David Weigel echos Democratic Talking Points on Etheridge "Hug"

[TigerPrwn]

David Weigel is why I boycott Reason. He crucified Ron Paul during the 2008 election and I could never figure out if we was a neoliberal or neocon hack. I am thinking he is just a hack.

It seems that his new "mission" is to find out who the horrible right wing operative college kids are and is going to "expose" them.

Read this article by Ben Smith, and then watch and wait for Weigel to follow these talking points...

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Dems_defed_Etheridge_attack_Breitbart.html?showall

The Democrats' talking points:

1. There is always the part of the story that you can’t see in these gotcha style videos – what were these folks doing, how did they approach him, how was the cameraman and/or others off camera acting?

2. Why would any legitimate student doing a project or journalist shagging a story not identify themselves. Motives matter – what was the motivation here? To incite this very type of reaction?

3. This is clearly the work of the Republican Party and the “interviewer” is clearly a low-lever staffer or intern. That’s what explains blurring the face of the “interviewer” and refusing to identify the entity this was done for. The Republicans know if they were caught engaging in this type of gotcha tactic it would undermine their own credibility – yet if it was an individual acting on his own there is no reason that person would have blurred themselves out of the video – and if it was the work of a right wing blog they would have their logo on the video and be shouting their involvement from the roof top.

4. This was a purposefully partisan hit job designed to incite a reaction for political reasons – but is a tactic so low – the parties involved are remaining anonymous.

5. The fact that no one wants to take credit for this should raise real questions in the minds of voters and the press.

6. Push hard w/ blogs the lack of credibility inherent to anything Breitbart does/posts, given its role in the debunked ACORN videos:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/opinion/21pubed.html?src=twrhttp://mediamatters.org/research/201006010001

http://gawker.com/5508190/okeefe-and-breitbart-acorn-videos-severely-edited

Now, here are portions of the Weigel articles:

Who TMZ'd Rep. Bob Etheridge?

Last week Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.), who's seen as a safe bet for re-election this year despite representing a somewhat conservative (Cook R+2) district, ran into two self-described students with video cameras outside of a fundraiser.

"Do you fully support the Obama agenda?" asked one of the students

"Who are you?" asked Etheridge, grabbing one of the cameras and pointing it down -- a move more typically seen from Hollywood bodyguards than congressmen. The second camera rolled as Etheridge, irritated, held the wrist of the first cameraman, then pulled the student to his side and grabbed him in a hug.

"We're just here for a project, sir," said one of the students.

"I have a right to know who you are," Etheridge said.

"I'm just a student, sir," said one of the students.

It went on and on like that until Etheridge left. The videos were under a minute long. On June 11, a new YouTube user named "DCCameraGuy" posted two videos, one from each camera.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/who_tmzd_rep_bob_etheridge.html

A HUG!!!!!!!!!!!

and-


I'm still trying to find out who the students were.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/rep_bob_etheridge_apologizes_f.html

He is just disgusting. I can't wait for him to "expose" these "operatives" who in their treachery, instigated a HUG from Bob Etheridge, the true victim in all of this. THEN these horrible operatives had the AUDACITY to beg the congressman to "PLEASE let go"
Reason, as well as all Libertarians (and Wapo) should be embarassed and ashamed of this tool. He is a beltway sheep.

[gls]

Weigel has always been an establishment hack, which is why he is employed by the Washington Post.

[MsDoodahs]

Is he the guy with the black leather jacket?

[Kludge]

Is he the guy with the black leather jacket?

Nick Gillespie.

http://www.szasz.com/nick1.JPG

[MsDoodahs]

Are Weigel and the black jacket dude married?

[MRoCkEd]

Black jacket dude was good to Ron during the presidential election, unlike Weigel and others.

YouTube - Gillespie vs. O'Reilly on Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYqwmiprsBA)

[TigerPrwn]

"Libertarian" David Weigel thinks that you should have to "identify yourself" to your overlords if you expect to film them in public on public property:


I have no interest in publicizing the interviewers beyond finding out who they are. Is the position of the commenters criticizing me on this that people have no obligation to reveal their identity to the people they're videotaping? Yes, Etheridge acted like an ass, but because we don't know who he was acting like an ass to, we don't know why it happened, whether charges will be filed, etc etc.

Posted by: DavidWeigel | June 14, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/rep_bob_etheridge_apologizes_f.html

perhaps Weigel will have a new cause du' jour:
require press passes for filming in public. The "little people" don't have the proper press credentials unlike our Mass media hack David Weigel.

[Kludge]

Weigel wants to figure out what the story is -- whether or not that´s related to bias will show in HOW Weigal writes his follow-up, assuming he finds the kids´ identities. The story posted wasn´t even worth Weigal´s writing. The OP is the fellow bent out of shape over the issue, making grand assumptions to crucify a writer of a publication he clearly has a bias against.

[TigerPrwn]

Weigel wants to figure out what the story is -- whether or not that´s related to bias will show in HOW Weigal writes his follow-up, assuming he finds the kids´ identities. The story posted wasn´t even worth Weigal´s writing. The OP is the fellow bent out of shape over the issue, making grand assumptions to crucify a writer of a publication he clearly has a bias against.

Interesting. The "story" here is that a Congressman, who represents the people, assaulted a young kid. The "story" isn't who is the young kid, any citizen of this country has a right to ask their congressmen and women a question on public property. For crying out loud, he only asked him "Do you support the Obama Administration Agenda?" How is this "inciteful"?

Perhaps it is you that is biased Kludge? Care to comment on whether there is bias here by Weigel, and his calling what the Congressman has already apologized for, a Hug? Care to comment about the bias of Weigel implying that the "tactics" of the "students" (he puts "students" in quotes!) were inciteful, and provacative in nature?

I will admit to being biased against WaPo, but I have a feeling that I am not the only one around here that can't stand WaPo.

[Kludge]

I think it´s a valid suspicion that a couple kids filming a Congressman and then asking silly questions ("do you fully support the Obama agenda?") were attempting to unfairly smear the Congressman.

Weigal, however, is just an observer looking to go deeper into the story, while you are the person making ridiculous statements as ""Libertarian" David Weigel thinks that you should have to "identify yourself" to your overlords if you expect to film them in public on public property" which was not implied in Weigal´s writings.

[TigerPrwn]

I think it´s a valid suspicion that a couple kids filming a Congressman and then asking silly questions ("do you fully support the Obama agenda?") were attempting to unfairly smear the Congressman.

Weigal, however, is just an observer looking to go deeper into the story, while you are the person making ridiculous statements as ""Libertarian" David Weigel thinks that you should have to "identify yourself" to your overlords if you expect to film them in public on public property" which was not implied in Weigal´s writings.

silly questions are now banned, and unfair, and require a full investigation in to just WHO would ask such a thing... These "students" must be political operatives looking to incite "hugs".

I have heard it all now....

[roho76]

I think it´s a valid suspicion that a couple kids filming a Congressman and then asking silly questions ("do you fully support the Obama agenda?") were attempting to unfairly smear the Congressman.

I can't put my finger on a MSM outlet that does that. Oh, that's cuz they all do and I don't have enough fingers.

[Kludge]

silly questions are now banned, and unfair, and require a full investigation in to just WHO would ask such a thing... These "students" must be political operatives looking to incite "hugs".

I have heard it all now....

Weigal´s a reporter with every right to be curious. If lawsuits are filed against the Congressperson, or if the kids turn out to be political operatives of some group, it´ll be an interesting story. I´m not saying the kids are political operatives who were looking to smear the Congressman, but it´d be interesting to find out, and it certainly isn´t impossible.

[TigerPrwn]

Weigal´s a reporter with every right to be curious. If lawsuits are filed against the Congressperson, or if the kids turn out to be political operatives of some group, it´ll be an interesting story. I´m not saying the kids are political operatives who were looking to smear the Congressman, but it´d be interesting to find out, and it certainly isn´t impossible.

Kludge, do you believe that those kids had every right to be curious, or do you believe that it is only reporters that have this right?

Why do you think it is more "interesting" if these turn out to be "operatives" rather than "students" as Weigel describes them?

What about "Do you fully support the Obama Administration Agenda" brings out the conspiracy theory that these "students" are really operatives?

If they are not "students", and they are "operatives", does that give the Congressman the right to "hug" that kid? In other words, if these "students" are operatives, how does that change the story?

If I were either one of those kids, I would not want my identity out there, there are CTers galore that are wating with baited breath to dig up EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF DIRT in their lives, and exploit it for political leverage.

The victims will become the hunted. Its a sad state of affairs indeed.

[Kludge]

Kludge, do you believe that those kids had every right to be curious, or do you believe that it is only reporters that have this right?

Both. The kids have a right to try smearing the Congressman, the Congressman has a right to be an asshole, and Weigal has a right to further investigate the story.


Why do you think it is more "interesting" if these turn out to be "operatives" rather than "students" as Weigel describes them?

More data is more interesting. Being a "student" isn´t relevant. However, if these kids were interviewed or their organization interviewed, it may make the story worth reading.


What about "Do you fully support the Obama Administration Agenda" brings out the conspiracy theory that these "students" are really operatives?

I don´t support the theory that the kids are operatives, but the question (which is curiously vague) does not support an idea that they aren´t operatives. I don´t necessarily support Weigal, but if he finds interesting information, I´ll be entertained reading it, I suspect.


If they are not "students", and they are "operatives", does that give the Congressman the right to "hug" that kid? In other words, if these "students" are operatives, how does that change the story?

The Congressman grabbing the kid isn´t interesting. I´d be interested in learning about an organization which does what the kids did as an intentional tactic. We could learn how to more effectively smear Congressmen, at least.


If I were either one of those kids, I would not want my identity out there, there are CTers galore that are wating with baited breath to dig up EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF DIRT in their lives, and exploit it for political leverage.

I do not fault the students for not wanting to be associated with what they did. I never implied otherwise.


The victims will become the hunted. Its a sad state of affairs indeed.

They´re being hunted by the press.... What´s wrong with freedom of the press? Do you have any damning evidence which supports your own conspiracy theory arguing Weigal is attempting to smear the students to support the Congressman?

[TigerPrwn]

Perhaps Weigel should go after this "operative" instead. Maybe this guy will reveal his identity, and whether or not he is an "operative". Technically, this man really IS an "operative" of the Federal Government- does this make his question somehow less important, or an attempt at a smear? I guess any question that makes a Congressman "uncomfortable" could be classified "a tactic".

YouTube - Congressman Bob Etheridge Health Care Town Hall Lillington U.S. Marine Scolded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5-FIufRfMM)

Etheridge, in his fake apology, that implies the "students" were provacateurs, state that he has always shown respect to his constituents.


Throughout my many years of service to the people of North Carolina, I have always tried to treat people from all viewpoints with respect.

Watch the video above, and you will see that his apology is A LIE.

This is the man that Weigel is whitewashing for, calling an assault "a hug"

Tell me Kludge, do you think this wonderful Congressman gave that kid "a hug"?

IMO, it is becoming apprent where the real bias is coming from. Etheridge is a scum bag who attacks kids and implies that a US MARINE gets "free" health care. He is a disgusting pig that needs to go.

YouTube - Congressman Bob Etheridge Health Care Town Hall Lillington U.S. Marine Scolded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5-FIufRfMM)

[MsDoodahs]

Wow, that video demonstrates just what an asshole the critter is.

Nice find.

[Stary Hickory]

Weigal´s a reporter with every right to be curious. If lawsuits are filed against the Congressperson, or if the kids turn out to be political operatives of some group, it´ll be an interesting story. I´m not saying the kids are political operatives who were looking to smear the Congressman, but it´d be interesting to find out, and it certainly isn´t impossible.

Politcal operatives?.......the congressman ought to be arrested. The question was fine, how does it smear him? All he has to say is I support some of what Obama wants to accomplish as long as it benefits my constituents.

Grabbing the necks and wrists of citizens is not OK...especially had they done this to them they may have gotten a bullet in their back. In fact I would be tempted to punch that effer out. Why wouldn't someone? If someone grabbed me like that I would destroy them. Yet with a congressman you have to be "careful" and be subjected to this kind of physical assault.

It is despicable.

[BenIsForRon]

Kludge, you should know by now that you can't make a rational argument on this forum. THAT CONGRESSMAN GRABBED THAT KID AND HE NEEDS TO GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!111!

People here are to dense to realize that both the interviewer and the congressman are despicable individuals.

[TigerPrwn]

Wow, that video demonstrates just what an asshole the critter is.

Nice find.

I wish that OPERATIVE Weigel would go after that Marine and try to expose his identity, and expose HIM as an "operative". :D Wouldn't that be more fun, and more of a "story" according to Weigel? Hell, there isn't even any speculation as to whether or not he is an operative. :D

[TigerPrwn]

Kludge, you should know by now that you can't make a rational argument on this forum. THAT CONGRESSMAN GRABBED THAT KID AND HE NEEDS TO GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!111!

People here are to dense to realize that both the interviewer and the congressman are despicable individuals.

I am in need of a translation. Do we even know who the interviewer is?

[RM918]

Kludge, you should know by now that you can't make a rational argument on this forum. THAT CONGRESSMAN GRABBED THAT KID AND HE NEEDS TO GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!111!

People here are to dense to realize that both the interviewer and the congressman are despicable individuals.

So? If the people in question were even the most despicable of GOP operatives, that means the congressman had the right to put them in a headlock even though there was no physical threat?

[Stary Hickory]

Kludge, you should know by now that you can't make a rational argument on this forum. THAT CONGRESSMAN GRABBED THAT KID AND HE NEEDS TO GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!111!

People here are to dense to realize that both the interviewer and the congressman are despicable individuals.

You have a biased slant that puts you in awkward positions. You may disagree with the political tendencies of these two youngsters, HOWEVER they have every reason to ask elected representatives questions. These same elected representatives affect the lives and the futures of these two kids.

So now to ask questions is despicable...is that your general stance or only when it comes from certain political groups you disagree with? Reporters do these things ALL the time...are all reporters despicable? This congressman attacked two college aged kids because they asked him whether or not he believes in how Obama is governing this nation. The congressman is scum...because he chose to physically assault and intimidate.

[BenIsForRon]

So? If the people in question were even the most despicable of GOP operatives, that means the congressman had the right to put them in a headlock even though there was no physical threat?

Did you read my post? I said they're both despicable individuals. Why don't you try to rack your brain and put two and two together.

EDIT: By both I mean the congressman and interviewer. The interviewer is a young student that is already whoring himself out to the republican party, nearly pisses himself when grabbed by a drunk congressman, and won't even show his face in a youtube video.

[gls]

Kludge, you should know by now that you can't make a rational argument on this forum. THAT CONGRESSMAN GRABBED THAT KID AND HE NEEDS TO GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!111!

People here are to dense to realize that both the interviewer and the congressman are despicable individuals.

Yes because some college student asking a simple question is the equivalent of a career criminal who has supported the Iraq war, PATRIOT act, and the TARP bailout (you know, Obama's agenda).

[BenIsForRon]

Yes because some college student asking a simple question is the equivalent of a career criminal who has supported the Iraq war, PATRIOT act, and the TARP bailout (you know, Obama's agenda).

My point is that all you guys are attacking Kludge for no good reason. All he did is say that this kid is probably working for the republican party. Nothing near a justification for Etheridge.

Fuck all these strawmen.

[RM918]

Did you read my post? I said they're both despicable individuals. Why don't you try to rack your brain and put two and two together.

EDIT: By both I mean the congressman and interviewer. The interviewer is a young student that is already whoring himself out to the republican party, nearly pisses himself when grabbed by a drunk congressman, and won't even show his face in a youtube video.

If this guy:

http://politics.mync.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/081104_bob_etheridge.jpg

...suddenly put me in a headlock, I'd be pretty freaking confused myself. Maybe they hid their faces to avoid them and their families being hounded by the press? I don't know. Whatever the case, no matter how despicable either of these guys are, you don't just consider a crime 'irrelevant' because you think the victim was a douchebag. The victims may or may not have been scumbags, but at least they're not criminal scumbags.

[BenIsForRon]

You put 'irrelevant' in quotes like I said it. I NEVER SAID THAT. Fuck Etheridge, I'm happy to see him go. However, these fucking republican operatives aren't getting an ounce of my respect, mainly because they're in their early twenties and have already given up on society and become republican operatives.

[Stary Hickory]

My point is that all you guys are attacking Kludge for no good reason. All he did is say that this kid is probably working for the republican party. Nothing near a justification for Etheridge.

Fuck all these strawmen.

I have no problem believing these kids are conservatives or Republicans, but you'd have to be crazy to conclude they are "operatives" of the Republican party. What is more likely.....they are kids just doing what kids do.

It's almost a lame defense of this congressman..."OH...No he is not so bad...he was setup by evil Republicans"....man that kinda krap smacks of latent partisan bickering.

Fact: Kids have every right to ask elected offical question on sidewalk

Fact: Drunken aggressive congressman can a)ignore college kids B) answer question like "I support Obama when it's right for SC"( see how easy this is?)

Fact: drunken congressman physically attacking, grabbing, pulling the kids is against the law

Fact: If kids had retaliated aggressively or initiated this kind of attack on the congressman they could be dead or probably be crucified as crazed right wingnuts and arrested.


What is not a fact is that these guys were "secret operatives" of the Republican party. Based on the question they asked it's safe to assume they are Republicans and probably narrowly partisan in their views. But beyond this there is nothing to gleam from that video.

[MsDoodahs]

This incident has certainly been ... um ... illuminating, here at the ole forums.

lol.....

[TigerPrwn]

Did you read my post? I said they're both despicable individuals. Why don't you try to rack your brain and put two and two together.

EDIT: By both I mean the congressman and interviewer. The interviewer is a young student that is already whoring himself out to the republican party, nearly pisses himself when grabbed by a drunk congressman, and won't even show his face in a youtube video.

Ben,
you are still not making any sense at all. Please explain to us how this "student" is "despicable" for asking his Congressman a question on public property?
Surely you aren't saying that these kids have no right to ask their Congressman a simple question?
Are you being sarcastic?

The kid even said "please let me go sir" when the Congressman gave him a "love pat" on the neck. The kid says "please" and "sir", and he is despicable. Go figure.

oh, and by the way, Ben says War is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength.

Kludge, I think I might have offended you b/c of my Reason Comment. It is the truth. Perhaps I am wrong, but I always thought Weigel claimed to be a Libertarian, and that is why he writes for Reason? Am I wrong?

I've got news, Weigel is no libertarian.

[BenIsForRon]

They blurred their faces out. The didn't do it to avoid press scrutiny, they did it to avoid being ousted as republican tools.

[someperson]

If that student is truly in the service of "that party," I feel sorry for him, but I don't see how that makes him despicable. I also don't see how it's despicable for an individual to desire privacy from the, often despicable, individuals in the media. I suppose I'm just not a fan of "guilty before proven innocent."

...and one more thing... operatives? operatives. operatives lol. really? Sounds like that "journalist" spent an afternoon or twenty listening to Alex Jones. Whether that's a good thing or not is up to you ;)

[TigerPrwn]

They blurred their faces out. The didn't do it to avoid press scrutiny, they did it to avoid being ousted as republican tools.

And you know this how?
Perhaps they blurred their faces out so political operative tools like David Weigel wouldn't try to paint them in to monstrous baby eaters and midget punters? Ever thought of that? Perhaps they like their privacy, and had no clue that Etheridge would GO POSTAL on them?

Oh no, Ben has somehow gotten an "inside source" and is "in the know".
Spare us all.

I want to ask you a serious question. Who is NOT an "operative"? Tell me that. Tell us ALL that.

[MsDoodahs]

They blurred their faces out. The didn't do it to avoid press scrutiny, they did it to avoid being ousted as republican tools.

Cite your source, please.

Thanks.

[BenIsForRon]

Ben,
you are still not making any sense at all. Please explain to us how this "student" is "despicable" for asking his Congressman a question on public property?
Surely you aren't saying that these kids have no right to ask their Congressman a simple question?
Are you being sarcastic?



Of course they have a right to ask the question. I'm just saying its sad that anyone would take a job for the republican party, pretending like they're students doing a project. They have no fucking honor.



oh, and by the way, Ben says War is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength.


Yeah, I said all that, because I'm questioning somebody's motives.

[Stary Hickory]

Of course they have a right to ask the question. I'm just saying its sad that anyone would take a job for the republican party, pretending like

K man see here you assume they are "operatives"....there is like NO evidence supporting that. But you have decided they are.

[BenIsForRon]

Cite your source, please.

Thanks.

I think it's obvious. Do you really think they're students doing a project, when the first question is "Do you support the Obama agenda?"

[MsDoodahs]

Anyone know if the dems had previously considered Ethridge a safe hold?

[TigerPrwn]

...and one more thing... operatives? operatives. operatives lol. really? Sounds like that "journalist" spent an afternoon or twenty listening to Alex Jones. Whether that's a good thing or not is up to you ;)


LOL. That is just it. Everybody is a potential "operative". It's like 'terraists"- they're everywhere.


;) shhhhh....

[TigerPrwn]

Anyone know if the dems had previously considered Ethridge a safe hold?

Yes, they did, consider what Weigel said in his article-


Last week Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.), who's seen as a safe bet for re-election this year despite representing a somewhat conservative (Cook R+2) district, ran into two self-described students with video cameras outside of a fundraiser.

but it is all a bunch of hooey. Only the Dems think he is a "safe bet". This go round will be different, so I don't think he was ever safe. Now, I think he might be screwed. :D

[MsDoodahs]

I think it's obvious.

Your opinion, no proof. :)


Do you really think they're students doing a project, when the first question is "Do you support the Obama agenda?"

I have no idea. It doesn't even matter at all.

Fact is, the critter representing NC 2 committed assault.

My opinion: only individuals who place party before country would stoop so low as to defend a critter who committed assault because said critter is a demoncrat, and those who put party before country are pretty damned sorry and a big reason the country is in the shape its in today. :)

[Stary Hickory]

My opinion: only individuals who place party before country would stoop so low as to defend a critter who committed assault because said critter is a demoncrat, and those who put party before country are pretty damned sorry and a big reason the country is in the shape its in today. :)

This is what I see too....lame attempts to defend a congressman based on his political affiliation. To the point even the young college kids who were attacked are being demonized. I expect it from partisan and biased groups of the same political stripe as that congressman but not from unbiased rational folks.

The congressman had no business doing that even if they were paid reporters for a right wing paper.

[BenIsForRon]

My opinion: only individuals who place party before country would stoop so low as to defend a critter who committed assault because said critter is a demoncrat, and those who put party before country are pretty damned sorry and a big reason the country is in the shape its in today. :)

Are you talking about me here? Because I said that I'm happy to see Etheridge go, and he definitely assaulted the interviewer.

[TigerPrwn]

My point is that all you guys are attacking Kludge for no good reason. All he did is say that this kid is probably working for the republican party. Nothing near a justification for Etheridge.

Fuck all these strawmen.

Pardon me? Just who "attacked" Kludge? Surely Kludge doesn't think he was attacked, he was defending Weigel's "Hug" classification. No one attacked Kludge, I was trying to figure out where he was coming from.

I mentioned that I may have offended him by my Reason comment, but Weigel most certainly IS the reason I will not read there anymore and no longer support them. I can't say anything but the truth and that is the truth. Kludge has a right to defend Weigel, and I have a right to defend these kids. That is usually how it works on an internet forum debate.

Moreover, from all I have seen, Kludge is completely capable of defending himself, he is a smart man. I don't think you are helping his cause here to tell you the honest to God truth.

[Danke]

Thread made me laugh. People taking Kludge and Benis seriously.

[BenIsForRon]

Thread made me laugh. People taking Kludge and Benis seriously.

Ben Is For Ron. Get it straight dood.

[Kludge]

Thread made me laugh. People taking Kludge and Benis seriously.

It happens often enough that sometimes even I accidentally take myself seriously!

[TigerPrwn]

I think it's obvious. Do you really think they're students doing a project, when the first question is "Do you support the Obama agenda?"

It is every thing BUT "obvious". You are merely drawing conclusions, and making assumptions, and you are drawing conclusions and making assumptions about things that don't even matter.
Let me ask you some questions Ben.
Can an individual be a student as well as a Republican? If the student is a Republican, does that make him an "operative"?
Do Republican students participate in projects?
Does it matter if the student is affiliated with any party when they do the projects?
What is "an operative"?

You have already admitted that Etheridge was wrong for "hugging" the kids, but you seem to gloss over the fact that IT DOESN'T MATTER if they were little mutant ninja turtles, what Etheridge did was wrong. HE commited assault, not the students.


Meanwhile, galiant and noble "journalist" Weigel is still on his most important mission of his career- "exposing" these "students" for what they really are!- "operatives"!:

So, who were the young men hassled by Bob Etheridge?


We still don't know. I have asked program managers at several conservative organizations whether they know the identities of the two people in this video who say they are "students ... working on a project" and who are rewarded for their inquisitiveness by being manhandled by Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.).

And since I'm getting a ton of e-mail on this: I don't condone what Etheridge did at all, in any way. It was disgraceful. If he had a problem with fielding a simple question from a young man who didn't want to identify himself, he should have walked away, not grabbed his arm.

That said, we can't determine what will happen to Etheridge -- whether, for example, the young man will file a complaint against him -- because we don't know who these "students" are. (I use the quotes because the people in the video use that word to identify themselves, and we can't confirm whether it's accurate.) Robert Stacy McCain talks to a conservative operative who explains who or what kind of activists the "students" might be:

The operative, who has been responsible for numerous undercover ("black ops") political projects, compared the two students to a military "hunter-killer team" -- the tandem of a sniper and a spotter. The operative did not want to disclose the tactics and strategy of such projects, but said that we can expect to see more video confrontations during what Mike Flynn of BigGovernment.com predicts will be a "long hot summer." ... It is unlikely that the students involved in the Etheridge incident will claim responsibility, my conservative operative source suggests, because doing so would expose them to reprisals by staffers for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/so_who_were_the_students_hassl.html

Weigel has officially lost it.

If I were those kids, I'd give an offer to Etheridge:
"Resign, and we won't press charges."

I do believe their identities will eventually be "exposed" by the galiant efforts of saints like Weigel, but it is too bad that they will be treated like "potential operatives" and skewered and scrutinized by the press. Heaven help these kids if they have ever done anything "ilegal", like texting while driving, or getting a speeding ticket...

[Danke]

It happens often enough that sometimes even I accidentally take myself seriously!

You do keep me in stitches. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2750914&postcount=20

[TigerPrwn]

Look at these photo from www.kooks.com :

Rep Bob Etheridge (D-NC) Attacks Student and Takes Camera Phone
http://www.kooks.com/congress/1/Rep-Bob-Etheridge-D-NC-Attacks-Student-and-Takes-Camera-Phone.html

He is empty handed on arrival, then steals the students camera/phone as he was trying to hug him. If you pause the video at :37 you can see it clearly in his hand.

[someperson]

The operative, who has been responsible for numerous undercover ("black ops") political projects, compared the two students to a military "hunter-killer team" -- the tandem of a sniper and a spotter.
Yeeeees... I can see so clearly now... It all makes sense...
THE QUESTION WAS AN INSIDE JOB! wow.

This isn't universally applicable, but I believe it deserves a mention at this point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

[MsDoodahs]

wow the sonofabitch stole the kid's camera phone.

GIVE IT BACK ETHRIDGE, YOU SORRY PIECE OF SHIT.

:mad:

[GunnyFreedom]

I think it's obvious. Do you really think they're students doing a project, when the first question is "Do you support the Obama agenda?"

Um. I'm not a "Republican Operative" by any stretch of the imagination, and quite frankly, the primary question burning on my mind for the last year regarding Etheridge is...not joking..."Do you fully support the Obama agenda?"

I can tell you that just because that was their first and foremost qiestion does not make them GOP operations flunkies. I mean, sure they might be, but the question alone does not suggest that.

If I had to guess however, I'd guess the kids belonged to the campaign currently running against him.

But even so, I for one do not find that question "weird" at all like some have been saying. Indeed, that's the question that I have been wanting to hit him with myself since February of 2009...

[TigerPrwn]

Here is Weigel's latest.

Last call


Today set what I hope will be a long-standing record for hate mail, the result of Matt Drudge informing his readers that I had dismissed Rep. Bob Etheridge's (D-N.C.) hostile encounter with two anonymous videographers -- including his grabbing one of them by the wrist, then grabbing him by the neck and uncomfortably hugging him close as he asked to be let go -- as just a "hug." Drudge was lying, and I by no means condone what Etheridge did.

Democrats try to discredit Etheridge-gate by linking it to Breitbart.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) speculates about the source of Obama's biases.

Megan McArdle and Peter Suderman get married, and tweeted.

Deroy Murdock says gays should be angry at Islamofascists, not Elton John.

And this one's for Bob Etheridge:


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/06/last_call_35.html#comments

hmmm...
I see. Weigel says that Etheridge was "hugging" the "operative", but he doesn't condone "the hugging".
This guy is a complete joke. He should be laughed out of the media. No one should listen to another word this man writes, because up is down and left is right. hugging and love tapping of potential "operatives" should be investigated for the "inside jobs" they really are. To Weigel, poor Bob Etheridge was a victim of agent provacateurs. These "projects" that they are working on are really part of a vast right wing conspiracy that will some day allow Republican operatives to ask a question, and sorta like the jedi mind tricks, these questions trigger "something within" and the Congressmen to go completely BALLISTIC.

[devil21]

I think it's obvious. Do you really think they're students doing a project, when the first question is "Do you support the Obama agenda?"

Who cares what he asked? Does it really matter? They could have asked if the guy likes to copulate with toddlers and it's still perfectly legal and does not in any way justify the conduct of the congressman. This is (was?) a free country where words are NEVER justification to physically touch anyone else EVER. Why you insist on grouping the interviewer in with the abusive drunk is beyond me. The motivation of the interviewer matters NONE, especially legally. Maybe they are doing a project. A project to see if they can get power hungry drunk asshole Congressman to lose their shit on camera and assault citizens without cause. Mission accomplished!

(eta: Etheridge could have just kept walking and ignored them.)

[TigerPrwn]

Hey Weisel,
here is a tip for your career's most important mission - "exposing" these Ambush journalist wannabe "operatives" for who they are-

Ask Etheridge- he might still have the kid's phone that he grabbed out of the "operatives" hand. www.kooks.com

Boy that kid is a sloppy operative if I have ever seen one. He allowed that man to take his phone. Even asked him "please" and called him sir as he was being accosted and mugged.

Here is the latest from Breitbart, who the Left uses in their talking points:

Breitbart, Flynn, defend Etheridge vid, anonymous even to them
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Breitbart_Flynn_defend_Etheridge_vid_anonymous_eve n_to_them.html?showall

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Oh yeah, what a Ron Paul hater. Must be why he voted for Ron Paul during Paul's 2008 presidential run, right? :rolleyes:

[TigerPrwn]

Oh yeah, Weigel is such a Ron Paul hater. Must be why Weigel donated $2,300 to Ron Paul for his 2008 presidential run, right? :rolleyes:

Not that a monetary contribution proves loyalty or true support by any stretch of the imagination, but I'd like to see what gave you this idea. Source please.

Even the reason people are skewering Weigel, but here is a little snippet from the comments on this article:
Hating the Ideology, Not the Methodology
http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/14/hating-the-ideology-not-the-me#comment_1753199


Esoteric|6.14.10 @ 5:12PM|#

I thought Weigel's work on the Ron Paul newsletter debacle represented his true journalistic high point. Not only do I not hold that against him, I think it's something he can and should be justifiably proud of. He actually 'made a difference' in a good way with his reporting, which was 100% on the up-and-up.

David Weigel|6.14.10 @ 5:26PM|#

Thanks! And all it got was a lousy honorable mention.
Yes, Weigel did such "service" to journalism by re-reporting on the Ron Paul newsletters. What would the liberterarian world ever have done without him and his epic reporting on the potential "racist" Ron Paul?

[BlackTerrel]

I don't understand the issue here. How is this in anyway an "ambush"? They asked a legit question and he freaked. Even if they are "Republican operatives" that doesn't change anything.

Look I understand an ambush. I felt bad and could relate to some of the people in the Borat movie who probably just nodded along to the crazy rantings of a non-native speaker and then suddenly found themselves in the national spotlight. I also understand the celebrities who are hounded by the Paparazzi relentlessly and eventually punch the guy out. All that I understand.

This was none of that. He was asked a legitimate question, he was not being followed or harassed and he acted like an our of control lunatic.

In these situations I like to reverse things. How would I feel if it was my guy in this situation? This lets me decide if I am being biased or not. And there are times here when someone will post a negative article about someone and I think about it and I say "well if this was a guy I supported I would excuse it" and I refuse to pile on with the criticism.

None of the above apply to this situation. I don't care if it was Ron Paul or my favorite uncle. If they acted this way I would say they acted like an asshole. That is that. This guy acted like an out of control asshole. And he should be charged with assault. And I would say the exact same even if it was a guy I supported.