Right Wing Entitlement Culture: Pt. II - The Media

UPDATE: Somehow I posted the unchecked, raw version of this post the other day without noticing it. So, in the spirit of showing you that I'm not a dithering buffoon who doesn't understand grammar, here's the version that should have been posted.

---------------------------------------------

In the second installment of our series on Right Wing Entitlement Culture, we examine the singular aspect of the modern American landscape that the Right claims is largely against them - The Media.

While the Modern American Right continually blast the "Mainstream Media", it's interesting to note that they also love to blather endlessly about how Fox"News" enjoys a massive audience share that other outlets should be jealous of.

Admittedly, I do watch Fox"News" now and again, but not for the reasons that they claim most people do. More on that aspect of the Right and the media in America in a moment.

I thought I would start this off with what is likely the perfect example of Right Wing Entitlement machinations: a healthy dose of rank conjecture, conspiracy, and more than a sprinkling of insistence of victimhood.



Immediately Breitbart goes after his most prestigious foe - Media Matters. Not because they are explicitly wrong by using context and the precise and accurately accounted words of the Modern American Right and their Fox"News" masters, but because he has a metaphorical hard-on to see Eric Boehlert and company be proven false by any means necessary.

This is the first, and most shining example, of conservative framing - attack the messenger without merit.

In terms of O'Reilly's insistence that he and Fox"News" have proven that Media Matters is a sham operation funded almost exclusively by George Soros, he again references the demonstrably misleading chart of Soros's financial contributions to Media Matters - something Breitbart and Fox"News" have tried to do with NPR as well.

This is where Breitbart - accompanied by an easily convinced O'Reilly - start to make completely false connections with Media Matters, Daily Kos, and Anthony Weiner's staffers that is the perfect definition of "unfounded". What O'Reilly postulates is that simply because people question Breitbart's motives and sources, they are simply trying to "smear" him.

Here is where they actually got it wrong, though their instincts were right from the start.

Andrew Breitbart has been so eager to prove that his socio-political opposites are nothing but corrupt and immoral that he will distribute and champion material that he apparently doesn't properly vet. And for those that used this template as a rational for going after the story and it's credibility, they were wrong - this time.

Breitbart then tries to explain his specious and laughably poor "connections" by referencing the non-controversial Journolist story as if it were in any way controversial. But, to a Conservative or Libertarian, any way to besmirch media that you don't control automatically demands that you label it as controversial.

The pair then went full-on Beckian to insist that MSNBC, Media Matters, and the White House are in this together in order to attack Breitbart and Fox"News". Again, this is something that is not even provable or even in the realm of speculation. What Breitbart and O'Reilly are relying on is another piece of conservative framing - something that media outlets have decided to cover based on nothing more than the Right has said that it was true.

Certainly, Barack Obama has had meeting with bloggers and reporters that champion the Left, but he has be equally open to those on the Right. But, I suppose that O'Reilly and Breitbart think that since they have both not been invited to an exclusive "sit-down" with Obama that this means that there is some sinister plot to destroy them.

Immediately following, O'Reilly defends his network's easily probable track record - defending, championing, and even employing members of the Modern American Right - against attacks targeting them when Breitbart boasts it is simply "projection" by the Left. It's at this point in the "interview" that reality is completely turned on its head.

After Brietbart lambastes The Huffington Post for being a primary source for ensuring that conservative claims never see the light of day - something that simply doesn't happen - O'Reilly goes full on "you know they are going to try and kill you". And Breitbart is more than eager to embrace that meme. After all, conservative victimhood works to their advantage more often than most people are willing to admit.

With that said, I'm not going to state that people of any ideological stripe have not threatened Breitbart. But one has to question what those threats are and if they are real or just posturing. We have all seen where conservative rhetoric leads to.

So how does this "interview" express the very real aspect of Right Wing Entitlement Culture in relation to modern media?

Primarily, it demands that anyone within the Modern American Right never be accountable for their previous mistakes and favor a singular instance where they were correct. I'm reminded of the popular phrase that "a blind squirrel can find a nut every great once in a while".

Secondly, The Right demand on a daily basis that their framing be used as a primer for all media coverage. Unfortunately for those of Liberal/Progressive perspective, this is all too true - even though the opposition that makes these demands will never admit it. Just take a look at virtually all the Sunday Shows on all major networks and you will see this in action. The Modern American Right demand that all media push their narrative - regardless of its merit - again and again and again. This is where they get the term "Liberal Media Bias". If someone doesn't genuflect to their particular belief system then you are guilty of heresy of the highest order.

For classic examples of what Breitbart and O'Reilly are referencing, check here and here.

Let's get back to the notion that Fox"News" has such a large audience share because their "reporting" is accurate, yet they can't seem to embrace the idea that this would make them "mainstream".

I have stated many times that accurate reporting and ratings-share are mutually exclusive creatures and to state that one equals another is a complete fabrication. This equivocation is another form of Right Wing framing. If this were true, then it should cross over into all forms of communications to audiences: The film AVATAR would have been more factually accurate than The Hurt Locker, as more people saw the former at theatres than the later.

Also, employees of Fox"News" have also claimed that America is a nation that is "Center-Right", yet that flies in the face of the fact that a plurality oppose the views that Fox and their compatriots champion.

The job of the American Media is to report the events of the day. When those events are beginning to be largely shaped by Right Wing ideology - and the media doesn't accept that premise - those that are attempting to shape it consider themselves being attacked by those they are attempting to control. This is the very nature of Right Wing Entitlement culture in relation to media.

Essentially, they are spoiled children being told that they can't have all that they want all the time. The reality is that their socio-political opponents are not in control the way they are being presented as.

Decision Time

Fox"News" is practically beside themselves over Palin's upcoming "Hey, I'm On A Bus Again" show and how this likely means that she's running for President.





Let's not mince words on this - Palin loves her "celebrity stature" and will not give that up if she doesn't have to. And there are lots of things that Palin would have to give up if she won:

- No more "speaking engagements" where she gets paid above and beyond what anyone of her faux intellectual level should get paid.

- No more "campaigning"; since as we all know, the Modern American Right can't stand it when people "campaign all the time".

- No more "reality TV shows", because she'll have to be making important decisions now rather than trying to pretend that her and her family and just "normal, real, Americans".

- No longer can she be in the employ of Fox"News".

But wait, would she really be giving all that up if she did win? Do you think Fox"News", talk radio, and her drooling sychophants would let her?

I'm not going to convince myself that she isn't going to run, nor am I going to be afraid that she would win, since there are enough people within the Modern American Right that will realize that as the days draw closer to election day 2012, that they can't afford to have someone like Palin in the White House.

Sure, she won't be doing it alone - as all Presidents have various advisers and cabinet members - but at the end of the day, this is the woman that quit ( and yes, she quit ) when the political pressure got to her. Obama has had to endure more pressure and specious scandal than Palin could possibly imagine, and he hasn't quit.

As far as myself, I say bring her on. And when she does announce - and she will - we are going to see infighting within the Modern American Right the likes of which no one has seen in a generation - possibly ever.

Rush's Race To Use Race - Again

I'll forgo to obvious hypocrisy in Rush complaining about anyone on the political Left calling for "Civil War".

Take a listen to this......



Sure, it's a truncated quote from the show - and I would have loved to have heard the rest of his analogy - but this is part and parcel of whom Rush Limbaugh is: a socio-political virus that feels more than comfortable not only maligning anyone that isn't white but also appropriating the struggles of blacks to gain their Civil Rights in a sad attempt to make him and his ideological kindred equal to those men and women in the 60s South that faced more than just "fire hoses".

Free Market Ignorance

And I thought people like Fox"News" and the crazies they get some of their best material from were supposed to understand how "choice and competition" work.



Stupid doesn't burn much more than that.

Right Winger Says What?

In which Fox"News" cobbles together a panel designed to create the appearance of "balance" and "knowledge" only to have Micheal Scheuer come up with this whopper of a line at the 1:47 mark.



So, Americans hoping for a Democracy in a foreign country that is primarily Muslim are now labeled "Marxists"? Wait, the modern American Right are now Marxists because of what they wanted for Iraq and Afghanistan?

And this guy was allegedly some "terrorism expert"?

ASIDE: While Scheuer's laughable proclamation stands on it's own as a signifier of precisely how "buzzword crazy" the Right has gone in the last two years, it's almost equally as worthy to note how the modern American Right are worried about Egypt not being sufficiently "secular" while all but demanding Theocratic Rule here in America.

The Airing Of Grievances

While the true face of Fox is celebrating the Palin/Santorum fight, there's always the morning damage control team to count on to provide the "context" needed.



It's not a surprise that Palin - the candidate that Fox"News" will ultimately back for President in 2012 - is tasked to challenge any and every high level GOP member just to see how the Right Wing voting populace will react. Once it looks like Palin has made sufficient headway, her target is then tasked with bowing out from the fight as gracefully as possible in order to save enough face with the modern American Right that they can continue to be seen as a relevant voice.

Their games are so transparent, aren't they......

It Wasn't A Boxing Match

That, however, doesn't stop Fox"News" from claiming that there should be a "winner" to talk about.

Really?




.....but it wasn't much of an interview either.



Granted, this was the first part of a multi-part interview in which O'Reilly was more concerned with ratings rather than conducing any type of hard-hitting Q&A session.

And right on schedule, the fine, patriotic, folks at Fox"Nation" are framing the interview in their predictable way - and allowing unblushing racism and calls for assassination to go unchallenged.

But what else would one expect from Fox and their audience.

Floating The Understudy

I noticed early on that Palin was already being used as a "comparison metric" for the incoming Tea Bagger class of Congressional Representatives, and now it seems like Fox"News" is pushing the American Right prerequisite of "you must be pretty" in order to be taken seriously.



Yeah, and I'm guessing that most people on Fox think that Micheal Bay films are great simply because there are lots of "special effects".

Here's an early prediction - Noem will be offered a show on Fox"News" before the next Congressional elections, or maybe as a result of.

Shark, You Have Been Jumped - Again

I would say that this is shocking, unheard of, or even unexpected - but it is Limbaugh we are talking about.



Talk about someone completely missing the point.

Have you heard anyone on the left call Lougher a victim, claim he should get a lesser sentence, or even say that "America" is to blame? The only person I heard those claims come from was Rush.

While highlighting Sarah Palin as the "figurehead" of all violent Right-Wing rhetoric isn't exactly productive, this tirade from Limbaugh makes that look small time and easily ignorable.

But, the damage is done, and now a majority of conservatives in America are going to go to work, school, church, Wal-Mart, or anywhere they can find someone to listen that Democrats are prepared to give Jared Loughner a lesser sentence simply because Rush Limbaugh said so.

Typical.

Lessons In Conservative History

Considering the abject failure that Newt's "shutdown" was during Clinton's first term, why would they even be considering it as a possible "positive" for conservative gains in terms of the legislative process they claim to be championing?



You'll notice that Perino is still in her "press secretary" mode for the conservative movement, as she punctuated her statements by saying any form of shut-down would have to be addressed from a "communications" standpoint.

There wasn't a Fox"News" during the bulk of the Clinton administration, and Bill would likely have had a more difficult time seeking a second term had the conservative noise machine had the platform it does now. In that respect, Perino is likely speaking from a more accurate perspective, as the modern conservative movement is going to see a potential governmental shutdown quite differently than they did 15 years ago.

But what liberals/progressives know is that even though the conservative message is louder and will be heard by more this time around, the realities and consequences behind any shutdown will largely remain the same as they were back then.

The Unhinged

It's just this sort of incident that allows conservatives to continually cast themselves in the role of "victim", question the integrity of media outlets that aren't Fox"News", and provide specious claims that it's actually The Left that is to blame for moments like this:



A look at Duke's Facebook page - which has been taken down, naturally - reveals this about the man.

Duke's "Favorite Quotes" section contains a number of links to political websites—mostly pretty out-there 9/11-truther-here-comes-the-new-world-order stuff, but also the mainstream liberal Media Matters and, of course, a Wikileaks mirror. (Expect these sites to be the ball in the exciting "Clay Duke Was a Dangerous Liberal" vs. "Clay Duke Was a Nutcase Conservative" game we'll all get to watch over the next few days.) His "Religious Views" are "Humanism" and his "Political Views" are "Freedom Fighter."

And Glenn Beck is already launched into this game, albeit with a half-hearted caveat that Media Matters really wasn't responsible for the shooting.

Considering that Duke's Facebook page is gone, we really don't know what he had to say about Media Matters, but Beck certainly continues to paint a dark and venomous picture of who runs MM. Look for Beck's writers to fold this story into a new chalkboard meme in the coming days.

Other conservatives are even framing this from the angle that Media Matters and liberals/progressives aren't even going to be remotely curious as to why Duke read, watched, and listened to the information sources he listed on his page. Naturally, the "truther" aspects of Duke's digital footprint get no mention from conservatives. Typical.

But looking at Duke's "suicide note", you get a clear picture that this man was pretty screwed up, and is more on par with an Alex Jones fan than a liberal or progressive.

My Testament: Some people (the government sponsored media) will say I was evil, a monster (V)… no… I was just born poor in a country where the Wealthy manipulate, use, abuse, and economically enslave 95% of the population. Rich Republicans, Rich Democrats… same-same… rich… they take turns fleecing us… our few dollars… pyramiding the wealth for themselves. The 95%… the us, in US of A, are the neo slaves of the Global South. Our Masters, the Wealthy, do, as they like to us…

As far as the "V" symbol, this will likely become part of the Beckian analysis of this story, though it just appears to be yet another example of how plain-old batshit crazy this guy was.

Origins Of Speciousness

Fox"News" has been all about trying to show that the Bush Era Tax Cuts not only didn't add to the deficit, but the economy they were designed to save in the first place - which they didn't - is going to be thrown into further turmoil if they aren't extended.

Here's Dana Perino still thinking she's Bush's Press Secretary putting forth the clearly false narrative that it's the Democrats fault that the Bush Tax Cuts had an expiration date.



Considering that Republicans held majorities - albeit slim ones - in both Houses of Congress at the time this legislation was put forth, Perino's assertion essentially falls flat. And even though there would be required a certain amount of Democratic votes, the timeline of the cuts was already in the initial legislation.

The reason for this was twofold:

First, their needed to be a sunset provision in order to prevent the deficit from exploding to such an extent that the Republican could clearly be blamed for it. Not that that would matter, seeing as how upward of 86% of our debt was created by Republicans anyway.

Secondly, it was to create the alleged "trap", as Republicans are at least smart enough to know that they and their policies can't stay in power and intact forever. It was a near perfect tool to use during a Democratically controlled Washington - be it the White House or one or both Houses of Congress. Ultimately, the blame cannot and shall not fall at the feet of those that created the issue to begin with.

Turkey Day Thoughts

With people like John Stossel attempting to connect on-existent dots between "socialism" and the first recorded Thanksgiving feast, to Congressman Todd Akin talking about the Pilgrims coming to the new world to get away from Unbiblical Socialism, on down to Glenn Beck issuing a talking points memo to use at the dinner table today in between helpings of cranberry sauce and slices of pecan pie, I am actually thankful that these men are doing what they are doing.

By that, I am glad for the Freedom of Speech - and it's counterpart - the right to use your freedom of speech to completely refute ( or as the woman who's reality show has recently seen nearly half her audience disappear, yet ends up having her complete and unblushing butchering of the English language recognized as ground-breaking would say - "refudiate" ) the nonsense that these same men spout.

But the things I am thankful for don't end there.

Here's a brief list of what I am truly thankful for this past year:

- That my grandmother is still with us. She's the true embodiment of what it means to be a southern conservatives that lived during two World Wars, survived the Great Depression, and doesn't take her religion to the utmost extreme where she is more concerned with telling people they are evil in favor of sharing her love for who they could be.

- My job. I am lucky enough to have a great job with healthcare benefits that mysteriously are going to be slashed or have costs increase like the bulk of the modern conservative movement claims they will be.

- My friends, both in the liberal/progressive blogging community and those I interact with in real life. I think, no matter who we are, we should be thankful that we have those select people in our lives that are willing to stand by us in tough times, yet show us the error of our ways or even correct us when we are wrong. I think that this is a fantastic signifier of how liberals/progressives differ with conservatives, as the later is more than willing to defend their "friends" when they are wrong more often than when they are right.

- My education, both on a traditional and non-traditional level. By that, I mean that I learned just as much - if not more - in college from what I didn't have to read, memorize, or was tested on. More often than not, as Einstein once rightfully pointed out, it is the aspects outside that traditional definition of scholastic learning that are our true education.

- Technology. It will never cease to amaze me that it is so easy to divine the truth from a statement or be able to destroy a specious claim through the use of technology. I think that this more than anything should be an aspect of the modern conservative movement- that technology is available to everyone that is willing to use it - and that the things you say are going to stay with you forever, no matter how inconsequential you feel they are at the time.

- Lastly, at least as far as this post is concerned, I am thankful that our democracy allows people like Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, or Christine O'Donnell to not only run for elected office but actually have the potential to win. And on that same token, I am glad that when those people win that most sacred of positions of power, I'm thankful that I - and others like me - will be here to shine a bright and cleansing light on who and what they are.

There are many other aspects of my life that I am happy and thankful for, but these are some that immediately came to mind. And, despite who you are, what you believe in, where you are, what you do, or why you do it, I hope that your Thanksgiving is filled with what makes you happy. While we may all not agree on that at this particular moment in time, I think I should point out that I'm not so heartless that I can't hope that you have at least one day of happiness.

Decision Flexible

It's not surprising that Bush's book has themes and passages lifted from previous writings that lauded him as a great leader.

It also comes as no surprise that Bush's book - was it even written by him? - is being recognized as a "best seller", considering conservative authors rely on bulk purchasing to further the narrative the America actually buys into such nonsense.

And it should come as a shock to no one that Fox"News" is going to give Bush a multimedia handjob as often and as fervent as they can. But when they say he's "the boss", then one has to look at what they consider a successful "boss" to be.

Here's Hannity offering yet another dose of his man-love for W.



Seems that Fox, and apparently their viewership, think a "real boss" displays these qualities and runs his "business" like this:

- Taking credit for the successes of others

- Failing at literally every level of his private sector business attempts

- Ignoring a glaring warning of a threat against our nation

- Isn't concerned with the leadership of those that attacked us on Sept. 11th

- Presided over an administration that is responsible for a "bailout" that is now attributed to Obama and Democrats

- Increased the national debt by trillions in less than 10 years

Is that the type of "boss" you want?

Glittering Economic Generalities

I've always had a good laugh when listening to conservatives that were pretty much mum on economic issues for 8 years now fancy themselves masters in economic theory.



And while Palin was absent from the socio-political scene in the lower 48 until John McCain sealed his own fate by choosing Palin as his running-mate, you get the same sense from her - that she has no clue what she's talking about.

During the 10 years the Bush Tax Cuts were in place, incomes actually decreased by $2.7 trillion dollars, so to say that that the Obama administration is responsible for money not being about to be invested is to ignore even recent economic realities.

Secondly, in terms of "job creation", the unemployment rate during the Clinton era - when the marginal tax rate was reset to 34% - and that same group after the implementation of the Bush Tax Cuts is quite clear. So, to that end, I would ask Palin where were the jobs "created" during the tax cuts she is championing to extend?

This isn't to say that investment wasn't possible during Bush's tenure in office, just largely ignored or even muted by those that were able to invest and "create" jobs.

As an aside that I think should be hammered home by everyone that responds to allegations such as these by Palin - or any conservative the pretends to even marginally understand the complexities of the modern economic realm - what happened to those same conservatives complaining about Democrats engaging in "class warfare"? It's pretty obvious that that is precisely what she is doing and what Fox"Business" does on a daily basis.

Economics aren't cannot and should not be viewed through a conservative or a liberal lens. I think that that is where many people get off track when debating this topic.

Exit Question: If conservatives really wanted these cuts to be permanent, why did they set them to expire in 10 years?

The Voter As Consumer

Because after all, don't we all look to Dana Perino for honest analysis of edited clips from a much larger 60 minutes interview?



I'll forgo the preposterous notion Perino put forth that we are a "center-right" nation and just get right to the meat of the issue.

Obama made a very valid point about how it's much easier to talk about your ideas and your vision for improvement of the nation while on the campaign trail. This is what brought out the vote for him in 2008. But it's a totally new day once in office.

The reason that he finds it more difficult to implement his administrations plans is the completely unchecked - and often unchallenged - ignorance from the collective Right. This isn't, my any means, to say these people aren't educated, aren't aware of their surroundings, or lack the mental capacity to decided what is and what isn't beneficial to them. However, one must look at where many of these people - particularly the Tea Baggers - get their "facts".

And isn't that the point that Dana is ignoring. It's not that she is missing it, considering who she is currently employed by, but she is not admitting that conservative voters across the country voted in large part on how Fox"News" and their mouth agape throngs that aggregate it to them to.

As stated before, it's a matter of perception versus perspective. If you lack the accuracy of the later, a distortion of the former by an outside source is all too easy.

Excuses

In which the pity party for Christine O'Donnell begins - sort of.



Yeah, because a Republican could NEVER win in Delaware.

Wait, wasn't Castle a..................ah, nevermind. If you don't have the words "Socialism", "Liberty", "Terrorism", and "Radical" in your prepared remarks then you really aren't a Republican are you?

But What Will They Do?

I voted around 930 this morning.

My polling place was a local Baptist Church - something I found rather odd - and I immediately noticed that there were more people there than the Presidential election. Taking a quick glance around the room, it was populated largely with white males who's median age was easily over 60. And upon returning to the parking lot, I started to count the Rand Paul bumper stickers. Needless to say there were a great deal of them.

I didn't get exit polled - I never have, actually - but I did decide to drive around town to check and see if the Tea Baggers were out on street corners shouting as cars passed by.

Not a soul.

Were they all posted up on couches having their premature victory talking points spoon fed to them by Fox? Were they at work talking about how great America will be since the Republicans are "taking their country back"? Who's to know.

But here's one thing I do know - the Republicans who do win tonight should really start to consider what they are going to do once they move into those cozy offices on Capital Hill.

I'm not so naive to think that there won't be a majority of Republicans in the House, but they won't control the Senate. Sadly, though, that's enough for them to be even more of the obstructionists than they already have been. And that is precisely what they are going to do. And they are already framing this as "it's all Obama's fault":



And if they are to create spending bills that "cut funding", what exactly will they cut?

Recently on The Last Word, Lawrence O'Donnell interviewed some "leaders" within the "leaderless" Tea Bagger movement about what they think should be cut and how "Socialism" plays into these decisions - a constant cry from Republicans. Turns out that they had some, shall I say, interesting views.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As I watched this Sunday night, I realized that this is exactly how the candidates that the Tea Baggers vote for - the ones that actually win that is - are going to approach their legislative tasks, like a freshman fumbling at his first girlfriend's bra strap.

No clear goals. No battle plan. No forward movement.

And it's not just the Tea Bagger backed candidates that aren't taking their potential assignments as representatives of the people seriously. Their media masters are more in favor of pushing the narrative that Democrats and all other media outlets are going to completely lose it come Wednesday morning:



If anything, the next two years will be legislative gridlock - not that the last two years were as evenly paced as most would have liked. And we will surely see pointless investigations, attempts to repeal virtually every aspect of the Democrats agenda, and possibly articles of impeachment. But don't think for one moment that Republicans are going to work for America - it will be an all out push "against" Democrats.

Will conservatives wake up Wednesday and claim that their "freedom has been restored" - that their "liberties have returned"? I doubt that, even though the opposite is what happened the day after Obama was elected. My guess is that their will be a full blown push to blame Obama for everything that they will fail at.

O'Reilly's Metric

O'Reilly has successfully become a poor caricature of Glenn Beck.



Might as well have said "Did you know that Soros shops at Macy's twice a week? Should that shock America? Is he attempting to manipulate middle class mothers who are about to Christmas shop?"

Not only that, and to echo a point made by Bob Cesca, is O'Reilly really going to go the route of "look at all the mean things these people say" to claim that the modern conservative movement is somehow morally superior?

Then again, conservatives are more incensed when a woman is called a bitch while not taking violent assault against a liberal woman seriously.

Who Are The Thugs Again? Part II

Let's take a look at Beck's continued insistence that conservative Tea Baggers aren't the violent ones - it's those evil liberals and progressives.



Too bad that doesn't square with what happened in this clip:



And while the predictable conservative chant - lead by the mouth agape throngs at Fox"Nation" - is that this is some sort of "plant", a "hoax", one has but to look at what people like Beck and the Fox noise machine are cultivating - an atmosphere of fear, hatred, and conspiracy.

Hot Air and Ed Morrissey take a more interesting approach when discussing this issue: insisting that conservative candidates use the "Joe Miller Approach" and bring your own security force:

This is one of the reasons why it’s incumbent on candidates to provide their own security. While guard firms rely on the same legal principles of citizens’ arrest that apply to everyone else, they get a lot more training in it than rally attendees. Paul has his own security with him, as the video seems to show, and they knew better than to react to an obvious provocation, and especially not to overreact to it.

The person in this video shown stomping on the prone woman should be facing charges of assault and battery today, just as Gladney’s attacker should have to answer for his assault. And in the future, perhaps calmer heads will prevail.

That's right Ed, gloss over the fact that this woman was about to be curb-stomped by a completely unhinged Paul supporter, conflate this with the utterly specious claims surrounding Kennth Gladney, and insist that Rand Paul's security team acted accordingly. Guess what Eddie, they didn't do anything. They didn't stop this from happening and they certainly were within proximity to do so. They were, as many in the video show, nothing more than spectators.

And while Paul supporters are more than willing to push this incident aside as nothing more than socio-political theatre, Rand's campaign - as well as he himself - are looking at this from an entirely different perspective:



Rand seems kind of disconnected from the "issue", don't you think?

Something else that caught my attention - there was only one person, at least from the video footage, that attempting to help this woman. The remainder of those surrounding the violent assault simply watched.

While we are a voyeuristic people by nature - how many times have you slowed down to look at a car wreck, or house fire, or police subduing someone - when you are literally this close to someone being attacked by those you call "fellow patriots", perhaps it's time that you reconsider the fact that Tea Baggers are a peaceful lot.