An hour of my life — and about a pint of Mylanta — was wasted as I endured a mixture of George Dubya Bush's lies, pandering, and right-wing absurdities while doing my annual Annotated State of the Union. The time would have been better and cerainly more enjoyably spent experiencing root canal, undergoing electroshock or struggling through sex with — ugh — a man. Turns out we didn't need the president to tell us whether the union was weak or strong — another incident offered the correct answer much more succinctly.
Bush invited the parents of a dead Death Brigader — one who allegedly agreed with the Iraq invasion and occupation, natch — to be his guests at his annual address before Congress. One patriotic mother who lost her son in the Iraq debacle is Cindy Sheehan. She didn't make the guest list. But she was there.
Sheehan, the antiwar activist who has been reviled by the Bushies (they only like military parents who agree with them), was invited to the SOTU by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), who gave the outspoken lefty peacenik a front-row seat after she reportedly promised she would behave.
"I'm proud that Cindy's my guest tonight," Woolsey told the Associated Press before the speech. "She has made a difference in the debate to bring our troops home from Iraq."
Sadly, Sheehan didn't get to witness the oration: She was arrested by Capitol Hill cops and escorted from the building before the GOPster's Emmy-worthy performance began. According to CNN, Sheehan had smuggled an antiwar banner into the Capitol gallery that she was planning to unfurl in an effort to embarrass the Resident.
From Brad Blog:
The BRAD BLOG has confirmed the arrest moments ago with David Swanson of AfterDowningStreet.org.
According to Swanson, Sheehan was "arrested for wearing the shirt she was wearing all day, which had the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq... She was lifted out of her seat [in the Capitol Chamber gallery] by the Capitol Police and taken away."
She was wearing an antiwar T-shirt (according to MSNBC, it merely said, "2245 - How many more"), which I would think should be well within her rights to wear, so long as her naughty bits are covered. If we don't have the right to wear what we want, well, that doesn't say much for the state of the nation, does it?