Cindy Sheehan Arrested For Wearing T-Shirt

[Surlethe]

Stop gong down to fucking pessonal atacks and discus the Issue at hand I personaly think that that the presdent has the right to kick anyone wearing any kind iof message beacuse its distractig from the speech

Should this extend to behavior -- i.e., behavioral protests -- as well?

[Ghost Rider]

Stop gong down to fucking pessonal atacks and discus the Issue at hand I personaly think that that the presdent has the right to kick anyone wearing any kind iof message beacuse its distractig from the speech

1. Show where Bush gave any order to kick her out?

2. Don't play mod wannabe.

[Durandal]

Stop gong down to fucking pessonal atacks and discus the Issue at hand I personaly think that that the presdent has the right to kick anyone wearing any kind iof message beacuse its distractig from the speech

I predict a fun and interesting stay for you here.

[Keevan_Colton]

Stop gong down to fucking pessonal atacks and discus the Issue at hand I personaly think that that the presdent has the right to kick anyone wearing any kind iof message beacuse its distractig from the speech

Incase you didnt notice, it occurs on the turf of the legislative branch. The whole seperation of powers thing means that the president doesnt get to tell congress and the senate what to do...

[Darth Wong]

Redleader34 apparently doesn't realize that he does not have the authority to give orders to anyone, or to set our site policies.

[outcast]

You'd think a government event would be for the *people*, not just the jackoffs who 'rule' over the people and pretend to be protecting their interest.
I hardly think everyone in america is the suit kind of type. If some assholes were ejecting my ass from a *government* event, as in, the government *i* elected...you bet i'd be pissed.

[SirNitram]

Elfdart is right, if only because of the Broken Watch principle. He just can't prove it because he doesn't understand logical debate.

I understand it well enough to actually stick to the subject, asshole. As the rulings firefly and I posted links to show, Sheehan did nothing wrong. YOU on the other hand, have spent FOUR FUCKING PAGES arguing with an imbecile (and rather poorly) over T-shirts and which fallacy better matches the irrelevant points you two are making.

OH BOO HOO! Elffucker doesn't like that I had a tangent? What's that? Yea, that's me not giving a shit. You keep trying to make yourself relevent though.

Whatever, just pretend that you won another crushing victory. Maybe you should try to threaten him with your dark powers or whatever it is you usually do.

Then, as now, I really couldn't give a shit what Hemlock thinks, since he's fucking delusional. 'Dark powers'? Heh.

Couldn't have said it better.

Unsurprising, considering your utter lack of capacity for logic and intelligence. Fuck off, shortstack. Or at least try an original insult, you bore me.

[Gaidin]

I'm still not sure which I got more laughs out of...the tangent or the response to Redleader34....

[Glocksman]

So does this mean that there is no such rule? In which case, why the fuck did the keystone cops kick these two women out and arrest one? I don't like or agree with Cindy Sheehan, but that doesn't mean I support a violation of her civil rights.

Because they could. Simple as that really. I think that the charges were simply to get her out of the room and that they actually intended to drop them in the first place.

Ditto.

If the intent was to just 'get her out of there', why did they do the exact same thing to Congressman Young's (R-FL) wife, who wore a 'Support the Troops' shirt?
Like I said earlier, getting an 18 term chairman of a powerful subcommittee pissed at the Capitol police isn't going to make your chief pleased with your work.
When you look at both events, it's pretty clear that the capitol cops were just being overzealous in enforcing a non-existent (for the SoTU) rule about sloganeering.

[Elfdart]

If the intent was to just 'get her out of there', why did they do the exact same thing to Congressman Young's (R-FL) wife, who wore a 'Support the Troops' shirt?
Like I said earlier, getting an 18 term chairman of a powerful subcommittee pissed at the Capitol police isn't going to make your chief pleased with your work.
When you look at both events, it's pretty clear that the capitol cops were just being overzealous in enforcing a non-existent (for the SoTU) rule about sloganeering.

Most likely some Dems complained to the police that if Sheehan had to go for wearing a T-shirt with a slogan, they should have done likewise to Young.

[CarsonPalmer]

Or perhaps the police simply made a mistake in enforcing the rules and ejected both of them. But that couldn't happen because the Democrats, paragons of good and justice in the universe, had to remind the pawns of their eternal nemesis, the Republican Party, to be evenhanded. After all, ElfDart, "If you're not with us, you're against us."

[Master of Ossus]

Yes it would since you'd be wearing something almost literally stating it...there is room for something explicitly showing something you know...a guiness shirt implies that you like guiness, a rangers football top implies you like rangers and so on...I think I'd be right to think someone in a police officers uniform is likely a police officer and so on...

Then why not take other messages that people send with their clothes for face value? A girl who dresses very carefully prior to a date is more likely to be interested in the guy she's going with than another woman who couldn't have been bothered. Impeccably groomed people are more likely to pay attention to detail than people whose socks don't match and whose shirts are inside out.

Not neccesarily, what if you dont know he's a lawyer already? Does everyone with an expensive suit own it in the expectation of future earnings?

Virtually everyone who wears expensive suits is either wealthy already or they have high future earnings expectations. Faking this is very expensive, and economic studies have actually shown this difference to exist and even for regional variations in this trend.

It can, but it doesnt always, and drawing infrences from just someones attire will get you bullshit information a great deal of the time.

Only because we make so many judgements on the basis of people's personal appearances. The information gleaned from someone's dress is actually fairly accurate because the costs of "faking it" are so high and because society expects people to care about how they dress. For better or for worse, people do express themselves through their clothing and when they do so, other people can read the messages.

@Plekhanov: This is just random apologism that has nothing to do with the topic in question (because in this case Cindy was allegedly arrested for refusing to cover up a t-shirt, and the picture clearly involves it being covered with a coat), and because the t-shirt is not the source of her sophisticated look (if, in fact, you do believe that to look classy). If she were wearing a blouse or similar get-up, she would look more formal.

PS. Can an uninvolved moderator please split the discussion of the classiness of t-shirts and the messages that clothes send into a separate topic from the ridiculous Cindy Sheehan arrest, please?

[Glocksman]

Here's the official press release from the department.
Link

The United States Capitol Police will request that the U.S. Attorney’s Office not pursue the charge against Cindy Lee Sheehan who was arrested Tuesday Night before the President’s State of the Union address.

Mrs. Sheehan was charged Tuesday night with Unlawful Conduct after she displayed a T-shirt with an anti-war message while in the House Gallery. Subsequently she was arrested and transported to USCP Headquarters for processing.

As the Department reviewed the incident, it was determined that while officers acted in a manner consistent with the rules of decorum enforced by the Department in the House Gallery for years, neither Mrs. Sheehan’s manner of dress or initial conduct warranted law enforcement intervention. The USCP also asked Mrs. Beverly Young, to leave the gallery because of a T-shirt she was wearing. Mrs. Young did not return to the Gallery so there was no need for further police action. Neither guest should have been confronted about the expressive T-shirts.

"The officers made a good faith, but mistaken effort to enforce an old unwritten interpretation of the prohibitions about demonstrating in the Capitol. The policy and procedures were too vague," said Chief Terrance W. Gainer. "The failure to adequately prepare the officers is mine."

Chief Gainer met with Chairman Young and his wife to both apologize and share the Department’s plans for avoiding this in the future. A similar message has been left with Mrs. Sheehan.

The Department will work with the House Sergeant at Arms to clarify the rules of the House, and ensure that officers clearly understand the rules.

If you have any questions or concerns pertaining to this release please contact the United States Capitol Police Public Information Office at 202-224-1677.

Unless something else comes out, IMHO, this all but rules out the possibility that the Capitol Police targeted Sheehan simply to 'get her out'.

[Elfdart]

You're missing the fact that almost everywhere Bush goes to give a speech, people construed as possible dissenters are purged from the crowds, denied admission and in a number of cases manhandled -even when they've done nothing wrong. This fits a pattern for the Bush Junta. This statement from the Capitol Police looks like damage control to me.

[Glocksman]

You're missing the fact that almost everywhere Bush goes to give a speech, people construed as possible dissenters are purged from the crowds, denied admission and in a number of cases manhandled -even when they've done nothing wrong. This fits a pattern for the Bush Junta. This statement from the Capitol Police looks like damage control to me.

Then we agree to disagree.