Congressman assaults college students!

[Coito ergo sum]

Here's the complete tapes of the Etheridge assault, from two cameras at the scene: http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/14/n ... ult-video/ Fuck, he even takes the kid's cell phone right out of his hand!

That tape is still edited. We still don't see the face of the interviewer.

That's highly suspicious.

What's so suspicious about it? What are some examples of people whose identity would justify the Congressman's response?

Possibly if they had been following, harassing, or provoking him beforehand - but he says nothing particularity to suggest that that's the case.

Or the student could have been Osama bin Laden.

Why would the Congressman apologize if these folks had been stalking him? And, if these folks were harassing him, wouldn't the Congressman have said something tot he effect of, 'You again! Stop harassing me! I can't go out the door without you guys in my face! I told you to call my office!"

Further, what sort of "harassment" are you referring to that would justify this physical assault? If the Congressman was being threatened, wouldn't he have reported the incident(s)? If he was just being heckled, well, isn't that what public figures are supposed to put up with?

[Martok]

Well, Bob Etheridge issued an apology and that is that. Don't know what sort of punishment he'll receive from his fellow congressmen.

Has that twerp, I mean, student journalist filed charges against the congressmen? If he does he'll have to show his face.

[Coito ergo sum]

Well, Bob Etheridge issued an apology and that is that. Don't know what sort of punishment he'll receive from his fellow congressmen.

Has that twerp, I mean, student journalist filed charges against the congressmen? If he does he'll have to show his face.

Twerp? What in the world did he do wrong?

"Congressman, do you agree with Obama Administration's agenda?"

The nerve! Little twerp....

Maybe the drunken Congressman will get a condemnation....fat chance, coming from his fellow hypocrites.

[Martok]

Well, Bob Etheridge issued an apology and that is that. Don't know what sort of punishment he'll receive from his fellow congressmen.

Has that twerp, I mean, student journalist filed charges against the congressmen? If he does he'll have to show his face.

Twerp? What in the world did he do wrong?

"Congressman, do you agree with Obama Administration's agenda?"

The nerve! Little twerp....

Maybe the drunken Congressman will get a condemnation....fat chance, coming from his fellow hypocrites.

You'd think those "journalists" would be proud of their work. But for some reason they want to be anonymous. Even O'Reilly's ambush interviewers show their faces.

Weird.

[Coito ergo sum]

Well, Bob Etheridge issued an apology and that is that. Don't know what sort of punishment he'll receive from his fellow congressmen.

Has that twerp, I mean, student journalist filed charges against the congressmen? If he does he'll have to show his face.

Twerp? What in the world did he do wrong?

"Congressman, do you agree with Obama Administration's agenda?"

The nerve! Little twerp....

Maybe the drunken Congressman will get a condemnation....fat chance, coming from his fellow hypocrites.

You'd think those "journalists" would be proud of their work. But for some reason they want to be anonymous. Even O'Reilly's ambush interviewers show their faces.

Weird.

They said they were college students working on a project, not journalists. And, one need not be a journalist to ask Congressmen questions on the street. Even if these folks were convicted felons whose only purpose was to embarrass and humiliate Etheridge, it doesn't change the fact that they did nothing wrong, and he committed an assault and battery, and attempted to intimidate people who were engaged in the lawful exercise of their freedom of speech.

[Martok]

Even if these folks were convicted felons whose only purpose was to embarrass and humiliate Etheridge, it doesn't change the fact that they did nothing wrong, and he committed an assault and battery

Assault and battery? Has the congressmen been charged?

[Coito ergo sum]

Even if these folks were convicted felons whose only purpose was to embarrass and humiliate Etheridge, it doesn't change the fact that they did nothing wrong, and he committed an assault and battery

Assault and battery? Has the congressmen been charged?

You do so love transparent apologetics, don't you? Is it so painfully difficult for you to simply say: Congressman Etheridge was wrong and should not have done what he did?

Charges are not required for there to have been an act that meats the definition. If someone intentionally makes harmful or offensive bodily contact with another person, then it's a battery whether or not someone files charges. Battery is also a tort which can be the subject of a civil suit if one is inclined to pursue such a claim, and one can win that suit without there being criminal charges brought.

If someone punched someone else in the face would you refer to it as an assault and battery? Or, should we refer to as the attempted occupation of the same spacial coordinates by all or part of two individuals? Do rapes not occur unless charges are filed?

[Martok]

You do so love transparent apologetics, don't you? Is it so painfully difficult for you to simply say: Congressman Etheridge was wrong and should not have done what he did?

Its rather obvious he was wrong. I don't deny that. However, considering the who the interviewers are and who they are connected to. It still leaves some questions about those people.

Charges are not required for there to have been an act that meats the definition. If someone intentionally makes harmful or offensive bodily contact with another person, then it's a battery whether or not someone files charges. Battery is also a tort which can be the subject of a civil suit if one is inclined to pursue such a claim, and one can win that suit without there being criminal charges brought.

Lawsuit? That means the blurry faced student will have to reveal who he is.

[devogue]

I think the congressman was right.

If they wanted to ask him a question, why not contact his office and request an interview or submit a few questions? It's just basic politeness. Walking up to him and asking him questions in the street while videoing him is plain fucking rude. The little bastard deserved a slap in the chops.

[Coito ergo sum]

You do so love transparent apologetics, don't you? Is it so painfully difficult for you to simply say: Congressman Etheridge was wrong and should not have done what he did?

Its rather obvious he was wrong. I don't deny that. However, considering the who the interviewers are and who they are connected to. It still leaves some questions about those people.

How do you know they're connected to anyone?

Charges are not required for there to have been an act that meats the definition. If someone intentionally makes harmful or offensive bodily contact with another person, then it's a battery whether or not someone files charges. Battery is also a tort which can be the subject of a civil suit if one is inclined to pursue such a claim, and one can win that suit without there being criminal charges brought.

Lawsuit? That means the blurry faced student will have to reveal who he is.

So? What's the difference?

[Martok]

You do so love transparent apologetics, don't you? Is it so painfully difficult for you to simply say: Congressman Etheridge was wrong and should not have done what he did?

Its rather obvious he was wrong. I don't deny that. However, considering the who the interviewers are and who they are connected to. It still leaves some questions about those people.

How do you know they're connected to anyone?

Because the videos were first shown at Andrew Brietbart's website. The same guy who gave us James O'Keefe. Brietbart is the one who apparently blurred the face of the interviewer. Why?

[drl2]

This was clearly an attack interview - the guy charged up to him, shoved a camera in his face, and asked an obviously loaded question - but that's no excuse for the congressman's reaction.

Why was the interviewers face blurred?

Don't know. But, I'm not sure how that's relevant. We have the entire incident on video. While MSNBC bent over backwards to gloss over the incident, I haven't heard one justification for a physical assault on a free citizen, on a public way, by an elected representative, who was asked a simple, non-insulting, non-profane, question. The Congressman appears drunk, a subject about which I have no meager experience, and that explains the ludicrous behavior.

What's embarrassing is the obvious selective reporting in the MSM. That awful candidate, George Allen, in Virginia was run out of town on a rail by the media for returning a heckler's heckle and calling the heckler a "macaca." This guy Etheridge physically assaults and tries to intimidate a person with a video camera, and there is little criticism, except in the conservative commentary shows.

This guy is one of the conservative-leaning "Blue dog" democrats that MSNBC hasn't been shy about vilifying in the past... not sure why they'd back off now. I've certainly seen it covered on a number of left-leaning political sites that pretty much agreed that the congressman was in the wrong even if the interviewer was basically an asshat.

[drl2]

Lets see the unedited tape. James O'Keefe used heavily edited tape to smear ACORN.

And, the unedited tape still appropriately smears ACORN. The unedited tapes were just as indicting as the cut versions. Nothing in the unedited tapes excused their behavior.

Not according to the investigators who cleared ACORN (posthumously) of all charges. Of course this just plays into any number of paranoid conspiracy theories... of course they were cleared, because Obama rules Brooklyn with an iron fist and ACORN was to be the elite vanguard of his conquering Islamofascikenyacommunist horde.

[Coito ergo sum]

This was clearly an attack interview - the guy charged up to him, shoved a camera in his face, and asked an obviously loaded question -

One, there was no charging or shoving, except by the Congressman. And, the question was soft-ball. "Do you agree with Obama's agenda?" I mean - if THAT sets you off, you need fucking psychiatric help.

Shit - Bush used to get people jumping up at his press conferences accusing him of murder.

but that's no excuse for the congressman's reaction.

Then why call it an "attack?"

Why was the interviewers face blurred?

Don't know. But, I'm not sure how that's relevant. We have the entire incident on video. While MSNBC bent over backwards to gloss over the incident, I haven't heard one justification for a physical assault on a free citizen, on a public way, by an elected representative, who was asked a simple, non-insulting, non-profane, question. The Congressman appears drunk, a subject about which I have no meager experience, and that explains the ludicrous behavior.

What's embarrassing is the obvious selective reporting in the MSM. That awful candidate, George Allen, in Virginia was run out of town on a rail by the media for returning a heckler's heckle and calling the heckler a "macaca." This guy Etheridge physically assaults and tries to intimidate a person with a video camera, and there is little criticism, except in the conservative commentary shows.

This guy is one of the conservative-leaning "Blue dog" democrats that MSNBC hasn't been shy about vilifying in the past... not sure why they'd back off now. I've certainly seen it covered on a number of left-leaning political sites that pretty much agreed that the congressman was in the wrong even if the interviewer was basically an asshat.

I can tell you why. Because places like MSNBC have been predicting violence from the scary Tea Partiers which never came, and now we have a physical assault by a Democratic Congressman in response to a soft-ball question.....

[Martok]

I can tell you why. Because places like MSNBC have been predicting violence from the scary Tea Partiers which never came, and now we have a physical assault by a Democratic Congressman in response to a soft-ball question.....

When teabaggers showed up with guns at events the president was going to be at it makes one wonder what those loonies had in mind. It also shows what kind idiots teabaggers are for even doing such a thing considering our nations history of assassinations and attempted assassinations of presidents.