I already explained why your suggestion would be an impossibility. You repeat it here and add inanity. All while there are a several questions you haven’t answered:
I even bolded them so your less apt to miss them this go around.
Oh really? Care to be more specific? So you don’t come off as just being full of shit? What did I write that is contrary to those facts?
For someone whose emphatic denial of having things enter their ass, you’ve sure got your head well and truly rammed deep inside it.
As for your questions, they’re irrelevant since your OP demonstrated you are a mindless drooling partisan drone. You attempted to imply the entire Democratic party was a horrible corrupt awful bunch of poopyheads because of a meaningless incident in a local election. You sir, are worthless and your questions are bullshit.
Not at all. Rationality isn’t everything there is to a person. A person can be irrational, yet still be a worthy and admirable member of society. Not you of course, you’re a fucking idiot, but plenty of people aren’t rational and still rock.
Sorry liar. You made a silly thread. And now you’re too much of a coward to own up to it. Go on and hide under attack posts, we honestly don’t expect different from you.
You really need help. You accuse ME of hiding under “attack posts”? That’s all you ever do. But here’s a chance to step up to the plate for once: simply explain—in detail—what makes my OP “silly”.
Also, what am I “lying” about. Be specific, you know so I and others can see if your charge might have real merit or it’s just you spewing your usual mindless attacks.
We’ve already dealt with the “stupid” accusation and the “irrational” one. Try to keep up. What it comes down to is me holding opinions that are quite conservative and a board that skews heavily the other way. I 'm tickle that you don’t see that possibility and must repeatedly kneejerk into calling me and other conservative posters stupid, morons, etc.
Also, what part of my OP demonstrates “ignorance”? Again, please be specific.
I have to say that I expected the video to be inconclusive about whether Meehan actually shoved the reporter. After all, anything that is posted on Drudge needs to be taken with a boulder of salt. But having watched the video a few times, Meehan definitely stiff-armed (if that’s the right phrase) the reporter. He may or may not have intended to knock the reporter down, but he did stay right in his face in a way that was reminiscent of a movie-style mafioso.
Coakley had nothing to do with the altercation, but should fire the guy if he is on her staff. She has a tough enough race to run here without giving the independent voters more reason to think she’s a cold and nasty woman - one of the most common criticisms out there currently.
All of it.
Democratic Thuggery?
Thank OG for someone posting something actually useful.
Aw, shucks. I feel like a rock star now 
Don’t let it go to your head, lowlife. 
After all, this IS the Pit.
I know, I know—it’s just that it doesn’t rhyme with “rat” that way, and for some reason that’s like, *really *important…
Oh, come on, you can do better than that. Especially since you repeatedly bring up things having to do with my ass and I already made the joke about having YOUR head up YOURS. And much more artfully than you do here. The judges give you a 1.3.
But the OP is where the primary question is. It is asked very clearly. It is short and to the point. To help you along I even offered my opinion. You do know how a debate board works, right?
Now we’re getting somewhere. The problem is you have woefully poor reading comprehension. I said, nor implied, any such thing. I’ve even stated plainly that Coakley, the Dem who is most closely tied to this, should not suffer because of Meehan’s thuggish behavior.
Like a pin to a balloon, such are samclem’s words to my ego.
Since this was originally posted in Great Debates, here is my answer:
I think that if the reporter in question feels he was assaulted he should file charges against the alleged attacker. The local authorities should do the appropriate investigation. If the investigation reveals that the charges were justified then they should arrest the perpetrator and prepare a criminal case. I assume the judicial system would take it from there, with the end result ideally depending on the ability of the evidence to overcome reasonable doubt.
That is what should happen to the alleged attacker, in my opinion of course. I note it is in many ways similar to your own opinion, although you have more emphasis on immediate prosecution and less on investigation.
Could you elaborate on what specifically you were hoping to get out of this debate? There are many cases of assaults in local news around the country, many with far more serious injuries to the victim - what made this one stand out?
Other posters have implied you have partisan motivations. You claim otherwise. All the same, the alleged attacker shares many common classifications, but you did feel that two in particular were important enough for the thread title: (1) being a Democrat and (2) being from Boston. I note that the thread was titled “Democrat thuggery, Boston style”. You have to admit that does implies that those two classifications are important to your debate. Or was it just random chance, and on any other day you would have said “White thuggery, political-aide style”?
Is there a Boston or Democrat related risk of assault that you wish to debate? Or is there a more general concern regarding assaults in this country that you would like to debate?
Oh, you really are just full of shit who can’t back up what he says. Feel free to ignore previous post to you.
I personally use the word “thuggery” ever day, in most conversations. It isn’t something that I get from Democratic-leaning websites. Really. No, really. :rolleyes:
The REASON… it burns! Can’t look! Take it AWAY!
Driver8,
Fist, I’d like to thank you (and Mithril) for demonstrating that it indeed is possible to understand the question in the OP and answering it thoughtfully.
I don’t disagree with your take on what should be done. I assume the investigation would take place with my “as the law permits”.
Obviously this isn’t a run-of-the-mill assault. It is political in nature and am surprised how due to that people are willing to turn a blind eye to it. The other incident I sighted is similar. The fact the Holder aw to it that charges were dropped against that thug is as disgusting as it is amazing. There was also an incident in which a conservative assaulted a couple of months ago, with very little interest by dems that I could see. So, I do see an unfortunate tendency for those on the left to hand wave such behavior from those on their side. This thread has become a great example of that.
But I was simply interested in what people thought should happen to Meehan. I should also have asked what Coakley should do regarding this. As I’ve stated, I think that Meehan’s behavior has nothing to do with her. But the incident having happened, I do think it is incumbent upon her, as Mithril offered, to fire him and state that such behavior is 100% unacceptable.
Really? I don’t. But it often comes to mind when I see thuggish behavior. Weird how that works.
Does it often come to mind when the people you get your marching orders from use the word “thuggery”?
By the way-“Democratic”, not “Democrat”. If you want to pretend that you are engaging in an honest debate, you might want to leave the juvenile buzzwords at home.