Mums the word for this Administration

Especially if you disagree with them. "White House officials can exclude dissenters from taxpayer-funded appearances by President Bush without violating the protesters' rights."

The argument here is that the Administration has some kind of right to control the message being promulgated at these events. Excuse me! Private events and GOP funded events can be as restrictive as they want in terms of the guest list, what gets reported, what the message is and who the audience is.

Taxpayer-funded events are another story and here that ugly "free speech" thing comes into play. The administration has had no problem staying on message but I think that once again, they are chipping away at the constitution under the guise of firmness of resolve. One message, one voice, that's the mantra being chanted in the White House. But at taxpayer-funded events the opposing voices should not be silenced.

Don't get me wrong here. Disruptive behavior either for or against a particular position is wrong no matter how you slice it.

The parties in the issue at hand here had a "No blood for oil" bumpersticker. They also had anti-Bush T-shirts on but these were not displayed nor was there any disruptive intention (or so they say). Regardless of their intentions, they were summarily refused entry to the event.

The current administration flexes its muscles at every opportunity but once again I feel they have overstepped their authority. The voice of the opposition cannot and should not be silenced.

One of the main problems that I have with "W" is the unwillingness to hear other ideas. This "arrogance" is not "resolution". We are a weaker nation because of this attitude. The answers to many of our issues often can be found in the middle of the road but the unwillingness to listen and be open to compromise builds a wall that cuts off everything but a single lane of that road.

Maybe 2009 will see a widening of our political highways and a new willingness to stay to the middle. Go Purple...