“It was her fault,” says Fred Dooley

I’ve previously noted the story of Tim Proffitt, the former Rand Paul campaign muckety-muck who stomped on a woman’s head at a recent event in Kentucky, and I’ve also written about Proffitt’s statement that he believes the victim should apologize to him. Here in the Cheddarsphere, the story has been largely ignored by bloggers on the right (not surprisingly), with the exception of Fred Dooley of “Real Debate” Wisconsin, who opined that Lauren Valle was to blame for Proffitt stomping on her head, writing, “it was her fault.”

I’m not exactly sure what Lauren Valle did that merited being pushed to the ground and having her head stomped on by several men, but it’s curious to me that Fred Dooley is defending the actions of a bunch of overzealous thugs who resorted to physical violence against a woman because she dared to exercise her First Amendment right to freedom of speech.


Related Articles

37 thoughts on ““It was her fault,” says Fred Dooley

  1. For the record Zach, you are a lying piece of crap.

    1. The woman rushed a car and tried to shove her signs into it, security took her out. As I said, which you failed to mention they went too far. Howeever if she had never rushed security, nothing would have happened. She bears responsibility even if refure to admit it. You also fail to admit she has been arrested for going to far time and time again. Only a radical partisan like you would ignore that history

    2. Nobody touched her head, it was her shoulder, but then why would you care about facts? And it was one man, not several. Then again, what do you care about facts? They don’t fit your template after all.

    3. There are videos of the event all over of her rushing the car Zach. Do you condone people rushing security. What if someone did it to Obama’s vehicle. Shall security ignore that? I say no. Rand Paul deserves security as does the President.

    4. Are you aware a left wing man with a knife just threatend a female Congressional Candidate? Seeing as you didn’t mention I guess you must condone threatening women with knives.

    5. I’d attack you in publuc on my blog, but you are not worth it.

    1. “security took her out.”

      Causing her to have a concussion. The response was definitely commensurate with what she did. She definitely deserved what she got, right Fred? Maybe next time that woman will know better than to dare to exercise her First Amendment right to free speech!

      By the way, I’m waiting for you to explain how what Lauren Valle did was illegal. After all, she must have been doing something illegal to warrant being thrown to the ground by not one but two men while a third stomped on her head, causing her to have a concussion.

      By the way, if what “security” did was so acceptable and defensible, why was Tim Proffitt served with a criminal summons? If Tim Proffitt did nothing wrong, as you’re asserting, surely police could have looked at the video and determined he did nothing to warrant a criminal summons.

      The fact is, you’re defending a man who assaulted a woman after she had been thrown to the ground by two other men, and that says A LOT about you.

      Let pose a hypothetical situation to you….feel free to share your thoughts.

      Let’s say a woman and her boyfriend get into an argument, and during said argument, she slaps the man, who then throws her to the ground and stomps on her back/shoulders/head, causing her to have a concussion. Was the man right in doing what he did, since the woman “provoked” him?

      I look forward to reading your response.

    1. Fred, clearly a knife-wielding maniac confronting a candidate for elected office is simply unacceptable (not to mention obviously criminal), just as it’s unacceptable for a man to plot the assassination of leaders of the ACLU and Tides Foundation because he was angry at “the way Congress was railroading through all these left-wing agenda items.”


      The fact is, it happens on both sides, but in this case there’s simply no justifying what Tim Proffitt and his thug friends did to Lauren Valle.

  2. she absolutely did not get taken out by security! that was not his official role he was just a campaign staffer. so she got a concussion by being touched on the shoulder????

    since when can’t citizens show up to ask questions of elected officials? this was inexcusable and it’s telling you defend them!

  3. Fred has always had a special affection for the women. Even his comments here are fairly mild and balanced compared to some of the things he has had to say, especially to Kay of Blue Racine.

    He is a real prize alright.

  4. PP, I also said they went too far. Zach failed to mention that.

    She must accept responsibility though for rushing the car.

    If I rushed a car carrying a senate candidate and jabbed the candidate in the head multiple times I’d expect security to take me down. Oh and then I’d accept responsibility instead of just blaming the security that did their job. Remember though I did say they went too far, again Zach left that part out.

    By the way Zach also failed to mention in all of his mentions of this that a Conway supporter stomped on the surgical boot of a woman who had just had surgery breaking open that wound. She filed assault charges.

    Why has Zach not said a word about that? I’ll tell you why he only wants to try and make a cheap political point and now make an attack on me. Something he does time and time again.


    Come on Zach, where is your outrage for this woman, assaulted at the same event by a Conway supporter.

    My post mentioned both events, yours only one of them. I wonder why? Apparently in your liberal world liberals are not responsible for their bad behavior.

    1. Surely if Lauren Valle “jabbed” Rand Paul in the face with a sign, she’d be facing charges as well, right? It’s curious that no charges have been filed.

      And I’m still waiting for you to share your thoughts on my hypothetical….I’d really love to read your thoughts on when men are justified in putting their hands on women.

    2. the point is she was NOT “taken out by security” she was “taken out by rand pauls staff and and supporters – they might be self appointed security but they were definitely NOT acting in that official manner.

      If she poked rand paul in the face a few times, then you have a serious scoop because no one else , including Rand pAul himself has said that. he said he only saw people ‘jockeying ‘ for position.

  5. Where did I say any deserved to be physically assaulted, Freddy? Where? Oh, but that’s right, you are the king of hypocrisy. You can make all the personal attacks you want, but no one is allowed to criticize the statements or the positions of a conservative woman.

    I’m surprised you’re not wearing a dress by now.

  6. I see Zach, I’ve said multiple time they went too far.

    Why can’t you grasp that?

    So your position then is male security should never lay hands on a woman? Should female security lay hands on a man?

    I really thought we had moved beyond such silly nuance.

    You should really give some thought to male and female equality, you are being a bad liberal Zach.

    I’m done with your games, I’ll be back on Wednesday to watch you cry and whine. I can assure you I will enjoy the schadenfreude.

  7. They went too far…..but “it was her fault” that they threw her to the ground and gave her a concussion.

    Got it.

    See, I look at the situation and say, “it was their fault” for throwing her to the ground and stomping on her head, instead of acting responsibly.

  8. There’s a reason this story has been largely ignored by bloggers on the right — it’s irrelevant! That Tim guy isn’t running for anything and was fired after the incident. Quite frankly I am surprised you devoted this much blog space to this issue 5 days before a monumental election.

    1. Eh, it was something that caught my eye…and it speaks to a bigger trend that I’ve noticed among some on the right when it comes to fomenting violence.

        1. Well the problem is right wing e-thugs like to talk about torturing members of the ACLU to death, how it’s treason to say we made a mistake with the Iraq war, that you shouldn’t be a citizen if you aren’t Christian, etc.

          These are fringe wackos, but when such extremists actually do something that backs up their online rhetoric like what happened here, it’s important to condemn it – no matter what their political affiliation is.

          I’ve seen (not as many but I’ve still seen it) liberal comments calling for shooting CEOs responsible for frauds etc too, which is just as evil a stance. I speak out about those too. I just don’t really browse politics that much. It upsets me too much to see so many people not believing in the simple freedoms I take for granted in this country. It’s great that we can openly disagree like this without threat of violence, intimidation, or death. When people with any political view do something like this, it’s important to speak out about it.

    2. he may have been fired but he was working directly for rand paul which makes rand paul responsible. Paul also has not apologized OR given the money back that this goon has given him.

  9. Yep, Fred’s right. She was asking for it. Hopefully, the tea party patriot who stomped on her head will get some pain medications for that sore back he whined about when he said she should apologize to him.

    But not too much medication, huh?

    1. scot, maybe that’s why he stomped on that woman’s head…..he didn’t realize what he was doing because of the painkillers he was taking for his bad back!

  10. The tea party aka “new black panthers” or should I say the “old white elephants”?. Apparently things like voter intimidation or intimidation of anyone who is not a tea partier is a-ok with them (which is why the right wing is ignoring it).

    The tea party is at best a mob and at worst, terrorists.

    1. Wow, now they are terrorists! Are you for real? Now I’ve heard it all.

      You talk about the right wing ignoring voter intimidation? Um, what about the Justice Department ignorning ACTUAL voter intimidation from the REAL Black Panthers?

      Wes, you are extremism at its finest.

  11. And the rest of us who normally comment are strangely silent.
    So I’ll say this: when an unknown person crosses a security boundary with objects in their hands in a manner that appears threatening to a political candidate, I am okay with security getting that situation under control. If that control involves bringing an assailant to the ground that is acceptable to me. If the assailant is injured in that process then it is a tragedy that could have been avoided by the behavior of the assailant.

    It appears to me that there was a lack of intent to harm the assailant but it occurred anyway.

    The sex of the assailant is irrelevant.

  12. “So I’ll say this: when an unknown person crosses a security boundary with objects in their hands in a manner that appears threatening to a political candidate, I am okay with security getting that situation under control….”

    What Security boundary? I watched the video and looked at the pictures provided by fred and didn’t see any boundary.

    “If that control involves bringing an assailant to the ground that is acceptable to me. If the assailant is injured in that process then it is a tragedy that could have been avoided by the behavior of the assailant.”

    So there is no such thing as police brutality then? According to you, the assailant is always in the wrong. You know, like rodney king, he must have deserved that.

    1. What’s more, I’d like to know what objects Lauren Valle had in her hand, other than a large sign.

      Further, I’d love to hear PB explain how throwing her to the ground and stepping on her head/shoulders is acceptable.

      1. The sign was the object. The boundary was the space between the protestors and the vehicle.

        How our tune would have changed if the assailant had a gun or knife hidden behind that sign and the security team just stood and watched as the assailant stabbed or shot the occupants. Blam.Blam.Blam.

        Justifiable actions in defense of the candidate by the security team in my opinion. A tragedy that the person was hurt and that her actions triggered a security team response. There was no beating; no maleficence on the part of the security detail in my opinion.

        I wish it had turned out differently and that the security team had been a little slower to learn that she was harmless but I do not fault them for a quick response in defense of the occupants.

        That is how I see this.

        1. “The boundary was the space between the protestors and the vehicle.”
          Except there was no barrier to prevent anyone from approaching the vehicle.

          “Justifiable actions in defense of the candidate by the security team in my opinion.”
          The people who dealt with the girl were not a “Security Team”. Period. Don’t even try to float that lie.

  13. “These pictures clearly show she holds no fault for rushing Paul’s vehicle and jabbing him in the head twice….”

    Also, in the pictures provided by fred, there is no clear evidence she jabbed him in the head twice. If there was video of the arrival, it would be a lot easier to say what happened. But “jabbed” in the head was not seen by me.

  14. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I submit Exhibit A. You will notice at approximately 16 seconds into the video the sign wielding “assailant” rushes towards the vehicle. You will also notice that she realizes that her weapon is not pointed at her intended target and quickly flips the sign in order to ensure proper positioning for perusal (PFPP for short). The “assailant” is then subdued, wrestled to the ground, and then stomped to death by an angry mob (if you listen closely you’ll hear the crowd chant “kill the beast!”).

    Now, the prosecutor (Dooley) would like you to believe that the still-photos tell a different tale. He would like you to believe “that the paid leftist twice jammed her sign into Paul’s face”. But the evidence is clear. The truth being that the so-called “assailant” did no such thing, and therefor should be exonerated.

    I rest my case.

  15. Too often in today’s political landscape discourse is kept among those who agree. Fred’s is a blog to promote that. He discusses ideas here and there but not always, he asks that you keep your tone in check and respect those who are willing to share, and condone the stomping of heads as necessary, such as when thugs try to inject funny signs into the political process.

  16. Zach, simple concept.. She does not attack a Senate candidate, she never gets touched.

    A shame you have no ability to accept that basic premise.

    But then I forget, liberals are never held accountable.

    By the way, why do you keep saying they stomped on her head? It was her shoulder. When you are issuing attacks at least be honest adn accurate.

    1. Fred, if she “attacked” Rand Paul – as you allege – then surely she would have been charged with something. Surely the Paul campaign would have issued a statement condemning her actions if she had attacked him.

      Just keep blaming the victim Fred…..

Comments are closed.