Earlier this week, the Democratic party headquarters for the state of Colorado in Denver was vandalized. The attacker left behind anti-health care reform posters. Most of the damage occurred to windows directly in front of pictures of Obama and advertisements supporting health care reform.
It must have been carried out by some angry tea-bagging redneck gun-toting right wing anti-Obama racist, right?
That's what the state Democratic Chairman believed. That's what the press reported. And to this day, the press and the state Democratic Chairman have not backed away from that stance.
The police, on the other hand, have arrested a former Democratic canvasser and charged him with the vandalism. Maurice Schwenkler, who was paid $500 in November to walk door-to-door in support of Democrat Mollie Cullom, a candidate for the state House, was arrested on charges of criminal mischief. Schwenkler was also arrested in St. Paul, MN on the last day of the 2008 Republican convention on charges of unlawful assembly when he and a group of leftists tried to disrupt the convention.
Denver police say they have not "identified a motive" in the incident.
State representative David Balmer told the Denver post that it's possible vandals may have been trying to make Republicans look bad. That seems like a logical assumption to me, given the background of the attacker.
The official Democratic position? The Democratic leadership asserted that this was the "most ridiculous comment" they've ever heard. "This wasn't just any random kind of thing." The official position of the state Democratic party remains that the attacker was a right wing anti-Obama nutjob.
From the sounds of things, the state Dems have egg on their faces.
UPDATE: Reports are now coming out that "Maurice Schwenkler" is a transgendered ... uh .... "person" who may also be known as "Mary Schwenkler" and goes by the name of "Ariel Attack." Mr. or Ms. "Attack" is an anarchist (according to recent reports), who is has been an active democrat in the past, but is upset with Obama for not pushing a radical homosexual activist agenda.
Just a couple of observations: I'm not sure why someone who would describe themselves as an "anarchist" would have been recently involved campaigning for Democrats. I don't advocate anarchy, but by its very nature, anarchy is an extreme right position advocating no government at all, while Democrats are leftists pushing for increased government intervention in our lives.
The other observation is ... and I don't know how to put this .... I want to remain family friendly, but I also just want to understand .... I don't get why someone would CHOOSE which gender they want to be, and then become a homosexual in that chosen gender. Does that defeat the purpose? Can someone explain this to me?