# Grandmother Escorted From Polling Center Because Of Button - Colorado



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 5, 2006)

*Grandmother Escorted From Polling Center Because Of Button* 





*Author: *The Denver Channel   *Source: *The Denver Channel (CO) 




*Title: *GRANDMOTHER ESCORTED FROM POLLING CENTER BECAUSE OF BUTTON

A Colorado Springs woman who sported a button that read: "Grandmothers for Peace" as she cast her ballot early this week said she was pitched from the El Paso County Clerk and Recorder's Office.

Election officials said 63-year-old Rita Ague violated a law against campaigning within 100 feet of a polling place when she tried to vote Monday.  [*Read Full Story*]
Source: Wrens Nest


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 5, 2006)

Whether is was illegal or not and in my opinion it wasn't, they probably could have handled it a lot better by just asking her to remove the pin of cover it while she was in the polling area.....it seems like everything always ends up as extremes, no more quick and polite handling of things....


----------



## Phoenix44 (Nov 5, 2006)

Geez, we used to have freedom of speech.


----------



## OUMoose (Nov 5, 2006)

Ping898 said:


> Whether is was illegal or not and in my opinion it wasn't, they probably could have handled it a lot better by just asking her to remove the pin of cover it while she was in the polling area.....it seems like everything always ends up as extremes, no more quick and polite handling of things....


Quick and polite doesn't make headlines.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 5, 2006)

It has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
It has do with the law.  There is no campaining allowed in the plling area - most places that I am familair with say no campaining within 100 feet.
She broke the law and paid a price.
The fact that she is a "grandmother" also has nothing to do with it.  Why should someone who is a "grandmother" be allowed to break the law?

Also, take that same grandmother and send her back to the same poll wearing a button that says "fight terrorism" and you have the liberal left screaming about it.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Nov 5, 2006)

there's going to be subtext with this.

most people in an authority position are decent folk.  you hear about unreasonable stuff like this from time to time because it makes for good ink.

but most of the time, you find the guard/monitor/whatever was provoked.  read about a security guard smacking some teenager with a baton?  you're likely to discover the kid just gave him the bird and called him a filthy name.

i'm certain the situation could have been handled better.  i'm equally certain it could have been handled worse.  let's not all pay attention to peace grannie and stop watching to make sure this election is carried out fairly.


----------



## Last Fearner (Nov 6, 2006)

Bob Hubbard said:


> *Grandmother Escorted From Polling Center Because Of Button*


 
Ok, now I know I shouldn't mix reading Martial Art forums with politics. After reading this title, I kept wondering why a Grandmaster was escorted from a polling center! Then I realize . . . oh . . . a *GrandMOTHER*! jeesh!

Well, I can agree that anyone, regardless of their age or anything else, should be held to the rule of law. However, I also believe in the equal application of the "spirit of the law." I don't know all the details, or exactly what this "button" looked like that caused it to be classified as a "campaign" button, but I can not imagine *ANY* political party saying that they are not in favor of "peace." So who could she be campaigning for or against. What if the button had said "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute!"? Is one political party for pollution, and one against it? (don't answer that you smart alecks!)

Be careful if you take your kids to the polls, and they're wearing Garanimals with a donkey or an elephant on them! :lol2: 

Last Fearner


----------



## Ping898 (Nov 6, 2006)

OUMoose said:


> Quick and polite doesn't make headlines.


as I said....seems like everything is always at extremes....


----------



## Marginal (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> It has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
> It has do with the law. There is no campaining allowed in the plling area - most places that I am familair with say no campaining within 100 feet.
> She broke the law and paid a price.
> The fact that she is a "grandmother" also has nothing to do with it. Why should someone who is a "grandmother" be allowed to break the law?


So if I kicked you out of a polling place because you openly displayed a corporate logo, (say, a Nike swoosh) telling you that you are advocating for sweatshops, you'd agree that my action was reasonable?


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 6, 2006)

I find it odd that "Peace" is campaigning...  would make a damn good case for not voting for the side that took exception.

At least there is some sanity in that article though:



> The American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado said peace isn't a political stance, and tossing Ague out of a public building was probably unconstitutional.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 7, 2006)

The ACLU is one of those left wing organizations that would take offense at someone wearing a "fight terrorism" button and would never defend someone that did.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 7, 2006)

Marginal said:


> So if I kicked you out of a polling place because you openly displayed a corporate logo, (say, a Nike swoosh) telling you that you are advocating for sweatshops, you'd agree that my action was reasonable?



Now this is just stupid.  No wonder you have your rep points disabled.
Too bad you like to give the negatives.  You'd get it back.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Nov 7, 2006)

*=============
Mod. Note. 
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Jonathan Randall
-MT Moderator-* 

- Also, if posters have any questions or complaints about the reputation system please contact an MT Administrator or Assistant Administrator.


----------



## Don Roley (Nov 7, 2006)

bushidomartialarts said:


> there's going to be subtext with this.
> 
> most people in an authority position are decent folk.  you hear about unreasonable stuff like this from time to time because it makes for good ink.
> 
> but most of the time, you find the guard/monitor/whatever was provoked.  read about a security guard smacking some teenager with a baton?  you're likely to discover the kid just gave him the bird and called him a filthy name.



You do have a point. There is the known tactic of causing a problem and forcing the authorities to drag you off to jail. It is all for the cameras. I kind of wonder if she was asked to remove the pin while she was there, refused and then excorted out. Or if maybe she was doing something else. This sounds a little too much of a perfect PR story to not raise my suspicious nature.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Nov 7, 2006)

_I find it odd that "Peace" is campaigning... would make a damn good case for not voting for the side that took exception._

I think it's one of those odd things in our society today that wse have a hard time distinguishing between the literal and the implied, at least legally.  On the one hand, the ACLU can, correctly, argue that "Peace" is not political speech in any literal sense.  On the other hand, in today's political environment, it's hard  to say that a person wearing a button like "Grandmothers For Peace", especially in a political location, is not trying to make a political statement.  Or at least that's it's likely to be taken  that way to the average observer.

We've reach a point where it's a bt difficult to appeal to a sorta of 'common sense' understanding in the legal realm.  Maybe because common sense is not so common anymore?

Was it 'poltical speech'.   A reasonable person could say "probably" and a reasonable person could say "not really" and both would be at least rational and we get wrapped around 'meaning' vs 'intent'


----------



## elder999 (Nov 7, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> The ACLU is one of those left wing organizations that would take offense at someone wearing a "fight terrorism" button and would never defend someone that did.


 

Actually, while it's roots are quite left-wing, in practice they've come to the defense of virtually anyone's Constitutional rights, including the KKK's right to march publicly, so it's quite likely that they would defend someone that did wear a "fight terrorism" button. It's also just as likely that someone wearing it would have been thrown out of the polls as well, but that's neither here nor there, as the definition of "political speech" and campaigning is dependent upon the language used in the _state statute_ that applies the federal principle. It varies somewhat from state to state, and, in this instance, was properly applied, no matter how silly it seems.....


----------



## fireman00 (Nov 7, 2006)

its been against the law to make attempts to influence voters within xx number of feet at polling places for years for obvious reasons - the first being that God forbid my candidate were to win - you would be yelling bloody murder that I influened voters.  You won't seen candidates standing outside polling places for just that reason.

Hats, pins, flags, anything like that isn't and hasn't been allowed in polling places for years.


----------



## Marginal (Nov 7, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> The ACLU is one of those left wing organizations that would take offense at someone wearing a "fight terrorism" button and would never defend someone that did.


They defended the American Nazi party. Can't get much more right wing than that.


----------



## TonyMac (Nov 8, 2006)

I'm sorry. Wearing a button that says grandmothers for peace is not campaigning unless there was a referendum vote on war going on.


----------



## Kacey (Nov 8, 2006)

Not that I am in any way condoning the actions of the officials at this polling place - I'm not - but I will say that they are volunteers, not very well trained, and following a set of prescribed rules.  Does that mean they should have tried something else first - like asking her to remove or cover the button?  Or asking what it referred to, to see if it really wasn't allowed?  You bet.  But these volunteers are doing the best they can - at least they participate.


----------



## MA-Caver (Nov 8, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> It has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
> It has do with the law.  There is no campaining allowed in the plling area - most places that I am familair with say no campaining within 100 feet.
> She broke the law and paid a price.
> The fact that she is a "grandmother" also has nothing to do with it.  Why should someone who is a "grandmother" be allowed to break the law?
> ...



Well geez might as well all not say ANYTHING at all and just be big ole' dumb cows then huh?


----------



## crushing (Nov 8, 2006)

Marginal said:


> They defended the American Nazi party. Can't get much more right wing than that.


 
That, of course, depends on which limited two-dimension political spectrum you use.  I don't think I would put them in with libertarians, equality of right (as opposed to equality of outcome), and laissez faire capitalists.

One thing's for sure the flawed line spectrum sure gets abused a lot.

It would be nice if something like the political compass below was used to help describe where people stand politically.  Maybe something kind of like this:


----------



## Carol (Nov 8, 2006)

I doubt that the person would have been escorted if she wore a peace sign or a button that simply said "Peace", or even if she wore a button that said "Fight Terrorism."

"Grandmothers for Peace" is an established political action group that campaigns for a set agenda.  As is Greenpeace, the Gun Owners Action League, and the Christian Coaltion.


----------



## crushing (Nov 8, 2006)

Oops, I meant this chart:


----------



## Cryozombie (Nov 8, 2006)

crushing said:


> That, of course, depends on which limited two-dimension political spectrum you use.  I don't think I would put them in with libertarians, equality of right (as opposed to equality of outcome), and laissez faire capitalists.
> 
> One thing's for sure the flawed line spectrum sure gets abused a lot.
> 
> It would be nice if something like the political compass below was used to help describe where people stand politically.  Maybe something kind of like this:



At least I am on top.


----------

