# Repugs insist on oath for demos to hear Cheney speech. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 1, 2004, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795 "2004-08-01T01:23:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/21 "2004-08-01T15:32:17Z")
> [@wmulax93](#): > > Re: the OP. > > Thanks, I needed the laugh. That’s all I can do any more, because every day, it looks more and more like Joseph Heller was a psychic. Agreed. All I can add is that the first time anyone tries to make me sing _The Star-spangled Banner_ before I can [pile my plate 14 inches high with mashed potatoes](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=269231), all hell’s breakin’ loose! ---
**Author:** ![El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/41988e/32.png) [@El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Cid_Viscoso)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/22 "2004-08-01T17:15:54Z")
> [@](#): > > _Posted by OttoDaFe_ > > Agreed. All I can add is that the first time anyone tries to make me sing _The Star-spangled Banner_ before I can [pile my plate 14 inches high with mashed potatoes](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=269231), all hell’s breakin’ loose! > [@](#): > > The words of Joseph Heller, from _Catch-22_ > > He mashed hundreds of cakes of GI soap into the sweet potatoes just to show that people have the taste of Philistines and don’t know the difference between good and bad… OttoDaFe: Considering your handle, sir, I hope Our Singing Torquemada and his minions do not read this board. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/23 "2004-08-01T17:23:48Z")
Well, you never expect the Singing Torquemada… ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/24 "2004-08-01T17:28:14Z")
> [@El Cid Viscoso](#): > > OttoDaFe: Considering your handle, sir, I hope Our Singing Torquemada and his minions do not read this board. 😉 And as **OST** and the chorus break into _What a Day_ from **Candide** (the second edition) . . . I had another thought: my rendition of _The Star-spangled Banner_ (or anything else, for that matter) would probably lead to a 25-30% drop in the level of overeating, at least at the buffet in question. So maybe it wouldn’t be such a bad idea afer all. ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/25 "2004-08-01T17:31:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, you never expect the Singing Torquemada… Our two weapons are fear, surprise, and _Y M C A_ from **Can’t Stop the Music**. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/26 "2004-08-01T19:27:13Z")
despite the fact that Godwin’s law seems to apply to this thread already… _Link removed - CF_ ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/27 "2004-08-01T19:32:43Z")
> [@OttoDaFe](#): > > Our two weapons are fear, surprise, and _Y M C A_ from **Can’t Stop the Music**. Sir, if you insist on threatening us with weapons of sonic mass destruction, we’ll be forced to invade and depose you. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/28 "2004-08-01T19:42:14Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > This is a fucking retarded post for two reasons, first because the pledge will not keep out protestors and secondly because freedom of speech damn well does include the right to heckle politicians on the stump…even to _interrupt_ the evil fuckers if they want to. God, I hate this fucking attitude. Like the heckler’s veto is a valid exercise of free speech. What a load of bullshit. Drowning out the words of another speaker – effectively denying them _their_ free speech rights by simply screaming louder – is _not_ what the American ideal of free political discourse is all about. That ideal is about a marketplace of ideas, one where ideas of all kinds can be introduced and discussed. Shutting out a competing market participant by interfering with his free speech activities is contrary to, not consonant with, that ideal. If Bush detractors wish to spread their message, they can find methods of doing so that don’t step on the toes of Bush supporters. And just to be sure, because your post comes dangerously close to committing this common fallacy (and I note that **Mockingbird** goes ahead and commits it anyway): this isn’t a first amendment issue. The government isn’t making a distinction here. The RNC and the Bush-Cheney campaign are private actors, and can set the rules of entry to their events as they see fit, including efforts to keep out hecklers. Yes, the method chosen here is a bit silly and probably ineffectual. But let’s not paint this as some kind of affront to free speech, because that’s clearly not the goal. The goal, in fact, is to protect the free speech rights of the speaker from disruption. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/29 "2004-08-01T19:44:50Z")
> [@Mockingbird](#): > > So the only way that Bush and the Crypt Keeper(I mean Cheney) can handle dissent is to try and bully it into silence with unconstitutional means? > > Are’t they supposed to _uphold_ Constitution, not attempt to subvert and pervert it? I noted this in my last post, but just to be clear: exactly how is this unconstitutional? The RNC and the Bush-Cheney campaign are private actors, and their setting the rules of entry to their own events is no affront to the constitution. If you think otherwise, please do construct an argument to the contrary. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/30 "2004-08-01T19:46:58Z")
> [@Dewey Cheatem Undhow](#): > > The RNC and the Bush-Cheney campaign are private actors, Ah-hah! I think we knew it all along, they’re not public servants, but private individuals acting a role. mwahahahah! [FinnAgain does not support of endorse the above statements] ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/31 "2004-08-01T19:50:52Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Ah-hah! > I think we knew it all along, they’re not public servants, but private individuals acting a role. mwahahahah! This is a campaign appearance, and not one in his official capacity as Vice President. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/32 "2004-08-01T19:53:43Z")
> [@Dewey Cheatem Undhow](#): > > This is a campaign appearance, and not one in his official capacity as Vice President. So… he’s campaigning to be… dog catcher? ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/33 "2004-08-01T19:59:58Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > So… he’s campaigning to be… dog catcher? At this appearance, he is not appearing in an official capacity. He is appearing as a candidate for office. This isn’t like, say, Bush trying to keep all the Democratic Representatives and Senators from the State of the Union address. A private citizen running for office has every right to set the rules for attendance at his campaign stops. That Cheney is an incumbent shouldn’t change that basic principle. Cheney didn’t check his rights of free speech and free association at the door when he took office. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/34 "2004-08-01T20:12:28Z")
> [@Dewey Cheatem Undhow](#): > > At this appearance, he is not appearing in an official capacity. He is appearing as a candidate for office. This isn’t like, say, Bush trying to keep all the Democratic Representatives and Senators from the State of the Union address. 1. I’m not objecting to the repubs deciding on their guestlist. 2. I simply feel that your reasoning is obfuscatory. How on earth is the standing Veep not the standing vice president? How is he not acting as the standing vice president when he gives a speech as the standing vice president? > [@Dewey Cheatem Undhow](#): > > A private citizen running for office has every right to set the rules for attendance at his campaign stops. That Cheney is an incumbent shouldn’t change that basic principle. Cheney didn’t check his rights of free speech and free association at the door when he took office. Notice, I haven’t said the republicans can’t invite whoever they want to their convention, simply that the idea that the standing vice president giving a speech on why he should remain the standing vice president shouldn’t be considered to be acting as the standing vice persident. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/35 "2004-08-01T20:30:08Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Notice, I haven’t said the republicans can’t invite whoever they want to their convention, simply that the idea that the standing vice president giving a speech on why he should remain the standing vice president shouldn’t be considered to be acting as the standing vice persident. This isn’t that difficult. Giving campaign speeches isn’t part of the job of the vice president. They are unrelated to his official duties. Ergo, when he gives such speeches, he is acting in the capacity of a private citizen. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/36 "2004-08-01T20:42:08Z")
Yeah, I grasp that, he isn’t vice-pres in every capacity, when he takes a dump he’s just another asshole. But I suspect the issue is less a matter of hecklers drowning out the speaker, since we can be pretty well assured that any such hecklers would be a very tiny minority of the audience, and unlikely to drown out an amplified speech with sheer volume. No, what they want to avoid is the _appearance_ of dissent, much like they are motivated to protect and nurture free speech by giving it a special reservation, much as they protected and nurtured the American Indian. They want any snippets that hit the airwaves to show crowds of enthusiastic supporters, unsullied by doubt. They don’t the viewer to be reminded that not everyone marches in lockstep, they believe that the _image_ of a clear and solid majority may help to create the same. ---
**Author:** ![Coldfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@Coldfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coldfire)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/37 "2004-08-01T20:58:37Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > despite the fact that Godwin’s law seems to apply to this thread already… > > _Link removed - CF_ Official warning. Do NOT link to pornographic material on the SDMB. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/38 "2004-08-01T21:06:43Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > But I suspect the issue is less a matter of hecklers drowning out the speaker, since we can be pretty well assured that any such hecklers would be a very tiny minority of the audience, and unlikely to drown out an amplified speech with sheer volume. Several years ago, when I was a law student, Hillary Clinton gave speech in one of UT’s larger auditoriums that was interrupted by a handful of hecklers (say, 5 or 6). You don’t need big numbers to disrupt a presentation. And you can guess what the news focused on that night: not the content of the speech, but the images of security dragging those fucknuggets out of the auditorium. > [@elucidator](#): > > No, what they want to avoid is the _appearance_ of dissent, much like they are motivated to protect and nurture free speech by giving it a special reservation, much as they protected and nurtured the American Indian. Is this any different from the Democrats? Did you see the fenced-off area in Boston? How many “Bush-Cheney” shirts do you think would be allowed in to a Kerry campaign stop? But more to the point: who cares? Opponents of Bush and Kerry can certainly set up and stage their own protests and rallies. Dissent is alive and well and living in the United States. You don’t need to go very far to find it. Bush and Kerry seeking to ensure that their audiences hear their messages unimpeded is not an affront to the rights of others who wish to dissent. > [@elucidator](#): > > They want any snippets that hit the airwaves to show crowds of enthusiastic supporters, unsullied by doubt. They don’t the viewer to be reminded that not everyone marches in lockstep, they believe that the _image_ of a clear and solid majority may help to create the same. This is true of any politician in any campaign. So what? A campaign’s refusal to provide a stage for the campaign’s opponents is not a threat to free speech. ---
**Author:** ![Mauvaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mauvaise/32/11084_2.png) [@Mauvaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mauvaise)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/39 "2004-08-01T21:23:59Z")
> [@](#): > > Some Democrats who signed up to hear Vice President Dick Cheney speak here Saturday were refused tickets unless they signed a pledge to endorse President Bush… How legally binding would that be? Say I wanted to attend this little rally - I don’t live too far away. But I’m a Democrat. So I sign their little paper, what then? Can they really force me to campaign for Bush? Give my money to him? Put Pro Bush bumper stickers on my car? Force me to vote for him? What really does that “pledge to endore Bush” mean? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2004, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795/40 "2004-08-01T21:24:01Z")
**Dewey** , I fear that you are operating on the presumption that my every word is a direct contradiction to you. Be assured you ain’t my Betty Noyer. I don’t think this kind of control of a stump speech has any significant impact on freedom of speech. Its preaching to the choir, for the most part. What I _do_ find repugnant is controlling the _outside_ environment, herding protestors from the public streets and biways so their appearance does not mar the adulation for the Shining One as he _approaches_ the venue of the speech. And, yes, point of fact, I think a “Bush-Cheney” shirt wearer would be “allowed” to be present at a Dem gathering, leastwise, I’ve not heard of any being ejected. Have you? The Dems are not nearly the control freaks that the Pubs are, it is simultaneously thier biggest strength and biggest weakness. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repugs-insist-on-oath-for-demos-to-hear-cheney-speech/257795.md?page=3)