Rep. Bobby Rush kicked out of House chamber for hoodie

Page 1 of 1 [ 12 posts ] 

AnonymousAnonymous
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 69,878
Location: Portland, Oregon

29 Mar 2012, 3:16 pm

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/h ... ing-hoodie

He did so in protest of the shooting of Trayvon Martin while
speaking out against racial profiling.


_________________
Silly NTs, I have Aspergers, and having Aspergers is gr-r-reat!


snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

30 Mar 2012, 10:23 am

What an idiot.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

30 Mar 2012, 12:49 pm

AnonymousAnonymous wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/218691-rep-bobby-rush-kicked-off-house-floor-for-wearing-hoodie

He did so in protest of the shooting of Trayvon Martin while
speaking out against racial profiling.


Would a Jewish member of the house be asked to leave if he wore a skull cap?

ruveyn



LennytheWicked
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 545

30 Mar 2012, 5:16 pm

ruveyn wrote:
AnonymousAnonymous wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/218691-rep-bobby-rush-kicked-off-house-floor-for-wearing-hoodie

He did so in protest of the shooting of Trayvon Martin while
speaking out against racial profiling.


Would a Jewish member of the house be asked to leave if he wore a skull cap?

ruveyn


A Jewish member wouldn't be elected if he wore a skull cap. :roll:



shrox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

30 Mar 2012, 5:42 pm

Personally, I don't like wearing hoodies. For me they block my view, I like to be able to see all around. Half the population here in Eureka wears hoodies, and they never look when crossing the street, or even just walking down the street.



Alexender
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194
Location: wrongplanet

30 Mar 2012, 5:48 pm

I mostly like the pouch, I rarely see people wear the hoods


_________________
www.wrongplanet.net


shrox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

30 Mar 2012, 6:00 pm

Alexender wrote:
I mostly like the pouch, I rarely see people wear the hoods


The rain and fog is why people wear them here.



Alexender
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194
Location: wrongplanet

30 Mar 2012, 6:08 pm

If its cold or rainy, but still if its only 40 degrees then there isn't much of a reason to wear the hood


_________________
www.wrongplanet.net


shrox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

30 Mar 2012, 6:18 pm

Alexender wrote:
If its cold or rainy, but still if its only 40 degrees then there isn't much of a reason to wear the hood


There's about 20,000 hoodiephites here you can try to convince...

Hoodieians? Hooders?



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

31 Mar 2012, 5:23 pm

The first word that comes to my mind is decorum.
Aside from the hoodie, wtf was his reasoning for ranting like that to congress?
His ranting didn't even make any sense.
There's nothing they can do about what happened, anyway.
:roll:



Tadzio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 877

31 Mar 2012, 11:26 pm

ruveyn wrote:
AnonymousAnonymous wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/218691-rep-bobby-rush-kicked-off-house-floor-for-wearing-hoodie

He did so in protest of the shooting of Trayvon Martin while
speaking out against racial profiling.


Would a Jewish member of the house be asked to leave if he wore a skull cap?

ruveyn


Raptor wrote:
The first word that comes to my mind is decorum.
Aside from the hoodie, wtf was his reasoning for ranting like that to congress?
His ranting didn't even make any sense.
There's nothing they can do about what happened, anyway.
:roll:


Hi ruveyn & Raptor,

Court wrote:
The Constitution does not oblige the government to accommodate religiously motivated conduct that is forbidden by neutral rules, see Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 110 S.Ct. 1595, 108 L.Ed.2d 876 (1990), and therefore does not entitle anyone to wear religious headgear in places where rules of general application require all heads to be bare or to be covered in uniform ways (for example, by military caps or helmets). See Goldman v. Weinberger, 475 U.S. 503, 106 S.Ct. 1310, 89 L.Ed.2d 478 (1986). Yet the judicial branch is free to extend spectators more than their constitutional minimum entitlement.

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/app ... 53/500176/

Court wrote:
Petitioner, an Orthodox Jew and ordained rabbi, was ordered not to wear a yarmulke while on duty and in uniform as a commissioned officer in the Air Force at March Air Force Base, pursuant to an Air Force regulation that provides that authorized headgear may be worn out of doors but that indoors "[h]eadgear [may] not be worn . . . except by armed security police in the performance of their duties." Petitioner then brought an action in Federal District Court, claiming that the application of the regulation to prevent him from wearing his yarmulke infringed upon his First Amendment freedom to exercise his religious beliefs. The District Court permanently enjoined the Air Force from enforcing the regulation against petitioner. The Court of Appeals reversed.
Held: The First Amendment does not prohibit the challenged regulation from being applied to petitioner, even though its effect is to restrict the wearing of the headgear required by his religious beliefs. That Amendment does not require the military to accommodate such practices as wearing a yarmulke in the face of its view that they would detract from the uniformity sought by dress regulations. Here, the Air Force has drawn the line essentially between religious apparel that is visible and that which is not, and the challenged regulation reasonably and evenhandedly regulates dress in the interest of the military's perceived need for uniformity. Pp. 475 U. S. 506-510.

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/475/503/

"Decorum" requires the strong restraining with double quad-laces of the American Fasces, --a little more pleasing than the capering of a butcher's block, but not quite so much so as that of a wash-tub. Its greatest merit is the steely rigor of its decorum. The dancers, however, like ourselves, are a shade less appalling proper off the floor than on it.

The axe is more functional with weapon wielding barbarians that are beneath the guillotine:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... statue.jpg
Image

Tadzio



jojobean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk

01 Apr 2012, 10:43 am

Had Trayvon been aborted rather than shot....I think the reaction would have been different, even if Rush was wearing a plastic uterus on his head.

Jojo


_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin