We the tax payers will foot the bill!

The glitter bomber should foot the bill. Take it out of every government check he'll ever get. Deduct it from his Social Security account. Take it out of every tax refund. If he applies for food stamps or welfare, take it out of that too.

Ruin this man for the rest of his life and make him starve for his crime in abject misery. Show him the hatred he showed to Romney.

Yeah! Let's glitter bomb the punk!

What a load of non-sense. It's glitter. So what?

Yeah! Let's glitter bomb the punk!

What a load of non-sense. It's glitter. So what?

It's a perfect mask for an assassination, that's what. The glitter has to be tested for anthrax, nerve agents and other biological and chemical poisons because most people who don't like the American electoral process are quite evil people who would do such things in the name of Jihad.

Just a little bit of sarin or botulin toxin in the glitter and it's as good as any murder weapon on the planet.

The implied threat from this evil and despicable terrorist bastard is "I could have killed you."

I think the glitter bomber deserves to be treated like a terrorist... because he is one.

MeanGene - your name fits you; 'ruin this man for the rest of his life' for throwing confetti on someone? That's sort of like shooting a guy for stepping on your foot.

I'm all good with Homophobes getting glitter bombed. Take it too trial and good luck getting 12 people to convict someone, thanks for wasting MORE taxpayer money protecting your right to hate, not someone's right to dissent.

OK, so what happens if it's the POTUS getting glitter bombed and not just one of those 'evil Republicans'? It would be way too easy to put some kind of substance on the glitter to cause serious harm. The bottom line is they are throwing something at the candidates. If that is the only way you can get your point across, maybe you should just give it up.

MeanGene - your name fits you; 'ruin this man for the rest of his life' for throwing confetti on someone? That's sort of like shooting a guy for stepping on your foot.

It wasn't about throwing confetti. It was about the threat made.

If somebody put a burning cross on the White House lawn, would you say that's just a campfire? Of course not. It's clearly a threat. Even though there is no immediate danger to life or limb from a burning cross, the terrorism of the act is what makes it a criminal deed.

This was a terrorist threat. It said "I could have killed you, Mitt Romney."

Yes, how long will it be possible to keep Romney in jail to protect our country?

If somebody put a burning cross on the White House lawn, would you say that's just a campfire?

Well, based on the posts you regularly make here, you would.

Just ignore MeanGean. He's one of those people that loves to runs his mouth just to stir up trouble. You can't take someone that ignorant seriously.

The kid made his point. Fine him fifty bucks and send him on his way. No harm no foul. Oh, and MG979, LMAO @ you're comment. Excellent analogy!

I'm a libertarian who's pretty socially liberal, and I do support same sex marriage. While I don't agree with MeanGene necessisarily about ruining the man, I do agree with him that this is a problem (and wouldn't have a problem having the man who acted in what should be a crime footing his own bill).

Throwing something like glitter at at anyone, but particularly a Presidential candidate is fraught with all kinds of potential threats. You can't just say 'oh it's just glitter' and move on. The substance would need to be tested for all kinds of life threatening effects, and the fact remains its a form of assault.

I fully 100% support free speech, especially with regards to politics and the political process. But your right to free speech does not give you the right to infringe upon others rights. You can't assault someone and call that free speech. If you want to protest Romney's stance on same sex marriage, make signs, organize, march in protest, take your message to the internet, do whatever so long as you are not violating someone elses rights. Do the same to protest his 'general political philosophy' if you want too.

But do not throw anything at the man, glitter could be laced with all kinds of nasty stuff, and your right to protest ends where the political candidates rights to not be assaulted begins.

Ruin this man for the rest of his life

Let me guess, compassionate conservative?

See you in church on Sunday bubba...

...might wanna pray harder :(

Following the 6 months in jail, this young man can then work for free for the county, perhaps cleaning up the Occupy trash, to repay the county for the money it cost to keep him in jail. We, as taxpayers, pay for the stupidity (and also the evil actions) of our fellow citizens. It is uncivil and simply wrong to throw something at someone because you disagree with his political views. Get a degree, get active in your community, and make a difference. In the interim, since this young man did not learn civil discourse at home, he should do the time.

WE the taxpayers are also paying for secret service to protect a man who isn't even a presidential candidate yet. He hasn't won the electorate he needs why should we be paying for Mr. Armani to have personal body guards in the first place?

Arresting this kid stinks of the Bush era tactics. Like not allowing us to protest outside Madison Square when the Republican Circus was in town for the 2004 elections? This should be a warning to people that if we put the GOP in power we the people will lose our voices and our rights just to please them. As it is they've already wages war on the working classes with economic policies and took away many of our rights with the Patriot Act.

Yeah, throw glitter at old man Romney, another whiner.

Your headline " Glitter BOMBER " is way over the top. There was no attempt of physical harm. Yes he should have been escorted out and that is all but to arrest him and make him a scapegoat and criminalizing this issue is further proof how our system goes to far. Corporations and their wealthy cronies have done more harm to our country and are still free but they want to jail a guy for throwing glitter, where is the justice. One more time this is proof that those with influence and wealth can get away violating the law but a working class individual is criminalized for glitter throwing. The most he should be charged with is, maybe littering.

My only question is where do you draw the line. OK, so glitter cannot hurt, what about sand? Rocks? Darts?

I do not care what party they are a member of, you should not be able to throw anything at anyone and that no be considered assault. No harm would mean a very light sentence or fine. But they have to make it clear it is illegal and make the punishment harsh enough to discourage others.

Winker, they call it Glitter Bomber, because that is what they call themselves. It is usually accompanied with the assailant stating "You've been glitter bombed".

If somebody put a burning cross on the White House lawn, would you say that's just a campfire?

Glitter = Burning cross? I think you might have your priorities slightly mixed up.

Random religious fanatic is random.

Putting a 20 year old in jail for expressing his political opinion is RIDICULOUS!

He wouldn't be jailed for his political opinion, he would be jailed for assault.

JC, this is political in every sense of the word! If this kid threw glitter at the checkout clerk, he would be laughed at, not jailed!

If this guy threw glitter at any one of the prez candidates at a diner, for example, probably nothing would have come of it. However, this guy is a student at the college where Romney was speaking and R now has Secret Service agents protecting him, that alone makes it a federal crime to threaten a likely prez nominee. The college can, and will, also punish this guy with suspension, or something similar. Next time it could be anthrax, thus he will be made an example of to discourage others from making the same attacks.

If this type of activity is not punished, what would happen if the next such incident was something harmful, like acid, and used against President Obama?

Acceptable protest should not include ANY type of assault because it might encourage escalation into violence.

Roy, your argument is too pragmatic for a liberal to digest. Slow down my friend... baby steps.

So if I throw glitter on the President, all the libs will just chuckle and say it was all in fun!

It was assault. Had he done it to Obama, he'd also be accused of being a racist so it would be considered a hate crime. Maybe he hates Mormons and it should be considered the same. Six months seems a little short.

If he threw glitter at Obama, I would say the SAME THING...6 months in jail is RIDICULOUS! Give him community service if you feel the need to punish him, NOT JAIL!

Yes, here come all the comments along party lines. This guy should have thought ahead. There are all kinds of ways to protest and make your point.

This will be a divisive enough election, we don't need people throwing things, even glitter.

That said, can't they come up with a better charge than "throwing a missile", glitter isn't very missile like.

Do the crime.....do the time.....its not really complicated.....and the Secret Sevice has good reason to be concerned.....just think about it for a minute!.....By the way...the glitter bomber should be grateful he did not glitter bomb the Chinese President in China.....he probably would have been tried and executed the very same day!

While jail time might seem excessive, it's still an act of violence, so I am fine with whatever he get for doing it. The problem is lack of respect for differing views in this country. I might not like what the GOP or the Dems have to offer, but there is NO REASON to be rude or assault someone. This is not the way for anyone to behave in a free society.

I don't want to live in a country where my fellow citizens think it's okay to throw objects at one another to make a political point. However, since it is obvious that the majority on this particular thread disagree with me, and since I profoundly disagree with your political views, would you put your body where your mouth is?

That's right. Post your actual home and work addresses so that we might be able to assist you in creating the kind of political nirvana you imagine should exist. Since you gutless jerks won't, can we fairly conclude you don't really believe this is a proper form of political expression?

Thanks for being so hypocritical, as always.

Rich, excellent post! Liberals/socialists/freeloaders see life through a different prism than most, thus you cannot reason with such mindless, "hypocritical" folk.

Six months in jail? So he'll be out in time to see Obama win his second term.

Just a little perspective. The secret service arrested and detained a woman in Chicago for flipping the bird at Pres Clinton as his motorcade drove past at high speed. Mr Clinton specifically directed the secret service to pick up and detain her. She was fined for making a public nuisance. So, flipping the bird is an arrestable assault but throwing glitter should be protected under the first ammendment?

So in order to have an opinion on something, we have to know where a person lives? Or their phone number, or ethnicity, or their shoe size, the shape of their nose, or their country of origin? Silly, and smacking of the despotism that many on the right seem to yearn for.

Additionally, "Rich" if that is your name, your post is presumptuous to the umpteenth degree. The very fact that you think you have something to teach me is beyond pompous. You think that you have something that I or anyone else that believes what I believe do not? I'll wait for the standard logical-fallacy-ridden Teapub answer of "yeah, I have a job, a degree, morals, etc, etc" patiently I suppose.

I think it should have been a football to the groin.

I'm a liberal, but I find this sort of "political expression" pointless. Whether it's glitter, pies, whatever, throwing objects at a politician serves no good purpose and makes the perpetrator look bad, not the targeted politician. I don't know whether this is actually a crime; that's not the point. It's stupid and it doesn't send the right message, or at least not a message that's going to make people want to join your team. We have plenty of platforms to make a case against a politician we don't like. Defeat the politician with words and ideas -- use your brains -- not by engaging in immature behavior.

Hey George,

You are nothing if not predictable. See, you missed the entire point, and for a liberal like yourself I am not surprised. Peter Smith, the criminal in this case, is being defended by the likes of you and other Americans who have no idea that throwing objects at one another is wrong. You, instead, think that throwing objects at one another because we politically disagree is a GOOD thing.

So, if you are sincere (and I think you are profoundly a liar), then put your body where your mouth is and reveal a couple locations you frequent so that the rest of us might be able to help you achieve the wonderful America you want to create. I have nothing to teach you, but we can learn from one another.

Like in this case. I think throwing things at other Americans because we disagree is wrong. You think it is right. Just man up and act out the life you say is the right one. Further, I think having opinions is great, even if they vary from mine. You, obviously since you support the criminal act of assault over a political disagreement, don't.

So let me ask you a question that I think your answer will help teach Americans about the kind of person you are...Do you want to live in a country where people throw things at one another simply because we don't like them politically? It's a simple question, but, like with my previously simply written post, my bet is you don't comprehend it. Maybe you should begin your assaults with your former English teachers. They failed.

Hey again George,

Rick-in-SD might disagree with me on most political issues. But HIS view on this subject is a respectable one. Your's is a pathetic and degenerative one.

I didn't think any politician would be upset about having people throw useless pieces of paper thrown at them.

I thought that's what the Citizens United case was all about, corporations (people) throwing around useless pieces of paper (money) in support of politicians (speech) .

For the Republicans, my rebuttal. I don't want to live in an America where I don't have the right to defend my honor by being attacked with laws that make it illegal for me to kick your @ss for running your mouth.

Remember back in school? When you'd get into a fight, you got separated and life went on. Just because your a little pansy @ss who can't back up what they say does not make it right to criminalize me because I can. Come up to me, (42 years old, 6' 2" 180lbs and say something offensive about my family), I will kick your ass all the way to the state line and then some, because I believe in my right to protect my families honor. Republicans would rather just wet themselves and dry off their vagina, then defend themselves.

I'd ask you too see why Alexander Hamilton got shot, but I'm sure you'd never find it in Republican History. Throwing glitter is a form of dissent, I saw a news article the other day, A french person threw flour. Same thing, dissent to being forced someone else's ideology into law. Walk it like you talk it, hypocrites!

Hi Trust,

So, using your logic about defending your honor with a criminal act being okay, your comments about people who politically disagree with you should enable them to commit a criminal act against you as well? And this is the country you really want?

I think, frankly, that we will come apart at the seems. The philosophical observation that the center cannot hold is particularly informative in light of your post. The framers, since you wanted to go back to Hamilton, had bitter political disputes, and many didn't suffer one another well, but they found a way to agree on common matters. I don't think you can. You simply want what you want because you want it.

Hamilton engaged in a duel. That's why he got shot. What does that have to do with this? Or are you admitting, without actually being willing to admit it, that you think we should have the kind of government we did in 1804 like you seem to say we should have that same culture? Except for suffrage and slavery I would be inclined to agree with you. But I think you are being disingenuous for dramatic effect.

Six months in jail for a handful of glitter? Did he throw it baseball style, or was it a kind of limp-wristed toss? People say, "it could have had poison in it," well then he'd have been throwing poision, wouldn't he? While I mostly agree that throwing anything at a person is wrong, I'm not sure I agree with six months in jail for a glitter bomb. They should make him pay to have Romney's coat cleaned.

I wonder how he got through security with that dangerous glitter in his posession?

Before questioning "why' the Secret Service is protecting Mr. Romney right now, just take a look at the absolute hatred and vitriol being spewed at the man right here on the MSN/Newsvine site...most of it because he had the audacity to become enormously successful in his life. And the great majority of this hate comes from the minds of ever compassionate and fair-minded Democrats.

Based on what is written here, would anyone be surprised to learn that Mr. Romney has already been receiving death threats ??? And maybe that's why the Secret Service is traveling with him ???

He actually used the plural, Tyler, I'm not sure who else he meant but is was more than just one Candidate.

Republicans would rather just wet themselves and dry off their vagina, then defend themselves.

I know I shouldnt take the bait, but I cant resist. Lets take a look at this logically for a moment, shall we? We have democrats, who would rather take you to court with their buddies the ACLU because someone hurts their feelings, or heaven forbid the word God appears anywhere. Oh the horror.

I would ask you to look at our Armed Forces, and do a poll of which political party they most identify with. I hate to break it to you, but the military leans pretty hard to the right.

Finally, I will agree that throwing glitter is a form of dissent. But what comes next? When there is no reaction to the glitter, what is the next step?

This is why the US has the highest incarceration rate of any country on Earth (other than North Korea). Either Americans are really very bad people or the politicians pass legislation to put everyone in jail for every possible small non-violent offense including non-violent acts of protest.

The people who really belong in jail are most of the politicians.

If you go easy on one, they'll just laugh at all of them, and then it would be all too easy for an assassin to sneak something into the glitter. You have to come down hard to discourage this kind of crap. Like Romney or hate him, he doesn't deserve to die or be seriously injured, and that's what they're trying to protect against.

If nothing were done about this, as some of you suggest, just how many times would President Obama get "glitter bombed"...probably every campaign stop. It needs to end...a heavy fine (he can use his student loan money)...and time in jail (plenty of time for study)...then interview him!

This was a terrorist threat. It said "I could have killed you, Mitt Romney."

Haha, no it wasnt, it was "Haha Romney, now you're pretty like a gay guy!"

It doesn't matter what the substance was. This man is running for President, the highest office in the United States, and although I personally think he's a train wreck, NO ONE has the right to physically assault him, no not even with glitter.

This is our process. The kid needs to learn to respect it. He is trying to silence a man running for office. Who does he think he is? Does he think he somehow has the right to silence anyone he doesn't approve? A little jail time should impress upon him the fact that he's no longer 2 years old and there are grown-up consequences when he interacts with the grown-ups.

Cassie...thanks for the sanity.

It doesn't matter what the substance was. This man is running for President, the highest office in the United States, and although I personally think he's a train wreck, NO ONE has the right to physically assault him, no not even with glitter.

Newsflash... ANYONE can run for POTUS and besides, its not physical assault, he wasn't hurt in any way. he was laughing. Laughing.

I am pretty sure we have more dangerous criminals out there who need to spend time in jail than the glitter fairy.

I am pretty sure we have more dangerous criminals out there who need to spend time in jail than the glitter fairy.

So we should prosecute only those whose crimes you deem dangerous? If someone breaks into my house when no one is home, that didn't result in danger, so they shouldn't be prosecuted?

We have laws in this country regarding physical assault and other laws regarding freedom of speech. Those laws should be honored and when necessary, enforced.

The fact that Romney laughed has nothing to do with it. He had a split second to choose a public reaction and IMO he made a good choice. Nevertheless, I feel confident in my belief that he was not appreciative of the gesture.

The FACT is, NO ONE has the right to assault people with ANYTHING due to the fact they don't agree with the speaker. PERIOD. It's called freedom of speech and it matters.

So Cassie... is it assault when you get some glitter on you at a parade? Did the NFL assault everyone in the crowd at the superbowl when they shot the confetti cannons? Afterall, the fans didn't necessarily agree to be violently struck with light paper products.

I think its ridiculous that you think that someone deserves JAIL TIME for GLITTER. I mean, do you hear yourself? G - L - I - T - T - E - R. I understand that its the herpes of crafts products, but seriously. Fine him for being a disruption or something if that makes your sensitive self feel better. Don't put him in jail.

I guess I'll be careful around you. If I turn a fan on too high in your presence you would probably tell me that the unwanted moving air was an assault and I should be arrested.

It's not that I think he deserves jail time for glitter. I think he deserves jail time for throwing ANYTHING on a person who is running for office and trying to give a speech. I think that for a number of reasons. First, it's a slippery slope. Today glitter, tomorrow...? Second, he is disrupting our political process. He is trying to prevent someone from speaking, and not just anyone, but someone who is running for President. We have the right to hear what the man has to say. No one has a right to try to circumvent that.

It's only 6 months. It will make him realize that he has to control his impulses when they impact the rights of others -- especially the right to speak in public without being harassed or molested by juvenile delinquents.

Best he should learn it now before he pulls some other stunt and someone beats his little brains out.

I hate to tell you, Mandy, I'm surprised that you don't get my point and you really think I object to the glitter. Do you always judge things so superficially?

I don't think that glitter really is an attempt to stop someone from speaking, its an attempt to embarrass them. Tackling them is an attempt to keep them from speaking.

You may say its "only 6 months" but would you really like to spend 6 months in jail for throwing glitter? Do you think your job would be there when you got out? I think its stupid to ruin someones life over nothing. Again, why not just fine him. Its not like you go to jail for a parking ticket.

I get your point, I just think you are one of those people who overreacts to things.

I get your point, I just think you are one of those people who overreacts to things.

*shrugs* Maybe.

Or maybe I'm tired of people indulging in inappropriate behavior. IMO, it's time for some self-control and responsibility in this country. It's time for the adults to speak up and say "enough." Assuming there are any adults left.

Right, inappropriate is one thing, I agree with you that it was inappropriate. I just don't think the punishment fits the "crime"

Romney was joking and laughing about the glitter

Normally you would be correct but when there is a presidential election any person running as a candidate gets a Secret Service escort as though they were the president.

Pres *candidates* are protected too . . . and actually the Secret Service protects American currency traditionally: transport of legit money, protection of the special cloth/ink/templates, and prosocution of counterfiters. The Pres detail was added later is is more visable but isn't their main job. Last election some of the press made a stink because Obama was protected ealier than usual in the dem nomination process due to death threats towards his 2 little girls. As a parent, I really can't blame him for asking for early protection. But back to Romney, his protection detail is normal for this time in the election process. by the way, Romney didn't press charge, the SS did. It might be the wrong type of white powder instead of glitter next time. Glitter might be basically harmless, but anthrax or several other throwable items are NOT!

They get SS protection when they start getting the intelligence breifings I believe.

6 months in jail wont hurt him, but Im sure itll only be a couple days. If Obama doesnt pardon him.

Jwright,

According to the Secret Service, they provide protection for all major candidates unless it's declined by that candidate, not just for current and former Presidents and current VP's. They also have a wider range of responsibilities than just executive protection.

Major candidates get Secret Service protection too. This isn't just about throwing glitter on someone. That glitter could have been laced with all kinds of horrible stuff, and because of that fact as an act of hatred and would be terror through assault the man involved should be held responsible for his actions. I'm not a Republican, I don't really like Romney, and I support same sex marriage, fully support free speech and political dissent. But what this man did is not ok.

So the guy who gets assaulted be it harmful or not should pay to jail the "protestor"? Are you that ignorant? Say you put on something nice and go to a formal gathering you are speaking at and someone throws a bag of @!$%# on you, are you OK with that because "it's only a bag of @!$%#, it didn't hurt you"? Glitter, @!$%#, Water, whatever, it doesn't matter, it's assault and an infringement on Mitt's rights. If he had thrown his bag of fairy dust on Obama you would be begging for them to throw him in jail!

6 months for glitter seems a little steep, maybe send him to New York to pick up after the Giant's ticker tape parade. Ever try to clean up glitter? The stuff stays everywhere.........

Eric, actually that isn't a bad idea. A little public humiliation, like wearing a sign while doing the service you suggest, might go a long ways towards ending this stupid act.

Jwright...lots of people get SS protection. For some it is mandatory, for others they have to ask for it. Romeny asked for it. DHS looked at the request and agreed that SS protection was appropriate. Using your silly list of those who can get protection you would exclude the First Lady, the Second Lady, their kids, the NSA too. I think the bigger point is that we might need fewer SS protectees if we had more people who respected one another. Peter Smith doesn't respect liberty and the freedom to speak it insures. Peter Smith isn't a good American. Peter Smith, and fools like him, are why we have more laws that we should.

If I saw someone wearing a sign identifying them as glitter bombing Romney I'd hope they'd accept my help with their task, and let me buy them a beer when they're done.

Suggesting that next time it might be anthrax would be like saying the next white republican would be an ex KKK member. There is no merit to your statement other than typical republican fear mongering.

That would be like saying India is going to drop nukes on us. They could, but nearly impossible with current relations. Where does the madness end when someone besides the victim or the defendant can file charges? If Romney's all good with it, so should the Nazi SS group.

Ever since the assasination attempt on George Wallace, all presidential candidates are offered Secret Service protection. Since any one of them could end up being the President, it does make sense.

If Robert Kennedy had Secret Service protection, we likely would not have had a President Nixon and the downfall of the Office of President he ushered in. The world would be a different place, but for one assasin's bullet.

hey Trust, the only ex KKK member that served in Federal Government was a Democrat. Sen Robert Byrd. For several decades. He was proud of bringing billions of dollars in pork barrel spending to his tiny state, including literal freeways to nowhere. Look him up. And just because the Secret Service protects politicians of both parties I see no reason to equate them to Nazis, but then again you probably are too ignorant to know much about Nazi Germany and this little conflict called World War 2.

Kids using a likeness of Obama for target practice is the end of the world as we know it, throwing something at a live person, no biggie. Wow.

Maybe stick to the current decade ???

Gee, I don't know, seems like when people manhandle protestors at rallies they aren't charged with assault.

They could be....

I'm pretty sure glitter doesn't fall under the category of assault.

If it does... better watch out where you point a fan. The moving air could be considered a threat!

Eric...

Not when protestors act like idiots and deserve to be manhandled.

So...does it matter who gets glitter bombed?

It shouldn't in theory but in reality, I'm quite certain it does. Say you're out in public and someone throws glitter on you. Do you honestly believe you'll get a police officer to arrest the person who threw glitter on you? No way in hell.

I don't think it's right to NOT punish this guy because there's too much copycat crime out there. The next person won't throw glitter at a candidate, they'll throw rotten eggs, thumbtacks, nails, broken glass, or worse. I don't want that kind of distraction each time a candidate gets up to speak.

All that said, ain't no way you or I could ever convince a police officer to arrest someone because they threw glitter on you. So it really does matter who got glitter bombed.

The student did something that should be punished, if candidates are assaulted each time they start shaking hands or trying to talk to people they will stop interacting with the public, thats not good. The student was trying to force his ideas on us with a assault on the candidate not with a debate, not the way a civilized society should operate.

Like Barney Frank?

Where does it say Romney is pressing charges?

Sara-

You illogical bigoted comments are why people consider liberals uneducated. Glitter is regulated in makeups because the larger metal based glitter pieces (as opposed to the glitter powder found in cosmetics) can tear the cornea causing partial blindness. He forcibly threw small bits of metal at someones face, it's assult. Hold up a sign or tell him you disagree, start an Internet campaign against his policies. There are plenty of ways to protest that do not resort to harmful and ignorant tactics.

Forget the glitter or the politics, and the fact is: nowhere in this article does it even remotely mention that Romney, or his legal representatives, will be pressing charges against the student. Although it's certainly an option, this would be a matter for civil litigation.

This potentially inflammatory assumption is made on a basis of ignorance of the judicial system. The current charges are criminal, which means, the state/county where the offence occured is prosecuting, and collecting information, to try the defendant in a court of law; regardless of anyone's personal feelings... and this occurs in all cases of assault, etc. The alleged vic is not given the choice of whether an alleged perp will face possible consequences. Hence, the cjs=criminal justice system. *facepalm*

So, if a 20 year old college kid does something wrong we should just coddle them and say "ok... now you understand that wasn't a good thing to do, right? And next time are we going to be better behaved?" And then pat them on the bottom and let them go?! Uh, NO! Last time I checked 20 is an adult. If they don't know there are consequences to their actions, they certainly need to be shown there are. One of the problems with our society today is that we constantly make excuses for the younger generation as to why they shouldn't be held responsible. He's lucky that SS didn't shoot him thinking it was a real attack.

And BTW~ have you ever had glitter thrown in your face? It hurts! It can get in your eyes and scratch them, if you inhail it, it could cause breathing problems.... and so on and so on. If you want to raise your kids up to be idiots who can't make responsible decisions and then make excuses for them, more power to you... but don't blame others (ie: CEO's or govt) when they can't function in the real world.

sara,you are right,Jesus never would have arrested the man.but didnt Jesus eventually get asassinated???the one time the secret service lets down its guard for "glitter",it will wind up like rep.Giffords.

Obviously Sara, you are as uninformed as a number of other Liberals on here. First off, Romney doesn't press charges against the poor 20 yr old child, the Secret Service do that, learn to read, it's a good thing. Second point, any infringement on another's safety, security or an implied threat should be taken seriously, what happens if next time it's acid or some other toxic substance? This kid should be lucky he's not being charged with a serious offence like terrorism as he could be with these wacky laws they have on the books now. This kid is very lucky for only getting 6 months in jail, maybe that 6 months (probably 2 if he serves any at all) will give him pause to think next time and if he wants to protest, bring a sign, yell all you want etc but don't throw anything at anyone. I know if he did it to me, he'd be picking his ass off of the floor. He's also lucky he didn't get tackled or worse by the SS and only got ushered out of the place. Whether Romney tried to laugh it off or not is not the point. The kid did something stupid and should pay the consequence. That's the problem with these kids nowadays, they think they can do anything and won't be held accountable, well I hope this shows anyone else who thinks to do this that it's fine and they have the 'right' to do that but they must also remember they may have to pay for that 'right' with jail time and a criminal record for life.....assault in any form is not a 'right' you can exercise without consequences.

Hi Sara,

Targets of crimes do not have to "press charges". Peter Smith's crime was witnessed by LEOs, and so the state will press charges against Smith, not Romney. Romney could, if he wanted, tell the state to let him go, but he shouldn't. Smith is 20. He is not a good American, thinking he can instead commit a crime in order to push his political agenda. You shouldn't defend him, or his act, but it would be fine with me if you wanted to argue Romney is wrong, or any other political idea is mistaken--THAT is what makes us succeed.

It's always great to see the most upvoted comment is the one that is completely incorrect. Mitt Romney is not pressing charges against anyone. The secret service is pressing charges against this poor 20 year old and their boss is ultimately Barack Obama. It just not safe to let everyone throw things in the faces of our politicians. I wouldn't want anything to get thrown in Barack Obama's face either. Mitt Romney's dog was not "tied down" it was safe and secure inside a kennel. Also, his company helped a lot of other companies and saved a lot of jobs. Yes, there were a few companies he could not save but the vast majority of them were successful after Romney worked with them. His record shows that he has been honest and compassionate in his business and personal life. It says a lot when the worst thing you can attack him for is that he put his dog kennel on the roof. Your comment is heavy on attacks and light on facts.

Sara M, so what will happen? Romney is not a pimple on a man's A$$,

notso: no, he's just an A$$.

Sara, if it was the Secret Service that pressed charges, you shouldn't blame Mr. Romney.

I think glitter bombing is, at the very least, kind of silly. But it is unwise to do it to public figures like Mr. Romney or President Obama. You're just asking for trouble.

If this glitter actually came into contact with Mr Romney or others near him, the attacker should also be charged with battery, a much more severe criminal charge.

grow up you baby liberals. if Romney had a D before his name every single one of you would be foaming at the mouths in hatred for this college student. you all make me sick.

Yet the student got you to talk about publicly, no?

I think a perfectly appropriate penalty for the glitter throwing would be handing the student a broom and dust pan to clean it up. After all, why waste perfectly good glitter.

A glitter bomb? I'd rather see a football to the groin.

How very glib.

Yes, culhealth, but people are talking about the poor Powell boys that got murdered, too. Doing something just to create buzz isn't justification. And more to the point, is that really the sort of political world we want to live in? It's already bad enough. But do we want to continue the decline to where we all just shrug off presidential candidates being glitter-bombed, or presidents having shoes thrown at them, or presidents standing before Congress and having "You lie!" shouted at them? There is something called decorum, and I'm a big fan of it.

As I said, I don't support Mitt Romney at all, but I can't advocate people throwing things at him while he's giving speeches or campaigning. What if the next person decides to mix in a teaspoon of anthrax with the glitter? That's not something a broom and a dustpan can fix. A line must be drawn, and corrupting the electoral process like this is puerile at best, potentially dangerous at worst, and adds nothing of value to the process in ANY case.

Doing something just to create buzz isn't justification.

Tell that to the swiftboaters and teaparty hacks

Is it OK to throw crap at democrat presidents too?

Is it OK to throw crap at democrat presidents too?

You could ask Oscar Ortega-Hernandez about that one. He didn't do anything but shoot at bulletproof glass on the White House. The President wasn't even in town the day the pot shots were fired, but that really doesn't matter much. Mr. Ortega-Hernandez will not likely be voting in November.

Threats against our Electoral Process are threats against America itself. It's a very serious act with life-altering consequences.

Threats against our Electoral Process are threats against America itself. It's a very serious act with life-altering consequences.

You mean threats like Citizen United or the GOP clown car of candidates? I find both of those things far more threatening to our way of life than glitter throwing.

Gene

Did you really mean to compare glitter-bombing to firing a high powered rifle at the White House? Wow.

No harm no foul, right? Pay for the window and pick up the shell casing.

It's called degree.

Really? What things can I do to your body in the name of freedom of political expression? Anything I want so long as I don't harm you? Can I define what harm is?

It is not ok to touch people unless they want to be touched. Period.

If im running for office, and you can get by my security, all the power to you. Im not a wus or a poor-sport crybaby.

Of course, this is only appropriate for anything political. Candidates, incumbants, big mouths, protesters, etc.

They didnt touch him, he got sprayed with harmless glitter. And physical harm is physical harm, it speaks for itself. It doesnt need to be defined. Its either evident, or its not.

It is the asshats who started putting caustic soda or Drano in the pies that ruined that particular form of "free expression" for the rest of us. Sorry, but I just can't countenance throwing stuff at anybody and believe that six months in the cooler would be a just punishment for this one. And if the Bush shoe-throwing incident had happened in the US, I would have felt exactly the same way.

I pointed out that SS should try to stop it with all the zeal possible. Because what if it was harmful. And anyone caught trying to harm a candidate, should be roasted.

But, if someone does manage to glitter bomb or pie in the face a candidate, and it ISNT harmful in anyway. The SS and politician should suck it up and take it like men. They failed. They should be embarassed. If anything, this would keep them on their toes.

Freedom4Everyone, if you think that is OK, you are not all there. I am all for gay marriage, but you don't throw things at people. Attack me like that, and you are likely to be shot since I don't know your intentions.

this is about protecting a white man when that woman put her hand in my pres. face she shoud have been stretched out on the ground and hand cuffed but was she no because she was white and he was black i keep saying i don't trust those secret service

Keeping your hands to yourself is a really good rule, once taught in kindergarten.

Nikky - are you seriously trying to tell us this is racial in nature. That's patently absurd.

JC

Don't worry, Nikky is one of those race-baiters trying to turn this incident about a glitter assaulter and try to turn it about race from another story that has nothing to do with this one....the differences aren't even wirth talking about....she's an idiot straight up and a failed idiot at that.

How would the LibTards whine when a glitter bomb or "pie" is thrown rightfully so at Obama?

Grant it that Joe Biden is made for such things.

You really ask that question??? Hey freedom4everyone, you a socialist??? are you one of those 99centers that lives in their parents basement? Or where you one of those who lost their house because you took out three mortgages and lived beyond you means, could not repay what you borrowed and blamed others for your failure??? just wondering.....

Bad sportsmanship? Throwing things in the face of our leaders is not a sport, it's a crime. It's just not safe and I wouldn't want to see this happen to anyone. The secret service should be able to focus on protecting our leaders not playing some sort of "game" trying to chase down all the glitter throwers. Yeah I thought it was funny when Romney got hit in the face with the glitter. However I also understand why the secret service needs to press charges.

Just look at how the problems and trouble escalated with the goofball 'occupiers'...the more they got away with the messier the trouble became, ending in an attack of gutless vandalism right inside Oakland's City Hall.

So if throwing the glitter at Mr. Romney and now Mr. Santorum is simply to be brushed off...what's the next item to be thrown ?

I also feel that after the Gabby Giffords shooting, the Secret Service was slowhanded...the little glitter throwing punks should have been planted face-first on the floor before they made their pathetic throws. If they got close enough to a candidate with a handful of glitter, they also were close enough to wield a handful of anything...including a weapon.

A pie in the face isnt violence. Its lampooning a candidate. You really need to come up with better stuff.

when corrupt politicians do what they want, they wage wars to send people to die and kill in...to gain wealth and power for themselves and their owners...

and you call a pie tot he face violence...so what do you call waging wars for oil and mineral wealth????????????????????

And conservatives never do anything like that. Or if they do it's totally justified.

So Freedom, you're saying that if someone throws a rock at your kid, but misses, they shouldn't be punished because your kid wasn't harmed, right? The whole point is to stop the attacker BEFORE they actually hurt someone. Waiting until the victim is actually hurt before taking action is a totally asinine way of thinking.

I thought he was charged with throwing a missile?

what if you shot him with a water pistol

Pulling out a pistol of any kind in the presence of Secret Service agents would be an act of sheer stupidity.

If you pointed and shot Romney with a water pistol we'd be talking about when this idiot would be getting buried and his distraught parents for raising such an idiot. If he did do something like that he would deserve to be gunned down like the moron he is and I wouldn't blame the SS or anyone else except the idiot carrying a water pistol to an event like that. I know your point is hypothetical but if someone did do that they deserve whatever outcome would come of that...death or injury.

Maybe the guy's new jail house buddies want some glitter spread on them?

How much respect do you think a "glitter bomber" will receive in the big house?

That would be considered a toxic material, and dangerous. Anything Biological is a no no. Glitter is HARMLESS.

If you want to glitter bomb, protesters, i see nothing wrong with it. Just realize they may beat the hell out of you for it though. They arent officials or police, but regular people.

I want to put some glitter in your eyes. Its harmless after all. Maybe some sand too.

Glitter in the eyes is common, its doesnt cause any harm, its made not too. Why do you think women wear it all over themselves? Sand is completely different, that would cause harm.

They are all whiney wussies in my opinion. They dish it out, but cry like little girls when it their turn to eat crow.

I am sure you are talking about the Dems, am I correct? Gov. Romney just joked about it, and he did not press any charges, the secret service did that and rightfully so.

yeah right... He was all laughs out in front of the cameras, but I guarantee he was ranting and raving behind the scenes afterward. He's the one probably demanding they charge this guy, because it's not the first time hes been glittered.

Geez, Freedom, think much?

"If im running for office, and you can get by my security, all the power to you. Im not a wus or a poor-sport crybaby."

No, but you're also not much of a thinker. That is not exactly how security, freedom and personal space work.

"A pie in the face isnt violence. Its lampooning a candidate. You really need to come up with better stuff."

What? Throwing something in somebody's face isn't violent? It's "lampooning"? Really?

Only if it's somebody you don't support, obviously. Your agenda is so transparent it's pathetic. You REALLY need to come up with better "stuff"...

savoir...

Thanks for the dose of sanity....often hard to locate on this site. And I'm surely not 'lampooning' here.

I'm sure all the tough guys on this site would not mind a bit if some wierd little creep walked up to them on the street and threw a fistful of glitter into their faces. These folks, I am 'lampooning' !

Z-man, do you really have so little regard for human life that you're suggesting he should have been shot for throwing glitter? Shot? Seriously?

Saratotan

I can answer that. The answer would be Yes, unless your a fetus.

do you really have so little regard for human life that you're suggesting he should have been shot for throwing glitter?

Obviously the answer is yes.

I'm sure you said the same thing about the OWS protests too.

You just proved it !

mitt may be gay. a hell of alot of other republicans who were against gay marriage have come out of the closet. most of them were married too.

HATR...

You sound interested...why don't you give Mr. Romney a phonecall to find out. If he declines, you can always find a glitter-tosser.

No Tea Partiers bring their guns to events and even to church, you know that or you've ignored the news for the past 3 years or you can't look at anything objectively. Tea Party is rife with idiots too, at least give'em equal time. Besides they're all wussies as well, otherwise they wouldn't need a warm gun to finger during church services.

How very glib.

those tax dollars will be replenished somewhat by the fine at least. also the maximum he would get is 6 months and with overcrowding being what it is he'll probably get a fine and community service.

Glitter is made to not hurt the eyes. Its why women can wear it all over themselves and not worry. It gets in everywhere, and I mean EVERYWHERE. lol

So freedom4idots you think because it was glitter its ok? This kind of thing can escalate into something much more serious, kooks need to pay a price for something like this otherwise it will encourage even more kooks to come out of the woodwork.

I would say throwing glitter is not as serious as the Republican protestors that brought guns and displayed them openly at democratic rallies, or when Obama gave speeches. I would find that much more threatening and encourages far more violence and kooks out there. Really, glitter get over it Romney, grow up and be a man!!!

Yeah Mitt...be a real man like Mr. Obama...who courageously kept on with his courageous speeches while surrounded by all those wild & crazy gun-toting TEA Party members...flashing their weapons "openly" and stirring violence while the president bravely spoke on !!!

This site is sometimes like a comic book...only the stories are sillier.

Haha, seriously, right?