NEWS: Cheney forces event attendees to sign loyalty oath

Not illegal, but if that were a representative of *MY* political party... I'd seriously wonder what they were afraid of.

wussies.

you don't have to wonder, they came out and said it. They're afraid of assholes coming in and disrupting the event.

Yes. Thank you. Exactly.

Then why not make it an invitation only event? Do you really think this is the first time in recorded history that there have been problems with hecklers?

Sorry, but this is simply retarded. Its byzantine, ineffectual, and really fucking creepy. Its like the Masons meets the Cultural Revolution.

It reminds me of the Jehova's Witness' buildings with either no windows or shuttered-windows all the way closed. Nothing sinister is probably going on, but it does leave room for wondering just what the blazes people are doing on the inside. And hey, it's not like they won't let us watch it on TV without signing a document stating that we'll vote for Bush. No need to worry, kidlets and kidletettes.

I see the relevance as well.

I think maybe the correct phrase would be "how much support he has"... Even republicans are now calling for Bush to dump Cheney. Bush still has alot of respect (and, oddly, so does Tom Ridge) - but Cheney is now seen by many on both sides as the evil mastermind of this bullshit that's screwing with our world right now.
But even with that said, I'm sure I would be amazed at how much support and respec Cheney has.

so you have to sign it in blood right?

Frank said:

Yes, but this rally was to be held in the auditorium of a public school building. So not only are they cutting off access to an "elected" official, but also to a building paid for by local taxpayers. If it was being held at a country club, your argument would be valid...

Ummmmm, you DO know that your access to public schools is limited every single day, right?
You're not allowed to just walk on in, you need to sign in at the front desk. You're not allowed to walk into classrooms without permission etc...

Really, you have no angle here. Buildings that are paid for by the taxpayers are limited from public access all the time.

Hey, I didn't say I thought it was a particularly *good* solution, I was merely speaking to the claims that it was without purpose or justification.