June 14, 2010
Democratic Congressman Assaults College Student

His name is Bob Etheridge, a Democratic* Congressman from North Carolina. After being asked a simple (though perhaps loaded) question on a sidewalk, the Democratic* Congressman -- in the words of the NRCC -- "lost it" and assaulted the questioner: an unnamed, self-professed, college student. The Democratic* Congressman grabbed the person on the wrist, and later on the neck; he repeatedly asked, "who are you;" and then he lied that he had a "right to know" who the student is.

Frankly, I am more disturbed by the lie than by the physical assault. The physical assault, while disturbing, was a one-time incident, resulting in only a temporary loss of liberty to the victim. Such a lie, though, from an elected official of the federal government -- a Democratic* Congressman -- could be used to permanently deprive someone of his First Amendment rights.

Thinking more about it, though, I wouldn't be surprised that a Democratic* Congressman didn't know that we have a First Amendment right to anonymity, since the Democratic* Party has spent so much time in the last couple years assaulting our First Amendment rights (saying groups of people lose their right to speech when they exercise their right to associate, for example).

OK, maybe that was overly partisan. It's not like some Republican politicians don't have First Amendment problems too (John McCain did help author the bill I am referring to, after all). But I get really angry about government assaults on liberty, whether corporate assaults on corporate liberty (lockstep Democratic* opposition to the rights of filmmakers), or individual assaults on individual liberty (a Democratic* Congressman assaulting an individual on a sidewalk).

I agree with some of the commenters I've seen that the Democratic* Congressman should be removed from office as soon as possible. Practically speaking, that may mean just waiting until November, of course. It's notable that currently, Democratic* Congressman Bob Etheridge's election web site is not responding.

*Note that I used the proper form of the party name here. As an adjective, the word is "Democratic," not "Democrat." I took great pains to make sure everyone knows that this is a "Democratic" official, not merely a "Democrat" official: that he is, in fact, an elected member of Congress that belongs to the Democratic Party. (You're welcome!)

Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.

Posted by pudge at June 14, 2010 08:42 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I can't wait to see the liberals here defend the congressman.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 09:05 AM
2. Notice at the :26 mark, the Honorable Congressman from North Carolina takes the student's cell phone and it is still in his hand as he walks away.

I wonder if the student got his phone back.

So, added to the list of "Fighting words" are "do you support the Obama agenda"....

Posted by: SouthernRoots on June 14, 2010 09:07 AM
3. Well, it's nice to finally see a Democrat assume the mantle that they normally assign to SEIU thugs.

Posted by: Jack on June 14, 2010 09:12 AM
4. Being asked if you support Obama's agenda certainly brings out the worst in people.

Posted by: Kevin R. on June 14, 2010 09:15 AM
5. Democrats = marxist thugs

So much for open government. Ask a liberal a question and get assaulted.

This video such be on repeat loop until November. It will remind the voters of the true face of liberalism.

Posted by: Attila on June 14, 2010 09:44 AM
6. He has spoken:

"I have seen the video posted on several blogs. I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction and I apologize to all involved.

And:

"I have and I will always work to promote a civil public discourse."

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 09:48 AM
7. Gary: good for him. I suggest he puts this behind him, and not let it stop him from doing the work he needs to do ... brushing up his resume.

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2010 09:53 AM
8. ah yes ... the tolerant left.

The violent Tea Party scandles are being covered up and this guy is obviously a Republican plant.

Posted by: James on June 14, 2010 10:29 AM
9. He was just doing what Obama told him to do, "Get in their faces".
Ironically, a while back he was on video telling people to get involved. http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/14/video-etheridge-expounds-on-virtues-of-civic-engagement-in-politics/

Posted by: Mike336 on June 14, 2010 10:33 AM
10. Actually, taking the student's cell phone could be considered strong arm robbery - you know, what they prosecute purse snatchers or street gangs for.

Posted by: mykela on June 14, 2010 10:40 AM
11. Part of Pelosi's "most ethical congress ever" no doubt. No real surprise. Democrats act peaceful until they don't get their way, or don't like the debate. Then it is tantrums, flag burnings, union thugs, tire slashings, multiple troll repeat postings, etc.

I assume Keith Olbermann will be rushing to give this Dem his "Worst Person in the World" award. Oh wait, no he'll just pretend it never happened like all party-line MSM liars.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 14, 2010 10:57 AM
12. Jeff, Olbermann will probably attack what CBS called, "camera-wielding questioners". Does CBS call its own journalists "camera-wieldng questioners"?

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 11:17 AM
13. I noticed that the gentleman that was asking the question had a cameraphone at the beginning of the video. It was snatched by the Congressman when the Congressman grabs the gentleman's wrist. At the end of the video, the Congressman still has the cameraphone in his hand.

On top of incivility and lack of understanding of the First Amendment, it looks like theft can be alleged in addition to text book assault and battery.

Indefensible.

Posted by: Beantowner on June 14, 2010 11:35 AM
14. Really sad comentary for an elected official.

What an ARSE!

Really sad display for a leader of his state and political decision maker for this country.

Posted by: yo yo its meo on June 14, 2010 12:25 PM
15. This guy is right up there with Phil Hare (D-Illinois) who thinks he has a right to run someone's license plate if they ask him tough questions.

Posted by: Vatar on June 14, 2010 12:39 PM
16. All the media are starting to report that these were actually agents of Breitbart. The congressman was WAY out of line, but the narrative that these were harmless "students" is a fiction. They're rogue GOP brownshirts.

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on June 14, 2010 12:46 PM
17. #16. You're kidding. "agents of Breitbart"? They're "brownshirts" for asking a simple question that any Democrat should be able to answer?

You have *got* to be kidding me.

I told you guys it would be cool to see the liberals defend the tyranny. And now we have one.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 12:51 PM
18. I can't get over this. A citizen asks a Congressman an easy political question, and Joe calls the citizen a Nazi for doing so.

That is where the Left is in this country.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 12:55 PM
19. This kind of behavior comes from the sense of entitlement that these bums have. Our political system right now has some structural flaws that need to be addressed to put the humble back into people like this arrogant ass hat. making "public service" lean more toward the "service" end of things would be a good start. These guys are worth millions by the time they leave (how do they do that on such a meager salary?) with their name on huge pork barrel projects all over their home state. Building these self aggrandizing monuments to spending other people's money should stop immediately.

Sadly I doubt that this guy will pay for his boorish behavior.

Posted by: G Jiggy on June 14, 2010 12:59 PM
20. The Congressman should have called the police instead of trying to handle this premeditated provocation himself, yes. (Given the number of armed teabaggers we've got wandering around these days, I'm surprised powerful Democrats appear in public without bodyguards.)

That poor agent provocateur of Breitbart's must feel silly about having a senior citizen manhandle him so easily, though.

Posted by: tensor on June 14, 2010 01:00 PM
21. #20. tensor, what did the citizen do that was illegal that would require the police?

You think it's illegal to ask a Congressman a question?

"premeditated provocation"? What??? He asked is the Congressman supported Obama's agenda. Why is that provocative? Do you support Obama's agenda? Are you going to call the police now?


Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 01:05 PM
22. Ha, ha, ha!! Tensor you're such a drip I just have to laugh.

"Do you support the Obama agenda?" is "premeditated provocation"? Ha, ha, ha!!! You're such a tool.

Posted by: G Jiggy on June 14, 2010 01:06 PM
23. Gary: In tensor's fevered liberal brain, questioning a Democrat is a punishable offense.

Posted by: mike336 on June 14, 2010 01:08 PM
24. #22. I *knew* these guys would come out of the woodwork to support tyranny. It's so predictable. Why didn't the Congressman just say, "Yes", and move on? What the hell is so hard about the question? G Jiggy, don't forget that Joe thinks that question makes the citizen who asked it a Nazi.


Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 01:10 PM
25. "Given the number of armed teabaggers we've got wandering around these days.."

Let's see some proof to go along with this statement.

Posted by: Jack on June 14, 2010 01:12 PM
26. #23 mike336, yep. That's exactly what he said... ask a question, and get the police called on you.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 01:13 PM
27. You think it's illegal to ask a Congressman a question?

You think it's civilized discourse to shove a camera into a person's face and ask "loaded" questions?

Let's see some proof to go along with this statement.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_tLI9lLTD84fBBGXxqRJN7J;jsessionid=D5D333DFBD70E124585468B6A844823F

(The New York Post, like Fox News, is owned by Rupert Murdoch, so feel free to disbelieve anything in either.)

A Breitbart provocateur is not an innocent college student, no matter how earnest the pretense.

Posted by: tensor on June 14, 2010 01:33 PM
28. tensor, you're unbelievable. "Do you support Obama's agenda?" is a "loaded question" worthy of assaulting the citizen who asked it? And, failing that, calling the cops???

Do you support Obama's agenda, tensor?

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 01:37 PM
29. tensor - show the proof that the innocent until proven guilty college student is a Breitbart provocateur.

We already have the undeniable video proof that your hero Etheridge is a bully guilty of assault, battery and theft.

Posted by: dan on June 14, 2010 01:42 PM
30. #27 "A Breitbart provocateur is not an innocent college student, no matter how earnest the pretense."

So, that makes him guilty then? Guilty of what exactly? Asking a question of a Congressman?

Where did you learn that one is guilty if they ask a question that you don't don't like? College? Where?

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 01:43 PM
31. And tensor, who the hell cares if he does work for Breitbart? Why is that illegal? Have you ever even heard of the Constitution?

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 01:46 PM
32. Tensor is a mindless drone. He is pretty much regurgitating the talking points the DNC gave to Ben Smith at Politico.

Tensor is a good parrot, have a cracker.

Posted by: mike336 on June 14, 2010 01:51 PM
33. 16. All the media are starting to report that these were actually agents of Breitbart. The congressman was WAY out of line, but the narrative that these were harmless "students" is a fiction. They're rogue GOP brownshirts.

Posted by Joe Szilagyi at June 14, 2010 12:46 PM

You have it upside down. The mainstream media (i.e. Media Matters, Daily KOS, Huffington Post) are rogue Obamainite brownshirts and all GOP reps should have body guards to protect them against SEIU/ACORN and other union thugs. In addition, anyone who wears tea party movement insignia should also have protection to guard them against SEIU and other union thugs.

If it weren't for Breitbart, the leftist progressive brownshirts from unions and other leftwing media outlets would be harassing the public and spreading their quasi-marxist propaganda at will.

Posted by: KDS on June 14, 2010 01:53 PM
34. 27. You're either drunk or on the bong. Where in that article does it say anthing about the Teaparty? Your idiotic political beliefs have turned you into a delusional liar. You really ought to change your brand of booze.

Posted by: Jack on June 14, 2010 02:00 PM
35. Can you imagine how apoplectic the MSM/left would be if it was a DailyKos writer asking a similar question of Sarah Palin and she did the exact same thing?

Posted by: Palouse on June 14, 2010 02:03 PM
36. When was the last time a GOP or Tea Party member or elected official attacked someone questioning them? When was the last time a GOP elected official demanded your "papers please" because it's their right to see who you are?

Who are the brownshirt thugs?

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on June 14, 2010 02:06 PM
37. And Palouse, if Palin had beaten up some guy for ask, oh... "Do you support Reagan's agenda", we'd be the first to slam her.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 02:06 PM
38. Please tell me that if this was:
1) a Republican representative,
2) who was asked "Do you support enforcing immigration laws?",
3) grabbed the questioner,
4) took his phone,
5) restrained the questioner and
6) asked for his PAPERS ("who are you!")

that said Republican Congressman would not have already been forced to resign? That the media would not be covering the scene 24/7?

Startling.

Posted by: Beantowner on June 14, 2010 02:08 PM
39. Why is answering the question calmly and truthfully on camera be such an awful thing to ask of somebody, congressman or not? I agree with Gary, any regular person with a tiny bit of integrity would have said "yes", "no", or "please leave me alone" and continued walking. There are a hundred ways to avoid being the blogosphere's "unbelievable clip of the week".

Posted by: blindman on June 14, 2010 02:22 PM
40. All the media are starting to report that these were actually agents of Breitbart. The congressman was WAY out of line, but the narrative that these were harmless "students" is a fiction. They're rogue GOP brownshirts.

Yup, the leftist meme is already spreading! "GOP brownshirts", how colorful!

Posted by: Doug Smith on June 14, 2010 02:29 PM
41. The Democrats in power no longer wish to be questioned about their policies. They are becoming dictatorial. And they obviously know that the policies are not popular, or else they would not avoid the questions, or the public the way they do.
Even after the Congressmen apologies, his lemmings continue to defend him.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 02:29 PM
42. This is where we have arrived with the Left:

Q: "Do you support Obama's agenda?"

A: "How dare you ask me that, Nazi! Police, arrest this man!"


Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 02:34 PM
43. So according to the Left, it's OK for an elected U.S. Congressman to assault someone because he didn't like the question being posed.

According to the Left, it's OK for an elected U.S. Congressman to assault someone because he didn't like the way the question was being asked.

According to the Left, it's OK for an elected U.S. Congressman to assault someone because the person asking the question may or may not work for someone who holds differing political views.

OK. If that's how you want the rules of engagement to be? So be it.

But I don't want to hear one sniveling word out of you cowards if and/or when you're on the receiving end of a beatdown.

You're determining the standards for acceptable pubic behavior, not us. Don't come bitching when you don't like how it turns out.

Posted by: jimg on June 14, 2010 02:36 PM
44. Hey, I *said* the Congressman was way out of line, and he was.

All that aside, the trolls that did the fake pimp ACORN sting and then broke into Senator Landriu's office are now convicted criminals for their actions. Seriously you guys--Breitbart is the bottom barrel of the political world, on par with TMZ in the entertainment world.

Was Etheridge stupid for what he did? Absolutely. Was it humiliating for these strapping 20 year olds that a 68-year old man tossed him around like a wet rag? Absolutely!

Is ambush journalism bullshit? Absolutely, whether it's a pol or an entertainer or a private person.

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on June 14, 2010 02:38 PM
45. Liberals, this is how politics is done. In this video, Republican candidate for governor of Wisconsin, Mark Neumann, takes questions from Democrats at a Democrat convention, and he doesn't beat anybody up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sDppm_WEcg

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 02:40 PM
46. Joe Szilagyi: you're a terrible person. Who cares WHO these people were? How does that matter? If I see YOU taking video in the street, can I assault you, being an "agent of the left"?

It is irrelevant who they were. They did not ask him an abusive question, they showed no hostility toward him, and they did not assault or harm him in any way.


tensor: The Congressman should have called the police

What for? They did nothing wrong, and violated no laws.


That poor agent provocateur of Breitbart's must feel silly about having a senior citizen manhandle him so easily, though.

So now he did something wrong by not stooping to the Congressman's level and engaging in physical violence?


You think it's civilized discourse to shove a camera into a person's face and ask "loaded" questions?

Civilized, yes (as civilization is required for any sort of verbal-language-based discourse). Civil? Maybe not, but since when is assault (and potentially, battery) a rational response to mere (and mild) incivility?


A Breitbart provocateur is not an innocent college student

Actually, in this case, he absolutely IS innocent, unless you have evidence that he committed some sort of a crime warranting a violent physical reaction from an elected Democratic* official of the federal government,

You people are ridiculous.

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2010 02:42 PM
47. #44. Joe, you are now forever on record as believing that a citizen who asks a Democrat, "Do you support Obaama's agenda", is a Nazi.

Do you support Obama's agenda?

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 02:43 PM
48. I guess the "satire" button sets you guys off a bit, eh?

How many times do I have to say the old man was out of line?

You guys ran the country for 8 years (rather successfully!). Now you don't. Lighten up a bit.

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on June 14, 2010 02:46 PM
49. @Pudge @Gary

Let me be more clear...

"Hyperbole (pronounced /haɪˈpɜrbəli/, from ancient Greek ὑπερβολή 'exaggeration'), is a rhetorical device in which statements are exaggerated. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.

Hyperboles are figures of speech that are exaggerated in order to create emphasis or effect. Hyperbole is a literary device often used in poetry, and is frequently encountered in casual speech. On occasion, newspapers and other media use hyperbole when speaking of an accident, to increase the impact of the story."

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on June 14, 2010 02:48 PM
50. Joe, at #16, you wrote:

"The congressman was WAY out of line, but the narrative that these were harmless "students" is a fiction. They're rogue GOP brownshirts."

Do you support Obama's agenda?


Posted by: G on June 14, 2010 02:48 PM
51. Oh, so you're taking it back, Joe? A citizen who asks a politician a political question is not a Nazi? Are we supposed to de-cypher everything you write?

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 02:53 PM
52. Joe Szilagyi: Hey, I *said* the Congressman was way out of line, and he was.

Yes, right before you placed blame on the innocent victims of the crime.


How many times do I have to say the old man was out of line?

One more time ... after you retract your implication that the victims of this crime are in any way to blame.


All that aside, the trolls that did the fake pimp ACORN sting and then broke into Senator Landriu's office are now convicted criminals for their actions.

Yes, and hopefully, some of those ACORN employees will also become convicted criminals. You know, the ones who attempted to aid and abet child sex slavery with government money.


Breitbart is the bottom barrel of the political world, on par with TMZ in the entertainment world.

Yes, we get it: you are saying, clearly, that it is somehow less of a crime to assault certain innocent people.


Was it humiliating for these strapping 20 year olds that a 68-year old man tossed him around like a wet rag? Absolutely!

It's humiliating to choose to not physically strike an elderly Congressman? You're an idiot. Sure, it would've been somewhat entertaining to see Etheridge rolling around on the ground like Don Zimmer, but I respect the restraint. I am bigger than those kids are, and likely stronger than they and the Congressman, and I very likely would not have struck back or significantly resisted (although I surely would've used stronger language). While he does not respect the people, I still respect his office, and would have resisted the urge to knock him out.


Is ambush journalism bullshit? Absolutely, whether it's a pol or an entertainer or a private person.

He's a Congressman. He was asked a question by a member of the public. He was not asked a question any worse than the majority of questions many leftist reporters asked Bush during his tenure. Calling that "ambush journalism" is bullshit.

If they had jumped in front of him and sprayed blood around and screamed "why are you a babykiller?!," that would be ambush journalism. Getting literally in an astronaut's face and calling him a coward and a liar for participating in the coverup of the faked moon landing (after harassing the astronaut for years) is ambush journalism.

Asking a very mildly loaded question of an elected official is part of democracy, even if we don't like it sometimes.

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2010 02:56 PM
53. "Do you support Obama's agenda?"

I'm 100% behind his efforts to

1. Make BP pay 100% of every penny lost to their disaster, and all required cleanups to make the Gulf be the same as they found it.

2. Remove liability caps to make corporations as fully exposed to repercussions as any private citizen, including criminal, tax, and civic liability is. if they want to be treated like a "person" (such as for free speech in the recent SCOTUS decision) they have to take the good with the bad. All or nothing. I run you down in my car, I'm 100% liable criminally and fiscally. The same applies to BP, Comcast, MSFT, Boeing--anyone.

3. Fix Wall Street regulations to minimize as much as possible the conditions of a 'too big to fail' ever happening again.

4. No more corporate bail outs.

5. Building to a future where anyone who needs medical care can get it without having to worry about lifetime financial destitution from something like cancer or a broken bone.

6. Minimizing everyone's access to nukes--ours included.

7. Being a good international citizen--we're not some special bird. We get a seat at the big table but are never entitled to arbitrarily claim a seat at the head. Only if others grant that.

8. Training up Afghan and Iraqi police and military to take over successfully, and then us getting out.

9. Coming up with a plan to drive down the deficit once jobs and the general economy is stabilized. You walk into a hospital and say, "Doctor, I got this bad cough for a week, can you fix it?" And the doctor says, "Sure, but let me fix that gunshot wound that's bleeding all over my ER first." You gotta do these things in order and by priority.

Those are the big ones, yes, that I follow. So mainly yes, I do.

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on June 14, 2010 02:57 PM
54. "Do you fully support the Obama agenda" is now considered fighting words. I can see November from my house.

Posted by: Vatar on June 14, 2010 02:58 PM
55. Joe: aw. I wanted you to attack Gary instead of answering him.

From now on, I plan to ask every Democratic elected official and candidate for office that I run into, "Do you fully support the Obama agenda?" I want to see if any of them assault me. LOL @Vatar.

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2010 03:02 PM
56. #53. So, you answered the question. Am I a Nazi for asking it? And why couldn't Etheridge answer in the same fashion? I know... I know... the citizen who asked might know Andrew Breitbart! The horror! And if know him, does that make me a Nazi for asking you the exact same question? What if a liberal had asked that question? How do we know the person wasn't?


Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 03:02 PM
57. "Yes, right before you placed blame on the innocent victims of the crime."

Nuh uh, you don't get to do that and reshape the narrative of what *I* wrote. I did two separate things: I said Congressman was grossly out of line, *and* I took a slam at the reported Breitbart ties.

I wrote at first:

"The congressman was WAY out of line, but the narrative that these were harmless "students" is a fiction."

I slammed both sides. Please don't try to make it out like I was somehow apologetic. These weaksauce Fox News language tricks don't work for anyone with college level reading comprehension. ;)

I'll be even more clear: Ethridge=stupid, Breitbart=stupid, "Kids"=ask valid question, "Old man"=physically tossed kid like rag.

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on June 14, 2010 03:03 PM
58. Absolutely NO reason for his behavior. I would have told him 'once' to take his hand off me...had he declined I would have given him ample reason to remember me the rest of his life. :)

Posted by: Duffman on June 14, 2010 03:03 PM
59. Joe:

You guys ran the country for 8 years (rather successfully!). Now you don't. Lighten up a bit.

Typical liberal/statist who thinks that one side or another "runs the country". Obviously a big believer in big-government top-down rule.

Posted by: Doug Smith on June 14, 2010 03:08 PM
60. Joe: Nuh uh, you don't get to do that and reshape the narrative of what *I* wrote.

I reshaped nothing.


I slammed both sides.

Yes: you slammed the innocent victim of the violent crime as much as you slammed the perpetrator of that crime. How noble.

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2010 03:10 PM
61. #53 - your comment in #16 was vindicated, but it was peculiar way to say it. It is clear that while you pay attention to what Obamao say, you do not pay much attention to what he does.

Same is the case in #53 - The real Obama Agenda does not contain anything (with the possible exception of #1) that have either not happened or will never happen (#3, 4, 6, 8 and 9 fall into that category). #7 is irrelevant - feel good bilge.

Posted by: KDS on June 14, 2010 03:10 PM
62. Joe wrote:

You guys ran the country for 8 years (rather successfully!).

More hyperbole there Joe? Because Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Reid claim nearly half that timeline...

Of course, it's always "8 years of GOP" to blame and attack. Probably why this nutjob of a Congressman snapped, because of 8 years of brownshirts, eh Joe?

I mean, we cannot question our leaders, we work for them, right? Or was it the other way around? Nah, must be the first, how else can we attack anyone as stupid for deigning to ask our dear leaders a perfectly valid question!

Or perhaps it's because he saw the new polling data showing Americans greatly prefer the GOP over the Democrats. By an even larger margin than 1994, and we know what happened then. So maybe he was just lashing out at the writing on the wall, I guess...

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on June 14, 2010 03:13 PM
63. Dan, GOP congressional ballot is up 10 points. Obama will be a lame duck (lamer anyway) President
in a matter of months.

And Etherdidge is going to be out of a job also.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 03:18 PM
64. Joe: Those are the big ones, yes, that I follow.

Of course, the actual question was: "do you FULLY support the Obama agenda?"

Do you?

Do you support forcing people to buy health insurance? Do you support banning the manufacture of "assault rifles" and certain ammunition? Do you support laws that say a filmmaker can't advertise a film about a politician too close to an election? Do you support government taking over any company it wants to? Do you support censorship of political views on the radio? Do you support NOT extending the Bill of Rights to the states?

All of these are part of Obama's agenda.

Oh, and I think it's sad that you agree with Obama that America is not special. But I would appreciate it if you could tell as many people as you can that you support Obama's view that America is not special.

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2010 03:19 PM
65. #64. Watch it, pudge, you're getting pretty close to being a Nazi for asking those questions :)

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 03:23 PM
66. And here is a female Democrat in TN:

"You have to lift their skirts to find out if they are women. You sure can't find out by how they vote," said Rep. Janis Baird Sontany, D-Nashville.

You see, Democrats believe that *all* women must vote a certain way, and that *all* African-Americans must vote a certain way, etc. And how is this not sexist and racist?

It's a bit off topic, but you see... if you disagree with a Democrat, then you are don't count, and cannot be innocent, as Joe and tensor have so eloquently illustrated.

Posted by: Gary on June 14, 2010 03:28 PM
67. "Dan, GOP congressional ballot is up 10 points. Obama will be a lame duck (lamer anyway) President
in a matter of months.

And Etherdidge is going to be out of a job also."

Be wary of complacency ! Etheridge may have sealed his fate. However, the obfuscator in chief (Obamao) is using chaos as his friend and will create situations that he hopes will sway the public to see things the leftwing ideological way.

The GOP still need to demonstrate (at the proding of the Tea Party activists) how they will get the country out of this mess, maintain a strong defense, but stop trying to be the police force of the world - that is their achilles heel. The previous 6 years of when the GOP last was in control of Congress was a black eye for them when it came to spending and one war in particular, which led to defeats in 2006 and 2008. People have not forgotten this yet, so don't get too cocky or it still could be a rude awakening, if the GOP does not gain control of the US House in November.


Posted by: KDS on June 14, 2010 03:30 PM
68. Smells like another despearte leftist to me!!

Posted by: Laurie on June 14, 2010 05:12 PM
69. #68 - I am not sure who you are referring to, but if it is my post - guess again ! I am only being a realist and if you haven't yet, its time that you realize that this is only a microcosm of the public Neither party rates that well in the eyes of all likely voters and I have outlined why the GOP has not climbed out of the hole they dug themselves into. The Democrats, on the other hand are using a backhoe to dig themselves into a hole of which they are trying to pull everyone in with them.

Posted by: KDS on June 14, 2010 06:24 PM
70. Of course people carry concealed weapons, they need to protect themselves from assault and battery by rabid congressthugs.

Posted by: Obi-Wan on June 14, 2010 06:50 PM
71. Congress forgot its history lessons; I give you the Roman Senate----taking us ALL down for a few breads & circuses;

but---many of us STILL vote these people back in, as if they are happy with what they do TO us--or--more frightfully---are just apathetic voter-drones;

either way, we ALL go over the cliff in the big America-canoe; November hopefully will be the blast of North Atlantic sea spray in the tired voter-sailor's snout...

Posted by: jimmie howya-doin on June 14, 2010 06:54 PM
72. What was so bad about asking if a democrat fully supports the Obama agenda?

Posted by: Michele on June 14, 2010 07:21 PM
73. I think if this had been me, the Congressman would have at the very least walked with a limp for the rest of the day. Unbelievable.

Posted by: jvon on June 14, 2010 07:52 PM
74. Ask a polite, respectfully-worded question from a Democrat on a public sidewalk, and watch the stalinist cockroaches show their true colors regarding freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
In liberal world, only friendly questions sponsored by the DNC, SEIU and ACORN are allowed.

Posted by: Attila on June 14, 2010 08:21 PM
75. Bob Etheridge:
"I have seen the video posted on several blogs. I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction [ but most of all that this was taped and I was outed for who I really am...oh, and that my MSM cohorts were not able to do better spin control....damm this internet! ] and I apologize to all involved," Etheridge said in a prepared statement.

Posted by: truthseesall on June 14, 2010 08:36 PM
76. This is assault and battery.
I really hope this student presses charges.
Even if the politician gets no jail time, this offense should be on his police record.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on June 14, 2010 09:19 PM
77. A Cop will tell you that simply yelling at someone can be a punishable offence, it's a form of assault. Getting verbal is one thing but when you lay hands on a person you had better know where you're going with it. When the dude grabbed the kids neck he should have received a head butt up the nose.

Posted by: carter on June 14, 2010 09:45 PM
78. bad behavior is not limited to one party
Settlement Was Paid in Whitman Shoving Incident
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/15/us/politics/15whitman.html?ref=politics

Posted by: Andrew on June 15, 2010 06:23 AM
79. Andrew, right, exact same thing. An elected official of the federal government grabbing someone and demanding they surrender their rights is totally comparable to a private colleague shoving another one in a heated moment.

Posted by: pudge on June 15, 2010 06:43 AM
80. #78
So Andrew, you're trying to equate a 10 year old incident between two workers in a conference room with a elected official to the U.S. Congress physically assaulting a college student who dares to ask him a question on camera?

Whitman wasn't an elected official when that happened everyone involved explains that Whitman had simply lost patience with an unprepared subordinate. The fact is that the subordinate who reported the incident still works at Ebay to this day and is complimentary both Whitman and the way the problem was solved.

This is just a case where onces again the MSM are trying to stick up for their liberal buddies in politics.


Posted by: johnny on June 15, 2010 06:56 AM
81. What's interesting is that if you listen closely, the congresscritter starts to demand who they are before they ask if he supports Obama's agenda. The only things they'd said was "Hi congressman" and "how are you?" and he started demanding to know who they were. So it looks to me like he was more upset over the mere fact that they had a camera than any question they asked.

Posted by: Ken on June 15, 2010 11:21 AM
82. Bob's high school guidance counselor should re evaluate that "people person" assessment.

I knew it was easy to unhinge a Democrat, but who knew "Barack Obama's agenda" was up there with Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney and George Bush for getting them to fisticuffs!?!?!?!?!

Posted by: Andy on June 15, 2010 12:37 PM
83. ...important question:

Should we interpret his response as a "no" in terms of supporting the president's agenda?

Posted by: Andy on June 15, 2010 02:16 PM
84. Who do these kids think they are, citizens of a representative democracy or something? They have no idea how stressful it is to be in Congress, passing 2000 page health bills you never read, protecting the right to kill tiny babies, capping oil leaks a mile under the ocean, and making sure alien criminals are not harassed by goose stepping amerikan fascist cops. And then to have to endure such abuse from a couple of brown shirt terrorists whose loaded questions are really tantamount to drive by shooting with an automatic assault revolver loaded with cop killer bullets laced with ricin! They should be sent to some re-education camp in Poland or Germany or something. If we don't put a stop to this now what's next - old ladies asking embarrassing and insulting questions of the POTUS from the front row of the White House press room?

I think the Congressman should introduce legislation legalizing his own behavior, for everyone. Then, we can all assault each other on the street, forcibly take each others' possessions, and demand proof of identity of any stranger who dares talk to us in public. Except for republicans and those teabagger nuts.

Posted by: Steven Adler on June 15, 2010 03:06 PM
85. Joe, do you also share Barry's support of partial-birth Obortion?

Posted by: Matt M on June 15, 2010 06:05 PM