Robinson Responds

Yesterday, I reported that numerous people believed that they knew the identity of the person who appears in this video, purportedly kicking a restrained protester: They believe the person on the tape is Wharton student Scott Robinson, who interned in Washington, D.C. this summer. At this point eight of them, seven D.C. interns and a University of Pennsylvania political science student who says he lived across the hall from Robinson for a year, have provided comments for attribution, claiming to be certain the person on the convention video is the student and intern they know. (Various others have sent anonymous statements to myself and other bloggers to similar effect.)

On Thursday evening (technically very early Friday), I spoke with Robinson. He conceded that he was in New York at the time, volunteering at the Republican National Convention, but says that he was not at the Andy Card speech where the incident took place around noon that Wednesday. He said he had been out late Tuesday night and didn't wake up before midday, as he was only working evenings. He also gave me the name of the Wharton fraternity brother with whom he stayed that week, with whom he said he'd been at the time of the Card event. That person, whose name I'm omitting at his request, declined to say anything on the record when contacted via email.

Update: The University of Pennsylvania's campus paper has picked up the story, with a comments section where students are discussing it. That piece adds a visual ID from the chair of the UPenn College Republicans, though a more tentative one than other sources have given. No further word from Robinson himself as yet.

Comments

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 4:22pm | #

That person, whose name I'm omitting at his request, declined to say anything on the record when contacted via email.

What exactly can we infer from this?

dhex | September 17, 2004, 4:25pm | #

not very much, really.

it is odd that no one bothered pursuing criminal charges, though. or at least hunting the kid down for a good old fashioned ass kicking.

it is fun, however, to hear people i know who are decidedly of the liberal mindset tossing "and he kicked a girl no less!" onto the woodpile. like, fuck guys...the whole point is that he's kicking someone while they're down, not that the person in question had boobage.

Mo | September 17, 2004, 4:27pm | #

You know atrios has the uncropped photo on his site. (sorry)

One of the atriotes made some comment about "What's with the free market solution to comment posting," as a jab at Reason, the comments were closed before I could respond that the flood and poor performance was a classic case of the tragedy of the commons.

ABC | September 17, 2004, 4:31pm | #

You know, I've actually met two different people in my life who looked just like me... it's very disconcerting.

Mo | September 17, 2004, 4:33pm | #

ABC,
One of my friends swore he saw my twin. The wierdest thing is the guy drove the exact same make, model and color car as I did and exited off the same freeway exit as I do to go home. My friend called me about it and I said I was at work at the time, it was spooky.

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 4:38pm | #

dhex,

Well, we can confirm that so far, his main source to corroborate his alibi will not do so (or at least won't do so "on the record"). Further, we also know that he was at the Convention (which places him at the "scene" of the incident). What we need to find out now is whether his story can be corroborated by someone else - in particular, anyone who witnessed him being "out late" Tuesday night, and anyone who witnessed his tardy exit from his room on Wednesday.

brooke | September 17, 2004, 4:41pm | #

Certainly kicking anyone while they're down is in poor taste--I in no way mean to defend it.

But some Bureaucrash protestors had a similar experience in Thailand, involving Act Up Paris. The Act Up group had scheduled a demonstration at which the Bureaucrash gang counter protested. The Act Up folks pushed me, very nearly to the ground, and are caught on video striking another female Bureaucrash member.

The lefty activists really are only in favor of free speech at their own convenience. (And in the RNC case, it isn't really a free speech issue--the RNC had rented the Garden and therefore had the right to control attendance. The girl who was kicked had no right to free speech, and the RNC had no obligation to provide her with a forum for her views.)

Is there any moral outrage directed at the Act Up Paris from any of the Democratic Underground folks? Come on! We're girls!! And they pushed us!

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 4:41pm | #

ABC,

Well it shouldn't be; our genetics can only create just so many unique faces, etc.

Atrios | September 17, 2004, 4:44pm | #

I think we can all agree that kicking someone when they're down on the ground being subdued by 3 secret service agents is a crappy thing to do, no matter what the political affiliation of those involved.

And, no, it doesn't mean all Republicans are thugs. It means this one is.

Guy | September 17, 2004, 4:45pm | #

You know, I've actually met two different people in my life who looked just like me... it's very disconcerting.

Weird, I've met exactly two people that look very much like me. One guy on the Metro was particularly creepy, almost a mirror. Same sunglasses, similar clothes.

dhex | September 17, 2004, 4:49pm | #

gary: i dunno. i'm not one much for internet dickwaving with legions of crazed hordes myself. besides, his alibi could lie, etc.

besides, he has to live with the knowledge of being a pussbucket wussmaster general. :)

brooke: "The lefty activists really are only in favor of free speech at their own convenience."

sadly, this is more or less true of every political group. i'm more disturbed, however, at the ridiculous gender bias displayed by people who claim to know better, somehow, somewhere.

equal work
equal pay
equal bruises

it's the only way this stuff works.

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 4:51pm | #

brooke,

The lefty activists really are only in favor of free speech at their own convenience.

*rolls eyes* Its only the evil leftists that are this way. :) You see, conservatives are never assholes, and they never think of free speech as something for their own convenience. :)

At Auburn University I had a number of experiences with conservatives over the LGBA group I belonged to, to realize that there is very little that seperates rabid leftist and rightist activists when it comes to bullshit.


The girl who was kicked had no right to free speech, and the RNC had no obligation to provide her with a forum for her views.

I don't think anyone argued that they did. So why exactly are you even bringing the issue up? Probably to deflect from the fact that one of your Republican ilk is an asshole.

thoreau | September 17, 2004, 4:57pm | #

I'm always amazed at the way that partisans will defend the indefensible if it comes from their side.

In that one respect libertarians are in fact superior to other factions: We mercilessly rip on "our own kind" all of the time. OK, it's not a matter of principle, just that we're prone to infighting and petty squabbles. Still, at least we can say that we don't cut any slack for people that we agree with ;)

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 5:01pm | #

Atrios. Indeed. It is, admittedly, fun to call any Bush supporter who acts like this "kid," a brownshirt, et al, but you are correct, that it isn't that he's a Republican, the issue is that he has so far, escaped indictment and prosecution for feloneous assault. In an alternate universe, were he were a Kerry supporter, kicking a member of the href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x828458">Parlock family, one could imagine the difference in media coverage and "outrage."

Not Laurie | September 17, 2004, 5:02pm | #

Fuck that shit -

I say just kick the shit out of him BECAUSE he was at the RNC - never mind the fact he kicked someone on the ground?

I hope this asswipe has this litte incident follow him around the rest of his life.

Fuck them all!

Ted | September 17, 2004, 5:05pm | #

Why am I not surprised that he tried to use a fraternity brother to fake an alibi?

David Ehrenstein | September 17, 2004, 5:06pm | #

"And, no, it doesn't mean all Republicans are thugs. It means this one is."

Nope. All Republicans are thugs. That's been clear for quite some time now.

Look at the way they got their hired goons to handcuff the grieving mother of a dead National Guardsman because she dared to protest in front of Xanax Queen Laura Bush.

brooke | September 17, 2004, 5:06pm | #

Actually Gary, whether or not Scott kicked the girl or not, I've always thought he was pretty much an asshole based on the accounts of people I know who have worked with him. I also came to that conclusion based on the stuff he's written. He's not at all of my ilk, thank you very much.

If you'll go and read some of the comments on the blog Scott posts on, which has been widely referenced, you'll see that much of the criticism towards him is indeed about free speech--why attack a harmless girl who just wanted to have her say, they are asking. What about her free speech? Well, she had no right to a say in that particular forum. I am pointing out that the free speech issue is a canard thrown out by the commenters on that blog. I would expect that a right-leaning protestor who snuck into the Dem convention would've gotten the exact same treatment and been equally deserving.

I'm just saying that lefty protestors, in my experience, seem to act as though they have some kind of monopoly on protest. Libertarian protestors realize that without lefty protestors, they'd have very little to counter-protest--so abridging the freedom of speech of lefty protestors is not at all in their interests. Pointing out the absurdity of their arguments is. I by no means intended to let right-wing crazies off the hook.

Todd Fletcher | September 17, 2004, 5:06pm | #

I'm mystified as to why anyone cares about this. Whoever did it is a grade A jerk, no question, but...so what? Someone somewhere right now is getting kicked while they're down, why don't you go find them and start another thread, eh Julian?

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 5:07pm | #

Atrios. Indeed. It is, admittedly, fun to call any Bush supporter who acts like this "kid," a brownshirt, et al, but you are correct, that it isn't that he's a Republican, the issue is that he has so far, escaped indictment and prosecution for feloneous assault. In an alternate universe, were he were a Kerry supporter, kicking a member of the Parlock family, one could imagine the difference in media coverage and "outrage."

dogbreath | September 17, 2004, 5:07pm | #

Come on! We're girls!! And they pushed us!

Sorry, dear. You didn't get kicked while three people were holding you down. Not good enough.

Go out and get kicked in the head by a democratic man and then come back and we will all howl at the outrage.

Zeds Pregnant | September 17, 2004, 5:08pm | #

I say.

Why aren't the freepers and little green and yellow football cowards clamoring for getting to the bottom of this kicking story, and punishing those responsible? I mean, they're all about fairness and justice and obedience to the law, and swift punishement for the guilty, aren't they?

Aren't they? Aren't they?

pigwiggle | September 17, 2004, 5:09pm | #

thoreau-
I second that. I'd kick any one of you while you were down. Who said "it's not enough that we succeed, others must fail" ?

anon | September 17, 2004, 5:11pm | #

Mr Robinson also posted this before the convention. It was on the Koch Fellows website yesterday, but gone today.


"Sick of Radical Protesters"
Koch Fellows,
My good friend from school, Dan Kline has a Protest Warrior Chapter. It is a great organization that opposes left-wing protests and demonstrations, and does a little counter protestation of its own.

Watching some of the clips and reading a little from the this link (and from elsewhere and my personal visits to some of these demonstrations), many people wouldn't believe some of the radical tactics that many of these maniacs employ. When the mob mentality sweeps over them, they are so full of hatred and a wreckless disregard for truth, reason, and couth.

Anyone who wants to is welcome to join our U of Penn chapter for the periodic updates. There are numerous other towns and colleges with chapters. You can browse by state. Just go to this link and click on "register". There are no obligations and if you decide to, I'm sure that you will be glad that you did. Pass this on the word to fellow anti-protesters....."
posted by Scott Robinson at 12:35 PM | 0 comments

David Ehrenstein | September 17, 2004, 5:11pm | #

" I by no means intended to let right-wing crazies off the hook."

Oh sure you do, Brooke. Do you think we were all born yesterday?

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 5:14pm | #

thoreau,

I agree (somewhat). As a regular reader of Atrios, I have seen them attack one of there own for being wrong, mean, or stupid on occasion. That said, here's the best slam sent to Mr. Robinson, along the same lines that you describe...

I seriously don't know what's worse -- the fact that you'd beat up some girl, or the fact that you "claim" to be part Libertarian/Randian while being an apologist for the GOP.

Get a clue, son -- what do the following things have in common?

Pre-emptive/interventionist/humanitarian war

The Police State -- laws against consentual crime: prostitution, gambling, euthanasia, drug use

The Drug War

Constitutional Amendments banning gay marriage, abortion, flag burning, and forcing mandatory school prayer

A government-engineered "trickle down" tax system that shifts the tax burden to the middle class.

Corporate and Farm Subsidy

No Child Left Behind

The Expansion of the Welfare State -- 1/2 trillion-dollar Prescription Drug Corporation Giveaway

Threatening to arrest people who buy drugs from Canada

Stripping the consumer of his or her purchasing power

The Patriot Act

Government funding of marriage promotion

Government funding of private religious charities

Deficity spending -- boosting GDP by funneling taxpayer money into unnecessary war

Using the military as an arm of multinational corporate interests

Closing the Borders

Giving the corporation human status

****Give up? Let me tell you. All of these things go against the tenets of classical liberalism, when imposed on a federal scale -- which they ARE.

Libertarianism 101: CEOs running the government, and making laws in favor of corporations is NOT the "free market." The marriage of corporations and government is fascism.

Your party, as you envision it, doesn't even exist. It is run by corrupt extremists who have contempt for the Bill of Rights, hate civil liberties and plan on using the government to funnel money to the ultra-wealthy, and dump the check on our kids. "Trickle Down," at best, (in conjunction with a war economy) temporarily spikes the GDP numbers -- and, at worst, is the finest in big government social engineering -- only right-wing style, instead of left-wing style.

You have the right to think whatever you want, but quit trying to masquerade as the "party of freedom," when you're actually populated and run by Christo-Corpo-Fascists.

You [guys] give the "free market" a bad name.

SNAFU | September 17, 2004, 5:17pm | #

There is something extra thug-like when a grown man decides to "let loose" and kick a woman. I've got two younger sisters, and spent a certain amount of time in high school being "big brother". So, my own personal sense of outrage has most definitely been stoked. And, Atrios is dead on, one Republican's bad behavior is not meant to mean all Republican's are such... important to make that distinction.

IMO, the harsh reaction to this incident is twofold- 1) the fact that said thug kicked another person when they were down. 2) the fact that he blatantly lied about it mere minutes from the act, on camera. Brutuality plus chickenshit denial and arrogance will not go unchecked.

That much is clear.

My take on the "denials" of the alleged perpetrator: it looks bad for him. The wagons are being circled. The clincher: The cropping of the photo at the NTU site... says it all really. If Robinson was NOT the person at the RNC, why crop it? If Robinson wants to clear his name, then speak up. Stand tall.

Jon H | September 17, 2004, 5:18pm | #

Now can we track down the middle-aged Republican wussy who was photographed at an event standing behind a protesting woman and yanking her hair?

It's on the net. I don't have a link.

pigwiggle | September 17, 2004, 5:20pm | #

Here is a little intolerance from the left. He made that poor little girl cry.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/040917/480/wvrs10109170018&e=7

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 5:20pm | #

brooke,

Actually Gary, whether or not Scott kicked the girl or not, I've always thought he was pretty much an asshole based on the accounts of people I know who have worked with him.

Ouch.

What about her free speech? Well, she had no right to a say in that particular forum.

I pointed that out yesterday on the original thread below.

I am pointing out that the free speech issue is a canard thrown out by the commenters on that blog.

Maybe so, but that hasn't been a subject of contention here. So I wonder why you bring it up here? Are you assuming that the posters here generally think that she had some free speech rights (as guaranteed by the Constitution) at the Convention? I don't recall anyone on this forum saying that she did.

I'm just saying that lefty protestors, in my experience, seem to act as though they have some kind of monopoly on protest.

Well, my experience with conservative protestors is that they act similarly. I am neither a conservative nor a liberal, but a libertarian.

I by no means intended to let right-wing crazies off the hook.

So did you go against Act-Up because you dislike gay people, or because you aren't in favor of Act-Up's policies?

Fair enough.

marceaumarceau | September 17, 2004, 5:22pm | #

In this information age, SOMEONE should be able to conclusively say who this person is. He wasn't wearing a disguise or anything. So, run a blog's "America's most wanted" and serve him up!

If it Is Scott R., there should be some recent pics of him that match better than the ones seen so far.

To date, I still think the earlier theory (son of a certain Dr.) looks like a better match.

Jon H | September 17, 2004, 5:23pm | #

"Here is a little intolerance from the left. He made that poor little girl cry."

Except the guy, Mr. Parlock, seems to get in the news all the time being the 'victim' of similar incidents.

It happened in 1996, and 2000, as well.

So either he's a particularly abrasive personality... or it's staged.

The "union guy" who supposedly tore up the little girl's poster looks an awful lot like Mr. Parlock.

Tom Frank | September 17, 2004, 5:24pm | #

Todd Fletcher:

Stories have legs when they speak to larger truths. Nobody would have cared about the stupid Al Gore stories unless they already thought that he was a superior creep. Similarly, people perceive Republicans as significantly closer to violent fascism than Democrats. In part this inevitably follows from the nationalistic/militaristic flag-waving demagoguery that they have adopted as a party platform, and in part from the rhetorical violence and hysteria that typified their response to the Clinton administration. By the time we saw arson, window-smashing, vandalism, hair-pulling and beating of restrained protestors we more or less knew it was going to happen. It's happened before.

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 5:24pm | #

Pigwiggle,

Too bad he's a professional victim, or you'd have a point. Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are such incidences, I just think its humorous that you picked that one.

Steve

Jon H | September 17, 2004, 5:27pm | #

Simulated dialogue with Scott Robinson:

Q: What do you think Jesus would do, if standing next to a female protester who'd been wrestled to the ground by the Secret Service?

Scott Robinson: I think Jesus would have planted a boot in the bitch's uterus. And again! And again! And again! And again, until she learns her place.

pigwiggle | September 17, 2004, 5:30pm | #

Steve-
With all the people clamoring to his defense it is hard to tell if the "union stooge" is his son. Easy formula, go to political rally A with sign B. Still, it doesn't excuse the behavior.

Anaxamander | September 17, 2004, 5:31pm | #

Brooke - speaking as a woman, I don't ask for better treatment than men. You shouldn't have been pushed because that's obnoxious, not because you're a girl. We point out this Scott Robinson jerk because the right has been pointing out leftie "violence" for decades while pretending that they would never stoop to such. Robinson himself decried the bitterness in politics. So he's a snotty little hypocrite. And that's worth pointing out. And he ought to own it, but he's a liar, too. Like preznit, like acolyte.

Dan | September 17, 2004, 5:31pm | #

I'm always amazed at the way that partisans will defend the indefensible if it comes from their side

Has anyone actually defended what this guy did?

On the other hand:

he has so far, escaped indictment and prosecution for feloneous assault

I seriously doubt you could get felony charges to stick.

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 5:34pm | #

Pigwiggle,

No it doesn't and you are right. If I were to go to a Bush rally with a anti-Dubya sign or shirt, I would expect to be harrassed, just like if I wore a Chief's jersey at a Bronco's game. Actually, scratch that. Football fans are more reasonable and polite (most of the time, despite alcohol) than political partisans. Especially the uber-fanatical Bush supporters -- who ironically enough were all small-government supporters during the Clinton Administration. Funny, that.

Steve

:-

Tom Frank | September 17, 2004, 5:35pm | #

Still, it doesn't excuse the behavior.

If by that you mean that nothing excuses repeatedly staging attacks so that you can play a victim for partisan benefit, yes.

pigwiggle | September 17, 2004, 5:40pm | #

Tom-
No, I don't think this was his son. Lets say it was; why are all of these self proclaimed compasionates sitting there like doorknobs?

kc | September 17, 2004, 5:42pm | #

The girl who was kicked had no right to free speech, and the RNC had no obligation to provide her with a forum for her views.)

Gee, when you put it that way, kicking the snot out of her seems like perfectly reasonable response.

R C Dean | September 17, 2004, 5:43pm | #

Tom - any proof that the attacks were staged? It has happened to this Parlock guy three times, but on the other hand he does have a habit of counterprotesting at Dem events.

I don't find it implausible at all that counterprotestors regularly get roughed up, regardless of who they are protesting.

I will say, from personal experience, that if you are ever at a political event espousing a position opposed by the local labor union, you would be wise to steer clear of beefy men wearing labor colors.

mdhatter | September 17, 2004, 5:45pm | #

All through college (30K+ student State school) people kept coming up to me and calling me "Jake", literally maybe twice a month it would happen.

I started playing along eventually, then started sending the message back by his friends that he was a good looking man.


As for kicking someone, it's not that it was a woman, or even that she was on the ground, it's that other people were forcibly holding her in place while he kicked her, and THAT ain't fair.

I think she should press charges, and WE should let the justice system take care of it.

brooke | September 17, 2004, 5:47pm | #

Uh, I'm a libertarian too, Gary. I'm frankly surprised at your defensiveness about what I wrote.

On libertarian grounds, Bureaucrash opposed Act Up Paris's protests at the 2004 AIDS Conference--they were demanding that patents be broken and drugs and research provided for free. The particular event we were crashing was a demonstration they held where they demanded of several pharmaceutical execs to agree to not enforce their patents on AIDS drugs in developing countries (where the bulk of the AIDS cases have nothing to do with gay people).

I agree that when it comes to craziness, both left and right aren't far apart. But in terms of manistream protestors, I've always felt that the lefty ones had a mindest that their demonstrations are superior and more legitimate than those of right wing protestors. Maybe I'm reading that wrong, but as a fairly objective observer, it's been my experience. Perhaps the true anarchists are one exception to this, but there seem to be very few true anarchists these days, and more kids wearing black and covering their faces with bandanas because it looks cool.

And I wasn't bringing up free speech because it was a point of contention here, by the way. I noticed that you had dealt with it yesterday. I brought it up because it is an issue elsewhere in the blogosphere and I thought the Reason blog would get more insightful and balanced commentary on the matter than it received anywhere else. Sorry for trying to discuss something in this forum without running it by you first.

Helios | September 17, 2004, 5:47pm | #

"The lefty activists really are only in favor of free speech at their own convenience. (And in the RNC case, it isn't really a free speech issue--the RNC had rented the Garden and therefore had the right to control attendance. The girl who was kicked had no right to free speech, and the RNC had no obligation to provide her with a forum for her views." -Brooke

I respectfully beg to differ.
Madison Square Garden is located in the United States of America, the Constitution of which, at this date, still does in fact guarantee the Right of Free Speech.

Furthermore, kicking anyone while they are down is universally regarded as mere cowardice.

Lastly, if one wishes to control attendance, one can certainly find any number of civilized, humane, and lawful ways to do so, such as politely but firmly escorting the person who's attendance one wishes to control to the door.

Let's talk turkey, shall we? The overwhelming majority of Republicans in the US are fine, law abiding Gentlepeople, and the same goes for the Democrats.

That being said, for every instance where some form of cheap unamerican thuggery is perpetrated by a private Democratic citizen, there are in actual fact at least 10 committed by their Republican counterparts. This is not exactly what any rational person would call a fair situation.

What is happening here on a National scale is that the scrappy little Democratic kid, after all this time, has simply had enough, and is finally, in his long-suffering anger, standing up to the chronic schoolyard Bully, and poping him a good one right on the Kisser.

It is interesting to note the disingenuous Republican "outrage" at this turn of events; the
"activist" Republicans relish any opportunity to dish it out, but in the very rare instance when the tables are turned on them in their own game, they just can't take it at all.

A cheap shot is a cheap shot. It's wrong, it's unfair, and it's Unamerican.

On another level, this really goes to the heart of much more important issues with extremely serious consequences for all of us regardless of our political orientation.

Bush, Cheney, Rove, and all the other Republican "leaders" complicit in these tactics, although they promised the exact opposite, have succeeded in 4 years in effectively polarizing the American Citizenry to a degree not seen in this country since the Civil War.

This last is no coincidence, it is in fact a key element in their ongoing agenda to divide and conquer our Nation, our People, and our vast resources for their own personal gain.

This is how they do it.

They care nothing about our actual well-being and real "family values", what they care about is power and money, in roughly that order.

As long as they can emotionalize the debate, they can obscure and distort their actual policys; because they have the entire Citizenry wound up in a crippling partisan rage, the People are less likely to think clearly, and in this poisonous atmosphere the human tendency is to focus not on the broader issues, but on narrow, immediate, emotional "fights".

When the People take a breath to look around, what do they find?

Federal agents in their librarys, multi-trillion dollar debt, ever-downward spiralling wars, devastating reductions in healthcare and overall quality of life, and much to their dismay, they find themselves widely disliked and often despised by former friends in the International community who were, only 4 years ago, close and valued associates, staunch allies, and often enthusiastic supporters.

We get what we vote for. Oh, that's right, we did not actually vote for all this the last time around.

This time, we must do better.

TWC | September 17, 2004, 5:48pm | #

Went to a McGovern (yes, I'm that old) rally in LA to annoy the lefties way back when. A McGovern fan yanked my protest sign out of my hands. I belted him very hard and he flew backwards into the crowd. He gave me the sign back.

Later I was accosted by another gentleman (different issue) and we came to blows (he started it). About 3.3 seconds later several plainclothes secret service agents had us seperated and escorted off the premises. Good thing, too, because I think he coulda taken me.

At no time while being escorted off the premises by the secret service did anyone kick me.

Voted for Hospers later that year...

ryan b | September 17, 2004, 5:51pm | #

This is bad, but some leftist did it too once! Also, they disagree with me on some other issue! So no big deal! /pro-GOP "libertarian".

Christ, grow up. You get caught assaulting someone, you pay the price. Doesn't matter if you're leftwit, rightard or anti-gay-marriage-pro-war-on-drugs "libertarian."

dak | September 17, 2004, 5:52pm | #

i'm more disturbed, however, at the ridiculous gender bias displayed by people who claim to know better, somehow, somewhere.

What in the flying f**k does "equal rights" have to do with "equal physical stature"?! Are you trying to argue that women have the right to be kicked, just like men?!

Unless the protestor happened to be a female bodybuilder, there is a very high probability that the guy that kicked her was considerably larger and more muscular. That it wouldn't have been a fair fight even if all other things had been equal definitely does make it worse. Or are you really arguing that it's okay to attack someone that's much smaller than you, so long as they're not restrained? Or that it's just as okay if I attack a slight person that weighs 120 pounds as it would be if I attacked a muscle-bound person weighing 220 pounds?

pigwiggle | September 17, 2004, 5:53pm | #

Helios-
"That being said, for every instance where some form of cheap unamerican thuggery is perpetrated by a private Democratic citizen, there are in actual fact at least 10 committed by their Republican counterparts. This is not exactly what any rational person would call a fair situation."

Are you fucking high? In actual fact you have no idea what the ratio of thuggery by either faction is. Please.

rea | September 17, 2004, 5:58pm | #

"The lefty activists really are only in favor of free speech at their own convenience."

I'm not sure that ACT-UP counts as lefties--they're focused on a single issue, and a particular set of tactics. Rather than being a part of the right or the left, they go their own way. Liberal Democratic politicians have been their targets, too:

http://www.actupny.org/actions/gorezaps.html

thoreau | September 17, 2004, 6:08pm | #

I have no interest in figuring out whether the left or right has more thugs. I'm confident of 4 things:

1) Most people on either side are decent and non-thuggish. Even most partisans are decent people.
2) Nonetheless, the partisans on both sides seem to be obsessed with the number of thugs on the other side while sometimes minimizing the number of thugs on their own side.
3) The actions of thugs on either side have no bearing on the validity of either side's ideas.
4) We libertarians are much less likely to turn a blind eye to our own wackos, due to our propensity for infighting and bickering. We're not any more principled, we're just ornrier! ;)

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 6:09pm | #

brooke,

I guess I didn't realize I was being defensive; many apologies if I appeared to be acting that way; it was not my intention.

On libertarian grounds, Bureaucrash opposed Act Up Paris's protests at the 2004 AIDS Conference--they were demanding that patents be broken and drugs and research provided for free.

Ok; well, I think some reforms of patent law are required, same with copyright law (especially copyright law).

The particular event we were crashing was a demonstration they held where they demanded of several pharmaceutical execs to agree to not enforce their patents on AIDS drugs in developing countries (where the bulk of the AIDS cases have nothing to do with gay people).

Well, see, as long as they don't ask the government to coerce them to do so, I've no problem with them asking them not to enforce their patents.

Sorry for trying to discuss something in this forum without running it by you first.

Hey, no problem. :)

Onceler | September 17, 2004, 6:20pm | #

Well, in terms of right vs. left-wing protests, the left usually has a reason to think theirs are superior...

First of all, when was the last time you saw a real (as in 10,000 or more people) right-wing protest? Second, the Seattle protests were against a Clinton policy, so, are those protestors right or left wing according to your logic? Third, sounds like you've never been to a women's health clinic. People will literally attack you, scream in your face, spit on you, call you a murderer, harass you nonstop. I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever in my life witnessed such reprehensible behavior from a group of left-wingers as that. Never, anywhere, there is NO COMPARABLE example on the left.

Now, what were you saying?

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 6:27pm | #

rea,

Well, Act-UP has fairly lefty positions, however, you are right, they are more than willing to go after a Democrat.

JDM | September 17, 2004, 6:34pm | #

"there are in actual fact at least 10 committed by their Republican counterparts"

Thank God you pointed out that it was an *actual* fact, otherwise people might think you were just making things up.

Kevin Carson | September 17, 2004, 6:41pm | #

"Your party, as you envision it, doesn't even exist."

I think that's true of both major parties. The rank and file of both parties, working people in Main Street America, have pretty much the same populist values, and the same resentment of elites who get a free ride. They want more control over their own lives, instead of having decisions made for them by suits a thousand miles away.

The Demos use populist rhetoric to appeal to quite justifiable public resentment of corporate welfare and crony capitalism; the GOP, likewise, uses fake populist rhetoric about "Hollywood" and "trial lawyers," and the increasing tax burden on workers. Both parties, in practice, continue to augment the corporate state and increase the power of Big Government and Big Business establishment over our lives.

Phil | September 17, 2004, 6:43pm | #

I respectfully beg to differ.
Madison Square Garden is located in the United States of America, the Constitution of which, at this date, still does in fact guarantee the Right of Free Speech.

So you can just run out on the court and do whatever you want at a Knicks game, too? Your house is located in the United States -- can I come into it and do and say whatever I want?

Tom Frank | September 17, 2004, 7:00pm | #

The GOP has decided to coopt nationalism and militarism as its winning strategy. Melding party with state suggests that opposition is treasonous. For christs sake, we already saw naked rhetoric saying precisely that in 2002. By now we take it for granted. When a party decides to adopt that tactic violence always follows.

In this particular election season, the rightwing owns violence and criminal acts of intimidation. If anybody has an example of similar behavior by Democrats other than that one headlock guy and a Republican with a history of victimizing himself, I'd be more than happy to be wrong.

Mr. Murder | September 17, 2004, 7:01pm | #

The frist thing to highlight is tough boy's words and attempts at projectionism. Very much Goebblesspeak in every since of the word, and upon examination the same behavior and people he villifies he acts out against.

Go ahead Squat Robinson, kick your oedipal counterpart.

The scene from animal house, the paddle and the pet goat, and your fearless codpiece leader's story of legend on his most famous day. You are proof that such conditioning cannot be broken. It simply resurfaces when at underduress or exposed to stress...

If you're so damned libertarian donate to Joe Lie-berman. He needs reinforcement somewhere, and most common sense Dems do not claim him.


Exactly how many McGovern supporters were even allowed to Nixon rallies? Thanks for ignoring the tactics your idols used and thrived upon... those who forget the past are condemned to vote republiclown.

brett | September 17, 2004, 7:04pm | #

Fuck you, Sanchez, for this cyber-lynching. What the hell business is it of yours? And is this what your platform here is for?

JDM | September 17, 2004, 7:08pm | #

"In this particular election season, the rightwing owns violence and criminal acts of intimidation."

You see? You forgot state that they *actually* own violence and criminal acts of intimidation, so people may think you have no rational basis for saying this. Your post may even be mistaken for non-factual ranting.

Todd Fletcher | September 17, 2004, 7:09pm | #

Tom Frank,
"Similarly, people perceive Republicans as significantly closer to violent fascism than Democrats."

Oh they do? Because I've spoken to "people" too and I never got that impression. The nice person:jerk ratio seems pretty much the same on both sides in my experience.

Is this the kind of garbage that gets posted at liberal sites? What a bore.

Peter K. | September 17, 2004, 7:11pm | #

the video link does not work

skippy | September 17, 2004, 7:25pm | #

You know, I've actually met two different people in my life who looked just like me... it's very disconcerting.

i've met two people who looked just like you, too.

weird.

Jorge W Arbusto | September 17, 2004, 7:26pm | #

You people are an incredible accumulation of what the late great Bill Hicks would call capitalist scum-fucks. Have fun with your lalafallujah fascist fantasy.
And, by the way, the neo-con bush bunch did 9/11, you can bet the corporate farm on it.

Mo | September 17, 2004, 7:27pm | #

I guess this is the flip side of the RNC comment board.

Yikes.

JDM | September 17, 2004, 7:31pm | #

Mo,

Haven't you ever read Democratic Underground? It's a real hoot. Much worse than these Atrios visitors.

I strongly suspect some of these people write for Mother jones.

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 7:31pm | #

Brett,

I take it that one, you didn't watch the video, or two, you approved of what that jackass did? And I dare say a "cyber-lynching," IS NOT THE SAME THING AS A REAL LYNCHING! And you are probably a freaking hypocrite since if the political affiliation were reversed you'd be be tying gas soaked rags around big sticks and going to Home Depot to purchase a pitchfork. There, I feel better.

Steve

kmw | September 17, 2004, 7:34pm | #

You people are an incredible accumulation of what the late great Bill Hicks would call capitalist scum-fucks. Have fun with your lalafallujah fascist fantasy.Comment by: Jorge W Arbusto at September 17, 2004 07:26 PM

Wow, we're getting some Commies here now! This is almost as much fun as a mosh pit at a Pearl Jam concert circa 1992

David Ehrenstein | September 17, 2004, 7:41pm | #

"On libertarian grounds, Bureaucrash opposed Act Up Paris's protests at the 2004 AIDS Conference--they were demanding that patents be broken and drugs and research provided for free."

How rude! Don't they know that profits are more important than people?

" The particular event we were crashing was a demonstration they held where they demanded of several pharmaceutical execs to agree to not enforce their patents on AIDS drugs in developing countries (where the bulk of the AIDS cases have nothing to do with gay people)."

I'll bet you've got a personally autographed copy of The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, right Brooke?

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 7:50pm | #

kmw,

Opposing unbridled capitalism (especially corp-welfare) does not automatically make one a communist no more than opposing excessive taxation make you a libertarian. Just saying.

And Bush “allowing through neglect,” 9/11 ain’t that far fetched as you think.

Steve

patriotboy | September 17, 2004, 8:04pm | #

While it's true that not all Republicans are thugs, there is a fairly large element within the mainstream conservative community who believe violence in the pursuit of ideology is no vice. Their anger is fueled by Coulter, Malkin, Horowitz and the other stars of the Young Republican speaking circuit.

Len | September 17, 2004, 8:07pm | #

You know, I've actually met two different people in my life who looked just like me... it's very disconcerting.

They didn't happen to also look like memos obtained by CBS, did they? Because that would be just too weird.

Julian Sanchez | September 17, 2004, 8:08pm | #

Brett-
Err, what? It's my business because it was news (I'm not like, the first one to mention this case), because I'm a journalist, and because I happened to get the tip. So, yeah... that's exactly what my platform is for. As for "lynching"... I've reported something I was hearing from a bunch of sources that seemed credible. I reported Scott's counterclaim too, and my attempt to verify it; I'll report on further such attempts if he wants to give me any other avenues to try. If he can convince his friend to give me a corroborating quote I can print, I'll happily print it, either with a name or anonymously. Plenty of people seem to have concluded it's him and posted some angry comments--but if angry comments on a weblog constitute a lynching, I get "cyberlynched" all the time.

Dan | September 17, 2004, 8:14pm | #

people perceive Republicans as significantly closer to violent fascism than Democrats.

Those people have presumably never been to a union rally or a "peace" march.

JDM | September 17, 2004, 8:14pm | #

"While it's true that not all Republicans are thugs"

"Not all," eh? Are you sure you aren't being too generous here?

"there is a fairly large element within the mainstream conservative community who believe violence in the pursuit of ideology is no vice."

Again, is this an *actual* element? Because if not, someone may get the mistaken impression that you are just voicing your prejudices, or paranoid fantasies.

brett | September 17, 2004, 8:15pm | #

You're a public figure. You invite criticism. You post here under your real name; you have a public presence on the Web. He doesn't, or didn't, until you came along.

This has nothing to do with what he did or didn't do. This poor sack now is subject to harassment from Atrios-types, because you felt like you had to use this blog to secure justice for the protester who was allegedly assaulted. It's not your place; that's what the police are for. This is vigilante justice, pure and simple. This is a very visible blog, and by posting this guy's name, you incited people to, at the least, invade his privacy. Hopefully it doesn't go beyond that.

You are not the law. There's nothing illegal in what you did, and there very well might have been something illegal in what he did; but you have no right to conclude that he's guilty and release the lefty hounds on him.

This is news? Really? You don't think this happens every day, on both sides of the equation? What about the little girl whose Bush-Cheney sign was ripped up? I don't see any posts from you on that one.

I'm a subscriber; I like your magazine. But this is absolute bullshit.

Mo | September 17, 2004, 8:18pm | #

JDM,
That's why I tend to avoid sites like DU and FR. I prefer the more collegial environs of Reason's boards. Even the rudest posters here don't hold a candle to the guys that just pop in. True of wingnuts on both sides. Heck, these guys make JB look like Ghandi.

"Wingnuts: Making the French look polite since 1974"

patriotboy | September 17, 2004, 8:23pm | #

Those people have presumably never been to a union rally or a "peace" march.

I've been to both, many times. I never saw any violence. In fact, the brotherhood (siblinghood?}I've felt rivals, if not surpasses, that of the church services I've attended. If it wasn't for the people driving by yelling threats at us, I'd describe the events as love-ins.

Tom Frank | September 17, 2004, 8:25pm | #

Funny, lots of criticism of paragraph two and not a mention of paragraph one. Here's a syllogism to make it more digestible:

* Parties who co-opt nationalism and militarism generally go on to suggest that dissent is treasonous.

* When members of a party suggest that dissent is treasonous violence usually follows. Plenty of historical precedent.

* The GOP began its dissent-is-treason-and-Democrats-dissent-therefore-Democrats-are-treasonous campaign in earnest around 2002.

* Therefore, people quite reasonably expected violent behavior to follow.

Whether "jerks" exist is irrelevant. I ran an environmentalist group and I can tell you about jerks. Plenty of proto-fascism in the activist fringe, which is why I dropped it. The question is whether one party has put itself in a rhetorical position that inevitably ends in violence.

Brian Ritzel | September 17, 2004, 8:32pm | #

"On libertarian grounds, Bureaucrash opposed Act Up Paris's protests at the 2004 AIDS Conference--they were demanding that patents be broken and drugs and research provided for free. The particular event we were crashing was a demonstration they held where they demanded of several pharmaceutical execs to agree to not enforce their patents on AIDS drugs in developing countries (where the bulk of the AIDS cases have nothing to do with gay people)."

So, you are against a private group that was using protests as a tactic to negotiate favorable terms with another private group? And you have the nerve to insist that your opposition to this negotiation between two private parties is grounded in your libertarian beliefs? LOL!

Your true intent is revealed by your parenthetical, which is totally beside the point, but for some reason you deem relevent.

This is precisely why I loathe so-called Libertarians... the vast majority are simply rightwing loons that camoflage their true feelings in libertarian rhet.

Continuing to roam Reason with my latern in hand....

michael | September 17, 2004, 8:35pm | #

ripping on people in reverse order:

JDM wrote: Haven't you ever read Democratic Underground? It's a real hoot. Much worse than these Atrios visitors.

I strongly suspect some of these people write for Mother jones.

Indeed. Who let all this rifraff into the room! Well, now you've told them...


Brooke wrote: Sorry for trying to discuss something in this forum without running it by you first.

to which Gary says Hey, no problem. :)

Jesus Gary why'd you cave? Well, let me say it: Brooke: Shut the fuck up. You weren't getting smacked down for bringing in new points; you were getting smacked down for making no fucking sense:

you wrote: The lefty activists really are only in favor of free speech at their own convenience. [totally evidence-free, and irrelevant to boot!] (And in the RNC case, it isn't really a free speech issue--the RNC had rented the Garden and therefore had the right to control attendance. The girl who was kicked had no right to free speech, and the RNC had no obligation to provide her with a forum for her views."

a) this is legally true, but of course it's legalistic crap. The conventions are supposed to be pageants of "democracy". It's a Greek word. Look it up.

b) In any case, it's beyond irrelevant. Unless of course you believe that renting the hall gives the ruling class party carte blanche for assault. (or to use Phil's clever analogy, John Starks or whatever stiff the Knicks have now can beat the shit out of Spike Lee whenever he gets too loud)...

But the real whopper of the evening is on Thoreau's tangential: We libertarians are much less likely to turn a blind eye to our own wackos, due to our propensity for infighting and bickering. We're not any more principled, we're just ornrier! ;)

Yes, Thoreau, because Lord knows the Left, or even liberals (there is a difference you know, people) have no centuries-old history of ripping each other to shreds--often quite literally.

Man you Randheads can be a sheltered bunch.

m

SM | September 17, 2004, 8:46pm | #

Note to self : Do not check back before tuesday. Hit & Run should be disinfected by then.

DanInAlabama | September 17, 2004, 8:59pm | #

"What about the little girl whose Bush-Cheney sign was ripped up? I don't see any posts from you on that one."

Again, as already mentioned twice in this thread, with pictures:
http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/2004/09/bogus-assault-father-freeper-of-year.html

Steve in CO | September 17, 2004, 9:14pm | #

Thanks Dan, I posted that as well, but of course, when is trying to make an argument despite evidence, it pays to ignore countervailing argument.

:-)

PS Brett, I can't believe you actually believe what you wrote. The "kicker," is clearly deserving some derision, Lord knows, people who have done much less reprehensible things have been "cyber-lynched," for MUCH LESS.

Steve

johnL | September 17, 2004, 9:16pm | #

There are a couple of things we should all learn from this.

1 - If you are going to hit someone, really hit them. I don't care if it's a punch or a kick or a swing of a bat, put your body into it and give it some follow through. Don't "punch like a girl".
2 - Don't hit anyone if you won't be able to explain it to your dad later.
3 - Especially at a news event.

Great work Julian.

Todd Fletcher | September 17, 2004, 9:33pm | #

Tom Frank, T
Thanks for the clarification. Let me see if I have this right: one Republican loon kicks some other Democratic loon, and therefore the Republicans are Nazis.

Republcans can of course resort to dirty tricks. It's another name for politics. Shocking revelation: Democrats do it too.

Can someone please fumigate this thread?

Lindsay Beyerstein | September 17, 2004, 9:34pm | #

It is fun, however, to hear people i know who are decidedly of the liberal mindset tossing "and he kicked a girl no less!" onto the woodpile. like, fuck guys...the whole point is that he's kicking someone while they're down, not that the person in question had boobage.

OTOH, it's equally fun to hear about XY on XX kicking where the XY is representing the party of "traditional values."

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 9:50pm | #

Todd Fletcher,

Since this thread has already been hi-jacked...

Speaking of odd things, Justin Raimondo has an article featured on a racist website:

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/index.php

Bill | September 17, 2004, 9:51pm | #

The kicker is an asshole and the kickee is a trespasser. He should be prosecuted for assault and she should be prosecuted for trespassing. He's an asshole and she's ...

I can't believe how these threads have generated so many posts. Millions die the world over and people get so worked up about a little conflict between two political opponents. Maybe we can just get rid of war and replace it with sign-tearing and kicking. Face it folks, this is small potatoes. If the Dems and Reps start shooting at each other, then I'll worry.

Also, Helios is a fool. He's just another idiot who doesn't have a clue about the constitution. He's probably one of those "living document" assholes. He said:

"Madison Square Garden is located in the United States of America, the Constitution of which, at this date, still does in fact guarantee the Right of Free Speech."

The first amendment does not guarantee free speech. The first amendment prohibits the government from making laws that prevent speech. The prohibition has nothing to do with private parties. For example, if a restaurant owner fires a waiter for calling a customer an asshole, he's well within his rights. On the other hand, if I want to go outside and yell "Bush is an asshole," the government has no right to stop me. Get a grip, fuckhead. Learn to read and read the constitution.

Douglas Fletcher | September 17, 2004, 9:52pm | #

So this is the face of the coming Sanchez Police State. Bizarre.

John Hood | September 17, 2004, 9:53pm | #

I could have sworn I just felt spittle hitting my face.

Yes, the disinfectant may take a while. Better come back Wednesday.

rea | September 17, 2004, 10:20pm | #

"Well, Act-UP has fairly lefty positions"

Gary Gunnels: in what sense? If they have a position at all on anything other than AIDS-related issues, I can't think of an example.

anon | September 17, 2004, 10:22pm | #

The Kicker felt that, in the company he was in, the kicking would be perfectly acceptable, even praiseworthy. That's the scary part. Think how he'd behave in an alley.

JDM | September 17, 2004, 10:24pm | #

"blah blah blah, Therefore, people quite reasonably expected violent behavior to follow."

So your inassailable tower of logic predicted this weiner delivering a sissy kick to a girl knocked to the ground while protesting at the RNC. Congratulations. Maybe after another decade of careful thought and contemplation you'll be able to forsee a purse snatcher outside a Moonies rally. Let the cops in on it ahead of time next time though, OK? Save Julian the trouble of having to root him out.

"Indeed. Who let all this rifraff into the room! Well, now you've told them..."

I admit I don't get why this constitutes "ripping." I guess you win.

Gary Gunnels | September 17, 2004, 10:36pm | #

rea,

Universal health care is one position they take.

anna | September 17, 2004, 10:45pm | #

ah, gotta love the google cache. here is the kicker's post on the koch website mentioned waaaay upthread.

just visiting the links he posts sends shivers down my spine. scary stuff.

Brian Cook | September 17, 2004, 11:08pm | #

Sweet Fancy Moses. I am a long time lurker and often have I rolled my eyes at the angry fuck-headedness of various Reason posters. I retract all said eye-rolls after seeing... well, whatever the hell this thread is.

Julian, I have to agree with Brett, although less strenously. You've got a two pictures which show what may be one person and several people who emailed you *after* you posted the two pics saying it's him. Dan Rather might have run with it, but I think you didn't do due diligence here before unleashing *these* people on a potentially innocent man.

Now if you'll excuse me, since I believe in individual liberty I've got some nuns to beat the shit out of.

spur | September 17, 2004, 11:27pm | #

the reason so many leftists are on here -- and welcome btw -- take time to read some of the great articles -- is that this has been cross-posted on A LOT of lefty/anarchist blogs and websites, mailing lists, etc.

There is no reason to prosecute the guy -- if he goes to school at UPenn in Philly he's gonna have some very unpleasant experiences in the next few days and weeks -- he should really consider transfering schools.

On the bureaucrash protest -- I mean really -- there are a lot of things to protest and counterprotest -- but ACT-UP -- they may be wrong but it should be way down on the priorities list.

How about 1,027 dead US military in Iraq. How about 10-30k dead Iraqi civilains in Iraq since the war was deemed over by Bush? 52 more dead today.

I find it enraging that more people are dying in Iraq on a daily, weekly, monthly basis in Iraq under US oocupation than even Saddam managed to off.

lefty libertarian who reads counterpunch as often as reason,
spur

Rick Perlstein | September 17, 2004, 11:38pm | #

TWC, shoot me an email. I'd like to interview you for a new book I'm doing that involves the 1972 election.

RP

Ellen Lincourt | September 17, 2004, 11:56pm | #

Like he would say it was him? First, the person on the video immediately tried to deny his actions. Second, if Mr. Robinson was the person admitting to ANYONE that it was him would immediately convict him if legal charges are brought against him. Moreover, this young man has a huge threat to his academic career right now. His behavior at the RNC was illegal and immoral. He could be asked to leave UPenn. Finally, if he admitted he was the person who kicked the protester the social ramifications would be enormous.

So, I'm sorry.. but if it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, sounds like a duck.. it probably is a duck. Mr. Robinson's denials is his only hope of avoiding total legal, social and academic ruin. I simply cannot take them seriously.

Brian Cook | September 18, 2004, 12:05am | #

Ellen, if you made me guess yes or no on the guy's guilt, I'd say yes. But it would still be a guess, just like everyone else's. There's nothing approaching proof here and, as you mention, it could seriously damage the guy's life. Fair enough if you're certain. This does not constitute certainty.

Ellen Lincourt | September 18, 2004, 12:16am | #

Brian,

Physical identification has long been a strong factor in any legal conviction. In addition, we have motive, opportunity and physical identification. Robinson's own alibi refuses to cooberate his whereabouts. Fianlly, we have photodocumentary of the crime itself. By the standard of just about any court, we have enough for a conviction (but, of course, we also seem to have people who are mounting an OJ defense for this young man - it could be his identical twin seperated at birth!).

harold | September 18, 2004, 12:49am | #

It may be a crime to physically assault or rob someone, but when my son (age 14) was assaulted and robbed I found out that the victim (not onlooker or parent) has to come in and make the formal complaint for the police to pursue it.

That is our system. Otherwise you might just as well have anonymous denunciations.

Ellen Lincourt | September 18, 2004, 12:54am | #

Actually, there are many states where there are laws on the book that allow the state to prosecute without a complaint from the victim. I have to wonder what state you live in and how they handle domestic violence cases where the victim refuses to cooperate? There are 51 different legal codes in the US (I'm counting the District of Columbia, but you could also add in Puerto Rico and a few other of our protectorates). I don't think you have all the facts concerning the laws. I don't precisely know the NY code either, but since I know they prosecute DV without the cooperation of the victim frequently there is a strong possibility that that state's code would allow the DA to prosecute without a complaint from the victim. In that case the state of NYC would be the victim.

aaron | September 18, 2004, 12:56am | #

Thanks, Atridiots, for ruining what used to be a civil,interesting comments site.

High Tech Lynching | September 18, 2004, 1:05am | #

Who needs courts when the Ellen Lincourt standard of proof is met? Let the lynching commence! (btw Atrios has the picture posted on his website)

Ellen Lincourt | September 18, 2004, 1:15am | #

Question High Tech Lynching are you perhaps Scott, one of his friends or maybe a frat brother?

I am applying logic to his denials. They can be entirely dismissed as being self-serving. Any good lawyer would pick them to shreds, especially in light that his "alibi" witness refuses to cooberate his whereabouts. So, we are all supposed to suspend our ability to rationally look at the evidence and dismiss it? I see you too are going to subject us all to an OJ defense. Until he admits his guilt we should all say he's innocent? You've got to be kidding?!

If I was his lawyer (and by the way, there is a lawyer in Carlisle PA, Scott's hometown, with the last name Robinson. I wonder if it is his dad?), I would tell him to deny it. Unless he's under oath it doesn't legally matter if he denies it was him. So, telling anyone it wasn't him has the same value as spitting on the ground. Now telling someone it was him, would be extremely dangerous to him. His admission to another would be almost as good as a signed confession. His denial in light of the photographic evidence, the character witnesses, his motive and his opportunity are worthless.

Paul | September 18, 2004, 1:37am | #

That tee-shirt he was wearing... I'd could swear it was in a proportional font...

Ellen Lincourt | September 18, 2004, 1:43am | #

By the way, let's discuss for a moment what the standard for an unbiased jury member is. We do not ask for jury members to be entirely ignorant of the case. In the US, we ask only that our jury members be able to put aside what they have heard outside of the courtroom and to judge based only upon the evidence presented in the court. Therefore, if Mr. Robinson goes to court on this event, I'm sure he will get a fair jury.

As to the burden of proof, we do not ask that a conviction be made beyond ANY and ALL doubt, but rather for conviction to be only on the basis of being beyond a REASONABLE doubt. In short, sure aliens may have come down and taken control of Scott's body or his mother may have given birth to two identical twins and one was taken by the government at birth, but those are not REASONABLE doubts. As I've stated above, we have physical identification including a video tape of the crime, character witnesses all stating that this is well within Mr. Robinson's character, we have opportunity and motive and his own witness refuses to cooberate his alibi. The only contrary evidence to date is Mr. Robinson's denial which is most likely self-serving.

I think many of you may have been watching too much Perry Mason or some such shows. Rarely do we ever get a confession.

Helios | September 18, 2004, 2:02am | #

"Thanks, Atridiots, for ruining what used to be a civil,interesting comments site."

I think you should thank the Kicker and the actual "values" encouraged by the "Leaders" of his Party for that, don't you?

After all, we are in an election cycle, and this thread was originated to discuss that particular topic, no?

Your complaint strikes me as the Kicker Affair equivalent of the "Democrat lefties are terrorists responsible for 9/11" angle, but that dog just won't hunt.

As far as actual "civility", Sir, may I kindly offer you another tall, invigorating glass of that delicious, crisp, refreshing Kool-Aid from the pitcher sitting on the table in the corner over there?

Helios | September 18, 2004, 2:19am | #

Oh, and Bill, the ad hominem insult stuff you so fluently apply under the right of Free Speech that you yourself enjoy in our Freedom-loving, tolerant, and fair Republic? Even a lawyer would have to agree it is very uncivil, n'est ce pas?

Paul | September 18, 2004, 2:36am | #

In short, sure aliens may have come down and taken control of Scott's body or his mother may have given birth to two identical twins and one was taken by the government at birth, but those are not REASONABLE doubts.

I disagree completely. After looking at Mr. Robinson, I'm quite sure that that aliens did come down, impregnate his mother leading to her giving birth to identical twins, one of which was taken by the government.

Paul

Todd Fletcher | September 18, 2004, 3:29am | #

Hey Ellen, let's just kill 'em all and let God sort them out.

Jor | September 18, 2004, 6:00am | #

The stupidity of some people is truly unparralleled. Dan, do you understand what you are saying when you say your opponents are all fascists?

Gadfly | September 18, 2004, 7:19am | #

Here's an interesting url on the guy who discovered the alleged forged CBS memos.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

Pertinent excerpt:

"But it did not come from an expert in typography or typewriter history as some first thought. Instead, it was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes who helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the Times has found."

"Reached by telephone today, MacDougald, 46, confirmed that he is Buckhead, but declined to answer questions about his political background or how he knew so much about the CBS documents so fast.

"You can ask the questions but I'm not going to answer them," he told The Times. "I'm just going to stick to doing no interviews."

Hmmm...

Flyover Country | September 18, 2004, 8:30am | #

Gadfly,

And Ben Barnes, Bill Burkett, the secretary are all Democratic supporters. I guess that means we can dismiss everything they say as well. The difference is, "buckhead" looked at physical evidence or at least copies of it. The three I mentioned all have no evidence.

Lower Tiberius | September 18, 2004, 8:51am | #

First off ..... I had no idea Scott Robinson was related to Dr. Ruth ...oops I mean Dr. Laura.
Second .... Brett and Brian ... your mutual br is BS. I say take Scott downtown and throw him in the jailhouse. (Referring to this aggressive out of control coward as a "poor sack" is just plain ignorant) If he and also you were "worried" about his future and the potential of this incident it might do now to denounce vicious violent expression and come clean on a crime that is clearly "owned" by this young man. He'll heal unless he packs layers of lies over the wound and is afraid to change the bandage.

Hudson | September 18, 2004, 11:07am | #

It's only illegal to kick a defenseless woman if you're a Democrat. Republicans get a pass.

oldwhitelady | September 18, 2004, 12:57pm | #

Since the woman was already wrestled to the ground and contained by the agents, shouldn't the guy kicking her be detained for interfering with the arrest?

Helios | September 18, 2004, 12:58pm | #

So, then, applying his own words (not mine), I believe I am entirely within my rights of Free Speech to assert that "....Bill is the fool.
He's just another idiot who doesn't have a clue about the Constitution.

He's probably one of those "dead document" assholes. He said:

The kicker is an asshole and the kickee is a trespasser. He should be prosecuted for assault and she should be prosecuted for trespassing. He's an asshole and she's..."

What she is, Bill, is entirely within her Rights under the Constitution. It took a tremendous degree of Courage for that woman to protest.

We do not live in a proto-fascist feifdom where we must cringe and tiptoe before our Unelected masters, Bill, as much as you want that to be
the case.

This is The United States Of America, Pal, and my Father, Uncle, and Millions of other Brave, Honorable, and Courageous American Men and Women nearly had their asses blown off in WW II when we kicked the living shit out of the Nazi Menace, in order to secure the Rights and Freedoms that all of us enjoy today, you included.

You especially; right, Bill?

He should be arrested for kicking, it is true, but what "crime", exactly, do you propose this woman committed? Offending the dignity of the RNC??? You have got to be joking.

Once again, in case you did not get it the first time, what should have happened, but did not, is that a trained Security person should have politely escorted her to the door.

Arrested for "Defiant Trespass"??? Don't make me laugh. They are literally making this shit up as they go along. Yesterday some complete jackass in "security" tried to make a huge deal over the resemblance of an 8 oz weighted bookmark to a "sap". They took the poor lady away from the Airport in shackles, then "declined to press charges".

This hysterical over-the-top arrest-everyone-at-the-drop-of-a-hat shit started under the Guiliani
regime in NYC, and is a Disgrace, a Fraud, a Sham, a cynical Abuse Of Power, and is in fact
an insidious Subtrefuge carefully designed to distract, draw attention away from, and obfuscate the very serious actual theft that is in fact being perpetrated against the American People.

Our country is literally being stolen from
us under the rubric of "Patriotism" and "Law
and Order". A lapel pin doth not a Patriot
make, Bill. Often, it is quite the opposite.

"The Patriot 'Act' " is the most aptly-named piece of flim-flammery ever to be perpetrated in the history of our Nation. Let's look at who the real criminals actually are, shall we?

You know Bill, don't you, that the unelected duo of W and Dick "Lon" Cheney misled this Country into an Illegal war, and have slaughtered over 1000 soldiers so far, and are now trying to suggest that Kerry, of all people, is somehow to
blame for their utter, miserable failure in the desert?

Most outrageously, this entire adventure has drained our economy of 3.5 TRILLION
dollars, and for what? For the purpose of allowing Dick "Lon" Cheney to make even
more money than he already has, while Millions of people have lost their Healthcare.

Perhaps the most important thing that has been lost under this immoral and unelected regime that cynically cloaks itself in the rhetoric of "Family Values" is our traditional American sense of basic Fairness, Tolerance, and Compassion towards our fellow Citizen.

"Fuck The Other Guy", and "I've Got Mine" have become the order of the day, and that is EXACTLY what W & Dick "Lon" Cheney want. The average American today is concerned with TV, Sports, SUV'S, Money, and their own personal degree of comfort, roughly in that order.

Free markets are all very well, Bill, but there is something known as the social contract, and it is being pissed on and ripped in two, just like
that poor little 4-year old girls Bush Sign.

Only this isn't a phony set-up. This is for real.

The contemptible, entirely Unamerican display of cowardice which a Republican crowd exhibited by chanting "4 more years" as a single poor, brave woman protested her child's murder by this unelected regime, and was hauled off and arrested by jackbooted police, is a dishonorable, disgraceful, and very serious stain on this entire Nation's Honor, something straight out
of Triumph Of The Will; an insult of the most serious nature to all Freedom-Loving people everywhere.

Take a good, long, close hard look at these people, Bill

This IS the REAL "Axis of Evil", these are the men who are destroying OUR country from within, and this is how they are doing it.

It's time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid, Bill, and do one thing right on Nov 2, because you are not going to get another chance.

matt | September 18, 2004, 2:32pm | #

Hell this thread has been all over the place, so I'll continue the trend.

Helios:

"Free markets are all very well, Bill, but there is something known as the social contract, and it is being pissed on and ripped in two, just like
that poor little 4-year old girls Bush Sign.

Only this isn't a phony set-up. This is for real."

The "social contract" is a real document? Wow, that's news to me. Where is it exactly and can you show me where I signed and agreed to it (you know, since it is a "contract" after all)?

Zzzzz | September 18, 2004, 3:32pm | #

Hey, Helios, just write a book next time... And make sure everything's in super-annoying bolded CAPS.

Thanks for performing a nice fanatical liftoff for all of us here to witness. Hey, if you can't argue your point well enough, drown them out with your long, boring posts crammed full of hackneyed cliches. You forgot to include "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!".

joe | September 18, 2004, 4:44pm | #

dhex sez: "the whole point is that he's kicking someone while they're down, not that the person in question had boobage."

The whole point is that he's kicking someone smaller, weaker, and more vulnerable than himself.

"equal work
equal pay
equal bruises

it's the only way this stuff works."

A 170 pound man kicking a 105 pound woman. A 105 pound woman kicking a 170 pound man. That's not equal, dhex.

joe | September 18, 2004, 5:01pm | #

"Ideas have consequences."

Let me ask you people something: would you kick somebody who you believed was helping terrorists kill Americans? I sure as hell would. If I saw three cops drag someone who was helping terrorists kill my neighbors, I'd try to land as good a blow as I could on the bastard, if I got the opportunity. Wouldn't you?

The Republicans have spent the last four years equating opposition to their policies to support for terrorism. They morph Democrats' faces into Osama and Saddam in their ads. The Attorney General has said that people who complain about the Patriot Act "are giving aid and comfort to the enemy," an offense defined as Capital Treason During Time of War. The President said that elected representatives who disagreed with him about the workplace rights of federal bureaucrats don't care about stopping terrorism against the American people. The Vice President recently said that voting Democratic would lead to catastrophic terrorist attacks on American soil.

It's been almost 3+ years of this shit, culminating in the Cheney n Zell show in Madison Square Garden.

Republicans aren't thugs because they believe in flat taxes, high military spending, and eliminating Medicare. They're thugs because of how they fight.

I don't buy this "one bad apple" bullshit.

Ideas have consequences.

fyodor | September 18, 2004, 5:08pm | #

joe,

Does the comparable size between kicker and kickee really even matter when the kickee is being held down by others who are in the