Activist Cindy Sheehan Arrested at Capitol

[Verto]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Cindy Sheehan has once again usurped the President on what was supposed to be his day to give his vision to the country.

Well done.

Please, she's a has been news story desperately trying to stay in the limelight.

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Ming


Yep... the repugs played right into her hands.

They should have just ignored her, and this would have been a non story. Instead... morons.

No, she would have done something at the speech. She's not that level headed to express calm when her target is less than 50 feet away.

[SlowwHand]

Protests are not on the agenda. It goes both ways.

Capitol Police arrest antiwar activist Sheehan
Republican congressman’s wife also removed for ‘Support the Troops’ shirt

NBC News and news services
Updated: 11:20 a.m. ET Feb. 1, 2006


WASHINGTON - Cindy Sheehan, mother of a fallen soldier in Iraq, wasn’t the only one ejected from the House gallery during the State of the Union address for wearing a T-shirt with a war-related slogan that violated the rules. The wife of a powerful Republican congressman was also asked to leave.

Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Florida — chairman of the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee — was removed from the gallery because she was wearing a T-shirt that read, “Support the Troops — Defending Our Freedom.”

“Because she had on a shirt that someone didn’t like that said support our troops, she was kicked out of this gallery,” Young said on the House floor Wednesday morning, holding up the gray shirt.

“Shame, shame,” he scolded.

Mrs. Young was sitting about six rows from first lady Laura Bush and asked to leave. She argued with police in the hallway outside the House chamber.

“They said I was protesting,” she told the St. Petersburg Times. “I said, ‘Read my shirt, it is not a protest.’ They said, ‘We consider that a protest.’ I said, ‘Then you are an idiot.”’

They told her she was being treated the same as Sheehan, a protester ejected before the speech Tuesday night for wearing a T-shirt with an antiwar slogan. Sheehan wrote in her blog Wednesday that she intends to file a First Amendment lawsuit.

“I don’t want to live in a country that prohibits any person, whether he/she has paid the ultimate price for that country, from wearing, saying, writing, or telephoning any negative statements about the government,” Sheehan wrote.


Capitol Police took Sheehan, invited as a guest of Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., away in handcuffs and charged her with unlawful conduct, a misdemeanor. She later was released on her own recognizance.

Capitol Police Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said police warned her that such displays were not allowed in the House chamber, but Sheehan did not respond.

Woolsey gave Sheehan her only ticket earlier in the day — Gallery 5, seat 7, row A — while Sheehan was attending an “alternative state of the union” news conference by CODEPINK, a group pushing for an end to the Iraq war.

In her blog, Sheehan wrote that her T-shirt said, “2245 Dead. How many more?” — a reference to the number of soldiers killed in Iraq.

She said she felt uncomfortable about attending the speech.

“I knew George Bush would say things that would hurt me and anger me and I knew that I couldn’t disrupt the address because Lynn had given me the ticket,” Sheehan wrote. “I didn’t want to be disruptive out of respect for her.”

She said she had one arm out of her coat when an officer yelled, “Protestor.”

“He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs,” she wrote. She was then cuffed and driven to police headquarters a few blocks away.

“I was never told that I couldn’t wear that shirt into the Congress,” Sheehan wrote. “I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things...I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later.”

Sheehan was arrested in September with about 300 other anti-war activists in front of the White House after a weekend of protests against the war in Iraq. In August, she spent 26 days camped near Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he was spending a working vacation.

The Associated Press and NBC News’ Sarah Blackwill contributed to this report

[Arrian]

Maybe that would've been interesting, at least. The SotU sucks ass. Talk for 10 seconds, applause, talk for 10 seconds, applause... rinse, repeat. It's awful.

I really wish we did it the way the Brits do.

"Would the honorable gentleman from Texas please explain why he looks quite a bit like a Chimp and cannot manage to speak in coherent sentences?"

-Arrian

[SlowwHand]

It's your comprehension skills, not a lack of coherency on his part.

Then again, when he said "You're against us or with us" and "Terrorism wherever it's found" somehow went misunderstood. Pretty plain to me.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


It'd be interesting to see how the rule she broke (if any) gets around the First Amendement. What compelling governmental interest would be furthered by banning T-Shirts with slogans??

Or are all T-Shirts banned. Or all T-Shirts with writing on them. How 'bout with cartoon characters? Or cartoons of George Bush standing on mountains of dead babies?? Rules banning speech are tough.

Imran, are you still awake? What do you think of this?

I'd like to know how the government can violate the first amendment, as well.

[SlowwHand]

Through misinterpretation by people, same as separation of church and state.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
It's your comprehension skills, not a lack of coherency on his part.

Then again, when he said "You're against us or with us" and "Terrorism wherever it's found" somehow went misunderstood. Pretty plain to me.

Those are pretty clear, albeit the "with us or against us" line is silly in its own way.

You know damn well that the Pres is a terrible speaker. It's impossible to miss that. Even if you're Sloww...

-Arrian

[SlowwHand]

Hey, but I like how he licks his lips when he's pissed. Reminds me of my grandfather. That's the only way anyone would know he was bothered.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Through misinterpretation by people, same as separation of church and state.

Nah -- the government knows that it is deliberately violating the first amendment.

Of course, certain naive people might think that the government would never do anything wrong, deliberately.

[Mao]

Originally posted by PLATO
I think Cindy Sheehan missed the boat. The House rules are very clear on any form of demonstration in the gallery. She would have gotten more mileage out of the 10 second shot of her while Bush was talking about Iraq.

Hmmm...what's the definition of "demonstrating"? The dress code thing I can understand, and she was probably clearly violating a semi-formal dress code if there is one in place, but what exactly is demonstrating? Just standing there? Who decides? What if people in the gallery all wore blue one day because they support a cause, is that "demonstrating"? Or those Lance Armstrong yellow bracelets? I'm curious as to what extent one has to go to to be "demonstrating."

[Winston]

Edit: Oh. This should have been in the State of the Union thread. Oh well, nobody will listen anyway..

I like when he leans across the bar, I mean pulpit, to make sure people know he's being serious.

I've watched a decent amount of his speeches, and while he does frequently seem close to stumbling on the words, the overall impression I get is clearly one of an above average political speaker.

His press conferences and campaign debates are a different matter. But as a Presidential speaker, he passes muster.

[MrFun]

I will be impressed when presidents go back to actually writing their own speeches rather than just be a mouthpiece for other writers.

[SlowwHand]

Name one.

And you can get in line with those not understanding the Constitution.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Name one.

And you can get in line with those not understanding the Constitution.

So according to the Constitution, the first amendment can be disregarded at the whim of the government??