Sorry but it was not an open mic night, nor was it a open forum. The speaker slated was the only one who should have been speaking in both cases. One issue that comes up with the “democracy in action” comment is that this is a democratic republic, not a democracy. The sooner that you realize that your elected representatives are your voice, the louder you can be heard, otherwise you need to move to a democracy, or work to change this democratic republic to a democracy.

By Toddnks on Sep 6, 2008

There are certainly enough alternate viewpoints about what form our government most closely resembles, and yes, it is important to listen when someone is speaking publicly. However, by stifling the protestors at his rally, McCain only demonstrated the sort of detachment from the public that he is already being lambasted for. Obama, on the other hand, gave the impression that he will LISTEN to the needs and desires of the public at large. This does not mean that he can or always will act according to the will of the people, but it does show that he realizes we are here and that he serves at OUR pleasure, by virtue of ballot and impeachment.

By Brad E on Sep 6, 2008

George W. Bush let that guy speak aswell who gave out about abortion and things, while the crowd was shouting at him to shut up. He must really listen to the people as well, yeah?

I went to a lecture on economics before and a guy started heckling the speaker. The guy was going on about the failures of neo-liberalism, etc. The talk was on why the economy of Africa was in the state it was. Should that guy have been allowed speak, I live in Ireland which is also a democracy. I was there to listen to the lecturer, not some angry protester.

By Jimmy on Sep 7, 2008

The prior comment is proof that Obama is only a good politician, and not proof of his qualifications to be president. The truth is that Obama has said all of the right things to make people believe that he is for the little guy, and democracy. However, if you look at his voting record, it shows the opposite. He is a party line voter, regardless of what the public thinks. Words are just that – WORDS! They do not give someone the experience required to lead this nation.

The first comment was partially correct and this initial comparison is actually an unfair comparison. You see, Obama’s response was made at a public campaign event, by a person who was a member of an open audience. The protester during McCain’s speech was at the party’s convention, which is a closed event, by invite only. Thus, the demonstrator was an uninvited guest bent on disrupting the convention. You tend to see democrats pulling this kind of trick at the Republican Convention, but not the other way around. I am wondering if this question would even be posed if the situation were the other way around.

By JohnnyWonder on Sep 7, 2008

I think the point of this is that certain groups try to quiet dissenters and other groups try to listen to them. One just tries to shut up anyone who does not agree the other group attempts to listen to their concerns. I think we all know which one is more democratic.

By Danielle on Sep 7, 2008

“The sooner that you realize that your elected representatives are your voice”

Perhaps they were trying to share their thoughts with the person they could potentially elect to be their voice…

By Ksnddot on Sep 7, 2008

I don’t know what Obama “meeting” you are referring to (you give no reference to the place, date, or type of meeting) so it could very well have been a Q&A townhall type gathering where he was answering peoples questions anyway (for all I know). Whereas, McCain was giving a SPEECH before a nationally televised audience, not a townhall gathering, not a Q&A. It was HIS turn to talk. I saw that protester on tv (if it’s the same one you’re referring to), she has the right to assemble peaceably, but not to disturb the peace, which is what she was doing. Same goes for the protester at Obama’s meeting.

Besides, Obama probably didn’t have anything worth saying anyway, so he figured he’d let somebody else do the talking.

By Jerry on Sep 7, 2008

Can you please state what each protester said or was doing at each incident? I’d be interested to know.

By Jordan on Sep 7, 2008

The context in which the protests arose is very important here. Obama was faced with his in a town hall meeting, which are built around a give and take with the audience, while McCain was formally accepting his party’s nomination as a presidential candidate. Also the Obama hecklers had a point to make unlike Code Pink supporters who generally do nothing but yell and disrupt meetings that they are involved in.

By Jagger on Sep 7, 2008

Obama takes every opportunity to pose as a listener. He tilts his head and furrows his brow and then obfuscates his answer from the question or comment. His brand of socialism is “no no let him speak” OK finished? Now dig deep into your pocket while I tell you what’s good for you”. Of course now the cost is in the Trillion$ or for those of you who learn economics from Oprah that’s thousands of Billion$. What’s worse is it’s growing
McCain on the other hand says “This is our event, we paid for it and you won’t steal our time today. Go get your own event and market it and sell it like we did. We are not going to do it for you”.
I am glad the republicans started shouting as soon as the wackos started their static. It just drowns them out so they can be dragged away.
And just what does what the public at large mean anyway? Does it mean anything one side can get up the votes for? Or maybe just enough government reliance on programs A-Z so that it creates a constituency large enough to vote themselves a “thief in chief”. This class envy schtick is really old and obvious and not healthy for those who should move through the economic levels as most do during their lifetimes.

By Mark W on Sep 7, 2008

Toddnks – As this nation is a democratic republic, we, as citizens, are intended to be the ones who decide on who will represent us. This is generally done through discourse on the policies of those applying for the position of representative, followed by a vote by the populous, who tend to vote according to how persuasive each given candidate was in their arguments.

As neither Mr. McCain nor Mr. Obama are elected representatives yet – or at least, not for the office they are currently campaigning for – they are likewise not the official voice of the people. As such, the general populous is fully entitled to (and indeed, encouraged to) their questions, regardless of venue. Naturally, neither of the candidates in question are in any way obligated to answer such questions, but your comment about a democratic republic not supporting Mr. Obama’s “democracy in action” quote is invalid. Indeed, by the very definition of a democratic republic, he was speaking nothing but the truth.

By Keegan on Sep 7, 2008

Come on now. Obviously there is a HUGE difference between a meeting and ones acceptance speech at their party’s convention! Those are two completely different arenas with the meeting being much more open and laid back. Apples and Oranges my friend. Nice try though.

By jon doe on Sep 7, 2008

If you think that is a contrast, look at the protesters getting arrested for dancing in the streets. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUcb8d1hhQU

and here is a reporter getting arrested for asking why her crew was arrested. She had credentials, and was already on the floor of the convention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjElGHmCVlg

Amy Goodman

By Jim on Sep 7, 2008

Every 4 years the same politicians tell the same lies. And every 4 years the American public believes those same lies. Then, when they get elected and turn around and do the exact opposite of what they said they were going to do – we alllllll act surprised. Hmmmm… Remember “Read my lips: No New Taxes!!” (and the crowd goes wild) Or how about “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” But my favorite is, “Iraq has WMD’s and chemical weapons such as anthrax, etc.” Look up how many times Ron Paul flip-flopped on issues. “Honest” and “politician” should never be used in the same sentence – unless you are speaking of Dr. Ron Paul! wantToKnow.info ? No, you probably don’t.

By Mr X on Sep 7, 2008

People who attend these things uninvited tend to be on the extreme fringe of pretty much everything. Obama’s claim that giving the “microphone” to one of them is an example of democracy is wrong, unless he intends to give the mike to everyone else for an equal time. In doing so, he was assured of having an ignorant and embarrassing (to the other side) message being presented.

If everyone in the country who wanted to shout something were given the opportunity, it WOULD be static. This country more than almost any other provides avenues of expression and descent. Avenues. If everyone were allowed to drive anywhere without regard to roads, curbs or traffic direction, no one could move safely or get anywhere.

By Hugh Hemington on Sep 7, 2008

I think it’s McCain’s reaction that is the most disturbing. Sure they were in different venues and Obama was very appropriate for his context and that can’t be expected during an acceptance speech at a party’s convention.

But. There are a myriad of ways McCain could have responded that didn’t make it seem like he considers criticism to only be “ground noise and static.” I don’t think he should have said “Allow the man to speak,” but he certainly could have intoned that yes this is a democracy (or democratic republic or whatever) and that everyone has the right to protest. All that protester was doing was holding up a sign. He wasn’t yelling or heckling or anything. It was the ridiculous chants of “USA!” that stopped McCain’s speech. If he had acknowledged the man’s rights as an American instead of referring to him as mere static noise, I wouldn’t have been turned off at all.

It makes me wonder how McCain will respond to people’s criticism if he is elected. Will our patriotism be questioned again as it has been in recent years? It are his core beliefs and philosophies that worry me. That was the only moment in the speech that wasn’t scripted and rehearsed. That was McCain speaking from his heart.

By Farrell Ingle on Sep 8, 2008

“We the people…” what a crock? We the people are suckers. Every election politicians from all parties promise this or that and get into office and things are no different for most people. Lobbyist run the country and the more money your lobbying org has the more say you get. Any one who thinks otherwise is a fool. Neither McCain or Obama can or will eliminate lobbying all together but that is the only way “We the people” can mean anything. McCain supporters bash Obama all you like but McCain won’t rid Washington of lobbyists. Obama supporters bash McCain but he won’t do it either. Why do these guys need lobbying org around to tell them how to vote. They are elected as representatives to vote for what is best for the people they represent. But, that rarely happens. This is how earmarks have become so popular. I give the lobbyist what they want. Then, I slip in earmarks for my constituents back home to make them think I’m working for them in Washington. This is all a game and the party that plays the game the best wins. I’ll vote for Obama because I have to vote for somebody and the Republicans have had their 8 years and Haliburton and Big Oil have been the winners. Let’s see what company benefits from a Democratic presidency. Last time it was Computer Technology companies and startups which wasn’t too bad.

By Mr Y on Sep 8, 2008

Sorry Farrell Ingle, but you are incorrect. The chant of “USA” was to drown the yelling and screaming of the protester. If you TIVO’d it, you can go back and listen carefully, and you’ll notice occasionally that just before the “USA” chant, there is someone starting to incoherently yell. She was not JUST holding a sign. “USA” was being chanted by McCain supporters throughout the crowd, most likely near the protester as they heard her begin to holler. If you saw some of the newscasts later, there is some footage of security removing her from the building. Hopefully you’ll see that there was more to that situation than you first realized and won’t be so offended by his statement. But that’s for you to decide. Of course, your paragraph refers to the protester as ‘him’, so maybe you are thinking of the wrong protester.

By Jerry on Sep 9, 2008

I did see the woman, but I was referring to the guy standing in the balcony who held a sign that said “McCain votes against veterans.” Or some such thing.

It was hard to tell who the chants were referring to–they continued even after the woman was dragged off. My main issue was that McCain referred to protests as nothing more than “static.” I don’t think that is pretty low.

And to respond to protesters with chants of USA! USA! How hypocritical is that? This nation was built on wild protests and the freedom to be able to believe in anything you want. These past four years the administration has tried to make its constituents believe that to protest is to be anti-American. When really, to protest IS to be American. To think otherwise is close-minded and scary.

Of course the people attending the convention would boo anyone who protests their candidate–the same would’ve happened at an Obama speech. But I really don’t think Democratic supporters would yell USA! over and over.

By Farrell Ingle on Sep 9, 2008

Thanks for allowing me to comment. I normally don\’t leave them, but I really like what you had to say. This is important stuff!

By Political Humor on Sep 13, 2008

I agree with your post. Which is not something I will usually do! I enjoy reading a post that will make one think. Also, thanks for allowing me to comment!

By Political Humor on Sep 20, 2008

My problem is when activists freespeech downs out the voices and ability to listen of the less aggressive. When I was in School I was part of my universities associated students. There were a group of students who were angry about the 911 inside job conspiracy stuff so they came to all the meetings and clogged up the public comment section and then helkeled the rest of our meetings because we voted down their resolution. During all this protesting other students voices were shut out and our ability to tackle important issues was diminished.

Ability to express you opinions is an important part of liberty in this country, but it is a violation of others liberty when it drowns out their voices and ability to listen.

Featured at Goldwater: Wed Evening by Ryan

By Ryan on Oct 9, 2008

I hope you will agree that whoever wins the election they have to be an improvement on Bush

By Chris Hutcherson on Nov 1, 2008