I don't think you can fairly compare this to a wedding, or a private establishment. The Capitol Police are not there to enforce a dress code, nor should they be. This is a public building, and should not be off limits based upon a de-facto "bouncer's" subjective decision as to how appropriately a visitor is dressed. This is the United States Capitol, not a club.

That said, those that support arresting her (which of course does NOT include the Capitol Police) are doing so because of what they believe Sheehan was GOING to do, not how she was dressed.

For a change you are correct. You do not think, or at least in the way that 99.999% of the rest of the world thinks.

The Capital Police are there to keep order, and to enforce the laws and rules in effect during the speech. Sheehan was not following one or more of the rules and was taken out, as were several others in the audience who as well could not follow the rules. These rules have been in effect for years, and not just with Pres Bush.

None of us where there. She could have simply walked out nicely. She might have been "uppity" to the police and thus gotten herself handcuffed and taken out. She could have left her jacket zipped up. She decided to take the jacket off, exposing a t-shirt. The t-shirt could have been a nice normal one, and she could have remained at the event. She made the decision to wear one that had a political expression on it, and thus was taken out due to her breaking the rules at the speech. She had several choices to make in this situation and made the wrong ones in every case, and was taken out of the event. It was her choice in all the situations that caused her to be expelled.

What part of this do you not understand? Why is it taking eons to get this into your head? Its her fault!!!

What I don't understand is why you correctly state that the Capitol Police, not you or me or Mr. Higgins, are " there to keep order, and to enforce the laws and rules in effect during the speech," and then COMPLETELY DISREGARD their conclusion that Sheehan DID NOTHING WRONG.

Are you making the rules or the Capitol Police? Unless you are, you must accept their conclusion that they, not Sheehan, were WRONG in this incident.

I'm opposed to unConstitutional federal laws; such as those regulating firearms. All federal laws restricting firearms; all of them, are patently unConstitutional.

The law broken by those federal thugs is constitutional in that restricting a citizen's rights under color of authority is illegal and should be prosecuted.

Are you enlightened now?

I am as well opposed to the laws regarding firearms. Please tell that to the cop when he slapps the cuffs on you and see how far it gets you.

Working through the system beforehand to get it changed is a lot better than working from prison IHMO, but I have no experience at the later.

Did your knee hurt your chin when it slammed into it?

Your leap that my opposition to firearms laws would mean that I'd be carrying into a SOTU event is beyond the pale, it's silly.

Quote:

Working through the system beforehand to get it changed is a lot better than working from prison IHMO, but I have no experience at the later.

Funny thing, how that works. When the system is corrupt from top to bottom, it changes little without feeling heat first. Take medical cannabis laws. People worked within the system, largely, and changed the laws. In California, the legislature, who resisted the reduction in state power that passage would bring, have enacted no legislation protecting a now legal practice from state and local police who still arrest folks and cooperate fully with federal drug thugs to investigate citizens, and work to help federal thugs arrest people. There have been exceptions, notably the Santa Cruz county sherrif who intervened to stop federal arrests, which was right and proper.

Working within the system gets you an arrest of a federal hitman in Idaho, him charged with manslaughter by a state grand jury, and a federal judge who takes over the case and releases said murderer into the populace.

Where you get some of your ideas is a very good question. Please post where I said one word about you carrying a weapon into the SOTU event or for that matter, anywhere? You cannot because I never mentioned a word about it. Unbelieveable where your mind wanders at times...

OK, so you feel that the system is corrupt and have made the decision to not work from within, but you are advocating either open or covert revolution? Federal thugs? Well, you are a part of this country and how could you let it get to the point where you feel that the feds are thugs?

I agree that the medical pot situation is AFU, and the feds need to stay out of the situation. Let the states decide what is best for their citizens.

The situation in Idaho is sad, and Lon Horuichi, the sniper who killed Weavers wife and son should be in jail, along with his supervisor. Feel that the people in charge of Waco should as well be in jail.

While on the subject of federal meddling, I feel that its none of the govt's business about abortion. Personally I am against it but feel that its the womans decision, period. I do not have a vagina and until I do I feel that my nose (and others like myself) should stay out of the issue. These idiots who want to ban abortion are just that IMHO, idiots. If that is done abortions will still happen, just like they did when we were younger, in back alleys, or in Mexico, and women will die from it.

Does this surprise you? A conservative who can look at the issues not be in "lock step" with the party they support? God gave us a brain and my parents taught me to use it and make my own decisions. Hopefully we all can do this...

Joe A

Ok Pat, I can understand your position, but I think your ire is directed in the wrong direction. You seem to want the "thugs" who arrested her to be charged when if ANYONE should be charged it would be the supervisor who told the "thugs" to arrest her. Shooting the messenger a bit, aren't you?

I really don't care too much about the Sheehan thing, it's obvious she was trying to get attention and I don't buy her sob story about being hot and not realizing she had a war protest shirt on for one second. She wanted to make a scene and she did. It's her MO.

Should she have been arrested? Apparently not. If she wants to sue the Capitol police then fine, go for it. She can have her day in court.

I'm laying mony that the next respose from Pat:

"Nazi's were just following orders also.........?"





You freakish lefties are waaaaaaaaaay is too predictable.

No, and it's not my [i]ire[/ire] that's propelling my statements, it's a law that was broken by federal police. It must be enforced against them without fail if it is to be enforced at all.

Quote:

I really don't care too much about the Sheehan thing, it's obvious she was trying to get attention and I don't buy her sob story about being hot and not realizing she had a war protest shirt on for one second. She wanted to make a scene and she did. It's her MO.

That's completely irrelevant. Will the federal thugs be held accountable to the law, that's the important question.

Quote:

Should she have been arrested? Apparently not. If she wants to sue the Capitol police then fine, go for it. She can have her day in court.

Her day in court should be a day with these federal thugs facing criminal prosecution for their lawlessness.

Look folks, a neo-con seeks cover for a lawless federal thug by implying that the law shouldn't be enforced, and if it is enforced then that's a liberal position.

You neo-con socialists are just so predictable. Enforcement of laws when it suits you, ignoring others when your favorite ox gets gored.

Awwww, your just pi$$ed that I took away your next argument.

BTW, careful who you call a neo-con.

Careful who you call a freakish lefties.

...If the shoe fits...

Not even close.

Sorta walks like a duck, sorta looks like a duck, often talks like a duck...Might as well be a duck.