Congressman Attacks Student (video must see)

This next song is dedicated to the good Congressman:

I'm sorry but in this case I would have to side with the Congressperson.

All the punk had to do was identify himself by answering the question.
A simple "I am a constituent of your congressional district" would have sufficed.

reply to post by deanorw


Well, by the looks of his face, he looked more panicked than threatened, but that's not the point.

When you're an elected leader, you are required to behave rationally.

Clearly they had a camera and asked their question from a short distance.

The rep ASSAULTED the kid, not the other way around.

When you feel threatened by say... a cop, or a bouncer at a bar, or... whatever, do you assault them? Or do you get out of dodge asap.

My point, if indeed it was a flight or fight response, all roads point to flight.

He was not cornered or forced into a life threatening situation wherein he had to use force to keep himself safe.

Your argument, in reality, has no basis.

reply to post by deanorw


You're suggesting that the video lacks context? I disagree immensely.

The video begins with initial contact between the Congressman and the student.

Student: "Hi Congressman."

Etheridge: (inaudible) Hi???

Student: "How are you?"

(video cuts, but when it resumes, it is from the same exact point in time)

Student: "Do you fully support the Obama agenda?"

Etheridge: (glazed eyes) "Who are you? Who are you?" (slaps student)

There is nothing out of context about that. Etheridge attacked the student with no provocation.

If you go up to people and shoving an object in their face it is an invasion of personal space. It is also unlawful to record audio of someone who does not give consent. I will say it again. Those kids were not media. They ambushed him.

It has nothing to do with Politician's or Men in Charge. I could walk up to you on the street, start recording you and say stuff. I could then go home and edit that material to demonize you and post it online. What i am saying is that not everything you see can be taken at face value. If anyone on that clip had an agenda it was the kids. Be wary of what you watch, just because he was an "evil" politician does not mean those kids were innocent in any way shape or form.







[edit on 14-6-2010 by deanorw]

"video was removed by user"..translation..

" network offered the user big bucks for the rights to the video and was removed by user"

Originally posted by Mr Objectivity

Everyone should behave rationally. I don't feel just because he was a politician that he should have less rights over anyone else. We are all human and react. Since he is a politician, and we know how many out there have extremist motives and views, he should have a right to be assertive when warranted.

Originally posted by Alxandro
I'm sorry but in this case I would have to side with the Congressperson.

All the punk had to do was identify himself by answering the question.
A simple "I am a constituent of your congressional district" would have sufficed.

Huh?

I think the student was wholeheartedly taken aback when he was attacked by an elected congressional official. His wrist was being gripped without a lot of pressure, obviously. It is my observation that he was legitimately surprised and probably afraid by the violent and aggressive behavior of the congressman. His heart would have been beating fast, causing panic to rise in his body. He was just trying to get away from a sudden threat that unexpectedly turned violent for no reason whatsoever.

I'm unclear in what you're trying to say...

Are you saying that unless you're a reporter, you have no rights to speak to a rep?

And what were they shoving in his face?

The only shoving we see is... obvious.

If I was walking down the street and someone was video taping me and trying to ask me questions, I'd probably say "get that camera out of my face before we have problems.."

UNLESS I WAS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.

And even then, if i didn't want to talk to the guys?

"No comment" repeatedly, as I keep walking.

There is no defense to what the Rep did.

reply to post by Alxandro

I'm sorry but in this case I would have to side with the Congressperson.

All the punk had to do was identify himself by answering the question.
A simple "I am a constituent of your congressional district" would have sufficed.

The kid was on a side walk he doesn't have to do squat for nobody! Including answering the question who are you.

I'd respond, "The person who pays your salary!"

I guess you support TYRANNY in the land of the free.

The country is going right down the toilet.

Originally posted by deanorw



If you go up to people and shoving an object in their face it is an invasion of personal space. It is also unlawful to record audio of someone who does not give consent. I will say it again. Those kids were not media. They ambushed him.

It has nothing to do with Politician's or Men in Charge. I could walk up to you on the street, start recording you and say stuff. I could then go home and edit that material to demonize you and post it online. What i am saying is that not everything you see can be taken at face value. If anyone on that clip had an agenda it was the kids. Be wary of what you watch, just because he was an "evil" politician does not mean those kids were innocent in any way shape or form.

[edit on 14-6-2010 by deanorw]

Normal people do not slap others when in situations like this. People only react like that when they have something to hide, are violently drunk or exhibit psychopathic tendencies. I entirely agree with personal privacy. If someone were to approach me on a sidewalk with a camera, filming me, and I did not want to be filmed, I would politely request that they no longer do so. For instance, "Sorry, but could you please not videotape me?" If they refuse, I would call the police. Physical confrontation is not a rational response.

The congressman is not a rational human being. He exhibits one or more of the following: something to hide, violently drunk or psychopathic tendencies.

Ive seen the video, and heard the statements of others, and the only thing that I have yet to hear is.. the Congressman looked TERRIFIED! Like he wasn't in his right mind, like there was a possibility that due to things being different as far as most politicians these days getting on youtube, he was scared to be the next person who get's "caught up" and while doing that did the exact opposite.

For example, ever see a movie of a guy in the mob "terrified" of his boss, and then every stranger in the street scares him, just in case its a set up. Like there's a price on your head if you speak to free media, and expose your "true" feeling about anything concerning the White House or the current administration.

The world is waking up, and I can say this for certain, he DID NOT want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag!!!

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver
Ive seen the video, and heard the statements of others, and the only thing that I have yet to hear is.. the Congressman looked TERRIFIED! Like he wasn't in his right mind, like there was a possibility that due to things being different as far as most politicians these days getting on youtube, he was scared to be the next person who get's "caught up" and while doing that did the exact opposite.

For example, ever see a movie of a guy in the mob "terrified" of his boss, and then every stranger in the street scares him, just in case its a set up. Like there's a price on your head if you speak to free media, and expose your "true" feeling about anything concerning the White House or the current administration.

The world is waking up, and I can say this for certain, he DID NOT want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag!!!

I haven't considered that scenario. It is an interesting one. You may be right, even though it is a farfetched theory. Star for thinking outside the box.

Somebody should "iReport" this to CNN. If CNN won't take it, FOX News definately will.

--airspoon

Originally posted by Mr Objectivity

Well if you came up to me on the street and knew who I was and started asking questions, I would not give you anything unless you identified who you were to me. The kids refused for some strange reason. They even clouded out their faces. With so much innocence and nothing to hide, they sure made an effort to do a lot of hiding.

That whole clip was nothing but a setup IMO. It simply reeks of it. I can see agenda written all over it. We can sit around and say we expect this and that from politicians and demonize them left and right. It is a different thing though when you have one just walking down the street, living normal life and getting pounced on. He had a right to act defensively. he had no idea what those kids would do. With his job he knows there are some out there who want to harm him.

[edit on 14-6-2010 by deanorw]

reply to post by deanorw


T's illegal to record audio of someone without them knowing.

holding a camera or a microphone is giving that person notice that they are being recorded..therefore allowing them to censor themselves or not say anything at all.

Its on a public street and filming is allowed....

Originally posted by airspoon
Somebody should "iReport" this to CNN. If CNN won't take it, FOX News definately will.

--airspoon

CNN Report

reply to post by OrphenFire



There isn't any video on the CNN link only audio!

Looks like damage control is on going!

This was just on The Daily Show... I hate to say it, but I don't think this is a big deal...
He is a old guy, and I am sure not going to put up with any BS from college punks.
all political agenda aside, I know lots of old guys who would have done the same thing.
It's more of that Old School respect your elders thing

reply to post by deanorw

The kids refused for some strange reason. They even clouded out their faces. With so much innocence and nothing to hide, they sure made an effort to do a lot of hiding.

Do you understand PUBLIC SIDEWALK?

I can film anyone on a sidewalk without answering any questions, and I can ask as many questions as I wish!