• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gladney The Uninsured Activist

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.
Well from what i've seen on the videos another black guy is on the ground first and gladney is standing over him then a union members gets in the way and gladney trips and falls. Nowhere does the video show the supposed vicious beating gladney speaks of. His face looks fine the rest of him looks fine. Unless you're saying they did a good job with makeup he seems pretty fine.

This is correct, my apologies. I was basing the "hate crime" discussion on the mistaken assumption that the guy was white.
So Gladney's whole bit about it being a hate crime is false. The guy seems to want attention. He's calling for people to donate to pay "medical" bills and yet is against reform. Interesting.



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.
Its also possible to fake injuries in front of cameras to elicit sympathy and call for donations for help.

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 video doesn't seem to remotely back up his story. He tripped and fell to the ground then jumped back up if it was a severe beating like he said he would have been on the ground.

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 just seems to me that he is cashing in on his 15 minutes of fame being the new Joe the Plumber
 
If he's stuck in a wheelchair, there's most likely a doctor somewhere in the picture.
You don't need a doctor to get a wheelchair. You could go to an amusement park fake an injury and get a wheelchair. He's wheeled out in front of cameras with a wheelchair.


Which is a legal issue. My point stands.



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.
Okay alleged hate crime. Call it whatever you like but proving a hate crime based on nothing is going to be pretty hard. Gladney would have to prove he was "beaten" because he was black which doesn't seem to be the case because
1. the video doesn't show him getten beaten up but rather tripping, falling, then getting back up.
2. the man who called him the N-word was another black guy
3. You would have to prove intent, which can't be proven at this point.

Gladney is the one tossing it out there to cash in on his 15 minutes.



So then show me what the law is in Missouri when it comes to hate crimes if you wish to diminish my point. :shrug:
Missouri's law calls makes it illegal to perpertrate violence or intimidation based on race. This means you would specifically have the intent to target a specific race. This did not happen. So any claim of a hate crime is reaching.

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



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

A guy who was totally fine before the camera rolls and has no visible signs of injury. Right.

Yes, I remember the girl with mental problems. I don't see the relevance to this issue.
Totally relateable. The video doesn't back up Gladney's story. Now he will be propped up by the right much like Joe the Plumber. Hey why not though any excuse to attack the unions.

Yes, a smear job.
Of the unions yes. The video doesn't back up his story. In fact it was a union member who was on the ground in the start of the video and Gladney standing over him.

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


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


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.

Maybe not in this video...

I dunno. Ask him.

No smear job needed looks like a con to make a quick buck. He's already asking for donations.
 
You don't need a doctor to get a wheelchair. You could go to an amusement park fake an injury and get a wheelchair. He's wheeled out in front of cameras with a wheelchair.

If he is going out on camera in a wheelchair, I am sure there is a doctor involved somewhere. Until you can prove he got his wheelchair at an amusement park or whatever nonsense you were trying to peddle, my point stands.

Okay alleged hate crime. Call it whatever you like but proving a hate crime based on nothing is going to be pretty hard. Gladney would have to prove he was "beaten" because he was black which doesn't seem to be the case because
1. the video doesn't show him getten beaten up but rather tripping, falling, then getting back up.
2. the man who called him the N-word was another black guy
3. You would have to prove intent, which can't be proven at this point.

Gladney is the one tossing it out there to cash in on his 15 minutes.

As was pointed out to you, the video does not show the entirety of the event. As it stands now, there is an "alleged" hate crime. A court will decide what to do about it; not me or you.


Missouri's law calls makes it illegal to perpertrate violence or intimidation based on race. This means you would specifically have the intent to target a specific race. This did not happen. So any claim of a hate crime is reaching.

If he was being called the N-word while being beaten, I'm not really sure it matters. Hate crime legislation also does not limit "race" as the deciding factor in whether a crime is a hate crime or not. It only demands that a person be targeted for being affiliated with a group and that affiliation or membership in that group be the reason the person was targeted. The "hate" crime in all this may very well be that he was part of the opposing "team".

I find it stupid that we have to elevate or diminish victims based on something so trite but it is what it is. Unfortunate, though.

A guy who was totally fine before the camera rolls and has no visible signs of injury. Right.

Again, you don't know that he was totally fine. You see a small part of what happened, you have no MD credentials, and you have not examined him, his x-rays, or any medical tests. You don't know what the situation is.

Totally relateable. The video doesn't back up Gladney's story. Now he will be propped up by the right much like Joe the Plumber. Hey why not though any excuse to attack the unions.

Joe the Plumber and Gladney have no relevant relation.

Of the unions yes. The video doesn't back up his story. In fact it was a union member who was on the ground in the start of the video and Gladney standing over him.

So why aren't you moaning and bitching that the union guy just tripped? You didn't see in the video Gladney attacking him either. But I see how quick you are to relinquish that awesome power of examination of yours and immediately default to speculation when you think you can attack "the other guy" with an accusation.

typical.

No smear job needed looks like a con to make a quick buck. He's already asking for donations.

Donations to cover medical expenses. And before you start spouting off, you still don't know what those expenses and injuries are despite wanting...no, needing...them to be nothing.
 
If he is going out on camera in a wheelchair, I am sure there is a doctor involved somewhere. Until you can prove he got his wheelchair at an amusement park or whatever nonsense you were trying to peddle, my point stands.
The doctor has been quite a bit lacking around Gladney. All you have is a guy suddenly in a wheelchair who a day before was perfectly fine to talk. I'll remember next time I trip and fall to threaten to sue everyone around me


As was pointed out to you, the video does not show the entirety of the event. As it stands now, there is an "alleged" hate crime. A court will decide what to do about it; not me or you.
As it stands now there is no alleged hate crime only Gladney claiming such. You'd need more proof of that. That's if this even will get to a court. So without the video you have a case of he said she said.


If he was being called the N-word while being beaten, I'm not really sure it matters. Hate crime legislation also does not limit "race" as the deciding factor in whether a crime is a hate crime or not. It only demands that a person be targeted for being affiliated with a group and that affiliation or membership in that group be the reason the person was targeted. The "hate" crime in all this may very well be that he was part of the opposing "team".
You have to prove he was specifically targeted because of his race. Once again this is where the hate crime argument fails to meet the criteria. He was called the N-word by a black guy. It is unclear who initiated the confrontation but we do know a black SIEU member was on the ground and Gladney was standing over him. We do know that someone got in Gladney's way and that Gladney fell over. We do not know for sure what happened before or after but according to the current evidence there is nothing to denote a hate crime. Hate crimes in MO cover race, religion, ethnicity and orientation. They do not cover political groups. Again in order for it to be a hate crime you have to show he was specifically targeted for being black.


I find it stupid that we have to elevate or diminish victims based on something so trite but it is what it is. Unfortunate, though.



Again, you don't know that he was totally fine. You see a small part of what happened, you have no MD credentials, and you have not examined him, his x-rays, or any medical tests. You don't know what the situation is.
I haven't heard a peep out of anyone who has examined him. I see a guy sitting in a wheelchair with no physical evidence of a beating taken place. His face was fine, his arms and legs were fine. He described that he was kicked while on the ground. There doesn't seem to be any outward appearance of that. Well you don't know what his situation is either but you're still propping him up. He was all over fox news on the 7th giving interviews perfectly fine no wheelchair, no painkillers. He claims he was kicked and punched in the head. For someone hit like that his head looks fine. Unless those big bad mean union workers hit like girls. Yet he comes out at a press conference with a wheelchair and supposedly too drugged up on pain killers to talk.


Joe the Plumber and Gladney have no relevant relation.
Really now? Both after their own 15 minutes of fame blowing up their own situation bigger than it was. Joe criticized Obama even though Joe wasn't going to be taxed under the plan and his business didn't make enough to be taxed. Gladney opposed to reform while at the same time asking for donations for "medical" bills. Seems pretty similiar.


So why aren't you moaning and bitching that the union guy just tripped? You didn't see in the video Gladney attacking him either. But I see how quick you are to relinquish that awesome power of examination of yours and immediately default to speculation when you think you can attack "the other guy" with an accusation.

Why am I not moaning and bitching about the union guy? The union guy isn't milking this for 15 minutes of fame. He's not playing the victim here. Even though Gladney stood over him. Right now its not even a given that anyone was attacked. You have a union guy on the ground and you have gladney falling over when a union guy came between Gladney and his friend.



Donations to cover medical expenses. And before you start spouting off, you still don't know what those expenses and injuries are despite wanting...no, needing...them to be nothing.
You don't seem to either. As of yet we don't see much proof of anything.
 
Last edited:
The doctor has been quite a bit lacking around Gladney. All you have is a guy suddenly in a wheelchair who a day before was perfectly fine to talk. I'll remember next time I trip and fall to threaten to sue everyone around me

The doctor seems to be lacking around Gladney? Okay, you are just reaching now. I am not going to fault the guy for not taking cameras with him to his doctor appointments.

As it stands now there is no alleged hate crime only Gladney claiming such. You'd need more proof of that. That's if this even will get to a court. So without the video you have a case of he said she said.

No, without the video you have a case of an alleged hated crime being witnessed or not by a crowd of people.

You have to prove he was specifically targeted because of his race. Once again this is where the hate crime argument fails to meet the criteria. He was called the N-word by a black guy. It is unclear who initiated the confrontation but we do know a black SIEU member was on the ground and Gladney was standing over him. We do know that someone got in Gladney's way and that Gladney fell over. We do not know for sure what happened before or after but according to the current evidence there is nothing to denote a hate crime. Hate crimes in MO cover race, religion, ethnicity and orientation. They do not cover political groups. Again in order for it to be a hate crime you have to show he was specifically targeted for being black.

Well he was being called the N-word. :shrug: I am sure the courts will decide; not you or me.

I haven't heard a peep out of anyone who has examined him.

And you probably won't before a hearing occurs. He has a right to medical privacy and his doctor has an obligation to maintain that right. Get over it.

I see a guy sitting in a wheelchair with no physical evidence of a beating taken place. His face was fine, his arms and legs were fine. He described that he was kicked while on the ground. There doesn't seem to be any outward appearance of that. Well you don't know what his situation is either but you're still propping him up.

Bull****. I haven't propped anyone up. I have stated that your accusations are baseless and unfounded because...now let me check...yep, you still have zero credentials to make the determination that he is "fine" (wonder how one arrives at a medical diagnosis of "fine" :lol:)

He was all over fox news on the 7th giving interviews perfectly fine no wheelchair, no painkillers. He claims he was kicked and punched in the head. For someone hit like that his head looks fine. Unless those big bad mean union workers hit like girls. Yet he comes out at a press conference with a wheelchair and supposedly too drugged up on pain killers to talk.

And until you have a medical report that supports your uninformed conjecture, your "diagnosis" of "fine" means as much to this debate as the dust on my shoe.

Really now? Both after their own 15 minutes of fame blowing up their own situation bigger than it was. Joe criticized Obama even though Joe wasn't going to be taxed under the plan and his business didn't make enough to be taxed. Gladney opposed to reform while at the same time asking for donations for "medical" bills. Seems pretty similiar.

I suppose if you so desperately need the comparison, you can make anything fit. I find your comparison stretching at best but closer to irrelevant.

Why am I not moaning and bitching about the union guy? The union guy isn't milking this for 15 minutes of fame. He's not playing the victim here. Even though Gladney stood over him.

Gladney stood over him? Or Gladney was standing there when the guy fell? You're soooo quick to condemn Gladney with little information (oh, oh...except a laymen's diagnosis of "fine". still can't get over that. :lol:). But at the same time, with just as little information, so quick to absolve the union guy. I find the hypocrisy quite amusing. But not surprising.

Right now its not even a given that anyone was attacked. You have a union guy on the ground and you have gladney falling over when a union guy came between Gladney and his friend.

In your perception, skewed as it is.

You don't seem to either. As of yet we don't see much proof of anything.

Exactly. So then why so quick to condemn a man when you confess that you don't know jack **** about the situation?
 
I have been trying to fallow this story--but all we have so far is what again...


For the video of the aftermath:

I've watched the video and it's difficult to tell what really transpired BEFORE the video. I think this MAY be one of those situations where not everything is what is appears.

I hold my opinion until more smoke clears...The press conference with his attorney asking for donations while not a evidence of anything specific, does raise some reasonable eyebrows.
 
The doctor seems to be lacking around Gladney? Okay, you are just reaching now. I am not going to fault the guy for not taking cameras with him to his doctor appointments.
He had a trip to the ER but not much after that. So does he have insurance or not? Why is his lawyer asking for donations for "medical" bills.


No, without the video you have a case of an alleged hated crime being witnessed or not by a crowd of people.
Fair enough if you have an alleged hate crime you also have an alleged beating and an allegedly hurt gladney.

Well he was being called the N-word. :shrug: I am sure the courts will decide; not you or me.
A black guy calling another black guy the N-word isn't a hate crime. Once again you have to prove intent a specific targeting of an individual for his race and intimidation and violence because of the race.



And you probably won't before a hearing occurs. He has a right to medical privacy and his doctor has an obligation to maintain that right. Get over it.
We probably won't hear much. If he loses this will go quiet and no one will hear about him. The right's cause of the moment will be gone.

Bull****. I haven't propped anyone up. I have stated that your accusations are baseless and unfounded because...now let me check...yep, you still have zero credentials to make the determination that he is "fine" (wonder how one arrives at a medical diagnosis of "fine" :lol:)
Really now you seem to be doing quite a bit of propping up. There's nothing unfounded there's no physical evidence that the alleged beating took place. Just like there's no evidence that an alleged hatecrime took place. I'd say you have zero credentials to make a determination that he was actually beaten and was hurt.

And until you have a medical report that supports your uninformed conjecture, your "diagnosis" of "fine" means as much to this debate as the dust on my shoe.
Until we have a medical report to support anything I'd say we don't have much to go off of other than a guy sitting in a wheelchair with no obvious signs of injury considering he was "kicked in the head".

I suppose if you so desperately need the comparison, you can make anything fit. I find your comparison stretching at best but closer to irrelevant.
No desperation here. You're trying to say there was a hate crime based off of no actual evidence of it.

Gladney stood over him? Or Gladney was standing there when the guy fell? You're soooo quick to condemn Gladney with little information (oh, oh...except a laymen's diagnosis of "fine". still can't get over that. :lol:). But at the same time, with just as little information, so quick to absolve the union guy. I find the hypocrisy quite amusing. But not surprising.
You're so quick to support Gladney's tale as well when the video evidence doesn't back it up. Gladney stood there pretty close to him. I'm so quick to absolve the union guy because we have no proof the beating took place.


In your perception, skewed as it is.
I'm basing it off the available evidence what do you base your opinion on?

Exactly. So then why so quick to condemn a man when you confess that you don't know jack **** about the situation?
I know enough to see that a guy supposedly kicked in the head has no head injuries.
 
All I have to say on the matter is that I will sit back and wait for facts to come in before condemning or congratulating anyone. I am more inclined to believe the first hand accounts of his injury than I am to accept your "diagnosis" of "just fine" (that still cracks me up..."just fine" :lol:) as a person with bias speculating on internetz.

That will be all.
 
or he has not insurance and is a hypocrite to his own cause...

How does him being uninsured and opposing socialized medicine make him a hypocrite? It does no such thing. In fact, it makes him more legitimate than people with insurance. Despite the fact that he currently has no insurance, rather than lobbying the government for a forced publicly subsidized hand out that would help him in the short term he still holds true to his belief knowing that choice in the long term will be bad for the nation as a whole. Your characterization is backwards.
 
How does him being uninsured and opposing socialized medicine make him a hypocrite? It does no such thing.

It's no more hypocritical than someone without a drivers' license opposing the establishment of a bungling, bureaucratic government-run DMV.

:2razz:
 
Back
Top Bottom