You must really dislike yourself in that case. I wonder how the Secret Service would have reacted had she attacked Obama's car in the same way.
You are paranoid and justifying their paranoia. In her first attempt to rush the car she showed that she wasn't a threat, since she did nothing threatening once she got to the car. If she was a threat she would have had more than sign (which according to you is capable of blowing up the white house and half of DC) and she would have done more than turn it around. That was all she did. Anyone who had been previously concerned and was thinking straight would have realized she posed no threat at that point. I'm a gun owner, and think a lot of the regulations surrounding guns aren't necessary, but people who over react like this, and perceive threats where none exist also have guns we are all less safe.
The woman had a concussion, and sprained arm. Whatever you think of what happened to her head under the guy's foot it was enough to cause that.
Rushing is to attacking as stepping on is to stomping. You don't like exaggeration unless it is in your favor. When she rushed the car, no one except her knew her intent. I still wish a foul-smelling, really fat guy would have been handy to sit on her until the police came. There would have been no violence and move-on.org would have been rightfully shamed.
The fat smelly guy would have been fine, but after she rushed the car every one did no her intent and that it wasn't harmful. They still through her down and stomped on her after she rushed up to the car. Like I said, you don't have to call it stomped if you don't want to. But he did put his foot down on her, and then smash it in harder, giving her a concussion and sprained arm. Whether you call that stomped or not that is bad enough.
Can I see your psychiatric license and my client file? If you can't provide them both, shut up about that please. Would you give a rat's ass if that was a teaparty chick on the ground at a Harry Reid event? Of course you'll say "YES" I'm predicting and we all should as far as the over-reaction goes but to yield to no criticism for this woman. I read somewhere that she was paid to go there and do that. Free speech comes from the heart not the wallet.
There is more evidence that John Lewis was spit on that that Valle actually meant to do physical harm to Paul. A cop isn't a politician, you keep on changing the terms of what you are arguing about.
If you know about working security, particularly sensitive security like this, you know that you have to be very careful how you act. THis situation perfectly illustrates that. These guys acted out of paranoia and they have made things worse for their candidates and are facing assault charges. Except in the thread said that it should be expected that kids selling lemonade would encounter people openly in the public. YOu didn't limit it to just from the back of the car. Instinct and information though can go very wrong as this case shows. Heck even police who are trained do deal with these sort of things occasionally get brought up on assault charges. FYI, I have worked security before at concerts, trained with and trained police, bouncers and MP's and other people who do security work. One of the biggest things that you are taught is to not give in to instinct but to assess the situation and act in a limited manner. Bottom line for you and Tallanver is that the only people charged with assault in this incident are the two Paul supporters, who FYI were not professional security. [/quote] Watch the video again. As noted earlier her hood covers part of her head which the man steps on but if you see the outline you can see he is clearly stepping on her head and neck area. And I have never said Tea Partiers were jackboot thugs on the whole. I certainly credit others in the crowd who tried to stop the two men.
That is the way to the House why should they be forced to walk another way. Now what force motivated those people to have a hostile protest? COuldn't they have done what you are saying Valle should've done and just hung back and waved their signs peacefully?
No one said that should have gone another way. Didn't these protesters just line the way? Isn't that totally appropriate? My point was that they didn't rush or impede the House members-- except an allegation of spitting or slurring which ran like hell but never got legs.
The guy I referred to was the second guy holding her down-- on the near side. Outta here.... kid has a soccer game.
I've admitted it was stupid and she deserved derision for what she did. But you folks need to stop exaggerating saying things that aren't true like she reached into the car, or that she's guilty of assault, of that she attacked the car, or that she posed a threat. That's all BS, and I don't need psychiatric license to realize that believing those things is a symptom of paranoia. And let's not forget the BS that box cutters brought down commercial airliners. Just look how much dishonesty and exaggeration people are using to try and slam the woman who was a victim of violence, also suffered a concussion, and sprained arm.
Anyone truly concerned with security should not be paranoid but try and maintain a clear head so as not to escalate situations and become a security threat themselves. They can be vigilant but need to be able to use good judgment.
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/10/stop-action-photo-sequence-loony-moveon.html she also has a long history and arrest record for doing other stupid 'activist' stunts. I also find it interesting that MoveOn is the only one saying she had a concussion. again, I think the two men should be arrested for assault.
Like I said, maybe she should be criticized for doing a stupid stunt if that's something that bothers people. She deserves that. But there is no reason to make stuff up about her.
are you still an advocate of torture? i remember having quite a few back-and-forths with you on the subject and you were a staunch defender of the practice.
I don't think she needs to be derided; I just don't respect her means of protest so I don't feel the need to cut her any slack for her part in the mess. I don't think she is guilty of assault. We don't know how far she was trying to reach because she was stopped. Reportedly she was trying to hand Paul an award. In the moment it is impossible to tell whether or not she is a threat; is it fair to say she moved on the car? You have the luxury of hindsight to pronounce all this judgment about what should have happened. I don't think I said that she "attacked" the car. All in all, it looks like your insult about my paranoia is mis-placed.
