DC Protests Draw 2 Million

[AllieBaba]

Again, no link, no substantiation. Let's see your source.

Yes, I did. The cited and linked source I provided, Eric Boehlert's article, is heavily sourced itself and demonstrates the real vs fictitious numbers. As have many other people. The Washington Post reporter estimate of 20-30,000 is in my quoted source, its link is here: Post Politics: Wilson Rebuke, Confederate Flag, More - washingtonpost.com, several people have linked to the 60-70,000 number.

Post a direct link that supports your bullshit. Not to a meandering transcript of reporters talking.

 

[QUENTIN]

Another interesting fact relating to David Barna, the quoted Park Service rep in that last link dispelling the lie just proffered by Si modo:

The Washington Monthly

9/12 CROWD ESTIMATES JUMP THE SHARK.... The "debate" over the size of the crowd for the right-wing protests in D.C. on Saturday have been painful to watch the last few days. Absurd claims and bogus photographs abound. This morning, Glenn Beck said a "university" put the number at 1.7 million, but he couldn't remember which one.

All of this has been embarrassing for a few days now, but the story didn't become farcical until today.

Yesterday on his radio program, while discussing the crowds at this weekend's 9/12 protests, Glenn Beck claimed that the London Telegraph "quote[d] a source from the Park Service, the National Park Service, saying that it is the largest march on Washington ever." This led to a good deal of confusion here, as the Telegraph article contains no such quote. Just another case of Beck making things up? Actually, the story behind this turns out to be much funnier than we could have anticipated.

Several conservative blogs have been quoting National Park Service spokesman "Dan Bana" as saying the 9/12 protest was "the largest event held in Washington, D.C., ever." This appears to be a repurposing of this quote from David Barna (who, unlike Dan Bana, appears to be a real person):

"David Barna, a Park Service spokesman, said the agency did not conduct its own count. Instead, it will use a Washington Post account that said 1.8 million people gathered on the US Capitol grounds, National Mall, and parade route. 'It is a record,' Barna said. 'We believe it is the largest event held in Washington, D.C., ever.'"

There are an astounding number of conservative bloggers running with this today, all of whom are telling their readers that Saturday's protest was the largest in D.C. history. (My personal favorite was the one mocking "Democrats and their media acolytes" who refuse to believe it.)

The problem, of course, is that the quote conservatives are so excited about referenced the Obama inauguration. The article that generated all of this right-wing excitement has a headline that reads, "Inaugural crowd size reportedly D.C. record." The very first sentence in the article that the conservative bloggers relied on reads, "The National Park Service says it will rely on a media report that says 1.8 million people attended President Obama's inauguration."

Charles Johnson, himself a conservative blogger at Little Green Footballs, finds the right's approach to this rather depressing. "This is so pathetic I don't know whether to laugh or cry," he said, adding, "An epic, monumental fail."

Allie, read the Boehlert article, the first one I posted, that proves the lie in the exaggerated numbers and reveals their source. The WaPo link is just a reference to the most conservative legitimate estimate made.

 

[Si modo]

Another interesting fact relating to David Barna, the quoted Park Service rep in that last link dispelling the lie just proffered by Si modo:

The Washington Monthly

....

Allie, read the Boehlert article, the first one I posted, that proves the lie in the exaggerated numbers and reveals their source. The WaPo link is just a reference to the most conservative legitimate estimate made.

What the fuck are you talking about? How the fuck did I lie in saying that there are no official numbers in for estimates of the crowds on 9/12 and where the fuck did I even mention any comparison to the Inauguration?

Lay off the crack. Or start being honest about something. You have yet to show an ounce of honesty.

 

[AllieBaba]

I echo the sentiment. I'm getting dizzy from the deviation & switchbacks.

 

[Si modo]

I echo the sentiment. I'm getting dizzy from the deviation & switchbacks.

Summarily dismissed. That poster is dishonest, does not support his claims at all, posts bullshit links containing no support for his claims, then resorts to personal attacks. Sure signs of an intellectual midget.

 

[QUENTIN]

And, just a bit of trivia: In case anyone is wondering why Park Police, DC FD, Metro Police, etc. no longer do official estimates of crowds for the District it's because the 9/15 protestors whined so loudly about what they felt were lowball numbers from Park Police. So, blame the whiners from 9/15/2007 for this whole lack of official estimates.

Your assertion about 9/15 protesters whining being the reason police don't do estimates is a bold-faced lie you just made up:

Park service changes course, plans to offer crowd estimate - USATODAY.com

The park service stopped releasing crowd estimates in 1996, when Congress stripped its budget of money to do so following a controversy over the estimate for the 1994 Million Man March. Barna said there is debate within the park service over whether that prohibition was permanent or just for that year.

Another interesting fact relating to David Barna, the quoted Park Service rep in that last link dispelling the lie just proffered by Si modo:

The Washington Monthly

What the fuck are you talking about? How the fuck did I lie in saying that there are no official numbers in for estimates of the crowds on 9/12 and where the fuck did I even mention any comparison to the Inauguration?

Lay off the crack. Or start being honest about something. You have yet to show an ounce of honesty.

You misread and misunderstood. The lie proffered by you that I dispelled with the first source that quoted David Barna was that "In case anyone is wondering why Park Police, DC FD, Metro Police, etc. no longer do official estimates of crowds for the District it's because the 9/15 protestors whined so loudly about what they felt were lowball numbers from Park Police. So, blame the whiners from 9/15/2007 for this whole lack of official estimates."

You completely made that bullshit up, it has no basis in fact as the USA Today article and many others demonstrate, they stopped doing crowd estimates in 1996 when they lost their funding for it in the aftermath of the Million Man March. Nothing whatsoever to do with September 15, 2007 protest and 11 years before it.

But somehow I'm the dishonest one? Nah, you actually fabricated a lie of your own making and posted it on here like fact. Summarily dismissed indeed.

 

[AllieBaba]

You of course have something which proves he's lying.

 

[QUENTIN]

You of course have something which proves he's lying.

You illiterate or just simple?

Here's I'll post it for the third time in a row now:

Park service changes course, plans to offer crowd estimate - USATODAY.com

The park service stopped releasing crowd estimates in 1996, when Congress stripped its budget of money to do so following a controversy over the estimate for the 1994 Million Man March. Barna said there is debate within the park service over whether that prohibition was permanent or just for that year.

Here's the quote from Si modo against contrasted with the full article dispelling his lie, from January 2009:

And, just a bit of trivia: In case anyone is wondering why Park Police, DC FD, Metro Police, etc. no longer do official estimates of crowds for the District it's because the 9/15 protestors whined so loudly about what they felt were lowball numbers from Park Police. So, blame the whiners from 9/15/2007 for this whole lack of official estimates.

Reversing a 13-year-old policy, the National Park Service said Monday that it will offer an official crowd estimate for today's presidential inauguration to determine whether the event will set a record.

The largest inauguration crowd is believed by the National Park Service to be 1.2 million people for the swearing-in of President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965. President Clinton's 1993 ceremony drew 800,000 people, according to the park service.

Barna said the National Park Police will take aerial photos at the moment of President-elect Barack Obama's swearing-in that the park service will use for a crowd estimate. He said the agency should have a crowd estimate later this week.

"None of us here want to go through the next 20 years saying LBJ was the biggest we've ever had if that's not true," Barna said.

The park service stopped releasing crowd estimates in 1996, when Congress stripped its budget of money to do so following a controversy over the estimate for the 1994 Million Man March. Barna said there is debate within the park service over whether that prohibition was permanent or just for that year.

Disputes over the size of gatherings, especially protests, are common, said Paul Wertheimer of Crowd Management Strategies. Large crowds of people "mean power in a political situation, or they mean money in a commercial situation. So the numbers are very important to the people who put on an event."

The District of Columbia police will estimate the crowd for its own information but will not release the number, said Traci Hughes of the joint information center for law enforcement agencies involved in the inauguration.

"Somehow or other I think we will wind up seeing a range of estimates," said Steve Doig, a journalism professor at Arizona State University. Doig plans to estimate the crowd with the use of photos taken early today from a tethered balloon over the National Mall.

The inauguration has been predicted to draw large crowds virtually since Obama's election in November. Washington, D.C., Mayor Adrian Fenty's office said it expects 2 million.

Estimating the size of a crowd requires aerial photographs, dimensions of the gathering space, and an estimate of the crowd's density.

If the National Mall is densely packed from Third Street to the Washington Monument, and if the area from the monument to the Lincoln Memorial has an average density, the space could contain 1.5 million people, Barna said. Average density is one person per 5 square feet. A tightly packed crowd has a density of one person per 2.5 square feet, an area slightly larger than this newspaper.

Clark McPhail, a University of Illinois professor and expert in crowd estimation, said it's "very important" to provide a number, even if only an estimate. "These are events of historical significance," he said. "A president ought to be able to know how many people turn out for his inauguration."

So yes, not only do I have a source, I posted it many times. It proves point-blank he was completely full of shit and made up that lie.

 

[Intense]

You of course have something which proves he's lying.

You illiterate or just simple?

Here's I'll post it for the third time in a row now:

Park service changes course, plans to offer crowd estimate - USATODAY.com

The park service stopped releasing crowd estimates in 1996, when Congress stripped its budget of money to do so following a controversy over the estimate for the 1994 Million Man March. Barna said there is debate within the park service over whether that prohibition was permanent or just for that year.

Here's the quote from Si modo against contrasted with the full article dispelling his lie, from January 2009:

And, just a bit of trivia: In case anyone is wondering why Park Police, DC FD, Metro Police, etc. no longer do official estimates of crowds for the District it's because the 9/15 protestors whined so loudly about what they felt were lowball numbers from Park Police. So, blame the whiners from 9/15/2007 for this whole lack of official estimates.

Reversing a 13-year-old policy, the National Park Service said Monday that it will offer an official crowd estimate for today's presidential inauguration to determine whether the event will set a record.

The largest inauguration crowd is believed by the National Park Service to be 1.2 million people for the swearing-in of President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965. President Clinton's 1993 ceremony drew 800,000 people, according to the park service.

Barna said the National Park Police will take aerial photos at the moment of President-elect Barack Obama's swearing-in that the park service will use for a crowd estimate. He said the agency should have a crowd estimate later this week.

"None of us here want to go through the next 20 years saying LBJ was the biggest we've ever had if that's not true," Barna said.

The park service stopped releasing crowd estimates in 1996, when Congress stripped its budget of money to do so following a controversy over the estimate for the 1994 Million Man March. Barna said there is debate within the park service over whether that prohibition was permanent or just for that year.

Disputes over the size of gatherings, especially protests, are common, said Paul Wertheimer of Crowd Management Strategies. Large crowds of people "mean power in a political situation, or they mean money in a commercial situation. So the numbers are very important to the people who put on an event."

The District of Columbia police will estimate the crowd for its own information but will not release the number, said Traci Hughes of the joint information center for law enforcement agencies involved in the inauguration.

"Somehow or other I think we will wind up seeing a range of estimates," said Steve Doig, a journalism professor at Arizona State University. Doig plans to estimate the crowd with the use of photos taken early today from a tethered balloon over the National Mall.

The inauguration has been predicted to draw large crowds virtually since Obama's election in November. Washington, D.C., Mayor Adrian Fenty's office said it expects 2 million.

Estimating the size of a crowd requires aerial photographs, dimensions of the gathering space, and an estimate of the crowd's density.

If the National Mall is densely packed from Third Street to the Washington Monument, and if the area from the monument to the Lincoln Memorial has an average density, the space could contain 1.5 million people, Barna said. Average density is one person per 5 square feet. A tightly packed crowd has a density of one person per 2.5 square feet, an area slightly larger than this newspaper.

Clark McPhail, a University of Illinois professor and expert in crowd estimation, said it's "very important" to provide a number, even if only an estimate. "These are events of historical significance," he said. "A president ought to be able to know how many people turn out for his inauguration."

So yes, not only do I have a source, I posted it many times. It proves point-blank he was completely full of shit and made up that lie.

Quentin, Sorry I wasn't watching the Thread I would have posted sooner. All True about the Park Police, regarding the Policy about counting, and the exception for the inauguration.
Sometimes it's about being misinformed, let's try to distinguish between that and lying. It happens to us all.

 

[Si modo]

And, just a bit of trivia: In case anyone is wondering why Park Police, DC FD, Metro Police, etc. no longer do official estimates of crowds for the District it's because the 9/15 protestors whined so loudly about what they felt were lowball numbers from Park Police. So, blame the whiners from 9/15/2007 for this whole lack of official estimates.

Your assertion about 9/15 protesters whining being the reason police don't do estimates is a bold-faced lie you just made up:

Park service changes course, plans to offer crowd estimate - USATODAY.com

Another interesting fact relating to David Barna, the quoted Park Service rep in that last link dispelling the lie just proffered by Si modo:

The Washington Monthly

What the fuck are you talking about? How the fuck did I lie in saying that there are no official numbers in for estimates of the crowds on 9/12 and where the fuck did I even mention any comparison to the Inauguration?

Lay off the crack. Or start being honest about something. You have yet to show an ounce of honesty.

You misread and misunderstood. ....

Yes I did. I was misinformed, and I would thank you for the correction on that, however as you chose to call me a liar, I see no reason for any thanks.

Now, support your claims. You have not, thus your talk is cheap talk - nothing of substance.

 

[QUENTIN]

I've just searched for nearly every combination imaginable of the relevant words and phrases in your claim about September 15, 2007 protesters whining being the result of park police no longer counting crowds.

Not to my surprise, there is not a single source on the internet that can be found making that claim, except the last couple pages of this thread.

This is why the notion that you were "misinformed," which is fair and commonly occurring, doesn't hold water here. Where did this misinformation originate? Nowhere. You personally made it up out of thin air, you got called out and shown to be lying. I don't expect you to admit it, but it's true and we both know it.

 

[DiveCon]

I've just searched for nearly every combination imaginable of the relevant words and phrases in your claim about September 15, 2007 protesters whining being the result of park police no longer counting crowds.

Not to my surprise, there is not a single source on the internet that can be found making that claim, except the last couple pages of this thread.

This is why the notion that you were "misinformed," which is fair and commonly occurring, doesn't hold water here. Where did this misinformation originate? Nowhere. You personally made it up out of thin air, you got called out and shown to be lying. I don't expect you to admit it, but it's true and we both know it.

its my understanding the "whining" was over the count for the "million man march"

 

[Si modo]

I've just searched for nearly every combination imaginable of the relevant words and phrases in your claim about September 15, 2007 protesters whining being the result of park police no longer counting crowds.

Not to my surprise, there is not a single source on the internet that can be found making that claim, except the last couple pages of this thread.

This is why the notion that you were "misinformed," which is fair and commonly occurring, doesn't hold water here. Where did this misinformation originate? Nowhere. You personally made it up out of thin air, you got called out and shown to be lying. I don't expect you to admit it, but it's true and we both know it.

Guess how much I give a shit whether you believe me or not?

Gracious - look it up.

Now, support your claims of official numbers for the 9/12 protest.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Just take Republican #s and divide by 10! That is a scientifically PROVEN fact.

 

[DiveCon]

Just take Republican #s and divide by 10! That is a scientifically PROVEN fact.

except the 2 mil number is alleged to come from democrats

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Well I guess the Dems know that a Repuiblican protest is dividedc by 10.

 

[Intense]

Well I guess the Dems know that a Repuiblican protest is dividedc by 10.

Only if you divide by 20 for the Million Man March.

 

[Ame®icano]