Randi Rhodes rocks! "People applaud the tasering"

[MalloyLiberal]

"You don't taser someone because they are ANNOYING!"

[saracat]

1. And that is clearly in Randi self interest sometimes! LOL!

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[brentspeak]

5. Interesting. You've been bashing Kerry all day, and yet, for someone named "MalloyLiberal"...

...you haven't made a single post to the ongoing - and very long - thread entitled, " Mike Malloy says the Missing nuke B-52 crew are all dead":

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1830040&mesg_id=1830040

[saracat]

6. Hey, I love Randi but she can be annoying sometimes.

[Cobalt Violet]

21. So now we should taser randi?

:shrug:

[bunkerbuster1]

31. No, but yesterday's show was pretty awful.

I'm sure she'll redeem herself today, but I really couldn't stand the way she kept on laying into Kerry.

[Macchendra]

10. Randi who?

Amy Goodman is far better. Who needs a "Rush Limbaugh for the left?"

[MalloyLiberal]

15. Amy Goodman would hate the brutality too

And would want the questions asked as well.

Expect her to cover it tomorrow.

[Maat]

3. Right on, Randi!

Exactly!

[TwilightGardener]

4. Wow--I would love to Taser the annoying. But that's just me--carry on.

[Bluebear]

7. Cindy Sheehan & this kid called "attention whores" here.

yesterday people say "where's the outrage????". This student is outraged, and agree or disagree with his message, people say he is an attention whore and deserved his taser shot.

[saracat]

8. Isn't this more important?

BREAKING*** DEMS IN SENATE SAY NO TO COMPROMISE
Democrats Won't Temper Iraq Legislation
By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

(09-18) 13:15 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --


After weeks of suggesting Democrats would temper their approach to Iraq legislation in a bid to attract more Republicans, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared abruptly Tuesday that he had no plans to do so.


The Democratic leader said he will call for a vote this month on several anti-war proposals, including one by Sen. Carl Levin that would insist President Bush end U.S. combat next summer. The proposals would be mandatory and not leave Bush wiggle room, said Reid, D-Nev.


"There (are) no goals. It's all definite timelines," he told reporters of the planned legislation.


Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Monday night he would have agreed to turn the summer deadline into a nonbinding goal if doing so meant attracting enough votes to pass. Several Republicans have said they are uneasy about Bush's war strategy but do not like the idea of setting a firm timetable on troop withdrawals.


Reid's hardline stance reflects a calculation by Democrats that Levin's proposal probably would have failed either way. Democrats hold a thin majority in the Senate and similar legislation has repeatedly fallen short of the 60 votes needed to break a GOP filibuster.

<SNIP>

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi ?
f=/n/a/2007/09/18/national/w131138D56.DTL

[Bluebear]

9. Oh OK, are we confining ourselves to that one subject now?

I hadn't checked the schedule. :)

[saracat]

11. No but jeez.There is other news!

[Bluebear]

12. Alright already! We'll comment on that too!

:hi:

[saracat]

13. Okay!

:hi:

[NoPasaran]

14. Sorry, unless Levin tases someone

This just isn't going to get much love today.

[The Count]

17. Look over there? Nothing happened! kerry didn't watch a kid get tortured and

did nothing (My pet Goat)

[The Count]

18. Nice try - but condoning torture matters too!

[MalloyLiberal]

16. People hate Cindy Sheehan because she cares about her country

More than she does the stupid party.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

34. He is such an attention whore, that this morning instead of appearing on The Today Show

himself, he had his lawyer appear. Now how's that for attention? Not appearing on nationwide tv.

BTW...I am also sure there are those that think Code Pink are attention whores too.....

[The Count]

39. Same with all demonstrators who want media coverage

My question is: to what was he drawing attention? Were his questions about trivial things? Election, impeachment - seem legitimate objects for my attention.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

43. Why the hell is this going over the head of Meyer detractors here at DU? I am so damned

puzzled by this whole thing. I am surprised they aren't screaming for him to be tarred and feathered. There are posters on DU who have joined that bandwagon, some posters that I have had deep respect for in the past, and I'm shocked.

He asked questions lots of us at DU have asked on these boards. Questions I would love to ask Kerry directly and Meyer took the chance. Kudos to him for having done that.

[softwarevotingtrail]

19. Rationalize justification, work backwards, just like the Repubs

I'm sooooo sick of the Republicans who begin their argument by justifying the heinous Republican action/statement/crime and then work backwards.

The folks who do the same on the Democratic side seem to have the same part of their brains missing.

[wicket]

20. I'm sick of trolls who've already been tombstoned once, coming back & spreading their lies

:nopity:

Sounds like someone else has part of their brain missing :rofl:

[softwarevotingtrail]

22. Throw me off of the cliff, please

I really can't stand this place. I never cared for the state-sponsored organ Pravda, either. I'm a fan of the truth, not of the party line. I'm a registered Democrat, but why I keep coming back I'll never know.

[wicket]

24. You've already admitted to being banned once

If you can't stand it why do you keep coming back? You obviously don't care about following the rules of this board. Why don't you go back to FR where your right-wing views will be appreciated :hi:

[softwarevotingtrail]

28. An inane comment, you prove my point precisely

I'm a registered Democrat, I DON'T have "right wing views." But since I disagree with you, you jump to the conclusion that I'm a "right-wing Freeper" and that my comments aren't worth considering. That's not a dialogue. It's a monologue.

I've never even posted to Free Republic and have no intention of doing so. I think that many of the people who post there are just a few shades from fascism if not spot on.

But I do I believe this black and white, us and them, "fit the silo" philosphy is ultimately toxic and counterproductive.

I wonder, is there room for an online political forum where people may express truly opposing views in a civil fashion without fear of being banned?

[wicket]

36. You were spreading a right-wing meme about Kerry

Pretty clear what your agenda is.

I wonder, is there room for an online political forum where people may express truly opposing views in a civil fashion without fear of being banned?

Why don't you create your own instead of wasting Skinner's bandwidth? :shrug:

[softwarevotingtrail]

23. Throw me off of the cliff, please

I really can't stand this place. I never cared for the state-sponsored organ Pravda, either. I'm a fan of the truth, not of the party line. I'm a registered Democrat, but why I keep coming back I'll never know.

[abq e streeter]

27. I feel your pain, annoyance, frustration.

Sometimes I wonder why I keep coming back too, as I see so much not well thought out opinion (in my, well...opinion) and intolerant, self-righteous attitude that we, as some of the most progressive and well informed Americans, should be above. But we're not perfect, either; and I certainly include myself; I've been wrong on issues before (but like you, wasn't tied to ideology so I could learn, and revise my thinking). But I keep coming back because I DO learn something here all the time. Yes, I sometimes learn that leftists can be idiots too.But more often, MUCH more often, I learn important things about whats really going on that I'd never learn from the MSM, and I get to read the writings of profoundly talented writers like Nance Greggs, and many other of my brothers and sisters in our struggle to keep each other informed and keep a dialogue among ourselves that's respectful and intelligent a lot more than not. (and of course I wish it was that way all the time, but can't always get what you want)... I love what you said about yourself--fan of the truth, not the party line; that's exactly where I'm coming from, and have been treated so rudely here on more than one occasion for daring to have a dissenting opinion, that I too thought, screw this place, who needs it...but the truth is , I do need it apparently, because I do keep coming back. And I continue to be blown away by how extraordinarily intelligent , well informed,eloquent in expressing themselves( I keep trying, with very limited success to be one of those eloquent ones) and just plain nice, most of those I've encountered on DU are. So hopefully you can do what I'm still struggling to learn how to do---ignore the small minority of idiots and appreciate everything good here. By the way, I have already been rudely and somewhat abusively attacked for daring to disagree with the same person rudely attacking you in this thread. The moderators deleted her abusive posts and left mine intact. That should tell you something. I know its hard to ignore the bullshit here sometimes, but its worth it if you can.

[softwarevotingtrail]

30. Thanks for the thoughtful post

I, too, find DU to be a great source of news. After all, we saw the Florida video at least a day before it became a story in the MSM.

Here's a hypothetical - Say I was invited to a party (as in social engagement) and I had a choice of going to one where there are all Democrats or all Republicans. I'd take the all-Democrats party hands-down. The all-Republican thing would probably creep me out and leave me enraged.

But honestly, I think I'd have the most fun if there were some people of both parties, right down the line. I enjoy a good debate.

I think, bottom line, that maybe I'm better off when I don't start posting stuff here. Just read. So maybe that's why I'm asking to get Tombstoned.

[abq e streeter]

33. You're already more openminded than me--I generally avoid republicans whenever possible

not necessarily proud of that, just being honest... by the way, what is " getting tombstoned"?

[softwarevotingtrail]

35. That's when they ban your account if you write something that's "incorrect"

In my case, I said something critical of Kerry, who has been my US Senator for the past decade.

Kerry has pretty much always checked out on state-centric issues, preferring to focus on international stuff and running for president.

Not so with Ted Kennedy (who, unlike Kerry, voted against the war). He has boots on the ground for the most mundane of state issues, when it matters. Big fan of Ted, by the way.

[wicket]

42. Oh come on now

Poor widdle you had your feelings hurt by the big bad feminist :rofl:

:nopity:

My posts were deleted because I called you a name - against DU rules. I can live by that, and now you are really living up to the name you were called. Nice one (oh and nice work in continuing a flamewar from a locked thread :hi:)

[softwarevotingtrail]

45. I wasn't referring to you, in fact you didn't even register on my radar

I was referring to my own experience here several years ago. Call me anything you want. Talk is cheap from a computer keyboard hundreds or thousands of miles away.

[wicket]

47. If you'll look closely, you'll see my repsonse wasn't to you

:hi:

[softwarevotingtrail]

48. i caught that after I posted, oh well

no harm done :)

[abq e streeter]

57. My sympathies on your continuing need to embarrass yourself

Final time I'll be spending any of my precious time on earth reading anything you have to say, but go ahead and speak your piece if it makes you feel better.

[w4rma]

25. Police report apparantly said that he wasn't tasered. They placed it on him, but never turned it on.

He was acting.

[Cetacea]

29. If you fire an unloaded gun at someone

it is still a crime.

[karlrschneider]

44. How exactly would one fire an unloaded gun?

:eyes:

[The Count]

38. No kidding! So those sparkles I saw on the video - they were special effects?

Man, you go to any lengths, doncha...

[w4rma]

41. I personally "go to any lengths" to do what, The Count? (nt)

[Ian David]

26. Randi Rhodes pissed me off when I called her about the tasering incident

I was "Ian from Brockton, Massachusetts."

I pointed her to the clip on LiveLeak, and pointed out that it was linked from Democratic Underground.

Randi HATES Kerry.

Founded or not, she does NOT want to hear the whole story.

When Randi gets mad, her ears turn off, and her mouth goes into overdrive.

I am FURIOUS at Randi right now, but I will probably get over it eventually.

See prior thread:

NEW! Footage of the nutcase arrested at the Kerry event...AFTER leaving the event
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1833205&mesg_id=1833205


See also:

Randi Rhodes is a forceful voice and really knows her shit, BUT........
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1838928#1839130

[bunkerbuster1]

32. I heard your call.

After you'd pointed her to a more substantial video clip, what does she proceed to do after the break? Why, play the shorter one from CNN.

I still love her, but yesterday's show just sucked. She tried to bring the focus back to Blackwater, but kept on getting distracted by Taser Kid, until I just couldn't take any more.

[Ian David]

37. Since when did Randi trust CNN to give her the whole, correct story?

Since CNN had something that made John Kerry look bad.

That's since when!

I've never "loved" Randi. I've always respected her and really liked her a lot.

But now, she's lost a great deal of my respect.

I know I'll forgive her eventually, but she needs to do some work to regain my respect.

Meanwhile, why not torment her with calls demanding a more male-friendly system of divorce?

[blm]

40. Randi - who pays her? Any activist Dem who hates Kerry is suspect to me. Establishment

powers in DC have been trying to take Kerry down for three decades. EVERY GOP administration has targeted Kerry relentlessly, and I doubt that Randi or 99.9% of her listeners could endure being a target that long and STILL work to uncover, investigate and expose so much government corruption.

Randi, Malloy and all the I'mbetterthanJohnKerrybecauseIhaveatalkshow types can honestly say they would be able to endure that? BULLSHIT! They don't even have the character to appreciate what Kerry has endured let alone endure it themselves.

[Goblinmonger]

46. He was asked to leave because he was Annoying.

He was not listening to requests to wrap it up. He was not asking any questions. When he did say something like a question and Kerry tried to answer it, he talked over Kerry and kept ranting. THAT is why his mike was cut and he was asked to leave. The security had a right (and I would argue a duty) to make sure the event was run smoothly and getting him out of there was the right thing to do.

THEN he started resisting. He was physically resisting being removed from the event. He was screaming, pushing the cops, and not letting them do their jobs. THAT is why he got tasered. I think that was the best thing they could have done at that point. The only other option was to use physical force and pain as a means to getting him out of the room. Would it have been better if they had dislocated his shoulder or broken his arm?

[baby_mouse]

49. Given the arresting officers' lack of knowledge of his past medical history...

It would have been more sensible to use physical restraint techniques, yes. Tasers are dangerous, they have been known to kill people. Tasers are okay against armed opponents, with unarmed ones, they're too dangerous. I hope you will agree that broken arms and dislocated shoulders are better than possible arrhythmia and death.

[Goblinmonger]

50. I don't know the numbers

but I don't think the taser = death scenarios are that common.

I can only imagine the shitstorm that would land on DU if the officers had decided against the taser and had, instead, used physical force and broke his arm and dislocated his shoulder. I highly doubt the reponse would be, "well, it's better than a taser."

[baby_mouse]

51. I don't know the numbers, either, but to me they don't really count.

It's a matter of hazard, not risk, the likelihood of causing damage is a different factor in considering this problem from the actual damage caused. It's probably less likely that the opponent would be injured using a taser, but they stand to lose a lot more if they are. I'm taking the position that it's better to adopt the slightly riskier technique than the high-hazard technique. Do you see what I mean?

[Goblinmonger]

52. Well, that's silly.

If there is a .01% chance of killing someone with a taser, but a 90% chance of dislocating a shoulder or breaking a bone (and both of those MUST carry some risk of death in and of themselves), then you would opt for the taser.

You are committing a mini-max fallacy. Look into John Rawls.

[baby_mouse]

53. I don't have time to extensively research John Rawls for the sake of an Internet message board!

I've never heard of the mini-max fallacy. What's it's structure?

[Goblinmonger]

54. Basically it is coming out of games theory (think: prisoner's dilemma)

Saying that you would want the maximum benefit for the most of society. Your problem is that you are taking something with minimum likelihood (though maximum impact) and basing your decision on that when you are ignoring something with (much closer to) maximum likelihood and (a much more) minimum impact. Your decision will cause much more people to be hurt even though it will save the lives of very few to no people.

on edit: me know gud spelller

[baby_mouse]

55. Well, yeah. that's the structure of my position... but, um, I thought you were suggesting it was a

... *logical* fallacy? i.e. my position contradicts itself somehow or isn't relevant to the matter in hand?

You seem to understand me perfectly, but I still actually can't see what you think is *wrong* with the position. Yes, more people will get hurt, but the trade off is that less people will die.

And it's because we're discussing a potentially life-threatening procedure that it may seem counter-intuitive, I'm not willing to accept the use of a device that has a slim chance of costing someone *everything* over the use of technique with a reasonable likelihood of costing them *something*. It's not the risk that's significant in determining the appropriate course of action, it's the hazard, and the reason it's the hazard is because the hazard is the suspect's death. Please recall that we're discussing an unarmed opponent.

Here's an analogy, and it's pretty much identical in structure: I don't like flying, REALLY don't like it, and it's not because of the likelihood that the plane will crash, it's because of the hazard, it's because of what I stand to lose in the very unlikely scenario of a crash, i.e. my life, that is the significant factor in making my decision, not the likelihood of the event actually occurring. If I'm in a plane and it crashes I'm basically dead. For this reason when going overseas I vastly prefer surface-based travel even though train and car crashes are statistically more common. Inland, I take trains, always. As far as I can tell, you should think that my position is illogical. Would you feel comfortable telling me that I'm *wrong* to make that decision?

Perhaps we simply take a fundamentally different view of human life. I don't think morally we get to take slim risks of mortality with other people's lives, it's not *absolutely* okay to kill people even by accident. That means it's not okay to take even a *very small* risk of killing someone by accident, even if the alternative may cause them significant injury or pain.

The point you bring up about dislocation and limb-breaking being a potential cause of death is interesting, as one of the major causes of taser-related deaths is the restraint status, a suspecs with their hands cuffed behind their back is at significant risk of cardiac problems because the muscles in their biceps tear through being electrically stimulated but unable to move. Potassium ions from the muscle tears flood the cardiovascular system and cause cardiac failure. It's incredibly dangerous, and not at all as uncommon as you seem to think, there have been quite a few taser-related deaths now, something like 250. Dislocating the shoulder or breaking the arm can also take place in this scenario, it need hardly be added...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

56. I'm not surprised Randi is defending this kid

She likes to ask people questions and then just talk right over them too.