http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/10/10/moveon-supporter-brutally-attacked-by-rand-paul-supporter/65155/

http://www.fox41.com/Global/story.asp?S=13386076

DON'T TREAD ON MY UPPER TORSO.

Libertarians don't curb stomp, that's infringing on the victims right to not have their face stomped on.

I would say that dude is just a crazy fanatic, and not even a libertarian fanatic.

I'll add that when the people around you, who otherwise agree with you, go "no no no no no" you know you're doing something fucked up.

get the cops...get the police..
oh screw it..lets just step on her head!
teabaggers..keeping it classy and making rednecks look sophisticated.

more on the story:
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/rand-pauls-lame-response-wont-condem

The stomper is believed to be a Tim Proffitt, and the guy who forced her down is believed to be Mike Pezzano.

>> ^gwiz665:

Libertarians don't curb stomp, that's infringing on the victims right to not have their face stomped on.

I admit, my description is just a tit-for-tat unfair generalization I'm trading with blankfist, but your comment is basically a textbook case of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

No true libertarian ever does anything wrong, because by definition libertarians don't do anything wrong.

I hope she's alright. Curbstomping is one of the most sickening things possible.

Ah, I see your argument, but I don't say that libertarians never do anything wrong. (There are different people in all camps) My point is that the idea of libertarianism is the focus of individual liberty, this curbstomper obviously does not agree with that philosophy, which is at the very core of libertarianism, which lead me to say that libertarians don't do that. They don't do that, because that goes against what libertarianism is.

It boils down to this, libertarians don't like curb stomping.. but love fluffy kittens... why, here's one now!



>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^gwiz665:
Libertarians don't curb stomp, that's infringing on the victims right to not have their face stomped on.
I admit, my description is just a tit-for-tat unfair generalization I'm trading with blankfist, but your comment is basically a textbook case of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
No true libertarian ever does anything wrong, because by definition libertarians don't do anything wrong.

>> ^gwiz665:

Ah, I see your argument, but I don't say that libertarians never do anything wrong. (There are different people in all camps) My point is that the idea of libertarianism is the focus of individual liberty, this curbstomper obviously does not agree with that philosophy, which is at the very core of libertarianism, which lead me to say that libertarians don't do that. They don't do that, because that goes against what libertarianism is.

And my point is, that's the definition of a No True Scotsman fallacy.

I doubt that the Platonic libertarian that behaves perfectly in tune with the principles of perfect libertarianism exists, although some people may come close. Now, especially, I think a lot of self-described "libertarians" are just former Bush-supporting Republicans too ashamed to call themselves Republicans or conservatives (e.g. everyone in the Tea Party).

Quantum Mushroom, get your foot off the nice lady's head. That's no way to behave.

"I'm sorry that it came to that, and I apologize if it appeared overly forceful, but I was concerned about Rand's safety. A friend of mine went up to three policeman before Rand got there, and told them about the girl who was standing there with that wig on and that she was getting ready to do something. The policemen looked at him and said that's not our job." - Tim Profitt (that guy who curb-stomped a woman half his size while another guy held her down)

In other news, the guy who held her down, Mike Pezzano was wearing a "Don't tread on me" pin.

I guess it's okay for Libertarians as long as it's OTHER people being violated.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

"I'm sorry that it came to that, and I apologize if it appeared overly forceful, but I was concerned about Rand's safety. A friend of mine went up to three policeman before Rand got there, and told them about the girl who was standing there with that wig on and that she was getting ready to do something. The policemen looked at him and said that's not our job." - Tim Profitt (that guy who curb-stomped a woman half his size while another guy held her down)
In other news, the guy who held her down, Mike Pezzano was wearing a "Don't tread on me" pin.
I guess it's okay for Libertarians as long as it's OTHER people being violated.


Note that he doesn't actually apologize for assaulting her, he's just sorry that he was forced to curbstomp her to protect Rand Paul.

Rand Paul and Ron Paul are not libertarians, they are anarcho-capitalists.

Apparently the stomper was Rand Paul's Bourbon County coordinator. In English, that means he was a volunteer for Paul's campaign, and at least a couple rungs up the ladder (I never met Obama's county coordinator, and I volunteered for the Obama campaign for months).

Some idiot in a wig attempts to bum rush a political candidate. What does she expect will happen?


Meanwhile, Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme, who attempted to assassinate President Ford, was paroled.

John Hinkley Jr., failed Reagan assassin, gets 9-day furloughs and has a driver's license.


Liberals are incapable of recognizing potential threats, except to their ill-gotten power.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Some idiot in a wig attempts to bum rush a political candidate. What does she expect will happen?

Meanwhile, Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme, who attempted to assassinate President Ford, was paroled.
John Hinkley Jr., failed Reagan assassin, gets 9-day furloughs and has a driver's license.

Liberals are incapable of recognizing potential threats, except to their ill-gotten power.


FAIL. Who's been telling you people to start bringing up Squeaky Fromme? Protest != Assassination. Everyday it's difficult to believe that the fanatical right could get any crazier or surreal, but they always manage to exceed expectations. By week's end, the story will be that Obama and the Kenyan government sent her there to make Rand Paul look bad.

I dont see any stomping of heads. I see a bunch of people jumping on the "overstate the truth" , "awefullize what happened" , "Damn my lieing eyes" bandwagon. The guy put his foot on her shoulder and then shoved a little more. Not polite? yes. too much? maybe. What was that dumbshit wearing a wig and busting moves for? I'm not a big fan of Rand Paul but going overboard like a bunch of old ladys doesnt help things. I normally enjoy Kieth O and Rachel and the rest at MSNBC, but their coverage of this security breech is kinda pathetic.

Show me the video of Democrat volunteers wrestling down Republican protesters?

Show me the video of Democrat candidates not condemning violence started by one of their own.

I despise both parties, but one party has a clear propensity for violence, the other does not. Analysts warned us of right wing extremists acting out more and more did they not?

The video appears to be taken down. What would the violation be?

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by CaveBear.

>> ^CaveBear:

dead


Well, ain't that a load of Orwellian horseshit.

Fixed embed to AP's version. We'll see if YouTube says that violates some mysterious policy.

This is Rand Puals fault obviously...somebody punch him!

She tried to show a sign to him. Clearly she's a Manson-family mole.

Completely uncalled for, but not curb stomping to be sure. I was expecting a cut from American History X, glad I didn't get what I expected. In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

Updated title since it's no longer in doubt whether the stomper is really a Rand Paul supporter.

*promote

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Tuesday, October 26th, 2010 1:15pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter NetRunner.

Misleading, sensationalized headline.

That said, what happened shouldn't have and those involved should be investigated, etc. Can't discussions be had anymore without someone sensationalizing [or in this case outright lying] about something? What happened was terrible, to be sure, but to mislead people into thinking someone was curb stomped is just typical Internet journalism. Typical of Digg, Reddit and VS, apparently.

Stop using the word stomp, because that's not what happened. I've watched the video, so have many others. Want to see a stomp, watch American History X...there is a difference between what's in that video and someones head/neck being stomped on about the size of the Grand Canyon.

It's hard to take you seriously when you sensationalize, and you're smarter/better than needing to resort to such extremes. The people involved were stupid, to be sure, but you're making them sound like attempted murderers, and this is disingenuous at best.

>> ^NetRunner:

Updated title since it's no longer in doubt whether the stomper is really a Rand Paul supporter.
promote

I'll ammend my comment to saying, that's a bad libertarian, then slap him in the face.

NetRunner...your headline is the equivalent of me saying "Apparent Obama supporter bashes in my car window and steals my wallet"

(true story with the window bashing and the wallet stealing)

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Completely uncalled for, but not curb stomping to be sure. I was expecting a cut from American History X, glad I didn't get what I expected. In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

>> ^hPOD:

Stop using the word stomp, because that's not what happened. I've watched the video, so have many others. Want to see a stomp, watch American History X...there is a difference between what's in that video and someones head/neck being stomped on about the size of the Grand Canyon.


I don't get you guys. Three men grab a woman, push her to the ground, hold her there and then stomp on her head, giving her a concussion. The Lexington Police has sent Tim Profitt a summons to appear in court so a judge can decide if criminal assault charges are warranted.

Sure, it didn't work like it did in American History X where they put the guy's teeth on concrete first. It also didn't work like in Gears of War where the victim's head explodes like a blood-filled watermelon.

So because it doesn't look like exaggerated Hollywood violence, it's not a stomp?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

So GeeSussFreeK, the real issue with sanity isn't that someone stomped on someone's head, it's that liberals like me called it a stomp? Seriously, what the fuck are you smoking?
>> ^hPOD:
It's hard to take you seriously when you sensationalize, and you're smarter/better than needing to resort to such extremes. The people involved were stupid, to be sure, but you're making them sound like attempted murderers, and this is disingenuous at best.

The only words I've used to characterize the content of the video is the title...

Original: Apparent Rand Paul Supporter Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head
Current: Rand Paul Co. Coordinator Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head

What's disingenuous or misleading about either? Lauren Valle is a member of MoveOn. When I didn't know whether the guy was affiliated with Rand Paul, I said so. Now that I know he's not just a supporter, but someone who's part of the campaign organization, I updated it.

I know, must be the word stomp. Dictionary.com redirects stomp to stamp, so here's the definition they give:

stamp
–verb (used with object)

1. to strike or beat with a forcible, downward thrust of the foot.
   
2. to bring (the foot) down forcibly or smartly on the ground, floor, etc.
   
3. to extinguish, crush, etc., by striking with a forcible downward thrust of the foot (fol. by out): to stamp out a fire.
   
4. to suppress or quell (a rebellion, uprising, etc.) quickly through the use of overwhelming force (usually fol. by out).
   
5. to crush or pound with or as with a pestle.
   
6. to impress with a particular mark or device, as to indicate genuineness, approval, or ownership: to stamp a document with a seal.
   

>> ^rottenseed:

NetRunner...your headline is the equivalent of me saying "Apparent Obama supporter bashes in my car window and steals my wallet"
(true story with the window bashing and the wallet stealing)


Except your picture didn't include a guy dressed in a shirt with the Obama campaign logo on it doing the smashing.

You also haven't read the rest of the comments because we now know the guy's name, and the fact that he was a member of Rand Paul's campaign.

It's no longer "apparent", it's now confirmed.

Now you play semantics to justify your sensationalized headline.

What's happening in that video is NOT someone getting their head stomped on, once again, stop trying to make it something it's not. The worst part is, what you are attempting to do with your attention grabbing headline isn't even necessary. What happened in the video is damning enough without you making it sound worse than it was. We SEE the video. We know YOU see the video. We know that it's not a stomp. So now you try to list general definitions of what a stomp/stamp is in order to justify the headline. It would be more genuine of you to say she was held down forcibly with someones foot than to say someone stomped on her head, which is an out right fabrication.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Completely uncalled for, but not curb stomping to be sure. I was expecting a cut from American History X, glad I didn't get what I expected. In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

>> ^hPOD:
Stop using the word stomp, because that's not what happened. I've watched the video, so have many others. Want to see a stomp, watch American History X...there is a difference between what's in that video and someones head/neck being stomped on about the size of the Grand Canyon.

I don't get you guys. Three men grab a woman, push her to the ground, hold her there and then stomp on her head, giving her a concussion. The Lexington Police has sent Tim Profitt a summons to appear in court so a judge can decide if criminal assault charges are warranted.
Sure, it didn't work like it did in American History X where they put the guy's teeth on concrete first. It also didn't work like in Gears of War where the victim's head explodes like a blood-filled watermelon.
So because it doesn't look like exaggerated Hollywood violence, it's not a stomp?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

So GeeSussFreeK, the real issue with sanity isn't that someone stomped on someone's head, it's that liberals like me called it a stomp? Seriously, what the fuck are you smoking?
>> ^hPOD:
It's hard to take you seriously when you sensationalize, and you're smarter/better than needing to resort to such extremes. The people involved were stupid, to be sure, but you're making them sound like attempted murderers, and this is disingenuous at best.
The only words I've used to characterize the content of the video is the title...
Original: Apparent Rand Paul Supporter Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head
Current: Rand Paul Co. Coordinator Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head
What's disingenuous or misleading about either? Lauren Valle is a member of MoveOn. When I didn't know whether the guy was affiliated with Rand Paul, I said so. Now that I know he's not just a supporter, but someone who's part of the campaign organization, I updated it.
I know, must be the word stomp. Dictionary.com redirects stomp to stamp, so here's the definition they give:
stamp
–verb (used with object)

1. to strike or beat with a forcible, downward thrust of the foot.
   
2. to bring (the foot) down forcibly or smartly on the ground, floor, etc.
   
3. to extinguish, crush, etc., by striking with a forcible downward thrust of the foot (fol. by out): to stamp out a fire.
   
4. to suppress or quell (a rebellion, uprising, etc.) quickly through the use of overwhelming force (usually fol. by out).
   
5. to crush or pound with or as with a pestle.
   
6. to impress with a particular mark or device, as to indicate genuineness, approval, or ownership: to stamp a document with a seal.
   

hPOD you're right, he was trying to be nice by blessing her with the bottom of his foot. I do it to my mom all the time. Keep talking, you make alot of sense.

Dude, the guy started stomping. It was about to get all American History X, but then someone said, "no no no, come on..." Clearly, that guy standing right next to the incident perceived that as a curb stomp; probably because it was. He didn't "slip" while "holding her down forcefully with his foot." He was attempting to bash her head against the curb using his foot. That, my friend, is a stomp. You can tell because there was no loss of balance, and then he made aggressive pointing gestures at the victim. Would you have preferred "attempted curb stomp?"

Looks like a pretty trivial incident to me.

The title is wrong, this was obviously a murder. Rand Paul murders people, you heard it here first.

@GeeSussFreeK, @hPOD what title would you prefer?

A more accurate one?

How about 'Rand Paul supporter goes too far...', which would be more along the lines of accuracy. People will view it, and people will agree he/they went too far. There is no need to tell people someone had their head "stomped" on. Also, do note that while one or two of these supporters were morons, another clearly tells them to knock it off.

There ARE good people out there, even if they disagree with your politics.

>> ^NetRunner:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/GeeSussFreeK" title="member since August 1st, 2008" class="profilelink">GeeSussFreeK, @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hPOD" title="member since August 6th, 2010" class="profilelink">hPOD what title would you prefer?

In the future, if/when you give a more grown up, non condescending response to something you disagree with, maybe I'll acknowledge it and actually reply back to what you said, rather than how you said it.

>> ^Truckchase:

hPOD you're right, he was trying to be nice by blessing her with the bottom of his foot. I do it to my mom all the time. Keep talking, you make alot of sense.

>> ^NetRunner:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/GeeSussFreeK" title="member since August 1st, 2008" class="profilelink">GeeSussFreeK, @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hPOD" title="member since August 6th, 2010" class="profilelink">hPOD what title would you prefer?


Rand Paul's Co. Coordinator

roughs up/assaults/pushes down/rapes girl with purple dildo (opps, not this one)/gets physical/lets his feet do the talking/ shows what it means to be conservative/has nice shoes for crushing hippies/and on

There are infinitely more, funny, accurate (and I mean in relation to the word curb stomping being deadly, or at least extremely brutal and debilitating...you don't walk away from it), or even ironically less accurate (see purple dildo). Like I said before, when I saw curb stomping, I was dreading what was to come. I don't like Rand Paul, and was perhaps even slightly wishing something bad happened, even though I didn't want to see it. But curb stomp is not what happened (thank god), and I felt as I was manipulated from the start.


With alllll that being said, what happened here was completely shitty. I almost hate that the title is so much of an issue more than what has actually happened. This video actually illustrates why I don't take place in rallies anymore. It basically brings out the worst in people most times. Sporting events, political rallies, and the like are more in line with violence than discourse. This is why I avoid people!


(arg, quote system so broken!)

Here's another angle on the event...

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

Now - when an unidentified, unauthorized person makes a mad dash with an object in their hands at a political figure in a vehicle then you sort of have to expect a bit of manhandling. Imagine if some random Bush supporter had made a similar dash at President Obama, for example. You think just maybe that security & aides would dogpile the breach until "the package" was confirmed safe? I'm surprised this nutcase got off as easy as she did.

Also consider the source. This is a MoveOn.org neolib flake with a documented history of radical behavior. As a publicity stunt this loser runs up with a trophy. Whatever. But when that objective fails she runs whining to favorable left-wing media outlets like MSN to peddler her non-story as a "woe is me" tale of Rand Paul violence. And look how freaking HAPPY she is to be on MSN hawking her balony. She's not upset. She's happy as a clam. This went better than she hoped. So boo-hoo cry me a river, toots.

Show me the video of Democrat volunteers wrestling down Republican protesters? Show me the video of Democrat candidates not condemning violence started by one of their own ... one party has a clear propensity for violence, the other does not.

You mean the Democrat party, right? Because they're the main offenders for voter intimidation, violence, and shenanigans. Democrat union thugs intimidate voters at the ballots, and even target them at their homes. Democrat supporters beat up poor black guys at rallies. Rather than condemn the sleaze, Democrat politicians act as apologists for this behavior. And hey - how about that great Etheredge vid where he manhandles a blogger? "Who are you?!?" indeed.

Examples you say?

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/09/29/violence-hatred-and-thuggery-by-liberal-extremists-against-conserva
tives-so-wheres-the-media-video/

And please no whining about the source. Yeah it's a conservative blog, but all its doing is linking youtube videos. Sorry man - but if you imagined up a world where only Repblicans are mean jackholes then you had to do it by ignoring documented fact.

@hPOD ahh, so instead of titling it with objective fact, I should title it with subjective judgment?

@GeeSussFreeK, umm, my title should be funny? I think "roughs up" is inaccurate (I usually think of that as involving multiple strikes), I think "assaults" has a legal connotation, I think "pushes down" isn't what all the fuss is about, and you're the one bringing up crazy things that didn't happen (rape & murder).

To both of you, just google Lauren Valle, and look at the press headlines describing this event. Most include the word "stomp", including the current embed from the Associated Press. The ones that don't aren't really any less inflammatory. Many use the verb "attacked", one said "brutally attacked", another said "kicked in the head", and a student newspaper even called it "A Crack of the Skull 'Heard Around the World'".

The most mild I've seen is "stepped on" her head, but I'd say that implies that it was unintentional, and it clearly was no accident.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
With alllll that being said, what happened here was completely shitty. I almost hate that the title is so much of an issue more than what has actually happened.

>> ^hPOD:

In the future, if/when you give a more grown up, non condescending response to something you disagree with, maybe I'll acknowledge it and actually reply back to what you said, rather than how you said it.
>> ^Truckchase:
hPOD you're right, he was trying to be nice by blessing her with the bottom of his foot. I do it to my mom all the time. Keep talking, you make alot of sense.


The basis of your assertion demands condescension. You're picking a fight about something that is entirely unacceptable regardless of the semantics of the situation. I won't spend any more time on this, as doing so undermines my own unspoken assertion that your commentary doesn't deserve attention since it is, by design, a distraction from the point of the video.

You're taking what I said wayyyyyyy out of context. I said it was typical of sensationalized Internet media to take something and make it far worse than it actually is/was. I do not and will not consider what happened in that video to be stomping on someones head, but as proven here, that can be argued. I do, however, feel it was out of line and the people responsible should be investigated.

This is why it's nearly impossible to have an intelligent conversation with people these days. You can say whatever you want, and that's that. Nothing is open for discussion or disagreement anymore.

Objective fact? She wasn't curb stomped nor was her head stomped on, at all. Saying so, and claiming that to be the case and calling it objective fact is a lie. I could agree with you if you said someone stepped on her neck, but stomped? No.

Objective judgment? Possibly. It is of my judgment that they went too far in what they did to her. That said, at least I'm honest about my objective judgment and am willing to admit that's what it is. I suppose others could say they didn't go far enough in what they did to her, which would make my opinion on this a judgment call.

In the end, what I said makes you mad? You got mad at me because you disagree with my opinion that I consider what actually went down versus how you titled it to be sensationalized? That's truly sad. I thought better of you, but I guess you're like the typical majority of Internet opinion makers -- if I disagree with you, you get mad at me for it. Oh well.

>> ^NetRunner:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hPOD" title="member since August 6th, 2010" class="profilelink">hPOD ahh, so instead of titling it with objective fact, I should title it with subjective judgment?
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/GeeSussFreeK" title="member since August 1st, 2008" class="profilelink">GeeSussFreeK, umm, my title should be funny? I think "roughs up" is inaccurate (I usually think of that as involving multiple strikes), I think "assaults" has a legal connotation, I think "pushes down" isn't what all the fuss is about, and you're the one bringing up crazy things that didn't happen (rape & murder).
To both of you, just google Lauren Valle, and look at the press headlines describing this event. Most include the word "stomp", including the current embed from the Associated Press. The ones that don't aren't really any less inflammatory. Many use the verb "attacked", one said "brutally attacked", another said "kicked in the head", and a student newspaper even called it "A Crack of the Skull 'Heard Around the World'".
The most mild I've seen is "stepped on" her head, but I'd say that implies that it was unintentional, and it clearly was no accident.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
With alllll that being said, what happened here was completely shitty. I almost hate that the title is so much of an issue more than what has actually happened.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Rand Paul and Ron Paul are not libertarians, they are anarcho-capitalists.


Bwahah! What? That's not even close to being true.

In other news, using your feet to stomp someone is assault with a deadly weapon. I never knew that.

I can't believe there are people trying to justify stomping on a woman's head. Partisanship is one thing, but condoning violence against women is just sick.

@hPOD handed @NetRunner his ass to him. Snap!

Also I think Rand Paul is a Republican and not part of the actual Libertarian Party. But let's not let things like facts stand in the way of good sensationalism and political smears.

I'm usually pretty eager to disagree with NetRunner, but the dude really does pretty obviously slam his foot down on the woman's head, though it's not a curb-stomp. What are you guys saying actually occurred here? There is a video of a woman with her head on the ground. Another guy places his foot over her. It moves down rapidly. Her body moves with the blow. What are you all seeing?

Translation:

I'm not tolerated because I don't agree with you.

I'm not picking a fight about anything, I'm merely pointing out that in typical modern fashion, something is being sensationalized in the name of votes or hits, or whatever have you. It worked, so whatever, the headline got the votes...the video, however, did not. What went down in that video was reprehensible, and those involved should be punished. But I maintain that the punishment should fit the crime. They should be punished for going too far, but they should NOT be punished for curb stomping a woman, since it never happened.

My commentary, by design, was to point out the title is disingenuous, at best. It wasn't meant to exonerate these people for what they did.

>> ^Truckchase:

>> ^hPOD:
In the future, if/when you give a more grown up, non condescending response to something you disagree with, maybe I'll acknowledge it and actually reply back to what you said, rather than how you said it.
>> ^Truckchase:
hPOD you're right, he was trying to be nice by blessing her with the bottom of his foot. I do it to my mom all the time. Keep talking, you make alot of sense.


The basis of your assertion demands condescension. You're picking a fight about something that is entirely unacceptable regardless of the semantics of the situation. I won't spend any more time on this, as doing so undermines my own unspoken assertion that your commentary doesn't deserve attention since it is, by design, a distraction from the point of the video.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^rottenseed:
NetRunner...your headline is the equivalent of me saying "Apparent Obama supporter bashes in my car window and steals my wallet"
(true story with the window bashing and the wallet stealing)

Except your picture didn't include a guy dressed in a shirt with the Obama campaign logo on it doing the smashing.
You also haven't read the rest of the comments because we now know the guy's name, and the fact that he was a member of Rand Paul's campaign.
It's no longer "apparent", it's now confirmed.


He yelled "I love Obama" after he ran away with my wallet. Then he blew marijuana smoke in my pregnant mother's face...

and why would I read any comments? I have something to say and that's all I care about.

@hPOD

1. read direpickle's comment.
2. shut up.
3. move on.

[heh. ^punny]

Not nice to tell people to shut up.

Yea, it was such a brilliant post I don't know what I'm going to do with myself.

>> ^blankfist:

Not nice to tell people to shut up.

>> ^hPOD:

Objective fact? She wasn't curb stomped nor was her head stomped on, at all. Saying so, and claiming that to be the case and calling it objective fact is a lie. I could agree with you if you said someone stepped on her neck, but stomped? No.

Like direpickle asked, what exactly are you seeing in this video? There's a woman with her head on the ground, a guy moves his foot rapidly down, and strikes her head.

I even hear a crunch when it makes contact, though that could easily be something else.

>> ^hPOD:

In the end, what I said makes you mad? You got mad at me because you disagree with my opinion that I consider what actually went down versus how you titled it to be sensationalized?

Uh, no. I'm mad that the main thing you felt was important to say was to essentially level a personal attack at me, saying I'm making something up to trying to make it look worse than it really is.

Have you considered that perhaps using the word stomp is accurate, and not an attempt to sensationalize?

It certainly wasn't my intention to, and I've asked a couple times for what, exactly, a non-sensational title for something innately sensational like this would be. I've given my reasons for why I think stomp is a pretty accurate and objective description of what happened, including by reminding you of what the definition of the word stomp is.

All you've done is said "What's happening in that video is NOT someone getting their head stomped on, once again, stop trying to make it something it's not" and added more and more personal attacks.

I knew this post would ruffle feathers, and I suspected it would result in personal attacks on me, but I more expected "you're evil for trying to make this look like it's only on one side", not "you're a liar for saying his foot made contact with her head".

i think blankfist is just trollin' as hPOD.

>> ^blankfist:

Not nice to tell people to shut up.


I'm not condoning what he said, but he didn't tell him to shut up. He politely suggested that he be quiet.

The guy in the video is a scumbag. We can at least all agree to that, right?

Rand Paul's political party is Republican not Libertarian. We can at least all agree to that, too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul

Rand Paul didn't shove his foot into the lady's back; this guy did. Agreed?

Smear campaign over yet? Good. Now let's get back to that scumbag Grayson!

>> ^direpickle:
I'm not condoning what he said, but he didn't tell him to shut up. He politely suggested that he be quiet.


Let's read his comment together, shall we? Maybe you're right, let's see... hmmmm.... nope, I think point #2 still says "shut up" and not "politely I suggest you be quiet."

I never meant to level any sort of personal attack on you, and if I did, it was never my intention. I just disagree with modern need to sensationalize. Again, if you felt my words were personal or went over the line, I apologize.

I think we agree on one thing, what happened was reprehensible. I think we can just meet in the middle at that. We just disagree, vehemently, on what a stomp is.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^hPOD:
Objective fact? She wasn't curb stomped nor was her head stomped on, at all. Saying so, and claiming that to be the case and calling it objective fact is a lie. I could agree with you if you said someone stepped on her neck, but stomped? No.
Like direpickle asked, what exactly are you seeing in this video? There's a woman with her head on the ground, a guy moves his foot rapidly down, and strikes her head.
I even hear a crunch when it makes contact, though that could easily be something else.
>> ^hPOD:
In the end, what I said makes you mad? You got mad at me because you disagree with my opinion that I consider what actually went down versus how you titled it to be sensationalized?
Uh, no. I'm mad that the main thing you felt was important to say was to essentially level a personal attack at me, saying I'm making something up to trying to make it look worse than it really is.
Have you considered that perhaps using the word stomp is accurate, and not an attempt to sensationalize?
It certainly wasn't my intention to, and I've asked a couple times for what, exactly, a non-sensational title for something innately sensational like this would be. I've given my reasons for why I think stomp is a pretty accurate and objective description of what happened, including by reminding you of what the definition of the word stomp is.
All you've done is said "What's happening in that video is NOT someone getting their head stomped on, once again, stop trying to make it something it's not" and added more and more personal attacks.
I knew this post would ruffle feathers, and I suspected it would result in personal attacks on me, but I more expected "you're evil for trying to make this look like it's only on one side", not "you're a liar for saying his foot made contact with her head".

>> ^hPOD:

I never meant to level any sort of personal attack on you, and if I did, it was never my intention. I just disagree with modern need to sensationalize. Again, if you felt my words were personal or went over the line, I apologize.
I think we agree on one thing, what happened was reprehensible. I think we can just meet in the middle at that. We just disagree, vehemently, on what a stomp is.

You didn't cross a line, it just irked me mightily because I agree with you completely about sensationalism in media, and I was aiming to be cautious with the title (and openly not with the quip in the description).

I'm certainly happy to agree to disagree on what a stomp is.

I guess my trolling here is done.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^direpickle:
I'm not condoning what he said, but he didn't tell him to shut up. He politely suggested that he be quiet.

Let's read his comment together, shall we? Maybe you're right, let's see... hmmmm.... nope, I think point #2 still says "shut up" and not "politely I suggest you be quiet."


I don't know what comment you're reading, but it's obvious that he didn't tell him to shut up. It was clearly an accidental misspelling, as reprehensible as that is.

@direpickle, I'd like to introduce you to this comment by @GenjiKilpatrick:

"1. read direpickle's comment.
2. shut up.
3. move on."

You're right. An obvious misspelling.

>> ^blankfist:

I'd like to introduce the two of you.
<em>>> <a rel="nofollow" href='http://videosift.com/video/Apparent-Rand-Paul-Supporter-Stomps-On-MoveOn-Member-s-Head?loadcomm=1#comment-1090582'>^direpickle</a>:<
br /> I don't know what comment you're reading, but it's obvious that he didn't tell him to shut up. It was clearly an accidental misspelling, as reprehensible as that is.<br></em>
<em>>> <a rel="nofollow" href='http://videosift.com/video/Apparent-Rand-Paul-Supporter-Stomps-On-MoveOn-Member-s-Head?loadcomm=1#comment-1090540'>^GenjiKilpatrick</a>
:<br />
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hPOD" title="member since August 6th, 2010" class="profilelink">hPOD</a> <br> <br> 1. read direpickle's comment.<br> <b>2. shut up.</b><br> 3. move on.<br> <br> [heh. ^punny]<br></em>


What?

>> ^GDGD:

The stomper is believed to be a Tim Proffitt, and the guy who forced her down is believed to be Mike Pezzano.

Step 1: Stomp a helpless lady.

Step 2: ?
Step 3: Proffitt.

Sorry, I had to...

>> ^Truckchase:

hPOD you're right, he was trying to be nice by blessing her with the bottom of his foot. I do it to my mom all the time. Keep talking, you make alot of sense.


I do it to your mom too...

BOOYAH!

Oh and boys?

Stomp != curbstomp

He steps on her neck/back/head and pushes quite a bit... I'd characterize it as a stomp too, even though it's a relatively light one.

Tea baggers = Shit bags

Argh. The violent act itself is bad enough, but the particular location ... you do NOT want an injury there. This could very easily have been a lot worse

>> ^blankfist:

Not nice to tell people to shut up.


I'm going to fucking Kill You!

I'm sorry you were saying something about being nice?

*backup=[]

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by NetRunner.

Crazy shit.

After seeing different shots of this event, I can certainly see where it's warranted that she was restrained. Dragged to the ground probably wasn't necessary and whatever you want to call what the guy did with his foot, that was absolutely uncalled for.

I don't see how these guys had any right to drag her to the ground at all. But then again there's something about the cut of her jaw and her horn-rimmed glasses that makes me not care that she was.

>> ^blankfist:

I don't see how these guys had any right to drag her to the ground at all. But then again there's something about the cut of her jaw and her horn-rimmed glasses that makes me not care that she was.


You're a bastard, Blankfist.

Yes I am.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I can't believe there are people trying to justify stomping on a woman's head. Partisanship is one thing, but condoning violence against women is just sick.


I hate to nitpick, but is it any less sickening if a muscular guy had been stomped on? Unjustified violence is unjustified violence.

It shouldn't matter if it was a woman, or does being stomped on build character in men?

The Right is full of wackos with outrageous demands like 'low taxation' and 'smaller, acountable government'. Why, I even heard ONE guy talk about 'States' Rights'? STATES' RIGHTS! Isn't that what HITLER was after?

My original AWESOME observation stands. While liberals depend on Lady Luck and poor bomb-building skills at the muslim ITT to protect Americans from terrorists, the rest of us do what must be done. If the protest kook was just standing there with a sign and got tackled, I'd agree it was too much. I wouldn't expect to quickly hand Alan Dis-grayson a revolver made of chocolate and not be tackled.


The outcome of these comments is as follows: I on the Right am right, you on the left are insane. As usual.

The point is that this is quite arguably NOT 'unjustified' and also quite arguably NOT 'violence'. The other video I linked above has (of course) been ignored. Watch it. The Sift choice above is the aftermath. What brought it on is here...

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

Hmm - not quite the innocent little rose, is she?

1. "Unjustified". The video plainly and clearly shows Ms. Kooksalot jumping right up at Paul's car window. No one knows who she is. No one knows what the heck she's trying to do. No one knows what the object in her hands might be. A bomb? A gun? When unidenified persons with unidentified objects and unknown intentions jump at political figures they get tackled and held down by security. She's lucky she didn't get tazed or pepper-sprayed or something more serious. If Ms. MoveOn.Stupid runs at political figures like that then a gentle nudge with a foot should be the least of her concerns.

2. "Violence". I've seen several different shots and angles of this so far and I'll just come out and say it. I've gotten harder 'kicks' from infants. The guy puts his foot on her upper tricep area and kind of gave her a bit of a push. Considering what she did, she got off way easy. If it was me then she'd have been in a full nelson eating asphalt until she was identified.

[redacted]