Cindy Sheehan Arrested at Capitol

[irishbosoxfan]

LAND OF THE FREE-HOME OF THE BRAVE!!!

We came here to America to avoid persecution for our beliefs and here many sit in judgment of one person who feels as many do. While her beliefs may not be yours she IS entitled to her opinion. SHE is the one who lost a son to this war and should be entitled to grieve or protest as it is- how she sees fit. When a person signs up for the military regardless of what branch of service it is they are not allowed to question the Commander in Chief,they are there to follow whatever orders they are given and to do their job to their utmost ability wether they agree with the President or not. They defend the Constitution till death or they get out of the military whatever comes first but not once during their time in the military are they allowed to partake of the fruits of the Constitution. There is no vote to be taken. There is only ORDERS and FOLLOWING ORDERS. Not one of us here can say for sure what transpired between her and her son as far as conversation goes but one thing everyone here can agree on is that HER SON DIED DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES and with that his moms right to FREE SPEECH and free speech includes a tshirt with a well known fact printed
on it----I'm sure if people were there with tshirts that said McDonald Douglass or other well funded through our government companies not many would have given a second look but because she was wearing a tshirt considered offensive to this portion of our government and because of her over excuberence to her cause she was removed.


One group I would like to see severely chastised for their anti war protests would be the group that travels to soldiers funerals protesting their involvement in the war with signs that are inappropriate to their supposed cause-If these people are allowed to picket soldiers funerals and harass their families without fear of arrest then why isn't she allowed to wear a tshirt to a public gathering?

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

No they say that if their candidate does not win they will leave the country. But then they don't so that is why some say leave then.

I see...so now Alec Balwin speaks for the entire Democratic Party...listen to Rush much? I guess the show just ended and the Dittoheads have been let out of the asylum!! Run for your lives!!

 

[charlie,nj]

Charlie, it sounds like the good congressman was quite indignant about his wife's removal. Ironic isn't it?

yes but rules are rules!

.

 

[bsnyder]

Very true, but please don't assume that everyone who may identify with the right wing and/or Republican party necessarily believes or says that. So far on this thread, I've only seen one person suggest that, although I will admit it is a sentiment that is offered too often and too freely.

It seems to come down to individual tolerance levels of free speech -- how much dissent can we as individuals learn to accept before we "go off" on someone else. While I may not approve of specific sentiments, such as "America - love it or leave it", if I am to be consistent with my beliefs, I would have to defend someone's right to say it. Just as I would defend Cindy Sheehan's right to say almost anything (within legal bounds and performed within the law).

That's why I think free speech is a double-edged sword. It would, at least for me, seem to require that I work on exercising my tolerance more.

Being critical of Cindy Sheehan or anyone else for that matter has nothing to do with free speech or dissent. She's free to say and do whatever she wants (within the boundaries of the law) and I'm free to call her an America-hating publicity hound.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Very true, but please don't assume that everyone who may identify with the right wing and/or Republican party necessarily believes or says that. So far on this thread, I've only seen one person suggest that, although I will admit it is a sentiment that is offered too often and too freely.

It seems to come down to individual tolerance levels of free speech -- how much dissent can we as individuals learn to accept before we "go off" on someone else. While I may not approve of specific sentiments, such as "America - love it or leave it", if I am to be consistent with my beliefs, I would have to defend someone's right to say it. Just as I would defend Cindy Sheehan's right to say almost anything (within legal bounds and performed within the law).

That's why I think free speech is a double-edged sword. It would, at least for me, seem to require that I work on exercising my tolerance more.

I get you, T_M, and that's why I said "many" Righties...not all. I know how you roll, man...in a sea of neocons, you're one of the last true Reagan Republicans around these days.

 

[bsnyder]

I see...so now Alec Balwin speaks for the entire Democratic Party...listen to Rush much? I guess the show just ended and the Dittoheads have been let out of the asylum!! Run for your lives!!

He speaks for the Democrats about as much as Pat Roberterson speaks for the average Republican.

 

[Planogirl]

No they say that if their candidate does not win they will leave the country. But then they don't so that is why some say leave then.

VERY few have ever said that. I hate that this is applied to all of "them" so often.

I'm all for free speech on both sides but some comments are just plain nasty which is pointless and unpleasant. Not that being pointless and unpleasant are against the law or anything but it does little to get one's ideas across.

Also, disagreeing with someone by saying that they should leave the U.S. is to me very unAmerican. The U.S. was built upon dissent after all.

 

[MrsKreamer]

LAND OF THE FREE-HOME OF THE BRAVE!!!

We came here to America to avoid persecution for our beliefs and here many sit in judgment of one person who feels as many do. While her beliefs may not be yours she IS entitled to her opinion. SHE is the one who lost a son to this war and should be entitled to grieve or protest as it is- how she sees fit. When a person signs up for the military regardless of what branch of service it is they are not allowed to question the Commander in Chief,they are there to follow whatever orders they are given and to do their job to their utmost ability wether they agree with the President or not. They defend the Constitution till death or they get out of the military whatever comes first but not once during their time in the military are they allowed to partake of the fruits of the Constitution. There is no vote to be taken. There is only ORDERS and FOLLOWING ORDERS.

And God Bless them, they still enlist of their own free will.

Not one of us here can say for sure what transpired between her and her son as far as conversation goes but one thing everyone here can agree on is that HER SON DIED DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES and with that his moms right to FREE SPEECH and free speech includes a tshirt with a well known fact printed
on it

Not at the SOTU address, she was told to cover up or to leave.

----I'm sure if people were there with tshirts that said McDonald Douglass or other well funded through our government companies not many would have given a second look but because she was wearing a tshirt considered offensive to this portion of our government and because of her over excuberence to her cause she was removed.

Did you hear about the congressman's wife who was also escorted out....oh and she had on a "support the troops" shirt on....it works both ways, unlike your theory.

 

[wvrevy]

T_M - I certainly don't view free speech as a "double edged sword." I have never intentionally claimed that people shouldn't have the right, by law, to call Mrs. Sheehan any name in the book. When I say that they don't have the right to treat her as some sort of pariah, what I mean is that she sacrificed considerably more for Bush's war of choice than any of these people you see here that are so gleefully calling her names like nut bag and saying that she needs professional help (and not out of concern for her welfare, but in pure malicious attempt to make her look crazy, or so it comes across). I realize that is a fine distinction, but it is one I am comfortable making. They haven't walked a step in her shoes, let alone a mile, so no, I don't believe them worthy to make such comments. Sure, they have the legal right to do so...but that hardly makes them better people for excersizing that right in such a way.

Free speech is just that: free. Yes, they have the right to say people should "leave" if they don't agree, just as I have the right to name them sheep for willingly following along without bothering to think for themselves. But to tell someone that they are unAmerican - by suggesting that they would be better off somewhere else, for example - because they disagree with the direction this country is heading is, by it's own nature, unAmerican.

There can be nothing more patriotic than standing up for our rights and refusing to surrender them out of cowardice.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Being critical of Cindy Sheehan or anyone else for that matter has nothing to do with free speech or dissent. She's free to say and do whatever she wants (within the boundaries of the law) and I'm free to call her an America-hating publicity hound.

I would disagree. My point is that it is completely about free speech -- both sides have the same right to express their thoughts, opinions, facts, etc. No one, no matter what their position, has any more or less right to speak freely than anyone else.

My point was addressed to those who would argue that somehow being a mother who lost a son in Iraq somehow elevates Cindy Sheehan above criticism. I disagree with that and would argue that (1) Sheehan has made herself a public figure and thus is available for criticism and comment just like any other public figure and (2) any American has the right to say just about anything they want (within the boundaries of the law).

I think we are saying the same thing -- only differently?

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

He speaks for the Democrats about as much as Pat Roberterson speaks for the average Republican.

Roll your eyes all you want, Bet, but never once did I say that all Republicans go along with Rev. Robertson's ridiculous statements, like the previous poster insinuated that all Dems go along with Alec Baldwin.

 

[inaminute]

...why isn't she allowed to wear a tshirt to a public gathering?

I don't believe this is exactly a public gathering. My understanding is that one has to be invited to attend this event and, it appears. one must follow a dress code of sorts.

 

[wvrevy]

And God Bless them, they still enlist of their own free will.

In fewer and fewer numbers every year. There is also an implication when joining the military that you will not be put in harm's way unless it is essential to the defense of this country. That promise was broken by Bush when he invaded Iraq.

Not at the SOTU address, she was told to cover up or to leave.

Funny, that's not how she tells it. Oh, but wait...I'm sure you don't bother believing her, right?

Did you hear about the congressman's wife who was also escorted out....oh and she had on a "support the troops" shirt on....it works both ways, unlike your theory.

As well it should. So?

 

[Judge Smails]

These are PRIVATE citizens who are expressing THEIR views on the whole program. This is not a court ruling on the matter. We, on the DIS Boards, are PRIVATE citizens expressing OUR views on various topics; we are not a ruling body. As such, our words and thoughts, much like the words and thoughts of the folks who wrote this letter, hold NO WEIGHT as to the legality of this program. Now, if this program is found to be illegal by a court of law, then yes, penalties should happen. But until then, live with it.

Yes they are but did you bother to look at their credentials?


Curtis Bradley, Duke Law School, former Counselor on International Law in the State Department Legal Adviser's Office[14]

David Cole, Georgetown University Law Center

Walter Dellinger, Duke Law School, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel and Acting Solicitor General

Ronald Dworkin, NYU Law School

Richard Epstein, University of Chicago Law School, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution

Philip B. Heymann, Harvard Law School, former Deputy Attorney General

Harold Hongju Koh, Dean, Yale Law School, former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, former Attorney-Adviser, Office of Legal Counsel, DOJ

Martin Lederman, Georgetown University Law Center, former Attorney-Adviser, Office of Legal Counsel, DOJ

Beth Nolan, former Counsel to the President and Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel

William S. Sessions, former Director, FBI, former Chief United States District Judge

Geoffrey Stone, Professor of Law and former Provost, University of Chicago

Kathleen Sullivan, Professor and former Dean, Stanford Law School

Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law School

William Van Alstyne, William & Mary Law School, former Justice Department attorney

 

[irishbosoxfan]

Did you hear about the congressman's wife who was also escorted out....oh and she had on a "support the troops" shirt on....it works both ways, unlike your theory.[/QUOTE]




Actually the "total death tshirt" and the "support our troops" tshirt generally fall under the same category--With the total tshirt we pay homage to all our fallen comrades and with the support tshirt we keep in ouir hearts all our loved ones still there with DUTY HONOR and COURAGE.

Many wear the total tshirt as an anti war sign but that wasn't its original intent

 

[Tigger_Magic]

T_M - I certainly don't view free speech as a "double edged sword." I have never intentionally claimed that people shouldn't have the right, by law, to call Mrs. Sheehan any name in the book. When I say that they don't have the right to treat her as some sort of pariah, what I mean is that she sacrificed considerably more for Bush's war of choice than any of these people you see here that are so gleefully calling her names like nut bag and saying that she needs professional help (and not out of concern for her welfare, but in pure malicious attempt to make her look crazy, or so it comes across). I realize that is a fine distinction, but it is one I am comfortable making. They haven't walked a step in her shoes, let alone a mile, so no, I don't believe them worthy to make such comments. Sure, they have the legal right to do so...but that hardly makes them better people for excersizing that right in such a way.

I can't argue with you on this point.

Free speech is just that: free. Yes, they have the right to say people should "leave" if they don't agree, just as I have the right to name them sheep for willingly following along without bothering to think for themselves. But to tell someone that they are unAmerican - by suggesting that they would be better off somewhere else, for example - because they disagree with the direction this country is heading is, by it's own nature, unAmerican.

ITA. It goes back to learning to develop a degree of tolerance for speech with which we disagree. I know I have a long way to go to learn how to disagree agreeably. Somethings still push my buttons a little too easily.

There can be nothing more patriotic than standing up for our rights and refusing to surrender them out of cowardice.

I couldn't agree more!

 

[bsnyder]

I think we are saying the same thing -- only differently?

Yes, but you stated it so much clearer than I did. Thanks!

 

[Judge Smails]

Again people, don't construe the "Support Our Troops" as being pro war.

 

[numbersman]

...she sacrificed considerably more for Bush's war of choice than any of these people you see here that are so gleefully calling her names like nut bag and saying that she needs professional help (and not out of concern for her welfare, but in pure malicious attempt to make her look crazy, or so it comes across).

It doesn't take any "attempts" on anyone's part to make her "look" crazy; she's doing a fine enough job of that on her own.

 

[MrsKreamer]

In fewer and fewer numbers every year. There is also an implication when joining the military that you will not be put in harm's way unless it is essential to the defense of this country. That promise was broken by Bush when he invaded Iraq.

Funny, that's not how she tells it. Oh, but wait...I'm sure you don't bother believing her, right?

As well it should. So?

I come from a military family, and I believe that if you go to sign up for the military you should always be prepared that our country could go to war.

I believe she is so lost in her grief that she puts a spin on her side of the story.
I agree that both women should have been escorted out, that was the point I was making.