March on Washington: Video

Looks like fun...and quite a crowd!
Funny, this looks like a crowd that wants it all but is not willing to share the cost.

If they did not either walk to washington on their own two feet, eating pesticide free food that they grew themselves from non-hybridized seeds of plants whose unadulterated lines are generations and genrations old, then their even getting to Washington was done with both the financial and intellectual as well as practical help of all those who have contributed, including all the medical benefits that vaccinated, kept them healthy, educated, and so on.

Selfish whiners...... these teacup tempest makers, nothing more....
I'm finding it difficult to think of any input I have seen that rivals yours in insignificance.
 
wow. even the conservative Wall Street Journal doesn't even come close to a million:
  • wsj_print.gif


  • SEPTEMBER 12, 2009, 4:53 P.M. ET
Protesters March on Washington




By JAKE SHERMAN

WASHINGTON -- Thousands of demonstrators descended on Capitol Hill Saturday, protesting the expansion of government spending and illustrating the network of conservative activists that has emerged in opposition to President Barack Obama's policies.

Protesters March on Washington - WSJ.com
 
It was not "created by Hillary Clinton."
HA HA HA, yes, it was, for her and by her.

We know because Media Matters’ links to Hillary are at once intimate and multitudinous, and the organization’s devotion to her is nothing short of profound. In 1996 (eight years before Media Matters’ creation), the then-conservative David Brock was commissioned (with a $1 million advance) by the Simon & Schuster subsidiary Free Press to write a hard-hitting expose of Hillary. But the book, completed in 1997, turned out to be nothing more than a tepid, distinctly sympathetic account of the former First Lady’s life. That same year (1997), Brock publicly announced his political epiphany, unequivocally recanting his previous negative writings about the Clintons and embracing the liberal/Left cause. During this period, Brock developed a close relationship with Neel Lattimore, Senator Clinton’s openly gay press secretary and close confidante. Brock would eventually hire Lattimore as a director of “special projects” for Media Matters.

Brock’s affinity for Mrs. Clinton grew over time, and vice versa. According to Glenn Thrush of Newsday, Hillary “advised Brock on creating” Media Matters in 2004, “encouraging the creation of a liberal equivalent of the Media Research Center, a conservative group that has aggravated Democrats for decades.” Thrush reports that Hillary still “chats with [Brock] occasionally and thinks he provides a valuable service . . .” “For her part,” Thrush adds, “Clinton’s extended family of contributors, consultants and friends has played a pivotal role in helping Media Matters grow from a $3.5 million start-up in 2004 to its current $8.5 million budget.”

Notice the highlighted name?

I know full well what 'mediamatters' is and who created, what you posted is their nice lil propaganda that somehow they are credible, but like all attack dogs, they aern't.

Media Matters, Hillary, and the Center for American Progress

Media Matters and Hillary Clinton are further linked by their respective relationships with three of the most influential leftist operatives in the world—George Soros, Morton Halperin, and John Podesta. All three of these men are intimately involved with a vital think tank called the Center for American Progress (CAP)—which, according to Cybercast News Service’s research, “was instrumental in getting Brock’s media group off the ground”; which helped launch Media Matters on May 3, 2004; and which maintains a tight bond with Brock’s organization to this day.

Soros and Halperin first proposed CAP’s creation in 2002 to promote generally the cause of the Left and the Democratic Party. But CAP’s overarching objective is considerably more specific than that: As an inside source told reporter Christian Bourge of United Press International, CAP is in fact “the official Hillary Clinton think tank.” Not long after its formal founding in the summer of 2003, Mrs. Clinton told reporter Robert Dreyfuss of The Nation: “We’ve had the challenge of filling a void on our side of the ledger for a long time, while the other side created an infrastructure that has come to dominate political discourse. The Center [for American Progress] is a welcome effort to fill that void.”

Hillary OWNS them.

FrontPage Magazine - Media Matters: Hillary’s Lap Dogs
 
Tea Party Express Takes Washington By Storm - Political News - FOXNews.com

And for the win:

The tens of thousands of protesters marched to the U.S. Capitol chanting various slogans and waving posters that voiced a rather broad array of grievances against big government and the leaders, particularly President Obama, who the protesters blame for its size and scope

As usual, Eagleseven is a liar and wrong.
:rofl: The winna!

WSJ and now even FoXy News dispute the credibility of the Malkinites.

:rofl:

Good one Robert!
 
Tea Party Express Takes Washington By Storm - Political News - FOXNews.com

And for the win:

The tens of thousands of protesters marched to the U.S. Capitol chanting various slogans and waving posters that voiced a rather broad array of grievances against big government and the leaders, particularly President Obama, who the protesters blame for its size and scope

As usual, Eagleseven is a liar and wrong.


And as usual you are DUmocrat DUng,, wassamatter haven't had time to scrape the floor today? :lol:
 
"Grassroots" my ass.

Think Progress » Pressed On FreedomWorks’ Connections To Tea Parties, Dick Armey Lashes Out At TP As ‘Juvenile Delinquents’

The Washington Independent » DeMint Blames Lack of Tea Party Crowd Diversity on Timing, Media

I loved this line:

I agreed that it was a geographically and economically diverse crowd, but I mentioned that the protesters were at least 99 percent white — in fact, in my four-plus hours at the event, I’d only seen three African-American protesters.

DeMint had a simple explanation. “It’s probably just the time and organization and the media that promoted it,” he said.

Right, cross-section *wink wink*.

In other words, anyone who protests the Ossiah is a white racist. got it.

No, if you look at the video, there are a lot of black and other minority people there in the crowd. Haven't you seen them?
 
It was not "created by Hillary Clinton."
HA HA HA, yes, it was, for her and by her.

We know because Media Matters’ links to Hillary are at once intimate and multitudinous, and the organization’s devotion to her is nothing short of profound. In 1996 (eight years before Media Matters’ creation), the then-conservative David Brock was commissioned (with a $1 million advance) by the Simon & Schuster subsidiary Free Press to write a hard-hitting expose of Hillary. But the book, completed in 1997, turned out to be nothing more than a tepid, distinctly sympathetic account of the former First Lady’s life. That same year (1997), Brock publicly announced his political epiphany, unequivocally recanting his previous negative writings about the Clintons and embracing the liberal/Left cause. During this period, Brock developed a close relationship with Neel Lattimore, Senator Clinton’s openly gay press secretary and close confidante. Brock would eventually hire Lattimore as a director of “special projects” for Media Matters.

Brock’s affinity for Mrs. Clinton grew over time, and vice versa. According to Glenn Thrush of Newsday, Hillary “advised Brock on creating” Media Matters in 2004, “encouraging the creation of a liberal equivalent of the Media Research Center, a conservative group that has aggravated Democrats for decades.” Thrush reports that Hillary still “chats with [Brock] occasionally and thinks he provides a valuable service . . .” “For her part,” Thrush adds, “Clinton’s extended family of contributors, consultants and friends has played a pivotal role in helping Media Matters grow from a $3.5 million start-up in 2004 to its current $8.5 million budget.”
Notice the highlighted name?

I know full well what 'mediamatters' is and who created, what you posted is their nice lil propaganda that somehow they are credible, but like all attack dogs, they aern't.

Media Matters, Hillary, and the Center for American Progress

Media Matters and Hillary Clinton are further linked by their respective relationships with three of the most influential leftist operatives in the world—George Soros, Morton Halperin, and John Podesta. All three of these men are intimately involved with a vital think tank called the Center for American Progress (CAP)—which, according to Cybercast News Service’s research, “was instrumental in getting Brock’s media group off the ground”; which helped launch Media Matters on May 3, 2004; and which maintains a tight bond with Brock’s organization to this day.

Soros and Halperin first proposed CAP’s creation in 2002 to promote generally the cause of the Left and the Democratic Party. But CAP’s overarching objective is considerably more specific than that: As an inside source told reporter Christian Bourge of United Press International, CAP is in fact “the official Hillary Clinton think tank.” Not long after its formal founding in the summer of 2003, Mrs. Clinton told reporter Robert Dreyfuss of The Nation: “We’ve had the challenge of filling a void on our side of the ledger for a long time, while the other side created an infrastructure that has come to dominate political discourse. The Center [for American Progress] is a welcome effort to fill that void.”
Hillary OWNS them.

FrontPage Magazine - Media Matters: Hillary’s Lap Dogs
Ah David Horowitz's magazine and some others have reported Hillary advised him,. Wow.

Now that's hard hitting and completely discounts what is written there.

You still never got to the meat of the Matters.

I direct you to the last few paragraphs of my last post, which you conveniently ignored (and nicely clipped out of my quote):
While I admit Media Matters leans left, and their mission is to point out the lies and distortions of right wingers, I have yet to find much where they are actually incorrect in which they report.

A good deal of the stories contain actual clips, videos, and what I see is well sourced. While I don't doubt they err in their reporting from time to time (by comparison, WND, what some of the wingers would call their counterpart and discount as readily (as you did) just because they are WND - BUT WND has been proven to be wrong or misleading about 80% of the time _ and they rarely source their material, usually linking back to their own stories...)

If you can show me where they are out and out wrong, or do not back up what they report, I'd be happy to see it.

And where in the post I presented is there anything but an editorial - much like the OP had presented here? And where exactly is it wrong?​
 
Last edited:
In other words, anyone who protests the Ossiah is a white racist. got it.

Nope, that was never my point. As I was just explaining to someone else, the whole point of me posting that was the fact DeMint was blaming the media for the lack of minorities at the rally. Which is plain stupidity on his part.
 
And psst: I might add Xenophon, from the looks of it, and by reports from ABC News, Wall Street Journal, and even Fox News, it appears media Matters was right, again.
 
"Grassroots" my ass.

Think Progress » Pressed On FreedomWorks’ Connections To Tea Parties, Dick Armey Lashes Out At TP As ‘Juvenile Delinquents’

The Washington Independent » DeMint Blames Lack of Tea Party Crowd Diversity on Timing, Media

I loved this line:

I agreed that it was a geographically and economically diverse crowd, but I mentioned that the protesters were at least 99 percent white — in fact, in my four-plus hours at the event, I’d only seen three African-American protesters.

DeMint had a simple explanation. “It’s probably just the time and organization and the media that promoted it,” he said.

Right, cross-section *wink wink*.

The guy selling little flags and raking in dough was black.
 
No, if you look at the video, there are a lot of black and other minority people there in the crowd. Haven't you seen them?

Please, don't judge the protesters by the color of their skin...
 


The "Mail" seems to get sued a lot for telling lies about people.

Also found this:

Editorial stance

The Mail takes an anti-EU, anti-abortion view, based upon "traditional values", and is pro-capitalism and pro-monarchy, as well as, in some cases, advocating stricter punishments for crime. It also often calls for lower levels of taxation. The paper is generally critical of the BBC, which it argues is biased to the left.[39]

In the late 1960s, the paper went through a phase of being liberal on social issues like corporal punishment but reverted to its traditional conservative line.

It has Richard Littlejohn, who returned in 2005 from The Sun, alongside Peter Hitchens, who joined its sister title the Mail on Sunday in 2001, when his former newspaper, the Daily Express, was purchased by Richard Desmond, the owner of a number of pornographic titles. The editorial stance was critical of Tony Blair, when he was still Prime Minister, and endorsed the Conservative Party in the 2005 general election[40] In Blair's earlier years as Labour leader and then Prime Minister, the paper wrote positively about him and his reforms of the party. Opponents of Littlejohn have accused him of being preoccupied with homosexuality, and lying about asylum seekers being 'hosed down in benefits'.[41]
The Mail has also opposed the growing of genetically-modified crops in the United Kingdom, a stance it shares with many of its left-wing critics.
Daily Mail - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
And psst: I might add Xenophon, from the looks of it, and by reports from ABC News, Wall Street Journal, and even Fox News, it appears media Matters was right, again.

they are just spouting their orders,,errrr talking points..
 
And psst: I might add Xenophon, from the looks of it, and by reports from ABC News, Wall Street Journal, and even Fox News, it appears media Matters was right, again.

they are just spouting their orders,,errrr talking points..
Fox News and Wall Street Journal :eek: are in on the Media Bias too now.

:rofl:

You guys must be smoking some phunny sheeeet.
 
"Grassroots" my ass.

Think Progress » Pressed On FreedomWorks’ Connections To Tea Parties, Dick Armey Lashes Out At TP As ‘Juvenile Delinquents’

The Washington Independent » DeMint Blames Lack of Tea Party Crowd Diversity on Timing, Media

I loved this line:

I agreed that it was a geographically and economically diverse crowd, but I mentioned that the protesters were at least 99 percent white — in fact, in my four-plus hours at the event, I’d only seen three African-American protesters.

DeMint had a simple explanation. “It’s probably just the time and organization and the media that promoted it,” he said.

Right, cross-section *wink wink*.

The guy selling little flags and raking in dough was black.

You have some PROBLEM with BLACK entrepreneurial CAPITALISTS making a living?

Do you think flag sellers should all be white?

You think BLACK people should not be allowed to sell to whites?

You think white people should ONLY buy from other white people?
 
And psst: I might add Xenophon, from the looks of it, and by reports from ABC News, Wall Street Journal, and even Fox News, it appears media Matters was right, again.

they are just spouting their orders,,errrr talking points..
Fox News and Wall Street Journal :eek: are in on the Media Bias too now.

:rofl:

You guys must be smoking some phunny sheeeet.

you must be robertos dung bettle nice tomeetcha,, media matters is the party to whom I was referring. :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top