I believe this is a freedom of speech issue.

(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.)


She was on a school bus, presumably the school receives money from the government so therefore it is a public forum.

The bus and other traffic was stopped, therefore her giving the finger did not pose an endangerment to other drivers.

Whether the finger salute passes the obscenity test, may be debateable. One couod arague that it was seditious speech, which is not protected. (Seditious Speech and Seditious Libel .--Opposition to government through speech alone has been subject to punishment throughout much of history under laws proscribing ''seditious'' utterances. In this country, the Sedition Act of 1798 made criminal, inter alia, malicious writings which defamed, brought into contempt or disrepute, or excited the hatred of the people against the Government, the President, or the Congress, or which stirred peo ple to sedition. 90 In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 91 the Court surveyed the controversy surrounding the enactment and enforcement of the Sedition Act and concluded that debate ''first crystallized a national awareness of the central meaning of the First Amendment. . . . Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history . . . . [That history] reflect[s] a broad consensus that the Act, because of the restraint it imposed upon criticism of government and public officials, was inconsistent with the First Amendment.'' The ''central meaning'' discerned by the Court, quoting Madison's comment that in a republican government ''the censorial power is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people,'' is that ''[t]he right of free public discussion of the stewardship of public officials was thus, in Madison's view, a fundamental principle of the American form of government.'')

I haveto go back to work , but here is a godd website with info on the first amendment: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/c...n/amendment01/

TBC...

Fire this guy, too.

http://proliberty.com/observer/bush-finger.jpg

Is there evidence that kids actually saw her give the finger?

What's the story behind that picture? Never saw it before.

BTW, my neighbor uses the same dog groomer for her poodle that Bush uses for his dog in that picture. So that's Bush, dog, groomer, dog, glatt's neighbor, glatt. 6 degrees. Actually, I know the neighbor's dog, so that's 5 degrees. Chilling.

Blimey

I can't believe a driver can be fired for sticking a finger up. Using Noodle's analogy I wouldn't expect a driver to be fired for silent and unseen (by the children) support of an anti abortion rally either.

If the incident was part of serious documented complaints and the driver was on a final warning, then I can understand it. But if the driver has been immediately employed elsewhere then it sounds like oppression to me.

Respect for the office, respect for the man is neither here nor there in my opinion. I agree the act wasn't particularly eloquent, but neither does it seem to be anything more than an instinctive personal expression.

What if it had been someone from the Opposition in the cavalcade? Or a foreign leader?

What would have happened if one of the children on the bus came from a home where the current President is unpopular and had made an inappropriate gesture?

What if ALL the schoolkids made a gesture?

Surely some criticism of politicians must be allowed?

Yes, but again this isn't an issue of the action itself so much as the timing and circumstances. If she was standing on the sidewalk after school hours and flipped Bush the bird as the motorcade went by, THEN I would be screaming bloody murder if she was fired. But the employer has the right to dictate behavior while on the ticker, and MN says it very well here:

I think part of the problem is that the Bush team has spent such considerable effort making sure all dissent takes place in a "freedom of speech zone" 5 miles away from the President that they actually become shocked when confronted with any dissent.

Consider that the President is surrounded by loyal yes men. All he hears all day long is 100% agreement. Two thirds of the country disapproves of him, but he's surrounded by 100% approval all the time.

Fuck him, but I'm not that way. Even if was don't think I'd pick him.

And what if she'd flipped them the bird instead?

trend?

yep

http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchiv...ips_out_1.html

edit found on youtube

But both Bush and Cheney get a pass when they do it? Hypocrite. :flipbird:

The last one in office didn't, and didn't get my vote either time.

I was vividly reminded of just why last week when I read Dereliction Of Duty.

Simple as that, really. The anti-Bush crowd does not impress me. Dear God, their idea of their best standard-bearer was a scrub like John Forbes Kerry. They are a lot of stupid hysterics, and I'd rather they weren't in my republic. The dopes make us look bad.

Yeah, cause unprovoked aggression, using the constitution/bill of rights like toilet paper, pissing off all our allies, and torturing prisoners make us look like really swell guys, huh?