BSB publishes Obama “protester” home address

11 comments on “BSB publishes Obama “protester” home address”

1. Posted by tim russo | Aug 6, 2008 11:58 am

   here’s the problem with your “consensus”

   first of all, dude was a security threat. he made himself one. that makes his address fair game.

   second, this guy tried to play a game with a smear that people tend to believe, i.e., obama won’t say the pledge. he got pwned on that at the event. and then tried to remain anonymous, in an area of the event where identifying yourself is required, not only by the campaign, but by the Secret Service.

   dude’s contact info is fair game.

2. Posted by Eric | Aug 6, 2008 12:16 pm

   it was bizarre and you don’t approve. that’s helpful. keep on fighting the good fight Brian!

   oh, and welcome back. should be fun.

3. Posted by Brian | Aug 6, 2008 12:29 pm

   Tim, everyone’s a security threat. That’s why the Secret Service screens everyone with metal detectors. And when the guy’s outburst was over, he hadn’t been violent. What’s the point of calling someone a security threat when that potentiality wasn’t realized? He was a threat to the smooth running of the show- and carried through on that.

   If the Secret Service demanded his name and he refused- well, they have their methods, don’t they? Anyway I didn’t realize that Nick had been deputized.

   And finally, the content of his disruption involved a smear, as you say. So everybody’s going to decide on a case-by-case basis whether each disruption to a campaign event meets the smell test, and publish home addresses if they don’t? That could get interesting.

   There’s absolutely no problem with you posting video and everyone publishing his name, but the only reason to add a home address is to encourage harassment.

4. Posted by Brian | Aug 6, 2008 12:32 pm

   Eric, if I didn’t add that disclaimer, some folks would assume I support that kind of stuff. So just so you know. And thanks.

5. Posted by cpr | Aug 6, 2008 2:05 pm

   The guy used and abused his position as press to disrupt the event. had he been there as a citizen it might have been a different story. He gave up certain privs (the right to comment, privacy) to gain others (to walk in at the end, have prime view, and not get monkey butt from his a$$ sweating) But he instead disrespected those of us who waited 3 hrs to see senator obama speak. He thrust himself into the spotlight and made himself a public figure for the limited purposes of his disagreement with Obama and his misuse of press credentials. Given his freelance status, I would say his home is his professional address (especially if he declares it as such for for taxes). anyone who misuses this information should be dealt with in the appropriate manner, but to send a letter to discuss either of the issues should be fine.

6. Posted by tim russo | Aug 6, 2008 2:27 pm

   brian, i realize you’re a blind partisan, but try not to be ignorant while you do it.

   not everyone is a security threat. that’s moronic. if you stand up from a press riser, which, as i posted, is never a source of random disruption, and access to which is less secure than the general public, as i also posted, and shout at the candidate, that’s a threat.

   second, this guy was accredited as press. to get that access, as comment #5 lays out, you have to agree to certain standards of behavior. he did not. and, he refused to identify himself. that made him an anonymous, less-screened, higher-access, threat.

   as for the smear, he only did what he did to try and bait obama into refusing to say the pledge, which is a lie, and a smear, that has been debunked repeatedly. doing that, on top of all the other stuff, makes him even more of a threat.

   if you can’t see why this guy was a threat, than you are just being a blind partisan. which i know is your modus operandi, but when it comes to security, i thought partisanship was supposed to stop.

7. Posted by Brian | Aug 6, 2008 3:04 pm

   If the Secret Service or another security force had silenced him during his outburst and led him out, I’d have been fine with that. As I am whenever any protester disrupts an event. (Don’t taze me, bro!) In the moment, you don’t know what they’ll do next. But after the fact, we know that he didn’t do anything violent. You’re saying that because he could have done something far worse, he should be treated as if he did. In the end, he engaged in some disruptive free speech, which- to repeat- I don’t approve of.

   However, I’d be surprised if the guy wasn’t on the Secret Service’s blacklist now.

8. Posted by tim russo | Aug 6, 2008 3:30 pm

   if not on the Secret Service list, he’s at least unlikely to ever be credentialled for a presidential campaign event again. which proves my point.

9. Posted by Thomas Paine | Aug 7, 2008 5:23 am

   Tim, can registered sex offenders get credentialled for presidential campaign events? Just asking.

10. Posted by Columbuser.com » What’s a little phone harassment among enemies? | Aug 10, 2008 2:53 pm

    […] State Blog had earlier published John Quinn’s apparent home address, which I posted about here. In the comments, Tim Russo seems to think that because John Quinn was engaging in a […]

11. Posted by BizzyBlog » Things I’d Like to Post About Today ….. (081108, Morning, Round 2) | Aug 11, 2008 8:37 am

    […] who has just-returned to active blogging (welcome back!), has another addition to the “By their fruits, you shall know them” […]

Leave a comment