At least, not if you oppose the Iraq war:
WASHINGTON — Cindy Sheehan finally got her invitation to see President George W. Bush again, but before she set eyes on him at the State of the Union address, Capitol Police removed her from the gallery overlooking the House chamber.
The offense: her shirt, bearing an anti-war message and other “unlawful conduct,” police said.
I wonder what other t-shirts could get you arrested at the State of the Union speech? An old Kerry/Edwards shirt, perhaps? One that says “Defend our Civil Liberties”, maybe? That old standby, “Buck Fush”? On the other hand, would it be okay to wear a shirt with the message “I worked at the White House and all I got was this semen stained blue dress”? I’m just guessing here, but I bet that one might pass muster. Some speech is freer than others, you know.
Nonetheless, the legal issues presented are legion. For example, is it now illegal to wear such shirts only when the the President intends to speak before a joint session of Congress, or will such seditious t-shirts get you arrested any old day you happen to sit in the Senate or House galleries? Is the wearing of such shirts a prima facie violation of the law, or must you knowingly intend to embarrass the President or other republicans? I’m sure Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Alito, Scalia and Thomas have some thoughts on all this. I can’t wait for Cindy to make a federal case of her arrest so we can all benefit for their acumulated store of wisdom as to what constitutes appropriate apparel in the halls of Congress.
I guess we should have known it’s a major fashion faux pas to wear an anti-war shirt. What would Blackwell say?
Maybe if she’d just brought a dog instead, everything would have been all right, or maybe if Laura Bush had given her her ticket?
First lady Laura Bush’s guests at her husband’s annual address to Congress certainly were diverse. One, in fact, wasn’t even human.
Rex, a 5-year-old German shepherd, fit in with the other Iraq war veterans who were guests of Republicans and Democrats.
Ah to be young, and canine, eh?
Update [2006-2-1 8:57:25 by Steven D]: Cindy in her own words regarding the arrest: LINK
I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled; “Protester.” 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. I said something like “I’m going, do you have to be so rough?” By the way, his name is Mike Weight.
The officer ran with me to the elevators yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, “That’s Cindy Sheehan.” At which point the officer who arrested me said: “Take these steps slowly.” I said, “You didn’t care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps.” He said, “That’s because you were protesting.” Wow, I get hauled out of the People’s House because I was, “Protesting.”
I was never told that I couldn’t wear that shirt into the Congress. 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. I was immediately, and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for “unlawful conduct.”
{{ shaking my head and holding back some tears}}
Again and again, you can say what you want, you just can’t say it here.
More from Reuters:
I can’t find anywhere where it says why it was unlawful. It’s not like she was shouting or demonstrating. She was just wearing a Tee Shirt. One year in jail for wearing a tee shirt? (if they decide on the max).
Ridiculous.
I doubt they will do much more than slap her on the wrist, though. If they did put her in proper jail i cant see how the anti war movement could fail to make something of it.
I know there are a lot of law savvy people here. exactly what law was it that they said she broke? Public nuisance? Unlawful demonstration?
I think.. we need to pin their ears back and get them to tell us ..exactly.. what she is guilty of
My point exactly. And precisely why I would advocate making it a fashion/apparel issue.
She did nothing. She said nothing, she simply wore the wrong thing–if that’s a crime, I want to see the statute outlining that crime.
Someone was saying something about a dicatorship…?!
Behold, the power of a woman in a T-shirt. Too much for poor shrub to handle, so his congressional goon squad made the Capitol police arrest her.
this arrest should have been the lead story in every paper in America this morning. The lead story, over the SOTU.
If this is what we’ve come to, we don’t need an address to tell us the state of our union.
I guess brown shirts and jack boots are the preferred fashion statement in Washington these days.
by this. No wonder I’m in a funk this morning.
So, now stating facts is unlawful conduct? Correct me if I’m wrong but, how can stating that 2245 US soldiers now are dead due to the Iraq war be dismissed as being anti-war? Of course I know Cindy is anti-war but even a pro-war person can’t get away from the 2245 dead US OIF soldiers. Cindy got thrown out because of who she was as much as for what her t-shirt stated.
As I stated in a comment last night, I wouldn’t even go the “free speech” route on this. Sheehan didn’t say anything, she wore a T-shirt. She was arrested for a fashion statement, nothing more.
My question is why the Northwestern University “athletes” who “raised” so many “eyebrows” last summer by wearing flip-flops to the WH weren’t arrested for that. See also
Athletes raise eyebrows…
I mean, considering the potentially politically volatile implications of flip-flops of all things.
Wearing a T-shirt is NOT a form of protest, it’s a fashion statement. At least that’s the way I’d frame the thing if I were “king of the forest.”
“T-shirt? What T-shirt? Oh, THAT old thing, I was so excited about the opportunity to attend this earthshattering event, gosh, I didn’t even think about what to wear (or not to wear).”
well…. not to be too too fussy about this.. since i’m on your side here.. but just about anythign can be a form of protest… if the powers that be do not want you to do it. If your in power and you show a distaste in people wearing bandana’s (because many gang members wear bandanas) and then everyone starts wearing bandanas you could honestly call that a protest. Or at least a tweak on the nose.
What’s interesting is that the gov considered a TEE SHIRT a form of protest. That tells us that they are afraid of ANYthing off message.
I DO consider the kind of cloths you choose to wear to be expression. A form of speech. But, the fact that they have to suppress such an innocuous form of it is a problem. Perhaps for them as well. It’s not like she is heckling the pres. Maybe Cindy knew they would act this way and that’s why she smiled.. she expected it.
Cindy has a diary over at dKos explaining exactly what happened.
Looks like we cross-posted. See my update.
Shooting themselves in the foot? Had Cindy been allowed to stay, we would have little to say now. This may come to cause them more trouble than they figured.
Gotta love the subliminal work of these folks. Rex at the right hand? Zero tolerance of civil disobedience?
She wasn’t arrested. Not the same treatment as Sheehan. I think this was an afterthought, frankly. Had to ahve something to make it appear like they were being fair and balanced. But this lady ain’t facing no jail time.
they anticipated some chatter over Miss Cindy’s treatment, but as you point out, nothing in the piece suggests that they arrested the lady, which actually puts them in a worse light – You can’t wear a support the troops shirt, or a shirt with the number of dead expendables, but only the latter shirt will get you handcuffed by the popo and hauled off to jail.
Not to mention the absurdity of considering either shirt a “protest.” ๐
Of course, if you went around water coolers today, most people would probably tell you that Cindy had a banner and was shouting anti-Bush slogans and trying to disrupt the speech.
And they would never have heard of this congressman or his wife.
Yep. This is good. The comparison is good. But I also think Sheehan made a mistake by admitting it was a deliberate political statement.
We on the left could take a few cues from these re-thugs. Play dumb. Deer in the headlights. T-shirt, what T-shirt? Learn to fucking lie if you have to.
(I am reminded of the “good ol days” when I returned from Europe [where being a ‘feminist’ was still a good thing, even tho it had since become a 4 lttr wd here!] and figured out I’d have to scrub the word ‘feminist’ from my CV if I ever hoped to get anywhere, at which point I thought about writing a book on the subject, title: Learning To Lie: Developing Survival Strategies for Life in these United States.)
Yeah, I know, pretty sick stance coming from someone who has repeatedly express an all-out committment to truth, but politics is politics….
.
Cindy Sheehan has been prominent in the news in the Netherlands. The radio interview yesterday is followed by many articles written in today’s large Dutch newspapers.
WASHINGTON (NRC Handelsblad) Feb. 1 — The American police have offered their excuses for the arrest of well known activist, Cindy Sheehan in the building of U.S. Congress.
Sheehan came to Capitol Hill on invitation of a Democratic representative to hear President Bush on the State of the Union. Cindy was seized before the speech started, arrested and taken away …
T-shirt
The reason for the arrest was a T-shirt with the text `2245 dead – how many more?‘. According to the police in retrospect, it was unnecessary and exaggerated to arrest Sheehan for this.
Apart from Sheehan’s arrest, the wife of Republican representative Bill Young was summoned to leave the chamber where Bush would speak. She wore a T-shirt with the text: “Support the troops who protect our freedom“. Contrary to Sheehan, this woman was not arrested and taken to a police station.
“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
It will be interesting to hear his answer when he is asked (if he’s asked?) whether Ms. Sheehan should have been ejected. Will he stand up for her rights, or just his wife’s?
In Keith Olbermann’s newsletter, this is his second item … so, it’ll be interesting to see what he says.
And he makes the POINT that — arrested or not — she was asked to leave, which is rather shocking in itself:
Where is the written record of these “rules” they keep talking about? Anyone know? What is the basis for booting people from the gallery and where is the written record that justifies arrest in one case and not in another.
Or are we talking about unwritten rules of “polite” conduct?
Where’s miss manners when you need her the most, eh? ๐
The rules are broad and vague and left up to law enforcement to use their judgement in determining what is unlawful activity. Simply posing a potential threat to disrupt an event is prosecutable now. Ms Sheehan didn’t do that in any way but all it takes is the discretion of one officer.
Still, I would like to see the actual TEXT.
It’s kinda like B*sh coming out and claiming his wiretapping was “legal”–well, where’s the statute to confirm that?
It’s bad enough that they’re making up the laws according to their own whims, but I’d like to at least SEE that they’ve already written the law before they enforce it, yaknow?
Those can be so hard to obey as faithfully as we all want to.
I guess that’s what Ari Fleischer meant when he warned the public to watch what you say and watch what you do. Just in case you might be inadvertantly breaking a Secret Law.
Last night, after reading that Cindy had been arrested for having an anti-war banner I was a bit miffed with her. Shame on me. I should have known it was a lie. Reading her diary at Kos this morning and the Reuters’ photog’s account changes the opinion I had last night. Shame on me. A t shirt with the truth on it gets you arrested these days. I have a tshirt with my sig line on it, a shirt with Bush’s picture and it says I am not with stupid, one with What Noble Cause George?, one from the Iraq Vets Against the war. Guess I will have to start wearing them more often. WIll I be next? She wasn’t arrested for wearing the shirt, she was arrested because she is Cindy. Even if she had not worn the shirt they would have found a way of getting her out of there.
I’m guessing the illustrated Good bush – Bad Bush T-shirt I have would be banned there too.
That must be some of the fuzzy math Bushie refers to.
Great pic.
I bet some of these would be worth 5 to life, eh?
Those are excellent. Nice work and compliments to the creators. Yeah, any one of those would be enough to piss off the powers that be. That’s just part of their appeal…:)
They’ve been around for quite awhile–the homeland security ones have been very popular in Indian Country.
My absolute fav, tho, is the one that just says YOU ARE ON INDIAN LAND, and I used to have it as a bumper sticker on my 68 VW bug–that one would probably actually be “safe” in congress or WH: those idiots are too stupid to understand how fucking subversive those four little words actually are.
Sheehan can get a year in prison for a t-shirt.
I don’t expect otherwise but the MSM seems to forget she lost her son in the war of choice Bush started.
I caught part of an interview of Pres Clinton not too long ago and the interviewer asked him about dealing with reactions of angry/hurting families like that. He said taking that rage from the family was a small part of what he owed them for the sacrifice they’d made. He said it was the least he could for them to accept their venting like that.
What a difference.
I wouldn’t even go there. You have a fucking right to wear whatever the hell you want on your body in this country, whether or not you have lost a son in the war or not.
I find it absolutely alarming that wearing a T-shirt is being seen as a form of protest: where I come from, wearing a kalishnikov on your shoulder is a form of protest, wearing NOTHING and scrawling something on your naked chest, then flashing the audience with it is a form of protest, wearing a T-shirt is just “normal”–obviously, as the case of Mrs. Young makes clear.
The point being, these wardrobe “malfunctions” are not equal:
pro-war T-shirt–polite escort out of the gallery.
anti-war T-shirt–arrest for unlawful conduct.
Sounds to me like Mrs. Young was to act as the “cover up” in this most recent flagrant suppression of dissent–as always, could be that the cover up turns out to be worse than the crime itself.
Tsk tsk. They’re so fucking stupid.
A reps wife was ASKED to leave for wearing a pro-war t-shirt.
Cindy hauled in cuffs and iarrested and could face a year in prison.
What about those congressmen who wore red, white and blue ties?? Or YELLOW ties.
Fuck this administration!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We ash that our children die in Iraq to protect our freedom and then we go and shit on those freedoms.
Cindy and I and YOU can wear whatever the fuck you want! Whenever the fuck you want!
I still remember the days when women of all people would tsk tsk over a rape victims choice to wear a mini skirt.
I’d like thank all those who suspended their assumptions and gave Ms. Sheehan the benefit of the doubt and awaited word from her before jumping to conclusions.
We can wear what we want! Remember!!! Don’t let them tell you what’s inappropriate or not. It’s a slippery slope. Fucking REMEMBER that!
Hypocrisy!!!
They’ve shot themselves in the foot again on this one, Janet.
Best g.d. thing they could have done was what they did.
And don’t forget about the flip-flops either
If you can’t say “fuck” you can’t say “fuck the draft.” A line from one of my favorite free speech cases in law school.
Realisically, what they’ll do is drop the charges. Oops, sorry, our bad. Too late for her to see the speech now . . .
I suggest that if she gets to keep the shirt off her back, she auction it. Right here.