Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Done Deal | Because "The Singer for REO Sp... »

Wednesday, February 1, 2006

Everything That’s Wrong w/ This Country…And Always Has Been

Posted by on February 1 at 10:27 AM

From Drudge:

FLASHBACK: Man Wearing Anti-Clinton T-Shirt Removed from Senate Gallery at Impeachment Trial

Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war activist who was removed from the House gallery last night before the State of the Union address for wearing a t-shirt with a political message, is not the first person to be tossed from a Congressional gallery at a high-profile event for wearing a political t-shirt.

In the early days of the Senate’s impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in January 1999, a Pennsylvania man named Dave Delp was removed by the Capitol police from the Senate gallery for wearing a t-shirt that said, “Clinton doesn’t inhale, he sucks.”

The Pennsylvania school teacher was yanked out of a VIP Senate gallery and briefly detained during the impeachment trial for wearing a T-shirt with graphic language dissing President Clinton.

Delp, 42, of Carlisle, Pa., and a friend had just settled into their seats when four Capitol security guards approached them. Delp said at the time that he was ordered to button his coat and follow the guards. Outside the chamber, he was told “several people felt threatened by your shirt.”

Even after establishing that Delp was a guest of Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), the guards wouldn’t let him back in and escorted him to a basement security area, where they questioned and photographed him.

After being given one of the photos as a souvenir, Delp said he was banned from the Capitol for the rest of the day. “They were polite and professional,” Delp added, “but they really did scare me. I think I should have been given the chance to cover up.”

CommentsRSS icon

"after being given one of the photos as a souvenir..." lol. our tax dollars hard at work, folks.

He was removed. He was not arrested.

The goal here was to remove a disruptive presemce at an official event, not silence opposition.

Also (and hey, Cindy knew she wouldn't be able to wear that shirt and I wouldn't expect that anyone could wear a protest shirt at an event like that, no matter who was standing at the podium), it's telling that the 1999 tshirt crasher was wearing a dumb bumper sticker slogan that "slammed" Clinton with absolutely no real indictment of his character or actions, but Cindy was just wearing a shirt stating a deplorable matter of fact which didn't mention Bush at all. Given the facts it's hard to believe that Bush has any approval rating at all.

ARRESTING Sheehan is definitely scary and weird—and I'm psyched that she's taking legal action. But simply removing someone for wearing a "Clinton Sucks" t-shirt is also dumb and wrong.

And you're getting into a little dicey Animal Farm speak by parsing "remove a disruptive presence" as "opposed" to "silence opposition." You're giving Clinton access to a slippery slope there, Kevin.

When you go to someone else's house, you should expect to follow their rules.

If you don't follow the rules, you can be asked to leave. I have no issue with that. The issue I have is the arrest.

Silencing opposition is being done with intimidation using the legal system. This is the scary part.

I just read this on

"Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Fla., was removed from the gallery because she was wearing a T-shirt that read, "Support the Troops - Defending Our Freedom."

She was not arrested. She was removed. Apparently the CONTENT of the shirt means the difference between removal and arrest. Now it all makes sense!!!!

"Someone else's House," Kevin?

The guy was in the Senate gallery in the U.S. Capitol building. That is not someone else's house. Your tax dollars etc....

If he'd actually been disruptive, yeah, remove him, but the guy was wearing a t-shirt.

I’m a little disturbed by the rule, but I’m not sure they screwed up. I think that the difference between being removed and being arrested has to do with how willingly the folks participated. Much as I love what she does, it seems like Cindy refused to follow the initial order/request.

I've read a few accounts of both incidents. I haven't read anything about Cindy Sheehan resisting. She was descrived as being cooperative.

Beverly Young, on the other hand is descibed as resisting and quoted as calling the officer a "moron".

The only difference between arrest and removal seems to be the message of the t-shirt, not the behavior of the wearer.

Hey man...sorry I missed the party.

Hi you have a nice homepage

Hey man...sorry I missed the party.

This is the coolest La Cocina.

Hi you have a nice homepage

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).