Gladney The Uninsured Activist

PeteEU · Aug 11, 2009

Sorry but this story is one of the "funniest" I have yet heard out there.

The Washington Monthly

Gladney did not address Saturday's crowd of about 200 people. His attorney, David Brown, however, read a prepared statement Gladney wrote. "A few nights ago there was an assault on my liberty, and on yours, too." Brown read. "This should never happen in this country."

Supporters cheered. Brown finished by telling the crowd that Gladney is accepting donations toward his medical expenses. Gladney told reporters he was recently laid off and has no health insurance. [emphasis added]

Come on.....you just cant make boneheads up like this.

And now there is of course an update..

The Washington Independent spoke to Gladney's attorney, who said the St. Louis Post-Dispatch article is mistaken. Gladney did lose his job, the attorney said, but now has health insurance through his wife.

It's unclear, at this point, a) why Gladney initially told reporters he has no insurance; and b) why he would need to solicit contributions from far-right activists to pay his medical bills if he already has coverage.

So either he has insurance and tried to commit fraud, or he has not insurance and is a hypocrite to his own cause... wonder which in the end will be the truth

sam_w · Aug 11, 2009

PeteEU said:
Sorry but this story is one of the "funniest" I have yet heard out there.

The Washington Monthly

Come on.....you just cant make boneheads up like this.

And now there is of course an update..

So either he has insurance and tried to commit fraud, or he has not insurance and is a hypocrite to his own cause... wonder which in the end will be the truth

This ranks up there with the "Keep your government hands off my Medicare". This is as Michael Kinsley wrote back in the 90s about the babyism of our society. People that cry about balanced budgets, lowered taxes...then whine equally about preserving or enhancing their benefits.

RightinNYC · Aug 11, 2009

I've got to say, I wouldn't have thought it would be someone like you posting this story here. I would have thought that you would have preferred to bury this story.

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, here's what happened.

Black guy is at a protest against the Obama health care proposal. A bunch of white union thugs supporting Obama's proposal come over, get into an argument with him, and then beat him so bad that he has to get put in a wheelchair. Oh, and did I mention that they called him a nigger while they were doing this?

See, where I come from, that's called a hate crime. But I guess PeteEU is completely okay with it.

For the video of the aftermath:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqpfU_AC7Ls"]YouTube - Obama's SEIU Thugs Attack a Black Conservative Outside Russ Carnahan Town Hall. [RAW VIDEO][/ame]

Some choice quotes:

"You attacked him!"
"No we didn't"
"Yes you did!"
"He attacked America!"

If this guy were a liberal who had been beaten by republicans, Sharpton and Pelosi would have made him the most famous man in the country right now.

And instead, you're on here trying to accuse him of...what, exactly? Not having insurance? Getting laid off? Not agreeing with you?

It's good to see that you're following along with orders from thinkprogress to smear this victim before his story really blows up. Real classy of you.

PeteEU · Aug 11, 2009

RightinNYC said:
I've got to say, I wouldn't have thought it would be someone like you posting this story here. I would have thought that you would have preferred to bury this story.

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, here's what happened.

Black guy is at a protest against the Obama health care proposal. A bunch of white union thugs supporting Obama's proposal come over, get into an argument with him, and then beat him so bad that he has to get put in a wheelchair. Oh, and did I mention that they called him a nigger while they were doing this?

See, where I come from, that's called a hate crime. But I guess PeteEU is completely okay with it.

For the video of the aftermath:

YouTube - Obama's SEIU Thugs Attack a Black Conservative Outside Russ Carnahan Town Hall. [RAW VIDEO]

Some choice quotes:

"You attacked him!"
"No we didn't"
"Yes you did!"
"He attacked America!"

If this guy were a liberal who had been beaten by republicans, Sharpton and Pelosi would have made him the most famous man in the country right now.

And instead, you're on here trying to accuse him of...what, exactly? Not having insurance? Getting laid off? Not agreeing with you?

It's good to see that you're following along with orders from thinkprogress to smear this victim before his story really blows up. Real classy of you.

Stop trying to change the subject. But for the record any and all violence or attempts of violence by both sides is wrong.

What this is about is this man's credibility and hypocrisy around him and not how he got hurt.

It is your side that are using the situation he got himself into at the rally as an example of "how bad the left is" and all that jazz.

But you and the party of "NO" fail to mention the fact that he has no health insurance because he lost his job, one of the key issues in the whole debate. And the fact that he asked via his lawyer for donations to pay for the treatment he needed after the situation he got himself into. So basically he got hurt protesting a idea that would give people like him healthcare and then when he needs healthcare there is nothing for him so he has to go out begging. That sir is a classic own goal of epic proportions.

Then fast forward a day or so and we learn from a lawyer that he did have insurance via his wife. So tell me this.. is it not illegal in the US for someone to ask for charity when there is no charity needed? Is that not fraud? Another own goal of epic proportions.

Redress · Aug 11, 2009

RightinNYC, that does not change the point that Pete is making. It's a separate point, and what happened to him should be condemned, and as a law and order liberal, I hope those involved get prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, it's still a separate point.

You got to admit that what Pete posted is funnier than hell.

RightinNYC · Aug 11, 2009

PeteEU said:
Stop trying to change the subject.

The stuff I posted is the only part of this thread worth discussion.

But for the record any and all violence or attempts of violence by both sides is wrong.

Gee, thanks for that condemnation. Now where's the usual rant about how the US is racist and horrible? Do you only save that for situations where it fits your preferred narrative?

What this is about is this man's credibility and hypocrisy around him and not how he got hurt.

What the **** does his "hypocrisy" matter? If a black guy who was protesting Bush's policies (despite getting more money under the tax cuts) was beaten by republican thugs using racial slurs, I can guaran-****ing-tee you that nobody on here would be saying "oh, well forget the fact that he got beat, lets talk about his tax burden under bush v. clinton."

You're so far off the reservation here that I can't understand how you think this is worthwhile.

It is your side that are using the situation he got himself into at the rally as an example of "how bad the left is" and all that jazz.

No, we're using the situation of how he got beat down by racist union thugs as an example of how ****ed up that mentality is.

But you and the party of "NO" fail to mention the fact that he has no health insurance because he lost his job, one of the key issues in the whole debate. And the fact that he asked via his lawyer for donations to pay for the treatment he needed after the situation he got himself into. So basically he got hurt protesting a idea that would give people like him healthcare and then when he needs healthcare there is nothing for him so he has to go out begging. That sir is a classic own goal of epic proportions.

Then fast forward a day or so and we learn from a lawyer that he did have insurance via his wife. So tell me this.. is it not illegal in the US for someone to ask for charity when there is no charity needed? Is that not fraud? Another own goal of epic proportions.

This is far and away one of the ridiculous things I've read on here. Did it cross your mind that maybe he was misquoted? Or maybe he was mistaken? Maybe he thought he wasn't covered, but it turned out that he is? Maybe his coverage will pay for things like aspirin, but won't cover injuries incurred from beatdowns by union thugs?

But hey, don't let me rain on your parade. I'm sure there's a thread about someone being raped that's just waiting for you to come by and explain why it's her fault for wearing that slutty dress.

jallman · Aug 11, 2009

Redress said:
RightinNYC, that does not change the point that Pete is making. It's a separate point, and what happened to him should be condemned, and as a law and order liberal, I hope those involved get prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, it's still a separate point.

You got to admit that what Pete posted is funnier than hell.

True. About as funny as a hate crime that leaves a man in a wheel chair. :2wave:

RightinNYC · Aug 11, 2009

Redress said:
RightinNYC, that does not change the point that Pete is making. It's a separate point, and what happened to him should be condemned, and as a law and order liberal, I hope those involved get prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, it's still a separate point.

You got to admit that what Pete posted is funnier than hell.

No, it's indicative of a simplistic mindset. It's not at all incompatible to be without health insurance and yet oppose a particular health care proposal.

There are a multitude of reasons why one could oppose a policy that they would stand to benefit from - the fact that Pete either won't or can't understand that is more of a reflection on his own shortcomings than of anything else.

PeteEU · Aug 11, 2009

RightinNYC said:
The stuff I posted is the only part of this thread worth discussion.

Then take it some where else because that was never the intention of the thread and you know it. If you want to discuss then start a thread.

jallman · Aug 11, 2009

PeteEU said:
Then take it some where else because that was never the intention of the thread and you know it. If you want to discuss then start a thread.

It may not have been the intention, but the truth of the situation you posted has been brought to light and is now the focus of the thread.

You didn't seriously think you would be unopposed in your attempt to smear this man without someone telling the whole story, did you?

RightinNYC · Aug 11, 2009

PeteEU said:
Then take it some where else because that was never the intention of the thread and you know it. If you want to discuss then start a thread.

So try responding to the rest of my post pointing out why your entire argument is based on an idiotic premise.

ReverendHellh0und · Aug 11, 2009

PeteEU said:
Sorry but this story is one of the "funniest" I have yet heard out there.

The Washington Monthly

Come on.....you just cant make boneheads up like this.

And now there is of course an update..

So either he has insurance and tried to commit fraud, or he has not insurance and is a hypocrite to his own cause... wonder which in the end will be the truth

This is the guy that those union thugs beat the crap out of? Really? this is your problem with this situation, not the racist union thugs?

They should be dragged out of there tied to the back of some citizens car or strung up in front of town hall to let the unions know that the citixzens will not be intimidated. These thugs are a bunch of fat bastards that have no business at these town halls. They are not there to give input but to intimidate.

And while the liberals and democrats are calling us "mob" and "kkk" and "racists", it turns out thier goons are everything they are accusing us of being....

Crunch · Aug 11, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is the guy that those union thugs beat the crap out of? Really? this is your problem with this situation, not the racist union thugs?

They should be dragged out of there tied to the back of some citizens car or strung up in front of town hall to let the unions know that the citixzens will not be intimidated. These thugs are a bunch of fat bastards that have no business at these town halls. They are not there to give input but to intimidate.

And while the liberals and democrats are calling us "mob" and "kkk" and "racists", it turns out thier goons are everything they are accusing us of being....

Note to self: Concealed carry permits are a good thing to have at Democratic town hall meetings.

PogueMoran · Aug 11, 2009

RightinNYC said:
I've got to say, I wouldn't have thought it would be someone like you posting this story here. I would have thought that you would have preferred to bury this story.

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, here's what happened.

Black guy is at a protest against the Obama health care proposal. A bunch of white union thugs supporting Obama's proposal come over, get into an argument with him, and then beat him so bad that he has to get put in a wheelchair. Oh, and did I mention that they called him a nigger while they were doing this?

See, where I come from, that's called a hate crime. But I guess PeteEU is completely okay with it.

For the video of the aftermath:

YouTube - Obama's SEIU Thugs Attack a Black Conservative Outside Russ Carnahan Town Hall. [RAW VIDEO]

I've watched the full video and it doesn't play out the way Gladney says it did. First off his fight was between him and a black SIEU member. It was a black guy that called him the N-word. It was the black SIEU member who was on the ground at the start of the video and Gladney was standing over him. The SIEU member tried to get between Gladney and his fellow member who was on the ground and they both ended up falling over. Gladney looked fine at the end of the video. Now he supposedly has to speak through his lawyer. No hate crime. Besides aren't conservatives against the concept of hate crimes?

jallman · Aug 11, 2009

PogueMoran said:
I've watched the full video and it doesn't play out the way Gladney says it did. First off his fight was between him and a black SIEU member. It was a black guy that called him the N-word. It was the black SIEU member who was on the ground at the start of the video and Gladney was standing over him. The SIEU member tried to get between Gladney and his fellow member who was on the ground and they both ended up falling over. Gladney looked fine at the end of the video.

I would default to the doctor's opinions before making any statement about how fine he is.

Now he supposedly has to speak through his lawyer.

That usually happens when law suits are involved.

No hate crime. Besides aren't conservatives against the concept of hate crimes?

I don't really buy into the whole hate crime legislation but knowing that liberals typically do, I find it a little telling of their hypocritical nature that they aren't all over the "hate crime" aspect of this situation.

PogueMoran · Aug 11, 2009

jallman said:
I would default to the doctor's opinions before making any statement about how fine he is.

Clearly you can see in the video he trips and then gets back up perfectly fine. Sounds like another Ashley Todd in the making.

jallman said:
That usually happens when law suits are involved.

Law suits for what? The video looks like he initiated the confrontation

jallman said:
I don't really buy into the whole hate crime legislation but knowing that liberals typically do, I find it a little telling of their hypocritical nature that they aren't all over the "hate crime" aspect of this situation.

Well then you obviously don't understand what a hate crime is. Gladney would have to have been specifically targeted because of his race, you would have to prove intent. This is unclear considering Gladney looked like he was going to beat up on another black guy at the beginning of the video

jallman · Aug 11, 2009

PogueMoran said:
Clearly you can see in the video he trips and then gets back up perfectly fine. Sounds like another Ashley Todd in the making.

I would default to the doctor's opinions when determining how "fine" he really is.

Law suits for what? The video looks like he initiated the confrontation

If a lawyer is involved, it stands to reason that there is some legal issue or lawsuit at play here. I am not surprised at all that he speaks through his lawyer where this is concerned.

Well then you obviously don't understand what a hate crime is.

Do not deign to tell me what I do and do not understand. If I don't understand something, I will let you know and ask for clarification. Until then, if I comment on a topic without such a request for clarification, then you may assume I have at least a rudimentary knowledge of the topic being discussed.

Gladney would have to have been specifically targeted because of his race, you would have to prove intent.

Not always true. Here in California, if the N word is tossed out in the commission of a crime, a hate crime charge is almost always attached to it or it at least becomes an aggravation to the original charge.

This is unclear considering Gladney looked like he was going to beat up on another black guy at the beginning of the video

So it's unclear. If it were unclear that a democrat supporter possibly maybe got beat up and put in a wheel chair by someone who called him the n-word who happened to be a republican supporter, Sharpton would be all over it with his bullhorn and we'd never get the real story because of all the accusations flying.

We don't see that here. We see a smear job and a commitment to devaluing the violence perpetrated here because of the political charge behind the incident. Hypocrisy at its finest.

PogueMoran · Aug 11, 2009

jallman said:
I would default to the doctor's opinions when determining how "fine" he really is.

I would if there was a doctor to default to.

jallman said:
If a lawyer is involved, it stands to reason that there is some legal issue or lawsuit at play here. I am not surprised at all that he speaks through his lawyer where this is concerned.

Or something akin to ambulance chasing which conservatives despise.

jallman said:
Do not deign to tell me what I do and do not understand. If I don't understand something, I will let you know and ask for clarification. Until then, if I comment on a topic without such a request for clarification, then you may assume I have at least a rudimentary knowledge of the topic being discussed.

You stating this to be a hate crime when it doesn't even fit the bill doesn't show a very clear understanding of what a hate crime is

jallman said:
Not always true. Here in California, if the N word is tossed out in the commission of a crime, a hate crime charge is almost always attached to it or it at least becomes an aggravation to the original charge.

It once again depends on who uses the word and what the motive is. Also this took place in St Louis, different laws out in Missouri.

jallman said:
So it's unclear. If it were unclear that a democrat supporter possibly maybe got beat up and put in a wheel chair by someone who called him the n-word who happened to be a republican supporter, Sharpton would be all over it with his bullhorn and we'd never get the real story because of all the accusations flying.

Put in a wheelchair? The guy walked away from the incident fine on the video then the next day shows up in a wheelchair. You never heard of anyone making injuries out to be more than they are. Remember Ashley Todd the McCain worker who carved a backwards B in her face to try to attack the Obama campaign. All the while conservatives flocked to her until they found out she was a liar. Nice comparison but not accurate.

jallman said:
We don't see that here. We see a smear job and a commitment to devaluing the violence perpetrated here because of the political charge behind the incident. Hypocrisy at its finest.

A smear job? The video doesn't fit his dramatization of the events. There is no smear job, no hate crime. The guy tripped and got back up the video doesn't show the beating the guy claims. Why doesn't he show everyone his injuries?

jallman · Aug 11, 2009

PogueMoran said:
I would if there was a doctor to default to.

If he's stuck in a wheelchair, there's most likely a doctor somewhere in the picture.

Or something akin to ambulance chasing which conservatives despise.

Which is a legal issue. My point stands.

You stating this to be a hate crime when it doesn't even fit the bill doesn't show a very clear understanding of what a hate crime is

I never called it, definitively, a hate crime. But let's do clarify things ad nauseum for your sake. We'll just refer to it as the "alleged" hate crime which is what it now is since it has been tossed out there.

It once again depends on who uses the word and what the motive is. Also this took place in St Louis, different laws out in Missouri.

So then show me what the law is in Missouri when it comes to hate crimes if you wish to diminish my point. :shrug:

Put in a wheelchair? The guy walked away from the incident fine on the video then the next day shows up in a wheelchair.

In summation, put into a wheelchair from this "alleged" hate crime...my point stands.

You never heard of anyone making injuries out to be more than they are.

I have heard of such. Before I prosecute the man for being a phony, I will wait for more facts to roll in, however.

Remember Ashley Todd the McCain worker who carved a backwards B in her face to try to attack the Obama campaign.

Yes, I remember the girl with mental problems. I don't see the relevance to this issue.

A smear job?

Yes, a smear job.

The video doesn't fit his dramatization of the events.

It's one video and there is a lot of motion and commotion in it. I will wait for more facts to come in.

There is no smear job,

Oh this thread is quite telling that there is a smear job being attempted.

no hate crime.

You're right. There is an "alleged" hate crime. A court will decide if there was an actual hate crime or not. You, however, won't be making that final determination.

The guy tripped and got back up the video doesn't show the beating the guy claims.

Maybe not in this video...

Why doesn't he show everyone his injuries?

I dunno. Ask him.

apdst · Aug 11, 2009

So, let me get this straight, only the insured folks can protest a bill that will obviously be detrimental to health care in this country and the uninsured have to put the blinders on and do as they're told? Is that it?

Crunch · Aug 11, 2009

apdst said:
So, let me get this straight, only the insured folks can protest a bill that will obviously be detrimental to health care in this country and the uninsured have to put the blinders on and do as they're told? Is that it?

No, no, no, no..... you got it all wrong.

Anyone that isn't full hearted behind Government controlled health care are supposed to shut up, put the blinders on, and do as they’re told.... K?

apdst · Aug 11, 2009

Crunch said:
No, no, no, no..... you got it all wrong.

Anyone that isn't full hearted behind Government controlled health care are supposed to shut up, put the blinders on, and do as they’re told.... K?

Damn, that's right! I slipped there, please pardon me for thinking rationally for a minute.

Crunch · Aug 11, 2009

apdst said:
Damn, that's right! I slipped there, please pardon me for thinking rationally for a minute.

Well.... alright, but don't let it happen again.

apdst · Aug 11, 2009

Crunch said:
Well.... alright, but don't let it happen again.

yessir...!

RightinNYC · Aug 11, 2009

PogueMoran said:
I've watched the full video and it doesn't play out the way Gladney says it did. First off his fight was between him and a black SIEU member.

The video in this thread shows the last 2.5 seconds of the fight. Unless you're referring to some other video, neither you nor I have no idea of what happened before that.

It was a black guy that called him the N-word.

This is correct, my apologies. I was basing the "hate crime" discussion on the mistaken assumption that the guy was white.

It was the black SIEU member who was on the ground at the start of the video and Gladney was standing over him. The SIEU member tried to get between Gladney and his fellow member who was on the ground and they both ended up falling over. Gladney looked fine at the end of the video.

PogueMoran said:
Clearly you can see in the video he trips and then gets back up perfectly fine. Sounds like another Ashley Todd in the making.

It's possible to "look fine" after a fight and still be injured, especially when the worst part of it supposedly happened before the cameras started rolling.

Law suits for what? The video looks like he initiated the confrontation

And you're basing this off of the two obscured seconds of the fight that you saw on the tape? Statements by Gladney and witnesses offer a different perspective, and it was the other folks, not Gladney, who were arrested for assault that night.

The disconcerting part of this is how people like PeteEU and those behind ThinkProgress are so eager to attack someone who, as far as we know, is the victim of an assault.

Gladney The Uninsured Activist

PeteEU

sam_w

Well-known member

RightinNYC

Girthless

PeteEU

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

RightinNYC

Girthless

jallman

RightinNYC

Girthless

PeteEU

jallman

RightinNYC

Girthless

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.

Crunch

PogueMoran

Well-known member

jallman

PogueMoran

Well-known member

jallman

PogueMoran

Well-known member

jallman

apdst

Crunch

apdst

Crunch

apdst

RightinNYC

Girthless