Y'all read the Stomp Editorial in the NY Times today?

[Demoiselle]

(www.nytimes.com/2010/10/28/opinion/28thurs2.html?ref=opinion)


The Good Grey New York Times seems to believe, in its wisdom, that BOTH candidates are to blame for this thuggery.

Some excerpts:

......"The incident took place just before Mr. Paul and the Democrat, Attorney General Jack Conway, began their second debate. Lauren Valle — who was arrested in May during a Greenpeace demonstration against the Gulf oil spill — tried to present Mr. Paul with a mock award as part of a provocative skit that MoveOn had organized about secret corporate money in the campaign. Tim Profitt, Mr. Paul’s Bourbon County coordinator, helped wrestle her to the ground and pushed his foot into her head and shoulders. The police issued a criminal summons to Mr. Profitt, and the campaign dismissed him.

....."The Kentucky race has been boiling ever since Mr. Paul unexpectedly won the Republican primary on an extreme libertarian platform, saying he was not fully supportive of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and calling the Obama administration “un-American” for its strong criticism of BP during the oil spill. But it was taken to a shrill new level earlier this month when Mr. Conway decided to run an ad saying that Mr. Paul had been part of a college secret society that mocked Christianity and worshiped invented idols.

...."In the few days left in the campaign, the two candidates need to stop baiting each other and talk about their genuine policy differences. Before things get any worse."


I was looking for the magic phrase"There is NO EXCUSE for this behavior." Instead we get the "feelings are high on both sides" horseshit PLUS the gratuitous info that Ms. Valle was arrested for a demonstration in May.

I find this infuriating. Am I overreacting?

[JustAnotherGen]

1. Nope

I would hope to see: Tim Profitt engaged in an act of criminal assault and beyond a criminal summons he's going to be prosecuted in a court of law for assault and battery in the 1st degree.

[Enrique]

2. i find it infuriating too

they do this shit all the time.

[Ikonoklast]

3. And yet, it is only the liberal side of the equation getting stomped on,

threatened with death, their families put in danger, their supporters getting beaten...


Yeah, both sides do it.


BULLSHIT.


Until we finally wake up and start to knock a few of their heads together, call me.

[demwing]

4. Not at all

pure bullshit from the Times. How sad...

But then again, I understand why. I believe it's part of of a reluctance to see this violence for what it is. We can't believe we're all not good people, so we presume that the victim must have deserved it in some way.

This helps us stay blind to the fact that the right is pulling us into jackbooted tyranny, and that the rest of us are doing nothing to stop it.

[Angry Dragon]

5. Mr. Proffit is 53 years old .............. bad back ......... retired

Is he getting disability, work comp, is he on the government dole??
If he is then why is he supporting a man that wants less government??
Why is not anyone asking these questions??

[glitch]

8. Excellent questions! nt

[glitch]

6. The Grey Lady reminds me of Mrs. Bates.

Norman's mom. There's healthy grey (more like silver, think Betty White) and then there's long dead mummified grey.

A corpse being propped up by sickos. RIP.

[lumberjack_jeff]

7. Head stomping? Aqua-budda made me do it. n/t

[gratuitous]

9. Let's see, physical assault = negative ad

I'm just trying to keep up. Paul's mob beats down a Conway supporter, but it's all right really, because Conway's campaign ran an ad critical of Paul. The Conway ad was "shrill" and there's nothing worse than that. Elided over is the fact that in all the time since the Conway ad aired, Paul has never quite gotten around to denying that the incident ever happened. I realize Paul's scheduled out the wazoo, but he can't take a few seconds to say that the Aqua Buddha incident never happened? Is there a reasonable inference that can be drawn?

So Conway runs an ad about an incident, quite old to be sure, but apparently true. But it's "shrill"! So Rand's supporters are totally justified in assaulting Conway partisans. Is that what the Times is saying?

[DirkGently]

10. Not overreacting. The editorial couldn't run harder from the TPer's unmasking as snarling thugs.