Naturally, I get my news from teh most reliable of
sources. Before reacting, let's review the characters in this little one-act.
Andrew Meyer: Student writer still high on the thrill of being published/noticed fires a steady stream of questions at Kerry, leaving Kerry no time (inclination?) to respond. Student moves from 2004 election questions to Clinton's "blowjob" to Skull and Bones conspiracy theories. They cut his mic and he refuses to leave. (Steve Kloosterman? Anyone? No? Okay.)
Police: The police. Campus security, secret service?
Student Body: Andrew's fellow students, who may know his
body of work. According to youtubers, Andrew violated
campus speech policies during his time at the microphone.
In my simplistic view of things, Meyer is either a loon who was taken down in due process or he was a free-speech advocate silenced by The Man. The takedown was ugly. No question about that. The auditorium was (half) full of people who got to listen to Meyer wail when tazered. I keep coming to this: Was Meyer's speech worth defending? Would I interfere with campus police over the right to spout conspiracy theories during time meant for Senator Kerry to speak to/with the entire student body?
No. Meyer was an attention whore who got exactly what he wanted. He refused to let Kerry answer any of his questions because he was trying to come off as some kind of muckraking hero, shouting down a speechless Kerry. If Meyer had given Kerry time to respond, then they would've been involved in a conversation, which might have been worth defending. So... I would've thrown Meyer to the dogs. Sorry,
Colbert. Here's another blog to throw on the pile.