by Ayre
I believe our founding fathers hated their country and thats why they rebelled against it and created a new one. Dissent is our birthright. Nationalism is unproductive and is created to distract the masses. Waving the flag is the least you can do ... seriously it is the least you can do.
Rosie is a liberal target. Picked out by the right wing to sling mud upon. Go ahead. As a liberal, I thank you. You could be targeting someone that actually matters.
Rosie is a liberal target. Picked out by the right wing to sling mud upon. Go ahead. As a liberal, I thank you. You could be targeting someone that actually matters.
Originally Posted by SMB-IL
2. It is NOT anti-American to speak out against the policies of an elected official. Just because GWB (and some in here, obviously) believes that he should have the powers of a 15th century king, doesn't make it so.
Originally Posted by wildcatlh
They must've written that "except for seditious or other anti-American speech" clause at the end of the First Amendment in really tiny lettering that nobody could read, huh?
The drafters of the First Amendment wanted to give people the right to speak about in favor of change where they thought the government was failing. Even the most famous people charged under the Sedition act, at their core, LOVED their country.
There is far cry from what Rosie said (America is a terrorist nation and our troops are murders) and sedition. I hope you can see that.
Last edited by DVD Josh; 05-25-07 at 04:01 PM.