Perrin:
> I don't know or really care about the Sparts -- that end of the political
> spectrum is more your turf than mine. But I find it interesting that a
> "public" antiwar rally has taken on private features, i.e., those with the
> mikes will decide who speaks, based on ideological fitness. Like the corp
> media, you and your allies are fashioning the discussion to serve a narrow
> end. Your right, of course (though if such a thing were done to your little
> sect, I highly doubt you would keep quiet about it). If you want to hold a
> private, invitation-only rally, by all means do so. Just spare us the
> "public" tag.
So, forgive my asking this, Dennis, but have you ever ATTENDED a rally, teach- in, public meeting, etc.? You are describing the universal characteristics of all political gatherings in human history. My "little sect" has dealt with these realities every day of its existence.
As for public rallies, the 'public' part is that everyone is invited to attend the rally. Everyone is not invited to speak at the rally. Committees of organizers haggle over the lists, making their decisions on the basis of considerations such as political line, national and gender representativeness, media draw, speaking skill, name recognition, reputation, do they have a reputation of going over the time limit, and so on. If you insist on a legal justification, the right of the organizers to do this is guaranteed by the 'free association' clause in the Bill of Rights.
I am surprised to hear that this is all news to you.
LP