Could that sphincters actions be considered assault? Could she be charged as an accomplice?

My God, if that is correct about those child sex abuses cases, she belong in hell and not incongress.
Reading this can make someone not sleep at night. If she gets in, damn the people of MA.

I can't even find words...

Great post. My comments on the incident are in another thread:
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2010/01/13/coakley-hooligan-shoves-weekly-standard-reporter-into-railing.php#comment-974595

The interesting question is at the very end: Do the people of Massachusetts want or deserve better?

In a democracy we get the government that we deserve. For years, the brain-dead liberals in Massachusetts voted for Democrats and let the Democratic machine run the state, and they've been running it into the ground. Periodically, the voters elect a Republican governor and just enough Republican legislators to prevent total disaster, but in general, the overwhelming majority vote straight party-line for the Democrats without any real thought.

(I've had fun over the years talking politics with my extended family in Massachusetts. Too many times they can't understand why their state is circling the bowl. My response is just to laugh and say, "Well, what did you expect? You only vote for Democrats. The Democrats aren't going to change unless they feel threatened. They may be corrupt and incompetent, but as long as they have your support, they have no reason to change.")

Do the people in Massachusetts want better? Well see, but they may not get it. Massachusetts is not a democracy. Years of giving unfettered power to the Democratic political machine have created a sea of corruption. A majority of voters may decide that they want Scott Brown to represent them, but car loads of ballots for Coakley cast by dead people may change the results.

BTW: I hope that the Brown campaign will also hammer the Massachusetts voters about Coakley's support for illegal immigration. They need to be remember that if she gets to Washington as a Senator, she'll be thrilled to help with the next item on the Democratic party's agenda: comprehensive immigration reform.

Paging Mr. Green, Mr. Steve Green.
Your entree of crow is waiting.

Man, yet ANOTHER Obama administration nominee is a thug. How many does that make now?

If it were indeed a crime, I presume McCormack has pressed charges? Oh, he hasn't? He is treating this more of a case of an overly rude handler (who apologized at the time) than a crime warranting prosecution and seemingly just wants to be reimbursed for the pants that got ruined during the encounter? So by all means, let's blast Coakley for not jumping in to tackle the miscreant and save society.

This isn't to say she should win... or that the guy was right to push the reporter... just that there are better and more substantive issues with which to criticize her.

The situation in California is exactly as you describe in Mass. Kevino. And I too have talked with relatives in exactly the terms you relate.

It is a fair question, do they deserve what they've sown? Yes, of course they do. It's only the innocents which deserve mercy.

It's obvious the Kennedy family needs to speak up and tell the people who the Kennedy's want FOR TEDDY'S SEAT. Screw the common man. The 'intellectual elite' know what's best for the state.

If Brown manages to win, there will be an earthquake in Washington.

steve sturm, that the victim has declined to press charges does not change the circumstances: Meehan knocked him to the ground, and Coakley saw the whole thing.

The legal question is settled. However, the whole incident gives us tremendous insight into a hand-picked Obama nominee and the Massachusetts Attorney General who would be a senator.

I, for one, don't like what we saw.

J.

Could you imagine if one of Rush's consultants shoved and knocked down a liberal reporter from, say an SF paper? The looney left would probably support waterboarding then.

"However, the whole incident gives us tremendous insight into a hand-picked Obama nominee and the Massachusetts Attorney General who would be a senator."

Exactly. Aren't we supposed to hold our public officials to a slightly higher standard?
If two regular joes have a beef and one kinda pushes another to the ground, that's one thing. But if a Presidential nominee does it, he should at least get an official wrist-slap. I'm not talking jail time, but an official reprimand is in order.

And if a private citizen is involved with a public scuffle, that's one thing. But if the Attorney General is involved, shouldn't she at least pause for a couple seconds to see what's going on or ask those nearby to see what's going on? I don't expect her to slap the cuffs on, MacGyver-style, but could she at least make a public statement decrying the use of violence by people involved in her campaign?

As usual fascist stevie sturm weighs in with...nothing.

"...just that there are better and more substantive issues with which to criticize her.

Did you read the post?

God I love you wingnuts. Steve Sturm is the most realistic and intelligent poster on this site, and every time he tells you something you don't want to hear, the knives come out. I especially love it when you accuse him of being a (gasp!) liberal, because he is most certainly not. If you were smart, you'd recruit him to be an "editor", but instead you savage him for telling you the truth.

But, what am I saying? The last thing I want is for conservatives to grasp reality. You could actually be a political force if you put aside your wishful thinking and got real.

Go back to Kos, Sturm! You socialist!

Palin/Bachmann 2012!!!!1!

max:

Sturm is being "criticized" for getting the facts wrong. What he said was:

1. "If it were indeed a crime, I presume McCormack has pressed charges?"

Wrong. Not all crimes are prosecuted. Police officers frequently try to talk everyone down after an assault and then get assault victims not to press charges. If one party is beaten badly enough to require medical attention, pressing charges gets to be necessary. In this case, just because the victim is a good guy and isn't pressing charges, doesn't mean it wasn't a crime. (And there are a lot of serious crimes than never get reported - for various reasons.)

2. "He is treating this more of a case of an overly rude handler (who apologized at the time) than a crime warranting prosecution and seemingly just wants to be reimbursed for the pants that got ruined during the encounter?

(a) The victim is being a good guy, but you can't assume that the victim thinks this is an "overly rude handler". Nothing in the article says that.
(b) The article doesn't say that the thug apologized at the time. He made a statement later.
(c) The victim wrote that he wants to be reimbursed for the pants, but that may not be all that he wants.

3. "So by all means, let's blast Coakley for not jumping in to tackle the miscreant and save society."

A silly strawman argument that completely ignores all of the issues reflected by this incident. Even without it, there is plenty to blast Coakley for. Many things are posted here and the related posts.

Oyster and Jay Tea got it absolutely right.

And for the record, I noticed that they got it right on the facts, and they didn't call Steve a "liberal".

"God I love you wingnuts. Steve Sturm is the most realistic and intelligent poster on this site"

Calm down, Max. Your standards aren't very high.

max "If you were smart, you'd recruit him to be an "editor", but instead you savage him for telling you the truth."

Well then, I hereby nominate you for the position as editor at Wizbang.

That oughta be a real hoot given your long history of snark over substance.

Great post, Jay. But, the way you phrased the following:

Corporate crime, corporate misdeeds, and other questionable priorities [...]

suggests that you think that for a prosecutor to have corporate criminality be included among their priorities is questionable. Obviously, most of us would prefer that prosecutors focus mainly on the everyday crime that is a threat to all of us, but there also has to be accountability when a corporation defies the law.

Still no steve green huh>? No suprise there.

steve sturm
Just because no charges were filed does that mean that no crime was committed? I mean look at the left howling for charges for Bush for everything from global warming to mass murder. I dont see you telling these guys. Hey no charges were filed so everything is peachy keen. Why not?

Also there have been a slew of dems like Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Tom Daschle and other democrats who have had legal problems lately especially in the area of taxes but havent had charges filed. Does that mean that no laws were broken?

Liberals shallow arguments are umm so shallow.

Simply take then their statements and say well if Bush had done it then what would you say and watch them get tongue tied, doublespeak, backtrack and add a slew of but but buts.

I was talking to a liberal collegue about the Harry Reid. he went on and on defending Reid. When I asked what would you say if Rush had said the same thing he got red in the face, stuttered some things and found something else he needed to get done.