October 27, 2010

Yes, yes, I know there was that eye-catching "head stomping" to talk about yesterday...

... but that just highlights the lack of anything serious in the political news this week.

Yes, yes, I know that liberals would like to purvey the notion that tea partiers are violent and that incident fit their template, but:

1. One data point proves nothing about a large group (unless you follow the thinking style of bigotry).

2. The "violent Tea Party" meme has been pushed since the very beginning of the Tea Party movement, so it's nothing new. And the failure to pick up enough data points to look anything like a pattern is glaringly obvious.

3. The MoveOn.org woman came to the event to create an incident and caused the Ron Paul's supporters to worry about his safety, so that violent incident was prompted by the urge to defend, in which case even that one incident isn't a data point that fits the gapingly empty template.

4. "A person in a disguise, carrying a sign from a radical organization, tries to push through the crowd to hand a political opponent an unknown object.  What would the Secret Service have done to her?"
Indeed!

5. I bet some of you, reading #4, thought of saying: "Person"?! It was a woman. How threatening could a woman be? But:
A: That's sexist. You think women cannot be dangerous?

B: Squeaky Fromme, Sara Jane Moore. It happens.
6. Are we really going to elevate every prank and beating to a political event deserving analysis? That "stomping" had nothing do with anything worth thinking about in deciding who to vote for. If that counted as substance, it's evidence of the extreme dearth of substance this week.

7. And let me say one more thing to those who delighted in what they imagined was the political usefulness of the "stomping" incident. There is a big rally in Washington this weekend that will draw many thousands of persons. Within that throng of presumed liberals and lefties, there will be all sorts of characters, with their diverse problems and motivations. You don't know who will act up, what foolishly overstated signs they will carry, and what provocations will lead someone with clouded judgment or poor impulse control to do something that will look awful on video. That will happen 3 days before the election, leaving very little time to explain. If that happens, you will want to eat all the words you've been saying about the stomper.

ADDED: New video shows the aggressive behavior of the woman — Lauren Valle — that took place before the men took her down. 

428 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 428   Newer›   Newest»
Sprezzatura said...

"In all of that time I never thought about politics or the internet. Like the rest of America."

But, it can be cathartic to be an A-hole online, when doing so in "the rest of America" would be problematic.

AlphaLiberal said...

Althouse speaks from the wine box:

Show me where I jumped to a conclusion.

You said that that MoveOn probably staged it, based on zero evidence.

Having been shown you were wrong, you double down on your lies and dishonesty.

Trooper York said...

I know 1jpb.

"We are not really assholes, we just play one on the internets."

Hagar said...

I can't find it. The videos down the page are mostly marked "Updated," which I take to mean edited to remove extraneous matter distracting from the "narrative." There is some text surviving, which can be read that she was just peacefully walking around with her sign. That is belied by the other video that was up yesterday showing the struggle they had with her from behind, but that seems to be gone too.
Anyway, just the little that is left of "her" clip, shows no injury, and she is speaking clearly and distinctly, so I do not believe she suffered any "concussion." A sore neck, perhaps - though she looks to be a bit too young and in good shape to have suffered even that for no more than the "stomping clip" shows.

This is a storm in a teacup.

AlphaLiberal said...

Althouse speaks from the fringes of AMerican politics:


"A person in a disguise, carrying a sign from a radical organization"

MoveOn.org is not a radical organization. That's the talk of party hacks. It's a citizens group engaging lawfully and appropriately in the American democratic process.

Liar.

Trooper York said...

I love the sweaty smell of desperation in the morning.

It smells like victory.

Hagar said...

"Staged" also has a subsidiary meaning of "provocation," and this certainly was a Moveon.org staged provocation!

Daniel12 said...

Anyway, just the little that is left of "her" clip, shows no injury, and she is speaking clearly and distinctly, so I do not believe she suffered any "concussion." A sore neck, perhaps

Bill Frist? Is that you, diagnosing on the floor of Congress again?

Unknown said...

"She tried to hand something to Rand Paul and Ann Althouse says that justifies a beating!!"

Alpha's lying (surprise). She ran up to Rand Paul's car as it was pulling up to the debate site and tried to shove something (presumably the sign) into the car through the window.

Not the same thing.

Fox has video - they just showed it.

AlphaLiberal said...

Althouse speaks from the fringes of AMerican politics:


"A person in a disguise, carrying a sign from a radical organization"

MoveOn.org is not a radical organization. That's the talk of party hacks. It's a citizens group engaging lawfully and appropriately in the American democratic process.

Liar.


This "citizen's group" was created and is funded by George Soros to advance his radical, anti-American agenda.

Take a Haldol, man. You've lost.

Daniel12 said...

I can't find it.

Debunked: "She said she charged"

Freeman Hunt said...

"If some random dude physically restrains me from doing something I have every right to do by dragging me down to the ground, that's assault."

Are you really arguing that only a designated person should intervene in that situation? If someone rushed Obama and you could stop the person, you wouldn't? That's insane. He's our President. I don't even like Obama, but I would absolutely be willing to physically defend him.

Heck, I would intervene on behalf of a total stranger with no special political status. Wouldn't you? I think most people would.

garage mahal said...

She ran up to Rand Paul's car as it was pulling up to the debate site and tried to shove something (presumably the sign) into the car through the window.

LOL

Anonymous said...

AL:

As an occasional reader (and even more occasional commenter) of this steaming pile that calls itself a blog, I have to ask you: why bother? What good do you expect to come from engaging with a bunch of ass-kissing, hero-worshipping, zombie authoritarian violence apologists like those that congregate here? Come on -- the high point of their day is when the Great and Powerful Wineguzzler gets a "Heh. Indeed" from Glenn Reynolds. That's too pathetic for words.

They're dead-enders, and they can't be persuaded. Go out and find some true fence-sitters, discouraged Democrats, open-minded independents and the like. At least with those folks, (1) you have a hope of being successful at persuasion; and (2) you are actually accomplishing something in the real world. Not to mention avoiding the serious psychological and emotional issues that leap off the page from pretty much every comment. It's a cornucopia of pretty much the entire DSM-IV here.

This place, fetid and noxious and fucked up as it is, is NOT REAL. Tough message to hear for the denizens of the fever swamp who gaze adoringly at their full-size portraits of the GAPW (scary thought, that) as they post each comment, but there it is.

Stop gratifying Althouse's already bloated ego with meaningless prattle, and maybe if we are all lucky, she will be left with nothing but teaching first year law students the ins and outs of the privileges and immunities clause.

Think about it.

Trooper York said...

Hey Garage, since she ended up on the roadway does she qualify as roadkill? Just askin'

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
WOW, Althouse you've lost Alpha's respect....how EVER will you survive.

OK, Alpha now that you have lost all respekt will yu be leevin' Althouse?

James said...

So, when angry conservative men started showing up carrying (licensed and permitted) guns outside of events with Obama and other Dems (apparently because once in office, Obama was immediately going to confiscate all guns or something - still haven't heard anything about those plans yet), Althouse and her posters saw nothing wrong with that. In fact, Democrats who were wary of those situations were Constitution-hating sissies.

But if a liberal woman shows up to a Rand Paul event carrying a super-scary "unknown object" (an extremely lame "award" for being in the pocket of corporations), Conservatives are completely justified in throwing her to the ground and stomping on her. In fact, according to the man who did the stomping, the woman should be apologizing to him for having the nerve to show up to his candidate's political event and putting her head underneath his foot!

Trooper York said...

Jeez the libots are out in force today.

It feels like a Will Smith movie.

Only more boring if that is possible.

Daniel12 said...

Are you really arguing that only a designated person should intervene in that situation? If someone rushed Obama and you could stop the person, you wouldn't? That's insane. He's our President. I don't even like Obama, but I would absolutely be willing to physically defend him.

This is why I don't respond to people's hypotheticals. You've laid out a set of conditions here explicitly different from the ones I've laid out, pointed out how ridiculous it would be not to intervene under these conditions, and then used that to undermine my very clear and very different statement.

It's called a straw man.

Freeman Hunt said...

I finally watched the video. That is what is causing all this controversy?

It looks like she is being held back but continuing to try to force her way toward Rand Paul while the people trying to restrain her yell, "Get the police! Get the police!" Then she goes down, and that one guy pushes his foot on her the way an untrained person might do to try to get someone to stay down which would make sense if she had been forcing her way through as it appeared she was. Someone immediately tells him to stop.

Wow. This is what you lefties have right now? Really? I expected that video to be completely different based on all the hullabaloo.

Trooper York said...

Wait it should be spelled lib-bot.

I think.

I am not used to making up words. I need hdhouse's advice. He makes up words all the time.

Freeman Hunt said...

Daniel, no, you emphasized the phrase "random person" as though that mattered. Does it matter or not?

Sprezzatura said...

"It smells like victory."

If I were in the R camp, I'd spend less time savoring the upcoming victory, and more time worrying that the Rs were going to sell me out, again. W/ this much of a lead, it is definitely time for the R supporters to start threatening their party.

W/o such vigilance, there's no reason for them to fear you. You're so enamored w/ the win, that the governing is only a (distant) secondary concern. It's only been a couple (or four) years since the Rs were running the show, into the ground, and selling out so-called conservative principles, and supposedly their actions upset y'all. And, the blather filled Promise to America wasn't encouraging. Was it?

The chest pounding here is out of weakness, and it's a sign that R voters are easily played because of their emotionalism.

Sad.

Anonymous said...

A: That's sexist. You think women cannot be dangerous?

Ann-- You suffer political correctness here. Men are more dangerous than women. Been true for centuries. Call it as it is.

garage mahal said...

Trooper
Doesn't embarrass you in the least seeing a once proud movement relegated to defending a bunch of weird creeps assaulting a woman? Think about it. Just sayin.

Rialby said...

"OK, Alpha now that you have lost all respekt will yu be leevin' Althouse?"

Seriously. If you hate Althouse so much, why are you here?

Rialby said...

Btw, the left never engages in conjecture of any kind...

An experiment.

Trooper York said...

Well 1jpb, quite of few of the candidates this time are not the usual country club Rhino's that well sell out right away. I agree that they will sell out over time but for now we can hope that we are going to get something different. If you go Thelma and Lousie with your Democrats you can be sure of the same old, same old.

Tax and spend. Lot of taxes lots of spending.

So lets see what happens.

But you have to admit you pal Alpha and his ilk seem to be pretty desperate. Just sayn'

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
If I were in the R camp, I'd spend less time savoring the upcoming victory, and more time worrying that the Rs were going to sell me out, again. W/ this much of a lead, it is definitely time for the R supporters to start threatening their party.

Is that the new talking point? You guys need to worry about governing? Funny how quickly things change, from January 2009, Democratic Majority for Decades to Come, to “Don’t you guys get too comfortable winning. Now the hard part’s coming.” Physician Heal Thyself….

I’ll enjoy your tears of ineffable sadness and rage, they will sweet. Will you be fleeing and how loudly will your Significant Others be lamenting?

Freeman Hunt said...

Of course conservatives and libertarians are worried that the Republicans will sell us out. We're always worried about that. That's why so many of us are focused on taking over their apparatus.

Fen said...

There is some text surviving, which can be read that she was just peacefully walking around with her sign. That is belied by the other video that was up yesterday showing the struggle they had with her from behind, but that seems to be gone too

RedState has video of minute prior - she rushes passenger window of car in the Paul caravan as they drive up

Original Mike said...

1jpb said: If I were in the R camp, I'd spend less time savoring the upcoming victory, and more time worrying that the Rs were going to sell me out, again. W/ this much of a lead, it is definitely time for the R supporters to start threatening their party.

W/o such vigilance, there's no reason for them to fear you.


No kidding. The Tea Party people say they're going to do exactly that. Why aren't you a supporter?

traditionalguy said...

jsmdLawyer...That was beautiful work. You have dethroned our regular Slander King named Jeremy. But you have a ways to go to match the always eloquent Ritmo. Style counts in the political guilt shoveling events around here. You also got points deducted for length of comment...really great accusers can say all that counts more succinctly. Have a nice day next Wednesday.

Daniel12 said...

Daniel, no, you emphasized the phrase "random person" as though that mattered. Does it matter or not?

Yes, it matters. In conjunction with the other part. As in -- a random person can intervene physically if I'm doing something of sufficient threat. And a police officer can intervene physically under certain circumstances even if I'm not doing something of sufficient threat. But I see no justification under any circumstances of a random person intervening physically if I'm doing something that does not pass a certain level of threat (which I defined in my statement as "something I have the right to do").

Clear?

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)


You Leftists have no dignity. Really at this point in 1992, 1996, 2006 I wasn’t “Raging against the dying of the light”. I was ruefully contemplating being out of power and trying to be a man about it.

As some womon put it, “Man up.” You’ve lost, Rand Paul is going to win, the only thing from giving the Republicans a 60-plus majority in the Senate is the Six Year Rule for Senatorial Terms. You’ve lost the House, the only question is, “Is it 1994, 1932, or 1896?” Unless your POTUS gets pretty smart, pretty quickly, he’s going to be vying with Jim-muh for title of “Worst Living POTUS.”

You can rail against Althouse, Cons, Re-thugs, Tea Baggers, Wingnutz all you like, but it won’t change the outcome…so at least have a little dignity.

And remember, 2012 is a completely different electoral cycle.

Trooper York said...

I am just as embarrased as you are defending Hamas Garage.

Sometimes you can't be proud of the guys on your team.

Like Roger Clemins. Or Brett Farve.

You can't always pick the guys on your team like it was kick ball.

By the way I don't defend these guys. If they did something wrong this woman should bring charges and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Why isn't she bringing charges?

Original Mike said...

Thanks for the link, Fen.

Freeman Hunt said...

You have a right to rush through crowds at people without hindrance?

If you are in a crowd that Obama is walking by and someone rushes through the crowd toward him, you are going to get out of the way?

I think that would be a very poor choice.

Anonymous said...

I just find it fascinating that Profitt asked for an apology so quickly, instead of waiting for close to 19 years after the fact.

Daniel12 said...

You have a right to rush through crowds at people without hindrance?

Of course.

Trooper York said...

Could it be because it is a big bag of bullshit and she doesn't want to let all of the facts come out in a court of law? If it is as clear cut as Alpha and Alphettes think then she could be in the money in a civil suit. Why doesn't she a police report and press charges?

Fen said...

Breaking: Valle attacked passenger in car with sign

Backfire!

TOLD YOU SO

Libtard meltdown in 3 2 1....

The partisan shills who turned a shove into a "stomp" will now explain how "hitting" someone with a sign is okay....

I'm making the popcorn!

garage mahal said...

Why isn't she bringing charges?

She is.

Freeman Hunt said...

Daniel, so if someone does that to Obama, you're going to get out of the way?

Also, I think if you'll try that at your next political event, you'll find that you do not, in fact, have that right as doing so is generally considered threatening.

Trooper York said...

Well that's good if she is Garage. I would like to see everyone testify under oath and all the facts come out.

But I am dubious that this will happpen. But I have an open mind and are more than happy to let the chips fall where they may.

Fen said...

Looks like the passenger Valle attacked with her sign was Rand Paul himself.

Daniel12 said...

You have a right to rush through crowds at people without hindrance.

You do not have the right to rush at the President of the United States.

Sprezzatura said...

"The Tea Party people say they're going to do exactly that. "

I would guess that 99% of the folks would agree that we should go back to a leader like Reagan.

Some how the perfect R is a leader who triples the debt, doubles the deficit (as a percentage of GDP), raises taxes on the middle class (payroll) to the point that the gov is taking in huge surpluses that can be used to partially fill-in the hole left from marginal tax cuts for the rich. And, he promised to never back down to islamic terrorists who killed hundreds of Americans, but then he bugged out a couple months later. And, since then we've had three decades where the middle class has been treading water.

But, the TPers feel that we need more of that. They feel it deeply. Very emotionally driven.

Trooper York said...

Do you know who Jerome Johnson was?

Not the football player. The photographer. So to speak.

Fen said...

Libtards will now explain how physically attacking Senatorial Candidates is okay....

Daniel12 said...

It's funny to me that those who were willing to parse every single second of the video yesterday have absolutely no doubt that the video today completely supports everything they've said.

Daniel12 said...

Later y'all. Been fun. Back to work.

Rialby said...

After seeing that video, I'd duck out too.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
You have a right to rush through crowds at people without hindrance.

You do not have the right to rush at the President of the United States.


Non sequitur. What if the POTUS is in a crowd? THIS is your logic?

And actually no you don’t have a right to rush thru a crowd…a part of the idea of “fire” and “Crowded theatre” you are STILL responsible for your actions and the harm they may cause.


WV: "celingi" this would be a movie re-make starring Ben Alfleck and Celin?

Freeman Hunt said...

You have a right to rush through crowds at people without hindrance.

You must live in an alternate world. I invite you to go to the mall today and attempt to rush determinedly up to strangers even sans crowd. Or at your next city event, try rushing at your mayor. Your argument here is absurd.

Fen said...

Daniel: You have a right to rush through crowds at people without hindrance.


You do not have the right to do this


OOOOPS...

Your "victim" attacked Rand Paul with a sign.

Now Daniel, go back over the last 600 comments on this and eat each and every word.

And try to show a little shame.

Rialby said...

So, let's all go out and bum rush Democratic candidates for the US Senate. See how far we get...

Rialby said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tank said...

Daniel?

Daniel?

Where he go?

bgates said...

Was the Daniel who posted

So if I'm at a Rand Paul rally and I yell "SHE'S GOING RIGHT FOR HIM!!" am I allowed to beat the shit out of anyone I want?

the same guy who posted

This is why I don't respond to people's hypotheticals. You've laid out a set of conditions here explicitly different from the ones I've laid out, pointed out how ridiculous it would be not to intervene under these conditions, and then used that to undermine my very clear and very different statement.

It's called a straw man.


?

Freeman Hunt said...

Daniel is waiting for someone to come bail him out after he was arrested for intimidation and criminal threatening at the mall.

Anonymous said...

THWACK!!

"Who capitalizes "HItler" and not "Jews"?"

You're gonna' want to put some ice on that, hdhouse.

Freeman Hunt said...

Someone's been using The Revised Elements of Style by Cedarford.

Fen said...

So, let's all go out and bum rush Democratic candidates for the US Senate. See how far we get...

We already know how far: the Dem congressmen would try to provoke us and then, when we didn't react, they would just make up a claim that we "spit" on them.

Catch that? If while exercising your free speech, you are shouting so loud that your spittle hits a Democrat candidate, they will falsely accuse you of spitting on them.

But its no biggie when Democrats physically attack a Republican candidate with a protest sign.

Lincolntf said...

I hope you've all seen the semi-newly released video on Fox. It looked a lot like an "assassination attempt" from a B-movie.

Won't change any minds, but it is another view for those who are cultivating a desperate "all Tea Partiers are violent rubes" meme in the waning days of their monopoly on Power.

chickelit said...

Daniel?

Daniel?

Where he go?


♫ Daniel's unraveling now ain't it plain?,
I can see the red tail lights heading for pain...♫

jimspice said...

Oh good Lord! Are we going to diagram sentences now? Given your legal training and experience, I'm sure you can run logical circles around me. But the relevant statements, as I see them:

ME: "Ann, you should have just said 'Wow, I was really off base yesterday. I jumped to conclusions, and should not have done so.'"

YOU: "In fact, you owe me an apology for YOUR lie in that very statement."

You clearly state that I lied. I did not lie. "You should have said" is a statement of opinion. I do hold that opinion. What went inside the quotation marks is irrelevant as long as I believed it. Since I do believe it, I did not lie. Now you could argue that I have mistaken beliefs, but you cannot argue that I lied. Well you can, but you would be wrong.

A professor once told me that I write like a woman, in that I tend to use phrases like "I believe" or "I feel" rather than just stating a position. For example, I might say "I believe this discussion is stupid" rather than "this discussion is stupid." I do not know if in fact women and men tend towards different argument styles, but it has suited me just fine.

chickelit said...

Wasn't the original Tea Party incited by a Stomp Act?

Fen said...

Jimspice: "Ann, you should have just said 'Wow, I was really off base yesterday. I jumped to conclusions, and should not have done so.'"

So. Jim.

Ready to take your own advice?

The full video now shows that Valle rush the motorcade and attacked Rand Paul through the passenger window.

In fact, if you have a shred of integrity, your mea culpa should include the words "I was really off base yesterday. I jumped to conclusions, and should not have done so."

Ankur said...

Salamandyr, that was me claiming the republicans were going to take the democrat's guns away. I would have imagined that even though all the intensity of that conversation, the satirical nature of that comment would have come through.

For the record: No, I don't believe republicans are going to take the democrat's guns away.

jimspice said...

Sorry Fen. The new video does not change my feelings one bit. I see no evidence of the stomper being in on it as was the subject of conjecture yesterday. If you can show a specific instance of anything I said that was factually incorrect, please do.

Ankur said...

And it is really funny how toxic the term "Jackbooted Thugs" becomes when used against republicans, but when used BY republicans, its all fine.

That is a term I have seen used in a throwawy manner on this blog often. So, it is amusing when the very people who use this term get the vapors when it is used in their direction.

Trooper York said...

The Republicans are going to take the Democrats butter away. Just sayn'

bagoh20 said...

"Ugh. I used to actually harbor some respect but you have lost that."

OMG! How will she get over that?
Meade, better stay on suicide watch now.

Deep dark depression, excessive misery,
gloom despair and agony on me.

Ankur said...

Guys, stop attacking Ann for insinuating conspiracies. Insinuation is NOT jumping to conclusions.

As to whether insinuation is better than blandly stating belief - well, we report, you decide!

Unknown said...

Congrats, Althouse Hillbillies, you've worn down all of PB&J's KosKid talking points to the point he's back to his old "Reagan was as bad as Obama" shtick.

As always, PB&J gets his economic data from the Paul Krugman Fan Club. Another Son of Saul.

Freeman Hunt said...

Of course conservatives and libertarians are worried that the Republicans will sell us out. We're always worried about that. That's why so many of us are focused on taking over their apparatus.

My point exactly. The electorate trusts the RINOS as much as they trust the Demos and the Tea Partiers intend to keep up the pressure.

I finally watched the video. That is what is causing all this controversy?

It looks like she is being held back but continuing to try to force her way toward Rand Paul while the people trying to restrain her yell, "Get the police! Get the police!" Then she goes down, and that one guy pushes his foot on her the way an untrained person might do to try to get someone to stay down which would make sense if she had been forcing her way through as it appeared she was. Someone immediately tells him to stop.

Wow. This is what you lefties have right now? Really? I expected that video to be completely different based on all the hullabaloo.


Excellent summation, ma'am.

Ankur said...

..(note to self) but most importantly, don't lose your sense of humors! (and I mean that completely earnestly)

Opus One Media said...

now now children.

the video presented showed a women being wrestled to the ground and a thug putting his foot on her neck/head area and pushing down. Paul was many feet away and heading walking away in the frames immediately before.

This thug wasn't crowd control or a bodyguard. He assaulted (menace) her - read the definition of menacing

508.050 Menacing. (1) A person is guilty of menacing when he intentionally places another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical injury. (2) Menacing is a Class B misdemeanor. Effective: January 1, 1975 History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 69, effective January 1, 1975.

Battery is the criminal offence whereby one party makes physical contact with another party with the intention to harm them. In order to constitute battery, an offense must be intentional and must be committed to inflict injury on another. Battery is different from a similar offense called assault. An assault is any attempt to threaten or attack another party. Physical contact is not required to constitute an assault.

ooops....the thug may be in some trouble.

DADvocate said...

You said that that MoveOn probably staged it, based on zero evidence.

Not zero evidence, the newspaper identified her as an employeed of MoveOn.

You're the idiot who, yesterday, posted the long list of supposed right wingers tied together in violent action through some sort of mind control practiced by Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh and others.

Once again, you prove yourself to be absurd, asinine, bedlamite, bonkers, cracked, crackers, daffy, demented, deranged, dopey, flaky*, foolish, fried, giddy, half-baked, idiotic, in the ozone, inane, insane, lunatic, mad, mental*, nuts, nutty, off the wall, out of one's gourd, ridiculous, screwy, silly, simple, touched, unbalanced, unhinged, unsound, wacky, whacko, witless amongst other things.

roesch-voltaire said...

Alpha, your points stick better when not covered in hyperbole, or excessive personal attack-

Hoosier Daddy said...

If you listen real closely to the video you can hear her yelling "Don't stomp me bro!"

Hoosier Daddy said...

Now if Rand Paul had gotten out of the Earth destroying, environmentally unsound SUV, put the Moveon.org babe in a headlock while yelling "Who are you! Who are you!" I might be more sympathetic to charges of thuggery.

Remember that little incident? I recall quite a few lefties defending an apparently drunk Democratic Congressman who assaulted a college student who had the audacity to ask him a question.

And the wheel goes round and round.....

bagoh20 said...

I know the libs here won't understand it, but the last two days of this ranting here have made it clearer than ever what's wrong with them.

This is all you got and you're running with it? It sure points out that policy is not your strong suit in this race. Thanks for providing that clarity for those who didn't already know.

Matthew Dessem said...

I stand by my approach to looking at and analyzing an unfolding situation, and I recommend that you do too. I will continue to help people question and analyze the news that is reported.

I appreciate your help! I have taken your advice and, going forward, will follow your approach to looking at and analyzing unfolding situations. That's why I am skeptical that Carly Fiorina was hospitalized for an infection. Isn't it possible that she was having an alien embryo surgically removed? There is just as much evidence for this theory as there was for a MoveOn.Org's Operation Headstomp Street Theater. I am waiting for answers!

Similarly, the Indonesian earthquake seems just a little convenient for the international aid organizations who stand to profit. Isn't it possible that the Red Cross has invented an earthquake machine? I demand that blog commenters provide me with detailed rebuttals to these baseless aspersions, or I will be forced to (reluctantly) conclude that Tadateru Konoé is controlling the earth's seismic activity from some sort of island fortress (most likely built around an active volcano).

Wheels within wheels!

X said...

I'd have knocked her out. BTW, I voted for Obama, so I guess that's indicative that Obama voters approve of coldcocking lunatics charging at candidates. Fuck Sirhan Sirhan's free speech rights. I'm proud that Americans spontaneously subdued her.

Carl said...

"A person in a disguise, carrying a sign from a radical organization, tries to push through the crowd to hand a political opponent an unknown object. What would the Secret Service have done to her?"

Well, as trained security personnel, they likely would have--

Oh that's right! I forgot! The asshats at the Paultard rally WERE FUCKING INSANE VICIOUS BASTARDS WHO PLOTTED TO MAIM ANY LIBERAL WHO DARED DISAGREE WITH THEM!

Ankur said...

After reading through this thread - I have to say: Thank you for your humor, Pastafarian, and thank you for your sanity, Michael and lyssalovelyredhead.

The Dude said...

hdhouse mugs the English language here daily and yet he wanders the earth. Free. Free from understanding and free from bowel control.

Trooper York said...

The only way to settle this is if the "victim" files a police report and it is investigated and everyone testifies under oath. Then all facets of this incident can be looked at and settled by a jury of her peers.

But somehow I don't think that is what is going to happen.

bagoh20 said...

Those ranting the hyperbole have no interest in settling this, quite the opposite is the goal.

Nora said...

"... but that just highlights the lack of anything serious in the political news this week"

This is only right if you consider accusations of election fraud coming from several states as not serious political news. Most of the media would gladly embrace the "stomping" story instead of talking about election fraud, because the reported fraud is being commited in favor of democratic candidates.

alpha leftie is always a good indicator of what the commissars' orders are, and for now they obviously are - blow stomping story out of all proportion.

blake said...

Wow, that does look like--well, did that remind anyone else of the John Hinckley video?

Security fail.

I think we're in "pound the table" mode, here, folks. October surprises ain't what they used to be.

Where's America's Politico been, by the way? Shouldn't he show up telling us how this proves America's going to vote Dem Tuesday?

Unknown said...

HDHouse said...

now now children.

the video presented showed a women being wrestled to the ground and a thug putting his foot on her neck/head area and pushing down. Paul was many feet away and heading walking away in the frames immediately before.

This thug wasn't crowd control or a bodyguard. He assaulted (menace) her - read the definition of menacing

...

ooops....the thug may be in some trouble.


As always, HD blows it (no pun). No thug, as in the case of the SEIU goons who beat Kenneth Gladney, but a county chairman for Rand Paul. He is under summons for 4th degree assault, a minor misdemeanor.

Contrary to HD's nonsense, the video shows him place his foot on her shoulder (not head/neck) and pushing rather slowly down (see Freeman's excellent summary).

Since the woman tried to rush Rand Paul's car and shove something in the window, she may be in a bit of trouble herself.

Trooper York said...

The only way to settle this is if the "victim" files a police report and it is investigated and everyone testifies under oath. Then all facets of this incident can be looked at and settled by a jury of her peers.

But somehow I don't think that is what is going to happen.


Precisely. I think Profitt may have to pay a fine if it goes to trial, but I believe you are correct. I have a feeling Dr Evil doesn't want this thing too throughly investigated.

Meade said...

Good thing Valle's sign didn't put Rand Paul's eye out.

garage mahal said...

No thug, as in the case of the SEIU goons who beat Kenneth Gladney,

Nothing illustrates the pure detachment from reality an self delusion more than this. One video shows a boot on a woman's neck, that isn't a beating, and the Ken Gladney video which shows no beating, no punching, no kicking, but simply a dude falling on the ground, which is a beating. Just amazing.

Meade said...

Or even if it made contact with his head - wouldn't that be assault?

HDHouse? Do you know?

Meade said...

Isn't she an agent for MoveOn.org? Are they paying her to shove signs into open windows at candidate's heads?

Meade said...

Is shove the right word?

Jab?

garage mahal said...

Was his head pillowy like a concrete curb? Was the sign cushioned like a sneaker?

Opus One Media said...

Meade said...
Or even if it made contact with his head - wouldn't that be assault? HDHouse? Do you know?"

No contact is necessary for simple assault - battery yes - assualt - in kentucky it is menacing as assult seems to require a weapon and other stuff.

Anonymous said...

Was his head pillowy like a concrete curb? Was the sign cushioned like a sneaker?

I have it on authority that the sign Valle shoved through the window weighed 200 lbs, and it had feet that stepped on Rand Paul's head.

Of course, being the same kind of authority that Althouse herself relies on, it's probably not worth crap.

The Dude said...

hdhouse wrote "assult" - is that an insult to your ass?

jamboree said...

I don't think its sexist. I think it's realistic. I don't think most women can be dangerous to most men unless armed. They even can be physically aggressive, have tempers, and it still won't matter.

On the other hand, most men *can* be dangerous to most women - and so it remains very bad form for a guy to attack a woman because of the unequal capabilities even if they start hitting/slapping, etc.

Case in point: I saw an episode of "The Jersey Shore" where Jenn, who is very in shape and a mentally and physically aggressive type, probably an ex-tomboy, went to hit Mike - she even connected with rotating body force - a shot in a million - and yet, any of the guys could easily restrain her by using their upper body strength to stop hers. She had to wait until they let her go and use surprise to get her hit in. It made a point, but still didn't do much damage.

Clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTjESswuhO8

bagoh20 said...

All this ranting about the head stomp that did not involve either a head nor a stomp is most easily explained by this:

From the Washington Times:

" Saying there’s no way Democrats can keep control of the House, Ireland’s largest bookie on Wednesday said it has already paid off all bettors who wagered the GOP would capture the chamber.

“In our opinion this race is well and truly over with nothing short of a miracle stopping the Republicans taking down the House,” said Ken Robertson, communications manager for Paddy Power, the Irish bookmaker.

Mr. Robertson said the odds had tipped so much in Republicans’ favor it made no sense to continue taking bets. In July Democrats were favored 8-11 to keep control, but by Wednesday the GOP was favored 1-50, meaning it would take a bet of $50 would win just an addition $1."

Meade said...

digitalbrain said...
I have it on authority that the sign Valle shoved through the window weighed 200 lbs, and it had feet that stepped on Rand Paul's head.

So it wasn't a jab? Just a shove.

HD: Assault not battery. Thanks.

And then as far as MoveOn.org, the non-radical mainstream political group... was it a coordinated effort with Valle? Or do they stick strictly to ads in the NYT calling General Petraeus "Betray us?"

HD? Anyone?

Alex said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...

Chris Matthers says Rand Paul incident Reminiscent of 1930s Germany

My god, Alinsky would we weeping with joy!

DADvocate said...

One video shows a boot on a woman's neck,...

Do you know the difference between a boot and a running shoe? If not, I can explain it to you using my size 14s.

No lie is to small to pass up, is it?

garage mahal said...

Running shoe on a woman's neck. Sorry!

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Methadras said...

AlphaLiar is on fire today. Hey buddy, lay off the hot sauce. You know, less irritation and all that.

traditionalguy said...

Oh Daniel boy...The pipes the pipes are calling, from glen to glen beck and down the mountain side of Kentucky, the summer's campaign is gone and all the Democrats are a falling. Tis you tis you must go and Rand abide. But come ye back when summers in the meadow and 2012 sees Sarah elected and Barack buried in a landslide.

Trooper York said...

Garage. I love you man. You are one funny guy.

Alex said...

I'm enjoying my healthy bok choy salad. I hope Alpha Liar is eating a greasy burger, fries and a THICK milkshake.

jungatheart said...

If she had a lick of sense she would have hopped up on the car hood and displayed her sign. Or at least have a sign small enough to stick through the window. Kids today.

chickelit said...

Running shoe on a woman's neck. Sorry!

Thugs don't wear running shoes Garage--they wear jackboots.

Get with the pogram!

Unknown said...

You get the feeling the regulars pushing the talking points really didn't look at the videos. I guess independent thought is banned all over the Leftosphere, not just npr.

PS I wonder if two posts of this topic was Ann's way of putting the blog on autopilot so she could grade midterms ;)

garage mahal said...

And why would this "supporter" wear running shoes anyway? Only if he wanted to run somewhere fast. And you know who else wore running shoes? Yes, O.J. Simpson.

chickelit said...

And you know who else wore running shoes? Yes, O.J. Simpson.

Are you suggesting that Profitt should be acquitted (if charged)?

Michael said...

Meade: If the woman was "head stomped" then the action she performed was more than a shove or a push. A thrust? A slash? A stab? Strike? Plunge? Yes, that's it, plunged. She violently plunged the sign into the car window attempting to stab the candidate.

Roger J. said...

No Garage--he wore Bruno Maglis--

The bottom line it seems to me is the Mr Paul is up by 8 (real clear politics). And somehow I dont think this incident is going to have a scintilla of effect on the election in KY next Tuesday other than increasing the republican turnout.

Libs have their panties in a bunch on this topic (well at least the 10or so fools who usually represent the liberal side on this blog). This incident doesnt seem to have major national coverage, so I suggest it is a tempest in a tea(baggers) teapot.

But do carry on--it is intensely amusing.

Opus One Media said...

@Meade

yes to both. battery certainly for the foot on neck..touching. assault (with the big "a" in honor of the other big "a" 60grit) with the menacing gesture after and possibly but unseen something before first contact.

I'm sure your wife will tell you and that this is a 'setup' but think "if you don't shut up i'm going to knock your teeth in and then you do it"...assault (presenting the expectation that physical harm will befall the victim - battery by carrying out the threat.

Opus One Media said...

El Pollo Real said...
"Thugs don't wear running shoes Garage--they wear jackboots."

This is Kentucky El Pollo...shoes of any kind are a rarity.

jd said...

If professor althouse were grading this as an exam answer, it would be found lacking and one-sided. There's no attempt to even understand how the stomper could have been in error--just one line of argument seeking to exhonerate his intermedling assault

chickelit said...

This is Kentucky El Pollo...shoes of any kind are a rarity.

Are you dissing Appalachia House? 'cause that just ain't gonna fly.

Michael said...

HD: Very reliable comments regarding the footwear of those west of the Hudson and south of N.J. This is, of course, exactly representative of the Liberal and Democratic view of southerners and poor white people. Thanks for reminding us and thanks, too, for keeping me entertained.

garage mahal said...

Roger
I'm sure Paul is going to win too. Cannot stand the guy personally, but not for me to decide.

jungatheart said...

I think HD might say that running up to the car at a political rally might create "expectation that physical harm will" occur.

Michael said...

Actually, the Juice said he didn't own or like Bruno Maglis. Remember if the foot slipped you must aquit.

Michael said...

acquit.

Roger J. said...

Again tempest in teapot--=Paul is going to win and win big; the police have responsibility for the incident and the legal system will grind out its decision. and the nearly 800 comments on this subject are not worth a fart in a whirlwind.

Freeman Hunt said...

Now we see that she lunged at Rand Paul through the window and attempted to gore him in the face using a sign-like bayonet.

He escaped with his life due only to the selfless and patriotic bravery of his nearby supporters.

Roger J. said...

The woman involved in this will, like Cindy Sheehan, be forgotten by the end of the week--

bagoh20 said...

Reports suggest that the sign may have been painted with Anthrax which is not available at domestic Home Depot stores. This suggests foreign involvement. Where is Soros right now?

The Dude said...

Look at hdhouse - he can spell "assault" after all. Can't use upper case letters properly, but then again, that would require coordination, intelligence, basic English skills, and empty Depends. Sadly, he is lacking all those, along with basic decency, honesty and common sense.

Tell us again, hd, about your offshore bank accounts used for your tax dodging schemes, and your many patents. We love to read your lies, you fucking retard.

former law student said...

Having seen her on Olbermann, I believe she merely wanted to prank Ron Paul, making her simply a left-wing James O'Keefe -- but without the attempted tampering with telecommunications equipment, of course.

Anyone who applauds O'Keefe's work in taking down ACORN should applaud Valle's attempt to take down Rand Paul.

Roger J. said...

60grit--you gotta be nice to HD--after all he has 9 patents and has the order of lenin for his work with the soviet union--of course the only patent holder with the same name is an optomitrist in tulsa--of course those dude dont wear shoes in OK either.

The Dude said...

Hdhouse has some sweet Bruno Magli's that his pal OJ dropped off. Hmm, OJ, HD - what are the odds that two criminals would use the same naming scheme? I think we may be on to something.

Roger J. said...

I think it was Cedarford who suggested ole HD had a restraining order that would keep him from 500 yards of any school--Not that theres anything to that of course--but you never know.

Roger J. said...

ooops--I back slid--Trooper advised me to drop the HD House thing--sorry I let you down troop; and HD--it was all in fun--you have a great day--you really arent the asshole you play on this blog.
cheers

Beth said...

Good thing Valle's sign didn't put Rand Paul's eye out.

My mom always said it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.

Beth said...

This suggests foreign involvement. Where is Soros right now?

He's not foreign.

former law student said...

What Valle should have done was pretend to be a citizen blogger and interview Rand Paul in his office with a videographer. Then she whisks off her breakaway suit to appear in a bustier, whip in hand, to take pictures of her satisfying Paul's unusual sexual desires, to put on Youtube.

None of this "impaling with a picket sign" crap. Just good old American kink.

Fen said...

Former Law Student: What Valle should have done was pretend to be -

No.

What Valle should have done was NOT rush the motorcade and attack the candidate with her sign.

bgates said...

Anyone who applauds O'Keefe's work in taking down ACORN should applaud Valle's attempt to take down Rand Paul.

Three cheers for O'Keefe's success in making ACORN a national pariah.

Two cheers and a giggle for Valle's pathetic failed stunt.

Fen said...

Former Law Student: Having seen her on Olbermann, I believe she merely wanted to prank Ron Paul

Well golly gee FLS. I believe the "stomper" was merely reacting to the Valle attack on Paul that he had witnessed seconds before.

Michael said...

Freeman Hunt: Gore!!!! That is the perfect word which neatly mirrors the "stomp" usage. Well done.

Trooper York said...

You know fls, we often inadvertently reveal our darkest sexual fantasies when we post comments on the internet.

Everyone knows about my unrequited love for Elizabeth Montgomery, Barbara Eden, Stella Stevens and Charo.

But I kinda think you shouldn't let slip those bustier fantasy musings about Rand Paul.

Just too much information dude, but remember not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Michael said...

She tried to gore him in the eye with the sharp end of her sign before she was subdued.

There. Much better.

Anonymous said...

On a related note, take a look at how the campaigns reacted to the event. Each disowned the altercation, but the Democrat Conway had to inject a clear case of anti-male bias into his statement:

We can disagree on issues, and I don't know what preceded the incident, but physical violence by a man against a woman must never be tolerated...

What utter bullshit, and Conway should be ashamed of himself. If a man sees a woman who is obviously drunk, or stoned, or otherwise impaired, about to get behind the wheel, I hope he has the presence of mind to deck her ass right there, by whatever means necessary. Yes, there are plenty of instances where I will tolerate violence by a man against a woman, and not only tolerate it, but wholeheartedly endorse it!

Oh, and if Conway had bothered to do the slightest bit of research, he could have easily found what preceded the incident: a woman in a disguise, carrying an odd object, pushing through the crowd, trying to accost Rand Paul for purposes unknown. According to foot-pusher Profitt, the police were informed of her odd appearance and behavior before the altercation, but refused to intervene.

Conway has done himself no favors, by exposing himself as a self-hating male, and as someone who can't be bothered to get facts before blowing his hot air.

Time was, that would have made him perfect for the Senate.

Fen said...

Ankur: And it is really funny how toxic the term "Jackbooted Thugs" becomes when used against republicans, but when used BY republicans, its all fine.

Wow. I bet its never occurred to Ankur that we learned how to be toxic from the Left [3-2 odds]

And I bet that Ankur actually believes *we* were the ones who brought Alinsky into this [2-1 odds]

We should start with a baseline:

Hey Ankur! Do you think the CBS Memo Hoax was real? Gee, thwose wascally wepubwicans and their dwirty twicks!

Robin said...

AlphaLiberal, how do you pretend to be serious with such an immense amount of hypocrisy spilling over.

jimspice said...

By the way, I put together a little mouseover image at http://www.timprofitt.com/. These are two images from the video, separated by 5 frames so you're looking at 1/6 of a second. Looks like the foot comes down 8-10 inches. I had to adjust the image over and up by 13 and 7 pixels respectively to control for camera motion. Though not perfect, it should be rotated as well, it gives a reasonable facsimile of reality.

M Jordan said...

How could Mr. Stomper have known it was a woman when he grabbed her? She had a wig on. And they obviously spotted this ruse since it was unceremoniously yanked off. But they had no idea it was a female underneath it. In fact ... why the hell was she wearing that phony looking wig? Highly suspicious. Perhaps she wanted them to think her a man in disguise as a woman.

Jim Treacher said...

This woman drew the foul. Unfortunately for her team, the media aren't the refs. The voters are the refs.

Nate Whilk said...

Oh, you leftists should just cool off. It wasn't a STOMP stomp.

BJM said...

Wah-wah-wah!

How about those of you who are so appalled and disgusted with our host, who provides an exceptionally open and free forum, get your own god-damned blogs.

ted nugent is a chickenhawk nancy boy said...

"wearing a disguise"

You guys are insane. She was dressed normally. That's not a disguise. The fact that she was an activist for MoveOn.org should not and does not cause anyone to fear for their safety. I'm willing to go way out on a limb here and say if a Tea Party activist were treated the same way by a Democratic Senate candidates' campaign coordinator, your reaction would be very different.

BJM said...

@FLS

Anyone who applauds O'Keefe's work in taking down ACORN should applaud Valle's attempt to take down Rand Paul.

Rand Paul was willing to assist with federal funding for human trafficking of minors? Who knew?

You're losing it Laddie.

metasailor said...

Hi! I haven't posted here in years. Just wanted to point out that Daniel is clowning you all, and all you have to do to resolve this is agree to his quite reasonable statement upstream:

"If we could just agree that some guys knocked her down and another stepped on her, and that at the very least the guy who stepped on her is and deserves to get charged, I'd be fine with that. "

I mean, let's be real here.

From the video evidence, it looks quote obvious to any reasonably objective observer that they did not grab her because they thought she was maybe some super-assassin; they grabbed her because they thought she was going to try and embarrass Rand Paul.

And also from the video evidence, it looks quite obvious that one jerk couldn't control his anger issues, and stepped on her head.

So to sum up: they overreacted because they love Rand Paul, and one guy overreacted to a clearly violent degree that is worthy of assault charges.

This is an observation of fact that casts no further aspersions on any other Tea Party candidates, Ron Paul, or anyone else in the entire universe.

Is there any good reason why we can't agree to this?

edward said...

Professor Ann,
You are going to take all kinds of flak for questioning the validity of this "story". I think your analysis is absolutely on target and that is just going to make the progressive moonbats completely unhinged.
Keep up the good fight and ay the truth win out.

Ed R-
Fellow Prof at another University

Trooper York said...

metasalor you have to take yes for an answer. If a crime was committed these people should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The should be a criminal complaint and a police report and everything should be settled on the record and under oath where questions can be quite properly be asked of everyone involved. Surely you would agree?

Trooper York said...

Let the chips fall where they may.

metasailor said...

I totally agree, and in fact that seems to be what's happening. This man was charged and also fired from Rand Paul's campaign.

So, all right then.

If people in general looked at the facts *even if it might make someone on their side look bad* - rather than try to head off how bad it might look by positing a bunch of different theories and larger concerns, as it looks like Ms. Althouse did - the world would be such a better place.

Fen said...

metasailor: And also from the video evidence, it looks quite obvious that one jerk couldn't control his anger issues, and stepped on her head.

No. From the video evidence, it looks quite obvious like he did NOT step on her head.

Where do you see him step on her head? Be specific: at what time in the clip are you saying this happened?

dbp said...

"Daniel is clowning you all, and all you have to do to resolve this is agree to his quite reasonable statement upstream:

"If we could just agree that some guys knocked her down and another stepped on her, and that at the very least the guy who stepped on her is and deserves to get charged, I'd be fine with that. ""

Nonsense: In earlier posts Daniel opined that any restraint of the Move On activist would be criminal. And plenty of people have agreed to your statement:
"that some guys knocked her down and another stepped on her, and that at the very least the guy who stepped on her is and deserves to get charged" except "the very least part". What else do you think should be done to him besides charging him with 4th degree assault?

DADvocate said...

Just say Chris Matthews on Soft Head, oops, Hard Ball stating more than once that this was a paid army of thugs (Starts his claims about the 9m45s point). And, then saying show me a progressive candidate who has a paid army of thugs.

Is there any evidence any of the "attackers" were paid? Has Matthews forgot about the SEIU, ACORN and the New Black Panthers?

Again, is there any lie too small for liberals, progressives, lefties not to tell? Seems not. Indeed, their whole ideology is based on lies.

Opus One Media said...

DADvocate said...
"Is there any evidence any of the "attackers" were paid?"

Now wait a minute there sonny. You don't for a minute think you can get talent like this guy for free do ya? Ya'll get what ya' pay for I always say. Ya' want elite storm troop types, by gosh and by golly ya' gotta pay for 'em otherwise you get thugs I tell ya'. Thugs.

metasailor said...

Fen:

Seriously?

OK, using this video as a reference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsrD9NxRC74

It's hard to pause the youtube player at exactly the right moment. So let's say between 12 seconds and 14 seconds in. Wherever you see him shift his weight and shove her into the street with his shoe. Ffs.

So please tell me you aren't about to try and slice angels off the head of a pin by saying "He didn't step on her head, he stepped on her shoulder and then his foot slipped onto her head."

Let's say that's the case. That makes it any better?

This piece o' crap's put his foot with his weight on her while she was already on the ground, restrained, outnumbered, and in fact had made no physical threat to anyone.

At this point, with her making NO MOVE, he then deliberately shifted his weight and shoved her into street hard enough you can hear the sound of her glasses hitting the street. At that point, said piece o'crap lifted his foot up to either maintain the pressure, or more likely *do it again* - and only moved away when someone else who was not as much a piece o'crap told him to move away.

Please don't make excuses for this guy. You don't need to do that, because he's not emblematic of the Tea Party - right? He's just some freak who no one should take as representing the real Tea Party movement or Rand Paul - right?

Opus One Media said...

@Roger...."Cindy Sheehan forgotten in a week"....


heheheheheh

1. I rememeber Cindy
2. Naw...this little footage has some legs to it...now that the thug asked her to apologize to him...

hehehehehe thank you Lord. thank you Lord.

metasailor said...

"Nonsense: In earlier posts Daniel opined that any restraint of the Move On activist would be criminal."

Nonsense yourself. Daniel may have said that earlier; then he stated the response that I quoted.

"And plenty of people have agreed to your statement:..."

That may or may not be. But did they agree about it to him?

Because I read quickly, but all I saw in response to Daniel was continued angry denial, and not one direct response to his statement.

But hey, if I'm wrong, that's great. that should be an example of how you treat someone if your'e genuinely interested in honest discussion. When someone's right, you give them the credit for being right. For everyone's claiming to be so distraught over hyper-partisanship, isn't it funny how little this one thing ever seems to happen when someone's on the other side.

garage mahal said...

Is there any evidence any of the "attackers" were paid? Has Matthews forgot about the SEIU, ACORN and the New Black Panthers?

None of whom attacked anyone? Why would he mention any of them?

Opus One Media said...

edward said...
Professor Ann,
You are going to take all kinds of flak for questioning the validity of this "story"."

Say edward. do you believe in physics or do you trust your lyin' eyes? seems to be a little conflict between what is real and what you want to believe.

for the life of me I can't figure out why you would want to believe it.

very very strange. very strange. very.

GT_Charlie said...

Lauren Valle (W/F, DOB 5/4/87, 415 Shorewood Drive East, Falmouth, MA), is a paid political operative of Greenpeace and MoveOn.org, and was arrested in Louisiana earlier this year when she and six others "boarded a vessel at Port Fourchon and painted messages with an unknown substance on different areas of the ship. The messages were directed to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. A representative for Salazar was at Port Fourchon this morning while other dignitaries congregated in Galliano with Secretary Salazar and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano regarding the ongoing oil spill impacting the Louisiana coastline."

http://thehayride.com/2010/10/rand-paul-protestor-previously-arrested-for-vandalizing-ship-at-fourchon/

She's a tool. She went to the event looking for trouble, and will ham it up for whatever it's worth.

Charlie

metasailor said...

GT_Charlie:

Oooh. She snuck aboard an abandoned boat and painted some stuff. She totally deserved to be chased around a car, tackled, shoved to the ground and then curb-stomped. Especially after the cops and security had already determined she was no threat and moved on.

Hey, maybe she will ham it up. Here's a solution: maybe jackasses shouldn't get so offended by perceived slights to their favorite candidate that they stomp on women's heads.

There. We can all get behind that, right?

Mike H. said...

Montana Highway Patrol history.

"1956

The historic 3-7-77 was added to the shoulder patch by then-Chief Alex B. Stephenson. The emblem is a tribute to the Vigilantes, the first law enforcement group in the Montana Territory."

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
She totally deserved to be chased around a car, tackled, shoved to the ground and then curb-stomped. Especially after the cops and security had already determined she was no threat and moved on.

1) I find it interesting that
metasailor” starts so reasonably, and ends at the very place s/he decries…rabid partisanship
2) “Curb-stomped” really from I gather her head NEVER was touched. So now, she was “curb stomped.”
3) Security had “determined” this how? I assume the same could have been said of Chapman, Hinckley or Mohamed Atta, PRIOR to their acting very badly.
4) Let us rephrase, alert citizens noticed this womon, alerted security which, for whatever reason chose to NOT investigate, she then charges a candidate, tries to run thru and around the crowd to close with the candidate and is forced to the ground.
5) Surely, we can all agree on this, right? Instead, we move from the “Reasonable Metasailor” to the “curb stomped” Metasailor…and then folks wonder why it’s so very much “Us v. Them” in places like this? Because once you agree to the “Reasonable Metasailor” the UNREASONABLE Curb Stomp Metasailoer rapidly emerges.
Physician Heal Thyself.

Fen said...

meatsailor: tell me you aren't about to try and slice angels off the head of a pin by saying "He didn't step on her head, he stepped on her shoulder and then his foot slipped onto her head."

In the video you use as "evidence", at the time frame you specified, he is not stomping on or even stepping on her head.

If you think "angles on the head of pin" applies to the difference between targeting the head or the targeting shoulder, you cannot be arguing good faith.

At the very least, drop the outright lie that "its *so* obvious he stomped on her head". Because thats total bullshit.

I would point out that, using your own standard of proof, one could jsut as easily "prove" that Valle tried to stake Rand Paul.

DADvocate said...

None of whom attacked anyone? Why would he mention any of them?

More of your lies. SEIU thugs attacked Kenneth Gladney. ACORN actively committed voter fraud. The New Black Panthers didn't attack, just made threatening comments a brandished weapons threateningly.

All different branches of thuggery serving the goals of scum. Liberals and lefties are just looking and hoping for excuses to create an even stronger police state with themselves in charge.

Shanna said...

/I finally watched the video. That is what is causing all this controversy?

Seriously Freeman. I can't believe this piddly incident has inspired almost a thousand posts.

I think folks are trying to think of anything but Tuesday's likely results. (speaking of, apparently my D2 in AR is probably getting a Republican. Half my states congressmen quit in anticipation of getting a beatdown this election).

jim said...

Wow, that sure is a lot of rationalizing. isn't it?

1: Requires ignoring Angle's "Second Amendment remedies," as well as the amusing case of the Texas man with a backpack full of pipe-bombs, as well as the man who had his gas-lines cut, as well as the person who ran a car off the road because it bore an Obama bumper-sticker, as well as Miller's strongmen detaining someone for the "crime" of trying to ask him a question, & on & on & on. There are more than enough "data points" to show just how thuggish a few of these "patriots" really are.

2: See above.

3: These people knew she was just there to hold up a sign, not to detonate her TNT vest - they'd met her before & knew damn well that she posed no threat to Paul whatsoever. Profitt's statement of concern for Paul's safety is pure bunk meant to excuse his vicious behaviour (he now wants HER to apologize, by the way). Their violence was planned (they had just boasted about "taking someone out") & intended to send a clear message: dissent against our candidate in his presence can & will be crushed with violence.

4: The Secret Service would detain & question her, not hold her down & step on her head. The "point" is a false analogy, unless you can seriously equate a candidate for the Senate with a sitting President.

5: The video speaks for itself. The woman who was attacked is about as threatening as a puppy.

6: "Are we really going to elevate every prank and beating to a political event deserving analysis?"

Her "prank" was intended to make a very cogent point: the GOP is receiving massive anonymous support from anonymous Astroturf "citizen's groups" who have total carte blanche in the wake of the Citizens United case to manipulate this & any future elections to suit their ends. Rand Paul is one of many who benefit signifigantly from this explicitly anti-democratic development. It's worth noting that this important topic is getting lost in the story of the beating, & that Paul will likely win in spite of it - neither of which says anything pleasant about the state of America in 2010.

7: Something bad might happen at the Stewart/Colbert rallies, & if it does that will prove that liberalism is, was & will always be morally bankrupt - so pay no attention to the woman getting her head stomped on!

I certainly can't argue with that ... because it's pure gibberish.

Jake said...

If there's one thing everyone ought to be able to agree on, it's that there shouldn't be violence at political rallies.

I'm not any friend of these uber-Greenpeace types, but the actions at the one rally, and the failure of the candidate and his supporters to condemn it, is wrong.

This blog is curiously eager to minimize what happened and make excuses for it. That's a shame.

Luther said...

AL, you ever been in a fight? I mean, where you felt an actual real life fist striking your real life intellectually pointy chin directly.

Have you ever actually dealt with someone for whom appeal to reason was as pissing in the wind.

That's what the deal is here.

That woman was looking for exactly what she got... I suspect she cashed her check happily. Though more likely she did it for nothing in return. Other than her ego.

That wasn't a stomp, it was a shove down, giving the recipient notice more bullshittery on her part would lead to greater force applied.

Common sense in other words.

In candor, I don't believe you have much practical experience with the world. But, then, that is the way of the Leftist. Words compared to Deeds. Of which 'Deeds' they have none, other than endless death in an attempt to force others to believe them.

Luther said...

AL, you ever been in a fight? I mean, where you felt an actual real life fist striking your real life intellectually pointy chin directly.

Have you ever actually dealt with someone for whom appeal to reason was as pissing in the wind.

That's what the deal is here.

That woman was looking for exactly what she got... I suspect she cashed her check happily. Though more likely she did it for nothing in return. Other than her ego.

That wasn't a stomp, it was a shove down, giving the recipient notice more bullshittery on her part would lead to greater force applied.

Common sense in other words.

In candor, I don't believe you have much practical experience with the world. But, then, that is the way of the Leftist. Words compared to Deeds. Of which 'Deeds' they have none, other than endless death in an attempt to force others to believe them.

bagoh20 said...

""This suggests foreign involvement. Where is Soros right now?"

"He's not foreign."


Neither was John Walker Lindh, but at least he's in custody.

metasailor said...

Fen:

"In the video you use as "evidence", at the time frame you specified, he is not stomping on or even stepping on her head."

OK, you *are* going to be slicing angels off of that pin.

ALright, in for a penny in for a pound.

Does his foot touch her head? Yes.
Both before and after he places the toe of his foot on her shoulder.

For the first time, start at 10 seconds. We know it touches her head because her head moves in reaction to it.

For the second time, it is after he already has some weight on her, she is already restrained, and she makes no threatening moves or even comments. He then deliberately shifts more of his weight onto her, pressing her into the pavement with his **foot on her head**.

Are we in disagreement that his foot touches her head?

Do I have to download the video, bring it into Final Cut Pro, make a screen grab for you and post it onto Flickr?

"If you think "angles on the head of pin" applies to the difference between targeting the head or the targeting shoulder, you cannot be arguing good faith."

I think it is splitting meaningless hairs, so yes. I think you splitting this hair rather than admitting this is a ridiculous overreaction on a lone woman who has already been tackled and restrained by multiple fat jackasses, means that you are not in any way interested in arguing in good faith.

But by all means, please prove me wrong and admit that:

a) Yes, his foot actually touches her head.

b) Yes, even if he "only" intended to shove this woman into the curb by leaning his full fat jackass weight on a DEFENSELESS, RESTRAINED AND UNMOVING woman's shoulder - that was still a jackass thing to do and therefore he's a jackass who deserves to be charged with assault.

"I would point out that, using your own standard of proof, one could jsut as easily "prove" that Valle tried to stake Rand Paul. "

And I would point out that this statement of yours is incorrect. To do that, you would have to show this woman restrain and tackle Rand Paul, have him on the ground helpless, and then have her shove the point of her sign into his shoulder and then "slip" so hard Rand Paul's head gets knocked into the curb. AND THEN PREPARE TO DO IT AGAIN - and have to be warned off by someone else in the crowd.

Ffs. Again, why are you making excuses for this guy?

This parsing is starting to remind me of the claims that the cops didn't beat Rodney King, their baton swings at his head were just meant as gentle warning taps but he just kept not moving out of their way.

Either admit this guy shoved her into the ground when she was already restrained and was making no threatening movements, or there is no point in us having any further discussion.

Fen said...

Are we in disagreement that his foot touches her head?

Yes.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
This parsing is starting to remind me of the claims that the cops didn't beat Rodney King, their baton swings at his head were just meant as gentle warning taps but he just kept not moving out of their way.
Odd you should bring that up, as the jury which saw the ENTIRE tape acquitted King’s abusers, isn’t it? So I guess tape parsing works….
You know Metasailor you don't seem a lot different from the rst of the "Lesftists" here.

Fen said...

5: The video speaks for itself. The woman who was attacked is about as threatening as a puppy.

Would that be before or after she attempts to stake Rand Paul?

Fen said...

so pay no attention to the woman getting her head stomped on!

Considering her head wasn't stomped on...

metasailor said...

Joe "Crypto-Jew" - if that is your real name:

1) I find it interesting that you define frustration at obvious denial as "partisanship".

2) If you seriously don't see his foot touch her head, I just don't know what to say.

3) "Security had “determined” this how?" - by seeing her, and then leaving her alone to concentrate on other likely threats.

You know, that old canard. Which you even admit in your next statement:

"4)...alerted security which, for whatever reason chose to NOT investigate,..."

BECAUSE THEY, PROFESSIONALS, COULD TELL SHE WAS NOT A THREAT.

Woo.

"5) ... once you agree to the “Reasonable Metasailor” the UNREASONABLE Curb Stomp Metasailoer rapidly emerges."

Here's another interesting statement that comes from nowhere. You see, sir - my further argument was with Fen who was still positing ridiculous excuses.

But hey. Feel free to consider my recognizing that placing your foot on a woman who's already restrained and previously considered absolutely no threat, and then shoving her into the curb, and then being about to do it again before you're warned off - consider that partisan all you like.

But consider that same exact situation with your mother underneath some jackasses' boot because she dared bring a mean sign to a rally. Seem like no big deal again?

wtf.

metasailor said...

"Are we in disagreement that his foot touches her head?

Yes."

OK! I have nothing more to say to you. I don't understand how you are able to make yourself think that. But please go and live the rest of your life happy, and I sincerely no one you care about ever has this same situation happen to them.

Fen said...

Either admit this guy shoved her into the ground when she was already restrained and was making no threatening movements, or there is no point in us having any further discussion

Its obvious you only see what you want, the rest you just make up.

The guy who "stomped" on her isn't the one who went down with her. If you watch carefully, you see another man try to restrain her (after she tried to rush the Paul a SECOND time). She struggles against him they lose balance and fall to the ground together. She continues to resist until more people (who are calling for police) help hold her down.

Fen said...

Metasailor: I don't understand how you are able to make yourself think that.

Its easy, all you have to do is watch the FULL video. Try it.

But please go and live the rest of your life happy, and I sincerely no one you care about ever has this same situation happen to them.

No one I know is going to attack a candidate for office. But thanks.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)

Gee Meta if you can’t just be “reasonable” how can any of us? I mean you explain how we just need to acknowledge a few simple facts, none of which included the words “curb stomping.” Suddenly, though now there are feet on heads and curb stomping…I just find your opening laughable in light of your current stance.

I would argue that OBVIOUSLY the security was wrong…she did charge the candidate didn’t she?

Anonymous said...

Really? how do you know that, Perfesser Winebox? Do you have video?

Or are you just another right wing parrot repeating the lies you've been fed? [...]

Ann, believe me when I say you disgust me. You make excuses for violent people and you attack their victims. You make false claims to neutrality all the while you spew your hatred toward liberals and Democrats.

Ugh. I used to actually harbor some respect but you have lost that.


I see those charm school lessons are finally paying off!

metasailor said...

"Odd you should bring that up, as the jury which saw the ENTIRE tape acquitted King’s abusers, isn’t it? So I guess tape parsing works…."

Oh, yes. NO question. Tape parsing works great - viewing the isolated frames over and over completely pulls the viewers out of the moment, and desensitizes them until they lose their perspective and are more amenable to rationalize away the circumstances.

Which is exactly what you guys are doing. Except you are starting from the reality-averse position that this guy's foot doesn't even touch the woman's head. Not even the Rodney King jury selected from Reagan's home town started off that out of touch with visible facts.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)

No Metasailor they saw the ENTIRE tape and discovered that the thirty seconds shown on National News….

The guy parsing the tape seems to be YOU…”look at frame 1256 the shoe clearly touches her skull! CURB STOMPING!”

metasailor said...

"If you watch carefully, you see another man try to restrain her (after she tried to rush the Paul a SECOND time)."

OK, so her trying to go up to Rand Paul is "rushing" him, in some manner that Rand Paul would have reason to fear for his life - even though security had already determined she was no threat.

But this guy putting his foot on her when she's already down and ISN'T MOVING, and then SHOVING her into the curb, and then needing someone else to warn him off before he does it again - that's restraining her.

And you're not even agreeing that his foot touches her head, when we can see her head move from CONTACT with his foot?

Alrighty then. Enjoy your universe.

metasailor said...

"I would argue that OBVIOUSLY the security was wrong…she did charge the candidate didn’t she?"

Please explain how security was obviously wrong, when she was proven to be no more a danger to Rand Paul than the fat jackass who "restrained" her by shoving her into the curb with his foot when she wasn't even moving.

Good lord.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 428   Newer› Newest»