Real funny, an overbearing Nazi like police tactic being used on a non violent young man. Oreilly and Beck are disgusting.

That kid was obviously pulling a stunt.

That kid went up there to make trouble, and he got it. He even reportedly told the cops afterwards, "You guys did nothing wrong."

He may not have anticipated getting tasered, but he was certainly waiting for someone to do something so he could further make a scene. After rambling endlessly and acting idiotic, the guy made every effort to escape the police.

I thought everyone saw this.

Exactly, and the police had no clue if this was a publicity prank or something far more serious.  Can you imagine if the guy had a gun, I even believe at one point he started to go near the stage at Kerry......the guy is a nut, I have no pity for him or what he started, he is responsible. 

Let the talk show hosts stick it to him all day long, if that's what floats their boat.

Tommy you obviously have not watched the video. Watch the whole thing first and then talk.

Thanks for the lecture, I've seen it - but I suggest you inform yourself of the circumstances before you direct me to the video itself.

Well if you watched the video you would not say that the student was approaching the stage.

If that's your defense of him, so be it.

Yet another time when Tommy proves he doesn't know what he's talking about.  There are so many of them now.....

The entire video is proof enough. It was the kids own video camera that recorded the event. He asked several questions and wouldn't stop. When asked MULTIPLE TIMES by security to comply he CHOSE not to. He did this as a stunt. Failure to acknowledge this blatant and obvious fact is proof that you are blinded by your emotions.

If you know Glenn Beck at all and you LISTEN to the comments, you KNOW that it's comedy. John Stewart has said far worse things yet he is never mentioned here.

Give it a rest you goofy libs.

Glenn Beck is NOT comedy - he's dead serious, his listeners take him as being serious, and he's downright dangerous.

Jon Stewart is understood to be a comedian because he appears on COMEDY CENTRAL.  When you have a dunderhead like Glenn Beck appearing on HEADLINE NEWS, people out there will believe that the crap he spews is factual.  When it's not.

The entire video is proof enough. It was the kids own video camera that recorded the event. He asked several questions and wouldn't stop. When asked MULTIPLE TIMES by security to comply he CHOSE not to. He did this as a stunt. Failure to acknowledge this blatant and obvious fact is proof that you are blinded by your emotions.

He was asking a multi-part question and was trying to finish when the Gestapo took control.  Failure to acknowledge this blatant and obvious fact is proof that you are blinded by your ignorance and adherance to a mind-numbing right-wing agenda. 

Lame. Totally lame. That's your response. You could at least have the common decency to say the kid didn't approach the stage but you believe he should have been tasered. 

No, that's your interpretation.  I stand by what I said. 

If you are standing by your statement that the campus police did not know if this was a prank fine. But if you are standing by your assertion that you " believe at one point he started to go near the stage at Kerry" then you are just plain wrong.

He did move away from the cops and towards the stage.

If you haven't seen it, then you need to watch another version of the incident.

He was standing close to the front of the auditorium near a mike stand. The cops were directing him towards the back, and he pulled himself away and was moving towards the front of the auditorium, where Kerry was. It was when the kid tried to yank his arms out the grasp of the cops.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/44455/

Taser's kill, occaisionally. To make a joke about cops using deadly force to subdue someone who is already pinned to the floor with several hundred pounds of cops is quite tasteless. Tasers are designed to severly shock a human nervous system, and cops have know way of knowing if the person they are tasing can handle such a shock. The cop in this situation has left them self wide open to a lawsuit as the suspect was already subdued to the point that he could not injure himself or anyone else. A little patience on the cops part could have avoided the use of potentially deadly force. Look at it from this perspective, what if that was your grandma who was subdued for some reason? Would anyone be saying she got what she deserved?????

Maybe I am just being grandmotherly but I do not believe our police have a right to taser someone who was unarmed and not violent.  I am sure if he had a gun it would have been caught in the medal detectors coming into the hall. 

That's exactly it; you hit the nail on the head.

The guy wants attention, that's it.  He didn't care about the answers, he just wanted to make a scene.  Everything would have been fine if they'd have skipped the taser.  After all, he was completely subdued.

Jerk or not, he was well under control.  They used  it as a punishment device, or a crutch.  Either way, it wasn't appropriate.

he was not completely subdued when he was on the floor.  he kept fighting them handcuffing him.  that is not subdued.  there is a video from the back that clearly shows this.  that's why when anyone says "watch the video", there is more than one.  i've seen at least four, including one where he is at the mic, he's going on and on and the woman cop tries to lead him away, and he pushes her.  she waits another 20 seconds before grabbing him.  this was a guy determined to make a scene.   which is ok, but take your punishment and don't play the victim for something you started and were given numerous chances to end.  the sponsors called the cops to remove him.  if he wanted to make a point, then say i wanted to get my message out even if i got arrested.  instead he lets a bunch of cops doing their jobs get called facists, suspended, and probably having to hire a lawyer.   i would give him some credit if he were to stop trying to blame others for what he did.

This was the most recent, and most grandiose of a long line of self-promoting stunts pulled by this clown.  If you watch the incident from several different cameras and do a little research to read the reports and comments of students who were actually present at the event, you get a pretty clear picture of what was really going on.  He PLANNED to disrupt the event and get himself physically removed from the premises, ON CAMERA, and everybody there knew it (why do you think the audience cheered when the cops finally started to escort him out?).  Getting tasered was just a big bonus for him.  When I see how many dupes on the Left are allowing themselves to be totally PLAYED by this idiot, I feel embarrassed, by association, to call myself a progressive.

Aside from Savage, they figured out that the guy wasn't a conservative so they now support overbearing police tactics.

Looking at Beck, he's been apparently watching way too many taser videos.

Is he trying to be funny here?  If so, I just don't get it.

The guy is a known prankster, acted up in front of the cameras and quieted down when there were none present, resisted, fought, whined, screamed and provoked the treatment he received.  He was even warned he would be tasered, and ignored the warnings to amp up the "circus" nature of the whole, overblown, silly incident.

The media is playing right into this guy's hands, they are being played like a fool for continuing to cover this........the campus police may have overreacted, but the publicity seeking tasered one is responsible.

Any ribbing he gets, he deserves.

Exactly, Tommy. Better than my comment above. Thank you.

Any ribbing he gets, he deserves.

I agree 100% Tommy.

So you think it's OK for O'Reilly to try to profit off of it with his smarmy lil bumper sticker ploy?

I believe, unless you know otherwise, that all profits from O'Reilly merchandise go to charity.  So I can't think of a better reason that this guy's antics pay off for a worthwhile cause.

I don't know, but I'm thinking he probably follows the 10% rule.

Profit or not, O'Reilly is shamelessly merchandising an incident that may have been a prank or a stunt, but quickly turned violent. 

He's mocking it, ridiculing it, propagating it, mass producing it, pasting on the side of a lunch box,  and marketing it, all to gin up his own celebrity.

It may not be monetary, but Bill-O is profiting.

You can bet he's profiting monitarily as well.  He never says ALL profits go to charity.

I don't believe he is under any obligation to give any of the profits to charity......so any or some is admirable.  Too bad you don't see it that way.

I would be interested in kowing what charity would take money that was raised from the sale of these despcable bumper stickers.  Unless O'Reilly's talking about Charity, an oerator on his favorite phone sex line......

Where in the hell did that come from???   Tommy, please allow me to steer you back to the subject.

Giving to charity is very admirable, and there are many outstanding charities that help many people.  However, profiting from other's misfortune is disgraceful, and that's what O'Reilly is doing here.

It's almost as bad as Sean Hannity's "Freedom Concerts" that he touts as a way to give to the children of our fallen soldiers.  Meanwhile, 20% goes into a trust fund to pay for their college at some later date, (Hannity's dishonesty makes me wonder if it'll still be  there at that later date) and he and Ollie North pocket 80% of the cash that comes in, making money off of the deaths of our troops, while telling Liberals how unpatriotic they are.

Perhaps that's the charity O'Reilly give to.  Then, a huge portion of the cash would go right back into his own pocket.  Nice scam, maybe.

Rick, The problem is you see this guy as a victim, I absolutely do not see him that way.  That is the crux of our disagreement and we each have our own viewpoint.  Arguing about O'Reilly or Beck won't change that for either of us.

True.  But I gotta admit that I get pissed off when you constantly change the subject from that which you can't defend.

I change the subject?  Who called it torture? 

This comment itself is steering away from the subject.  We were talking about charity, and how you accused me of thinking that giving to charity was not admirable.

I never said that.  Read it again, I said that obviously you think even if O'Reilly gives some profits to charity, that didn't impress you....that he is making money off it, which you still have no idea if that is the case.

He admitted that is the case by not saying "All profits go to charity."

Good to know you are in the exact word definition arena. So the next time I might say "Liberals are clueless", you will defend me by saying I didn't mean "All" because I never said that.

Forgot my :)

O'Reilly makes his living from words, and he knows exactly what he is saying.  He doesn't want to admit that he's making a profit off his mechandise, so he points out that hundreds of thousands of dollars go to charity.

You are well aware of his immaturity, and ego (inferiority complex), and if ALL profits went to charity he would run it up the flag pole.  And, honestly, I would have no problem if he advertised all profits go to charity, if that were in fact true.

You're not stupid, Tommie.  We both know this omission is no accident.

Even if all profits DID go to charity since they originated with HIS merchandising he could then take all of that off his taxes any way you look at it he is profiting

O'Reilly's marketing stunt is one ladder rung above selling crack cocaine to children and donating the profits to Easter Seals.

I don't consider his ploy admirable in the least. 

I don't think it's quite that bad.  We might not be on the same page, we are in the same chapter.

SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

"The media is playing right into this guy's hands, they are being played like a fool for continuing to cover this........the campus police may have overreacted, but the publicity seeking tasered one is responsible. Any ribbing he gets, he deserves." // TOMMY

Who's getting the most play out of this liberal being tazed??

Fox News, the Republican National Network has been flogging this, selling stickers like the "Band-Aid Purple Hearts" or campaigns like "The War on Christmas", and now the Resolution to condemn Moveon.org!! Anything but the miserable reality that is Republican Leadership leading us over the the abyss!

Welcome Americans to the future invisioned by our Republican Fascists, freedom of speach, sure, sure, when we say so, or your Un-American!

Happy Thoughts;

Dan Grady

Hmm? I didn't know Glenn Beck works for Fox?, better tell him, I think he's been showing up for work in the wrong building.

Tommy,

Dan did not say Beck worked for Fox. He referenced the stickers which are being sold by O'Reilly who is in fact on Fox.  

That's twice in this thread that Tommy has been proven wrong.  He should quit while he's behind.

I notice the multiple assertions of the ability to read a person's mind. Interesting. Intellectually dishonest, but interesting. But then we can find other examples of such assertions of knowing what individuals were "thinking." What a profound arrogance! What utter intellectual dishonesty. I expect nothing less.

Oh no. I dont want to HEAR he provoked. The police do not get to mete out punishment. THAT is not their function. They are not judges nor juries. IF your argument is they had to taser him to subdue him fine. IF he was already subdued it is WAY out of line for police to take upon themselves the right to decide he deserved punishment. That is not what they are for. THEY arrest. The DA, and courts mete out punishment. The police have NO such authority nor is that in ANY way justifyable. There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that punishment is within the pervue of the police.

BUT, the police do get you use necessary force to subdue people. This dork would NOT comply. He refused to put hs hands behind his back to be cuffed. He screamed nice and loud for the crowd to hear. He used his own damned camera to record the event. Go take a look at Meyer's self-serving web site for more proof that he's an attention whore like Paris or Brittney. (theandrewmeyer . com)

The police can use force needed to make someone submit. What applies to Rodney King applies to Meyer.

Way to GO! Tommy!

Yes, I get your logic - let's electrocute all the loud-mouthed publicity-seeking clowns who never listen to anything they're told.  Let's start with Bill O'Reilly & Glenn Beck.   And since Bill says 50K volts bounce off of him like Superman, let's really max that taser up. 

ZZZZZZZZZZZAAAAAAAAAPPPPP it to 'em, baby!  It's the Tommy American Way.

I bet they really get off watching old footage of Civil Rights marchers being hosed and attacked by police dogs...fun stuff! And when the cops swing those billy clubs....hooo waaaaa!

Geez Nerzog that's quite a leap.

I'd expect that kind of post from one of the nitwit lefty trolls here, not you.

The cops may have overreacted, but this kid is a known instigator. I've no sympathy for him nor do I condemn Beck or O'Reilly for their comments.

Jeter, I forgot who said it, but I believe the quote goes "If you want to know a person's true character, judge him by what he does to someone who can or can't do anything for him". Beck's response proves his character, which is low class egotist.

Snoop, You can't equate ribbing this idiot who did this to himself with unprovoked ribbing of someone who is truly a victim, can you?  They are ballparks apart.  Beck and O'Reilly are skewing an individual who pulled on a prank on the police, if you think he deserves some sympathy, or even restraint, then we disagree.

I think they are making a mountain out of a molehill. This will be endlessly played for nothing more than ratings by these two dolts. I'm starting a pool. $10 says this story gets played longer than the Ann Nichole Smith story.

Regardless of whether one thinks the kid did or did not deserve to be tasered, Beck is once again enjoying the suffering of others.

I'm not saying that this is a right wing trait or a Republican trait.

I will say that anyone who enjoys anyone's suffering is a f__king monster.

Worrier, 

Equating this ribbing of someone who is no victim does a disservice to those who really do get made fun of because of real pain and suffering.  

This guy is not suffering, he was warned he would be tasered, ignored it, thus received what he could have very easily prevented.  His acting abilities aside, he got right up immediately afterward - to say he is suffering demeans those who really do, or are. 

I made no comment about the kid's performance or the campus security people's actions.

My criticism was to Beck. He enjoys watching people suffer, this isn't the first time he's mentioned the pleasure he gets from seeing the suffering of another human being.

I didn't say that the kid is still in pain, I said that he suffered. It may have been fleeting, but it was painful none the less.

It doesn't have anything to do with justification for anyones actions. I'm not justifying the kid's or the cop's.

Getting right up is meaningless. Gunshot victims get up sometimes and aren't even aware they've been shot. I'm not equating the two, nor am I equating his suffering to anyone else's.

There are degrees of pain and suffering and this kid's was probably not that bad, but to say he was not in pain or did not suffer at all is ridiculous.

Beck is a piss poor human being lacking in compassion and empathy.

Worrier,

I have no idea what is in Glenn Beck's heart, I cannot imagine any decent human being delighting in another's real pain or suffering, that is horrible.......in this case this is probably more about Beck's talk show/satirical/tasteless mentality of ribbing a guy who acted out this entire scenario for his own 15 minutes of fame - and I absolutely think that's relevant in determining Beck's motives.  

Also, I seriously doubt no matter how much of a publicity seeking hound this guy is, if he had been injured in any serious way, then I would say that ridiculing him is out of bounds......but the fact that he was not and got right up afterwards and was quite civil when the cameras were turned off, tells me that his "suffering" was momentary and not very much at all.

Oh the comedy! First comes the ability to read another person's mind, especially if one can make a negative assertion about that person. But then, then comes the comedy: The denial of the ability to read another's mind or "heart"! Note the intellectual dishonesty. The selective powers of mind-reading. It really is quite funny! But, it is intellectually dishonest and inconsistent. Either you read minds or hearts, or you do not! Instead, what we find is the selective use of such rhetorical strategies. Again, typical. 

Okay, now one thing's become clear: you've never been tasered.

Geez, Tommy.  There were 6 cops on top of him, he was on the floor unable to move. Then they tasered him.

And yes, it WAS torture because they had him subdued.  If he was walking around threatening people, by all means use a taser to subdue him.  That WAS NOT THE CASE.  He was already subdued.

I don't care if there were 20 cops on top of him, they didn't know if he had a hidden weapon or what his agenda was.......expect that he resisted them throughout and ignored taser warnings.

You can victimize this buffoon all you want, I prefer to call him what he is - an opportunistic prankster who stuck his hand on the stove on purpose, and then complained the burners were on.

They asked him to settled down or they'd taser him.  He settled down, and they tasered him anyway.  Can't you see the problem with this type of torture?

You can call it torture, but that is ridiculous.  There is no point in continuing, we see it differently.

Fine, Tommy.  So log out of MMFA and go back to Free Republic.

Why do you only reply to the torture aspect of what I wrote?  The important part was that he settled down and they tasered him anyway.  Don't you have a problem with that?

Rick, Be serious.  You call it torture but I am supposed to ingnore that and address your other point?  No, he wasn't tortured in any sense of the word.  

I have already explained my opinion plenty on this entire topic, your question is answered in several other posts. 

Tommy, be serious.  Even if I were to concede your point that tasering is not torture, I also said that he was already subdued but they tasered him anyway.

Do you not have a  problem with that?

I will answer your question one last time, even though you wanted to change the subject to torture, and even though my many posts have already answered it......but, in this particular circimstance, with this particular individual, NO, I do not have a problem with it.

As I said, in your eyes he's a victim - in mine, he is the instigator. 

I'm glad we have this cleared up for the record, that he was already subdued but they tasered him anyway, and Tommy has no problem with that.

Good to know. (I think)

Rick, For the record, you said he was subdued and the tasering was not necessary, I never said that.  My point was he was warned he would get tasered, he ignored it, and the police carried out what they warned him they would do.

I have no problem with tasering him in this instance, as I have said.

Glad to clear that up for you.

At least I finally got an answer!  :-)

Tommy, I bet you'd be a lawyer's nightmare on the witness stand.

And you would be a witness' nightmare in front of a lawyer

;)

Hey now.........

This man was not "subdued" as he still had one arm free and he was screaming at the top of his lungs without stopping to listen to what the cops were saying. He didn't comply one time, NOT ONE TIME to the officers' requests.  He is not "subdued" until his hands were behind his back and cuffed. 

You are flat out wrong. In THIS country no one is guilty therefore no one is deserving of punishment until 12 people say so. The police have NO RIGHT to take it upon themself to mete that punishment out. If you have no problem with them doing so it is only a matter of degree to say they would be fine to just shoot people on the spot instead of arresting them for trial. It is a TOTAL perversion of the criminal justice system and takes the JUSTICE part directly OUT of the equation

It makes a big difference to me if the guy was indeed subdued (by that I am infering he was properly physically restrained and obeying law enforcement instructions) at the time he was tazered.  Once the guy is subdued and in restraints the person is in someone elses custody and are completely vulnerable.  If it happened that way, the officer opened up his/her department to a huge amount of liability.

That information would seem vital to any real analysis of the situation.

Yeah, but Tommy thinks that it would be okay to taser this guy in this situation.  I'm still not sure why.  However, Tommy's giving us a good Hannity impression.

They asked him to settled down or they'd taser him.  He settled down, and they tasered him anyway.  Can't you see the problem with this type of torture?

• - therick / Thursday September 20, 2007 03:49:47 PM EST

He hadn't settled down, though. They hadn't gotten him under control, and he was refusing to cooperate. What they used to do with people like him was beat them a couple of times with a night stick, or as many hits as it took, until they started complying with the cop's orders. Tasing is less deadly force than being hit with a night stick. More people will die or be seriously injured if cops don't use the taser and used a gun or a night stick than if they use a taser.

I hate cops. I think they're, overall, authoritarian jackasses who often don't deserve the respect they often demand.

When a cop tells you to do something, even if they're out of line, you need to do it. The cops told him to settle down repeatedly, and he continued to struggle. Even after he was tasered, he continued to complain and be difficult!

He tasered HIMSELF? Wow you must have been seeing a different video than everyone else. IF he was subdued the police had NO RIGHT, to mete out a tasering as punishment. THAT would be WAY out of line

You got beat up a lot in school, didn't you?

These guys are having a laugh at someone's expense, and that is not illegal, nor is it any different than the nicknames many posters here put out for the hated Repub leaders.

Nope, but since you think public humiliation is a justifiable right, here, have some more fun. By your definition, she brought it on herself as well.

Yeaaahh..except I didn't say he brought it on himself, I just said poking fun at someone is not something you should lose sleep over.

Did you lose sleep over those school kids kicking you around?  Were you always a knuckle dragging right wing thug?

I'm just poking a litte fun, so please don't lose any sleep over it.  :-)

Jeter, I'm crushed...well, not really.

"To me, Taser videos are a little like potato chips. I just can't watch just one."

Where's the leap? Beck says he enjoys watching people getting electrocuted. Even if the guy was obnoxious and "asking for it", what's so enjoyable about watching them use pain to subdue him?

Is Beck just being flippant? Then so was I.

Where's the leap?

The leap, IMO, was equating this to Civil Rights marchers being hosed and attacked by police dogs.

Not even close. This kid has pull *stunts* before.

I didn't mean to crush you...so I'm glad I didn't ;-)

No, no, no...my point was not to equate this kid to Civil Rights marchers...just to exaggerate the schadenfreude being exhibited by Beck and O'Reilly. Kind of like accusing them of pulling the wings off of flies for grins.

However, the kid was exercising his Constitutional Right to free speech, obnoxiously to be sure, and the police rousted him for it. I think both probably didn't handle the situation as well as they could have.

I'm not disagreeing with you nerzog, because I consider you a bro' (who wouldn't taze me, or anyone else), but where you refer to the guy as "being rude and obnoxious in a political meeting" and "engaging in a little bit of civil disobediance", please let me point out to you, that that's a fair appraisal that we might make of the guy, in the minutes and hours and days after considering the matter, and watching the videotape.

The campus police on the other hand, who seem to have been the sole security in a room full of people, all within RUSHING DISTANCE of a U.S. Senator (who apparently had no security of his own), they had no such hours minutes or even more than a second or two, to size up the guy and appraise whatever the heck it was he was doing.

Let me note something: That the campus police, in just the few seconds they had to appraise this guy and determine what kind of security risk he might be; and deciding that he needed to be escorted out of the auditorium; when this guy BROKE AWAY from those campus cops, his first move was in the direction of the stage where Sen. Kerry was.

Now, I might be wrong, but if it were the President up on that stage, and everything else was the same, the moment that guy BROKE AWAY from Secret Service Agents trying to escort him out of the auditorium, and made even the slightest move like he was RUSHING THE STAGE, they'd have probably put a bullet in the back of his head, and been glad to have done it.

Listen please: I hate to make examples and illustrations which may not have enough to do with the point I'm trying to make, but listen please:

I'm under the impression that John Lennon had no security whatsoever when he was shot dead; but had he security personell attending him, they would have had to make an appraisal of mark david chapman, similar to the appraisal those campus cops had to make, and in just the same amount of time, a second or two.

The same is true of Gov. Wallace's security, as arthur bremer approached him.

Robert Kennedy's security had just as little time, to even see what was in sirhan sirhan's hand, let alone stop him.

The same is true of President Reagan, and a nearby john hinkley.

These things happen so fast: In a second or two; it can even seem quicker than that.

And long after the fact, we might realize the idiot was a "prankster", or simply an angry young man, or whatever:

Time allows for a better judgement, where an instant relies on the reflexes.

OK, if it's not the same thing, then OK.

But those campus cops, being the only security I'm aware of, in a room full of people within more than a HEADSHOT of a U.S. Senator, they're easily within the distance to RUSH THE STAGE upon which stands an unprotected U.S. Senator, and having no more than a second to figure out this guy, who then decides to BREAK AWAY from them, in the DIRECTION OF THE STAGE...

OK bro', I think I've made my point.

I'm finished.

And it makes me sad to recall Robert Kennedy's senseless death, and John Lennon's too.

And I'm not kidding you bro', but as much as I think those cops did overreact, and no way needed to zap the guy...

...if he had turned out to be sirhan sirhan, or mark david chapman, then I'd have preferred he got a bullet in the back of the head, instead of simply being tazed (which I wouldn't do to you either, Nerzog my bro').

That's how quick cops in situations like that, have to size up guys like we're talking about. 

That's how just a second quick, Robert Kennedy and John Lennon lost their lives.

Dem, I won't disagree with you either, those are good points. But consider this; today's day and age we have more controlled events complete with metal detectors, bomb sniffing dogs, and who knows what else, not some open air outside event. I think the threat level should be lower given those circumstances.

And we are also not privvy to the death threats that public figures, notably politicians, receive regularly. The police are perfectly within their duties to diffuse any situation immediately before something happens.  People can get weapons through metal detectors and other security - for police to relax because everyone in the room may or may not have been screened would hardly work in their defense had something tragic occurred. 

An untennable argument. Nothing pointed to him attempting to get at a weapon. You can justify ANYTHING if allowed to come up with a hypothetical to justify it. By your logic they would have been justified to just gun him down and THEN say well he MIGHT have had a weapon. He MIGHT have had amazing death rays that shoot out of his eyeballs that hardly justifies doing whatever you want to him.

Tommy, last time I heard about someone making a working plastic gun to kill the president, and planned to sneak the bullets in by hiding them in a hollowed out rabbit's foot, was, hmmmmm, think think think - oh, snap! It was a clint eastwood movie!

"In the Line of Fire"

And wasn't it a wax gun?  I'm not sure, I can't remember. One of the two, but a good movie.

I don't think the student made any attempt to rush towards the stage. He pulled away from the people who were in fact pulling him away from the stage. I think that is slightly different.

Dem, those are sobering thoughts, and I'm generallly inclined to give police the benefit of the doubt in these cases. I will concede that they may have acted out of concern for the Senator's safety. Not being involved in law enforcement, I may not be aware of what actually goes through their minds when confronting a person who may or may not pose a threat.

Still, I don't think that excuses Beck's schadenfreude, does it? If it had been a Young Republican arrested and Tazed at a Hillary Clinton speech, I can't help but think he would be coming down on the opposite side. Is that cynical of me?

Oh, and to answer your question...I would never Taze you, Bro.

Nerzog, I am not so sure.  This guy was no fan of John Kerry, he was not being too kind to him in his remarks.  I really don't think Beck's motivation is ideological, it's more on the side of not sanctioning pranksters with purely disruptive agendas......and giving the police the benefit of the doubt, especially in the presence of a sitting Senator.

I am with you, against this whore beck: if he were a thing I saw floating in the toilet bowl, I would be angry at whoever it was that didn't flush, after they becked.

And there's really no more about it Brother.

I've found the whole thing fascinating, and don't figure this idiot at the University of Florida, and the video he stars in, to draw us much longer away, from the fight we make against...

Against all bad things, I guess.

As for that dope at the U of F, I don't know and don't really care.

As for the campus police who got drawn into it all?

They had so little time to figure it all out, and you rely more on training, and mostly on experience, in those kind of split-second situations.

No U.S. Senator got shot, or stabbed, or even punched... not even a pie in the face!

And John Kerry might look kind of funny, in Lemon Maraigne!

Whatever, those campus cops can rest on that, that nobody shot or stabbed or assaulted or even threw a pie in the face of, a U.S. Senator, on their watch and in their jurisdiction (the auditorium of the campus). 

We move on, and back to a better fight, Brother.

(And hey, no joke: If it had been the President up there on the stage, and the Secret Service in charge of auditorium security, then I think what that idiot had done, would have got him a bullet in the head BANG lead poisoning, that's what you get you idiot!

And it wouldn't have shook my faith either, not one bit.)

"I'd expect that kind of post from one of the nitwit lefty trolls here"

Sorry, Jeter, I went to grab some lunch.

That's funny.

Really Jeter?I expected better from you. Lets give you that the guy deserved to be tasered. I dont agree but lets gloss over that. How is it not dispicable to say you enjoy watching someone suffer no matter what they deserve? Is he not a human being? When pricked does he not bleed as Shakespear said? Even if inflicting pain is necessary is it not a sign of a lack of basic human decency to say you ENJOY watching that suffering? I personally dont understand that at all.

Lets give you that the guy deserved to be tasered. I dont agree but lets gloss over that.

Well Solon, I never wrote anything saying or implying that he deserved it, only that I had no sympathy for the kid. And my opinion stands on that.

Also I didn't say I agreed with Beck, or O'Reilly for that matter...only that I wouldn't condemn them for what they said. O'Reilly's bumper stickers & Beck's joking around about enjoying watching people getting hit with a taser may be a tad crass, but hardly despicable.

I personally believe the cops may have overreacted here even though the kid was being an ass & had he not struggled probably could have avoided being zapped.. 

The kid has a history of controversial behavior, I just don't buy someone like that as being a victim.

I am not sure of the difference between saying you have no sympathy for someone caused serious pain and saying he deserved it. I mean I assume had he NOT deserved it you WOULD have sympathy for him but lets leave that for a second. I am getting now that you arent saying one way or another whether its sad and pathetic for someone to say they ENJOY watching anothers pain you just wont condemn someone who says he enjoys watching anothers pain. OK. I guess. I ABSOLUTLY will condemn it. I think it is sick. I think only someone seriously soulsick would enjoy watching anothers suffering. I find Beck saying this to be disgusting and indicitive of someone without a shred of human decency

If you apply Beck's (lack of) logic, anyone ordering O'Reilly's bumper stickers is asking to get 'tazed' as well.  That's fair game, right?  So, where can I pick up one of those tasers?

As usual, Jon Stewart gets it right:

"An unfortunate combination of police over-reaction and what appears to be student douche-baggery."

I think the larger problem is that we, as a society, don't question the police forceably removing someone whose only initial crime was being rude and obnoxious in a political meeting. At what point had he broken the law up until they laid their hands on him? Okay, maybe the kid shouldn't have resisted, but the police should not have interfered so quickly, either.

In a way, the kid was engaging in a little bit of civil disobediance. Maybe he took it a bit too far, but maybe the police were a little heavy-handed, as well.

Nerzog, You have a point, but people who don't respect the rules, and he wasn't denied any form of speech, he had ample time and took it, and then come back and whine about their rights or some such nonsense in this case, should have thought about the ramifications when they stepped all over decency and forum rules.

However this guy knew the ramifications and that was what prompted him to throw his little fit in the first place, therefore he reaps what he sows. 

That kid was there to get his 15-minuts of fame.  From everything I've heard, he was rude, pushy and cut to the front of the line to ask his question.  Did he deserve to be tazered?  Well, that's a matter of opinion.

But Beck and O'Reilly make me want to puke.  Beck enjoys watchng it.  O'Reilly is trying to make a buck off of it.  I say let's tazer both of these morons and see how much they really like it. 

O'Reilly is not "making a buck off it", it goes to charity.  And even if he were, I'd say it's a pretty darn good marketing strategy - if people are offended by it, don't buy it.

O'Reilly said;"Profits go to charity."  He did NOT say; "All profits go to charity."

There is a huge difference.

Look, you hate O'Reilly, fine.  I am no fan of his either, you know that. But I don't reflexively and automatically take the opposite view of him just because of my personal feelings about him.  

However, you are free to do that, I prefer to look at each time his name is brought here and go from there.  In this case, I hope the charity that benefits in anyway from these bumperstickers gets quite a windfall.

I hope so too.  But, you gotta admit by him not saying "All profits go to charity" we both know that windfall could be a lot larger.  But I'm sure it's hard for him to get by on that measly 12 million a year that Fox "News" pays him.

Lets suppose every penny from his marketing goes to charity. He THEN gets to take it off his taxes so anyway you look at it he IS profiting from this.

Here's a little context to what was going on with regards to the tazering incident.

It may not change anyone's minds about the incident, but i find it interesting to have a little more background on why something happens vs just accepting the media's version of it.

Warning to the 'cons - the link goes to Greg Palast's website - one of those "god awful liberal journalists"

Author of tasered student's 'mystery book' points to irony in incident 

Well it seems to me that this is just The Beaver, aka Glenn Beck, being...The Beaver.

If you read everything he said and not just the bold, one could conclude that these are the rantings of a juvenile.  I mean, The Beaver's diatribe borders on the pathetic.  This is what passes for news or even commentary on a network like CNN?  Laughable.

The point of this article is not whether the student deserved to be tazered. It is about the response from Beck and O'Reilly. Even if the police were justified in their use of force it should not be made fun of. Of course the only exceptions to this would be honest to goodness comedians. Leno, Letterman, the Daily Show, these shows are meant to make fun of serious issues. 

Now as far as if the student should have been tasered . . . I just watched the video and that was stupid. The two officers behind him were out of line for creating physical contact with the student for asking his question. In my opinion they created the physical altercation which is what they are not supposed to do. I think the two officers behind the student did not like the fact that he smart mouthed off to them. Really pathetic.

So O'Rielly is saying, that hundreds of thousands of dollars are going to charity, from revenue earned from BillORielly.com ! Is BillORielly.com a 501c3? Where can one read about Billo's  2006 Tax Form 990? How much is earned, and how much is spent on charities?

Hey Bill, show us some proof of what charities are recieving, how much, and how much your site brings in! Think you can handle telling the truth once in your life?

Wow, do you want someone delving into all of your personal information and checking to see how you spend money?  He receives money, and what he chooses to do with that money is his business.  He isn't telling you how to spend your money, so get out of his personal finances. 

I seriously can't believe there are 60 posts on this article. I guess it justifies the existence of controversial camera-jocks taking up space on TV.

This can't come as a surprise to anyone, can it?

Have you ever heard of a rightwinger saying the police did something wrong? 

you have to admit...that bumper sticker is hilarious!....if it was someone other than bill-o that came up with it...say like Maher most wouldn't be bent out of shape.  

Exactly, even in something as nonpolitical as this, it's still there.