2012 Election | Activism | Crime | Glitterati | Mitt Romney | News

Student Faces Six Months in Jail, $1,000 Fine for Glittering Romney


Peter Smith, a University of Colorado Boulder student, has been charged over an attempted glittermbombing of Mitt Romney on Wednesday which was thwarted by the Secret Service.

Reuters reports:

Denver authorities detained Smith for questioning on Tuesday night, and he was cited on misdemeanor charges of creating a disturbance, throwing a missile and an unlawful act on school property, Denver Police spokesman Sonny Jackson said.

Smith, who faces up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine if convicted, said he has no regrets about his protest.

Smith said he was protesting not only Romney's stance on same-sex marriage but his "general political philosophy" and added that agents questioned him about the act of glittering: "They just mentioned this act was an issue that they've been trying to deal with more and more."

Meanwhile, a D.C. optometrist is warning of the dangers posed by glitterbombing: “If it gets into the eyes, the best scenario is it can irritate, it can scratch. Worst scenario is it can actually create a cut. As the person blinks, it moves the glitter across the eye and can actually scratch the cornea.”

I've reposted the attempted glitterbombing, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. I must concur. Glitterbombing is a pointless and stupid idea. Now a pie in the face. That's much better.

    Posted by: RJ | Feb 9, 2012 12:36:40 PM

  2. That was a stupid move by that student. 6 months in jail over that? Now that's ridiculous.

    Posted by: Chris in SF | Feb 9, 2012 12:40:06 PM

  3. You can see the evil, sinister look on Mitt Romney's face!

    Posted by: NY2.0 | Feb 9, 2012 12:42:48 PM

  4. Throwing a missile?

    Posted by: Brian | Feb 9, 2012 12:45:20 PM

  5. Then the only answer is MORE GLITTERBOMBING!!!!

    Only let's actually glitter him next time.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Feb 9, 2012 12:59:06 PM

  6. Glittering stupid.

    Jail time, even more stupid.

    Fining the idiot . . . makes sense.

    Posted by: Continuum | Feb 9, 2012 1:00:49 PM

  7. owww my eyesss!! my eyesss!

    sissy republicans

    Posted by: MalaysianHO | Feb 9, 2012 1:10:33 PM

  8. We should take up a collection to pay whatever fines and legal fees that this student is levied.

    Posted by: Jeffrey in St. Louis | Feb 9, 2012 1:17:08 PM

  9. Fine. Instead of glitter, use sugar that has been dyed various colors.

    Or is sugar also a dangerous eye-mutilator?

    (rolls intact eyes)

    Posted by: Randy | Feb 9, 2012 1:17:38 PM

  10. In India for Holi they throw color powder at each other for blessings. You could send rainbows flying and not hurt a soul. Just sayin'!

    Posted by: Mitchell | Feb 9, 2012 1:22:01 PM

  11. throwing glitter on someone = jail time and a fine.

    not being a responsible adult and choosing to be laissez-faire about a report of child-rape? totes acceptable.

    if i've learned anything in the last year it's that all you need to do to not be held accountable for your actions and inactions is to coach football.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Feb 9, 2012 1:26:03 PM

  12. He's a poor reflection on all trans people.

    Posted by: Right.... | Feb 9, 2012 1:51:59 PM

  13. QUICK!!! Rip the DANGEROUS GLITTER from our childrens hands!!! We've been handing over this hazardous weapon to our unsuspecting youth and teachers for years without concern for their well being, how could we have been so foolish.

    Posted by: NorthAlabama | Feb 9, 2012 1:57:59 PM

  14. @Randy
    With all of the post 9/11 "security concerns", I'm amazed that one of these glitter bombers hasn't been shot/tazed/detained. Throwing more avant-garde substances, let alone ones that are less recognizable than glitter, would horrify the security teams, and penultimately just make things worse without furthering the political point.
    Food for thought

    Posted by: Roodypoo | Feb 9, 2012 2:30:06 PM

  15. I am sure there are much more serious Federal charges that could have been brought. And since it is likely a first offense he will probably just face a fine and possible probation if convicted.

    But his parents will probably pay a lot of money to lawyers to defend him. And his school might take action against him. And this is something he will have to explain for the rest of his life to potential employers.

    Posted by: Charlie | Feb 9, 2012 2:55:52 PM

  16. Rice.

    Posted by: gb | Feb 9, 2012 2:55:53 PM

  17. Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

    Throwing glitter in someone's eyes isn't going to do anything to win people over to your argument. If anything, it accomplishes the exact opposite of your supposed goal.

    You can joke about how harmless glitter is all you want, and laugh about how deserving these people are of this happening to them, but all you've accomplished is to prove that you are as incapable of intelligent discourse as you accuse your opponents of being.

    Lead by good, positive example, not by futile, violent gestures.

    Posted by: NVTodd | Feb 9, 2012 2:56:21 PM

  18. NVTODD, can you give any specific actions of the "good positive example" and/or "intelligent discourse" that will have an effect on the Santorums/Romneys/Bachmanns/Gingrichs?

    because, as far as i can tell, even the Gay Republicans haven't been able to change their minds on any LGBT Issues, and lord knows they're as "inoffensive and considerate to anti-gay republicans" as one can be.

    so, any specifics you have in mind would be greatly appreciated.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Feb 9, 2012 3:01:15 PM

  19. counter-productive and lame. Someone come up with a better idea please.

    Posted by: Locutus of Board | Feb 9, 2012 3:18:05 PM

  20. "kiwi"

    I didn't say anything about being "inoffensive and considerate to anti-gay Republicans", so what's with the quotes ?

    Fabricating quotes and implying I've stated something I clearly have not isn't going to lend your views much credence.

    So far as "changing the GOP", these are politicians, you don't change them, you change the people who elect them. You don't give your enemies everything they need to garner support and sympathy, doing that just plays into their agenda. It's called "strategy".

    The fact that YOU can't think of a single example of how to be a positive influence IS the problem.

    Ellen is on TV just about every day changing hearts and minds, and she does it by showing people that not all gay people have to act-out and resort to lies and violence to make a point.

    The truth wins out when it's given an chance, put down the glitter and grow up.

    Posted by: NVTodd | Feb 9, 2012 3:26:01 PM

  21. Lets do it like Howard...just rant...a lot!

    Posted by: Vern Dufford | Feb 9, 2012 3:35:46 PM

  22. I didn't say I couldn't, I asked you what your specific plans of action would be, instead of these glitterings.

    i think it's worth noting that most LGBT people don't resort to any forms of violence.

    if the LGBT community had a "violent reputation" we'd have equal rights, believe it or not - people wouldn't be proud of spreading anti-gay bigotry because they'd literally be afraid of doing so.

    nobody is afraid of insulting the LGBT Community. at all.

    "not all gay people resort to lies and violence to make a point"

    i dare say the vast MAJORITY of LGBT people don't resort to lies and violence. we do not have a reputation for violence. it's very simple.

    i'll say this, though: clearly gay republicans are slacking and not doing their job. the GOP's base remains as anti-gay as ever - so what are Gay republicans NOT doing?

    what's not being done? Are they not actually Out? Are they not able to be firm and confident about LGBT people's rights to equality, liberty, freedom and fair treatment?

    Ellen is indeed great, and decidedly "benign" about her Gayness - that didn't stop "one million moms" from being furiously, and baselessly, homophobic and angry toward her.

    very odd, eh?

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Feb 9, 2012 3:40:13 PM

  23. Not that I have any great love of Mitt Romney, but violence is violence! Glitter-bombing is dangerous as well as asinine. It's about time charges got pressed, and I hope it becomes the standard way to deal with these attention-starved "activists".

    Posted by: Stuffed Animal | Feb 9, 2012 3:52:46 PM

  24. Glitter-bombing is stupid AND it hurts the cause that's supposedly being promoted. Cut it out, people!!

    Posted by: Seattle Mike | Feb 9, 2012 4:42:16 PM

  25. Glitter-bombing is dangerous? Someone tell the strippers and toy makers! Don't be ridiculous. I say glitter-bomb away. Civil disobedience is against the law by its very nature. Martin Luther King Jr. went to jail, remember. He had a parade without a permit. And you know what? I hope that they get glitter-bombed so much that it just sticks to them and they can't get it out of their hair. And I hope every glimmer and sparkle reminds them of how low and bitter they are to deny other people their rights. And in the least, its annoying.

    Posted by: Jon | Feb 9, 2012 4:47:58 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «CPAC Panelist Jeffrey Bell Tells Conference That The Left Seeks to Destroy Religion and Families: VIDEO« «