Restoring Honor Rally

[Liberty]

so.. how long before the cloned and pasted images are found? So, does the tea party prefer Gimp or Photoshop?


Gimp is the application that Thomas Jefferson would have used, you know.

jefferson would have probably took you behind a building and then shot you in the face, YOU KNOW.

 

[G.T.]

so.. how long before the cloned and pasted images are found? So, does the tea party prefer Gimp or Photoshop?


Gimp is the application that Thomas Jefferson would have used, you know.

jefferson would have probably took you behind a building and then shot you in the face, YOU KNOW.

Sounds like a loose cannon in that case. Murder = prison.

 

[The Infidel]

so.. how long before the cloned and pasted images are found? So, does the tea party prefer Gimp or Photoshop?


Gimp is the application that Thomas Jefferson would have used, you know.

jefferson would have probably took you behind a building and then shot you in the face, YOU KNOW.

Sounds like a loose cannon in that case. Murder = prison.

Not in Ted Kennedy's case ..... it ='d a senate seat.



Just sayin'

 

[G.T.]

jefferson would have probably took you behind a building and then shot you in the face, YOU KNOW.

Sounds like a loose cannon in that case. Murder = prison.

Not in Ted Kennedy's case ..... it ='d a senate seat.



Just sayin'

At worst it was murder, at best it was involuntary manslaughter.

 

[Samson]

Thank GOD this thread has finally gone so far down the shitter than I can unsubscribe.

 

[California Girl]

Glenn Beck rally sparks debate over crowd size - Yahoo! News

CBS commissioned an estimate from AirPhotosLive, a company that provides crowd sizes based on aerial photos. CBS noted that there's a margin of error of plus or minus 9,000. So, by this estimate, there were as few as 78,000 attendees or as many as 96,000.






lol this is the best though: Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann told supporters shortly after the rally that "we're not going to let anyone get away with saying there were less than a million here today — because we were witnesses."

Thing is, they were in the employ of a media company.... and... (and this is quite a big AND).... They don't do an academic count.... I personally prefer an academic view (that'll scare the liberals, I know.... a conservative who actually agrees with scientific methodology).... And the guy I use is a University based expert in crowd estimation. He used to be the guy that the media went to for accurate figures.... but, he is not longer giving official crowd estimates for any event. So, I'll go with his figures. Because he is a non biased observer.... and a liberal.

 

[The Infidel]

thank god this thread has finally gone so far down the shitter than i can unsubscribe.

eject eject eject!!!!!

 

[G.T.]

Glenn Beck rally sparks debate over crowd size - Yahoo! News

CBS commissioned an estimate from AirPhotosLive, a company that provides crowd sizes based on aerial photos. CBS noted that there's a margin of error of plus or minus 9,000. So, by this estimate, there were as few as 78,000 attendees or as many as 96,000.






lol this is the best though: Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann told supporters shortly after the rally that "we're not going to let anyone get away with saying there were less than a million here today — because we were witnesses."

Thing is, they were in the employ of a media company.... and... (and this is quite a big AND).... They don't do an academic count.... I personally prefer an academic view (that'll scare the liberals, I know.... a conservative who actually agrees with scientific methodology).... And the guy I use is a University based expert in crowd estimation. He used to be the guy that the media went to for accurate figures.... but, he is not longer giving official crowd estimates for any event. So, I'll go with his figures. Because he is a non biased observer.... and a liberal.

An employee of a media company means zilch. CBS couldn't approach a professional company and say, at risk of full disclosure and ethics investigations, "please skew the numbers to be less for our reporting." That's a ridiculous assumption, it's too cynical for me.

You wouldn't believe a random poster online citing "someone I know," so why bother ever saying that in the first place if you're not going to name the mother fucker. It's a moot thing to say, nobody's going to just go "humph, she must be telling the truth."


and eta: your "guy" who you claim is much more accurate says 90-110. That's a 20k range, and that's also relatively pretty fucking close to the "CBS employee" you're so skeptical of.

 

[California Girl]

Glenn Beck rally sparks debate over crowd size - Yahoo! News

CBS commissioned an estimate from AirPhotosLive, a company that provides crowd sizes based on aerial photos. CBS noted that there's a margin of error of plus or minus 9,000. So, by this estimate, there were as few as 78,000 attendees or as many as 96,000.






lol this is the best though: Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann told supporters shortly after the rally that "we're not going to let anyone get away with saying there were less than a million here today — because we were witnesses."

Thing is, they were in the employ of a media company.... and... (and this is quite a big AND).... They don't do an academic count.... I personally prefer an academic view (that'll scare the liberals, I know.... a conservative who actually agrees with scientific methodology).... And the guy I use is a University based expert in crowd estimation. He used to be the guy that the media went to for accurate figures.... but, he is not longer giving official crowd estimates for any event. So, I'll go with his figures. Because he is a non biased observer.... and a liberal.

An employee of a media company means zilch. CBS couldn't approach a professional company and say, at risk of full disclosure and ethics investigations, "please skew the numbers to be less for our reporting." That's a ridiculous assumption, it's too cynical for me.

You wouldn't believe a random poster online citing "someone I know," so why bother ever saying that in the first place if you're not going to name the mother fucker. It's a moot thing to say, nobody's going to just go "humph, she must be telling the truth."


and eta: your "guy" who you claim is much more accurate says 90-110. That's a 20k range, and that's also relatively pretty fucking close to the "CBS employee" you're so skeptical of.

I have always said I use my own sources. I also always tell people they are free to accept or not.... It means nothing to me.... You clearly focused on the small issue and ignored the big one.... That of the methodology.... Is that because you can't square that one away quite so easily or did you just ignore it? The methodology is the absolutely vital thing. Without knowing that, how can anyone put any faith in the information provided? You might - I certainly wouldn't.

 

[G.T.]

Thing is, they were in the employ of a media company.... and... (and this is quite a big AND).... They don't do an academic count.... I personally prefer an academic view (that'll scare the liberals, I know.... a conservative who actually agrees with scientific methodology).... And the guy I use is a University based expert in crowd estimation. He used to be the guy that the media went to for accurate figures.... but, he is not longer giving official crowd estimates for any event. So, I'll go with his figures. Because he is a non biased observer.... and a liberal.

An employee of a media company means zilch. CBS couldn't approach a professional company and say, at risk of full disclosure and ethics investigations, "please skew the numbers to be less for our reporting." That's a ridiculous assumption, it's too cynical for me.

You wouldn't believe a random poster online citing "someone I know," so why bother ever saying that in the first place if you're not going to name the mother fucker. It's a moot thing to say, nobody's going to just go "humph, she must be telling the truth."


and eta: your "guy" who you claim is much more accurate says 90-110. That's a 20k range, and that's also relatively pretty fucking close to the "CBS employee" you're so skeptical of.

I have always said I use my own sources. I also always tell people they are free to accept or not.... It means nothing to me.... You clearly focused on the small issue and ignored the big one.... That of the methodology.... Is that because you can't square that one away quite so easily or did you just ignore it? The methodology is the absolutely vital thing. Without knowing that, how can anyone put any faith in the information provided? You might - I certainly wouldn't.

I'll field that by telling you that if your guy says 90-110K, then his methodology is horrendous. His "range" is give or take 18% of his high-estimate.......................in other words, a 20K cushion when he "thinks" you're talking roughly 100K people is uh.....pretty "lenient" in judging his "accuracy."

 

[saveliberty]

It is safe to report it was at least 30 times bigger than Sharpton's rally. With 4% of Beck's gathering being black, it would mean more black folk showed up to Beck's rally. Where are the liberal reports of riots at Beck's?

 

[G.T.]

It is safe to report it was at least 30 times bigger than Sharpton's rally. With 4% of Beck's gathering being black, it would mean more black folk showed up to Beck's rally. Where are the liberal reports of riots at Beck's?

Difference is, who the fuck is defending Al Sharpton? That's in your head.....whereas, Beck's doing fine with "defenders."

I don't care if he had 4K people there. It's still lame/sad to me. Having 100+K is just horrific. I might actually start my own madame cleo service. You can get really rich from gullible peoplez

 

[Liberty]

beck doesnt need defenders...just those who already know the obvious to point it out. it doesnt take a stretch by any means.

 

[California Girl]

An employee of a media company means zilch. CBS couldn't approach a professional company and say, at risk of full disclosure and ethics investigations, "please skew the numbers to be less for our reporting." That's a ridiculous assumption, it's too cynical for me.

You wouldn't believe a random poster online citing "someone I know," so why bother ever saying that in the first place if you're not going to name the mother fucker. It's a moot thing to say, nobody's going to just go "humph, she must be telling the truth."


and eta: your "guy" who you claim is much more accurate says 90-110. That's a 20k range, and that's also relatively pretty fucking close to the "CBS employee" you're so skeptical of.

I have always said I use my own sources. I also always tell people they are free to accept or not.... It means nothing to me.... You clearly focused on the small issue and ignored the big one.... That of the methodology.... Is that because you can't square that one away quite so easily or did you just ignore it? The methodology is the absolutely vital thing. Without knowing that, how can anyone put any faith in the information provided? You might - I certainly wouldn't.

I'll field that by telling you that if your guy says 90-110K, then his methodology is horrendous. His "range" is give or take 18% of his high-estimate.......................in other words, a 20K cushion when he "thinks" you're talking roughly 100K people is uh.....pretty "lenient" in judging his "accuracy."

The reason why it's so large is because he doesn't have images for the whole time that the rally took place. That's why. See, you only had to ask.... He gave me his opinion on an accurate figure - but it is his opinion.... not a fact. He said, in his opinion, the crowd - at its peak was '120,000 - give or take 6,000' either way.... But, like all academics - he is obsessional about having ALL the images before he would commit to a stated figure.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Honor been restored yet?

Wow Mr. clean you really know how to bring it.

Do you have issue with one of the messages one of the speakers have said at the rally?

Or do you have absolutely nothing to make the rally look bad so resort to some silly comment like above?

Why is it a "silly comment?"

Implied in the name of the rally is that our present government (society?) is dishonerable.

I assume this is because we spend more than we make, and don't, or cannot realistically repay, our debt without extending it beyond our own generation (or even further into the future).
Furthermore, I assume the main objective of the rally will be to "Restore" reponsibility to government spending so that it is somewhere within, or even NEAR, a budgeted income.

Why is it a silly comment....for these reasons

 

[Liberty]

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Since Lonesome Rhodes Beck swears this is not political, who does he blame for the loss of honor he claims to want to restore?

Whatever happened to Beck claiming 9.12 as his day for rallying patriots? Why move it to THIS day?

He is still having a 9/12 rally. He didn't move it at all.

 

[G.T.]

I have always said I use my own sources. I also always tell people they are free to accept or not.... It means nothing to me.... You clearly focused on the small issue and ignored the big one.... That of the methodology.... Is that because you can't square that one away quite so easily or did you just ignore it? The methodology is the absolutely vital thing. Without knowing that, how can anyone put any faith in the information provided? You might - I certainly wouldn't.

I'll field that by telling you that if your guy says 90-110K, then his methodology is horrendous. His "range" is give or take 18% of his high-estimate.......................in other words, a 20K cushion when he "thinks" you're talking roughly 100K people is uh.....pretty "lenient" in judging his "accuracy."

The reason why it's so large is because he doesn't have images for the whole time that the rally took place. That's why. See, you only had to ask.... He gave me his opinion on an accurate figure - but it is his opinion.... not a fact. He said, in his opinion, the crowd - at its peak was '120,000 - give or take 6,000' either way.... But, like all academics - he is obsessional about having ALL the images before he would commit to a stated figure.

Let's compare the methodologies. I'm hoping to see where it is, exactly, you found fault in the 3rd party vendor of CBS's. What exactly do you take issue with, specifically, regarding their methodology and what does he do differently, specifically?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Has this turned into a "size" argument instead of a "how it was used" argument?

 

[G.T.]

Has this turned into a "size" argument instead of a "how it was used" argument?

I think Michelle Bachman is a useful tool.