Replies

"Mr. Franken's conduct was disorderly, but the heckler doesn't have a right to filibuster either."

I'm sorry, correct me if I'm wrong but i didn't think that "heckling" had been omitted from Freedom Of Speech.

As far as I can tell dissenting views showing up at the opponents rally or stum speech has been going on as long as there's been politics. It's part of the process.

Can you imagine if this had been a Bush rally and someone like Sean hannity had tackled a heckler? Or Dennis Miller had punched someone in the mouth for speaking up against the Persident at a rally? The media would be all OVER this! But infortuneately, like the story of Hillary's Secret Service detail ruffing up some people who disagreed with her at an event she was at. This will get no play in the media farther than what it has already.

Can you imagine if this had been a Bush rally and someone like Sean hannity had tackled a heckler?

I will be the last person to argue that a conservative would get an even break from journalists.
That does not change the fact that if everyone talks and no one is able to hear the person they are there to listen to, there is really no speech at all. Now if you as the speaker are able to put the heckler in his place with a verbal barb and shut him up, that is a win and you should do so. But if the police allow someone to prevent you from being heard when you deliver your scheduled speech, the ghost of Krystalnacht is abroad in the land.
I don't have the right to make you listen to me, but you don't have the right to prevent others from listening to me, either. The crucial distinction is the will of the listener, when that is patent--as assuredly it is in the case of an audience which has voluntarily gathered to hear a particular speaker. Our problem with the entertainment media is just that it makes so much noise that we have trouble burning through with what we want ~~to say~~ people to hear. But that doesn't give us the right to scribble our own message on the newspapers in the newsstands.