Of course one should not be surprised, upsetting children and insulting their parents has alaways been part of the American way of life. I DON'T THINK.

The people responsible should be charged and brought before the courts.

To be honest, I've seen this kind of stupid shit from both sides: yard signs stolen, cars with Kerry bumper stickers keyed, etc.

I don't care what any poll says, this is a very tight, very emotional race and it's only going to end after the first Tuesday in November. It can't come fast enough for me.

:jackson

jj

I wish that it would end after the election, but even if GW wins decisively, the Left will go ballistic. From threads on DU advocating armed revolution if GW wins (their rationale is if he wins, he must have stolen it), to Kerry's stable of lawyers poised with prepared boilerplate lawsuits to file across the country at 8:30 am in every court in every area he loses in...

Well, just as the increasing violence in Iraq by the jihadists are linked both to the US Nov elections and the Iraqi Jan one; I think violence against GOPer's and even attempts against GW and his admin will materialize.

I want to be wrong; I pray that I'm wrong. But I don't get a good gut feeling on this.

From this snap alone:

1. She'll be a union-buster when she grows up.

2. If the police department is worth anything, they'll show up at the next union meeting and charge some people with double assault. But, since this is Huntington, WV we're talking about, perhaps some members of the Army National Guard should take care of it instead.

Alan,
"Significant majority".
So you're saying 60-70% of the "far left" behaves this way?
Care to cite any statistical data to support this thesis?
Or is this just pure conjecture?

I'm also curious how you would define "far left".

J Zed,
Here-here!
In my town (Columbus, Ohio, USA) a Republican city attorney was caught having his daughter (a minor) jump out of his SUV to steal "Kerry-Edwards" lawn signs.

ok, ep

Elvispresley2k : please read it again. To help, I'll quote the section:

For evidence that a significant minority of the Far Left behave this way

min not maj.
As regards support for the thesis, I gave two URLs, one from the Left, one from the Right. The first is "in their own words" though of course you can't discount some degree of agents provocateur. The latter has several movies of violent incidents against anyone as right-wing as, say Dean.

As for the Far Left, I mean people who think that Michael Moore is a courageous truth-teller who is in constant fear of his life from the Jewish NeoCon Hit Squads out to get him. About as representative of the Left as the KKK was of the Right in about 1950 - a significant and highly embarressing minority.

I sent this photo to 30 of my closest friends last night so they could get a good look at the sensitive, caring Kerry supporters in WV.

Big brave union moron (to the right), having successfully intimidated a 3-year old girl, smiles that vacant smile I haven't seen since the Manson trial.

Woman in backround (mouth open, waiting for a fly) successfully hectoring father/daughter subversives from Team Bush.

The hypocrisy of the Kerry followers is palpable. Listen to them and you'd think they're what's right about America, but what they're doing here is their kind of entertainment. Too bad little Sophia wasn't on the ground so the Hero from the Painters Union could have maybe kicked her in the stomach, wouldn't that have been great?

Enjoy your day in the sun, Hero. It's all over soon.

Darleen, If an armed revolution is coming, what will the left do for guns? Guns are dangerous devices that wander the earth, killing people. The left doesn't own a decent M-14, let alone a nice Saturday night special.

I think it'll be interesting.......and a bit one-sided.

I hear you Darleen, the part of the 2000 aftermath where I actually got scared was when I finally realized that the Gore camp was not willing to lose. For democracy to work, everyone has to be willing to lose. As the 20th century demonstrated and underscored in blood, the political left is susceptible to the temptation of abandoning democracy as a means to an end. Until 2000, I never thought I'd see it happen here. With any luck, the Democratic party will simply split with the leftist either leaving or the centrists kicking the leftists out.

:jackson

AEB,
Whoops! Sorry, "significant minority" of far left.
So that's 10% 20%? More?

I agree though, jerks abound regardless of stripes. One is too many

ok, ep

Quoth aebrain:

The first is “in their own words” though of course you can’t discount some degree of agents provocateur.

Sure I can discount them. After all, the DU believes in censorship. Therefore, if the comments stay up, the DU is to some extent giving their endorsement.

This is an example of what the party of entitlement breeds.

The IUPAT President responds:

The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades believes in the fundamental right for civil discourse, freedom of speech and activism to support our candidates and issues.

What happened in Huntington, West Virginia yesterday is an affront to everything we, as a union, pride ourselves to represent. We extend our apologies to the Parlock family, especially Sophia, for the distress one of our overzealous members caused them.

I have personally taken steps to address this issue internally, and will take immediate disciplinary action to the full extent allowed under U.S. Department of Labor regulations and the constitution of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades.

It is my hope that this incident reminds all of our members that every last citizen in this country has the right to express his or herself freely. Not one single one of us has the right to tell them otherwise.

General President James A. Williams
The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades


I got that off Little Green Footballs.

I got union friends, mostly Bush supporters too. They're good people, and ass holes like this come along and make them look bad. The union better kick his ass out.

If you are really incensed, go read Eschaton...scroll down to "Coinkydinks".

Apparently, Parlock is a serial complainer of the same treatment. There is a good chance that the union brute is actually another of Parlock's kids.

Please apply the same level-headed analysis as you did on the allegedly-forged Rather memos. I'm looking forward to reading your views with the possibility that this is a scam.

dubyas, Why, you're right. I apologize. Upon closer examination the Union Assmonkey is actually Karl Rove.

I forgot - you guys never do ANYTHING wrong. That's what Dan Rather said, so it must be TRUE.

dubyas - Parentheitcally, your link is broken.

Smile - God loves you.

dubyas: So what? Does that make it OK to commit a double assault, one of which was on a minor?

Go ahead. I dare you to say "yes."

Some other people are blogging this and pointing to articles showing this guy has a habit of going to democratic rallies and ending up being harassed for supporting the republican candidate.

Apparently the point they're trying to make is that the guy doesn't deserve pity, or that this is staged because it's happened before. The point they actually seem to be making is that this isn't an isolated incident -- yes, the left really are that intolerant of dissent.

I learned much the same thing on viewing the RNC protests.

Apparently, Parlock is a serial complainer of the same treatment. There is a good chance that the union brute is actually another of Parlock’s kids.

Wow, he's sure got his three year old trained to perform well.

(And of course anyone that has ever lived with a three year old will know what a laughable assertion that is and get the joke.)

Or maybe he likes to go to Democratic demonstrations with Republican signs and keeps getting accosted.

:jackson

:::sigh::: and the puerile DU_by_n_by scribbles obscenities again.

I don't care about this man and his families' past. They were the victims of assault.

You know, even prostitutes can be raped. It doesn't give their rapist a "get home free" card.

I realize for Leftists, Rule of Law is inconvenient when it interfers with their "cause." DUby gives more testimony to that mindset (and I use the word "mind" quite loosely).

dubyas: So what? Does that make it OK to commit a double assault, one of which was on a minor?

and

I don’t care about this man and his families’ past. They were the victims of assault.

You are obviously missing the key point. The supposed assaulter might actually be another of Parlock's kids. The implication is that the whole thing was staged.

kis: I did not miss that point, but dubyas' speculation has about as much substance behind it as Kitty Kelly's latest book.

Once the IUPAT's "internal investigation" is done, if it turns out it was one of the younger Parlocks, it'll be splashed all over the MSM to show how evil the Bush/Cheney supporters are.

Wow!

I expected at least one poster to allow as how maybe Parlock the Senior might be complicit. That it wasn't time yet to convict the guilty (Kerry supporters, black woman obviously hectoring, puerile lefties). Nope. No chance that the black woman is an incensed Mom who doesn't want a child mistreated. Guess we know what's in store if Weakling, Lyin Crook Cheney, Jeb and his lapdog SecyState steal this one. Or the kind of good Christian love and open mindedness to expect if he gets his smirkin ass tromped.

It doesn't matter that Papa Warlock might be the thug. Even if it's true, the Demo/Commie/childish/KerryFairies are still guilty. They would have done it even if they didn't do it this time.

Just so you know where I stand...if it turns out that Papa Warlock did this nasty, I hope they take the kid away and put him in jail for the gunshot into Republican headquarters where he just happened to be in attendance when (allegedly) a Loony Lefty started blazing away.

gus, torpedo, Darleen Smile - God loves you.

Sorry about the screwed up link... here's eschaton

dubyus: Yes, there is a chance that the union-shirt-wearin', backward-baseball-cap-totin' guy is a junior Parlock. There is also a chance that, right now, Condi Rice is auditioning for the lead role in Whoopi Goldberg's autobiography flick. What evidence you do have of this? Nothing more than my say-so. But you expect me to accept your speculation based on the same amount of hear-say.

Take a very, very close look at that picture. I don't know what you see, but I see a man whose daughter is extremely upset and crying. That man is doing everything he can to make sure his little girl doesn't get hurt worse, including not looking his assailant in the eye.

The Lefty Libs have demonstrated that they don't care about the rules that they are all too willing to require of the Republicans. Until I actually see some evidence of what you claim is possible, your words will remain speculation and innuendo, nothing more.

Until I actually see some evidence of what you claim is possible, your words will remain speculation and innuendo, nothing more.

Parlock's history of claiming abuse at rallies, and the resemblance of the accused to his son, raises this above pure speculation. And of course the font on his union t-shirt is all wrong.

kis: So, just because he has shown several times at Dem rallies, holding Bush/Cheney placards, it's OK to destroy personal property and endanger his daughter?

My dare above, to dubyas, applies to you too.

Check out the little blonde kid with the clenched fists.

gus3
In my original post on this, I asked that you apply the same level-headedness as was applied to the (still-alleged) Rather memos.

Yet you persist. No one has condoned assault. I am pointing out that there may be more to this than meets the eye.

This jackass (IMO) has been involved in several similar situations. One of those was where a bullet went over the heads of people who were gathered in front of a Rep HQ.

According to his own accounts, he has been roughed up on several occasions.

First point, he is complicit without question. At minimum, he knows how to provoke attack. My hunch (and only that) is that it's nastier; that he sets up these photo ops.

Second point, I don't know if you're a parent (and if not, please don't speculate what it might be like). If I took my daughter at this age to an event where there might be violence, there would be hell to pay with my wife and probably with Social Services.

If this is all coincidence, then Warlock is a slow learner.

Here's my answer to your f'd question...nothing justifies an assault like this; nothing justifies bringing a child to this condition.

And if you'll be so gracious to reciprocate...what do you think should happen to Papa Warlock if it is discovered that he staged this? Whether or not this turns out to be bogus, do you support dirty tricks such as this?

Hey dubyus, you might want to take time out from trying to manufacture scandal and outrage against the dad to check this out:

http://www.ibpat.org/news/WVa.html

It's an apology issued by the President of the union of which the moron in the left of the picuture is a member for said moron's conduct in assaulting a three-year old.

That swirling sound you hear is your weak attempt at moral equivalence disappearing down the toilet.

Darleen: You have it exactly right. The radical Left has much in common with the islamic jihadists...they are never wrong, they are smarter, they are not rational or logical in evaluating their beliefs, they are frozen into a spurious belief system, and they utterly despise apostates (aka neo-cons), those who have fled the faith.
As yet, they practice only intellectual/emotional terrorism. As yet.
But, like the GWOT, our domestic struggle for our country is far from over.

Quoth dubyus, sans name-calling:

what do you think should happen if it is discovered that he staged this? Whether or not this turns out to be bogus, do you support dirty tricks such as this?

That is a fair question. And here is my honest answer:

I think his wife should divorce him, sue for custody, and press charges of reckless endangerment of a minor (not necessarily in that order). Then let him become the "protege" of someone named Spike. He would learn what it's like to depend on someone else for safety.

Alright, I'm getting down right irrational about the flagrant use of nick names for vilification. It pisses me off on talk radio. It's pissing me off on this board. His name is Parlock, not Warlock. When you call him Warlock, it strikes me as an argument from distraction. When you first proposed that Parlock was staging this, I was sympathetic. Now, I don't care. I'm sick of listening to you. Right, wrong, I'm done with it.

And yes, this extends to Dan Blather, whatever else I've missed in the past, and whatever you people choose to abuse in the future.

TBox,

One minor point. I am all for his using idiotic names because it is a red marker of his utter lack of argument.

Get this, his major point is the 3 year old deserved what she got.

gus3 I'm agree with you. Except that I don't think that my wife would let me do this in the first place...if in fact this yokel is mistreating his kid...not known yet. And if it's discovered that he was behind the shots at Rep HQ, there will probably be legal consequences.

and then...Jon Stewart is nothing compared to the comedy here.

TBox Great satire! Pretending to whine about my changing people's names to reflect my view of them. And then writing Dan Blather. Well done. It seemed like a sense of humor was nowhere to be found in these parts.

And jones Clever, clever. So according to your banana republic view of how TCP should be run, whenever anyone on TCP calls someone a name, they do so because they have no argument? Or does that just apply to the people you don't agree with? Kind of a thuggish way of stifling the opposition? And somehow what I wrote "...nothing justifies bringing a child to this condition" gets turned into "his major point is the 3 year old deserved what she got". I don't want to hurt your feelings, but that is a shit-for-brains analysis...technically speaking, nothing personal.

and TL best for last. No wonder so many people here seem to be lining up to buy coWard's used underwear...if this is what passes for rational thought.

Here's the deal...I posted some information that seemed pertinent to the conversation and that ran counter to the chorus of demonization. I suggested the possibility that there may be more to this than meets the eye. No manufacturing of scandal and outrage. No moral equivalence. You made that up Your overheated hyperventilation is yours, not mine.

And the best...

It’s an apology issued by the President of the union of which the moron in the left of the picuture [sic] is a member for said moron’s conduct in assaulting a three-year old.

Nowhere in your post do you show that that the person is a member. Nor do you allow for the possibility that the moron on the left is not actually a member of the union. Nor do you mention that the President of the Union promised to do something about it. Imagine that! 1)Someone in authority apologizing, 2) for the behavior of someone who might not even be part of the union, 3) without being forced to do so. I can understand how weird that might be to you...seeing as how Weakling would never do such a thing. This kind of ass-hat analysis is what bothers me about the idea that tWirp might get something more than 20% of the vote.

Spade: Ta for the info. I'd seperately sourced it (via Instapundit) and had posted the update just before your comment came on-line, so no Hat Tip this time. But my personal thanks anyway, you were only a few minutes too late.

And while I'm on the subject of the apology, this should not be seen as an 'admission of guilt' by the IUPAT. They're apologising now, and if later on it turns out that it's a CAIR or Republican stooge wearing one of their shirts, no doubt they'll issue a statement to that effect. Faced with such a spectacular 'own goal' by what appears to be a thug in their ranks, they're doing the right thing. Or at least, what I would do in their place.

dubyus:

There is a good chance that the union brute is actually another of Parlock’s kids.

Fortunately you gave a URL where this, um, controversial claim is made, so we can look it up ourselves. This behaviour is to be encouraged, far better than bald statements without evidence. OK, so it's a bit of a stretch to say there's a 'good chance', but that is irrelevant.

As regards "What happens if it's a dirty trick", the days when a schlock story could be put on page one, then a retraction a few weeks later on page 83 are over. The Blogosphere has seen to that. A lot of people feel insulted when either confronted with an obvious forgery, or worse, get fooled by a professional scam. You can be damn sure it would make the front pages of TCP should this be so, and people like Atrios and yourself given full credit for seeing what the rest of us didn't. But breath-holding is contra-indicated, and you can also be sure that we'll make it quite clear that people like yourself engaged in a smear campaign to justify the thuggery should the story be confirmed. It works both ways. To raise the question "Could it have been one of his kids?" is one thing. To say "there is a good chance" is another.

gus3: Good point about DU endorsement. Actually, good points throughout your posts, or at least, I agree with you.

ep2K: re : 10%, 20% question - I have no idea how I['d even go about getting such figures. "Significant minority" is about as precise as I can be without being innaccurate. If you can think of a way to get the figures, please let me know, otherwise I'd just be pulling them out of my.... well, I'd have to get up out of my chair, let's put it that way.

Funny thing, DUby, it is YOU that mention the black woman.

Hmmmm... now I wonder why that would be? Maybe just another case of PROJECTION?

This was NOT a "Democratic party event", this was an airport. And I find it telling you blame the dad for bringing his daughter to the airport and even find it acceptable that Democrats act like dangerous beasts against the evil Republican..and if someone gets hurt, it's the fault of the citizen that expects his peers, even if they disagree with him, to still act civilly.

You, DUby, have the "moral" standards of a gangbanger.

Elvis,

Up-Against the Wall MotherF****** must have been before your time.

The left has always been violent. Lennin showed how a small disciplined group of violent revolutionaries could take over a country. The left loves this shit.

Having been a far-lefty in my youth I can vouch for its attraction.

The right in America is a status quo party (well slow change - this is America after all) the left the party of change. Now these days with almost every one getting a piece of the pie rocking the boat is not very popular.

So if you can't get revolution by popular acclaim how do you get it?

Violence.

Wow. I guess the fact that the guy is wearing A UNION SHIRT doesn't mean much to you.

I'm guessing that you have a hard time with facts you don't like, which is why you grasp at any convenient conspiracy theory to get around those facts in your under-equipped mind.

There may be medication that can help, but those are usually administered orally. Hopefully, someone will come up with a suppository version of them so that you can get the help you need.

Dubyus

If she didn't deserve it, show me where you condemn the Union Thug's behavior.


All you care about is that the Left is innocent.

TL : Re

There may be medication that can help, but those are usually administered orally. Hopefully, someone will come up with a suppository version of them so that you can get the help you need

Which part of

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

Do you not understand?
I have zero problems with your first two paragraphs, and happen to agree with you. But this is a plea : PLEASE COOL IT PEOPLE. Or you will be cooled.

I'll correct that last post : "under-equipped mind" doesn't exactly come off as either civil or respectful.
If you must vent your spleen, why not try the "over politeness" method. Consider how much more effective it would have been to say

I’m guessing that you have a hard time with facts you don’t like, which is why you grasp at any convenient conspiracy theory to get around those facts in your lofty and original-thinking intellect.

The reason that I recommend it is that quite often, what starts out as ambiguous irony can mutate into a genuine respect for another poster, no matter how wrong you think they are. It also has better entertainment value.

Darleen : Sorry I didn't include you in my call for common courtesy. It was an oversight, and I apologise. You can be assured that remarks such as

You, DUby, have the “moral” standards of a gangbanger.

if repeated will get you an e-mail warning, then banning for a further offense.
Oh yes, if anyone sees a stray temper around, please contact me, as I'm in danger of losing mine if this stuff continues.

Alan,

Thanks for the tip. I can't wait to see how you apply your standards to Dubyus's post.

TL

You know, Alan, this used to be a great website, and the comment threads were an amazing thing. Sure there was a degree of stupid name calling and a generally uncivil tone, but there was insight and humor as well, and real debate. Which is no longer the case. But the puritanical zeal with which the civility policy is enforced is only part of what's wrong with the CP now - it's the hypocrisy and onesidedness that's galling and that is exactly why I stopped commenting here.

You take virtually everyone to task on this thread for comments directed at dubyas, who is free to say things like "shit for brains", "ass-hat analysis",
"your f'd question". To all appearances, this is because he espouses what are referred to in the comment policy as "unpopular opinions" - ie the vice president is a "weakling, lying crook" and the Secretary of Defense is "his lapdog". Not to mention the cheezy little potshot about Christian love. But much milder things from the other side of the proverbial aisle are grounds for rebuke and threats of banning.

Likewise, I've noticed that Don's snide condescension - a defining characteristic of his gazillion posts on this site - is defended at all costs. God help anyone who gives Don a mild dose of his own medicine. This is nothing short of depressing to watch, because, as I said, this used to be a great website.

Understand, Alan, I don't have any problem with dubyas's remarks - their tone, the choice of words, whatever. It's the hypocrisy of the enforcement that I object to, and it's getting more and more transparent all the time.

As I said, the best days of the CP comment threads allowed for free expression and the occasional idiocies were a small price to pay for the insight, humor and spirited discourse that flourished here. This truly was a unique forum and provided a view of American opinion at the onset of war that was unavailable anywhere else - as such they are a gift to posterity and I hope and pray that admin doesn't censor those threads before MINERVA gets hold of them.

Torpedo-8, jones, TL, Darleen, :jackson zed--(and anyone else I may have overlooked)

I respect you all for hanging in there. But the way things stand now, if any of you get banned over something you posted here, well, if I were you, I'd consider it an honor.

Alan

I work at a District Attorney's office. My remark to DUby was neither gratuitous nor discourteous, but discriptive of the mindset of what I deal with on a daily basis. I'm sorry you think differfently.

Gangbangers' morality is based on "turf." It doesn't matter if you are a "citizen", you are in "their" turf and if something bad happens to you, it's your fault not theirs. And heaven forfend you are not forthcoming with the correct answer to "Where you from?"

DUby is peddling the same schtick by saying that Parlock had "no right" to go to the airport with his Bush/Cheney sign. Parlock "should have known better." And if Parlock gets assaulted, if his daughter is attacked? Parlocks fault.

Now, see how I draw the parallel to what I experience on a daily basis?

Alan,

There are in both sides, as in every county around the world, some yokels who want to impose their ideas to the other ones. This is for sure.

But this little girl that you show in this picture, is probably crying because of the noise and the spectacle of the people messed and screaming. How old she is? 4 years old?

Please, keep her mind virgin from the political point of view, she is just a pretty and little girl crying because she is bored, or afraid or surprised…I don’t think that somebody among the protesters had the intention of attacking her.

Apart from this, I think that it should be forbidden the presence of little kids in the political meetings. I was a happiest person when I had not idea about politics.

VT,

She is three.

A better explanation is that she was having fun waving a sign and a bunch of assholes stole it from her. Had the sign been Stalin/Hitler 2004 no one has the right to take it from her.

That you find fault with all but the assholes is a poor reflection on you.

Boy is this a load...

I work at a District Attorney’s office. My remark to DUby was neither gratuitous nor discourteous, but discriptive of the mindset of what I deal with on a daily basis. I’m sorry you think differfently.
Gangbangers’ morality is based on “turf.” It doesn’t matter if you are a “citizen”, you are in “their” turf and if something bad happens to you, it’s your fault not theirs. And heaven forfend you are not forthcoming with the correct answer to “Where you from?”

DUby is peddling the same schtick by saying that Parlock had “no right” to go to the airport with his Bush/Cheney sign. Parlock “should have known better.” And if Parlock gets assaulted, if his daughter is attacked? Parlocks fault.

This construction of "gangbanger" has nothing to do with my posts. Further...putting quotes around no right in the context of this comment leaves the strong impression that my post actually said that. Same with should have known better. For the record, I don't know what happened. As Alan points out, I should say that there is some chance of funny business, not a good chance. My hunch is that this dude is a trouble maker and gins up these "DemThuggeries". We'll see, perhaps. I think that the guy had every right to be where he was. There may have been individuals from any political persuasion who acted like animals. I'll remind you...against a litany of "ain't it awfuls", I presented some information that ran counter to that sentiment. As Jack said, "You can't handle it."

Darleen writes "it is YOU that mention the black woman." Try this DA Legal Eagle Eye "Woman in backround (mouth open, waiting for a fly) successfully hectoring father/daughter subversives from Team Bush." Posted by Torpedo Eight and my legitimate, alternative, far less inflammatory explanation of what T8 called hectoring 6 hours later

If Papa Warlock takes his 3-year-old-kid into what he should know by now may be rough, then he shares responsibility. Under similar circumstances, where this dude has initiated action, he has been shot at, assaulted, pushed down, his face has been abraded and he's disobeyed Secret Service requests. And he brings his kid?!? Is this part of the message of the Family Friendly Republican party? If you say so, you are loony. And I write this against the background that any assaults under these circumstances are wrong. Using your alleged DA background story, what would your DA say to someone who was contemplating going into some gang's turf and wearing the wrong color?

I don't know where you work for a DA, but I hope there are some activist judges around there. This is loopy thinking.

jones "All you care about is that the Left is innocent." That comment is pitiful, mindless. But I suppose it makes sense to one who sees the world from a simple-minded "All you care about is that the Right is right."

Alan, I appreciate your comments. Not because I can't handle it; I'm clear that I'm flying the wrong gang colors here. My biggest concern about this political season is that the level of animosity has reached new heights, at least in my lifetime. Even when I was protesting the war in Vietnam, I could count on civil conversations.

Can't resist the obvious...wasn't tWirp the one talking about being a uniter, not a divider? Isn't he the leader of this country? What the hell happened to that? He doesn't tell the truth, and he'll say anything to be elected. I think that he's mentally off. For sure, he's a Son of a Bush.

Refute them. Show me where you were concerned about anything other than the purity of the left's actions.

dubyus:

Having been called on:

petty name-twisting wild speculation without evidence blaming the victim playing the victim yourself

and still insisting on engaging in these behaviors, indicates to me that you have passed beyond rationality on this matter. No further discourse can be productive while this is the case.

DUby

You are the first person to identify the woman as "black." Now, why did you find that necessary? Hmm?

You write: Using your alleged DA background story, what would your DA say to someone who was contemplating going into some gang’s turf and wearing the wrong color?

Yes, some people claim to be what they aren't on the net. Well all remember Micah Wright's flights of military fancy. If you wish to draw conclusions to soothe yourself, go right ahead. But do note that I post under my real name both here an on my own blog. I've related my experience with the DA office in many other venues. I'm open about it. As my children grew and I experienced a divorce, I went back to work and back to college. I've been at the DA for over six years. I'm a felony clerk who shepherds anywhere from ten to fifteen attorneys on a daily basis (we have about 35 attorneys total in our branch office).

What would a DA say about victims who innocently or not so innocently wore colors in the wrong territory? S/he would say "they're victims, let's prosecute the perps to the full extent of the law." That's it. Period. I know because exactly those kind of scenarios happen. I have an ongoing case (not gang, but drug related) right now at prelim stage where some of the victims are not "innocent" but it does not ameliorate the crime committed against them by the perp.

Even prostitutes get raped. Capiche?

And still, from your derisive misspelling of Parlock's name to your continued shifting of blame to him for his own assault, you still are operating on the "you don't belong here, so you deserve what you get" amorality, belying all your statements to the contrary.

Now, who d'fool?

If you can take some time from your busy student schedule, I suggest you volunteer some time at your local DA and get a real education.

Dubyus,

I will say, given that you're old enough to have been protesting the Viet Nam war, I admire your youthful exuberance and ability to keep experience and memory from intruding on your viewpoint.

I'm especially impressed that somebody that tosses around the inflammatory and insulting comments and banal Word games that you do is able to simultaneously lament the demise of civil conversation.

I believe this was a federal civil rights violation. Mr. Parlock may be a moron for bringing his child to a political event, but that does not mean that his rights should be trampled.

Two questions for Blackdog:

1. Which specific civil right(s)?

2. Are you a lawyer?

..WVA..dang guess they are going to have to chg their motto to" WILD AND THE NOT-SO-WONDERFULL"idiots on the left,idiots on the right,idiots going to court...is there a doctor in the house..dont care just make it STRONG...

For the record, this from Michelle Malkin:

PARLOCK UPDATE
By Michelle Malkin · September 21, 2004 04:01 PM

For those still interested:

Just received a call from the IUPAT, which has now identified the union member who grabbed the Bush/Cheney sign from Phil Parlock's daughter and threw the pieces at the family as they left the event. "We are taking steps to deal with the individual," the union told me. Meanwhile, President Bush sent the little girl a new sign that read:

"Dear Sophia, Thank you for supporting my campaign. I understand someone tore up your sign. So I am sending you a new sign and a signed picture."

Sweet.

(This post copy-pasted from http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000558.htm)

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: