From Toilet Paper Media:
A gay rights activists threw glitter at Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) as she left the stage at the RightOnline conference here Saturday. The “glittering” is not the first glitter-related stunt pulled on a Republican running for president this year.
Get Equal, a California-based gay rights group, claimed responsibility for the glittering, which did not hit Bachmann. A previous glittering aimed at Newt Gingrich was more successful in reaching its target.
While I support their cause, this “glitter bombing” stuff is stupid and dangerous. I spent a number of years working security, and somebody rushing at a candidate with something in their hand (or pulling something from their pocket) would be considered a deadly threat.
Think Gabrielle Giffords or imagine somebody rushing at President Obama. The Secret Service agents guarding the President would have split seconds to react. If they capped some glitter-bomber rushing at Obama it would be ruled justifiable homicide.
BTW – The same thing applies to people with cream pies or anyone else pulling similar protest/publicity stunts.
Glitter, pies, acid …
Apparently the ability to think your way out of a wet paper bag is not required for some of these protest activities.
Next up, glitter gun that looks like a real gun. What could possibly go wrong?
Weird.
Yeah, rushing with anything in your hand (probably even a camera) is just not a good idea.
Glitter. Is that supposed to be like fairy dust?
While today that may be true. I’ll forever be grateful for the cream pie in Anita Bryant’s face as she tried everything she could to have us LGBT people burned at the stake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS91gT3XT_A
Yup that was a good one. I had forgotten all about it until you mentioned it.
From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Bryant
Time for some tazers.
I’ve never been a big politico. Just the past couple of years or so, the klown and others have gotten me more interested, to their dismay. Most of this stuff is new to me. Back in college, I was very supportive of women’s advocacy and gay rights, I had more gay friends than straight ones, and my affinities haven’t changed much over the years. Until 2007, I had been working and living abroad a lot. Pretty soon after I came back, we had the clusterfuck 2008 election season. I’d always been a Hillary supporter. I barely even knew what a Progressive or a New Democrat was. Anyway, all this activism now has my head spinning. I don’t know if I’m a Democrat anymore. I remain a strong supporter of both women and gay causes. But the progressively aggressive, hate-everyone, pay-attention-to-me-me-me political activism from some LGBT political activists lose me, and I never thought that could happen.
I wonder if some of the attention getting and hostile advocacy is because we no longer can rely on representative governement of any kind.
I am a supporter of LGBT rights because I believe supporting the rights of everyone is the only way to ensure we all get fair treatment. Plus, I have good friends who are part of this community and I’d do anything to help them too.
I am sure my fairy dust question sounds weird – but I have to wonder who thought that was a good idea? Glitter?
Amen to all that. I have family and dear friends in the LGBT community and couldn’t be more supportive of full equality. Glitter is a rainbow of sorts, I guess, though it seems highly ineffective to me.
Well, at least some of it is media filtering. They always gravitate toward the most outrageous part of any social movement. It’s easy to get the impression that the whatever-group is crazy or stupid or demanding outrageous stuff. The great majority of gay rights activists aren’t risking life or serious injury to throw some silly glitter.
That being said, I don’t get the glitter thing. The pie in the face thing — that I get. I get animal rights activists who throw fake blood on fur-wearers (although I’m not actually down with that, at least I get it). What is the message, they’re all superficial glitter and no substance? (all hat, no cattle?) Well, that’s not very original or exciting, since we all knew that already. Plus neither Gingrich or Bachman are particular shiny. Now glittering Obama would make some sort of sense.
And I believe that. Wasn’t the glitter thing as much as the aggressive LGBT activist voices I see on facebook and twitter, and I connect with many. I should probably ease up some, too much politics, could be hearing voices in my head. 🙂
been doing that foe years 😆 😆