When was it you decided to start thinking?....

And stop using the 'its hard to prove a negative' tactic. Its old and we are all on to you.

The protests were overwhelmingly peaceful and orderly, but there were a few incidents of (seemingly unprovoked) violence. Does the latter tar the former?

The police by and large conducted themselves professionally and with restraint, but there were documented (and seemingly unpovoked) incidents where they used excessive force and behaved like thugs. Does the former completely excuse the latter?

Does the latter of the first justify the latter of the second?

There will be questions galore about the conduct and motives of all sides involved. The Plate is perfectly within their rights to call out those protestors who went violent in their home city. But, as Glenn has cautioned us, no one person saw everything.

The incident with Amy Goodman will likely stand out the most, and given her cred and standing the St. Paul PD isn't going to come out of this looking very good. If anything, they've elavated Amy's standing further still.

As far as 'conspiracies' go, its easy to assign bad motives and intent to the GOP these days. In large measure they've earned it. But given what a bumbling batch of clowns they've proven I'm not inclined to think they coordinated anything with the police; I'm not inclined to think they're even capable of that kind of activity, at least not without willing accomplices.

And where the police went overboard? Its as much a disgrace as the NYPD's Stasi-like behavior four years ago. The officers involved should be brought to legal account for their behavior. Whether they ever do or not, which will determine whether they can rebuild public trust, remains to be seen.

Gandhi and MLK proved that non-violence is the best way to deal with oppressive thugs. The RNCWC if they were responsible for broken windows and other damage and not provocateurs, even if it gets media attention from sensational seeking media, may well do more damage to their cause than help it.

I can see E-Dung’s smug smile through his comments. What a week he has had. He brought us Sarah Palin, or at least is pretending to by his refusal to answer my direct question to him. (see Time link to learn who the real Palin is) Now he wants to show us the real important truth that Goodman was not pushed down and in fact may have technically deserved to be detained.

How does an authoritarian mind like his find such pleasure in such inconsequential details, when he he blindly backs a government that has ruined the lives of millions of people in America and around the world? If he can’t see the truth behind this disastrous American government and blatant misuse of our military arm, then what are his comments really worth? If he can’t see and hear the heartfelt rage of almost all of the anti-Bush-Cheney-war-poverty protesters, of what value are his comments?

The truth to E-Dung is what he can make it, not what it might actually be. The lives and welfare of all citizens of the world- too bad, they’re not my concern. I’m going to get mine and get more anyway that I can. Those in trouble got themselves there.

And E-Dung, why haven’t you like the macho man McSame professed how much you care about hurricanes in New Orleans because it is a very important election year?

Your smugness and values E-Dung deeply disgust me as it should anyone who has human compassion.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html?xid=newsletter-daily

"Anyone here want to revisit my comment about how left-wing nuts can't be trusted to be civil?"

I may disapprove of their methods. In fact I do, but compared to your variety of nutbars who use actual bombs, blow up federal buildings killing children and target abortion doctors for execution, just "for practicing their love on women" well I'd call them "civil" by comparison and you can just blow me, Shooter. You have a big enough mouth to accommodate my prodigious member.

Furthermore, cops aren't automatons. They are human beings and they each have their own style of doing their jobs. Some may push you to the ground or others may do something else. Once your being detained and put under arrest, none of that is considered excessive force. You comply immediately or you will get fucked up. Period.

Why, I wonder, are there those who actually willfully and happily support the authoritarian tactics that are currently on display at the Republican Convention? I mean this question seriously.

I would love to to hear from one of the supporters of these tactics what they think is good about armies of black-clad shock troops willing to step on the necks of their fellow citizens, carrying automatic weapons on our streets, intimidating everyone with their promise of force.

I am reminded of Monty Python and the Holy Grail when Arthur comes upon the autonomous collective and is so enraged by a peasant's words that he attempts to physically muzzle the peasant, to which the peasant begins to respond, "Come see the violence inherent in the system! See how he's oppressing me!"

I have to say that it is totally reasonable for the police to assume that press passes are meaningless in that crowd, because inventing fake credentials to counter security measures is one thing violent activists routinely do. You can also get this information off the internet, in their adolescently violent periodicals, or simply by watching their "press conferences."

-- Tina Trent

Do you have some documented evidence of "violent protesters" successfully using fake press passes in order to stroll the streets of demonstrations?

Why are law enforcement being paid millions by tax payers if they are incapable of recognizing a legitimate member of the press wearing a legitimate press pass? Or in the case of Goodman and crew, at least two types of press passes?

Your solution - or non-solution - to the problem faced by journalists to document demonstrations and the people attending demonstrations, and the of law enforcement attending demonstrations, is basically to allow law enforcement, without question, to "Kill them all and let God sort them out later".

How are journalists going to be able document anything, and how is the public going to be able to view documentation, if you [the public] just throw up their hands and allow law enforcement, without question, to shoot first, ask questions later?