Let’s see: Democrats had a snit fit about an unhinged blogger being handcuffed by Joe Miller’s security after get violent, yet, I see nothing from them about a lady simply exercising her 1st Amendment Rights. Don’t question the Messiah
At one point Wednesday, a heckler who shouted “Liar!” as Obama delivered his speech was escorted out by security guards.
Looks like PBO can’t take a little criticism.
He also managed to call his supporters unappreciative jerks
Leaning forward at the lectern, his voice hoarse, Obama challenged the notion that he hadn’t accomplished as much as his most ardent supporters had hoped. With passage of a healthcare overhaul, many people will no longer have to choose between paying their mortgage or treating their cancer, he said. Combat forces have come home from Iraq and prospects are brightening for small-business owners, he said, thanks to the administration’s economic policies.
“Don’t let them tell you that change isn’t possible,” Obama said.
Yeah, about that change
A majority of voters in key battleground races say President Obama has either brought no change to Washington or has brought change for the worse.
In 10 competitive House districts, 41 percent of likely voters say Obama has brought change for the worse, and 30 percent say he has made no difference.
Obviously, these people are just scared, clinging to their Bibles and guns, fearful of people who do not look like them…..what’s that? The DNC is blowing off Hispanics? Strange. I blame global climate disruption. You know it makes people crazy, right?
And, a pre-Halloween scary story for Barry and the Unicorn Riders, even the AP notices that they will get their butts kicked on November 2nd. Don’t get cocky, though, folks. Get out there and vote. Get your friends and family out.
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU. Re-Change 2010!
Yes, Obama is a liar.
Yes, Obama is paranoid.
Yes, Obama is not a leader.
Yes, I can name a lot of negative things Obama is.
But the fact of the matter is that Obama is still the President. I If you go to hear him, have the courtesy to hear him. Although he often acts like it, Obama is not a bad Las Vegas comedian that deserves heckling.
The post correctly points out the hypocrisy between the left and the right when it comes to “heckling” and speaking truth to power.”
But the guy was still wrong for heckling the President of the United States. You don’t have to respect the man, but you should respect the office.
I definitely take your point, GT, though, I would point out that this was not a Presidential appearance as such, but, a partisan campaign event. And, not to be too argumentative, Obama doesn’t offer the same courtesy back to people who disagree with him.
Teach,
I understand it was more of a partisan appearance than an “official Presidential” appearance. At the same time, I believe that the office of the President is a 24 hour a day thing. The President is always the President whether he is at a partisan event, reading “My Little Goat” to kids in a school or even while being intimate with his wife.
But I do understand your point and think it is more of a grey area than black and white.
I also agree that Obama doesn’t offer the same courtesy back to people that disagree with him. To me, that is all the more reason not to be discourteous to him. After all, I don’t want to sink down to his level. I also don’t want to be known as someone who does the same things and believes in the same way as Obama does. ;)
I just think that we have gotten to the point where “he who shouts the loudest” believes they are “right.” I love going back and reading the papers of the Founding Fathers who had fierce battles – political and personnel – with each other yet their writings are so strong and clever that they make a pile of manure smell like roses.
I agree with the sentiment expressed by the heckler. Obama and his cronies are liars, cheats and scoundrels. Yet just because you can heckle someone doesn’t mean that you should.
Gitar,
Hitler was the chancellor of Germany, Stalin was the president of the USSR. Both of those positions hold as much honor as the president of the US. Would it have made a difference to history and peoples lives if someone had stood up to one of these men at a time when they were venerable? What if a lone voice had dared to yell out a challenge that made at least one other individual think? It is an interesting thought. I know many who would like to do violence to our leaders and favor armed revolt. We are not in a typical election cycle. Our future is at stake. Obama has caused the creation of legislation that fundamentally robs us of our freedom and wealth. He has chosen to pit his fellow citizens against each other to futher his agenda. A good man would make sure that all people were treated equally and not subjected to redicule and hate speech in the manner that this president does. He has changed the playing field and as such has lost the respect of a sizable number of people. It is unfortunate that he is president, he has taken from the office and lessened its grandeur.
He deseverves public reticule and disrespect. This is tit for tat what he has shown to the people that elected him.
You might say that conservatives felt different with Bush. I thought Bush was a liberal and just about as bad for the conservative cause as Obama. Yet he still respected the people. He also was clearly a leader. Just because you have a title does not make you deserving of the honor of that title unless you show the competence necessary for the job.
As to the “change” that he desires, I don’t think the American people understood that to mean adaptation of a communistic government.
Hitler was the chancellor of Germany, Stalin was the president of the USSR.
Neither were elected by the people, so I am not sure that the comparison is valid.
Both of those positions hold as much honor as the president of the US.
Not even close, David. Do you really think that the position of the president allows him to murder people in ovens or send people to the gulag?
It is an interesting thought.
No, it isn’t an interesting thought because we know what happened to voices that were raised against Hitler and Stalin. Those voices were killed. Literally. Are you accusing Obama of the same actions? Are you really trying to say that Obama is sending people off to ovens? To forced labor camps?
Do you think that more people would actually hear what Obama was saying and forming an opinion about it as opposed to them walking away thinking about the nut job that was taken away for yelling?
Heckling is designed to not allow the person to speak. Are you so afraid of what is said that you support other people preventing the President of the United States from speaking?
He deseverves public reticule and disrespect. This is tit for tat what he has shown to the people that elected him.
Than you are no different than he is.
Walt Kelly was right. “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
BTW – Goodwin’s law applies to your comments.
gitar,
Hitler was elected by 30% of the German people. Stalin was elected by the inner circle of the Communist party. Neither had the power to destroy people till well into their administrations.
What is Goodwin’s law and why are you so passionate about a man who is trying to destroy your country?
Hitler was elected by 30% of the German people.
Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany by von Hindenburg. He was never elected to the office.
Stalin was elected by the inner circle of the Communist party.
Thank you for agreeing with me.
Neither had the power to destroy people till well into their administrations.
You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own set of facts. Both men had embarked on a path of destroying people and removing those who spoke out against them long before they assumed power.
What is Goodwin’s law
I apologize for the typo. I meant “Godwin’s Law.”
why are you so passionate about a man who is trying to destroy your country?
Why are you so passionate about emulating a man who you believe is destroying the country?
This isn’t about Obama. I already outlined that I disagree with his policies and beliefs. This is about how we react to the office of the President. This is about how we react and the political discourse in the country.
I won’t lower myself to Obama’s standards of conduct as a person. Apparently you feel comfortable doing so.
I’ll disagree with the man, but uphold the position of the office. I feel no empathy for the man, but I feel an allegiance to the Constitution.
I am sorry you don’t feel the same way.
Wait wait, guys, you are mostly on the same side here.
Gitarcarver, let me ask this. If a Hitler type were to gain office in this country, would you still hold on to your reverence for the office?
For, I fear we are not that far off. Granted we have a few safeguards built in to help block such a man from doing things like Hitler did, but it isn’t impossible.
Would you still be a silent dissenter? You mentioned that those who did disagree with Hitler and Stalin disappeared. Do you think those people were wrong to confront those tyrants?
At some point, the freedom of speech comes up against the respect of office. If your disrespect of the man overpowers the respect for the office, then one might feel the need to stand up for what you believe.
For me, I could see myself yelling out against Obama for he has trashed the idea of that office an the sanctity of it as well. Yet, despite my anger over former Pres GW Bush, I had respect for the man and he gave the office respect and respectfulness.
Liberals on the other hand would feel the opposite to how I do. And they are free to do so.
hehehee,, and the security are free to whisk me or anyone else away that causes a commotion at his events. But, at least I would have said my piece.
BTW, you never answered David, and I will ask it here: What is Godwin’s Law and how did it apply to David’s comments?
If a Hitler type were to gain office in this country, would you still hold on to your reverence for the office?
Yes, because the office and the man are not the same thing.
At some point, the freedom of speech comes up against the respect of office. If your disrespect of the man overpowers the respect for the office, then one might feel the need to stand up for what you believe.
The issue is not standing up, the issue us WHEN one stands up. Heckling is one method of not allowing a person to speak. We have seen people like Ann Coulter get heckled to the point where she could not speak. Are you for that? Is it a matter of whose ox is being gored?
While people have tried to couch part of this in “standing up for what you believe,” the fact of the matter is that in heckling and trying to prevent a person from speaking, you are saying that you are against the First Amendment. You are saying that you want to stifle and silence someone else. I am not much for that position.
As much as I dislike Obama, I would still stand when “Hail to the Chief” is played as he walked in the room.
What is Godwin’s Law and how did it apply to David’s comments?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
There is a corollary that also says that the first person to bring a Nazi or Hitler comparison into an argument, loses the argument because of the absurdity of the comparison.
Cap’n,
Let me use this video as an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIHz5tevLAw
It is a comparison between Bush meeting some Marines and Obama meeting some Marines.
There has always been some discussion as to the orders given to the Marines attending each event, but the reactions are different.
With Bush, you can see a respect for the office as well as an affection for the man.
With Obama, you see only a respect for the office.
The man and the office are not the same thing.
AH. Thanks for clarifying the reference to Godwin’s Law.
As to the discussion, I understand and agree that heckling prevents a speaker from speaking. And I agree that it is disrespectful. But, I think where we disagree is to those to whom the heckling is aimed.
Would you disagree with those who would heckle Achmed of Iran speaking at a University? Me, I would applaud them. For this tyrant and oppressor needs to be shouted down and out of the country.
And, I have always been taught, and believe, that one has the Right to speak, but they don’t have the Right to be heard.
Where we differ is in the degree. I will show respect if the speaker has and shows respect. If not, then if the person speaks in public, they leave themselves open to have the other person express their First Amendment Right.
My respect for the office refrains me from throwing the ripe tomatoes.
gitar,
I am sorry, I can not agree with you about the office of the president. He is a man, he is elected by the people to a short term in office, he is only one branch of the government. The office was never, ever intended to have the status that you seem to deem necessary. It is only a part of the checks and balances. To elevate a person to a level above us is wrong and will result in problems.
Now that being said, this is not a normal situation. We are not fundamentally differing with a president as we did with Clinton or even Carter. The problem is that this nut is trying to destroy the country. He is in the process of changing the way we live in a manner similar to an invading enemy of another nation. In the entire time he has been in the office he has never told the truth. Ever. He currently is going across the country unlike any president I have ever seen spreading one lie after another for the simple purpose of obtaining power, not benefiting the country in any way.
As to the reference to Hitler, that is used to demonstrate in no uncertain terms the nature of an individual to change his country. I could give a flip on godwin.
As to Hitler’s election, he represented the Nazi party and the Nazi party received 30% of the vote in a 6 or 8 party race. As Hitler was the leader of the party, he was appointed to the position. A similar process used in England.
Would you disagree with those who would heckle Achmed of Iran speaking at a University?
Yes. To me it is better to listen to the person, and have his idiocy exposed rather than shouting it down. It is the old adage of “better to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.”
Let fools speak. Let their idiocy be exposed. Let it be shown on YouTube. Let is be seen on tv. Let bloggers write about it.
Me, I would applaud them.
Then you applaud those who seek to silence by heckling, storming the stage, etc, people like Beck, Coulter, Hannity, etc?
I am sorry, I can not agree with you about the office of the president.
I am sorry that you have such little respect for the Constitution and traditions of the United States.
To elevate a person to a level above us is wrong and will result in problems.
He is not being “elevated.” His office is given the respect it is due. I think you are having difficulties separating the man from the office.
In the entire time he has been in the office he has never told the truth.
And in doing so, he denigrates the office of the President.
I am amazed that you feel that because Obama is a lowlife that you should stoop to his level. I am saddened by the fact that you don’t want to hold the moral high ground and be above the things that he and those of his ilk do.
As to the reference to Hitler, that is used to demonstrate in no uncertain terms the nature of an individual to change his country.
You see no difference in a dictator like Hitler or Lenin and a democratically elected President of the United States?
Wow.
As to Hitler’s election, he represented the Nazi party and the Nazi party received 30% of the vote in a 6 or 8 party race. As Hitler was the leader of the party, he was appointed to the position. A similar process used in England.
Factually false.
I presume that you are talking about the German elections of 1932. In the first, Hindenburg received 49.3% of the vote while Hitler received 30%. The constitution of the German Republic required a 50% majority, so another election was held. This time Hinderburg received 53% while Hitler received 37%. (Note: both elections were marred by the killing of political detractors of the Nazis. Your insistence that Hitler only killed or disposed of dissidents after coming to power is factually false.)
Therefore, in the April, 1932 election, Hitler lost to the Von Hindenburg. He was not elected to the office.
In 1933, in order to forestall an rumored military coup and civil war led by former Hindenburg appointee and chancellor Kurt von Schleicher, Hitler was appointed chancellor.
Hitler’s appointment had nothing to do with the election. It had nothing to do with the parliamentary type government that England has.
Hitler was appointed simply in a political move to save the German Republic. He was never elected to the position. The only “election” was one similar to that of Lenin when in 1935(?) Hitler was elected “Chancellor for life” in a election filled with intimidation and violence.
As I said, you are entitled to your own set of opinions, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts.
ACtually, I am full supporters of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. But, what do these people have to do with heckling people in office? Are you suggesting that these lions of Conservatism heckle or storm stages?
I was also taught, silence is acquiescence. Those who fail to speak up, agree with their silence.
Giving a man like Achmed a venue to spew his vile filth is an atrocity in itself. And I wouldn’t have been able to remain quiet as he attacked America and our citizens.
To me it is better to listen to the person, and have his idiocy exposed
A one-sided debate is no debate at all.
“better to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.â€
This suggests that you believe all non-office holders are idiots. Office holders had to come from somewhere.
Gitarcarver, I understand your reverence for the office of the President. I just don’t agree with it. You can be sad, but I am not sad that you have a different opinion.
For myself, I revere no man above myself or my family. Some people I view with less reverence. IMHO, we as a society have fallen to far in to revering stardom. Hollywood actors are treated like royalty just because they make movies. People in elected office begin to think of themselves as royalty after a while and demand submission and a bowed head as they approach.
Just look at the throngs of screaming orgasmic people at all these events when an actor or politician (especially a recent former president) walks the hand-shake line. Its near sinful.
I think to David and myself, the man MAKES the office. Reagan made the office of president Presidential. Carter made it weak and vapid. Clinton sullied it, soiled it and sold it to the highest bidder. Now Obama. He treats it like it is his own private throne. A war-room if you will. He has turned the office of president into a pseudo-tyrant-like position. Bypassing Congress left and right.. well left and left. Taking over companies and banks. Crashing our economic system and destroying millions of lives around the world.
Like I said before, I can have reverence for the office of President, based on my (limited) knowledge of history of who held the position before, but my disdain and contempt for all that Pres Obama has done while in that office overpowers those thoughts and feelings. I believe George Washington would be appalled by how we treat the president like a king nowadays.
But, what do these people have to do with heckling people in office?
The correlation is that if you agree that heckling them or preventing them from speaking is wrong, then the same standard must be accorded to the President. If you do not agree, then you are elevating them above the office of the President.
I was also taught, silence is acquiescence. Those who fail to speak up, agree with their silence.
And you were taught this because there was no other option to disagree with the speaker? Your mouth magically sealed after the speech a person gave? Your fingers no longer could type or write your disagreement after the speech?
A one-sided debate is no debate at all.
I wasn’t aware that a speech was a debate.
I just don’t agree with it.
Oh well. You are free to agree with it or not. It says a great deal about you that you don’t want speech that you disagree with to be heard.
I think to David and myself, the man MAKES the office.
When the man is mentioned in the Constitution, I would agree with you. As it does not, the willingness to disrupt or prevent others from hearing that which you disagree with is childish and immature.
I believe George Washington would be appalled by how we treat the president like a king nowadays.
You are free to feel that way, but you would be wrong. While Washington was against the establishment of an “American King,” he accepted the office as being above the person serving within it. His second inaugural speech was greeted by some in the Congress with great hatred and anger yet no one would dare have stood up and shouted “you lie!” No one would have dared tried to shout Washington down simply because they disagreed with him. That is the tradition of the office and the country.
You are free to try and change those traditions if you want, but I suspect that you would not accept people preventing you from being heard or prevent you from speaking if you were on a podium.