Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The article
The women said they did not intend to protest. "I wanted to see if I would be able to make a statement that I feel is important, but not offensive, in a rally for my president," said Janet Voorhies, 48, a teacher in training.
“We chose this phrase specifically because we didn't think it would be offensive or degrading or obscene," said Tania Tong, 34, a special education teacher.
|
Fact is they're right. "Protect Our Civil Liberties" is just about as nonpartisan and inoffensive as can be. Even the GOP workers thought so. These 3 women got past 3 security checkpoints without a problem and were freely mingling inside the convention area. Just one measly campaign workers had a snit about the t-shirt and had security eject them.
Bottom Line: I think that it was the one campaign worker that caused this whole problem. If the worker really thought that the women could be potential troublemakers, he could have had them tailed so that they would be ejected if they did start trouble. This whole article and situation could have been avoided if the women were actually kicked out for heckling because nobody would care about what their t-shirts said. Instead, this whole situation reflects poorly on Bush.
Pre-emption (sp?) is always an iffy thing. It can work beautifully if it works, or it can blow up in your face. This is an example of the latter. It's not worth it.