Thursday, February 02, 2006

When the truth becomes spin.

Cincy Sheehan spoke out about her eviction from the State of the Union Speech and arrest in Washington.

As most of you have probably heard, I was arrested before the State of the Union Address tonight. I am speechless with fury at what happened and with grief over what we have lost in our country. There have been lies from the police and distortions by the press. (Shocker) So this is what really happened:

This afternoon at the People's State of the Union Address in DC where I was joined by Congresspersons Lynn Woolsey and John Conyers, Ann Wright, Malik Rahim and John Cavanagh, Lynn brought me a ticket to the State of the Union Address. At that time, I was wearing the shirt that said: 2245 Dead. How many more?

What was done to Cindy Sheehan was wrong.

What was done to Beverly Young is never mentioned.

Both were ejected from the State of the Union Speech for the same
offense: wearing a tee shirt with a slogan on it. Progressives get
upset over the suppression of Cindy Sheehan's rights. Progressives
(this forum, Daily Kos blog, etc.) do not mention Beverly Young at all.
Why? because her tee shirt said "support our troops." In Cindy's case,
there was the additional fault by the Capital Police of placing her
under arrest while Beverly Yound was only escorted away from the premises.

Beverly Young did not even make most mainstream media.

A Google Search for "State of the Union" "Cindy Sheehan" gets over half
a million hits. Substitute "Beverly Young" and you get 305.

If there is outrage for Cindy Sheehan, should there also not be outrage
for Beverly Young?

Then, maybe we should return to the days of Thomas Jefferson, when he
merely wrote out his State of the Union Report and had it walked over to
Congress. The incessenct Demorcrats stand up and applaud / Republicans
stand up and applaud / made for television grimaces from perspective
candidates has taken a serious event and placed it in the realm of
political theater, more meaningful for the effect that one wants to
portray than for the presence of ideas.

Cindy Sheehan took one more step deeper into the realm of spin meister
politician when she presented her case as suppression of her personal
dissent without aknowledging that this was not a one sided event in
which she had been singled out for her particular opposition.

I would like to have seen both Cindy and Beverly in a joint appearance
(though unlikely) in which they would have to deal with whether it was
right to have been removed from the gallery. Since it was both, then
maybe the questions go to whether this particular event is the place
for such expressions of support / dissent and whether we really want the
gallery at the State of the Union Speech to become the refuge for every
person with a cause to push, cheering, jeering, waving signs, etc. I
would tend to think not. But then I am an old fogey.

No comments: