24thState

Understanding The Success Of The St Louis Tea Parties

As Congress comes back into session, the healthcare bill stands irreparably damaged.  Public polling shows the majority of Americans now don't want this bill passed, and the Democratic Party leadership is left contemplating nuclear and possibly unconstitutional options like trying to pass the bill in chunks through the reconciliation process (which is for budgets).

The truth is we won the first battle.  Even with 60 votes in the Senate, a large majority in the House, and a President who likes to outsource all decisions to Congress, the Democrats couldn't shove this monstrosity through.  While the politics may go on a bit longer, the opportunity has passed.  The public wants none of this, and Obama's personal popularity, as well as that of several leading Democratic Senators, is taking a beating.  People are talking about a 1994 style reverse, and while it's premature to say its completely over, passing this bill would put a whole lot of politicians out of jobs, and they know it.  And the Tea Party rallies played a large part in that.  To understand what happened, one of the things you must do is look at St Louis as one of the catalysts in this fight.

Sunday Night Clean Up

Reboot Congress has photos and video from the 99 Corners Rally in O'Fallon.  The thugs who last week tried to intimidate a 67 year old woman didn't show, which is good for them considering we have their pictures. 

The HCAN rally tonight was a waste of time and resources.  Given enough paid staff, a closed off area not accessible to the general public, a giant bus that costs more than the premiums for all of SEIU 2000 and access to phone banks to call everyone you know in St Louis, you can bring out 6-700 liberals on a Sunday night to hold preprinted signs.  The people who showed were earnest (at least the first 250 that I saw get there between 5:30 and 6:30), but they were, surprisingly white middle aged liberals driving foreign imports.

The impact on the debate?  None.  Politicians know the difference between real and fake, and this is a sad attempt to match the passion and numbers of the Tea Protestors with lights, music, and a bunch of paid organizers.  I just heard on Dana's show that Russ Carnahan sneaked into the event to give a speech.  He didn't announce it, probably afraid it would have backfired.

The nice thing was there wasn't any violence, or intimidation. Tea Party folks didn't take pictures of every person coming in - we didn't threaten, we didn't scream in people's faces (even the few decent folks who came down to the staging point to speak with us).  There's a lesson here, and that lesson is the violence and the national racism was staged.  Without people trying to create problems, normal groups of political foes can rally and counter-rally without incident.  No matter what left wings loon try to say.

Of course, that doesn't stop progressives from fantasizing about gang violence visited on Tea Party members.  You have to wonder just how warped (and racist) a person would have to be think that a healthcare rally in University City would automatically lead to some kind of black-on-white gang warfare.  The Tea Parties got lucky the original McCaskill conference was canceled?  That's a progressive youth embracing his inner violent fantasies, and for good measure, this hulking banner of tolerance was videotaped screaming at Tea Party members during the Carnahan town hall.  

And nationally, we see yet another Green Party member and minister involved in violent intimidation of a Tea Party rally.  It's enough to make you wonder if there are actual marching orders coming from avowed socialists to disrupt Tea Party events.

Speaking of which, has anyone figured out who is paying for the lawyer of the SEIU staff member accused of assaulting Kenneth Gladney?  If SEIU Local 2000 is paying, isn't that admitting that McCowan was not there as a private citizen, as his report maintains, but instead was there on official union business?  I wonder if he's getting disability through work for that dislocated shoulder.  

Astroturfed Rallies in Raleigh and Denver

You want to see what sad sacks the left is?  They know they can't match us, so they create fake events, bar American citizens from entering, and then pretend they outnumber the protesters.

Fake Denver

Fake Raleigh 

The pictures are priceless.  Pre-made handmade signs shipped in and distributed to "grassroots volunteers."  Green-shirted organizers (to show the "go" for healthcare) tightly restrict access, demand signatures and addresses, and they are quickly joined by bused in purple people shirts.

In Denver, the location is changed at the last second to throw off counter protesters.

What are they afraid of?  Why this carefully orchestrated farce of a grassroots campaign?  Know what you see when you hear that supporters are now outnumbering protesters - they set it up, and expect us to play along.

Be prepared for this tomorrow.

The Importance Of Consequences In Healthcare

I made a decision when I was 19 that cost me more than $50,000.  It's a decision that still affects what I do today, but it's instructive in the debate about healthcare, government control, and choices.

It was the Spring semester of my sophomore year in college.  I had a full tuition scholarship at an elite school, and to be honest, my efforts in the second year had not been my best.  I'd moved into a fraternity house while attempting an early morning schedule of classes, and the result was predictable - I missed a lot of classes.  My grades started to suffer, and that was a real problem for someone on an academic scholarship.  It all came to a head during finals - I took one final, turned in a paper, and had only one exam left - a course in Human Biology. 

I slept through the exam.  Well, that's not entirely true.  I skipped the exam, as several of my brothers attempted to wake me, and I ignored them.  That exam was worth 50% of my final grade, and by skipping it, I guaranteed myself the first and only failing grade of my life.  I was not entirely self-destructive - I knew I could take the course over the next year, as I had plenty of credits and plenty of time to make it up. In fact, when I took the course the next year, I tied for the highest grade on that final exam (it helped to have taken the course twice).

If that was the extent of the story, the lesson would be you can learn from your mistakes, and sometimes correct them.  What was left out was a letter I received one month after returning home.  My scholarship had been revoked due to poor academic performance.  It was shocking, but not surprising.  The powers that be didn't bother with a warning, as my failure to even show up for an exam was clear evidence I was taking my scholarship for granted.

Through luck, through family, and through loans, I scraped together enough money to cover my last two years.  The result was $50,000 in debt when I left school.  I'm almost done, but today, I'm still paying for that one mistake, one morning when I was 19.  That $50,000 would come in handy.  If I had not lost my scholarship, that money could have been set aside, and I could have $50,000 in cash as a backup in case of catastrophic loss.  If I or someone in my family had suffered hardship, that $50,000 could have paid insurance premiums, or hospital bills, or any number of other contingencies.  But it didn't.  It went to pay interest and principle to a series of banks and student lenders.

I don't beat myself up for it.  It was an expensive mistake, but I can tell you the education I gave myself in the final two years was far superior to my education in my second year.  I was paying for it, so I knew the value.  And that $50,000 might have been lost in a business venture, or spent on entertainment, or lost in the stock market, so it's difficult to extrapolate too much from an event that happened back in 1993.  That decision has mixed with thousands of others good and bad, but it serves as an excellent reminder that decisions have consequences, and in my case, one decision cost me $50,000 and an unknown opportunity cost.

Proponents of universal healthcare will tell you that we are all victims of circumstance, and it's not fair to deny someone medical treatments beyond basic care.  If I lost my health insurance, and couldn't pay the premium, there is an element of tragedy, but now that you know a portion of my story, can we really say that I deserve to be taken care of by others who worked a lot harder and didn't make those mistakes?  If you look at the totality of the money I've spent on electronics, alcohol, food, dates, vacations, casinos, or any of the other entertainment expenses since I entered the workforce, can you really say that if I can't make my premium payments today, that you should be forced to pick it up for me?

I pay my way now, and though premiums are high, I work very hard to cover my expenses, my student loan payments, and my health insurance premiums.  I take time away from my family to work to provide for them.  It's a choice.  Every day that I go into the office instead of staying home and sleeping in, I'm making a choice to prepare for the future.    Every day I go to bed at 9:00 instead of staying up and watching a movie or heading out to have a few drinks is a choice I make to be best prepared for the next day. Consider it a lesson learned from when I was 19.

Does the payment and treatment of our healthcare system need to be reformed? Sure it does.  The system isn't fair to small businesses or individuals and it prioritizes treatments based on regulation rather than health.  But Obamacare solves that problem by removing responsibility and consequence from the system.  Obamacare unfairly punishes those who live responsibly and rewards those who take none.  I make choices today because I know they have consequences.  Obama's system removes those consequences from individuals and places them on the system as a whole.  Doing so punishes the responsible and rewards the irresponsible.  And that is a recipe for disaster.

The principle of pooling risk makes some assumption about good behavior by the majority of participants. If a group of 100 people buy flood insurance, the assumption is only one or 2 people will actually need it.  If all 100 people are flooded, there is no way to cover all of the costs.  In fact, if 5 or 10 people use it, the system breaks.  Healthcare is expensive because eventually, almost everyone needs to use it.  It's not so much health insurance, as healthcare cost management. 

What is the consequence of having a fully government controlled healthcare system?  Keep in mind while private companies will exist, they will have mandated premiums, profits, and benefit levels.  The consequence will be loss of choice.  Right now I can work and find a way to pay my premium to get the plan I want.  My choice is limited by the state of Missouri, but I can pay for the 7 minutes to see a doctor plan or the 100% covered after a deductible plan.  It's my choice, and my responsiblity.  When Obamacare comes, that choice will be no choice - government mandates bills and premiums, which means I get one size fits all healthcare.   

In other words, the consequences of your decisions will now become my consequences.  That's a recipe for exploding costs and declining care.  It represents a system doomed to failure from the start, and the only outcome is rationed care, starting with the elderly.  Though some may mock the idea of Death Panels, the truth is no government can live off rainbows and unicorn oil promises forever.  Faced with the choice, they will eventually have to start denying care to anyone whose life is no longer considered "useful."

Obama and the far left Democrats know this, but they lack both the courage and the honesty to tell us the truth.  They want single payer, and they know it will cost more.  Why can't they come out and say it?

That's easy. This isn't about healthcare.  It's about control.  The relationship between a citizen and a government that is responsible for the health of the citizen is far different than the relationship between a citizen and a government that regulates the system of healthcare.  Socialized healthcare is a huge lever to move public opinion.  Every time taxes need to be raised, politicians warn of cuts to education, police, firefighters, and essential government services.  They do this to scare voters into voting for more of their income to be taken.  What happens when the government can control your healthcare?  What happens when politicians can parade an endless number of children and elderly past the cameras to show how failing to raise taxes will lead to the death of the weakest among us?  You know they will.  Everyone knows this.  It's not even a question of if, but when.

Government healthcare isn't about some moral duty.  It's about giving more power to an elitist class of puffed up legislators who by virtue of being elected place themselves in the top 5% of all earners.  If you want to be a slave to wealthy elitists who live off your sweat and tears, then you are no friend of this country or of freedom.  I've taken responsibility for my actions - and continue to do so.  I also accept that there are those who cannot take care of themselves, and I accept my burden to help them.

What no one who supports Obamacare can say is why I should have to take care of not just the weak, but the self-destructive, the indolent, the irresponsible, and those who refuse to take care of themselves or their families. That is the argument.  No one takes a 250 pound unemployed man of 40 who smokes, drinks, eats fast food every night and parades him in front of the cameras.  That doesn't play as well on the newscast.

Cowardice Runs In The Carnahan Family

Robin Carnahan has spent $700,000 running for Senate so far this year, but there still isn't anyone who knows what she plans to do when she gets there.  Taking the Russ Carnahan approach to politics, Robin has decided that her campaign will be from prestigious Milford School, an institution famous for its credo that candidates should be neither seen nor heard.

Now, one must be very deep into the koolaid bowl to believe the Democrats aren't interested in an open Senate seat, which explains why I just got a League of Conservation Voters email breathlessly announcing a major television buy for yet another round of third party attacks on Roy Blunt.

Why do I bring Robin into this?  FiredUp, of course, which writes on the television ads and has them up at 11:09 this morning.  Funny, my press release didn't get here until 1:54. 

The ad was just released on YouTube this morning, and yet Sean has it up and running at FiredUP.

I have but one point to make.  If Robin Carnahan has something to say, maybe she should step out from behind the FiredUp curtain and say it, rather than coordinating with third party proxies to run attack ads.  heer brother voted for Cap and Trade without reading it.  Is Robin suggesting through FiredUp and the League of Conservation Voters that Roy Blunt should have voted for a bill he had no time to read?

Kenneth Gladney Is Not Politically Correct

I met Kenneth Gladney at the McCaskill Recess Rally and shook his hand.  He was walking with a limp, which would make sense if you were thrown to the ground by a union thug because you dared to try and make money by selling flags and buttons.  Either Kenneth is one heck of an actor, or the moonbats claiming he attacked McCowan are just dishonest propagandists with no first hand knowledge who would rather make up wild stories than face the fact a man was attacked at a Tea Party.  The problem, is Kenneth Gladney doesn't fit the narrative.

Bill Whittle of Pajamas Media discusses Kenneth in his Afterburner segment, weaving Gladney's story into that of Rodney King, the unnamed black man MSNBC edited out of Tea Party footage, and a little something called the Frankfurt School.  It's an excellent piece, well worth your time.  Bill Whittle is like that.

In other news, we find out why unions have been attending rallies, both those they beat people at as well as those they are bused to.  It seems that $10 billion in funding is earmarked for unions in the healthcare bill, and if the unions can set a precedent for taxpayers to bail out their benefit plans, the dam will break and union bosses won't be left explaining just how they spend their union dues.

Which makes the sad little copycat Billionaires for Union Welfare Wealthcare demonstration even sadder. Those starving actors, the students getting class credit, their wannabe puppet king thought they were being satirical, when in truth they were shilling for unions without getting paid.  It's bad enough St Louis leftists can't come up with an original idea and are forced to print off pre-made signs, but when they inadvertently prove the bill is a giveaway to unions?  That's just pathetic. 

With the healthcare bill in the ICU, and public distrust of the bill weighing down the Democrats and even Obama's popularity ratings, the only question now is just how violent and nasty the progressives will get as their dream of exercising total power of your lives goes down the drain.

ACORN And SEIU Decide To Target Seniors

The story of the K and N corner protest is an inspiring one.  One woman, a 67 year old patriot, has been holding a protest the last several weeks, and her example led others to join her. From just one person on a corner to almost a hundred, Janet has been the inspiration behind the 99 corners protests.

This is an example of organic leadership, but that cannot be tolerated by Obamacare supporters. Beating black men who dare to sell merchandise at a Tea Party and staging events for national media using Democratic operatives isn't enough.  The attempt to turn the debate from issues and accountability to violence and racism is now in full swing.  And now the left has decided that seniors who start protests will be the next to be taken down.

We knew that ACORN had specific plans to disrupt Tea Party protests, and their attempts to do so have become more desperate as the national polling shows just how little support Obama and the Democrats have on the government takeover of medicine.  At the Russ Carnahan rally on Brentwood, HCAN organizers attempted to draw Tea Party protestors into verbal and physical confrontations.  Failing to do so, they approached the local police and sought to press charges, hoping to generate false media attention. They failed, as the police watched the pathethic attempts to create division.

In O'Fallon, the same tactics failed again.  This is a live report from someone at the event.

After everyone left, there were about 4 people left standing around talking and two men came over and tried to start trouble, screaming that next weekend they were bringing 100 people and picket right here with us against us.  One person from our group got in their face screaming with these 2 men. I tried to tell everyone to calm down and that these gentlemen had the right to come just as we did and there was no need for fighting. However, someone called the police and there were six police cars and 3 motorcycle policeman. The African-American who was the one who started it had left when he saw the cars coming and the person who was screaming at these two men left also. The police spoke to me and the others there and said that next weekend if these people show up to protest, please do not engage in any altercations and to also remind people to not park in the Mobil parking lot. The officer took my drivers license info and home phone #, but no one else's and I didn't even get involved except to try to put out this fire of words being thrown. I just thought you might want to know to e-mail people that the police will come back if there's trouble next weekend.   This whole incident was a set-up in my opinion.  The police told us that someone called in saying there were 10 people there fighting and that is simply a lie. I talked to the two clerks at Mobil and they said the two men had come inside there first and went off on them that Mobil was allowing and basically endorsing the protest. They told the men that we were on public land and Mobile had nothing to do with it in any way.  Well, I just thought I would let you know what happened.

Note what is happening.  After the protest was over, a group of men appear and try to start an altercation.  At the same time, someone calls into the police anonymously and claims a large fight has erupted. The police show, but the "fight" and the people who caused it mysteriously have disappeared, but a local business has to deal with two people who seek to intimidate them.

The goal is simple.  Get a media story or a police report that can announce "violence" or "tense relations" caused by a "ratcheting up" of passion by "both sides."  The counter protestors have people walking around and shoving their cameras into people's faces, taking pictures of everyone there, and accusing them of being insurance shills.  Normal folks with jobs and families will be dissuaded from coming, out of fear of being seen on the evening news and suffering for it.

That is their plan. That is their goal.  They do not intend to debate you.  There has not been a single progressive in all of St Louis, no official staff, no bloggers, no Twitterati, who agreed to debate me on video.  And as Dana proved on her show tonight, the healthcare bill supporters don't know anything about the legislation, and aren't interested in learning.  They are only interested in shutting down our highly effective response to irresponsible governing. 

You cannot allow it.  You cannot allow union thugs and Democratic dirty tricks operatives to scare you away from participating in the political process.  Their tactics are the tactics of intimidation and fear, and they must be exposed. Use your cameras, and your video, and your common decency to stand up to those who care nothing about this country, but only about power and their place in securing spoils from the government.  Follow up on contacting your representatives.  Schedule time with their staff.  That is the next response.

Our townhalls have been effective in uncovering the cowardice of Carnahan and focusing McCaskill's attention on the concerns of her voters.  The next step is education and convincing.  They have to know that individually, we will give time and money to work against any representative who votes for huge government bills that foist cap and trade, healthcare, or EFCA on the American people.

A 67 year old woman is standing up for you.  Will you stand up for yourself?

Recess Rally At McCaskill's

The Recess rally at McCaskill's in Delmar has coverage over at Gateway Pundit - I don't have much in the way of pictures, except two shots showing the counter protestors and the 20-to-1 advantage of the Tea Party.  Oh, and I have video of me going up to the counter protestors to offer them 100% Obama KoolAid.

A couple of thoughts.
1) The organized rallies are mostly over - they've made their point, and the infiltration by SEIU and HCAN folks offers more negative than positive at this point.  As was seen at Carnahan's rally, progressives are actively working to create more violent and civil disturbances so they can paint Tea Party activists as violent racists ratcheting up the pressure.  They can't match our numbers, so they get sympathetic media to portray us as out of control, but folks like Carnahan have gone underground, holding private meetings with big donors to get press.  That kind of cowardice won't be rewarded at the polls.

2) The next step is education.  If you've been to a Tea Party event, we need you to get involved online and in your community.  Learn about the bills.  Do the research independently.  Get educated, preferably with a small group of others that share your views locally, and then schedule meetings with your representatives and their staff.  If 10,000 people schedule meetings with their representatives over the next two months, the pressure will be enormous, but they might actually learn something. Don't assume just because they're in Congress that they know the facts.  Carnahan reads talking points - he clearly lacks knowledge of what he is voting on.  So educate yourself, and go spend time with them.  That is the single best thing you can do.  Be polite.  Be educated.   Be consistent.

3) Start speaking out.  Now is the time to air your views.  Practicing speaking in small groups gives you confidence to speak to people in line at the grocery store, at schools, at parties, and at church.  You'd be surprised how many liberals haven't actually heard the arguments of freedom and responsibility.  Intelligent arguments make them stop and reevaluate what they've heard from the media.  As Tea Party activists, you've been branded as Flat Earth racist homophobes.  What happens when people meet you, and find out you're intelligent, articulate, and not at all as portrayed in the media?  Those people find themselves forced to think about the issues.

4) The group of counter protestors were mainly young adults dressed up as mock wealthy people, trying to make the point that only the super rich hate this healthcare bill.  I'm not sure if a local theater troupe was given a few farthings or if a Washington University professor offered college credit, but this sad bunch really bought into the role, admirably staying in character for an hour in the sun.

5) We were in the city, and what started as a few individual black men and women gathered over on the corner grew to a dozen or so by the end of the protest.  These folks were just regular citizens amazed to see hundreds of white people protesting McCaskill.  The group wasn't about to spend time with the weirdo white kids, but they got more and more agitated as they watched the protest.  To me, it was a very ominous sign.  These folks have bought into the lie that white folks are protesting Obama because he's black.  One man was verbally abusive, so much so that police officers followed him as he demanded the police remove the crowds before they got "what was coming."

As Obama's popularity fades, he and his liberal supporters will continue to blame it on race.  Despite the focus on Congress, on Reid, Pelosi, Dodd, Frank, Emmanuel, Axelrod, and Carnahan, these race baiters are trying to make this about race, and they are stirring a pot of resentment that can only end badly.  As Obama fails, blacks will have to decide - is he another Democratic Pied Piper who does nothing for the real problems of the black community, or was he destroyed by the "racism" of White America?

That story hasn't been written, but it's imperative that conservatives stand up to white race baiters.  They need to be marginalized, and defeated.  Few things are more grotesque than white liberals using race to try to win arguments.  Freedom and responsibility are not code words.  Those who attempt to paint them as such must be confronted, just as those who use racial slurs must be confronted.  Both poison groups of people against each other to gain power.  Both have no place in American society. 

Blogs Versus Twitter At CNN

I popped over to read this silly column at CNN about the conservative use of Twitter and had to laugh.  The first paragraph is so incredibly short-sighted it could only come from a CNN reporter using progressive bloggers as their primary source.  It starts like this:

Liberal bloggers established online political activism, besting their conservative rivals during President George W. Bush's eight years in office.

If this is true, who exactly were the warbloggers?  If liberal bloggers established political activism, how did we get into the Iraq war?   How did Bush increase his Congressional majorities in 2002 and 2004?  How did Dan Rather lose his job when bloggers exposed the shoddy reporting of CBS news?

The truth is libertarian and center-right bloggers started the blogosphere, with only a few (Hesiod, Kos,and Atrios) having much of an impact, and that was usually ridicule.  As the Bush administration went on, the national mood changed, far more from the press deciding to abandon all pretense of objectivity after 2004 than from anything the progressive blogs did.

The candidates supported by Kos lost every race until 2006, and even in 2008, when new media was supposed to rule the day, far more money came in from large donors to the Obama campaign than the efforts of the Netroots.

The columnist, Eric Kuhn, who purports to understand social media because he has a lame Twitter account, goes on to quote Erickson, Lewis and All, but the main point of the story is missed.  The Democratic Party and the progressive infrastructure embraced leftwing bloggers because they were out of power.  What this means is Democratic operatives fed information to liberal blogs who dutifully printed whatever was sent their way.  The hive mind of the progressive blogosphere is apparent at Kos, who long ago banned anyone who wasn't a progressive. It was his stated policy, and that mindset continues today.  Their goal is not discussion, but dissemination of their message.

Compare this to the libertarian and conservative bloggers who received no money, no inside scoops, and definitely no support from Republicans.  This is a strength, as the conservative side of the blogosphere carries a multitude of views, while the left side pretty much just links to bigger blogs and mainstream sources.

Want to know what's going on at FiredUp? Read ThinkProgress or TPM or CAP, or any of the other billionaire funded think tanks on the left that drive stories to a uncritical and single-minded progressive blogosphere.  In fact, read any liberal blog and you'll find it's 90% based on what some other blogger said, with almost no real analysis.  The problem is a logical fallacy called Appeal to Authority.   Argue with any progressive and they will try to prove their point by linking to one of these sources. It's on the news, thus it has to be true.  Center for American Progress wrote it, therefore it must be true!  That isn't debate, it's assertion, and the only reason it gives progressives an advantage online is large parts of the media are in agreement with the progressive worldview.  In what appears to be a major learning curve for liberals, kissing ass to those who control the news is now called speaking truth to power.

Conservatives dominate Twitter because they're far better at making connections, and the story of the day has been local news.  Connecting to other conservatives gives you alternate points of view - points of view you can't get in the mainstream media.  Yes, some idiots claim Fox News or Rush Limbaugh give conservatives their talking points, but if you listen to the shows, you see those news programs following blogs, not driving news to blogs.  It's a matter of speed.  Bloggers are faster than Talk Radio, which is faster than television, which is faster than newspapers, which is faster than print magazines.  Twitter and Facebook now are on the top of that curve, but what Kuhn fails to understand is how communities work.

Liberals didn't best conservative bloggers.  They sold out for traffic and advertising and attention, and the Democratic Party gladly took their support and now gives them nothing.

Connecting to liberals gets you the daily talking points of MSNBC, CNN, and now, the White House.  Yes, they won in 2006, but it's astounding to see someone from CNN try to claim that those victories were from blogs, and not media attention on Foley, George Allen, Abramoff and the Iraq War.  All in all, another shoddy piece of reporting from a "social media" consultant who wasn't there when it happened.

More On Perry Mullens, The Second SEIU Attacker

It's hard to know if it's Perry Molens or Perry Mullins, as multiple sources claim it is spelled different ways.

First, here's the story that Elston McCowan is telling the co-coordinator of the Gateway Greens (and socialist reporter), Don Fitz.

Walking outside, McCowan saw Gladney selling buttons of Obama in blackface and Obama smoking weed. Feeling insulted, McCowan asked why a black man would be hawking material denigrating the first black president as he pointed to one of the buttons.

“When I pointed at the button, Gladney slapped my hand. So I told him not to hit me and pointed at it again and repeated my question. He smacked my hand even harder, hit me several times and pushed me down. As I went down, I grabbed him by reflex to break my fall. I hit my shoulder and something popped. I lost consciousness for a moment but soon realised that Gladney continued to hit me.

“Another SEIU guy, Perry Molens, came over and told Gladney, ‘He’s a minister and won’t fight back. He can’t see out of one eye. Stop hitting him!’. When Gladney kept on, Perry tried to get him off of me and threw a punch in the process.

“I don’t know why Gladney had an attorney on hand, but his attorney came over yelling ‘You two attacked him!’. Gladney went off to find cops and told them to arrest us. The cops wouldn’t listen to us and did what the Tea Party people told them to do. They arrested me, Perry, a newspaper reporter and three supporters of healthcare reform.”

We've already pointed out that McCowan originally told the Post Dispatch he was walking to his car and was jumped out of nowhere, but now backs up Gladney's original story that this started when McCowan walked up to Gladney and asked him why he was selling buttons.  

Fitz now follows Adam from the StlActivist Hub off a cliff, claiming the video backs up McCowan's story, but if you watch the first 15 seconds of the original video, it's clear that McCowan is already on the ground when the video starts.  It doesn't show him falling.  It shows Gladney getting up, and the man in the white shirt rolling Elston onto his back (The man in the white shirt claims later Elston attacked Gladney).  Molens then throws Gladney to the ground, before falling down himself, while another woman yells at Molens to "get off of him, b****."  There are several people involved in stopping the action, and they are all witnesses. None of them have come forward to substantiate McCowan's story, nor has anyone else from SEIU, despite purple shirts being in evidence throughout the video.  We also don't know who the fourth man is, the one who ran off. He's an interesting story as well. 

1) Both men's stories now clearly show the video as the aftermath, not the initial assault.  That has been clear to anyone who actually saw the video, despite blogger headlines claiming it was something else. The only violence is shows is Molens throwing Gladney to the ground.

A second video of the incident, shot by the girl in the green shirt, has more of the aftermath.  Molens is yelling at someone, telling him to shut up or come fight him somewhere else. Several of the tea party protestors mock him, asking if that's the union way.  This video also has an eyewitness calmly telling the officers that Elston started the fight.  That's a big deal, because I have met that man, and his testimony will be crucial in proving what happened.  It won't be easily discounted by the police or the courts.  The video also shows the man in the ponytail speaking to the officers. The man in the ponytail is described as an SEIU man by Adam, but if that's true, why did they not arrest Gladney?  You can also hear a man saying, "they were whaling on him."  That sounds like it's backing up Gladney's story, as no second person is said to attack McCowan.  Gladney also continues on the second tape, repeating the same story on tape he said the next day - that McCowan approached him, accosted, him, slapped, his hands, and then punched his face {listen to the tape yourself}. 

Why does no one in the second tape stand up for Elston or Perry?  Where are their defenders?  There are none.  No one says they fought together.  Gladney says he was attacked, and McCowan says he was attacked.  One of them is lying, but only of them has witnesses agreeing.  This despite Adam and SEIU's claims that Elston had other protectors.  Where were they?

That's one thing Adam and the rest of the leftwing can't spin.  Their problem is their whole version is based on a video where they can't even separate the union members from eyewitnesses.  And there are eyewitnesses who will or have already given statements under oath.  The progressives mistake the man in the white shirt for David Brown.  They mistake the ponytail guy for an SEIU protector.  They assume Gladney's being able to get up is a sign he wasn't attacked, but then forget he gets thrown to the ground by Molens, and walks with what seems to be a slight limp afterwards.  Gladney tells the officers he was hit in the face while he holds his elbow.  Let's not forget the role of adrenalin when you've been attacked. You don't feel it right away.  Gladney asks McCowan what's wrong with him and asks where his glasses are.  Gladney asks McCowan why he hit his hands, which was Gladney's story all along - that McGowan hit his hands, and then hit him in the face.  So we're supposed to believe that Gladney slapped McCowan's hands several times, jumped McCowan with his glasses on, drove him to the ground, whaled on him while Elston lay there without resisting, and then jumps up and asks why Elston hits his hands?  He does this with multiple eyewitnesses around and expects not to get in trouble for it?  McCowan never defends himself.  He never says, "you attacked me."  He's quiet about the assault throughout.  That's strange for a man who says he was attacked, but not strange for a man who initiated an attack, but knows enough to stay silent about it.  He lets Perry Molens make the claim.

This story of Elston's is going to be the back-breaker to their silly assertion of Gladney being the attacker.  When you have the facts and the consistent story from Gladney, the video makes sense.  When you pretend the video was the assault, and then make up a story based on a few screenshots by a Kos diarist - well, that's a strange thing to do.

2) So what kind of man is Perry Molens?  Here's video of an accusation that Perry is not against a little intimidation.  This report is from the PubDef site. Watch the end of the video, where Marshall Rowland of Pro-Vote is surprised Molens is so forceful.  He uses the word, "accost," and then says Molens claimed to have the power to publish or retract an article in the Riverfront Times.  You can tell from the first two videos that Molens has a bit of a temper.  We also know he threw Gladney violently to the ground, because that is on the tape.  We see him blaming Gladney afterwards, but that's what you'd expect someone who started a fight to say.  That's where the eyewitness testimony will come in. 

3) Third - there's the angle of the lawyer.  McCowan's criminal defense lawyer is Paul D'Agrosa, a well-known and expensive St Louis Lawyer who also happens to be defending "Skip" Ohlsen.  Ohlsen is  tied to the Jeff Smith FBI inquiry and possible indictment.   Isn't it funny how all these people know each other?  We know what McCowan makes for the union - it's published online.  How can someone of his means afford D'Agrosa?  Is D'Agrosa going to cover the civil suit as well?  Is SEIU covering any of those expenses?  And if McCowan was attacked, how come he hasn't filed his own charges?

Does Molens have a lawyer?  McCowan admits Molens threw a punch, and we have video of him attacking Gladney.  Where is Molens in this? Why do they only bring out McCowan, and constantly call him a reverend?  We know the answers.  SEIU is spinning like a top to confuse people.

We know one thing for certain.  D'Agrosa can't be happy about the story McCowan gave to Fitz.  It makes his job a lot harder.  If McCowan stayed silent, they might get away with it.  Now it's all going to be based on procedure.  What can D'Agrosa get thrown out? 

And SEIU?  They don't know who to believe.  Based on their initial staff reports, seven tea party protestors were arrested and a reverend sent to the hospital.  Who wrote that report?  Or was it an attempt to get ahead of the press curve and obscure the real story? The head social media guy was out claiming it was an angry mob that attacked a minister.  He has to yet to admit his sources were wrong.

Adam at the StlActivistHub says he'll apologize if facts prove him wrong, but he's not going to buy it if tea party protestors are the witnesses.  If he can get the SEIU folks to talk to him, he might have a point, but if the only ones speaking are tea party folks,  I guess it's fair to say Adam will be disqualified from any jury.

Curious how Adam got all those shots?  Check out the SEIU img viewer page.  Note how inaccurate it is. For example, it says Perry yelled "get off of him," when in fact it was the woman yelling "a**h***, get off of him, b****." Funny how they missed that.  Read through their summary.  This story isn't over.