Why are DUers debating what kind of "person" Andrew Meyers is?

[Exiled in America]

What difference does that make to his constitutional rights? Excessive force by police / rent-a-police is okay if the victim is a jerk or idiot?

We taser people for being attention seekers now?

We're comfortable with the turn our country is taking towards more and more of a police state?

Jon Stewart said last night, "this was a case of excessive force and student douchebaggery." That about sums it up, but the latter does not somehow excuse the former.

[babylonsister]

1. I was HOPING someone would start another thread about this!

:sarcasm:

[Exiled in America]

4. There is nothing sillier than making a post in a thread saying you don't want to post in a thread

:eyes:

Don't like my topic? The "hide thread" button is your friend.

[babylonsister]

9. If you have been around the last couple of days, you'd agree with me.

But you advice is priceless.

[baby_mouse]

64. Replying in a thread negatively regarding its visibility...

...guarantees putting it on the front page.

[bryant69]

2. Because if a guy wants to be tasered to embarrass John Kerry,

that should be part of the story.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Exiled in America]

5. Oh please.

:eyes:

[bryant69]

7. Ah I see you can't come up with a contradictory argument. n/t

[Exiled in America]

16. Not quite.

I just don't think every "argument" warrants my time.

The simple fact is, this guy could have been wearing a sign that says "I hope I get tasered by cops to embarass John Kerry" and it would make absolutely no difference to his civil rights.

His "motives" should not be the story. That's what freepers do. His rights should be.

[Moochy]

19. Didnt you get the memo?

We are moving to merit-based rights system. That whole civil rights thing did not focus group as well as the merit based system.

[bryant69]

46. I said this below and I'll say it up here

If all you want to do is talk about the cops, I agree. If you want to talk about how this incident shows something about John Kerry or about Elected Dems, than I disagree.

Bryant

[Bassic]

70. That's true enough. nt

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Moochy]

6. I learn the darnedest things here

Its like a teach-in, but with less facts!

[YOY]

3. ...

[Exiled in America]

13. You know, some of us were in school all day yesterday

If this topic is old and tired to you, STOP POSTING IN THEM and enjoy the wonderful benefits of the hide thread button.

Me, I was suprised to log into DU this morning for the first time in 24 hours and see all kinds of threads / posts focused on what kind of person this was.

[YOY]

15. Hey, I quite agree with you about the guy

It's just the topic I wish people would move on from. Yesterday half of the posts were about the guy.

[poverlay]

8. You're right. People here are acting exactly like freepers. This is exactly what they do. I've

mostly stayed out of this fracas 'til now, but I find it shameful how easily many DUers get distracted and off message. No wonder things suck. Those of us who are trying to fix things can't unite long enough to agree on how to fix things let alone when, where, etc..
All we do is argue and attack and it shames me almost to the point of despair. Of course that's another weapon of the enemy.

[displacedtexan]

10. I see neither heroes nor villains in that incident.

Stewart has a great point, IMHO.

I have a real problem with tasers. Period.

I'm pretty sure (after watching all of the youtube videos) that the words
"blow job" caused the event organizers to cut the mic and set the police reaction in motion.

As for Sen. Kerry, I didn't expect him to jump into a police matter, nor did I personally
need him to do that in order to be my hero.

I haven't said much about this incident here on DU, but I can understand how different people comprehend
the situation differently.

"A case of excessive force and student douchebaggery" says it better than I can say it.

Thanks for posting this.

[Exiled in America]

28. no villians? Maybe villians is the wrong word, but there certainly was WRONG

"excessive force" is wrong.

We should be critical of the police who used it and demand accountability for their actions.

[Moochy]

47. Tasertastic!

Authoritarians and Cops love their tasers.. even here. Torture and excess, its not just for the enemy abroad, but for domestic technofascism to fully succeed we must assault the character of the victims. Cmon DU'ers do your part in bringing forth a more flexible compromised position on rights! Douchebag? Taser. Got a ornery president of the axis of evil who wants to go to ground zero? Taser him.

[onenote]

54. almost certainly not "excessive force" as a matter of law

YOu may disagree with the law, but until its changed, I'm pretty certain that the cops actions in this instance would be upheld in a heartbeat. Read the leading case on excessive force and compare it to this case and you'll see why.
http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200314745.pdf

[Exiled in America]

57. Well, the ACLU disagrees with you.

And they've had "a little bit" of experience interpreting the law around use of force. :)

[onenote]

60. The ACLU disagrees with respect to this particular case?

Or do they disagree with the law? They may disagree with the law, and want to see it changed, and I might even agree. But for right now, can you show me a legal decision or citation that contradicts or overturns the Draper case.

[lateo]

11. Because then they can justify what happened to him

for daring to question dear Kerry about him screwing us over in 2004. It really is amazing how many authoritarians are here.

[NavyDavy]

21. ok we get it you are a Kerry basher... now go away

[lateo]

23. Not likely mate.

I've been around DU since almost the beginning at DU1. So you can go and piss off.

[cali]

25. and one of the most vociferous. n/t

[lateo]

33. Yes, well some of us

Want to know why Kerry didn't fight for the election in 2004. Some people feel betrayed by him. Pardon us for caring.

[cali]

40. some of you simply have a hate on for Kerry n/t

[lateo]

42. That is your view.

I don't hate Kerry, I don't hate anyone. But I am sorely disappointed in him for not fighting for us in 2004. Don't you care that your vote was pissed away? Don't you care that Kerry not fighting for us left us at the hands of a megalomaniac? Or is it more important to you to protect Kerry's image?

[Bluerthanblue]

59. are you sure

your outrage over this incident is not fueled by your disappointment at Kerry's NOT being the President?

Your words seem to say that you blame him personally for the fact that * is at the helm-

I could give a fuck about a persons image. But I do care about people being dealt with honestly-

Those who lay the fault for what went down on Kerry aren't being honest, fair, or objective. imo

Meyers writing that was posted is very good. That doesn't make him either innocent or guilty - that writing has nothing to do with what happened in that auditorium.

[lateo]

61. I blame Kerry for not fighting...

His knees caved quicker than a $20.00 whore on payday. In 2000, under similar circumstances, Al Gore fought for us. He set the example for how you look out for the interests of the people who voted for you.

[Bluerthanblue]

66. i didn't ask

how you felt about Kerry's not fighting the result.

I asked if you were sure that your frustration with that wasn't coloring your view of what went down in Fla.

I don't believe Al Gore did enough to get the seat he was elected to- either.

I'm not without predjuce-

The tazing incident should be viewed apart from our personal grudges is what i'm saying.

[lateo]

71. Let's see.

"are you sure your outrage over this incident is not fueled by your disappointment at Kerry's NOT being the President?"
Yes.

"Your words seem to say that you blame him personally for the fact that * is at the helm-"

This is partly true. Kerry does share some of the blame for * being president. He ran a terrible campaign and in the end failed to stand up and fight against widespread vote fraud. It is impossible to say that his fighting could have reversed what happened but his inaction guaranteed the worst possible outcome.

In regards to Meyers, I don't care about his reputation, what I saw was a citizen of this country being brutalized by the State for asking questions. It just so happened to be during a John Kerry event. I would have been equally pissed off if it would have happened at "Jimmy Neutron on Ice". However, this particular event sparked an interest in me because I have always wanted to hear Kerry's excuse for not going the distance in 2004. It is too bad that the cops created a sideshow out of the whole thing because I wanted to hear Kerry's answer...an answer he never gave. Kerry did make a joke about this young man getting dragged off which just further tarnished my image of him.

[Bluerthanblue]

73. what was the joke?

i missed it-

[lateo]

76. He said...

"I'd like to answer his question but he isn't here to swear me in as President."

[Bluerthanblue]

77. -

strange joke-
thanks.

:hi:

[Bluebear]

12. They bitch because nobody is "in your face" about the war, then turn on a dime & cheer this taze.

It's incredible.

[bryant69]

14. Are they they the same people?

I mean I've been both defending Congressional Democrats and suggesting this guy may not be exactly what he presents himself to be - those don't seem to be contradictory to me.

Bryant

[Bluebear]

20. Did you read his July essay on the Iraq war?

[bryant69]

26. I don't believe so - I'm not sure of the relevance

I don't question his opposition to the war or his sincerity in opposing Senator Kerry - I don't think he's a secret freeper. I haven't seen him at any of the meetings, for one thing.

Bryant

[Bluebear]

27. In any case you don't taze someone for who "they present themselves to be".

Either it was excessive force or it was not.

[bryant69]

44. If all you want to talk about is the cops - I agree

If you want to paint this incident as showing the moral decadence of Elected Democrats, than I disagree.

Bryant

[Bluebear]

48. This has nothing to do with Kerry to me.

[Bluerthanblue]

53. it does to many people

wether they admit it or not-

[rodeodance]

17. seems Jon S. got it right. enough said.

[Bluerthanblue]

18. "who" Andrew Meyers is isn't important- BUT

when people start "dei"fing him, calling him "Rosa Parks" and refusing to acknowledge any responsibility he might have for what happened to him, his character enters in.

Why do people attack Sen. Kerry and disparage his character over this incident?

He didn't say "sic-him!!" or ask that the man be removed- wanted to let the man speak, and answer his question- if Mr. Meyers would have been still long enough to let him-


Our prejudices are showing.

[Exiled in America]

24. I guess I haven't read far enough back to see the "deification" yet, but I agree...

...I'd be just as frustrated by that. This kid is seems to be a douchebag, and just because he was a victim of excessive force doesn't make him a saint. But he WAS a victim of excessive force, and being a douchebag is not a crime.

[lateo]

30. No but...

being a douchebag that questions Kerry is around these parts.

[Bluebear]

31. Read "douchebag's" essay, EIA. It's like anything you could read at DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1848386&mesg_id=1848386

And indeed, excessive force is the issue. I don't know why people are so quick to cheer the use of shock weapons.

[Bluerthanblue]

38. i agree that the use of excessive force

is flat out wrong-

Its easy for me to say that were i there i wouldn't have decided to tazer him- If you watch all the available clips, you can see that he was escalating the situation- very intentionally. The cops just wanted him out of the room where he could calm down, or at least rant without an audience to play to-

When they are trying to get control of him, he's fighting and yelling- I would personally have liked them to continue to try and get him to comply and then remove him, they warned him he'd be tazered if he didn't settle down- and he continued to shout and struggle- when he screamed out in response to the tazering, the police WERE afraid- you can see it in one of the clips- people in the crowd started yelling out, and they were clearly worried that the whole auditorim was going to revolt-
I'm not trying to justify what was done- but rather to try and understand how it escalated to the point it did, and what could have been done differently. Both sides made mistakes imo-

:hi:

no, being a douchebag is not a crime- but policemen are just human beings too-

[The Vinyl Ripper]

43. Rosa Parks broke the law..

And was treated similarly by the authorities.

And yet she is now a hero..

On edit:

If it had been Bush up there on the stage, every single DU'er would be screaming for his head..

[Bluerthanblue]

49. if it had been bush doing the heckling would there be this kind of

outrage about his treatment? is what i've been asking-

Your twist on the situation doesn't really stretch our tolerance- or test our integrety(imo)

Many of us share the frustration Meyers initially spoke about- it is not difficult to identify with that issue.

I'm trying to encourage people to step into the other perspective, and see it from all sides.

Sometimes that helps-

[Stuckinthebush]

55. Surely you aren't comparing Meyers with Parks?

Surely not.

[baby_mouse]

67. Certainly looks like it.

I don't understand the problem. *Some* aspects of his situation map onto hers. Those are the aspects one should concentrate on in a comparison, not the differences, which is what you do when you *contrast* examples rather than compare them.

I don't think there's anything to be gained from reeling in horror because he isn't as "holy" as Rosa Parks. He attempted to resist authority, so did she. The act of comparison itself isn't unreasonable, it's the *result* of the comparison that should cast
light on the situation.

True there are some DUers who are going all holy-ass on him, which I think is stuuuuupid, but there *is* a point to be made regarding the efficacy of his tactics, which isn't really being discussed. Rosa Parks is probably the most useful avenue of comparison through which to open up such a dialogue.

[Stuckinthebush]

72. Rosa Parks was rebelling against segregation

Non-Caucasians in the US were given unequal status in all aspects of civic life. Her rebellion in the deep south could have cost her life. It was a brave act that took an unmeasurable amount of courage. Her actions were a catalyst in the eventual overturning of brutal Jim Crow laws in the South.

Andrew Meyer came to a public hearing looking for a confrontation. He was allowed to ask his questions and then when it became apparent that he was not going to act civilly he was asked to step aside. Upon this request by police (who clearly were aware of his history and intent), he started screaming and resisting. Upon resisting the officers tried to control him which is their duty. He continued to resist and scream which caused the officers to move to different restraint techniques. Unfortunately, the infamous taser was allegedly used and here we are today. The young man was not protesting a dual class system nor was he putting his life on the line. He came prepared for a scene with camera in hand with the purpose of placing the video on his web site. He even laughed with the officers in the police vehicle saying that they did nothing wrong and he was ok with all of it which indicates that he knew that it was a farce. The young man was given an opportunity to ask his question like all others at the meeting. When he became uncivil in our civil society he was asked to leave. Nothing about this is Rosa Parks-like and the comparison does an injustice to Ms. Parks and the civil rights movement.

[baby_mouse]

78. Shrug. I have to say I don't entirely disagree with you.

And at least you've gone to the trouble of actually making the comparison and discarding the bits that don't fit.

[Stuckinthebush]

80. OK

Look, if we can't get into a nasty sub-thread flame fest then what the hell are we doing here? This is DU after all!

Come on! Tell me I'm a authoritarian butt head or something!

:D

[baby_mouse]

81. You're a poo poo McNugget-head.

So there. :D

[Stuckinthebush]

83. Hot damn, now we are rolling!

How do you dress yourself in the morning?

You foul glob of irritating chicken waste!

You incredible basin of wild Ewok excrement!

You despicable shovel-full of dusky lark's vomit!


(I had to use the insult generator I found at http://www.webinsult.com)

:D

[baby_mouse]

85. One of your trouser legs is slightly too short!

And anyway, you dress generally in the manner of a tour guide on an inexpensive package holiday!

Pick the bones out of that, you coelacanth!


:P

[Bluerthanblue]

29. if the questioner had been a. coulter, or *, or rove, would you

still be outraged by his treatment?

We claim to be crying about the amount of force used in response to what is being called exercising free speech, were the situation changed and the heckler espousing a perspective that we are completely opposed to, I ask you- would everyone be as anxious to defend them???


Somehow i don't think so-:shrug:

[Bluebear]

32. ABSOLUTELY. That is what standing up for equality means.

[Exiled in America]

35. Man, you picked the wrong person to ask that of - I worked for the ACLU

before going back to graduate school...

...the answer to your question is YES I would absolutely be outraged by his treatment! In fact I know I'm naive but it still stuns me that any person claiming to care about civil rights wouldn't be outraged regardless of who the person is!

Civil rights aren't conditional. I supported the national ACLU in its defense of Rush Limbaugh's right to privacy during the scandal over his drug use. I supported the ACLU when they defended Jerry Falwell. And I supported the ACLU when they defended the rights of Fred Phelps.

I care about the rights of every person. And defending the 1st amendment rights for people I disagree with is one of the most important things I can do.

[Bluebear]

36. Bravo, EIA. You walk the walk. nt

[Bluerthanblue]

45. I'm glad- I don't have a problem believing either you or Bluebear but

I do believe there are those who have made Meyers into a saint, and used this incident to vent against Kerry, who would rejoice and celebrate were the 'victim' not someone who they felt ...kinship.. with-

But i'd love to be wrong.

For example, I believe in free speech, but i don't support fred phelps' picketing funerals. His right to 'speech' ends where it violates others right to not be verbally and visually assaulted while laying their loved ones to rest.

So, i can't really claim to be without personal predjuce.

Kudos to those who can though!

Thanks
:hi:

[Exiled in America]

56. He has the right to express his opinion in public.

Fred Phelp's right does not include the right to attend a private funeral and protest. It DOES however, include the right to stand on the public sidewalk and say whatever he wants.

[Jed Dilligan]

50. Hypothetical--because those cowards

would never put their ass on the line--but if they got tased without at least a weapon in hand I would still side with them vs. the cops.

[baby_mouse]

69. Somehow you don't think so.

Well you don't know, then, do you? Why should anybody defend imaginary positions that you attribute to them?

[Bluerthanblue]

75. um... that is

why i asked the question?

Or did you miss that?

:shrug:

[baby_mouse]

79. Yes, I did miss that, I read your post as rhetorical.

My apologies.

*humble bow*...

(this site could do with a humble bow emoticon, really...)

[Bluerthanblue]

82. no problem- i

agree with the emoticon wish- i'd probably end up using it more than any other.

peace-

blu

[Cha]

34. If we tasered people for being Assholes..

there would have to be a swat team of taser bearers deployed to the white house.

[cali]

37. I agree with Jon Stewart

but I think a lot of the focus on Andrew Meyer is of his own making.

[aikoaiko]

39. He was tasered for resisting the police escort several times.

and trying to wrestle free from the police after we was disruptive.

Understanding who the student is helps us understand the motive of his disorderly behavior and why he resisted the police.

[Bluebear]

41. Good, you can learn who the student is right here, a passionate Democrat:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1855324

[cali]

51. Just because he's a passionate dem

doen't exempt him from criminal behavior such as disorderly conduct. No, he shouldn't have been tasered. Yes, he's a self-promoter who crossed the line.

[Bluebear]

52. As you know, we disagree on this :)

[aikoaiko]

63. how nice, his friends say we a swell guy. :eyes roll:

Too bad he was an ass, attention whore, and an embarrassment at Kerry's talk who was disruptive and escorted out of the meeting. Had he not physically and forcefully resisted several times, he wouldn't have been tasered.

[tom_paine]

58. Because we ALL are so accustomed to arguing through Bushie Frames

that we cannot even see what we have become anymore.

"Attack the person, not the idea" works as well now when the Bushies are doing it as it worked whne the Nazis were doing it.

What is worse, how easily those of us who should "know better" fall into this trap.

It is the power, might and majesty of Goebbels v2.0, the Bushie Propaganda program that has been going on since the 70s or 80s, and is now bearing Hitlerian fruit, which is great if you're a Hitler-type or a Hitler-follower-type, but bad for the 74% of Loyal Americans who aren't.

And if anyone thinks I am excluding myself from everyone ese, I am as susceptible to subconscious propaganda advertising & Bushie framing, as everyone else is.

Being a sibconscious assault, it is difficult to resist.

So, I don't wonder anymore at myself or other DUers adopting Bushie frames to discuss "current events" in the Bushie False Reality Bubble.

It is what we grew up with, were indoctrinated with, what we're used to (yes, even those who see through it, Google "operant conditioning"), and what we fall back on whether we want to or not.

I am not suprised at all that what we are discussing is what the bushies want us to discuss...again.

[stillcool]

62. Is the subject ...

the use of tasers?
Is the subject police brutality?
Is the subject perceived threats?
Is the subject our violent society?
What is protection, what is intervention...and when and how do they meet?

[NaturalHigh]

65. Because we all know that you have no rights if you question the establishment.

It doesn't matter if it's Democratic or Republican. Our politicians feel a sense of entitlement, and they don't want to be inconvenienced by anyone who questions them.

Whether or not the guy who got the taser treatment is a jerk is irrelevant. Our country will never change until our politicians feel the need to answer to the people once in a while.

[blm]

74. Kerry INVITED Meyers question to stop the confrontation w/police but MEYERS wanted

the confrontation and exaggerated his erratic behavior to spur that confrontation.

Kerry had stopped the confrontation the moment he invited Meyers question. The cops stopped - then what did Meyers do? PERGORMED in a way to restart the confrontation he wanted filmed.

[Bassic]

68. Didn't you get the memo?

If you're not nice, you have no rights! :sarcasm:

[6000eliot]

84. I know that all of these people would be singing a completely different tune if this had happened at

a Bush event, and nobody will ever be able to tell me different. Who is going after this kid anyway? Who is digging stuff up on him?

[earth mom]

86. People on DU diss Cindy Sheehan for speaking out.

But it's okay for them to spew whatever they want about Sheehan or Meyers. :eyes:

This place is infested if you know what I mean.