PDA

View Full Version : what will happen to this congressman??



david gibson
06-14-2010, 11:56 AM
any guesses? pretty unbelievable behavior....

http://www.breitbart.tv/congressman-assaults-student-on-washington-sidewalk/

depittydawg
06-14-2010, 11:59 AM
any guesses? pretty unbelievable behavior....

http://www.breitbart.tv/congressman-assaults-student-on-washington-sidewalk/

Wow. Really amazing. I don't know what will happen to the dude. But if had been me he put his hands on he would have ended up on his back in a heartbeat.

mjh345
06-14-2010, 12:03 PM
What an arrogant as**ole
"Who are you"? "I have a right to know"
Give me a break!!
It will be interesting to see how his handlers try to spin this
I'm sure the voters will spin him out of D.C.
He should face criminal charges.
Good show of "LEADERSHIP"

david gibson
06-14-2010, 12:09 PM
What an arrogant as**ole
"Who are you"? "I have a right to know"
Give me a break!!
It will be interesting to see how his handlers try to spin this
I'm sure the voters will spin him out of D.C.
He should face criminal charges.
Good show of "LEADERSHIP"

they have already claimed that he was "assaulted" first - by virtue of a camera in his face.

on the other hand - kudos to VY for defending UT! ;-) seriously, stupid reaction, you gotta be better than the public - you'd think he would have learned from rothlesburgers mistakes.

ducknwork
06-14-2010, 12:20 PM
WOW....He needs to be in jail. Looked an awful lot like assault to me...

Cody Covey
06-14-2010, 12:47 PM
unfortunately for him you can't be assaulted by a camera on public property...unless hit with it of course. I saw this video a couple times getting ready for work in the morning but never caught that it was a congressman.

BonMallari
06-14-2010, 01:07 PM
two sides to this:

1.perfect example of today's "ambush style" of gotcha journalism, every out to make that You Tube video and get that sound bite...even Fox News does that with some of their productions..in retrospect if the students had identified themselves they might have gotten a more desired response

2.what the Congressman did was wrong too..plain and simple


what if you were in the public eye, how would you react to someone putting a camera in your face, do those standards change when you have kids with you..I am all for freedom of the press...but not at the loss of one's personal freedom of privacy and dignity..

road kill
06-14-2010, 01:17 PM
two sides to this:

1.perfect example of today's "ambush style" of gotcha journalism, every out to make that You Tube video and get that sound bite...even Fox News does that with some of their productions..in retrospect if the students had identified themselves they might have gotten a more desired response

2.what the Congressman did was wrong too..plain and simple


what if you were in the public eye, how would you react to someone putting a camera in your face, do those standards change when you have kids with you..I am all for freedom of the press...but not at the loss of one's personal freedom of privacy and dignity..

Maybe they just should have moved next door to him!!:D



rk

Cody Covey
06-14-2010, 01:37 PM
two sides to this:

1.perfect example of today's "ambush style" of gotcha journalism, every out to make that You Tube video and get that sound bite...even Fox News does that with some of their productions..in retrospect if the students had identified themselves they might have gotten a more desired response

2.what the Congressman did was wrong too..plain and simple


what if you were in the public eye, how would you react to someone putting a camera in your face, do those standards change when you have kids with you..I am all for freedom of the press...but not at the loss of one's personal freedom of privacy and dignity..First off you don't have freedom of privacy in a public place. Secondly he is a public figure where you have even less privacy rights...Thirdly the kid asked a damn question...that mean you grab him and steal his phone? If that was me and you grabbed my one arm you would be getting hit with the other...

mjh345
06-14-2010, 01:44 PM
First off you don't have freedom of privacy in a public place. Secondly he is a public figure where you have even less privacy rights...Thirdly the kid asked a damn question...that mean you grab him and steal his phone? If that was me and you grabbed my one arm you would be getting hit with the other...

BINGO!!!!!

depittydawg
06-14-2010, 01:48 PM
two sides to this:

1.perfect example of today's "ambush style" of gotcha journalism, every out to make that You Tube video and get that sound bite...even Fox News does that with some of their productions..in retrospect if the students had identified themselves they might have gotten a more desired response

2.what the Congressman did was wrong too..plain and simple


what if you were in the public eye, how would you react to someone putting a camera in your face, do those standards change when you have kids with you..I am all for freedom of the press...but not at the loss of one's personal freedom of privacy and dignity..
I don't know what you mean by "ambush" journalsim. If you're a public figure you need to stand before the public when addressed. Period. And the students did identify themselves as students. On several occassions in the video. There is no excuse for what the dude did. Hopefully he sill be sued for assault and booted out of office. Whats the lesson to be learned here? Hire a body guard to follow you if you want to ask a politician a question?

ducknwork
06-14-2010, 01:57 PM
I think when the congressman continued to ask 'Who are you?!' The students should have replied 'YOUR EMPLOYER!!!!'

It seems that he has forgotten that...

david gibson
06-14-2010, 02:26 PM
he has apologized and is set to give a press conference any minute now.......

huntinman
06-14-2010, 02:53 PM
What an arrogant jerk! Hopefully his constituents will answer his question.

Blackstone
06-14-2010, 03:23 PM
I'm no legal expert, but it looked assault to me. I don't think he had any right to grab that kid.

I don't think I would have liked being ambushed by someone sticking a microphone in my face, but that certainly wasn't the right way to handle the situation. If I didn't want to comment publically, I would have just told them to call my office, and make an appointment for an interview.

Buzz
06-14-2010, 03:30 PM
This is a new tactic by the right. My sister-in-law is a democratic state senator. Her republican opponent has one of his college interns literally stalking her with a video camera in hand.

M&K's Retrievers
06-14-2010, 03:38 PM
Do I think anything will happen to him? No way. Maybe a pat on the back from his colleagues.

huntinman
06-14-2010, 03:56 PM
This is a new tactic by the right. My sister-in-law is a democratic state senator. Her republican opponent has one of his college interns literally stalking her with a video camera in hand.

Nothing new, the dems have been doing it for years. Can you say Makaka?

Hew
06-14-2010, 04:08 PM
This is a new tactic by the right. My sister-in-law is a democratic state senator. Her republican opponent has one of his college interns literally stalking her with a video camera in hand.
LOL. Do you think if you say it with authority it makes it more believable?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.R._Sidarth (pssst...he's the student campaign volunteer for Dem. Jim Webb who followed George Allen around harrassing him at campaign stops until he was able to capture on video the infamous "macaca" slur back in '06 that effectively tanked Allen)

Hew
06-14-2010, 04:09 PM
Sorry, Bill, didn't see your post. Great minds....;)

dnf777
06-14-2010, 04:20 PM
Nothing new, the dems have been doing it for years. Can you say Makaka?

Not to ruin your fun, but that was *slightly* different. The man filming in no way incited the situation or even engaged the speaker....he was hanging out in the wings filming. The macaka comment was purely de novo, from the speaker.

Not that I'm saying what Etheridge did was right, but if a stranger put ANYTHING that close to my face, I'd be knocking it away too. Who knows if its a camera, squirt gun, mace, or whatever? Unless that kid was making some threatening gestures, the grabbing of his hand like that certainly appeared excessive, but then again, that tape was highly edited and interrupted with commentary screens. Why not show the whole, unedited clip? If they were truly students trying to get an interview, there are much more appropriate ways to approach and introduce yourself than that.

huntinman
06-14-2010, 04:25 PM
Not to ruin your fun, but that was *slightly* different. The man filming in no way incited the situation or even engaged the speaker....he was hanging out in the wings filming. The macaka comment was purely de novo, from the speaker.

Not that I'm saying what Etheridge did was right, but if a stranger put ANYTHING that close to my face, I'd be knocking it away too. Who knows if its a camera, squirt gun, mace, or whatever? Unless that kid was making some threatening gestures, the grabbing of his hand like that certainly appeared excessive, but then again, that tape was highly edited and interrupted with commentary screens. Why not show the whole, unedited clip? If they were truly students trying to get an interview, there are much more appropriate ways to approach and introduce yourself than that.

I'm thankful for you libs always interpreting things for me. The R was a jerk and the D was an innocent bystander...got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

ducknwork
06-14-2010, 04:29 PM
Not to ruin your fun, but that was *slightly* different. The man filming in no way incited the situation or even engaged the speaker....he was hanging out in the wings filming. The macaka comment was purely de novo, from the speaker.

Not that I'm saying what Etheridge did was right, but if a stranger put ANYTHING that close to my face, I'd be knocking it away too.When the student first spoke to the congressman, the camera was nowhere near his face. It looks to me like Chuck Liddell, oops, I mean Etheridge stepped into the face of the student. Does that change your feeling about it? Who knows if its a camera, squirt gun, mace, or whatever? Unless that kid was making some threatening gestures, the grabbing of his hand like that certainly appeared excessive, but then again, that tape was highly edited and interrupted with commentary screens. Why not show the whole, unedited clip? If they were truly students trying to get an interview, there are much more appropriate ways to approach and introduce yourself than that.

http://www.breitbart.tv/complete-un-edited-etheridge-video-camera-1complete-un-edited-etheridge-video-camera-1/

Here is your unedited tape from the camera that was knocked out of the student's hand. Sounds like the 'edited' version didn't leave anything out.

And here is camera #2

http://www.breitbart.tv/complete-un-edited-etheridge-video-camera-2/

BonMallari
06-14-2010, 04:32 PM
This is a new tactic by the right. My sister-in-law is a democratic state senator. Her republican opponent has one of his college interns literally stalking her with a video camera in hand.


Nothing new, the dems have been doing it for years. Can you say Makaka?

you both just proved my point...its that TMZ style, paparazzi , stalk,video and capture then post it on the net for the whole world to see..both sides do it...that doesnt make it right...if you are a public figure, where does the line for common decency stop, at the bathroom door,the bedroom door,the car door

huntinman
06-14-2010, 04:41 PM
you both just proved my point...its that TMZ style, paparazzi , stalk,video and capture then post it on the net for the whole world to see..both sides do it...that doesnt make it right...if you are a public figure, where does the line for common decency stop, at the bathroom door,the bedroom door,the car door

Bon, it's part of the youtube culture now. It's not going to change, just get worse. I think it will run all the decent people out of public office and leave just the snakes. There is no more working both sides of the aisle. It is all out war on the other side. Libs are in charge now, the people are sick of them. The R's take over till the same thing happens in reverse and so on...

Cody Covey
06-14-2010, 04:42 PM
you both just proved my point...its that TMZ style, paparazzi , stalk,video and capture then post it on the net for the whole world to see..both sides do it...that doesnt make it right...if you are a public figure, where does the line for common decency stop, at the bathroom door,the bedroom door,the car door
I am not sure where the line stops but I do know its most certainly not on the sidewalk in what appears to be a business district.

dnf777
06-14-2010, 05:05 PM
I'm thankful for you libs always interpreting things for me. The R was a jerk and the D was an innocent bystander...got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

You have some serious reading comprehension deficits if that's what you took from my post. And I've given up on the lib thing. Fortunately its offset by my truly liberal friends poking fun at me for being a NRA-lifer conservative who shoots little deer and birds! :D

depittydawg
06-14-2010, 05:13 PM
I'm thankful for you libs always interpreting things for me. The R was a jerk and the D was an innocent bystander...got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

I'd sum it a little different. The R was an ass and the D was a jerk.

depittydawg
06-14-2010, 05:14 PM
You have some serious reading comprehension deficits if that's what you took from my post. And I've given up on the lib thing. Fortunately its offset by my truly liberal friends poking fun at me for being a NRA-lifer conservative who shoots little deer and birds! :D

killing birds and bambi won't get you in trouble on the lib side. NRA membership... thats a stretch.

Hew
06-14-2010, 05:45 PM
I'm thankful for you libs always interpreting things for me. The R was a jerk and the D was an innocent bystander...got it. Thanks for clearing that up.
A nail struck squarely. If you don't mind, I'm going to steal that and it will suffice for an appropriate response to 93% of DNF's posts. Talk about a time saver!

david gibson
06-14-2010, 05:54 PM
Not to ruin your fun, but that was *slightly* different. The man filming in no way incited the situation or even engaged the speaker....he was hanging out in the wings filming. The macaka comment was purely de novo, from the speaker.

Not that I'm saying what Etheridge did was right, but if a stranger put ANYTHING that close to my face, I'd be knocking it away too. Who knows if its a camera, squirt gun, mace, or whatever? Unless that kid was making some threatening gestures, the grabbing of his hand like that certainly appeared excessive, but then again, that tape was highly edited and interrupted with commentary screens. Why not show the whole, unedited clip? If they were truly students trying to get an interview, there are much more appropriate ways to approach and introduce yourself than that.

i agree here, we have an unstated but respected "personal space" that you can declare and most cops and courts will support you. you can hold out a hand at arms length and declare "this is my personal space and anyone who intrudes on it will be considered a threat". i have done this numerous times and gone on to "remedy a situation" when that space was intruded upon and no issue ever rose, although i cant count how many times the guy (and one time a girl) said he was going to own me after he got out of jail. ho hum. thats what congressman Bob should have done. he has the right to first brush aside then knock the camera out of his face in my opinion and demand they stay greater than arms length while filming, but in all fairness you should offer the intruder to do it voluntarily first, then if he doesnt in most cases you have every right to declare that "personal space" and defend it at all costs with never taking a backwards step.

but grabbing his hand when he clearly was not trying to hit the congressman - and even if edited we are pretty certain that didnt happen or he would have said so in his news conference - and even worse grabbing the kid and clamping him against his body - sorry, he went overboard.

did the "kids" push the limit? yeah, and crossed it in my opinion, but they were clearly no physical threat.

we havent seen the end of this one folks! stay tuned!

depittydawg
06-14-2010, 07:11 PM
i agree here, we have an unstated but respected "personal space" that you can declare and most cops and courts will support you. you can hold out a hand at arms length and declare "this is my personal space and anyone who intrudes on it will be considered a threat". i have done this numerous times and gone on to "remedy a situation" when that space was intruded upon and no issue ever rose, although i cant count how many times the guy (and one time a girl) said he was going to own me after he got out of jail. ho hum. thats what congressman Bob should have done. he has the right to first brush aside then knock the camera out of his face in my opinion and demand they stay greater than arms length while filming, but in all fairness you should offer the intruder to do it voluntarily first, then if he doesnt in most cases you have every right to declare that "personal space" and defend it at all costs with never taking a backwards step.

but grabbing his hand when he clearly was not trying to hit the congressman - and even if edited we are pretty certain that didnt happen or he would have said so in his news conference - and even worse grabbing the kid and clamping him against his body - sorry, he went overboard.

did the "kids" push the limit? yeah, and crossed it in my opinion, but they were clearly no physical threat.

we havent seen the end of this one folks! stay tuned!

No way. Watch it again. It doesn't look like the student was close at all. In fact he wasn't even holding the camera. The cameraman isn't visible. No where does it appear that the students did anything other than ask a question. The congressmen was a jerk and needs disciplined. Period.

Hoosier
06-14-2010, 09:12 PM
He went off like that because he was asked if he supported the Obama agenda. That was bullying, no doubt about it.

david gibson
06-14-2010, 10:54 PM
No way. Watch it again. It doesn't look like the student was close at all. In fact he wasn't even holding the camera. The cameraman isn't visible. No where does it appear that the students did anything other than ask a question. The congressmen was a jerk and needs disciplined. Period.



just giving him the benefit of any doubt here. if he could grab the kids wrist so easily, then to me the kids hand was too close to begin with. like said above - how did he know it wasnt a can of mace or worse when he was surprised with it in his face?

the kids are wrong here - or at best somewhat less than right - but Etheridge is obviously way more wrong, thats all i am saying. he had a right to clear his space initially, but he went too far after that. guilty for sure but the kids are no angels, they pushed the limit.

Eric Johnson
06-14-2010, 11:00 PM
Article I. Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution....

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Whether or not this constitutes a Felony (probably not) or a Breach of the Peace....dunno.

Eric

Cody Covey
06-15-2010, 12:28 AM
just giving him the benefit of any doubt here. if he could grab the kids wrist so easily, then to me the kids hand was too close to begin with. like said above - how did he know it wasnt a can of mace or worse when he was surprised with it in his face?

the kids are wrong here - or at best somewhat less than right - but Etheridge is obviously way more wrong, thats all i am saying. he had a right to clear his space initially, but he went too far after that. guilty for sure but the kids are no angels, they pushed the limit.Watch the video again and see who gets in who's face. The congressman turns and walks up to the kids face...the kids are not wrong here at all..

cotts135
06-15-2010, 06:35 AM
People are making an issue here of whether the Congressman is a Democrat or Republican. That is irrelevant as is who the interviewers are and if they misrepresented themselves. Taken at face value this is pure and simple assault. If your not convinced , then turn the tables around and think what might have happened if one of those so called students had grabbed the Congressman.
These guys are beholden to the people they represent and the taxpayers that pay their salary. Just because they make the laws does not mean they are immune from them

ducknwork
06-15-2010, 07:12 AM
just giving him the benefit of any doubt here. if he could grab the kids wrist so easily, then to me the kids hand was too close to begin with. like said above - how did he know it wasnt a can of mace or worse when he was surprised with it in his face?

the kids are wrong here - or at best somewhat less than right - but Etheridge is obviously way more wrong, thats all i am saying. he had a right to clear his space initially, but he went too far after that. guilty for sure but the kids are no angels, they pushed the limit.

Go back and watch the unedited videos I posted. The kids addressed him when he was still quite a ways from them. The congressman stepped into the personal space of them, not vice versa! And how could he have been surprised when they first spoke to him 10 yds away? There was nothing threatening about what the kids did. Period.

BTW, does he seem drunk to anyone else?

dnf777
06-15-2010, 07:37 AM
Go back and watch the unedited videos I posted. The kids addressed him when he was still quite a ways from them. The congressman stepped into the personal space of them, not vice versa! And how could he have been surprised when they first spoke to him 10 yds away? There was nothing threatening about what the kids did. Period.

BTW, does he seem drunk to anyone else?

There's very litte to be gained from watching those "unedited" tapes, as far as how a threat may have been percieved. It appears that he over-reacted at the least, and possibly assaulted them at the worst. However, if that were Mitt or McCain, and a kid from a liberal college paper approached one of them in the same way, I can hear the justifications for taking him "out"! It's all who's ox is getting gored.

I've seen plenty of reporters on the street approach people, and when they behave like those ones did, the result is usually similar, or they're ignored. They were VERY unprofessional in their approach, and nowadays, I can see why that would cause fear in a public figure, and result in defensive posturing. Don't know if it justified his response, just not enough info.

Hoosier
06-15-2010, 08:23 AM
There's very litte to be gained from watching those "unedited" tapes, as far as how a threat may have been percieved. It appears that he over-reacted at the least, and possibly assaulted them at the worst. However, if that were Mitt or McCain, and a kid from a liberal college paper approached one of them in the same way, I can hear the justifications for taking him "out"! It's all who's ox is getting gored.

I've seen plenty of reporters on the street approach people, and when they behave like those ones did, the result is usually similar, or they're ignored. They were VERY unprofessional in their approach, and nowadays, I can see why that would cause fear in a public figure, and result in defensive posturing. Don't know if it justified his response, just not enough info.

That wasn't a reaction of fear; it was being a bully to a kid. I didn't see anything out of line or disrespectful about the way the kid addressed him. As a matter of fact the kid continued to call him sir and say please after it became physical. His reaction was to being asked if he supported the Obama agenda, why would that make him so mad?

dnf777
06-15-2010, 08:31 AM
That wasn't a reaction of fear; it was being a bully to a kid. I didn't see anything out of line or disrespectful about the way the kid addressed him. As a matter of fact the kid continued to call him sir and say please after it became physical. His reaction was to being asked if he supported the Obama agenda, why would that make him so mad?

Unless you have powers like Mr. Spock to mind-melt, you, nor anyone else knows what he was feeling at that time. Like I said, it appears that he over-reacted at the very least, but if two teens with that tone approached me in that manner, pointingt something at my head, I'm not sure how I would react.

road kill
06-15-2010, 08:37 AM
Unless you have powers like Mr. Spock to mind-melt, you, nor anyone else knows what he was feeling at that time. Like I said, it appears that he over-reacted at the very least, but if two teens with that tone approached me in that manner, pointingt something at my head, I'm not sure how I would react.
Yeah, you'd have to find out their party affiliation first.

I mean what if they were asking you a question like....oh....say...."Do you support President Obama's policies?"

Then you would HAVE to get physical with them.:D




rk

huntinman
06-15-2010, 09:15 AM
Unless you have powers like Mr. Spock to mind-melt, you, nor anyone else knows what he was feeling at that time. Like I said, it appears that he over-reacted at the very least, but if two teens with that tone approached me in that manner, pointingt something at my head, I'm not sure how I would react.

mind-meld

.

Hoosier
06-15-2010, 09:20 AM
Unless you have powers like Mr. Spock to mind-melt, you, nor anyone else knows what he was feeling at that time. Like I said, it appears that he over-reacted at the very least, but if two teens with that tone approached me in that manner, pointingt something at my head, I'm not sure how I would react.

Tit for tat darn near 3000 times, good job doc.

dnf777
06-15-2010, 09:22 AM
Tit for tat darn near 3000 times, good job doc.

Likewise.....

Got anything meaningful to add, or just more tit tat?

M&K's Retrievers
06-15-2010, 09:36 AM
Dave, it's Vulcan Patty Melt.

Hoosier
06-15-2010, 09:42 AM
Likewise.....

Got anything meaningful to add, or just more tit tat?

It really doesn't matter if anyone has something meaningful to say on POTUS, you'll be there every time pulling something ridiculous out of your keister as a response; just to be heard on every twist and turn of every subject discussed. "Mind melt":rolleyes:

ducknwork
06-15-2010, 09:42 AM
There's very litte to be gained from watching those "unedited" tapes, as far as how a threat may have been percieved. It appears that he over-reacted at the least, and possibly assaulted them at the worst. However, if that were Mitt or McCain, and a kid from a liberal college paper approached one of them in the same way, I can hear the justifications for taking him "out"! It's all who's ox is getting gored.

Now you are being ridiculous. Your last sentence is complete BS and you know it. In fact, in a situation such as this, it pisses me off that someone would still try to turn this into partisan politics. But hey, if anyone could do it, it's you! I don't think anyone on here would be condoning similar actions by anyone, regardless of political affiliation. If you truly think that, I am sorry for you. Although, I believe you are just stirring the pot...again. The purpose of the unedited tapes was your accusation that there were important parts that were edited out that 'may' have shown the kids threatening him or stepping into his face. It's clear that's not what happened.

I've seen plenty of reporters on the street approach people, and when they behave like those ones did, the result is usually similar, or they're ignored. They were VERY unprofessional in their approach, and nowadays, I can see why that would cause fear in a public figure, and result in defensive posturing. Don't know if it justified his response, just not enough info.

They addressed him politely when he was still 10 yards away. If he didn't want to answer the question (who can blame him), then he should have taken the high road and ignored them. Plain and simple. Maybe if he wasn't drunk...

BrianW
06-15-2010, 09:47 AM
It could be argued that by grabbing the student's wrist, the Congressman was defending himself. BUT when he let go of the wrist and THEN grabbed the student by the back of the neck and started pulling him towards himself, THAT stopped being self-defense and became an assault in my opinion.

dnf777
06-15-2010, 09:49 AM
They addressed him politely when he was still 10 yards away. If he didn't want to answer the question (who can blame him), then he should have taken the high road and ignored them. Plain and simple. Maybe if he wasn't drunk...

Oh come on! If that were McCain or Boehner, and some liberal college paper reporter approached him like that, there would be cheers for dotting his eyes from some on this list, AND YOU KNOW IT!! Not sayin' YOU, but there are some. Be real.

And I agree with brianW, the neck grabbing was clearly NOT defensive, despite whatever may have happened up to that point.

ducknwork
06-15-2010, 09:50 AM
It could be argued that by grabbing the students wrist, the Congressman was defending himself.

Against what? How was the student threatening him?

ducknwork
06-15-2010, 09:54 AM
Oh come on! If that were McCain or Boehner, and some liberal college paper reporter approached him like that, there would be cheers for dotting his eyes from some on this list, AND YOU KNOW IT!! Not sayin' YOU, but there are some. Be real.



Yeah, maybe from some of the extremes. Like DG or UB. But you have to take what they say with a shaker of salt anyway, so would they really count? Even then, I really don't think anyone would have approved of this action. Even if it was Ronald Reagan that did it. Or Ted Nugent. Or (insert some other conservative hero).

Buzz
06-15-2010, 10:00 AM
It could be argued that by grabbing the student's wrist, the Congressman was defending himself. BUT when he let go of the wrist and THEN grabbed the student by the back of the neck and started pulling him towards himself, THAT stopped being self-defense and became an assault in my opinion.

That was him making sure that the "student's" face got on tape too. Didn't you see him swing the kid around and put his arm around his shoulder like they were posing for a picture?

Interesting that they decided to blur it out.

The congressman knew that these two were trying to get him to say something that they could produce a hit video with and put it on the internets. I'm guessing he had a few too many at the fundraiser, he got pissed, and did something really stupid.

david gibson
06-15-2010, 10:03 AM
Yeah, maybe from some of the extremes. Like DG or UB. But you have to take what they say with a shaker of salt anyway, so would they really count? Even then, I really don't think anyone would have approved of this action. Even if it was Ronald Reagan that did it. Or Ted Nugent. Or (insert some other conservative hero).

so i am an exteme, eh? cool!

but i never advocate assault. all i did here was play a little devils advocate to give the esteemed congressman the benefit of the doubt, as anyone deserves. his actions still didnt pass muster. i thought i was trying to be fair to a liberal. i would have defended a conservative even less, you cant give ammo to the other side for one thing plus what he did was just wrong. cracked heads open for 4 yrs and never got cited because i knew the law, my limits, and kept a cool head.

depittydawg
06-15-2010, 10:10 AM
Oh come on! If that were McCain or Boehner, and some liberal college paper reporter approached him like that, there would be cheers for dotting his eyes from some on this list, AND YOU KNOW IT!! Not sayin' YOU, but there are some. Be real.

And I agree with brianW, the neck grabbing was clearly NOT defensive, despite whatever may have happened up to that point.

No doubt. Fox would already be spinning a web of character assassination on against the college kids.

BrianW
06-15-2010, 10:20 AM
Against what? How was the student threatening him?
In both videos there is out of camera action that we can't see. Therefore I can't judge what may/may not have happened in order for the Congressman to end up holding the "student" be the wrist. Hence, my "could be argued" allowance for the benefit of the doubt until the facts are known..


That was him making sure that the "student's" face got on tape too. Didn't you see him swing the kid around and put his arm around his shoulder like they were posing for a picture?

Interesting that they decided to blur it out.

The congressman knew that these two were trying to get him to say something that they could produce a hit video with and put it on the internets. I'm guessing he had a few too many at the fundraiser, he got pissed, and did something really stupid.

Whatever the Congressman's "intent" was, the fact is that he released the "student's" wrist, then reached out, grabbing the person by the back of the neck and pulled him towards himself. He did not ask permission to do so and in fact the "student" was requesting to be let go.

We'll never really know "what" they were trying to get him to say, will we? Asking a currently serving Democratic Congressional Representative if he fully supports the current Democratic President's agenda sounds like a reasonable question to me, and is one that I would ask my Democratic Congressman if I had the chance.

mjh345
06-15-2010, 12:35 PM
No doubt. Fox would already be spinning a web of character assassination on against the college kids.

Agreed Fox would probably spin it for the R's benefit and MSNBC would spin it for a D's benefit.
That is because our "unbiased" press is quite the opposite, and not as "fair and Balanced" as they pretend. They usually have a partisan agenda.

That is a big part of the problem with our system. The "watchdog press" has abdicated that duty and gotten in to bed with the parties. When we the voters and taxpayers become sheeple and start being influenced by and accept the "spin" and "partisanship" then the big problem becomes a HUGE problem.
We need to learn to be objective and hold our leaders to a standard and call a "spade" a "spade".

I don't give a crap if this idiot is a D or an R or an I what he did was WRONG; he approached the student and invaded his space and he laid hands on the kid!! That is WRONG. He is a US congressman dealing with a kid, and showed no leadership qualities min my book
He should be held accountable by the law if applicable and by his constituency in Nov.

I frequently agree with Dave and Buzz when they point out the hypocrisy that prevails in many instances on here, however any attempts you two are using to rationalize this idiots behavior seem like hypocrisy on your part.

PS Duckwork, I don't know this guy to know if he was drunk or not [he looked funny to me] but you can bet his handlers may try to rationalize his behavior with that excuse if he was

david gibson
06-15-2010, 12:44 PM
Agreed Fox would probably spin it for the R's benefit and MSNBC would spin it for a D's benefit.
That is because our "unbiased" press is quite the opposite, and not as "fair and Balanced" as they pretend. They usually have a partisan agenda.

That is a big part of the problem with our system. The "watchdog press" has abdicated that duty and gotten in to bed with the parties. When we the voters and taxpayers become sheeple and start being influenced by and accept the "spin" and "partisanship" then the big problem becomes a HUGE problem.
We need to learn to be objective and hold our leaders to a standard and call a "spade" a "spade".

I don't give a crap if this idiot is a D or an R or an I what he did was WRONG; he approached the student and invaded his space and he laid hands on the kid!! That is WRONG. He is a US congressman dealing with a kid, and showed no leadership qualities min my book
He should be held accountable by the law if applicable and by his constituency in Nov.

I frequently agree with Dave and Buzz when they point out the hypocrisy that prevails in many instances on here, however any attempts you two are using to rationalize this idiots behavior seem like hypocrisy on your part.

PS Duckwork, I don't know this guy to know if he was drunk or not [he looked funny to me] but you can bet his handlers may try to rationalize his behavior with that excuse if he was

after seeing his press conference i think he just has a slightly goofy manner about him that may make him appear to have been drinking at times. and even if he had a beer or two, so what? he wasn't driving. as far as what the other camera could have been doing etc etc, its notable that in his press conference he made no excuses and did not refer to anything that could have occurred out of camera range, so if he makes no excuses to rationalize his behavior then i dont see how any one else can......

depittydawg
06-15-2010, 01:11 PM
after seeing his press conference i think he just has a slightly goofy manner about him that may make him appear to have been drinking at times. and even if he had a beer or two, so what? he wasn't driving. as far as what the other camera could have been doing etc etc, its notable that in his press conference he made no excuses and did not refer to anything that could have occurred out of camera range, so if he makes no excuses to rationalize his behavior then i dont see how any one else can......

I don't think anyone on this forum condoned his behavior. There may have been one or two who tried to rationalize it. His reaction to the camera was completely irrational. When people behave like that, I gotta wonder if they just got hit with a load of bricks that had nothing to do with the incident. Like maybe his mistress threatened to go public or something... :cool:

Cody Covey
06-15-2010, 01:31 PM
Okay this is really annoying me the actions being described are battery not assault. While assault took place the parts of the video being described as assault are actually battery.

Now then Dave why do you keep saying again and again that we don't know what is going on when we have the video of them. You ask for unedited video and get it but still insist on the videos being doctored some how. Just like on another thread here where you asked for stats got them and then said the stats are obviously wrong....

independent ??????

david gibson
06-15-2010, 01:43 PM
Okay this is really annoying me the actions being described are battery not assault. While assault took place the parts of the video being described as assault are actually battery.

Now then Dave why do you keep saying again and again that we don't know what is going on when we have the video of them. You ask for unedited video and get it but still insist on the videos being doctored some how. Just like on another thread here where you asked for stats got them and then said the stats are obviously wrong....

independent ??????

thats just his MO. i used to respect his opposition and ability to back up the left viewpoint but lately all he does is just like you say above. thats why i have mellowed so much lately.... ;-)

dnf777
06-15-2010, 01:52 PM
Now then Dave why do you keep saying again and again that we don't know what is going on when we have the video of them. You ask for unedited video and get it but still insist on the videos being doctored some how. Just like on another thread here where you asked for stats got them and then said the stats are obviously wrong....

independent ??????

I think you're talking to Dave Gibson, but in this rare occurence, we seem to agree. We just can't see everything, even in the "unedited" shots. And although those clips may not have been altered, when you turn the camera on, and when you turn it off is a form of editing. The congressman's attention seems more focused on the camera filming the incident, rather than the one he took away from the kid.

I've already said that it looks like what he did was wrong, but then again, a stranger (kid, adult, he was full grown in any case) points an object at my head that close, I'm probably taking it down one way or another too! As would most on this forum, I will hazard to say. Despite snottily repeating "sir, sir, sir" they did NOT identify themselves as any respectable reporter would, so I can't fault the guy for getting defensive. It appeared that he got a little "offensive" though, and that's hard to explain away, other than by then he was really pissed.

Cody Covey
06-15-2010, 01:55 PM
I think i can speak for most on this board when i say that we would NOT take out a photographer or a guy holding a camera when asked if we support Obama's agenda.

david gibson
06-15-2010, 02:06 PM
I think you're talking to Dave Gibson, but in this rare occurence, we seem to agree. We just can't see everything, even in the "unedited" shots. And although those clips may not have been altered, when you turn the camera on, and when you turn it off is a form of editing. The congressman's attention seems more focused on the camera filming the incident, rather than the one he took away from the kid.

I've already said that it looks like what he did was wrong, but then again, a stranger (kid, adult, he was full grown in any case) points an object at my head that close, I'm probably taking it down one way or another too! As would most on this forum, I will hazard to say. Despite snottily repeating "sir, sir, sir" they did NOT identify themselves as any respectable reporter would, so I can't fault the guy for getting defensive. It appeared that he got a little "offensive" though, and that's hard to explain away, other than by then he was really pissed.

what??? not me homeboy. post 21 you ask for unedited video, post 39 you say its worthless, or"little to be gained" from it.

there you go again. selective memory even when Cody throws it right up in the open.

Buzz
06-15-2010, 02:16 PM
I think i can speak for most on this board when i say that we would NOT take out a photographer or a guy holding a camera when asked if we support Obama's agenda.

If you read what he said again, he didn't say anything about taking out the photographer. He was talking about taking out the camera.

dnf777
06-15-2010, 02:32 PM
what??? not me homeboy. post 21 you ask for unedited video, post 39 you say its worthless, or"little to be gained" from it.

there you go again. selective memory even when Cody throws it right up in the open.

that's right. after seeing it, it still left enough off camera as to not clarify the situation.

this has degenerated into a bunch of silly BS. I'm done.

Hew
06-15-2010, 02:38 PM
Now then Dave why do you keep saying again and again that we don't know what is going on when we have the video of them. You ask for unedited video and get it but still insist on the videos being doctored some how. Just like on another thread here where you asked for stats got them and then said the stats are obviously wrong....

independent ??????
Don't be so incredulous. He will never cease to amaze you. He's gnashing his teeth about context in this thread when just a week or so ago he was arguing that a compilation of Glenn Beck snippets was all the context that was needed. http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=55151

david gibson
06-15-2010, 02:58 PM
Don't be so incredulous. He will never cease to amaze you. He's gnashing his teeth about context in this thread when just a week or so ago he was arguing that a compilation of Glenn Beck snippets was all the context that was needed. http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=55151

that was unbelievable. has to be the best/worst carving of out of context snippits i have ever seen. and some people bit.

ducknwork
06-15-2010, 04:01 PM
that's right. after seeing it, it still left enough off camera as to not clarify the situation.

this has degenerated into a bunch of silly BS. I'm done.

OK, so what do you think the assaulted 'student' could have possibly been doing with the hand that wasn't holding the camera that would have provoked this attack? Please, tell us. He greeted E, asked a question, E stepped in his face and proceeded to assault him. It's clear as day! I honestly want to know at what point you think something could have happened. Obviously, the one holding the other camera wouldn't have been the one to do anything, since he wasn't attacked.

Cody Covey
06-15-2010, 04:06 PM
not only that but don't you think he would've said something in his press conference other than I'm sorry if he really felt provoked?

dnf777
06-15-2010, 05:15 PM
OK, so what do you think the assaulted 'student' could have possibly been doing with the hand that wasn't holding the camera that would have provoked this attack? Please, tell us.

Holding up a naked picture of E's wife? Or worse--a naked picture of E's mistress...

road kill
06-15-2010, 05:24 PM
Holding up a naked picture of E's wife? Or worse--a naked picture of E's mistress...


Dude......puhlease!!!!!!:barf:






rk

david gibson
06-15-2010, 06:09 PM
Holding up a naked picture of E's wife? Or worse--a naked picture of E's mistress...

nope. more like a toe-tapping buddy from the local airport.....

road kill
06-15-2010, 06:33 PM
Maybe he had a picture of Al Gore with Laurie David??:D



rk

ducknwork
06-15-2010, 10:59 PM
this has degenerated into a bunch of silly BS.

NOW, you are correct.


Holding up a naked picture of E's wife? Or worse--a naked picture of E's mistress...