quade 4 #26 February 1, 2006 Quote Yeah, you'll say I'm making excuses, but there is a time and place for people to rant and rave... and the SOTU isn't it. People have lost their sense of decorum, and would probably be taken more seriously if they hadn't. Yes, because I'm almost certain that during President Clinton's State of the Union addresses nobody on the right side of the aisle ever actually booed him. Please. President Bush and his staff are total control freeks when it comes to giving speeches. This t-shirt episode is symptomatic of a larger issue with him being insulated against dissenting opinions. Yeah, yeah . . . I'm only helping the terrorists by saying this . . . get a grip folks.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #27 February 1, 2006 Ypou are missing the point. Both were removed because they wore something that was inappropriate for the SOTU Speech. Had someone worn a "Fuck You Mother Fucking Fuckers", they would have been asked to leave also. It has nothing to do with a dissenting opinion as you previously claimed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #28 February 1, 2006 It has to do with THE MAN. Its always about THE MAN. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #29 February 1, 2006 QuoteQuote Yeah, you'll say I'm making excuses, but there is a time and place for people to rant and rave... and the SOTU isn't it. People have lost their sense of decorum, and would probably be taken more seriously if they hadn't. Yes, because I'm almost certain that during President Clinton's State of the Union addresses nobody on the right side of the aisle ever actually booed him. Please. President Bush and his staff are total control freeks when it comes to giving speeches. This t-shirt episode is symptomatic of a larger issue with him being insulated against dissenting opinions. Yeah, yeah . . . I'm only helping the terrorists by saying this . . . get a grip folks. Yes, and when they booed Clinton it was wrong too. Do you think it was OK because "the Republicans did it too (something inappropriate)." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #30 February 1, 2006 QuoteIt has to do with THE MAN. Its always about THE MAN. More like Sticking it to THE MAN. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #31 February 1, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote I managed to listen for about 10 minutes, but I got tired of the endless interruptions to clap for the cameras. Because it appears as if dissenting opionions are not allowed. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html It really doesn't matter to me what Sheehan's impact may or may not have been, but she had ever right to be there and had every right to wear something that indicated her views. You do know that a Florida Congressmans wife was also removed for wearing a " Support the Troops Defending Our Freedom" T-Shirt, don't you? Another attempted bash, torpedoed......................... Interestingly enough, Sheehan was charged with a crime for wearing her shirt. The Republican congressman's wife was not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #32 February 1, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote I managed to listen for about 10 minutes, but I got tired of the endless interruptions to clap for the cameras. Because it appears as if dissenting opionions are not allowed. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html It really doesn't matter to me what Sheehan's impact may or may not have been, but she had ever right to be there and had every right to wear something that indicated her views. You do know that a Florida Congressmans wife was also removed for wearing a " Support the Troops Defending Our Freedom" T-Shirt, don't you? Another attempted bash, torpedoed......................... Interestingly enough, Sheehan was charged with a crime for wearing her shirt. The Republican congressman's wife was not. I seriously doubt the Capital Police have a political agenda. It's more likely Sheehan got in their face and started screaming about her Civil Rights and the Congressmans wife left gracefully. Police do have discretion in making an arrest or not in many situations. I've always found if I treat the police with respect, they're cooler with me than some loudmouth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #33 February 1, 2006 QuoteYes, because I'm almost certain that during President Clinton's State of the Union addresses nobody on the right side of the aisle ever actually booed him. So should we or shouldn't we use other people's past actions as an excuse for us doing something? The dems got their chance to hoot and holler with the mention of voting down the SS reform bill. So let's say that negates the booing from the past. (If you want to really use that logic, anyway) QuotePresident Bush and his staff are total control freeks when it comes to giving speeches. This t-shirt episode is symptomatic of a larger issue with him being insulated against dissenting opinions. Do you really think that Bush told the security people to kick anyone out that disagrees with him? Almost 40% of congress despises the man and you think he is insulated from hearing dissent? Really? That's a good stretch. If people want to be taken seriously, they should act decently. Sure, ranting and screeching like many activists (and some politicians) do will get you some media attention here and there, but no one will take you seriously. And still, BOTH ladies may have been escorted out because they were wearing t-shirts, which I would think is inappropriate for such an occasion. Until proven otherwise, it makes as much, if not more sense than your "control freak" argument.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #34 February 1, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote I managed to listen for about 10 minutes, but I got tired of the endless interruptions to clap for the cameras. Because it appears as if dissenting opionions are not allowed. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html It really doesn't matter to me what Sheehan's impact may or may not have been, but she had ever right to be there and had every right to wear something that indicated her views. You do know that a Florida Congressmans wife was also removed for wearing a " Support the Troops Defending Our Freedom" T-Shirt, don't you? Another attempted bash, torpedoed......................... Interestingly enough, Sheehan was charged with a crime for wearing her shirt. The Republican congressman's wife was not. I seriously doubt the Capital Police have a political agenda. It's more likely Sheehan got in their face and started screaming about her Civil Rights and the Congressmans wife left gracefully. Police do have discretion in making an arrest or not in many situations. I've always found if I treat the police with respect, they're cooler with me than some loudmouth. You make a lot of unsubstantiated presumptions. Sheehan was asked to cover up the shirt; she simply peacefully declined and was escorted out. She was charged with "unlawful conduct." Mrs. Young (the Repub congressman's wife) was also asked to leave, and outside in the corridor she called an officer "an idiot" to his face. She was not charged. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #35 February 1, 2006 QuoteYou make a lot of unsubstantiated presumptions. Sheehan was asked to cover up the shirt; she simply peacefully declined and was escorted out. She was charged with "unlawful conduct." Mrs. Young (the Repub congressman's wife) was also asked to leave, and outside in the corridor she called an officer "an idiot" to his face. She was not charged. And you do a lot of selective reading: Quote 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. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11120353/ So she was warned not to wear the shirt and did so anyway. The Police main responsibility was to resolve the problem in the Chamber. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #36 February 1, 2006 QuoteQuoteYou make a lot of unsubstantiated presumptions. Sheehan was asked to cover up the shirt; she simply peacefully declined and was escorted out. She was charged with "unlawful conduct." Mrs. Young (the Repub congressman's wife) was also asked to leave, and outside in the corridor she called an officer "an idiot" to his face. She was not charged. And you do a lot of selective reading: Quote 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. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11120353/ So she was warned not to wear the shirt and did so anyway. The Police main responsibility was to resolve the problem in the Chamber. And Mrs. Young has been a congressman's wife for 12 years and presumably knows the rules of decorum in the House gallery. As I said in the other thread, in your zeal to be partisan, you tend to miss the point just as long as you get the last word in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #37 February 1, 2006 QuoteAnd Mrs. Young has been a congressman's wife for 12 years and presumably knows the rules of decorum in the House gallery. As I said in the other thread, in your zeal to be partisan, you tend to miss the point just as long as you get the last word in. Didn't you just accuse me of making unsubstantiated presumptions? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #38 February 1, 2006 QuoteQuoteAnd Mrs. Young has been a congressman's wife for 12 years and presumably knows the rules of decorum in the House gallery. As I said in the other thread, in your zeal to be partisan, you tend to miss the point just as long as you get the last word in. Didn't you just accuse me of making unsubstantiated presumptions? Yep. Mine was a substantiated presumption. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #39 February 1, 2006 Signs in restaurants I've gone to recently... "shirt, shoes required." "Tie required." Notes in invitations I've received lately. "Black tie" "Formal Wear" And in conversation while getting ready for the Crash/Weeds party the other day, "Suit and tie for your father, semi formal for you." I didn't get thrown out of any of the above. Had I been wearing inappropriate attire, I would have either been refused entry, or tossed off the red carpet (which wouldn't have mattered to me; I was looking for the back door anyway...). And had I caused a commotion, or ignored an officer's direct warning, then yes, I do expect to be arrested, ticketed, or worse. Common sense, people. Cindy Sheehan...from grieving mother to radical in one fell swoop...this certainly isn't a way to start a campaign against Dianne Feinstein, is it? (while I would love to see Feinstein replaced, Sheehan would be out of the frying pan into the fire.). Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #40 February 1, 2006 A few observations: 1. I don't know why you're focusing only on Sheehan when my comments went equally to Sheehan and Mrs. Young. 2. I agree that, generally, people must abide by "attire" rules. But Sheehan & Young weren't ejected for their type of attire, they were ejected for its content, i.e., the meaning of the message. The content was deemed to violate the prohibition against "demonstrations". Presumably (there's that word again) if the t-shirt said "Calvin Klein" on it, the wearer wouldn't have been ejected. Dress codes in restaurants, etc. generally don't implicate constitutional issues. 3. Sometimes you have to balance competing interests. Yes, venues have the right to regulate attire and decorum - but not necessarily an absolute right. Sometimes this right may need to yield to more compelling interests, such as the constitutional right to free speech. This also must be balanced. Vocally heckling during the speech? I'd say no. A sign? Possibly not; may depend on size, etc.. A t-shirt? Hmm.. that's a tough one...some would say - on balance- that it should be allowed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #41 February 1, 2006 Quotewas it just me or.. did you hear anything about border security? illegal immigration? in our rural north georgia county we have at least 35,000 illegals out of a census of 100,000 illegals are cloging up the hospitol ER and health dept. few have auto insurance,send there $$ to Mexico. the medical comunity has been swamped under with no relief in sight. .. _________________________________ I agree with you! something really needs to be done about the border situation. If, those folks who are 'sneaking' into this country would put as much effort into their own country... they would'nt want to leave their country. We are running out of room in this country. As you well know, Georgia, is the biggest recipient of illegals in this country at this time. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #42 February 1, 2006 Just in http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11120353/ “We screwed up,” a top Capitol Police official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. He said Sheehan didn't violate any rules or laws. Gee I wonder where the conversation will go now.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #43 February 2, 2006 Sorry, Andy, if you felt I singled you out. Yours was the last post in the thread, and thusly I responded to it. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #44 February 2, 2006 Quote As you well know, Georgia, is the biggest recipient of illegals in this country at this time. ummm...Why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #45 February 2, 2006 QuoteQuote As you well know, Georgia, is the biggest recipient of illegals in this country at this time. ummm...Why? _______________________________________ According to a recent news article, the construction trades, primarily. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #46 February 2, 2006 QuoteGee I wonder where the conversation will go now.... The conversation will be where it has been. Both women were removed because their attire was deemed inappropriate by the security personnel at the event. Apparently, it's always been that way and traditionally is a more "formal" event. Back to the point of decorum. From the same article you quoted... QuoteBy custom, the annual address is to be a dignified affair in which the president reports on the state of the nation. Guests in the gallery who wear shirts deemed political in nature have, in past years, been asked to change or cover them up.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #47 February 2, 2006 By Custom..... Not a rule... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #48 February 2, 2006 QuoteBy Custom..... Not a rule... And certainly not a crime.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #49 February 2, 2006 QuoteAnd certainly not a crime.... But certainly an excellent excuse to get that stupid fartknocker out of there before she could REALLY disrupt the event. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #50 February 2, 2006 So if people had been asked to leave in the past, it should have been known that they'd probably be asked to leave as well. Many restaurants and clubs would ask t-shirt wearers to leave as well... even though I've never seen the establishment rulebook saying they can't be worn. I think the very fact that both ladies were asked to leave shows that it isn't a partisan issue here. Now the arrest? If she refused to leave or something, I can see how it went down... but if she left with a nice "fuck you" to the security staff like the other lady did... that's not cool. I never said arresting that woman was right.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
