Anti-Health Insurance Reform Wingnut Knocks 65-Year Old Reform Advocate Unconscious

Well, now we’ve reached flat out thuggery. He must be a moderate: he only punched him in the face, he didn’t shoot him in the face. From Miami:

A 65-year-old man rallying in favor of healthcare reform was knocked to the ground by a man who disagreed with the call for a government-run health plan outside of a Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce meeting headlined by Sen. Bill Nelson.
Luis Perrero of Coral Gables was standing among about 40 Democratic activists and union workers when a man in a Ford pick-up truck pulled up to the rally at Jungle Island and began arguing with the crowd. The man, who only gave his first name as Raul, said Perrero called him a Spanish curse word. He punched Perrero in the face. Perrero fell to the ground and lay motionless for a few minutes.
“I’m amazed the way this has become such a politicized issue,” Perrero said, while still sitting on the ground but sitting up. “It shows that people who are against the public option will resort to anything, including battery on a senior citizen to prevent healthcare reform.”
Wilhelmina Ford, another healthcare reform proponent at the rally, said, “It was totally uncalled for. The guy may have had words with him but he didn’t have to hit him in the face.”

There is a descriptive term for a movement that uses violence to make its arguments: fascism. And it’s being tacitly encouraged by elected Republican officials.

This entry was posted in Basic Human Decency, Conservatives, Healthcare. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Anti-Health Insurance Reform Wingnut Knocks 65-Year Old Reform Advocate Unconscious

  1. JohnV says:

    I don’t see what the problem is. The puncher was just literally exercising his right to bear arms (afterall, that’s what his fist is connected to).
    And if we are to believe the anti-health reactionaries who bring handguns and rifles to these political events, they’re not using the threat of force to intimidate the opposition.

  2. “Raul” forgot to mention that before he was called a Spanish curse word, he called Perrero a comunista.

  3. Mike H says:

    There is a descriptive term for a movement that uses violence to make its arguments: fascism.
    You must have missed the one about the Thousand Oaks protest where the Obamacare zombie bit the fucking finger off of a 65 year old protester. So you can take your self righteous indignations and cram them up your ass.

  4. william e emba says:

    You must have missed the one about the Thousand Oaks protest

    Here it is: Finger biting incident
    Hmm. So you can’t bother to mention that the “victim” punched first? Why is that?

  5. JohnV says:

    Come now, Mr. Emba, when has honesty been the operational policy for the anti-health (and everything else) reactionaries?

  6. Mike H says:

    Hmm. So you can’t bother to mention that the “victim” punched first? Why is that?
    He was 65 years old and he had his fucking finger bit off by the Obamatron. Mad Mike certainly had his panties in scrunch when someone got punched, but has little to say when a finger is chewed off.

  7. Christena says:

    Mr. Emba, the assaulter, Mr. Anasagasti, claims that the victim, Mr. Perrero, raised his fist. Nor is it mentioned that Mr. Anasagasti jumped out of the truck and started accusing the people at the vigil of being dirty “comunistas”. But perhaps you are rejoicing in the blow struck for freedom, liberty and death to the
    castros. Chris, Hollywood, FL

  8. Chrisrena says:

    Mr Emba-You’re right. Sorta. Same topic,same tussle, wrong coast.

  9. Memo to self: don’t ever tell an Obama supporter to ‘bite me’. He might take it as an invitation to lunch.

  10. JohnV says:

    Memo to others: don’t assault people and you’re less likely to get your finger bit off.

  11. Mike H says:

    Memo to MoveOn and Organizing for America: If I even see your teeth, the coroner is going to be digging a .45 slug out of your skull.

  12. JohnV says:

    Hey look right wing extremists threatening to murder people for defending themselves.
    Gee hard to believe some of us are concerned when you people march around political events with fire arms.

  13. Mike H says:

    Memo to others: don’t assault people and you’re less likely to get your finger bit off
    Its actually battery jackass.
    Self defense is not murder. With the intimidation tactics we have seen from the SEIU, I think everyone should go to these protests strapped.

  14. Well, I guess when Obama talked about bringing health care into the digital age, this is what he meant (rimshot)
    So, if the hungry gentleman was from the SEIU, was he a purple people eater? (and again)
    And (not mine) can we now update the slogan to ‘Yes we cannibal’? (Thanks, I’ll be here all week! And remember your waitress!)

  15. william e emba says:

    Mr Emba-You’re right. Sorta.

    I’m right, 100%, no “Sorta”. Sheesh.
    Read the article in the link. The “victim” punched first, and the finger-biting was retaliation, or “self-defense”, as some would call it.

  16. tl says:

    I’m right, 100%, no “Sorta”. Sheesh.
    Read the article in the link. The “victim” punched first, and the finger-biting was retaliation, or “self-defense”, as some would call it.
    You mean as a complete moron would call it. There is a difference between self defense and retribution. Biting a guy’s f’ing finger off for hitting you (the article doesn’t say punch, so it could have been a slap, an elbo, a shove, a poke, who knows) is like shooting a guy for walking on your yard. It’s an order of magnitude more insane than punching someone for insulting you, which is still pretty nutty for the majority of cases.
    I mean seriously, biting the finger off an old man is f’ing nuts!

  17. Forget the finger-biting, what about when pro-Obama supporters <a href="
    attacked”>http://pumabydesign001.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/raw-video-obama-supporters-assault-african-american-conservative-at-tea-party-protest/“>attacked an African-American conservative at a rally? There’s video.
    I think some fairly wise gentleman once said something about removing the plank from your own eye before pointing out the speck in someone else’s…

  18. In all seriousness, I’m on the local tea-party email list, and we were warned not to counter-demonstrate against the moveon.org protest last night, because we’d gotten information they were planning to ‘intimidate’ counter-demonstrators.
    We had no idea, of course, that the intimidation would include the consumption of human flesh. Now I have to rent ‘Night of the Living Dead’ from Netflix so I can bone up (so to speak) on vital self-defense tips.

  19. D. C. Sessions says:

    If I even see your teeth, the coroner is going to be digging a .45 slug out of your skull.

    The Internet never forgets — and should Mike H ever find himself charged with assault against someone who smiles at him, you can expect the jury to be shown this as evidence of lethal intent.
    And, yes, the term is “assault.” “Battery” has been removed from criminal codes thanks to confusion.

  20. william e emba says:

    Finger-biting update
    Same link, but now more details: The anti-health-care “victim” punched the other guy in the nose first. Then they started fighting, during which the biting occurred.
    Punched in the nose. Got it? Not a poke, not a slap, not an elbow, not a shove, as someone here fantasized, all too conveniently to make the finger-biter look way out of line.

  21. mk says:

    Mike H… total pussy. Frightened little pussy. Make sure you carry that little pop-gun everywhere you go… cause you just never know! ;^}
    Pussy.

  22. Whatever about the conflicting stories of the incident, biting someone’s finger off is simply not an acceptable response to being punched, if indeed the 65-year old biting victim did throw an unprovoked punch. (And, if that’s what happened, punching someone is not an acceptable response to being called an idiot).
    I think the perp. has demonstrated he knows he’s in hot water by fleeing the scene. If he is caught, I expect the legal system will respond quite differently to the actions of the two protagonists.

  23. Left_Wing_Fox says:

    Shorter Mike H: If I punch a person and he bites my finger off he’s in the wrong.
    If he punches me though, I’m totally gonna shoot the fucker.

  24. D. C. Sessions says:

    If he punches me though, I’m totally gonna shoot the fucker.

    s/punches/smiles at/

  25. Left_Wing_Fox says:

    I stand corrected D.C.

  26. Troublesome Frog says:

    Whatever about the conflicting stories of the incident, biting someone’s finger off is simply not an acceptable response to being punched, if indeed the 65-year old biting victim did throw an unprovoked punch.

    Is there some sort of Geneva Convention protocol for what to do when somebody assaults you on the street? “You can punch the guy back, but no biting or kicking in the nuts, because that’s totally not cool.”
    Frankly, if you assuault a total stranger unprovoked, I can only laugh at how badly you get hurt when he fights back.

  27. Bob says:

    I think the perspective of appropriate use of defensive force depends on whether you spent more time bullying or being bullied as a kid. Bullies appear to think of violence in casual terms, it’s a means of communication and entertainment for them and they don’t think much of hopping out of a car and beating on someone over slights real or imagined, especially those where someone doesn’t just knuckle under to them. It’s all about maintaining that persona of Big Swinging Dick. And frankly, some people just like to brawl.
    Then there are the bullies’ victims. In a school setting you are positively dissuaded from using your brains to defend yourself; to wit, if you don’t have the brawn of the bully and you try to make up the asymmetry with a weapon, you get hauled in as the dangerous one, not the bully. Bullies tend not to pick on those that successfully kick their asses, at least not without calling in reinforcements.
    The bullied don’t enjoy brawling otherwise they’d be bullies (or masochists) so the goal is to fight as little as possible but to end a fight decisively and quickly by any means necessary.
    Outside the school context, the rules change a little. Bullies tend to get arrested, join the police force, or change their mode of violence, maybe get an MBA or become gym teachers. The bullied tend to avoid where the bullies hang out, maybe take Krav Maga, aikido, or some other martial art. In rare instances get a concealed carry permit or a nice compact home defense shotgun with HUD sight and loaded out with birdshot or rock salt, followed by 00 buckshot, finishing up with deer slugs in case the first 4 or so shells didn’t provide enough enticement to the attacker to back off. Glaser safety slugs are a must if you consider a handgun to be an indoor toy. I digress.
    Now the bullies are still violent douchebags and the bullied are still violence-averse, the difference now is that the two groups aren’t penned up in close proximity under a lopsided arrangement that favors the bully. There are differences in the level of maturity, and in each group’s understanding of the concept of ‘reasonable force’, and the ability for both sides to tilt the balance of power to favor themselves via training and technology.
    People who are familiar with brawling maybe have a better sense of reasonable force than people who are not. A shove doesn’t warrant crushing someone’s windpipe, for example. In aikido the goal is to avoid combat, to recognize threats before they become imminent, and to disarm and immobilize an opponent as quickly and gently as possible.
    For bullies, the fight is more about communicating dominance and the visceral thrill of combat. For some attackers, though, the point is to inflict injury or death.
    If you are the one attacked and it’s not clear which of these is your attacker’s goal, what’s the proper response? Do you let him kick your ass and hope he leaves you alive and goes away? Do you fight back Marquess of Queensberry rules and let the best man win? Or do you do whatever it takes to preserve yourself and make the fight stop?
    You get to make this decision very shortly after some fucker has punched you in the face; this may affect the time you spend deliberating and your eventual choice.
    Consider also that after said fucker has punched you in the face, he is now digging a finger around in your mouth. Due to his concern about health care, this is possibly an impromptu free gingivitis exam. Who knows – the sadist might well be a dentist and his punch in the face might have been an attempt to drum up business. Sounds like a Republican dental plan.
    Regardless, some violent guy now has a finger in your mouth and you just want the fight to end. Is it really that unreasonable not to bite down? And if the attack persists and escalates, is it not unreasonable to bite harder and not care one whit about the likely outcome to the violent fucker’s finger?
    The problem that I see is that nice folks like Mike H want to justify bullying and attacking those they disagree with but want to suffer no consequences for their actions. Left with an empty mental magazine, they devolve back into brawling thugs. Might makes right and no fair fighting in a way that means I lose. No fair making actions have consequences; if I go to kick some guy’s ass and I end up with my finger in his mouth and keep on beating him, no fair he bites me. No fair me not getting my way.
    While I don’t advocate initiating violence or unreasonably disproportionate responses, if you start the fight, be prepared to have it end with your being maimed or killed. Your victim doesn’t know how far you’ll go so if you lose a finger or your pulse, that’s just too fucking bad. You made the choice to engage in violence; no whining that you don’t like the harvest when you reap what you sow.
    And to the pantywaist libruls Mike H hates slightly less than those finger-biting assault victims, take an aikido class. It’s good exercise, it may help you avoid a broken hip (which Obamacare plans to euthanize you for !!!1!one!), and you learn to disarm and immobilize bulletheaded thugs like Mike H in the quickest, gentlest way possible.
    PS to Mike H: A coroner is a legal official who signs off on the cause of death when someone dies not in the care of a doctor. A medical examiner is the one who actually digs slugs out of skulls. A subtle factual difference, but I doubt you put much stock in subtlety or facts.

  28. Troublesome Frog says:

    Bob wins the thread. This is the best sentence I’ve read in a long time:

    Bullies tend to get arrested, join the police force, or change their mode of violence, maybe get an MBA or become gym teachers.

  29. Karni says:

    Thanks for sharing…
    http://www.herypgri1.blogspot.com

Comments are closed.