Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/1/2006 11:16:21 AM EDT
As reported on Rush's show today! Her 1st amanedment rights were also violated. Sigh.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index_594.html

FOAD!

Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:18:59 AM EDT
After seeing the pictures, it just confirms that she has absolutely no class.

SBG
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:19:48 AM EDT
This dumbass gets far too much attention. Pay her no mind, and she will just fade away..

F#ck her!

--VT
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:20:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:21:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ScaryBlackGuns:
After seeing the pictures, it just confirms that she has absolutely no class.

SBG



Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:22:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
img461.imageshack.us/img461/2020/asheehansingsnew250x4xt.jpg



Babe......I got you babe........I got you babe......
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:23:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:29:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2006 11:30:43 AM EDT by ScaryBlackGuns]

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By ScaryBlackGuns:
After seeing the pictures, it just confirms that she has absolutely no class.

SBG



img474.imageshack.us/img474/3075/psotu4dr.jpg



Yeah, that was the exact same outfit that she wore to the State of the Union. I think anyone who wears a t-shirt to such an event should be drug out of the building by their hair kicking and screaming. Show respect for the event and the office and have some class.

SBG
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:36:45 AM EDT
The media whore just needs to fade away.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:38:42 AM EDT
She is from Kaliphonia, and you people act suprised!?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:39:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2006 11:40:22 AM EDT by ArmedAggie]

Originally Posted By unforgiven5150:
The media whore just needs to fade away.



But it's all about her son!!!

I wonder if she even remembers that he died, or what his name was? Cuz for damned sure it has been all about her ever since.

ETA: Case in point, some of you forgot about that, huh?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:40:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Outsider_10fp:
She is from Kaliphonia, and you people act suprised!?



She goes above and beyond the norm as far as whackos go in California.. Damn cunt.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:42:06 AM EDT
No SHE violated the dress code. Jesus.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:45:55 AM EDT
She was invited bt Rep.Lynn Woolsey from California ,her website has her reaction to Sheehan's arrest.


Woolsey Statement Regarding Cindy Sheehan
February 1, 2006


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma) today issued the following statement regarding Cindy Sheehan’s arrest in the gallery of the House of Representatives before the State of the Union address. Mrs. Sheehan was Rep. Lynn Woolsey’s guest to the President’s State of the Union address.

“Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President? Cindy Sheehan, who gave her own flesh and blood for this disastrous war, did not violate any rules of the House of Representatives. She merely wore a shirt that highlighted the human cost of the Iraq war and expressed a view different than that of the President. Free speech and the First Amendment exist to protect dissenting statements like Ms. Sheehan’s last night.

“Stifling the truth will not blind Americans to the immorality of sending young Americans to die in an unnecessary war, against a nation that posed no threat to our security. The President's speech last night was yet another attempt to distort history, as he suggested -- once again -- that the 9/11 terrorists came from Iraq. Everyone knows this is not true. We must not be afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes. It's time to bring our troops home.”

How many mistruths can you spot? Friggen California Liberal Moonbats.

Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:47:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By leelaw:

Originally Posted By Outsider_10fp:
She is from Kaliphonia, and you people act suprised!?



She goes above and beyond the norm as far as whackos go in California.. Damn cunt.


Yeah, don't lump us in with that bag of crap.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:47:19 AM EDT
Can someone chop the photo of her sitting down at the table to say 2245 pornos?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:47:54 AM EDT
Oh I see...she was just hot from climbing stairs so she took her jacket off and what do you know...she forgot about having that T-shirt on underneath. I'm sure see would have zipped her jacket back up immediately once she noticed it.

Is anyone out there, even hard core libs, stupid enough to believe that????
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:50:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PinPointOne:
“Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President?"

How many mistruths can you spot? Friggen California Liberal Moonbats.



I found one!!

Someone with a pro-war shirt was also asked to leave.

But I do think it's a clear violation of the First Amendment to ask them to leave on those grounds.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:54:47 AM EDT
when will they get it right? (never) it is freedom of speech, not "free" speech....geez
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:56:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PinPointOne:
She was invited bt Rep.Lynn Woolsey from California ,her website has her reaction to Sheehan's arrest.


Woolsey Statement Regarding Cindy Sheehan
February 1, 2006


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma) today issued the following statement regarding Cindy Sheehan’s arrest in the gallery of the House of Representatives before the State of the Union address. Mrs. Sheehan was Rep. Lynn Woolsey’s guest to the President’s State of the Union address.

“Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President? Cindy Sheehan, who gave her own flesh and blood for this disastrous war, did not violate any rules of the House of Representatives. She merely wore a shirt that highlighted the human cost of the Iraq war and expressed a view different than that of the President. Free speech and the First Amendment exist to protect dissenting statements like Ms. Sheehan’s last night.

“Stifling the truth will not blind Americans to the immorality of sending young Americans to die in an unnecessary war, against a nation that posed no threat to our security. The President's speech last night was yet another attempt to distort history, as he suggested -- once again -- that the 9/11 terrorists came from Iraq. Everyone knows this is not true. We must not be afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes. It's time to bring our troops home.”

How many mistruths can you spot? Friggen California Liberal Moonbats.




Sheehan's rep used her for political gain (she had to know Sheehan would do something stupid if she showed) and Sheehan played right along.

Pathetic to use someone. More pathetic to continually allow yourself to be used while convincing yourself it is all about you.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:58:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By PinPointOne:
“Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President?"

How many mistruths can you spot? Friggen California Liberal Moonbats.


But I do think it's a clear violation of the First Amendment to ask them to leave on those grounds.



I disagree if the rules are applied equally to all. The speech is about the president's address, not every idiot's pet cause. If the rule was not in place it would be an even bigger circus than it already is.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 11:59:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2006 2:08:18 PM EDT by The_Beer_Slayer]

Originally Posted By Tromatic:
As reported on Rush's show today! Her 1st amanedment rights were also violated. Sigh.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index_594.html

FOAD!





Here's a hotlink for the people that are too lazy...

DO NOT HOTLINK THIS STUFF
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:03:08 PM EDT
Leftists are going to sue w/o grounds anyway, so the JBT's might as well beat them with nightsticks!
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:03:15 PM EDT
Sheehan's demanor & personality leave no question in my mind as to why her (RIP) son signed up. He wasn't gonna grow any chest hair living under the same roof w/ a "mommies forever" apologist.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:03:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HK_Shooter_03:

Originally Posted By Tromatic:
As reported on Rush's show today! Her 1st amanedment rights were also violated. Sigh.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index_594.html

FOAD!





Here's a hotlink for the people that are too lazy...





fyi: we usually do not hotlink to sites of the DU persuasion....
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:04:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2006 12:05:31 PM EDT by Admiral_Crunch]

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
I disagree if the rules are applied equally to all. The speech is about the president's address, not every idiot's pet cause. If the rule was not in place it would be an even bigger circus than it already is.



Agreed, but I still believe it is an illegal rule. Political speech is exactly what the 1st is about. Nevermind that the SCOTUS has decided that the 1A doesn't really exist anymore.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:11:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Outsider_10fp:
She is from Kaliphonia, and you people act suprised!?



Her son who was killed while on duty in Iraq was also from Calif...
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:15:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HK_Shooter_03:

Originally Posted By Tromatic:
As reported on Rush's show today! Her 1st amanedment rights were also violated. Sigh.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index_594.html

FOAD!





Here's a hotlink for the people that are too lazy...

www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index_594.html



I clicked on the link just to see who registered BanEdSr.com.

Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:18:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Sheehan's demanor & personality leave no question in my mind as to why her (RIP) son signed up. He wasn't gonna grow any chest hair living under the same roof w/ a "mommies forever" apologist.




I read that Cindy Sheehan hadn't had custody of her son since he was 7 years old, when as a result of a divorce, he was in his fathers custody


No wonder the father divorced the moonbat..........and another just recently divorced her crazy ass


This hooker is nuttier than a squirrel turd
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:20:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch: Agreed, but I still believe it is an illegal rule. Political speech is exactly what the 1st is about. Nevermind that the SCOTUS has decided that the 1A doesn't really exist anymore.
Then Cindy Sheetstain should've had the good sense not to interrupt President GW's 1st amendment right. He was in the middle of a political speech! She was just being a bothersome insect, a pest.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:21:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:


Well, now, that looks like a formal, professional gathering.

Did you get some local high school cheerleaders to make that sign for you?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:26:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By PinPointOne:
“Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President?"

How many mistruths can you spot? Friggen California Liberal Moonbats.


But I do think it's a clear violation of the First Amendment to ask them to leave on those grounds.



I disagree if the rules are applied equally to all. The speech is about the president's address, not every idiot's pet cause. If the rule was not in place it would be an even bigger circus than it already is.




Truth.


I can imagine it now... 1812, and every kook at a formal political event is wearing a shirt with "End the war with Britain now! No blood for freedom!" stenciled on it.



If I was invited to the State of the Union address I sure as hell wouldn't wear my "Vote from the rooftops" t-shirt. That's just asinine.



Maybe next year they can sell banner space to every PAC that is interested?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:27:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
I disagree if the rules are applied equally to all. The speech is about the president's address, not every idiot's pet cause. If the rule was not in place it would be an even bigger circus than it already is.



Agreed, but I still believe it is an illegal rule. Political speech is exactly what the 1st is about. Nevermind that the SCOTUS has decided that the 1A doesn't really exist anymore.



I don't think you would likely find anyone here who thought it OK to interrupt President Clinton during his SOTU speach. I do not believe that causing a comotion during a state of the union speach should be treated as acceptable behaviour.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:29:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By redfisher:

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Sheehan's demanor & personality leave no question in my mind as to why her (RIP) son signed up. He wasn't gonna grow any chest hair living under the same roof w/ a "mommies forever" apologist.




I read that Cindy Sheehan hadn't had custody of her son since he was 7 years old, when as a result of a divorce, he was in his fathers custody


No wonder the father divorced the moonbat..........and another just recently divorced her crazy ass


This hooker is nuttier than a squirrel turd



Well, I stand corrected. Feel bad for Dad.

Two divorces doesn't surprise me. Two marriages does.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:29:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ScaryBlackGuns:
After seeing the pictures, it just confirms that she has absolutely no class.

SBG


Agreed. She needs to just go the hell away already. Banish her to France or something?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:30:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Leisure_Shoot:
I don't think you would likely find anyone here who thought it OK to interrupt President Clinton during his SOTU speach. I do not believe that causing a comotion during a state of the union speach should be treated as acceptable behaviour.



Unless something happened that I haven't heard about, she didn't interrupt anyone.

She had a shirt with a slogan on it. It isn't like she tried to shout the President down or anything.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:32:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KlubMarcus:
Then Cindy Sheetstain should've had the good sense not to interrupt President GW's 1st amendment right. He was in the middle of a political speech! She was just being a bothersome insect, a pest.



Maybe I missed something, but I thought she was removed before his speech even began. She didn't interrupt anything.

And are you saying that one citizen's first amendment rights are more important than another's just because you disagree with their message?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:36:50 PM EDT
She should have just STFU, sat there, and the cameras would have been on her 24/7
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:37:42 PM EDT
Why hasn't someone taken one for the team and killed Sheehan yet? And why isn't Mrs. Young running for president?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:39:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VT4meGunCtrlisAntiUS:
This dumbass gets far too much attention. Pay her no mind, and she will just fade away..

F#ck her!

--VT



The whole country has been ignoring her and she still won't go away.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:46:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
I disagree if the rules are applied equally to all. The speech is about the president's address, not every idiot's pet cause. If the rule was not in place it would be an even bigger circus than it already is.



Agreed, but I still believe it is an illegal rule. Political speech is exactly what the 1st is about. Nevermind that the SCOTUS has decided that the 1A doesn't really exist anymore.



She violated rules of the House of Representatives, you are bound by the House's rules when you enter their Chamber. If she wanted to protest, she could do it out on the steps of Capitol hill, which would be the proper venue not in the House Chamber. Horseface was invited in by a Congressman, who is probably getting scolded by the Speaker of the House for being a jackass. Pissing off the Speaker isn't very smart.

BTW, SCOTUS cannot rule in any fashion against those rules, Separation of Powers prevents the Judicial branch from interfering with what rules the House and Senate operate under.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:49:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
I disagree if the rules are applied equally to all. The speech is about the president's address, not every idiot's pet cause. If the rule was not in place it would be an even bigger circus than it already is.



Agreed, but I still believe it is an illegal rule. Political speech is exactly what the 1st is about. Nevermind that the SCOTUS has decided that the 1A doesn't really exist anymore.



She violated rules of the House of Representatives, you are bound by the House's rules when you enter their Chamber. If she wanted to protest, she could do it out on the steps of Capitol hill, which would be the proper venue not in the House Chamber. Horseface was invited in by a Congressman, who is probably getting scolded by the Speaker of the House for being a jackass. Pissing off the Speaker isn't very smart.

BTW, SCOTUS cannot rule in any fashion against those rules, Separation of Powers prevents the Judicial branch from interfering with what rules the House and Senate operate under.



The biggest issue is that SCOTUS has ruled over and over again that it is appropriate to enact "time, place and manner" restrictions on speech.

Its a necessary qualification, otherwise it would be unconstitutional _not_ to specifically invite moonbats to every government veneration and allow them to interrupt, shout down, and trivialize it.

Having accepted an invitation to the State of the Union, she accepted the rules. (Hell, they're printed right on the access pass).


Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:55:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2006 1:02:08 PM EDT by LARRYG]

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By KlubMarcus:
Then Cindy Sheetstain should've had the good sense not to interrupt President GW's 1st amendment right. He was in the middle of a political speech! She was just being a bothersome insect, a pest.



Maybe I missed something, but I thought she was removed before his speech even began. She didn't interrupt anything.

And are you saying that one citizen's first amendment rights are more important than another's just because you disagree with their message?



Well, if you would bother to check the facts before engaging your mouth, you would know that they also removed Beverly Young, wife of Rep Bill Young's wife for having a T-shirt on with an opposite message:


Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Florida — chairman of the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee — was removed from the gallery because she was wearing a T-shirt that read, "Support the Troops — Defending Our Freedom."



www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183392,00.html

Instead of being so quick to defend leftwing lunatics, try reading.

ETA: I see that you did realize someone else had been asked to leave, but yet you continue with the nonsensical crap about "are you saying that one citizen's first amendment rights are more important than another's just because you disagree with their message?". It is as if you read it but it did not register. They asked someone else to leave who had the opposite message, yet you persist with the bullshit. Obviously, your question was answered (apparently not the way you liked) by the fact that they did ask someone else to leave.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:56:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By redfisher:

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Sheehan's demanor & personality leave no question in my mind as to why her (RIP) son signed up. He wasn't gonna grow any chest hair living under the same roof w/ a "mommies forever" apologist.




I read that Cindy Sheehan hadn't had custody of her son since he was 7 years old, when as a result of a divorce, he was in his fathers custody


No wonder the father divorced the moonbat..........and another just recently divorced her crazy ass


This hooker is nuttier than a squirrel turd



The fact that dad got custody should tell people a lot about her and it's not good.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 12:59:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By PinPointOne:
“Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President?"

How many mistruths can you spot? Friggen California Liberal Moonbats.



I found one!!

Someone with a pro-war shirt was also asked to leave.

But I do think it's a clear violation of the First Amendment to ask them to leave on those grounds.



So, are her First Amendment rights more important than the President's. I guess you think it is within her First Amendment rights to infringe on the President's and other's First Amendment rights.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 1:11:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:
Why hasn't someone taken one for the team and killed Sheehan yet?


A lot of us here will contribute to a legal defense fund.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 1:21:12 PM EDT
Out of respect for the dead soldier that probably still loved his goofy mom, just leave her alone.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 1:47:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jbweld:
Out of respect for the dead soldier that probably still loved his goofy mom, just leave her alone.



She does not love him. She loves herself. Her son fought and died for the very things that his mother is espousing as evil. He re-enlisted. He wanted to go back. Her son believed in this cause and she is using his death to help promote the opposite.

She does not love him or she would have honored him and his beliefs.

Link Posted: 2/1/2006 1:54:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By deej86:

Originally Posted By ScaryBlackGuns:
After seeing the pictures, it just confirms that she has absolutely no class.

SBG


Agreed. She needs to just go the hell away already. Banish her to France or something?



or Venezuela, with her buddy Hugo

Link Posted: 2/1/2006 3:41:17 PM EDT
She needs to STFU, her son signed a contract, took an oath and did his duty. He died serving his country, she needs to stop disgracing his sacrifice by running her piehole.

As a Soldier I get very angry over this "My son/daughter died for nothing, blah blah blah".

There were adults and voluntarily signed up and performed their duty, STFU.

If you are not a Vet, STFU.


She needed to have her ass beat a long time ago.
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 3:43:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Pointman_M4A1:
She needs to STFU, her son signed a contract, took an oath and did his duty. He died serving his country, she needs to stop disgracing his sacrifice by running her piehole.

As a Soldier I get very angry over this "My son/daughter died for nothing, blah blah blah".

There were adults and voluntarily signed up and performed their duty, STFU.

If you are not a Vet, STFU.


She needed to have her ass beat a long time ago.



I am not a vet, why do I need to STFU?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top