<Can you possibly justify moving attendees at a photo-op who are holding critical signs 200 yards away into a fenced pen, in the name of "security"; while allowing pro-Bush attendees to decorate the photo op with smiling faces and messages of support? How is this not a blatant violation of the First Amendment?

A lot of people confuse the right of free speech with the right to say anything they want ANYWHERE they want. Wrong. I can't walk into Carnegie Hall and start making speeches. I can't walk into someone's living room and make speeches. And I can't barge into a private photo op and make speeches.

Okay, say I'm George W. Bush. If I am holding a photo op, I've got the right to only allow red-headed people with a patch over one eye to be photographed with me if I want. It's a goddam photo op, and I call the shots. I'm not keeping anyone from voting, or writing to the papers, or talking to the press, or shouting insults, or holding a sign up in public somewhere nearby. What I'm trying to prevent is the rabid "Ashcroft and His Amazing Metal Boob" photographers from getting me in the same shot as the guy with the "Bush is a Dickhead" sign, which they would probably give an eye tooth to be able to do. Regardless of how often the Left says so, I didn't just fall off the turnip wagon.

And I'm certainly not keeping any reporters and photographers from wandering over to the other area and taking as many pictures of the "Bush Is A Dickhead" signs as they want. Which, being reporters, they have done and will do with great enthusiasm. What do you see in the newspapers when I make an appearance? It sure ain't the "We Love Bush" signs.