George,

I think it says a lot about a President when you have to vet the people who come to your pep rallies, and it says even more about that candidate when his staff threatens a man with arrest for practicing his First Amendment rights. Kudos to Glenn Hiller for exercising his First Amendment rights. The only thing is, in a truly free America, he shouldn't have needed to lose his job and been threatened with arrest by the President's campaign aides for speaking his mind. And what's even worse is that nobody cares. This is the United States of America, you know, and we're supposed to have something called the First Amendment.

It's funny how the people who have heckled John Kerry at his rallies haven't been threatened with arrest or lost their jobs. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I also haven't heard of John Kerry's campaign vetting the people who come to his rallies. I'd like a President who can stare criticism straight in the face, not run from it.

There's no way I'm voting for a candidate who has to vet the people who come to his rallies. That says all too much about a man's character if he can't stand up to criticism. Such a person doesn't deserve to be President in my opinion. Why does Bush and the Republican Party feel it needs to do vet the people coming to their rallies? What are they afraid of? Being criticized in public?

I don't like surrounding myself with people who agree with me all of the time. You learn nothing new if you keep hearing the same old thing repeated back to you. Criticism stimulates me. Besides, yes-men are spineless and make me ill.

Anyone in public office is going to be criticized publicly several times during his or her career. Elected office is not a place for wimps, and it's certainly no place for those who are afraid of people exercising their First Amendment rights in their presence.

If you can't take the First Amendment, get out of the Presidency, bub.

- Joseph Cheek, (electronic mail, August 24, 2004)