Rand Paul supporter tries to 'curb' a Moveon.org member

[T.A.M.]

I am not saying that she should have been stepped or stomped on. But I can certainly understand why she raised concern.

1. That was foolish behavior on her part. Peaceful demonstration does not include rushing up with a hoodie over your head, in a heated political rally, to the candidates vehicle.

2. It clearly then marked her to be watched...I suspect that is why they were on her so quick.

3. I agree, the force the VOLUNTEER (I am assuming he was not official hired security) used was excessive, and clearly an assault.

TAM

 

[BeAChooser]

Already seen it.

So in other words, you had seen her dash up to a moving vehicle and shove a large sign through the window of that car when you asked if she'd attacked anyone physically. I see.

 

[T.A.M.]

She was thrown to the ground and head-stomped (released from hospital with a concussion). Please parse that some more, to demonstrate your attempt to be "factual" why don't you.

GB

SHE WAS NOT "HEAD STOMPED"!!! see, that is the type of over embellishment meant purposely to inflame the other side. I don't know why I argue it, because it seems everyone on the left is using the same INACCURATE terms for it. She was SHOULDER stomped, and his heel may have struck her head lightly at that time. The SHOULDER stomp was SEVERE, and caused her to bend at the curb. This bending forced her head to strike the concrete, which is likely what caused her CONCUSSION.

SO here, lets say this...

"HE crushed her skull against the concrete causing here brain damage!!!!"

Is that accurate to you? Seriously. A concussion is brain damage (albeit temporary). crushed is another word we could use to describe what his leg did. Go for it.

Lets see if someone can come up with an EVEN MORE embellished and inflammatory way to describe it.


Oih!!!

TAM

 

[leftysergeant]

By the way, here's a video of Lauren Valle charging Rand Paul's vehicle as it arrived and trying to shove her sign through the window. One might view that as menacing or assaultive behavior, and her being at the event and then continuing attempts to approach Rand Paul as stalking, both of which are illegal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yiLeud-sxrM

She had the sign in both hands. Really freaking menacing.

She was a lot less menacing than the WeAreChanged goons that stalked Obama on the campaign trail and not a one of those jerks was ever handled like that.


Only a real wuss thinks that stomping on her is proportionate to the threat she presented.

I have seen GOPer thugs do a lot worse than that to try to disrupt a Patty Murray campaign event. Those of us there to watch for that kind of thing handled it a lot more politely. A bunch of fire fighters just surrounded the goon squad at the margin of the crowd that had assembled and kept watch over them. The police didn't even arrest the ones who were told that they could not shove their signs in people's faces, or those of us who chose to heckle the goon squad.

Paul and his supporters are a pathetic bunch of wimps.

 

[T.A.M.]

And your proof that she suffered a concussion is?

on keith olbermann last night, a moveon.org spokesperson he interviewed said she suffered a concussion, and was later released (a G1 concussion does not take a lot to occur, but it is also the least injurious of the concussions).

TAM

 

[johnny karate]

I figured a semantic battle on this. A push is not a punch. What was seen on the video is the equivalent of a push not a punch.

Where it happened is absolutely is material. Is stepping on a toe different that a poke in the eye?

The voice of reason, I think, would say this...

1. What was done to her was WAY OUT OF LINE, and charges are appropriate.
2. Rand Paul should have immediately condemned it, but at least he (through his people) did eventually do so.
3. The shoulder versus head, stomp versus heavy push is important, because it is important to give an ACCURATE description of the incident, so as to avoid INFLAMMATORY EMBELLISHMENT of what happened, which would be done solely for political reasons.
4. After reviewing the video many times, I feel that the SHOULDER was what was shoved/pushed, and it was done so much harder then would ever be needed for "restraint". The head seems to have been struck on the concrete below as a result of the motion. She did sustain a head injury, but based on my viewing of the tape, I would suspect it was secondary to the push of the shoulder causing her head to strike the concrete.
5. Semantics I am usually not in favor of debating, but I think when accuracy is important, here to avoid politically motivated embellishment, then one must try to be accurate.

All due respect to the both of you, but I think there's a difference between arriving at an accurate description and needless hair-splitting. This isn't a situation where incidental contact was made and someone ended up falsely accused of violently attacking someone else, or a push was mistaken for a punch, or a toe-step was mistaken for an eye-poke.

There is no doubt this woman was violently attacked by these two men. There is no doubt this woman was stomped (i.e. tread upon heavily and/or violently). Whether it was upon her head is debatable. But I don't think it's unreasonable to look at that video and claim that man stomped on her head. It may prove too be inaccurate upon further examination, but not far enough off the mark to make any real difference.

Finally you've creating a straw man. No one claimed what happened was not over the line.

My point was not to create a straw man, but to illustrate that once we are over that line, it becomes irrelevant to argue whether her head or shoulder or neck were stomped or merely pushed violently to the ground by someone's foot all for the sake of "accuracy" any more than it's relevant to point out her sweatshirt was not actually magenta but rather crimson.

 

[BeAChooser]

3. I agree, the force the VOLUNTEER (I am assuming he was not official hired security) used was excessive, and clearly an assault.

Whereas Valle was apparently an employee of MoveOn.org when she rushed up to the car and clearly assaulted the occupants with her sign.

 

[BeAChooser]

on keith olbermann last night, a moveon.org spokesperson he interviewed said she suffered a concussion

Not exactly an unbiased source, is it?

 

[T.A.M.]

All due respect to the both of you, but I think there's a difference between arriving at an accurate description and needless hair-splitting. This isn't a situation where incidental contact was made and someone ended up falsely accused of violently attacking someone else.

There is no doubt this woman was violently attacked by these two men. There is no doubt this woman was stomped (i.e. tread upon heavily and/or violently). Whether it was upon her head is debatable. But I don't think it's unreasonable to look at that video and claim that man stomped on her head. It may prove too be inaccurate upon further examination, but not far enough off the mark to make any real difference.



My point was not to create a straw man, but to illustrate that once we are over that line, it becomes irrelevant to argue whether she was stomped or merely pushed violently to the ground by someone's foot, or if it was her head or her shoulder or neck all for the sake of "accuracy" any more than it's relevant to point out her sweatshirt was not actually magenta but rather crimson.

It is irrelevant, yes, in terms of the right or wrong of what was done...I agree. That was never my argument.

My argument, is that to incorrectly describe, or to inaccurately portray the details of what happened in an inflammatory fashion (see my comments on the use of the term "head stomp" above) is to (A) lower yourself to the tactics of those ilk who committed the crime, and (B) to provide fodder for the pundits on the other side, who will say...SEE, THERE GO THOSE LEFTIES MISLEADING THE VOTER FOR POLITICAL POINTS!!! (or something worse).


I will also add something here. The use of the word "head stomp" or "curb stomp" IIRC is a possible reference to the Nazis/NeoNazis, and the purposeful crushing of the jaws of persosn by placing their open mouths on concrete. I even recall such a scene in the movie American History X.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=curb+stomp

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Whereas Valle was apparently an employee of MoveOn.org when she rushed up to the car and clearly assaulted the occupants with her sign.

I never said that, and if you read my comment on it, I did say her actions were not appropriate, and I can see why they had marked her to watch from that point on.

Not exactly an unbiased source, is it?

I agree the source is not unbias, but short of getting a public statement from the ER doc, or access to the file, I suspect it is all you will have to go on.

TAM

 

[johnny karate]

So in other words, you had seen her dash up to a moving vehicle and shove a large sign through the window of that car when you asked if she'd attacked anyone physically. I see.

I don't fault anyone from Paul's viewing her as a potential threat and taking the appropriate steps to address that threat. But how hard is it to merely restrain someone you substantially outweigh? What specifically did she do to warrant two large men to violently bring her to the ground and stomp on her?

 

[BeAChooser]

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
Whereas Valle was apparently an employee of MoveOn.org when she rushed up to the car and clearly assaulted the occupants with her sign.

I never said that

I didn't suggest you said that. I was merely contrasting the status and behavior of the man who stepped on Valle with her status and behavior when Rand Paul's car approached.

I agree the source is not unbias, but short of getting a public statement from the ER doc, or access to the file, I suspect it is all you will have to go on.

Pardon me if I don't take their word for it.

 

[T.A.M.]

I don't fault anyone from Paul's viewing her as a potential threat and taking the appropriate steps to address that threat. But how hard is it to merely restrain someone you substantially outweigh? What specifically did she do to warrant two large men to violently bring her to the ground and stomp on her?

exactly, they had, at one point, 3 fully grown men involved in her "restraint". It was clear from the way he pushed her with his foot, that his intent was not mere restraint. Anyone not a moron knows you do not "restrain" someone by shoving them down with your foot the way he did.

TAM

 

[leftysergeant]

What specifically did she do to warrant two large men to violently bring her to the ground and stomp on her?

Maybe they were pissed off that she was not impressed with their manliness.

 

[BeAChooser]

What specifically did she do to warrant two large men to violently bring her to the ground and stomp on her?

Did I say the man was justified in stepping on her in the manner we see? No. But I think they did have cause to restrain her when she ran towards Rand Paul a second time (as you can clearly see her doing about 53 seconds into the video I linked). And if that required bringing her to the ground because she was resisting them, then so be it. You can see her actually resisting them about 55 seconds into this more complete video of the incident than the one linked in the OP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuM5571nf1I .

She's not the *innocent* party some here are making her out to be. She clearly wanted to provoke a incident. She was hired by MoveOn.org to do it. She came prepared with a sign and a plan. She showed she wasn't to be deterred. She has a rather crazed expression on her face. She even wore a wig to disguise herself. Later, in an interview, she even admitted to having essentially stalked Rand Paul for two weeks before the incident. And I wouldn't be surprised if MoveOn.org was there to make sure the incident was recorded. Afterall, it is known that there were other MoveOn.org activists at the event. One of them, Alex Giblin, is quoted as saying he heard one of Paul's supporters say "We might have to take someone down." However given the source, whether that claim is true or not is quite debatable. Call me a skeptic.

 

[varwoche]

She was thrown to the ground and head-stomped (released from hospital with a concussion). Please parse that some more, to demonstrate your attempt to be "factual" why don't you.

Not much to parse but OK. This part is factual, this part is exaggerated, and this part I'm unsure about.

 

[Tricky]

I've moved another set of off-topic and bickering posts to AAH. That's two warnings. Do I need to tell you what will happen if this continues?

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[Brainster]

Already seen it. It's all over the net on Right Wing sites defending violence against against liberals and leftists.

Classic strawman. Nobody is defending violence against liberals and leftists in general or even in this specific instance. Let's see, here's Red State where I found the video:

Let us begin with what should be obvious and unnecessary to discuss: don’t stomp on anyone’s head. There are no mitigating circumstances to be presented in this article or video. You don’t stomp on a person’s head.

Riehl World View:

I watched it thinking I might see something that made what Tim Profitt did look defensible, somehow. It isn't there. In fact, it's the first time I saw how Profitt drove his foot down into her shoulder at approximately 1:42 into the first video. She was already subdued on the ground.

It was unnecessary and stupid. It was thuggish and it was wrong. I am more than happy to point out the media's double standard, as both Dana Loesch - and I have done. But I'm not going to defend some idiot unable to control himself, even one aligned with a campaign I support.

Confederate Yankee:

Let me use small words and short sentences so that the brain trust at firedoglake can't possibly twist this: the Rand Paul supporter that put his foot on a professional left wing activist outside the Paul-Conway debate was wrong to do so.

But please, continue to believe that it's alright to lie because the evil right-wing brownshirts are coming to get you.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

I thought teabaggers only played Halo/Call of Duty and not Gears of War

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Classic strawman. Nobody is defending violence against liberals and leftists in general or even in this specific instance. Let's see, here's Red State where I found the video:



Riehl World View:



Confederate Yankee:



But please, continue to believe that it's alright to lie because the evil right-wing brownshirts are coming to get you.

Oh, so it's not on Alex Jones' website?

GB