What I want to know is, if President Bush loses the election in November, will he sit down and compare the election returns against the loyalty oaths signed by voters who wanted to attend one of his rallies? I mean, if you’re being asked to swear you’ll vote for Bush, isn’t that essentially asking for you to vote now, before the campaign is complete, before the debates are held, before Bush actually rolls out his second-term agenda?
A Republican National Committee practice of having people sign a form endorsing President Bush or pledging to vote for him in November before being issued tickets for RNC-sponsored rallies is raising concern among voters.
When Vice President Dick Cheney spoke July 31 to a crowd of 2,000 in Rio Rancho, a city of 45,000 near Albuquerque, several people who showed up at the event complained about being asked to sign endorsement forms in order to receive a ticket to hear Cheney.”Whose vice president is he?” said 72-year-old retiree John Wade of Albuquerque, who was asked to sign the form when he picked up his tickets. ”I just wanted to hear what my vice president had to say, and they make me sign a loyalty oath.”
Whose Vice President and President are they indeed? There is an excuse though:
RNC spokesman Yier Shi said RNC campaign rallies are not official visits, but party events designed to energize the Republican base . He said everyone is welcome at the rallies as long as they support President Bush.
Personally, creating heckler free zones strikes me as cowardly. That’s right cowardly. I became politically aware while living in Britain, where the Prime Minister faces shouting opposition on a regular basis, televized for the whole world to see how he stands up to it. The leader of the free world should be able to hold his own against anyone bold enough to shout out a criticism, surrounded by Bush loyalists, with Secret Service everywhere, and with the PATRIOT ACT there to protect him if need be. I mean, it’s not like the hecklers would be al Qaeda or French. What do you make of a president who can’t even stand up to his own people?
For comparison:
The campaign of John F. Kerry, the Democratic nominee, has had to deal with Republican hecklers at events. The Kerry-Edwards communications director for New Mexico, Ruben Pulido, said that when Kerry visited New Mexico on July 10, several Bush supporters shouted ”Viva Bush” and waved flip-flops.
As Colin Powell once noted in response to hecklers, he’s worked his entire career to ensure Americans have the right to voice opposition. He might do well to whisper that notion in his boss’s ear.
“He might do well to whisper that notion in his boss’s ear”
Colin already has one foot out the door. He’s not even speaking at the Republican convention let alone attending, which is bizarre as he is the Administration official with the highest approval numbers. And as for the President going toe to toe on anything, I would advise against it if this audio clip is any indication.
http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/archives/Bush%20-%20Tribal%20Sovereignty.mp3
Ah.
The important thing about a loyalty oath is that the people signing it are loyal. And it’s an oath. A loyalty oath. So as you can see, loyalty oaths are good. God Bless America.
Colin already has one foot out the door. He’s not even speaking at the Republican convention let alone attending, which is bizarre as he is the Administration official with the highest approval numbers.
Why is it bizarre? As the Washington Post article probably responsible for launching this QuickMeme(TM) points out: ” . . . in keeping with tradition, Cabinet officials do not speak at the conventions — or other campaign events. So Powell will not appear.
So not only is it not bizarre, it’s customary. And I bet if Powell did speak, the Usual Suspects would complain about the GOP politicizing the SecState’s duties. As far as not attending, maybe he has, you know, other stuff to do?
On a lighter note, this certainly does not help the Bush/grammar meme.
*cough* Rod Paige is speaking *cough*
Let it go, carp… like Bluto in Animal House, he’s on a roll…
If that’s so, fine — but I wasn’t talking about Paige, I was responding to a comment about Powell. You do understand that they’re different people, right? I know they both begin with “P,” but attempt to keep up.
If the Post is correct, and cabinet secretaries traditionally do not speak at the party conventions, then it stands to reason that Paige speaking is bizarre, and Powell not speaking is, well, not. No?
ah Phil, first of all someone needs to clue you in that i’m not a Pinata (no ‘enya’ on my keyboard). Consider this your second warning.
Rod Paige is speaking this year which is not so odd as 2 conventions ago in Houston Lamar Alexander, a sitting Sec. of Education spoke as well. So when a sitting cabinet member speaks in 2 of the last 3 RNC’s, it’s not bizarre but somewhat the opposite.
and this info comes in the link you provided:
Elizabeth Dole, then Secretary of Transportation, and William Bennett, then Secretary of Education, spoke at the Republican National Convention in 1988.
starting to look like a regular feature of the RNC, no?
“Warning?” OK, wilfred. Whatever.
Can you provide a list of SecStates that have spoke at either convention, ever? kthxbye.
“Without realizing how it came about, the combat men in the squadron discovered themselves dominated by the administrators appointed to serve them . . . When they voiced objection, Captain Black replied that people who were loyal would not mind signing all the loyality oaths they had to.”
Joseph Heller “Catch-22” ch. 11
Can you provide a list of SecStates that have spoke at either convention, ever? kthxbye.
“kthxbye”?
And you’d like to be taken seriously?
I do notice that you’ve seized someone else’s comments about Powell as a rather effective way of avoiding addressing the who “loyalty oath” issue. Perhaps you’d care to comment on whether you feel requiring signed oaths of loyalty is really appropriate for the Vice President’s speaking events, whether requiring vote pledging is really appropriate or ethical, and whether the administration’s ongoing pattern of shutting out opposing viewpoints and protestors demonstrates anything but contempt for democratic principles of civil disagreement and the other 50% of the country they were elected to serve?
Catsy…that’s so on topic. Someone’s going think you’re new here. ;-}
And you’d like to be taken seriously?
It’s a joke. You know what those are, right? They do pop up with some frequency around here, so, you know . . . cripes, did everyone wake up with a case of the cranky and stupid today?
I do notice that you’ve seized someone else’s comments about Powell as a rather effective way of avoiding addressing the who “loyalty oath” issue.
I’m not “avoiding” it, as in a very real way, I don’t care. The only way BC’04 could get my vote is by purchasing it in the amount of several million dollars. In the abstract, I’m on record for, like, the entire time I’ve ever been on the Internet — and even in real life, having written strongly worded letters to weaselly Virginia Republican lawmakers — as opposing loyalty oaths, compulsory recitation of the Pledge, “moments of silence”, and all such forced displays of patriotism.
Perhaps you’d care to comment on whether you feel requiring signed oaths of loyalty is really appropriate for the Vice President’s speaking events, whether requiring vote pledging is really appropriate or ethical, and whether the administration’s ongoing pattern of shutting out opposing viewpoints and protestors demonstrates anything but contempt for democratic principles of civil disagreement and the other 50% of the country they were elected to serve?
So, is everyone now forbidden from addressing tangential points in posts, or just me? I just want to be clear on this, because it seems to have really bothered you. And believe me when I say I’d really like to see you get over it.
As for the rest, I stopped beating my wife some time ago, thank you.
did everyone wake up with a case of the cranky and stupid today?
stop the italics madness!!!
It’s a lot worse than screening out hecklers. All campaigns try to do that to some extent, send advance people to stand in between cameras and off message signs, etc. etc. But most Kerry supporters would not heckle–some booing or derisive laughter at worst, or perhaps just a lack of applause. They also keep out undecided voters.
The Daily Show did a piece on this last week, that ended with Ed Helms brokenly confessing, “Jon they have my parents!”
I wonder if this is part of the reason Kerry is drawing much bigger crowds? I’ve read reports of 10,000 in St. Louis, 12,000 in Flagstaff, 20,000 in Kansas city,1000+ in small towns in states Bush won, hundreds cheering as the train goes by without stopping in Missouri….
Kerry and Edwards really ought to make a speech in New York City a week or two before the convention. If they could draw 20,000 in Kansas City….50,000 or 100,000 seems perfectly possible in the right venue in NYC. A nice, nice contrast with the RNC.
John Edwards just came through our town and made a “public” appearance attended by those with invitations only. It was merely a leave the motel, walk through the crowd, say a few words get back on the bus thing. Sounds smaltzy, but they should be able to control their own events somewhat. Mountain out of a molehill.
Did Edwards make folks commit their votes to him now, before they could attend, RD?
It’s a joke. You know what those are, right? They do pop up with some frequency around here, so, you know . . . cripes, did everyone wake up with a case of the cranky and stupid today?
My apologies. I totally pulled the trigger hard on that one, and wrongly. I plead frustration with the likes of Timmy, who genuinely /does/ troll and derail discussions with regularity.
No harm, no foul, Catsy. I realize I don’t necessarily have built-in credibility on these issues, but I’d like it to go without saying that I oppose loyalty oaths and anything resembling such, unless one is either taking the oath of office or being inducted into the military. Also, public appearances should be public appearances, and party-only events should be party-only events, and never should the twain meet.
Can you provide a list of SecStates that have spoke at either convention, ever? kthxbye.
No, but then that wasn’t your original point, was it? You were simply repeating the canard that cabinet members don’t speak at conventions, and that was roundly disproved. Okay? Thanks! Goodbye.
Karen, I really don’t often side with Phil, but I don’t see that his comments on this thread deserve that much hostility.
I don’t really care who the Republicans get to speak at their convention. Nor do I see any reason why anyone not planning to go should care, one way or another.
I don’t really care who the Republicans get to speak at their convention. Nor do I see any reason why anyone not planning to go should care, one way or another.
I realize you probably didn’t mean it this broadly, but there’s plenty of reasons why someone might care who speaks at the GOP convention. Ultimately, though, if you’re an opponent most of them aren’t so much objections as oppontunities to illustrate something that is advantageous to you.