Posted on 01/24/2012 8:21:28 AM PST by Bigtigermike
Newt Gingrich insists his fans will not be silenced.
Mr. Gingrich, a former House speaker, on Tuesday morning threatened not participate in any future debates with audiences that have been instructed to be silent. That was the case on Monday, when Brian Williams of NBC News asked the audience of about 500 people who assembled for a debate in Tampa to hold their applause until the commercial breaks.
In an interview with the morning show “Fox and Friends,” Mr. Gingrich said NBC’s rules amounted to stifling free speech. In what has become a standard line of attack for his anti-establishment campaign, Mr. Gingrich blamed the media for trying to silence a dissenting point of view.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Of course people have the right to cheer on their candidate. That doesn’t mean it’s appropriate in every setting.
“The Media ARE SUPPOSED TO BE FOR ALL OF US.”
Says who? Media can spin things anyway they wish (and often do!). There is no constitutional requirement that they even report facts, as long as they do not run afoul of slander or libel.
“When they place rules, they are stifling free speech and representing only those they want to have win. (in this case obama)”
The hosts of debates can place any rules they wish even if in favor of any candidate they wish.
Asking the audience to keep quiet is not unusual in debate-type forums.
I agree. Have a cozy little round table. It would be more personal and would work with only 4 candidates now.
The big silent audience was just odd and creepy.
It doesn’t matter what Newt said. It’s the issue: Freedom of Speech.
It’s up to WE THE PEOPLE to do something. Speak out, File suit against the MSM, what ever it takes to draw the line.
The Liberal media should be given notice: We are not going to sit back silently and take it from them anymore. WE, the silent majority, need to find our voice.
IF NOT NOW, WHEN? Florida Freepers, Freep!
>> ... would you or would you not support a rule against audience participation?
With the implication that I’m Newt cheerleader indifferent to fair play? Nice try.
P.S. This is typical tyrannical behavior by the extreme left-wingers. It’s beent hat way for decades. Whena dictator speaks the applause goes on for minutes as no one wants to be the first to stop applauding for fear of being singled out and killed. If someone else speaks no one is allowed to applaud for the same reason.
Here you are wanting no one to applaud for Republicans, citing “rules”. Well, those are the same rules tyrants use to control their populace.
We will not be silenced!
I’m not a lawyer, so I have no idea the basis for such a lawsuit.
I just know that were you and I in that audience, we wouldn’t have played by NBC’s anti-free speech, robot rules.
I know we would have stood to shout and applaud every answer given by Newt and booed all of Romney’s attacks.
Had we been removed, then ... lawsuit, you betcha!
The audience erred in going along to get along. They out-numbered Brian Willaims and all of security on the scene.
Those well-mannered folks just needed a couple of rebels! I’m pretty much surprised, given the location: Tampa.
Must have been too many Yankees in that otherwise Southern audience! LOL.
Exactly. Brian and NBC know that Newt will attack the media and that he always gets applause when he does so.
People hate the media almost as much as they hate congress and Obama. Maybe more.
Because we know that without the media’s protection and support, Obama would never have been elected.
Their double standard is egregious and Newt should continue to call them on it.
your analogy is flawed.. if Gingrich was going to pull a Reagan he would have raised hell last night right on the stage like Reagan did at the time... THAT was what made it special not waiting a day later and then threatening to not show up in the next debate unless he got his way.. the way Gingrich did it this morning looked bad.. evidently you didn’t see it
you never would have heard Ronald Reagan whine the day after about taking his toys and going home if he didn’t get his way.. it would have been negotiated behind the scenes not out in front of the cameras the next day...NEVER
“I paid for this microphone.”
Why do people always think they know what Reagan would do?
Whether or not a speaker is inspirational is not something that is “valid” or “invalid.” It is a matter of opinion.
And my opinion is based on Newt’s history and the conduct of this campaign.
NO ONE would even give Newt a second’s look until we were all out of other choices. Why? Because he’s not inspirational.
Revving people up in a “hit him again, Joey” way is not inspirational, in my view.
There are no memorable soundbites from any of those long hours Newt droned on in previous years. Nothing wrong with that. But, in my view, that’s evidence that he’s not an inspiring speaker.
Finally, the fact that one can deliver a speech without a teleprompter doesn’t equal “inspiring,” either. LOTS of people can do that; in fact, most people in “speaking fields” can. But inspiration comes from ideas and the ability to paint them in words. Simply speaking without a teleprompter doesn’t necessarily get you there.
“”or better yet they are going to use this thread as a bug zapper.””
That possibility was beginning to dawn on me as well, in between trying to get folks to stop and listen to the clip, or read a transcript...
Ya know, Newt was NOT my first choice, but good Lord, with what we have left, IMHO he is our best shot, and I often reflect on how God gives imperfect people the opportunity to redeem themselves, and I find myself praying daily that not only is this Newt’s chance, but that we can prove our mettle in helping him.
May God guide our course.
Tatt
Is Newt or any of the other candidates “paying for this microphone”?
Moderator : Sit there and be quite, no applauding.
Audience : Okay
Goverment : Sit there and be quite until we ruin the country
People : Okay
Exactly.
Newt didn't threaten to take "his toys and go home" and your characterization that Newt was "whining" is your own.
Lib-Licker Laps-up Lib NYT Lies.
Point is that the audience did NOT follow the rules, there were plenty of noise from the audience. They were NOT removed.
The rule only applied to those NBC wanted to silence. Even a threat of a lawsuit would stop this media manipulation. If we don’t draw the line now, when?
No one yells fire, no conservaative has ever tried to out yell the moderators or candidates. The “rule” is against the law!
Exactly. Brian and NBC know that Newt will attack the media and that he always gets applause when he does so.
People hate the media almost as much as they hate congress and Obama. Maybe more.
Because we know that without the media’s protection and support, Obama would never have been elected.
Their double standard is egregious and Newt should continue to call them on it.
THAT’S IT! BULLSEYE!
Really?
That’s pathetic to view the presidential debates as a sporting match.
That pretty much vindicates Ann Coulter’s point, sorry to say.
Sure. The political debate format is a argumentative rhetorical form directly descended from the legal trial by way of the policy debate (aka: competitive academic debate), complete with presentation of evidence, rebuttals, cross examination and summaries.
That's like saying "ALL" and it's always wrong. I was for Newt Gingrich, long before most here.
I find his speeches inspirational, and you don't. That's also a matter of opinion, but that doesn't make yours valid or mine invalid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.