You mean the general population? Regular America has its problems to be sure, but it is a much happier place than ugly middle aged women with vague, innarticulate (idiotic) signs like "Ashcroft = Kerry"
I'll stay thanks for asking.
You still are avoiding how stumbling around holding signs like "This is the 1984 Utopia" make the slightest bit of difference to any citizen but a handful of kooks and extremists. How does that change a single policy? Hey I pity your position, I think there is some truth in a lot of what you are saying, what I'm trying to reason with you is that when you cry wolf by being outraged about everything you hurt the important causes. To make vague innarticulate catch-phrase signs mean something there has to be a well known movement BEFORE a protest so that people can see a sign like "Abortion is Homicide" and go "oh yeah, anti abortion people, I know what they want, here they are representing-I guess they are everywhere."
Now you compare that with the knucklehead you are defending making some kind of weird point about Ashcroft and normal people just go "huh? Looks like another kook." and then your whole group-even the antiabortion ones or the free speech ones all get lumped together. You need to realize your credability has been shot at that point.
Focus.
At this late date it is clear you still haven't even bothered to read word 1 of what the Ashcroft-Kerry connection means (it was posted on freerepublic). It is clearly what animates you, beyond all reason. The short version is that the camp that was created was done so at the direct advice/order based on "intelligence" provided ex parte by a District Attorney (over the objections and criticism of a REAGAN-era appointee to the Federal bench, in commentary that read like Scalia's stinging dissent against the Bush Administration in Hamdi). By the way, the term "camp" comes from the Federal Judge (Reagan appointee) at the center of the controversy who called it a "concentration camp." Now THAT would be over the top -- the sign is TIMID by comparison with commentary in conservative papers in New Hampshire and elsewhere. The connection is that Kerry's buds in the Boston City Council worked to pull permits for protests and signs, etc. for practically every single conservative group in the region (targeting especially anti-abortion protesters), thus forcing them into the "pen" -- while the filthy communists got the streets.
The "speech zone" idea was the creation of Leftists (see www.thefire.org) and institutionalized as law enforcement policy under Reno starting with the 1996 conventions. A federal judge tossed it in 2000, so they backed off that year. However, under Bush they have been implementing them virtually everywhere he goes -- the same PC Left-wing nonsense that animates Horowitz, Savage, Buchanan (running critiques of the speech zone policies in American Conservative), and so on. That's the point -- the Justice Department and Kerry have something in common -- PC commitment to socialistic regulation of non-elite political activity and speech under the Orwellian title of "speech zones." Now get a grip. The "focus" here is on the real problem that Rush and Savage complain about repeatedly, that Clintonistas are peppered throughout the top ranks of Justice, DoD, FBI, Marshals, etc. When Carter, Reagan, and Clinton came to power there was a clean sweep of the bureaucracies. NOT under the "bipartisan government" of Bush 43>>>If that's a marginal issue to you then we have different interests, but certainly nothing warranting the mindless vitriol you spew.
That woman, by the way, told me she worked on the Safeguard ABM system [targeting China, by the way, not the Sovs], while you were chewing gumballs. You can see her hanging out in one photo with the guy holding the anti-abortion sign (who was a vet from Korea). What the hell have you ever done for the cause except spew venom on a site for back-benchers?