someone throws a shoe at your head.

Funny, but rude.

Lets keep 'shouting while someone else is talking' a toddlers-only trait.

Interrupting is just plain rude.

In the 2000 campaign, Kristen Gore came to speak in my city. She was heckled mercilessly by some Green party advocates about her father's oil holdings. It was incredibly embarrassing.

So, too bad Michelle was put in that sort of spot but she handled it well and in her way. Her husband handles hecklers well too, but in quite a different way.

Heckle away, but be prepared for the stare down right in your face and drying your undies shortly after.

""Don't start nothin', there won't be nothin"

there was a raging debate over the code pink people who went after Condi.

But I agree, she handles it well. Laura Bush would not have. And Ann Rmoney, we can only imagine.

I never participated in Laura bush bashing ... I am somewhat uncomfortable "bashing," heckling, rudeness directed toward family members of public figures .... solely base on the fact that they are "family'

If they say or do something untoward.... then I may (or will) criticize, bash or heckle ... in the absence of poor behavior I don't think it is appropriate.

I positively detested Ann Romney .... but, my disgust was based solely on what she said and did.

And I was a part of it at times.

Good for you you didn't participate - I wish I would have avoided jumping on the hate bandwagon toward her. She had enough of her own troubles being married to that mass murdering idiot without my stones being thrown at her.

(in reference to accusations she was constantly stoned on Valium) .... i would have to be drugged to be married to that jack-ass

There's more than just that one, loud mouthed, arrogant, SOB in the room who wants to get his or her name in the news.

Her role is ceremonial and she has no political power, so it's just plain rude to heckle her. Go after all the politicians you want. Leave the First Lady and the kids be.

from their freedom to hear the speech they came to hear.

The arrogant SOB heckler was discriminating against the others who were present to hear a speech on another topic.

married lesbian couple, who didn't have any problem whatsoever tossing the disruptor out on her ass.

So there's that.

If the First Lady makes a statement on policy, then you can heckle her if you disagree with that policy.

That would be in bounds IMHO.

I think we also have to say that a discriminated-against group also has the right to protest and heckle anywhere and anytime.

smh

there was a lot of talk about the right to free speech. It was said that the lady had the right to say what she wishes when she wished. You don't exercise your right to free speech by taking away the rights of others. Obama has her right to free speech AND all the other people in the room who paid $500 a head had the right to hear her. This lady was taking away their rights with her actions.

Give the lady her free speech when it's her turn, that's fine; no one is taking that away. But she was getting in the way of other people expressing theirs and that is not fine.

Also, she did nothing but harm to her cause as far as I can see. And Michele is a kick ass lady! That's something I like! I just wish her husband had a little more of that where congress is concerned. On the other hand, he has his own style of dealing with the public and I think that is pretty cool.

She didn't get arrested, did she? It was a private event, not a public one, and the organizers have every right to control the behavior of attendees. See what happens when you try to talk on the phone at a Broadway show. No difference.

But either way, it works!

Ha... Broadway show reference is good! Memorable post.

Let's go with "being supportive".

when the time comes that it is not done, then we will truly know we are in Big Brother land.

is suddenly not so popular.

years ago.

Who here is saying the woman didn't have a right to speak? Nobody, that's who. That said, she thought her spending $500 to attend entitled her to ruin the evening for all the others who spent the same $500. She was rude and inappropriate. I have my issues also - I don't shit all over everyone around me to get them heard.

is not required to live in the WH, give speeches, attend state functions etc. I'm glad modern first ladies have made the most of the opportunity though.

And a little heckling is a big nothing when you know there are 1000's of people on any given day that are planning ways to hurt your kids or kill someone you love. Every first lady in my lifetime is certainly strong enough to handle a heckler.

And this First Lady was no different. She handled the heckler, and yet people are pissing and moaning about that fact.

I'm sure it's not because they despise her and hate her husband or anything...

In the case of this one, its not that the reason isn't good, per se, but that the request was stupidly unreasonable.

Obama shouldn't sign an executive order about discrimination while the supreme court is in the process of ruling on a nearly identical issue. It would be bad form in a number of ways, and could even result in DOMA being left to stand, rather than being struck down by court decision as is proper.

The EO and the DOMA decision are not one and the same. I'm not sure why people are conflating the two.

In this case, I don't personally believe it was appropriate.

I don't care if it's rude or not.

If someone heckled Laura Bush 6 years ago, this would be a non-issue here. But since it happened to Michelle Obama, it's not okay.

and she's there as a private citizen, so no.

She can't issue executive orders by herself and her husband knows the constitutional limitations on them, so that heckler was SOL on all fronts.

Let's hope she found some books and started reading once she was escorted out.

And for the record, I was just as against anyone heckling Laura Bush. Same reasons.

The first rule of civility is to listen to what the other person has to say.
If you don't agree with what they are saying, don't interrupt them, be an adult and either sit there and wait until they are done talking, or get up and leave.

The First Lady is not an elected official.
So, interrupting her is just being rude.

End of story.

...at your child's birthday party? Your mother's funeral? Can I crash your wedding to express my views on Japanese whaling?

Just how thick do you have to be to amass 15k posts here and still fail to appreciate that "FREE SPEECH" simply means that the government cannot enact laws limiting speech.

That part's pretty much settled, and the poll results would be much different had the question asked whether she should be prosecuted.

The question had to do with "proper", and whether such a heckling is within the bounds of acceptable societal norms. Much different.

at funerals, it's all free speech.

of the Phelps clan to do exactly what they do. I support the right of the Klan, the Tea Party, and every other ugly group in America to exercise their Constitutionally guaranteed right to Free Speech.

And as an American, you should too.

Doesn't mean it should be illegal or anything, though.

Granted, at a private event, you should probably expect to be booted when you decide to heckle a speaker, regardless of who it is.

I would have done what Michelle did in a heartbeat. I'm like that.

Regardless of venue.

publicity to the cause being touted. It makes the heckler(s) look like they are a bunch of bullying sandbaggers.

It's not good to do it to Michelle Obama any more than it was good to do it to Laura Bush or Pat Nixon.

Why? Because the First Lady does not make policy, is not a member of Congress and cannot participate in the crafting of laws, and she doesn't get paid a dime for four to eight years of involuntary, indentured servitude. Her (and so far, it's still just her) agenda is a very limited portfolio that focuses on families and children, improving the health of Americans, and cures for diseases.

and leave the fund raising to the pros.

She is out there because she is popular and brings in the dough, you don't just get the benefits, downside comes with the package. She is acting as a politician regardless of her actual duties, which are none by law.

distinction and a difference.

What you're saying, basically, is that if you support someone in their political efforts, that you "deserve" to have some asshole confront you verbally and interrupt you while you are discussing an issue near and dear to your heart, that you've been INVITED to speak about to a crowd of people who are donating to the political effort that you support.

By your "logic"--and I use that word advisedly, if it's "OK" to heckle Mrs. Obama, it should have been "OK" for Shoeboy of Iraq to crack Laura Bush upside the head with two tasseled loafers.

See, I am just so sick of this READY - FIRE - AIM bullshit that way too many so-called Democrats and so-called Liberals and so-called Progressives are shopping WRT this issue.

I'd like to see these so-called "activists" get their so-called active asses out and give Boehner a piece of their minds....but they never do. NEVER. They don't DARE. They're AFRAID. He's got thugs backing him up; they might get a bruise or two instead of simply having a crowd of people who came to see the FLOTUS, not some loudmouth jerk, say "Get the fuck out, asshole."

But hey, it's just DANDY for these "Heroes of the Revolution" to screw with the unelected wife of the President, who supports Equality....no biggie for them. Easy, cheap publicity. And no BRAVERY either.

You can color me UNIMPRESSED.

Nothing else to say!

There's yer problem right there, bub.

That'll be $200 bucks.

Whether it's these people interrupting Michelle's speech, or how the GITMO protesters were at UC Berkeley heckling Eric Holder. The people who they should be directing their attention to are on Capitol Hill. The people in Congress (Republicans in particular) are the ones who deserve to be heckled for impeding the closure of GITMO and being slow to get into the 21st century regarding gay rights, among a whole assortment of issues. It's almost like a disease where so many people on the Left forget about the checks-and-balances system and believe that the executive branch has control over everything. It's a big reason why liberal turnout tends to be lower in midterm elections than national elections. Furthermore, the First Lady doesn't even have any control over policy, anyway. A First Lady is not the person who signs and vetoes bills.

and the First Lady was publicly defending it - I would not oppose heckling under such an extreme situation. If the First Lady was a self-declared enemy of LGBT people - I would not have opposed it at this meeting. But neither of these situations were the case at this DNC fundraiser. .

She actively campaigns and fundraises for the Democratic Party. Despite not being elected, she possesses a great deal of influence, which she uses in doing said campaigning and fundraising. So I don't think the "private citizen" approach is valid.

Now I could buy the argument that it's rude and inappropriate to yell at someone, or to interrupt someone. However, I could definitely imagine times when I would be so angry at a political figure (George W. Bush comes to mind) that I'd forgive and perhaps encourage anyone who yelled at him. In a way, the powerless and excluded probably feel that's their only way of getting their message out.

So I'm having trouble coming up with a content-neutral opinion (one that doesn't depend on whether I respect or disrespect the person being interrupted). I'll simply say that I understand the frustration that many gay activists feel about this administration, and the urge to make sure their causes are heard in any non-violent way possible.

it's not civil, it's not standard behavior, but it's certainly ok to heckle the first lady as a protest or communication from the public.

The Queen, the Pope, the Obamas, Tom Cruise, Kim Kardashian - it doesn't matter who it is. Unfortunately, some people end up public figures without having any say in the matter (Caroline Kennedy and JFK, Jr. for example) but the vast majority do so willingly and need to deal with the consequences. There is never a proper time or place to protest. Some protests are more effective than others but by nature, they are intended to incite. I generally like the First Lady but she is correct in her assessment that there are parts of the job that make it such that she has to do things that she doesn't do well. Dealing with hecklers is obviously one of those things. I wouldn't defend or vilify either the FLOTUS or the protester - they both acted with motivations that made sense for them given what they wanted to accomplish. Neither may have made the best choice - I don't know and it doesn't much matter as this will blow over rather quickly but I'm not willing to turn any public figure into a sacred cow.

Heckling is not "free speech" it is just rude. Shouting someone down does little to advance one's cause. That said, if you present yourself as a representative of a group/position, then the possibility of being "heckled" is going to real. I support protesting and civil disobedience, but I don't see heckling as either of those.

I think that's misguided, but I don't think it's a moral or ethical or legal wrong.

heckler is heckling about.

The question is whether it was appropriate to heckle the FLOTUS in the venue in question, and the answer is no, it was neither appropriate nor effective, she did her cause harm by heckling the FLOTUS there, and she ought to have known that. Heckling is not some sort of bludgeon that one can use in a slapdash way and expect it to be effective.

In that case, I would say no. Unless she asks. Then I'd tickle away. But I can't image she would ask. Unless she is into that sort of thing. Not that there is anything wrong wrong with that. Either way, no tickling.

I also think option #1 is relevant. The First Lady isn't an elected politician, and I think deserves the respect of not being heckled.

I'm sensitive to people interrupting President Obama, because it has been done in a disrespectful manner at inappropriate times (SOTU and while giving a press announcement). On the other hand, I realize people do have a right to speak up.

It's a tough call, but I do believe Michelle Obama has worked hard to earn the respect of the American people, and since she's not elected and doesn't decide policy, I think she should be off limits to some degree.

Like it or not she is a public figure especially if she's out there raising money.

I know the truth hurts but it will set you free.

ETA: AT least some of us are free and not 2nd class citizens. Oh how some seem to have short term memories.

PB

If it were Laura Bush would this even be a question?

If you choose to heckle and interrupt, don't clutch your pearls and try to play victim when you get called out.

But if you do, then be prepared to have your ass handed back to you. I think Michelle Obama did the right thing.

...I could see it as an option at some point. Knowing the first lady has the ear of the president.. It depends on how evil the policy in question is.... It would not be the preferred course of action.

It's up to the organizers of the event to screen and exclude disruptive guests.

Maybe not illegal, but improper, rude, etc.

Not sure why this is so tricky for people to get.

You can heckle Nancy Reagan on drug policy, but not saving the rain forest.

You can heckle Michelle Obama on her nutrition program, but not gay rights. Especially since she's actually on the same side as the hecklers to begin with.

And heckling of this sort should be reserved only for when you're being denied a place at the table in the debate. This was not the case here.

The protest worked. It raised awareness of this ENDA issue, and the question of a possible executive order. I had never heard of the issue before this protest.

Also I'm not sure this should be called "heckling"

I think of heckling as disrupting gratuitously just to be mean or to harass somebody.

Making a scene as an act of political protest is a cool thing to do if it is for some kind of good cause.

n/t

If you asked whether it is OK to challenge the First Lady for public statements then I'd likely reply "yes, under any circumstances." When I consider heckling in that context, I feel the same way-- if the heckling is to challenge an assertion, or an assumption, or a conclusion that seems inappropriate then those sorts of things should ALWAYS be open to challenge in an open society. Heckling just to be impolite is, well, impolite. But no one should be above challenge. Ever. And anyone who expects to be above challenge is automatically intellectually dishonest, in my estimation.

AND she wasn't even speaking on the subject the heckler yelled at her about!

Heckling is about getting 15 mins of fame and your name and hopefully pic in the news.

As it should be.