Dissent you can believe in (New York Post)

How do you marginalize a significant protest against a politician or policy you support? Lowball the numbers, then dismiss participants as deranged and possibly dangerous kooks. In the case of Saturday's massive 9/12 protest in Washington, done and done.

"Small protest," popular lefty blogger Josh Marshall reported from his armchair, as an overflow crowd (at least 100,000, by my rough, unscientific estimate) filled the 1.5 miles between the south White House and the US Capitol, spilling out all over the National Mall and even down the street to Union Station.

The Center for American Progress, whose president headed up the new administration's transition team, warned that the rally was marred by signs that "were often racist, radical portrayals of Obama." Among the dozen or so pieces of evidence? A placard claiming, "Ayn Rand is right," and one of President Obama with the caption, "When his lips move . . . he's lying."

If calling the commander-in-chief a liar is the new racism, then Americans have been boiling in hate since long before we, uh, overwhelmingly elected a black president. I seem to recall a "Bush lied" sign or two in the massive (and impressive) protests at the 2004 Republican convention in New York, and then there was that whole "I did not have sex with that woman" thing from the fella before.

What's really going on is not hard to grasp: Even before massive proposed overhauls of health care and energy, the president's first wave of big-government policies -- auto bailouts, Wall Street welfare and just-spend-it economics -- are prompting a passionate pushback.

www.nypost.com...

Nice to see a paper print a good article once in a while.
It's obvious they know the figures reported in the MSM are complete hogwash.

Read my post for a discussion on the real numbers:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The New York times buried the Tea Parties, but played up a much, much smaller pro-Obama rally.

NY Times Buries Massive Conservative D.C. Rally, Hails Smaller Liberal Protests

The print edition wasn't much more forthcoming. Although the Washington D.C. Fire Dept. estimated 60,000 to 70,000 people attended the 9/12 protest, and many estimates are higher, the Times made do with one medium-sized story buried on page A37 of the Sunday paper

The atmosphere was rowdy at times, with signs and images casting Mr. Obama in a demeaning light. One sign called him the "parasite in chief." Others likened him to Hitler. Several people held up preprinted signs saying, "Bury Obama Care with Kennedy," a reference to the Massachusetts senator whose body passed by the Capitol two weeks earlier to be memorialized.

Now look at how they reported the other rally:

Thousands Rally in Minnesota Behind Obama's Call for Health Care Overhaul,

Thousands of roaring supporters turned out Saturday to rally behind President Obama's call to overhaul the nation's health care system, packing a basketball arena here as Mr. Obama warned that nearly half of all Americans under 65 could lose their insurance at some point during the next decade....On a day when demonstrators crammed onto the west lawn of the Capitol to protest what they regard as Mr. Obama's brand of big government, including his health plan, the images of screaming, cheering Obama supporters here provided a welcome visual counterpoint for the White House. The White House estimated that 15,000 people attended the rally here

A few people spoke out about this on the NBC network. I predict smear attacks from the MSM directed at these guys in the near future. Santelli already knows all about it.




[edit on 15-9-2009 by Wimbly]

reply to post by Wimbly


in regards to true crowd size, read my post here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

the MSM ought to be ashamed

Originally posted by warrenb
Nice to see a paper print a good article once in a while.
It's obvious they know the figures reported in the MSM are complete hogwash.

The NY Post IS the MSM! They just happen to be right leaning. NY Post and the NY Times are both MSM. They're just on opposite political "sides".

:shk:

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


It was a generalization.


On topic: so what do you think? Revolution is the answer or what?

I stopped reading the New York Times a few years ago when one of the editorials proposed we created "Smokatoriums" special places smokers could go and smoke without bothering anyone else. It just so happens that this idea comes right out of Judge Dredd, a comic known for social satyr.

These days I don't listen to any established media outlet because they're all skewed, yellow and bought out by big business interests. It's gotten to the point where you can't guarantee an unbiased reporting of an issue even if you read an article on the same story from five separate papers.

People don't realize that controlling the information you receive about a story amounts to controlling what and how you think about the issue. It's simple mind control.

Originally posted by warrenb
Revolution is the answer or what?

Answer to what?

I didn't see a question in the OP. I don't know what your question is.

But Obama's supporters in the media would rather write it off as racism. "Some people just can't believe a black man is president and will never accept it," The New York Times' Maureen Dowd wrote this weekend. Tea Party activists, the LA Times' Tim Rutten theorized Saturday, want to "convert the GOP into an almost exclusively white, zealously religious, mostly Southern party."

It's so sad that the black card is the only reasoning they have. Who paid these people off? They can't honestly believe this crap.

Thanks for bringing this to people's attention warren. It was getting
a little heavy (even here on ATS) on the "protesters are loons" side.
I was thinking that ATSers were above falling for these sorts of
MSM generalizations, maybe not. ah well......nobody's perfect.
We'll just have to keep on tryin'!