• 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!

Fox News contributor punched in face at pro-union protests in Michigan [W:867]

He went in to report that union protestors are violent, mindless thugs trying to intimidate their employers,
That is your spin.
He went to document the protest no matter what occurred.

Had the Union thugs not acted that way he would have nothing but video showing peaceful protest.
 
No I watched the video she posted that is what I am going by that makes your points moot. That is something she has pointed out more than a few times. I have to ask if this is such a simple assult why havent the police filed charges or the dumbass the went out looking for a fight. My guess is there is alot more that went on
You are simply being dishonest.
This is a debate forum.
Point, counter point.
When her point was countered, as it was repeatedly, it was your job to then counter it if you can. But as we know, you couldn't.
All you did is to continue arguing someone else's pov instead of the factual evidence. A pov that couldn't even be supported. That is called "nuts".


It was your responsibility to know what was being discussed.
That was the information from the OP.
That information showed her point to be irrelevant and moot, and yet she, and you, because you wanted to mimic her, failed to take that factual evidence into consideration. Well you were wrong. That video was not edited at the point in question and did not show him swinging on anyone.

The evidence I provided countered in whole what she provided. Yet you dishonestly ignored it. That is not debate. It is dishonesty. Perhaps you should come back when you know how to debate and not just mimic another memeber's point of view. Especially when it is as ridiculous as the one you decided to mimic.

Not only were her points irrelevant but they were made moot by the evidence just as you have made yourself moot by mimicking her stance.
 
Well I guess the point is you and Fox are good spelling nazi's:roll:

That's right--blame Fox News for a DP poster's being willing to see the difference between "Romeny" and "Romney" or to occasionally proofread.
Rats, those evil Fox Newers have dominion over us all.

Or maybe not. Maybe good spelling is a virtue, and without it, proofreading is.

And, BTW, a comma should follow your informal "Well," which is a parenthetical expression here, and "nazi's" should be capped without the apostrophe because as many of us know, proper names are capped and an apostrophe doesn't pluralize. All you have to do is add "s" or "es," and thanks very much for playing.

Meanwhile, do please continue your three-minute Fox hate. :lamo
 
That's right--blame Fox News for a DP poster's being willing to see the difference between "Romeny" and "Romney" or to occasionally proofread.
Rats, those evil Fox Newers have dominion over us all.

Or maybe not. Maybe good spelling is a virtue, and without it, proofreading is.

And, BTW, a comma should follow your informal "Well," which is a parenthetical expression here, and "nazi's" should be capped without the apostrophe because as many of us know, proper names are capped and an apostrophe doesn't pluralize. All you have to do is add "s" or "es," and thanks very much for playing.

Meanwhile, do please continue your three-minute Fox hate. :lamo

get a life or at least a sense of humor:roll:
 
Is there any evidence showing that the union activist who gave crowler his lumps had been physical with anyone or anything before crowler fought with him?
The union activist was instigating, yelling, moving about and such but nothing more and looks like he always had his hands by his sides.
Sure there was a lot going on around him but he doesn't appear to have been much of a threat other than his being outspoken and in the way.
 
Is there any evidence showing that the union activist who gave crowler his lumps had been physical with anyone or anything before crowler fought with him?
The union activist was instigating, yelling, moving about and such but nothing more and looks like he always had his hands by his sides.
Sure there was a lot going on around him but he doesn't appear to have been much of a threat other than his being outspoken and in the way.
"IF" true, that doesn't excuse his actions in assaulting Crowder.

But I do find his interfering with Crowder trying to stop the other thug from tearing down the tent, intimidating. He was basically pushing him back with his body.
Regardless, his interference (running cover for), makes him complicit in the action. Which makes him one of the aggressors.



And one can see that it is a concerted effort between the Union thugs in the above video.
 
That is your spin.
He went to document the protest no matter what occurred.

Had the Union thugs not acted that way he would have nothing but video showing peaceful protest.

Crowder is NOT a journalist. He is a conservative comedian of the shock variety.

And yoir video is garbage. Still no video of the guy actually going down. Did see Crowders brown leather jacket clad right arm contacting union guys left upper chest, shoving between the camera and the union guy in question.
 
Crowder is NOT a journalist.
:doh
WTF? Did I say he was?
Fact is he went to document the protest no matter what occurred.

Had the Union thugs not acted that way he would have nothing but video showing peaceful protest.

You can't change that.



And yoir video is garbage.
:doh
No it isn't. It shows the beginning of the occurrence with the Union thugs trying to take down the tent.
It shows short ****s complicity in it.
Garbage? Yeah, right! Garbage was your reply.




Still no video of the guy actually going down.
:doh
The video in the OP's article shows Crowder's back to the guy when he falls.The guy falls to Crowder's side, not like in a (cough) hip-check.
Showing Crowder's lack of involvement in his fall. Duh!


Did see Crowders brown leather jacket clad right arm contacting union guys left upper chest, shoving between the camera and the union guy in question.
:doh
And as we can see from the video you call garbage, the guy is pressing himself against Crowder to prevent him from interfering with the other thug trying to take down the tent.
You should really open your eyes instead of trying to make excuses for these thugs.
 
:doh
WTF? Did I say he was?
Fact is he went to document the protest no matter what occurred.

Had the Union thugs not acted that way he would have nothing but video showing peaceful protest.

You can't change that.



:doh
No it isn't. It shows the beginning of the occurrence with the Union thugs trying to take down the tent.
It shows short ****s complicity in it.
Garbage? Yeah, right! Garbage was your reply.




:doh
The video in the OP's article shows Crowder's back to the guy when he falls.The guy falls to Crowder's side, not like in a (cough) hip-check.
Showing Crowder's lack of involvement in his fall. Duh!


:doh
And as we can see from the video you call garbage, the guy is pressing himself against Crowder to prevent him from interfering with the other thug trying to take down the tent.
You should really open your eyes instead of trying to make excuses for these thugs.

You believe what you like.

As usual, you make up your mind and everybody else is blind and stupid.

Your certainty about incidents based on fragmentary evidence is staggering.

Stagger on.
 
You believe what you like.

As usual, you make up your mind and everybody else is blind and stupid.

Your certainty about incidents based on fragmentary evidence is staggering.

Stagger on.
Ah yes. So typical.
You cannot contest the factual non-fragmentary evidence as seen in the video, so you instead place blame on the other and run.
 
Last edited:
Hell. No one here can even explain why Union members are that close to a tent that doesn't belong to them.

That it self shows a concerted and nefarious purpose on their part.
 
You are simply being dishonest.
This is a debate forum.
Point, counter point.
When her point was countered, as it was repeatedly, it was your job to then counter it if you can. But as we know, you couldn't.
All you did is to continue arguing someone else's pov instead of the factual evidence. A pov that couldn't even be supported. That is called "nuts".


It was your responsibility to know what was being discussed.
That was the information from the OP.
That information showed her point to be irrelevant and moot, and yet she, and you, because you wanted to mimic her, failed to take that factual evidence into consideration. Well you were wrong. That video was not edited at the point in question and did not show him swinging on anyone.

The evidence I provided countered in whole what she provided. Yet you dishonestly ignored it. That is not debate. It is dishonesty. Perhaps you should come back when you know how to debate and not just mimic another memeber's point of view. Especially when it is as ridiculous as the one you decided to mimic.

Not only were her points irrelevant but they were made moot by the evidence just as you have made yourself moot by mimicking her stance.

Excon the man admitted to pushing people. H e pushed a man that did not go near the tent. Edited a film and cried foul. Fox ate it up because they hate Americans and are a mirror image of REpublicans. They hate the middle class and have for years. The video was edited. Plus the guy admit to assulting people that caused him to get punched. That is why there was no arrest. Please stop this madness.
 
becuase the Union moron goon had his name on his jacket...

Are you sure you don't want to think about that response?

Does it make sense to you that a stooge would be unable to get his hands on one of those jackets and/or make a copy of one?
 
I was waiting to see if any one else was going to post this but since they haven't ...

Figures… When MI Union Goon Is Not Harassing Conservatives – He’s ...
When MI Union Goon Is Not Harassing Conservatives – He’s ...

The comments are hilarious.

OMG! He is still using myspace. He should be very embarrassed. :doh iLOL
 
Excon the man admitted to pushing people. H e pushed a man that did not go near the tent. Edited a film and cried foul. Fox ate it up because they hate Americans and are a mirror image of REpublicans. They hate the middle class and have for years. The video was edited. Plus the guy admit to assulting people that caused him to get punched. That is why there was no arrest. Please stop this madness.
:doh
Wow!
You really have no clue do you?
Wrong Tara.
That is not a correct narrative.
Watch the damn videos and you will see, instead of all this dishonest rambling you are doing.

The person he pushed it the one attacking the tent. Not the one you think he pushed. You would know this had you watched the video instead of just mimicking another person's position.
That is defensive in nature. Do you understand that? He pushed a different person in defense of the tent.
The short **** Union thug is the one interfering with his defense of the tent. Making the Union thug complicit in trying to tear down the tent.
The edited video matters not because:
1.) it does not show what you and others have said it did.
2.) The non edited version proves your position wrong. (you know, the video you keep ignoring the video provided by FOX) Duh!​

And the additional video provided here shows you to be wrong also.
Wake up Tara. You are on the wrong side of the argument and continue to fail because you are.
 
:doh
Wow!
You really have no clue do you?
Wrong Tara.
That is not a correct narrative.
Watch the damn videos and you will see, instead of all this dishonest rambling you are doing.

The person he pushed it the one attacking the tent. Not the one you think he pushed. You would know this had you watched the video instead of just mimicking another person's position.
That is defensive in nature. Do you understand that? He pushed a different person in defense of the tent.
The short **** Union thug is the one interfering with his defense of the tent. Making the Union thug complicit in trying to tear down the tent.
The edited video matters not because:
1.) it does not show what you and others have said it did.
2.) The non edited version proves your position wrong. (you know, the video you keep ignoring the video provided by FOX) Duh!​

And the additional video provided here shows you to be wrong also.
Wake up Tara. You are on the wrong side of the argument and continue to fail because you are.

The man admitted to pushing people regardless of who he pushed the man was causing problems. I looked at the video that Moot posted and the man is picking himself of the ground and Crowder was right over him. This has been explained to you overand over again. You seem not to get it. You are wrong that is why there is no arrest I am going by what Crowder said he was pushing people.
 
The man admitted to pushing people regardless of who he pushed the man was causing problems.
Wrong!
He pushed a guy who was tearing down the tent. Watch the video.

I looked at the video that Moot posted and the man is picking himself of the ground and Crowder was right over him. This has been explained to you overand over again. You seem not to get it.
You do not get it because you have not watched the video that shows you to be wrong.
You are being dishonest.
It has been explained over and over to you that the other video (you know, the video that you should be familiar with because you are participating in the topic. The video shown by FOX) The video from the OP, shows the unedited portion in question which shows you to be wrong.
Duh! You know, debate? Point, counter point! :doh



You are wrong that is why there is no arrest
Wrong!
Again showing that you have no idea what you are talking about.
The State Police have already stated their willingness to prosecute.
If you had bothered to read the information in this topic, you would have known that.

I am going by what Crowder said he was pushing people.
No you are not.
You are being dishonest.
Because if you were, you would already know that his pushing was done in defense of. Do you not know the difference?
 
I am not defending an act of violence, nor am I saying that Crowder got what he deserved.

That's good to hear.

I'm saying that he's distorting the incident to create a narrative that didn't exist.

Um, no I don't think he is, at least not alone. Both sides seem to be making **** up out of whole cloth that is either unprovable, or just didn't happen the way they are making it out to be, to suit their own narrative.

He went in to report that union protestors are violent, mindless thugs trying to intimidate their employers, and unfortunately for our country, he was able to do that thanks to circumstances and somebody worked up enough to throw punches.

As if on a daily basis we don't see that sort of thing coming out of the MSM, with their own narratives, and agendas. It simply is not rational to believe that a liberal dominated media is allowed to further their narrative, and agenda, but somehow is wrong when someone from a conservative point of view does the same thing.

It is one thing to say that Crowder was there to create a video with a predisposed point of view in mind for the end result. It is another thing to say as others have in here that he deserves to get roughed up, or attacked for it. Not that you are saying that, but there are those in here that are.

This is dishonest and dangerous journalism.

Especially among those who have no regard for others rights.

This is why so many Americans hate each other right now.

Division in this country is purposely being sown by politicians that believe that only their own ideology matters.

Because "journalists" are lying, choosing to incite hatred in order to make money rather than telling the truth and having to make it in journalism the honest way.

It isn't just journalists though...Take a hard, objective look at the language coming out of the administration these days. Class warfare, 'Us against them', agendas being pushed through unelected regulatory bodies within the government, circumventing congress and the will of the people purposely. All of this has a broader implication, maybe for a thread of its own.

Throwing a punch (or three) can kill a person (had he been Kermit Washington). Doing what journalists are doing these days contributes to a horrific string of awful, awful things happening in this country. Neither side is to be defended, bottom line.

This I can agree with, but then you have to ask yourself why wasn't the man throwing punches in the video arrested? Charged? It was against the law what he was doing. Why weren't the goons cutting down the tent, and cutting it up arrested? That's against the law as well. My belief is that in some convoluted way the authorities let it go to "keep the peace" as it were, but these A-holes are allowed to do this sort of thing with impunity then they think it's ok...It's NOT OK. And liberals, progressives, or what ever the hell they want to call themselves these days better wake up. You can't push one side but for so long before they push back.
 
Hell. No one here can even explain why Union members are that close to a tent that doesn't belong to them.

That it self shows a concerted and nefarious purpose on their part.

AFP plopped two huge tents (which remained largely empty all day) right smack dab in the middle of where the protest was being held.

Nefarious indeed.

There are also numerous accounts of AFP people ****ing with the first tent themselves.
 
Fox News contributor punched in face at pro-union protests in Michigan

White guys who am be democrats and support unions... If you ax me, them am be cornball crackas yo!
 
Last edited:
AFP plopped two huge tents (which remained largely empty all day) right smack dab in the middle of where the protest was being held.

Nefarious indeed.

There are also numerous accounts of AFP people ****ing with the first tent themselves.


Do you have any idea how idiotic that sounds? You give far too much credit to people in foreseeing action v. perception.
 
AFP plopped two huge tents (which remained largely empty all day) right smack dab in the middle of where the protest was being held.
:doh
Sigh!
We have only seen the tents after they have been messed with by Union thugs.
Haven't you read the story of the Hot Dog Vendor?
Doesn't sound like they were empty at all. Sounds like they became empty after the Unions decided to **** with them.

And it doesn't at all change the fact that they had no business trying to take down the tents. Period.
Stop trying to justify their wrong actions.
They, and their actions, are not justifiable.




There are also numerous accounts of AFP people ****ing with the first tent themselves.
Holy ****! Yeah, obviously false reports.
Prove they are not. You can't. Just as I can't prove that they aren't.

But the likelihood of them being true is slim to none.
You don't put tents up to **** with them.
 
Last edited:
That's good to hear.



Um, no I don't think he is, at least not alone. Both sides seem to be making **** up out of whole cloth that is either unprovable, or just didn't happen the way they are making it out to be, to suit their own narrative.



As if on a daily basis we don't see that sort of thing coming out of the MSM, with their own narratives, and agendas. It simply is not rational to believe that a liberal dominated media is allowed to further their narrative, and agenda, but somehow is wrong when someone from a conservative point of view does the same thing.

It is one thing to say that Crowder was there to create a video with a predisposed point of view in mind for the end result. It is another thing to say as others have in here that he deserves to get roughed up, or attacked for it. Not that you are saying that, but there are those in here that are.



Especially among those who have no regard for others rights.



Division in this country is purposely being sown by politicians that believe that only their own ideology matters.



It isn't just journalists though...Take a hard, objective look at the language coming out of the administration these days. Class warfare, 'Us against them', agendas being pushed through unelected regulatory bodies within the government, circumventing congress and the will of the people purposely. All of this has a broader implication, maybe for a thread of its own.



This I can agree with, but then you have to ask yourself why wasn't the man throwing punches in the video arrested? Charged? It was against the law what he was doing. Why weren't the goons cutting down the tent, and cutting it up arrested? That's against the law as well. My belief is that in some convoluted way the authorities let it go to "keep the peace" as it were, but these A-holes are allowed to do this sort of thing with impunity then they think it's ok...It's NOT OK. And liberals, progressives, or what ever the hell they want to call themselves these days better wake up. You can't push one side but for so long before they push back.

Maybe some should consider the wisdom of binding the mouths of the kine that keep the peace.

Cop is usually a union job.
 
:doh
Sigh!
We have only seen the tents after they have been messed with by Union thugs.
Haven't you read the story of the Hot Dog Vendor?
Doesn't sound like they were empty at all. Sounds like they became empty after the Unions decided to **** with them.

And it doesn't at all change the fact that they had no business trying to take down the tents. Period.
Stop trying to justify their wrong actions.
They, and their actions, are not justifiable.




Holy ****! Yeah, obviously false reports.
Prove they are not. You can't. Just as I can't prove that they aren't.

But the likelihood of them being true is slim to none.
You don't put tents up to **** with them.

You absolutely do if you are trying tp create a false narrative.

Like i said. Wait and see.

You been O'Keefe'd.
 
You absolutely do if you are trying tp create a false narrative.

Like i said. Wait and see.

You been O'Keefe'd.
You are O'Keefing yourself.:doh
 
Back
Top Bottom