Republican Tea Party Candidate goons handcuff reporter.

[Bells]

And once the candidate has answered the question, to continue to harass Him is stalking.

He hadn't answered the questions.

Then did you also see that the security didn't do anything that they could be charged for?

Oh, his security could very easily have been charged. Why the DA refused to do so is up to him. One can guess or speculate as to why he has chosen not to, but again, that would be mere speculation.

Now do you know the difference between being detained and arrested, there is a legal distinction, even you should know that......no where in the article did it say that the reporter was arrested.

Yes, because you often handcuff people as you detain them and then stand guard over them the whole time.

Unless of course you are suggesting that Miller and his private little henchmen are into kinky stuff with the handcuffs..?

And guess what people are detained every day by private security across the country....even you should know that, yes every day, thousands of times.

By private security who are licensed and registered in the course of their employ, yes. But this reporter was not trespassing or shop lifting. All he did was ask Miller some questions about his dubious past.

But is this what you want in your country now, Buffalo? What's going to be next? The desire to have one whole group or sector of the community to not vote?

The Tea Party is a grass roots movement with, obviously, not much of a vetting process. Some kooks have slipped in, and some idiots (O'Donnell), but anything would be an improvement over our present congress.

Grass roots movement?

I guess you could call it that.

As for the kooks.. Heh.. I don't think 'some' quite covers it. Granted, O'Donnell's latest gaffe is not just as bad as Angle's latest gaffe, but it comes close.

I am curious though. Are you saying that O'Donnell would be an improvement?

 

[joepistole]

And if these Tea Party folks are so quick to use threats and physical acts of aggression before they take office - while running for office - one can only imagine what they would do if they should assume public office.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

He hadn't answered the questions.

He isn't required to Bell's.......

Oh, his security could very easily have been charged. Why the DA refused to do so is up to him. One can guess or speculate as to why he has chosen not to, but again, that would be mere speculation.

And that is all that is that this thread is......rampant speculation.

Yes, because you often handcuff people as you detain them and then stand guard over them the whole time.

Bells yes it happens multiple time every day in America by private security.

Unless of course you are suggesting that Miller and his private little henchmen are into kinky stuff with the handcuffs..?

So you know about kinky from experience?

By private security who are licensed and registered in the course of their employ, yes. But this reporter was not trespassing or shop lifting. All he did was ask Miller some questions about his dubious past.

But again Bell's Miller is not required to answer anything, and once He has expressed the fact that He isn't going to answer, Mr. Hopfinger become a stalker by continuing to harrass Mr. Miller.

Now considering that Mr Miller was the one holding the Town Hall, and it was His organization that held the Town Hall, I would think that they have the right to determine who is a guest at that Town Hall meeting.

But is this what you want in your country now, Buffalo? What's going to be next? The desire to have one whole group or sector of the community to not vote?

And Bells, who is telling Hispanics not to vote? a Hispanic, and what is his intention? to protest the fact that Amnesty for Illegal Aliens wasn't passed? to boycott the election......and supposedly show just how powerful the Hispanic Lobby is.

Grass roots movement?

I guess you could call it that.

As for the kooks.. Heh.. I don't think 'some' quite covers it. Granted, O'Donnell's latest gaffe is not just as bad as Angle's latest gaffe, but it comes close.

Liberal politically motivated attacks, and speculation, why? because the Tea Party is effective, and is seems that even the Democrats are saying there is going to be a paradigm shift in the political climate of this country.

I am curious though. Are you saying that O'Donnell would be an improvement?

Bells anything today would be a improvement over the Tax and Spend Washington elitist, and the unconstitutional legislation we have in government today.

Where is the Constitution does it state that there is a separation between Church and State? and that Religion must be driven out of the government and public square lest it offend some minority.

When I read the Constitution, all is states about Religion is that;

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Mrs. O'Donnel is correct, there is no separation of Church and State in the Constitution, and that under the Constitution.....Congress, the Government cannot make any law......

prohibiting the free exercise thereof​

Now since you claim to be a intelligent person what don't you understand about the absolute limitations place on Congress by our Constitution;

Congress shall make no law .........prohibiting the free exercise thereof​

 

[Buffalo Roam]

And if these Tea Party folks are so quick to use threats and physical acts of aggression before they take office - while running for office - one can only imagine what they would do if they should assume public office.

joe, you are becoming hysterical.

Scratch that, you are hysterical.

 

[Tiassa]

This and That

Grass roots movement?

I guess you could call it that.

We should not forget to wonder just how far this "grass roots" movement would have gotten without massive investments from the energy and health care industries, Dick Armey, and scores of GOP operatives coordinating both funding and events for the Tea Party.

I remember once, in high school, a student invited a local OB/GYN to speak to our bioethics class. Our teacher knew him and despised him as a baby-killer, so she got in his face a few times. Eventually, he just said, "Look, I know this is a Jesuit school and all, but you would be surprised who I've seen in my office. More ... than ... once."

It was a bit of a cruel line. I remember one girl in the class sort of shrinking away in this classic Catholic-guilt manner.

And, you know, I'm pretty sure that, some years later, she wore white on her wedding day.

It's a matter of interpretation. Her white dress isn't symbolic of her "purity", but of the virtue she aspires to and believes of herself.

Calling the Tea Party grass roots is sort of the same thing. But we could likewise call NOW, the NRA, or even the Catholic Church grass roots in the same context; it is, after all, made up of individuals.

As for the kooks.. Heh.. I don't think 'some' quite covers it. Granted, O'Donnell's latest gaffe is not just as bad as Angle's latest gaffe, but it comes close.

I thought it was interesting how you could almost feel the response of the high school students to Sharron Angle, but they pretty much kept their tongue. The law students, on the other hand, had no compunctions about laughing openly at Christine O'Donnell.

The problem this crop of Tea Party candidates presents is that their policy initiatives—such as they are—won't go anywhere. The most we might get out of a GOP majority hinging on the Tea Party is that the Republicans, who said of Bush that the people were tired of special investigators always looking into the president, will start ordering special investigations to stonewall the White House.

The flip side is that these politicians will, like Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, learn quickly how to dance the Potomac Two-Step. That is, sure it might be popular to say the economic did nothing and can do nothing, but saying so didn't stop Sen. Brown, or any number of his GOP colleagues who likewise maligned the stimulus, from flipping their rhetoric when pleading with various federal agencies for a slice of the pie.

Thus, the only real question is how the Tea Party will deal with disappointment. Will they wake up and recognize that they have been conned and exploited? Will they care? Or will they simply blame the Democrats because Tea Party Republicans are politicians, too?

And here the ouroboros emerges. We disdain extremism and illogical legislation. Indeed, it is not the fact of legislation itself that raises people's ire at Congress, but rather the idea of what those laws equal. To me, for instance, that Joe Miller, in Alaska, looks to East Germany as an example of border security tells me not only about his policy initiatives, but also—and more importantly—how bogus a foundation he has built that platform on. If Congress writes better, more useful, more appropriate legislation, people won't despise the institution so deeply and broadly. But it seems to me that if irresponsible, illogical legislation is the problem, electing a crop of Mad Hatters to emulate East Germany, interpret the Constitution without reading it, barter chickens for medicine, empower corporations in lieu of government, arrest who they want for no explicable reason .... Well, if bad legislation is the problem, I don't see how electing this crew is going to change that. Let's see: build a wall like East Germany; outlaw abortion under any circumstances; keep health care focused on money instead of health; oppress Muslims; get rid of the Civil Rights Act; investigate the president for being a secret Kenyan Muslim anti-colonialist socialist communist Nazi. Yeah, that sounds like an improvement, eh?

And when their policy platform collapses, will the Tea Party have learned anything? Or will they search farther out into the ideological fringes of the country? What goes around comes around, and bites them in the ass. And it will be everybody's fault but theirs.

• • •​

joe, now why aren't you having a fit about Tiassa and post 21? selective outrage, typical of liberals.

Don't you recognize the Tea Party candidates? The John Galt principles?

Why should Joe have a fit? Because I said something you don't like? Because I raised points you are afraid to deal with? Come now, people aren't stupid, Mr. Roam. Not everyone in the world regards every individual event as if it exists in a vacuum. Some people are even capable of discerning themes. The Tea Party is also an expression of any number of ideas that sound good in words, but don't work out so well in practice.

A Tennessee fire department, Joe Miller, Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, Carl Palladino. These issues and people tell us quite a bit about what the Tea Party promises. Dress things up in marketing terms, sure, but what do the words really mean? Accountability? Sounds great, now we're going to let a house burn down according to some master list somewhere. Protecting yourself? Sounds great, now we're going to handcuff people who ask us questions we don't want to answer. Abide by the Constitution? Sounds great, and who says we have to know what the Constitution actually says? No socialist takeover of the health care industry? Sounds good, I suppose, now go barter for your life with chickens. Border security? Sounds great, but are we emulating East Germany, or simply deciding that brown skin is bad? Family values? Sounds great, but how dare you ask about the daughter I fathered out of wedlock. Oh, and have you seen the dancing monkeys?

I don't know if you happened to catch Bill Maher's show last weekend, but he offered a great editorial about Brett Favre's penis:

... this story really isn't about sports or sex or how necessary caller ID is; it's about how pathetic and clueless white American males have become. Because the kind of guy who thinks there are women out there who just, cold, want to see your cock is the same kind of guy who thinks Sarah Palin is swell and tax cuts pay for themselves.

I will explain that connection further, but, first, let's just dwell for one more minute on how stupid it is to forget that in 2010 when you text someone a picture of your genitals, you're not just sending it to that person, but to every person on the planet who has access to the internet. Somewhere right now, there's a tribesman in Samoa thinking, "Brett Favre is texting a picture of his dick to a woman? That shit never works."

And he's right. No woman in the history of mankind has ever wanted to see a picture of a penis. Go back to the earliest cave paintings. The very first one is a cock, and after that they're all antelopes and sunrises. But, for some reason, men persist. Why? And here's where we're getting to it. Because men have always been in charge, especially white men. Brett Farve is like a lot of white males. He's owned the world for so long he's going a little crazy now that he doesn't. Also, like many white men across th country, he lost his job to a Mexican. [Mark Sanchez]

And, if Brett Favre's penis could talk, what would it say? Well, other than, "No photos, please." I think it would say, "I'm not a witch. I'm you." Because, for hundreds of years, white penises were America. White penises found America. They made the rules and they called the shots—in the workplace, in the home, and at the ballot box. But now the unthinkable is happening. White penises are becoming the minority.

2010 was the first year in which more minority babies were born than white babies. This is what conservatives are really upset about. That the president is black and the Secretary of State is a woman, and every shortstop is Latino, and every daytime talk show host is a lesbian. And suddenly this country is way off track and needs some serious "restoring".

If penises could cry—and I believe they can—then white penises are crying all over America. And that's where this crew [Christine O'Donnell, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann] comes in. The lovely milfs of the new right. And their little secret is that their popularity comes exclusively from white men. Look at the polling: minorities hate them, women hate them. Only white men like them. I'm no psychiatrist, but I do own a couch. And my theory is that these women represent something those men miss dearly—the traditional idiot housewife.

If an election between Obama and Sarah Palin were held today and only white men could vote, Sarah Palin would be president. Did you know that in 1788, when there were four million people in America, only 39,000—the rich white men—got to vote? That doesn't sound good to you? Well, what if I threw in a picture of my cock?

Which brings me back to Brett Favre. And I think it is worth noting that in one of the alleged photos of Mr. Favre, he is pleasuring himself on a bed while wearing Crocs. And if you think about it, is there any better metaphor for the sad state of America today than an over-the-hill white guy lazily masturbating in plastic shoes?​

It's comedy, Mr. Roam. Bear that in mind. But it's also a caricature of what people are actually seeing.

Maher also appeared yesterday on MSNBC's The Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell:

O'DONNELL: .... So, can you explain to me what is going on in this country right now that has given us the craziest political season we've ever seen?

BILL MAHER, HOST, HBO'S "REAL TIME": I guess you're talking about all the nuts that fell out of that nut bag.

I don't know, Lawrence, but all I can think of every week when we go and have this plethora of comedy material to work from is how silly the media was when Bush was leaving office, when the only question myself and every other comedian in the country was asked week after week was, how do you think you will be able to survive without George Bush?

Are you kidding? This cast of Paladino and Sharron Angle and Rand Paul—they make Bush look like Bertrand Russell. Are you kidding? This is the greatest political season I've ever covered.

O'DONNELL: Now, serious question. Is it just a coincidence that our politics have gotten crazier since the election of a black president? Or is it the very existence of a black president that's driving some of these people crazy?

MAHER: Oh, I think it's absolutely that that's driving these people crazy. When they say they want their country back, that's what they mean, really, is they want their country back to the appropriate time when a white person was in the White House.

It's called the White House, Lawrence. It's not hard to figure out.

But I think it's also just impatience. I mean, I don't want to cast most Americans as being racist, but I think a lot of them are just dumb. I'm sorry, but they are. They are clueless about the issues. They don't think further than things are not great, let's have a change—even though we just had a change two years ago.

I mean, they voted for this massive change two years ago. But because it didn't immediately start raining $20 bills, they want to go back to the way it was. They remind me of a battered girlfriend, you know, who goes back to the guy who was battering them because, I don't know, the new boyfriend forgot their birthday or something? ....

• • •​

O'DONNELL: Yes, and Harry Reid kept citing CBO and CBO estimates and all that kind of stuff, just like you'd expect a majority leader in the Senate to do. And, you know, there's an incredible simplicity to the Tea Party side of the campaigning season.

And it's interesting. It seems that it in a way mirrors the incredible simplicity of the Obama campaign, which was this one word "change." I mean, shouldn't the Obama people, when they won a presidential contest on basically this one word message of change, shouldn't they have been warned themselves that, wow, you can tip over American politics with real simple messages, which is what's happening to them now?

MAHER: And also, wasn't it brilliant the way the Republican Party rebranded itself as the Tea Party? Because the Republicans were thumped, as Bush himself said, in 2006 and in 2008, and they were a completely discredited political party.

The American public understood that these were the people who put us into two wars we didn't really need to be in. And brought the economy to a state it hadn't been since the Great Depression.

So, what to do? Well, let's call ourselves a different name, just like KFC did. We're now the Tea Party. We're not the Republican Party. Those are those people who drove the country off the cliff. We're a whole new group of people—except we think and vote and talk exactly like the old crowd did. It was pretty clever, though.​

I know it's a common conservative talking point that liberals just fall in line behind celebrity, but that's a reflection of conservatives themselves. It used to be that the preacher said, and the people believed.

With liberals, though—and, undoubtedly, some conservatives at least—the modern sensibility is that being able to relate to something is one of the components of admirability. Bill Maher is popular for much the same reason Rush Limbaugh is: there are people out there who hear what he says and think it makes sense. Two vital differences, though. First, Bill Maher is a comedian; Rush Limbaugh is a politician. Secondly, Maher's comedy is based on facts and identifiable reality; Limbaugh's political bluster is based on myth.

So before you tell me about white people and scream about racism, you also need to tell me something about psyche, and why it is that allegedly "hot" women (by some people's standards, apparently) who have no fucking clue what they're on about are so damn popular with white male voters?

People are able to see what is going on with the Tea Party. Indeed, it seems the only people to whom it's not clear are the Tea Partiers themselves. They can dress it up in whatever language they want, but the themes are layered so superficially that reality shows through.

It's not hard to figure out.
____________________

Notes:

Maher, Bill. "New Rules". Real Time With Bill Maher, #193. HBO, Los Angeles. October 15, 2010. HBO.com. October 20, 2010. http://www.hbo.com/real-time-with-b...aher/episodes/0/193-episode/article/new-rules

O'Donnell, Lawrence. Interview with Bill Maher. The Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell. MSNBC, New York. October 19, 2010. Transcript. MSNBC.com. October 20, 2010. http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39762294/ns/msnbc_tv/

Lowry, Rich. "Projecting through the Screen". The Corner. October 3, 2008. NationalReview.com. October 20, 2010. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/171291/projecting-through-screen/rich-lowry

 

[joepistole]

Well said Tiassa, and mr. roam is left alone in the dark projecting his demons on others.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Once again Tiassa like some kind of forum battleship delivers huge volleys of text from giant cannons with seemingly inhuman text generating capacity. Buffalo Roam though is like a submarine and the awe shockingly destructive blast of text fly harmlessly over his head. Witlessness is his cover and he dives deep in it, senselessly running, soon he will counter attack with a fallacy torpedo, the SS Tiassa might just be outmoded.

 

[John99]

Yes. But he had not broken any law that required a citizen's arrest. All he did was ask Miller questions.

You dont determine if the person you are holding has broken any laws. The reporter could have made a citizens arrest even at the same time as the he was under citizens arrest.

 

[John99]

Once again Tiassa like some kind of forum battleship delivers huge volleys of text from giant cannons with seemingly inhuman text generating capacity. Buffalo Roam though is like a submarine and the awe shockingly destructive blast of text fly harmlessly over his head. Witlessness is his cover and he dives deep in it, senselessly running, soon he will counter attack with a fallacy torpedo, the SS Tiassa might just be outmoded.

BR cites more credible information and less hypotheticals\conjecture. That is a trump card.

 

[ElectricFetus]

BR cites more credible information and less hypotheticals\conjecture. That is a trump card.

right wing blogs don't count as credible information, more so citations are worthless as they are irrelevant to the argument when they are used in a fallacy like the ones Buffalo spouts, might as well be citing the moon landings when arguing about orange juice, irrelevant!

 

[John99]

I said the information is more credible and more accurate.

 

[John99]

Buffalo spouts, might as well be citing the moon landings when arguing about orange juice, irrelevant!

What?

 

[Bells]

He isn't required to Bell's.......

Nor had the reporter broken any laws and nor was he trespassing. So why was he arrested by Miller's private police?

On what grounds?

And that is all that is that this thread is......rampant speculation.

Oh this thread did not start off as speculation. But it has turned into it and I will tell you why shortly.

Bells yes it happens multiple time every day in America by private security.

You mean by licensed and registered private security working in shopping centres and the like? Yes.

Unfortunately, Millers private police were neither registered or licensed at the time they decided to handcuff someone and "detain" them for nearly half an hour before they decided to call the police.

Good to see that the US does not have a guaranteed freedom of the press. Who'd have thought your country would have sunk so low, and be brought down by the very candidates spouting about bringing the country back by its Constitutional short and curlies.

So you know about kinky from experience?

I forget. You're a tea bagger, aren't you Buffy.

Ergo, you probably find masturbation a sin. So the thought of using handcuffs as a sex toy is probably foreign to you.

But again Bell's Miller is not required to answer anything, and once He has expressed the fact that He isn't going to answer, Mr. Hopfinger become a stalker by continuing to harrass Mr. Miller.

How exactly was he stalking Miller? Asking him questions is now tantamount to stalking? Is that how you teabaggers play this now? Would explain Angle's indescribable sprint from the media... She probably thought she was being stalked when she was asked a question.

Now considering that Mr Miller was the one holding the Town Hall, and it was His organization that held the Town Hall, I would think that they have the right to determine who is a guest at that Town Hall meeting.

Certainly, if he had not held said Town Hall in a public school and made it a Public Town Hall, open to all and sundry.

And Bells, who is telling Hispanics not to vote? a Hispanic, and what is his intention? to protest the fact that Amnesty for Illegal Aliens wasn't passed? to boycott the election......and supposedly show just how powerful the Hispanic Lobby is.

No Buff. It is a conservative group and their reason is dubious at best. In any event, trying to get a group of people to not vote or encouraging the exclusion of a whole group of the population raises eyebrows in any democracy. And yet, here you are defending it. Not surprising.

And now, lets get back to speculation, shall we Buff? Or should I say, your rampant speculation.

And since we are not in pre-school, I'll leave out your bold and coloured text (which you have been warned about, I believe) in quoting you.

Liberal politically motivated attacks, and speculation, why? because the Tea Party is effective, and is seems that even the Democrats are saying there is going to be a paradigm shift in the political climate of this country.

How is any of it a liberal politically motivated attack? Did you look at the video's linked? Both are quite clear and both are ridiculous in nature and proves, as Madanthonywayne points out, the simple fact that the Tea Party have not vetted any of their candidates and have instead, offered conservative voters like yourself and himself, utter kooks for candidates.

But you? Oh no. You think they are effective.

Which is really surprising that a supposed constitutional scholar like yourself could openly support the attempt to silence the free press. And how you, that constitutional expert you try to portray yourself as being, could support a candidate who cannot grasp the very basics of your Constitution. This is basic stuff that it seems she does not know about the Constitution she keeps saying she will be upholding if she wins.

Bells anything today would be a improvement over the Tax and Spend Washington elitist, and the unconstitutional legislation we have in government today.

Is that why the Tea Party have constitutional experts like O'Donnell running?

It is as if they have put their worst person forward in the hope they will lose.

You are seriously saying that you think it is good that you have a Senator who thinks they put functioning human brains into mice? She will be better for your country, will she?

Where is the Constitution does it state that there is a separation between Church and State? and that Religion must be driven out of the government and public square lest it offend some minority.

When I read the Constitution, all is states about Religion is that;

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Did you notice why those students were laughing Buffalo? I'll give you a hint, they were not laughing with her but at her. You can even hear one audibly call her stupid on the video. And do you know where the debate was being held? At a law school, and the audience made up of the law professors and law students. Of all the places to make your lack of knowledge about your constitution known, that would be the last place.

Your First Ammendment is quite clear on the matter. If public schools allowed prayer, then it would be implementing or preferring one particular brand of religion over any other in Government schools. I think that is what you and Ms O'Donnell do not quite grasp.

Your First Ammendment is there to protect all citizens and gives individuals the freedom to believe what they want to believe without it being forced upon them as prayers in schools would be forced upon those who do not happen to be Christian. It is not 'driven out', but kept out because to have prayers in public school would go against the First Ammendment in that if it were allowed, it would have your Government preferring one religion or type of religion over any other.

But being a scholar and expert, you should have that basic understanding, shouldn't you?

I mean this is grade 6 and rudimentary Buffalo. How is it that Ms O'Donnell, in a lecture hall filled with legal scholars, could not get the very basics of the First Ammendment? That was why they all burst out laughing.

Mrs. O'Donnel is correct, there is no separation of Church and State in the Constitution, and that under the Constitution.....Congress, the Government cannot make any law......

prohibiting the free exercise thereof


Now since you claim to be a intelligent person what don't you understand about the absolute limitations place on Congress by our Constitution;

Congress shall make no law .........prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Oh dear..

Since you claim to be a Constitutional Scholar, it is clear that you have grossly misrepresented yourself on this forum Mr Roam.

Your First Ammendment is explicitly clear on the matter. If public schools allowed the Lords Prayer to be uttered within its collective halls, it would ensure that the State was preferring one religion over another, ergo it would prohibit the free exercise of religion in those who did not happen to be of the Christian faith.

Yes, it is actually that basic.

Your First Ammendment clearly establishes the separation of Church and State. That includes prayers in schools.

 

[ElectricFetus]

What?

Exactly, over your submerged head. Dive, Dive, active Senseless Running!

 

[joepistole]

Getting back on subject, given the behaviors of these Tea Party candidates, one has reason for fear should these folk ever obtain the power they seek.

 

[Bells]

Getting back on subject, given the behaviors of these Tea Party candidates, one has reason for fear should these folk ever obtain the power they seek.

You know, one would think it could not get much worse. But no.. it possibly can..

Mr Millers security is provided by an organisation called DropZone:

"...an Anchorage-based military surplus store and bail bond agency that doubles as a security firm."


(Source)
​

Facepalm moment aside, Mr Miller's security has also caused a headache for the US Defence Force, who are now investigating the issue and incident.

One of the most troubling campaign moments this election season occurred Sunday night, when security guards working for Alaska Tea Party candidate Joe Miller detained and handcuffed a journalist as he tried to ask the GOP Senate nominee difficult questions.

Further, two of the guards who assisted in handcuffing and forcibly detaining Alaska Dispatch's Tony Hopfinger were active-duty soldiers moonlighting for Miller's security contractor.

A review of legal documents governing the political activities allowed to members of the armed forces confirmed the incident was a violation of the government's military directives.

Subparagraph 4.1.2.8 of Department of Defense Directive 1344.10 requires that members of the armed forces not "perform clerical or other duties for a partisan political committee or candidate during a campaign, on an election day, or after an election day during the process of closing out a campaign."

Soldiers Spc. Tyler Ellingboe, 22, and Sgt. Alexander Valdez, 31, assigned to the 3rd Maneuver Enhancement Brigade at Fort Richardson, would appear to be in violation of this law.

"As I read the regulations, regardless of the moonlighting or whether they were being paid for it, they shouldn't have been there performing these functions in the course of a political campaign," said Eugene Fidell, who teaches military law at Yale Law School and is president of the National Institute of Military Justice. "Had they been mere spectators it would have been fine. But being part of the team running the event crosses the line."

The Army allows off-duty soldiers to take outside employment if the job doesn't interfere with their military readiness, according to Maj. Bill Coppernoll, the public affairs officer for the Army in Alaska.

Coppernoll told The Anchorage Daily News that while the two soldiers did not have permission from their current chain of command to work as security guards for Miller, the Army was still researching whether previous company or brigade commanders authorized their employment.


(Source)
​

Now, the Army is having to investigate this incident and are also looking into the fact that their active soldiers were also involved in another incident that day, as they threated to detain and arrest two other journalists who were filming and questioning Miller and his security about their actions:

Meanwhile, the Army says that two of the guards who assisted in the arrest of the journalist and who tried to prevent two other reporters from filming the detention were active-duty soldiers moonlighting for Miller's security contractor, the Drop Zone, a Spenard surplus store and protection service.

The soldiers, Spc. Tyler Ellingboe, 22, and Sgt. Alexander Valdez, 31, are assigned to the 3rd Maneuver Enhancement Brigade at Fort Richardson. Maj. Bill Coppernoll, the public affairs officer for the Army in Alaska, said the two soldiers did not have permission from their current chain of command to work for the Drop Zone, but the Army was still researching whether previous company or brigade commanders authorized their employment.


(Source)
​

And what do the police have to say about this?

Anchorage Police Dept. spokesman Lt. David Parker said any person witnessing a crime can make a private person's arrest, though it's almost always used by store or mall guards who catch someone shoplifting or who confront someone previously kicked out of a store and told to never come back. When the police arrive, they decide based on the circumstances whether to jail or free the subject of the private person's arrest.

Parker said that someone making a private person's arrest has a right to restrain the subject -- as long as the arrest is legal in the first place.

"Usually they have some kind of identification," Parker said.

In the case of the Drop Zone guards, who were dressed in blazers and ties and wore radio pieces in their ears, they refused to give their names, say who they worked for, or cite the authority under which they were issuing commands to reporters.


(Source)
​

For his part, Mr Miller has attempted to claim that the school where the Town Hall event was held had told him to supply his own security.

Miller gave interviews to Fox and CNN on Monday. He told Fox, "I might also note that the middle school itself required us by a contract for a campaign, required us to have a security team." He told CNN, "There was a -- a private security team that was required. We had to hire them because the school required that as a term in their lease."


(Source)
​

A security team in their lease, eh?

I guess he took what the school actually required a bit further than that:

But the school district said there was no such requirement made of Miller -- he only had to provide a hall and parking lot monitor, and advise participants of school district courtesy and food rules.


(Source)​

*Snort*

 

[pjdude1219]

That was pretty good PJ. Well said.

I have my moments

 

[madanthonywayne]

The Tea Party is grass roots like Christine O'Donnell is a smart, viable candidate.

So you think any backroom cabal would nominate an idiot like O'Donnell? Her nomination should be prima facie evidence that the Tea Party movement is a grassroots movement that lacks any formal vetting process and tends to latch on to whoever seems to be saying the right things without looking too deeply into their qualifications.

 

[ElectricFetus]

So you think any backroom cabal would nominate an idiot like O'Donnell? Her nomination should be prima facie evidence that the Tea Party movement is a grassroots movement that lacks any formal vetting process and tends to latch on to whoever seems to be saying the right things without looking too deeply into their qualifications.

Its a little of A and B, the republicans and others feed the Tea Party Movement with money and media, they don't really control it, they are trying to, but the beast is too dull-witted.

 

[madanthonywayne]

..might as well be citing the moon landings when arguing about orange juice, irrelevant!

Wasn't Tang (powdered OJ) famously the beverage of choice for the astronaughts? Didn't they drink it on the moon?

Not so irrelevent after all.....