Protesters storm Bush's ranch

[buttmunch]

CRAWFORD, Texas Nov 23, 2005 — More than a dozen war protesters returned to a roadside near President Bush's ranch before dawn Wednesday, defying two new local bans on roadside camping and parking.

About an hour after the group pitched tents and huddled in sleeping bags and blankets, a McLennan County sheriff's deputy arrived and warned the group to leave or face arrest.

Protester and former U.S. diplomat Ann Wright told the deputy that most of the group would stay because they believed the bans restrict their free-speech rights. The deputy said the group would have two more warnings before he started making arrests.

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan wasn't among the protesters Wednesday because of a family emergency in California, but she planned to arrive at the camp later in the week. The protest was set to coincide with Bush's Thanksgiving ranch visit.

"We are proud to be here," Dede Miller, Sheehan's sister, said Wednesday as she huddled in a blanket at the campsite. "This is just so important. What we did in August really moved us forward, and this is just a continuation of it."

In August, hundreds of demonstrators camped off the road during a 26-day protest led by Cindy Sheehan, whose 24-year-old soldier son Casey was killed in Iraq last year. But a month later, county commissioners banned camping in any county ditch and parking within a 7-mile radius of the ranch, citing safety and traffic congestion issues.

Earlier this week, three demonstrators filed a federal lawsuit against McLennan County over the two local bans.

But the demonstrators said their protest would continue, even if they were arrested. The peace activists have set up camp at a private 1-acre lot that a sympathetic landowner let them use the last several weeks of their summer protest. The land is about a mile from Bush's ranch.


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Are they serious? They actually put through new laws to stop protestors? What kind of country are we living in, anyway?

[burnt_toast]

I think most cities have some sort of laws about where protests can take place (taking into consideration public safety, private property, etc.). I remember a protest at a Barnes and Noble that was broken up because the protesters were stopping traffic and putting themselves and drivers in danger.

It seems like a pretty obvious move, but unfortunately a valid one. They can protest, they just can't do it on the side of the road.

[buttmunch]

Where should they do it, in a 'free speech zone' several miles from the ranch? Sorry but this is AMerica and protesting is our right. Where would the Boston Tea Party be under these sorts of draconian laws?

[Mr. Authority]

Are they serious? They actually put through new laws to stop protestors? What kind of country are we living in, anyway?

If Bush can make "free speech zones" then I guess he wanted to go to the next level. A protest should never have restrictions, if it disrupts traffic so be it, as long as there's no violence then there's no reason a protest should be diminshed. This is our right as citizens and we should use when it's needed the most.

And good call about the Boston Tea Party buttmunch, where would this country be without that great event.

[burnt_toast]

It seems that perhaps we have become a bit too 'civilized' for our own good...my only point is that these kinds of laws are not new or unique to this situation. They are pretty common.

[Glasgow53]

I was a union steward at my old job, and did my fair share of picketting. We were allowed to picket on public property as long as we kept moving. We couldn't block traffic or cause dangerous situations. Bush obviously just doesn't want those mean old protestors cramping his style, so "poof" he gets some new laws. I have seen pictures of his ranch, I can't believe the traffic around there is very heavy. This is a typical Bush way of dealing with a problem - he can't deal with it so he just hides it away from himself. Out of sight, out of his teenytiny mind.

[deckchick]

Originally Posted by cloud

I think most cities have some sort of laws about where protests can take place (taking into consideration public safety, private property, etc.). I remember a protest at a Barnes and Noble that was broken up because the protesters were stopping traffic and putting themselves and drivers in danger.

It seems like a pretty obvious move, but unfortunately a valid one. They can protest, they just can't do it on the side of the road.

This would be valid if "Cowboy George" lived on a road with any traffic. He bought his ranch in 1999, my dogs are more cowboy then he is, in the middle of bumfuck nowhere. The only "traffic" is his.

This is abusing the law, what a shock from good ole Bush...

[buttmunch]

my only point is that these kinds of laws are not new or unique to this situation. They are pretty common.

It's a good point but the thing that I find disturbing is that the law wasn't there until people started protesting down at the ranch. That just smacks of censorship.