Skip to main content

View Diary: Pro-Gun Activists Heckle Newtown Dad (32 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  see above (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KVoimakas, gerrilea, oldpunk

    His question was rhetorical, and comments to the contrary belong on the record, which will never include retorts from the gallery.
    Gallery commentary is against all rules of parliamentary procedure, bad form, and of no substantive value to the legislative process.

    •  Hey, if I misread that it was rhetorical than (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ER Doc, gerrilea, oldpunk

      that's on me.

      All that I've said is that it didn't sound rhetorical to me and if I was asked the question, I would respond.

      Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 08:51:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I understand that. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KVoimakas, oldpunk

        However, it's always good practice for The Chair to address the gallery at the start of the proceedings and state the rules.

        1) Witnesses called before the (name) will have (x) minutes to speak.

        2) Written expansion of comments (will / will not) be accepted into testimony.

        3) All testimony is given (freely / under oath).

        4) Comments from the gallery are unacceptable and will cause your removal or clearing of the room of all, other than credentialed press and witnesses.

        5) Persons wishing to address the (name) (may / may not) see the Clerk for inclusion as witnesses, as time permits.

        6) This hearing will adjourn at (time) unless unanimous consent of the (name) is given for additional testimony.

        7) Recesses will be granted by The Chair for due cause, not to exceed 15 minutes in duration.

        That two minute address starches the rules in place, affirms Open Meetings laws, and prevents chaos theory from taking hold.
    •  I agree and disagree here. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KVoimakas, oldpunk

      "the rules of parliamentary procedure" are meant to give good "copy" for the evening news.

      The Delphi Technique utilized.

      Why have a "public hearing" if the public will not be allowed to speak freely?  Say, when asked a question, answering it?

      Or in an orderly fashion, like one at a time?

      When the "public" hearing is contrived from the get-go, it's nothing more than manipulation and propaganda.

      The "substantive value" to the legislative process is that the legislature would then actually know where their constituents stand on any given topic that will effect them all.  Democracy in action.

      I see KV's point, I never watched the clip but it does sound like he actually was being rhetorical UNTIL he says, "see no one will answer me".

      I found that to be manipulation.  IF it was a rhetorical question, he wouldn't have added that final sentence.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 09:01:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree that the witness went off script. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, oldpunk

        However The Chair was correct, and that comment will never be entered into the official minutes of the proceedings.

        The good "copy" dates back to Gutenberg.

        I'm not dismissive of hearings being rigged for the presentation of a single viewpoint.

        I've seen the chair accept all sorts of derision from the gallery if it's in support of the pre-determined conclusion.

        Hypothetical:

        In this case, let's use:  "Babykiller!  Murderer!" as comments towards a witness from the NRA.

        The Chair responds with: "Continue or I'll conclude your testimony."

        The witness from the NRA starts talking again, and the comments now come from 6 people salted around the gallery.
        The first heckler escorted from the room by the Sergeant-at-Arms, directed by a waive of the wrist by The Chair.  "Babykiller!  Murderer!  Death merchant!"

        The witness becomes flustered.
        The Chair blusters at the witness, a second warning to move testimony along or be dismissed.
        Finally The Chair bangs the gavel, dismisses the witness, and has the S-A-A remove the six hecklers.

        In the words of GW Bush:  Mission Accomplished.

        Now we can look at that and say:  "unfair".  Yep.
        "rigged".  Maybe.  Damn good film and audio.

        The NRA witness had two opportunities to continue speaking, didn't (for good reason) and The Chair took punitive action against the heckler (1), and all sides (7).

        Headline:  NRA witness and seven anti-gun hecklers ejected from Committee Hearing.

        Looks like a landslide for the NRA, and despite the fact that was the only witness "for the opposition", the hearing will be viewed as Fair and Balanced.

        It's politics, and that's probably a good slogan for a propaganda machine.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site