Rand Paul's former deity? "Aqua Buddha"

[Conan71]

I believe that tea bagger is the simplest way to mention a tea party person.  Tea Party Protester or Tea Party Person is just a pain to write and doesn't sound right.  Regardless of the double meaning. 

I find it offensive, it's a derisive gay epithet.

[Cats Cats Cats]

To me it looked like the guy was trying to keep her on the ground with his foot on her shoulder and it slipped off.  Although he left it on her head for a little bit longer than it should have been.  If I accidentaly stomped on somebodies head I honestly believed that I would say sorry if i was "only trying to subdue" them.

I also would like a full video..   This isn't some setup like O'keefe and "fancy editing".  I have no clue why volunteers are running security for them.  It doesn't make sense.

[Cats Cats Cats]

Over-react much?

Tell me where this isn't selective editing.  They open the piece with the "stomp", the most inflammitory scene they could show, and it's not even accurate to say he stomped on her head, his foot was on her shoulder.  Again, we don't see the provocation, only her being hauled up and wig removed, then the shoulder stomp. 

Why did she need to be wrestled in the first place?  We don't appear to have that on film.  Maybe I should be more biased in my thinking processes instead of wanting to know the full story before trying to pin this as a systemic problem with an entire political movement.  From her actions let's say all moveon libtards are violence baiters.

She was asking for it
I like it

[Cats Cats Cats]

I find it offensive, it's a derisive gay epithet.

I honestly don't think about that when I say that.  Even though I know the double meaning.

[we vs us]

Over-react much?

Tell me where this isn't selective editing.  They open the piece with the "stomp", the most inflammitory scene they could show, and it's not even accurate to say he stomped on her head, his foot was on her shoulder.  Again, we don't see the provocation, only her being hauled up and wig removed, then the shoulder stomp.  

Why did she need to be wrestled in the first place?  We don't appear to have that on film.  Maybe I should be more biased in my thinking processes instead of wanting to know the full story before trying to pin this as a systemic problem with an entire political movement.  From her actions let's say all moveon libtards are violence baiters.

Why is that overreacting when you follow up with "Why did she need to be wrestled in the first place?"  She didn't.  She was protesting, and by all accounts (including news reports from the scene) that's all she was doing.  She wasn't waving a gun around or attacking people or streaking through the crowd naked.  She was holding a sign and wearing a wig and yelling slogans (at maximum).  This is simply not stompable behavior.  But really, the point is that NOTHING is stompable behavior.  

That's what disturbs me about this whole episode.  It's full of excuses, mitigation, and a whole string of "yeah, buts"?  This used to be easily condemnable behavior, but now we have to somehow work all the angles so that Stomper comes out smelling -- if not rosy -- at least somewhat justified in assaulting a protester.  

Also, I stand by "thug life."  This is just one of a string of questionable tactics and behaviors, which include but aren't limited to: shouting down legislators at the healthcare townhalls, bringing assault weapons to political demonstrations, pushing variations on "second amendment remedies" (Sharron Angle, etc) threatening journalists (Carl Paladino), having your personal security threaten journalists (Joe Miller), and now relying on members of your campaign team to rough up protestors (Rand Paul). No one else does this but the Tea Party.  Neither Democrats nor Republicans (till this cycle) have pursued it to this degree.  Note:  I'm talking about candidates and their posses, not advocacy groups (most of whom don't do this either, but it will just muddy the discussion if we want to talk about the Black Panther Voter Intimidation Squad of Two.)

EDIT:  There's raw footage out there on the web, but my work computer won't let me search for it.  Suffice to say it's not surprising, nor does it change essentially what happened.

[Townsend]

I'm a little surprised this has not been "Godwin'd".

[Cats Cats Cats]

I'm a little surprised this has not been "Godwin'd".

Yeah, what the frak is that? (seriously I can't type w t f it turns into pancakes)

[we vs us]

I'm a little surprised this has not been "Godwin'd".

I've been doing my personal best to avoid Godwin, but it's getting harder, not easier.

[Conan71]

Why is that overreacting when you follow up with "Why did she need to be wrestled in the first place?"  She didn't.  She was protesting, and by all accounts (including news reports from the scene) that's all she was doing.  She wasn't waving a gun around or attacking people or streaking through the crowd naked.  She was holding a sign and wearing a wig and yelling slogans (at maximum).  This is simply not stompable behavior.  But really, the point is that NOTHING is stompable behavior.  

That's what disturbs me about this whole episode.  It's full of excuses, mitigation, and a whole string of "yeah, buts"?  This used to be easily condemnable behavior, but now we have to somehow work all the angles so that Stomper comes out smelling -- if not rosy -- at least somewhat justified in assaulting a protester.  

Also, I stand by "thug life."  This is just one of a string of questionable tactics and behaviors, which include but aren't limited to: shouting down legislators at the healthcare townhalls, bringing assault weapons to political demonstrations, pushing variations on "second amendment remedies" (Sharron Angle, etc) threatening journalists (Carl Paladino), having your personal security threaten journalists (Joe Miller), and now relying on members of your campaign team to rough up protestors (Rand Paul). No one else does this but the Tea Party.  Neither Democrats nor Republicans (till this cycle) have pursued it to this degree.  Note:  I'm talking about candidates and their posses, not advocacy groups (most of whom don't do this either, but it will just muddy the discussion if we want to talk about the Black Panther Voter Intimidation Squad of Two.)


EDIT:  There's raw footage out there on the web, but my work computer won't let me search for it.  Suffice to say it's not surprising, nor does it change essentially what happened.

You are aware she was trying to "present" him with an "award", right?

I've viewed the other raw video that's out there and still see nothing more than the take down.  We still have no idea if she emerged from the crowd thrusting something at Dr. Paul or was three rows back.  If she was thrusting something in that tight of quarters, chances are no one would have known for certain what her intentions were.  All I could see in her hand was a sign, given a split second to react, would you stand back or intervene if you suspected someone might have a weapon or intend to assault someone else if all you had to go on was sudden motion and it not quite regsitering yet what might or might not be in someone's hand?

Lunge at a national political candidate while wearing an obvious disguise like a garish blonde wig and see how quickly you get taken down, regardless what's in your hand.

Appropriately, the supporter has been banished from the campaign while the libtard world continues to spin this out of control and flat donkey exaggerate what happened (head stomp?).  Ms. Valle refused medical attention yet now claims to have recieved a concussion.  How would she know it's a concussion if she refused treatment?

Sheesh, one of the message boards is now making Dr. Paul guilty by extension: "When it's part of his rallies, his mantra and his organization, then by extension, Rand Paul's stomping the head of that woman."

Next we will hear Rand Paul stomped on her head.

As far as your thug life examples, don't you think you are obsessing a bit? Do you have a running database?  

[guido911]

The "stomper" wants Valle to apologize to him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/27/rand-paul-supporter-tim-profitt_n_774614.html

Here is what some a calling "raw video" of what might have precipitated this event. I cannot vouch for the authenticity.

For those that cannot open it up, it depicts a woman in a red shirt with blond hair running up to Paul's vehicle and trying to poke a white sign into a window.

[Conan71]

Based on Guido's video, she wasn't a peaceful protestor, she charged the vehicle.  It also looks like she was wearing a hoodie as she waited.  Seriously ask yourself if those around her weren't just slightly worried about her intentions: hoodie, wig, charge vehicle with candidate arriving. 

She was a moron for trying to pull something that stupid.  No it doesn't absolve anyone else for their actions, but it casts a whole lot of doubt about her being a member of moveon being a reason for it.

[Cats Cats Cats]

I am pretty sure at the time of the take down and shoulder/head stomp (I think thats a 200 point combo btw) it was pretty obvious she wasn't carrying a razor sign of death.  If Rand Paul/his driver/his security feared for his life they would have driven off.  It has no bearing on Rand Paul what happened. 

[Red Arrow]

Look. She can be stupid or smart, leftie or rightie . . . she could be a normal person standidng quietly, have Tourette's and be spewing cursewords or any other range of behaviors and it doesn't make it ok for those guys to assault her. 

This is a variation on the "I wouldn't have raped her if she didn't ask for it" argument and it's as bankrupt here as it ever was.   

You have said you stand by your statement of thuggery.  If that is really true, she should have expected a response she would not like. 

I like the variation of a traffic rule:  Just because you have the right-of-way, don't force the issue and make yourself dead right.

[guido911]

I am pretty sure at the time of the take down and shoulder/head stomp (I think thats a 200 point combo btw) it was pretty obvious she wasn't carrying a razor sign of death.  If Rand Paul/his driver/his security feared for his life they would have driven off.  It has no bearing on Rand Paul what happened. 

Again, assuming the video has not been tampered with and is accurate, it at least provides a little more context to what happened. I seem to recall how "context" was oh so important over the Sherrod mess.

[Cats Cats Cats]

Again, assuming the video has not been tampered with and is accurate, it at least provides a little more context to what happened. I seem to recall how "context" was oh so important over the Sherrod mess.

Aye, she approached once with her death sign.  Was pulled away, then fearful for his life he walked through the crowd.  She then comes back to try to give him the sign before he gets away and is caught again.

You know what they say, fool me once shame on your, fool me twice, stomp your head.