Buffalo News lies about size of DC protest

[buffknut]

In today's Snooze, they report that 100,000 attended the moonbat Cindy Sheehan anti-Bush protest in DC. Their source - the el-AP and International ANSWER.

The problem is, they didn't get close to 100,000 as shown by numerous photos at the site. See www.littlegreenfootballs for some actual photos compiled by many photographers that were actually there.

The News once again shows that:
1. It hates the US
2. It has a vendetta against Bush
3. It has no reporters who actually know how to do any research
4. It does not care about the truth
5. It is old media and is no longer relevant

[speaker]

Originally posted by buffknut
In today's Snooze, they report that 100,000 attended the moonbat Cindy Sheehan anti-Bush protest in DC. Their source - the el-AP and International ANSWER.

The problem is, they didn't get close to 100,000 as shown by numerous photos at the site. See www.littlegreenfootballs for some actual photos compiled by many photographers that were actually there.

The News once again shows that:
1. It hates the US
2. It has a vendetta against Bush
3. It has no reporters who actually know how to do any research
4. It does not care about the truth
5. It is old media and is no longer relevant

buffknut--what a bunch of baloney:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9463993/

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/25/politics/25protest.html?hp&ex=1127707200&en=39b41a1b5721a762&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[therising]

Originally posted by buffknut
In today's Snooze, they report that 100,000 attended the moonbat Cindy Sheehan anti-Bush protest in DC. Their source - the el-AP and International ANSWER.

The problem is, they didn't get close to 100,000 as shown by numerous photos at the site. See www.littlegreenfootballs for some actual photos compiled by many photographers that were actually there.

The News once again shows that:
1. It hates the US
2. It has a vendetta against Bush
3. It has no reporters who actually know how to do any research
4. It does not care about the truth
5. It is old media and is no longer relevant

:rolleyes:

[steven]

ROFLMAO

Are you serious?

[buffknut]

speaker,

the photos you referenced just confirm I'm correct. If the crowds were so big, why not show the CROWD?

Simple, there is none.

Estimates of 5-10,000 are more credible.

But use MSNBC and the NY Slime as your source. They are just as bad as the Snooze. And my 5 points about the Snooze apply equally to those other dinosaur publications.

steven, your comment shows your great intellect that I've come to expect. No I wasn't serious, I make all this up because I really do believe everything the Snooze, NYSlime, el-AP, el-Reuters, Michael Moore, Jane Fonda, Mama Sheehan, Sean Penn and all the others of that genre say and that you obviously respect so much.

The same media that claimed 10,000 lives lost in New Orleans. Guess they counted well there, didn't they?

How many times do the MSM have to be wrong before you guys see it? How many lies do they have to publish before you get it?

Forget it, I know the answer.

Here's one number that you can count on being accurate. George Bush will be in office 3 more years!!!!!!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA (I got that from the lgf dictionary)

[therising]

But use MSNBC and the NY Slime as your source. They are just as bad as the Snooze. And my 5 points about the Snooze apply equally to those other dinosaur publications.

MSN said the Yankees won last night, but I'm not so sure.

Maybe I better go check Little Green Footballs, they'll tell the truth.

[steven]

www.littlegreenfootballs
The page cannot be displayed

Sorry Bud but if your getting your daily news from a site called little green footballs................

Michael Moore, Jane Fonda, Mama Sheehan, Sean Penn and all the others of that genre say and that you obviously respect so much.

Whatever gave you the assumption I respect any of the names you just mentioned? Aren't Sean Penn and Jane Fonda Actors? Why would it occur to you that I would have some kind of respect for an actor?

Michael Moore? , sorry to disappoint you bud, never even saw his documentary.

And who or what is mamam sheehan?

[buffknut]

Sorry steven, I forgot the .com It should have read www.littlegreenfootballs.com Sorry you couldn't figure that out.

What makes you think that the NYTimes etal are any more credible than lgf? That is just your opinion that they are but it certainly cannot be supported by any facts. Remember Jason Blair? Guess that proves their credibility. And the same is true for all the rest of the MSM. They have lost their credibility and relevance. But you can continue to read them all you want. I'll take my news from the internet, not just lgf, but also:
www.polipundit.com
www.powerlineblog.com
www.instapundit.com

And many many fine others internet news sources.

Powerline also provides a news service.

Mama Sheehan = Cindy Sheehan. You really need to find some diversified news sources.

And those actors have become the prime spokespeople for your beloved Dhimmicratic party (look up Dhimmi if you don't know what it means - hint - you won't find it via the MSM).

And the fact they got the Yankees win right just shows even a dinosaur can get something right.

I'm in a gnarly mood after watching Losman & our 3rd down defense at the game yesterday. Grrrr.

[speaker]

I looked at LGF blogsite. What's that? Photos taken at...dawn? And that's supposed to be an example of the "attendance" at the protest?
Really, buffknut, you have to be kidding! :D

[steven]

buffknut

You get your news from some guys blogging spot? I like reading Buffalopundit but I wouldn't site him as a news source nor do I agree with everything he says.

As for the rest of your misguided comments when did I ever say I respected Cindy Sheehan? I said I felt sorry for her, I didn't say I respected her, thought she was great, or any other such nonsense you are trying to imply. As a former soldier who has been both a CAO and done the ceremony at funerals for soldiers KIA I can sympathize with the pain she is feeling having lost her son.

And those actors have become the prime spokespeople for your beloved Dhimmicratic party (look up Dhimmi if you don't know what it means - hint - you won't find it via the MSM).

You are making the assumption that I must be a democrat because I dislike Bush. How silly and single minded of you. I said it before and I will say it again its you people with the "for me or against me" attitude that are taking this country down. You are also making the assumption that I would believe someone because they are famous (IE actor sports figure etc) How silly again. I think people that idolize and put stock in what someone says because they are famous are dumb. FYI I didn't even now Sean Penn was politically active and could care less if he was. Being an actor doesn't give him anymore insight on politics that anyone else. Wasn't Jane Fonda's thing Vietnam? That was a little while before I become politically active so again you have struck out on that perceived insult.

Following the political advice of an actor makes as much sense to me as getting your daily news from some blog.

[buffknut]

speaker,

you are irrelevant to me so I really don't care what you think.

steven,

so, are you a democrat? just curious.

By the way, I'm not the only person who relies more on blogs and the internet for the news. There are many others out there who do not rely on the MSM for the news. The MSM credibility is zero and I'll take lgf over the NYSlime or Buffalo Snooze anyday.

The MSM credo is "fake, but accurate".

But go ahead, continue to rely on the dinosaur MSM. I've moved on.

[speaker]

Originally posted by buffknut
[B]speaker,

you are irrelevant to me so I really don't care what you think.



eiewww! that really hurt!

[WestSideJohn]

The attendance at the Bills game was overstated as well. I was out at the Ralph at dawn, and there were only about a dozen people there, but the MSM reported game attendence was many tens of thousands of people.

Dinosaurs!

[speaker]

;)

[crlachepinochet]

Originally posted by buffknut
And those actors have become the prime spokespeople for your beloved Dhimmicratic party (look up Dhimmi if you don't know what it means - hint - you won't find it via the MSM).

You don't trust the MSM worth a lick, but you read all the blogs faithfully? Those blogs are pretty popular, which would make them MSMB; does that make them untrustworthy? Your thought process is either really stupid or really far beyond me. I think it would take a long time to figure it out either way.

But what do you mean by the Dhimmicratic party? Are the Democrats now run by Muslims instead of Jews? What is going on?

[buffknut]

cr,

I don't really care if you think I'm stupid or far out or whatever you want. But don't waste your time trying to figure anything out. Just read your MSM and they'll tell you what to think anyway.

Westie,

Wow, it took awhile to be on a thread with you again. I was at the Ralph yesterday but can only attest to my being there. It's quite possible the rest of the stands were filled with psychedelic images. One things for sure; our defense sure as hell wasn't there on 3rd downs.

[WestSideJohn]

Good, so you were there at the Ralph and saw for yourself that there were many tens of thousands of people in attendance. Now perhaps you understand how circumstances can change over the course of a few hours. At dawn there might be only a handful of people at, say, a football stadium in Orchard Park or a war protest in Washington D.C., and just a few hours later there can be many <i>many</i> thousands more.

[WNYresident]

But are there any pictures of the crowd in mass formation?

[buffknut]

westie,

As WNY asks, and as I mentioned earlier, just show me the pictures of the 100,000. Then I'll eat my hat (actually I'll drink a beer).

That's all, show me.

Show me.

Why won't they show the massive crowd?

What are they hiding?

100,000. There should be lots of porta-potties for such a large crowd.

You can prove me wrong so easily. So easily.

\birds chirping

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by buffknut
westie, you can prove me wrong so easily. So easily. \birds chirping Nuttie, I have no interest in proving anyone wrong. I wasn't there, so I can't say whether there were 1,000 or 1,000,000 people there.

I've heard several accounts of attendance, ranging from your claim of 5,000 - 10,000 to a blogger who was there and claimed 500,000. To me, the most trustworthy comment comes from the DC Chief of Police who stated protest organizers probably reached their goal of 100,000. Building in a margin of error, I'd say 80,000-120,000 seems believable based on his comment.

As for pictures, I haven't seen any. For some reason they don't really show crowd pictures of any DC event these days, regardless of political ideology. For example, there were no crowd shots of the September 11 Freedom Walk, either. Maybe it's a security thing. I have no idea.

[steven]

Originally posted by buffknut
steven,
so, are you a democrat? just curious.
.

I consider myself an independent. Since I was in the army for 20 yrs I have not voted often enough in local elections but I have made it a point to vote in every presidential election.

The people I have voted for:

-Carter (dem)-self serving vote I must admit because he gave us military folks a huge raise (my pay jumped to a whooping $500 a month, this was the largest pay raise percentage wise every given to US Service members).

-Reagan (repub) The First Time because he seemed pro military but not the second because he kept me deployed all the f-ing time

-Anderson (repub- running on the independent line because they would not allow him to debate). CNN had him in a room by himself answering to the questions posed to Reagan and whoever he was running against and Anderson had a great one line zinger and despite popular belief he was the one that coined the phrase "Voodoo economics"

- Neither Bush Nor Michael Dukakis excited me so I honestly don't remember who I voted for in this election. I believe I was deployed and did not vote.

- Clinton (dem) The first Time around after all it was indeed ,"the economy stupid"

- Patrick J. Buchanan ( a real conservative) because he saw all the problems with nafta and "free trade". If you pay your workers 30 dollars a week and I have to pay mine 15 an hour its not Free (nor fair) Trade as far as I am concerned.

- Gore (a dem) Like most Americans I voted for Gore. I dislike Bush intensely (he smirks when talking to a crowd) and have never liked him. When He lost the popular vote I thought the honorable thing for him to do was concede to the will of the majority of people and hand the election over. What he did was in my mind the equivalent of forcing an arranged marriage on some poor girl that doesn't want you just because her father is making her do it.

- The last election was terrible I liked neither candidate, Bush I hate and What's His name was to wishy washy for me.

Looking back I see 3 dems and 3 repubs.

* I believe a woman has a right to an abortion if she so chooses and men shouldn't even be involved in the debate unless they are going to start giving birth.

* I believe parents should be able to send there kids to whatever school they choose A'la vouchers and if the public school system falls apart because of it, then tuff noogies.

* I believe the liberation of Kuwait was a noble cause, But we should have finished the mission then and we wouldn't be in the shape we are in now. Of course hind sight is 20/20 and daddy Bush couldnt have known that

* I believe the current occupation/peace keeping mission is a farce that is draining our money and killing our standing on the world community.

* I believe in the death penalty.

* I believe if I want to open a bar and let people do something legal (smoke) in my establishment its my business and if you don't like it you don't have to come in.


You tell me, am I am a dem or a republican?

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by steven
You tell me, am I am a dem or a republican? I vote 60/40 Democrat to Republican but that's not good enough for the folks that vote the party line on either side of the aisle. These partisan types do a lot of damage, because they put the interests of their own party ahead of the interests of the country.

Anyone who has ever said "I'd never vote for a _______" is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[buffknut]

Westie,

I'll vote for Democrats as soon as they can demonstrate they have the maturity and capability to lead, govern, and manage. That's not to say the Republicans are great because I certainly believe the Repub party has its share of bad politicians, such as Pataki (who I used to like).

But no one has ever been able to respond to my posts in previous threads where I asked for evidence that the Dems have actually accomplished anything. What exactly have they done here in Buffalo and EC that you can honestly say has improved the economic and political climate of this area?

On a national level, the Dems have moved so far left that they are no longer a viable party and the proof is they continue to have fewer seats in Congress, the Senate, and State governorships.

The Dem party has gotten lost.

So call me part of the problem if you want, but until the Dems can offer solutions instead of constant whining, then I don't consider myself part of the problem.

steven, it doesn't matter to me what party you are part of or not part of.

Somehow we are moving off-topic. I still maintain that the Snooze is a biased, poorly managed rag that does not report news accurately but takes the word instead of el-Ap and other services that are obviously biased. Fact-checking is no longer done at the Snooze. I challenge them to fact-check the wire reports and print pictures that show the enormity of a 100,000 person crowd (and the porta-potties that should be evident).

Lots of people have complained for years how Buffalo is a one newspaper town. Well, now you don't need to complain because there are alternative news sources that actually report news and fact-check. The Snooze can now be held ACCOUNTABLE for its bad reporting and any lies. We should all be celebrating that fact.

You can diss me all you want, but tell me, do you trust and believe the Buffalo News or not? Do you believe they are unbiased, fair, and credible?

I want to know.

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by buffknut
Westie, I'll vote for Democrats as soon as they can...Nuttie, I couldn't care less who you vote for. That's your business. But when people like you say "I'll never vote for a Democrat (as you did in your Newsweek Lied thread) you don't exactly come off as reliably objective.

Originally posted by buffknut
You can diss me all you want, but tell me, do you trust and believe the Buffalo News or not? Do you believe they are unbiased, fair, and credible?I want to know. I don't read the Buffalo News, so I can't speak for their bias. I doubt they tell outright lies, but then who knows.

People on both sides gain by fudging the numbers. The folks who organized this protest want the crowd to be reported as large as possible. Pro-war folks like you want that number to be as small as possible.

I've seen crowd estimates ranging from your claim of 5,000 - 10,000 to a ridiculously high 500,000. The person who strikes me as the most reliable is the DC Chief of Police who said the goal of 100,000 was probably met.

[steven]

Originally posted by buffknut
You can diss me all you want, but tell me, do you trust and believe the Buffalo News or not? Do you believe they are unbiased, fair, and credible?

I want to know.

I wasn't trying to diss you.

I don't think a lot of articles are totally unbiased. The people that write the articles bring all there baggage with them when they write them. So its to be expected.

See the interesting opposing articles from the ap during the NO debacle: one captioned "man loots store" The next "residents find food" of course "man loots store" was a dark skinned man and "resident finds food" was a Caucasian.

That said, its kinda hard in my mind at least for you to fault the news for running an ap article since that is the common practice of every other major news outlet in the country.

Totally unbiased? No. But I would trust what I read in the news before I believed what some guy just like me could have pounded out on his computer while sitting in his den in his underwear at 2 am in the morning scratching his butt. At least I know who the news people are and where they come from. A blogger could be anyone pushing any agenda.


Originally posted by buffknut
steven, it doesn't matter to me what party you are part of or not part of.

Then why did you ask?

[buffknut]

steven, Because I was curious, but it really doesn't matter. I'll leave it at that.

Westie, I'll still never vote for a Dem until they do as I mentioned. And since I don't expect the Dems to change, I guess i won't be voting for one anytime soon. BTW, did ya go back to view all 150+ previous posts of mine or do you have a photographic memory?

I'm still waiting for the crowd shots. With 100,000, it should be easy to have a pic of such a huge crowd. I mean, that's more than at the Bills game so visually it had to be huge. And who had the porta potty contract?

The points I made in the opening salvo of this thread remain valid. I challenge anyone to dispute my 5 points.

And steven, news REPORTERS are supposed to REPORT the news, not bring their biases. Let them write opinion pieces if they want to tell us what they think.

The Buffalo News is a schlock organization. By the way, in the interest of full disclosure (yawn) I subscribe to the Sat/Sun/Mon editions. Hey, we need the food ads!

[steven]

Originally posted by buffknut
steven, Because I was curious, but it really doesn't matter. I'll leave it at that.

My feeling is you didn't like my answer because you cannot conveniently place me in one column or another.

[therising]

Buffknut - Where does Wikipedia fall on your conspiracy plane?
They said 150,000 - 200,000 people were there. They even have a picture. At least, they claim it's a picture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Sheehan#Washington_D.C._rally



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d9/Washington-demo.jpg/240px-Washington-demo.jpg

[WestSideJohn]

Did the Buffalo News have a correspondent in Washington who reported on the crowd size or did they pick up the story from the wire services?

If it was the latter, then I guess the Buffalo News didn't lie, they just got "faulty intelligence" which as we all know can happen to anyone... even Republicans.

[moonshine]

A friend of mine just posted her pics of the demonstration. I'll vouch that none were modified to increase or decrease the appearance of the crowd...

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/madmadamim2000/album?.dir=4600&.src=ph

[buffknut]

Neither the wikipedia or yahoo pictures show crowds of 100,000. Our tailgate party Sunday at the football game was bigger (ok, I'm kidding - but the food & beer was better).

The wikipedia photo is of maybe 5,000 or so, but not 100,000.

Look, I don't know what the real number was. I wasn't there. But I'm not the Snooze & the wire services should be held to account for the numbers and information they publish. If the Snooze takes the AP as gospel, despite evidence to the contray, the the Snooze is guilty as charged. And westie, i know you'll just say something like "well, what about Bush" but save it. You hate Bush so you'll believe anything anyone says that is even remotely anti-Bush no matter what the truth is.

You guys that support the Snooze amuse me. But I'll continue to maintain that the Snooze is old media; a dinosaur. The new media is better, faster, more reliable, and more interesting. Even this site is infinitely better than the Snooze, despite its' liberal Democrat slant. You can't get this kind of interaction via the Snooze, can you?

steven, you are right, I can't place you in one column. Congrats.

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by buffknut
And westie, i know you'll just say something like "well, what about Bush" but save it. You hate Bush so you'll believe anything anyone says that is even remotely anti-Bush no matter what the truth is.That's simply not true. I don't hate Bush at all, though I disagree with many of his policies. <i>Big</i> difference.

Nuttie, it's strange to me how you start threads accusing the Buffalo News or Newsweek of lying, yet don't hesitate to post outright lies yourself.

Oh and one more thing... the photo of the event posted on little green footballs was <i>cropped</i>, showing only the ellipse and not the march, so of course the crowd looks smaller. Have you seen the full-sized photo? It tells a much different story. Take a moment and ask yourself: why would little green footballs, the site you constantly tout as a reliable information source, crop the picture?

You're a liar, Nuttie.

[speaker]

Originally posted by buffknut
Neither the wikipedia or yahoo pictures show crowds of 100,000. Our tailgate party Sunday at the football game was bigger (ok, I'm kidding - but the food & beer was better).

The wikipedia photo is of maybe 5,000 or so, but not 100,000.

Look, I don't know what the real number was. I wasn't there. But I'm not the Snooze & the wire services should be held to account for the numbers and information they publish. If the Snooze takes the AP as gospel, despite evidence to the contray, the the Snooze is guilty as charged. And westie, i know you'll just say something like "well, what about Bush" but save it. You hate Bush so you'll believe anything anyone says that is even remotely anti-Bush no matter what the truth is.

You guys that support the Snooze amuse me. But I'll continue to maintain that the Snooze is old media; a dinosaur. The new media is better, faster, more reliable, and more interesting. Even this site is infinitely better than the Snooze, despite its' liberal Democrat slant. You can't get this kind of interaction via the Snooze, can you?

steven, you are right, I can't place you in one column. Congrats.

I'd believe the Chief of Police of Washington before I would believe the far right websites and bloggers who don't want to believe, and don't want anyone else to believe, that so many people feel this anger for the war, deaths, bankrupting that Bush has brought on America.
And this despite the disapproval rating of Bush is about 70%. I think the protest just coincides with other issues. And is believable.

[buffknut]

westie,

you're naive.

Give me an example of one of Bush's policies you agree with.

I'll take www.littlegreenfootballs.com over the Snooze any day of the week.

You may continue calling me names if you like, but if you really think I'm a liar, then just ignore me.

I'm gonna get me one of these (I saw the link at lgf, that far right-wing site):

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8069

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by buffknut
westie, you're naive. Give me an example of one of Bush's policies you agree with.
Heck, I'll give you more than one.
1. The war on terror (Afghanistan/al Qaeda, <i>not</i> Iraq)
2. Tax cuts (I'd be even happier with spending cuts, but Congress gets the blame for that)
3. Stem cell research
4. His fidelity to his wife

I respect President Bush's Christian faith and morals even if I don't happen to share them 100%.


I'll take www.littlegreenfootballs.com over the Snooze any day of the week.So why did LGF crop the photo, Nuttie?

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by buffknut
speaker,

you are irrelevant to me so I really don't care what you think.

steven,

so, are you a democrat? just curious.

By the way, I'm not the only person who relies more on blogs and the internet for the news. There are many others out there who do not rely on the MSM for the news. The MSM credibility is zero and I'll take lgf over the NYSlime or Buffalo Snooze anyday.

The MSM credo is "fake, but accurate".

But go ahead, continue to rely on the dinosaur MSM. I've moved on.

Hate to say it Buffknut, but you are a perfect illustration of all that is wrong with getting news from Internet blog sites.

I've looked at the sites you've recommended. The news in them is culled from MSM, as you call it, but then put into an opinionated context.

The only so-called "news sources" you deem credible are the blug sites you agree with.

That's not being informed.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by buffknut
steven, Because I was curious, but it really doesn't matter. I'll leave it at that.

Westie, I'll still never vote for a Dem until they do as I mentioned. And since I don't expect the Dems to change, I guess i won't be voting for one anytime soon. BTW, did ya go back to view all 150+ previous posts of mine or do you have a photographic memory?

I'm still waiting for the crowd shots. With 100,000, it should be easy to have a pic of such a huge crowd. I mean, that's more than at the Bills game so visually it had to be huge. And who had the porta potty contract?

The points I made in the opening salvo of this thread remain valid. I challenge anyone to dispute my 5 points.

And steven, news REPORTERS are supposed to REPORT the news, not bring their biases. Let them write opinion pieces if they want to tell us what they think.

The Buffalo News is a schlock organization. By the way, in the interest of full disclosure (yawn) I subscribe to the Sat/Sun/Mon editions. Hey, we need the food ads!

Can you post some specific articles that your regard as biased etc.? I hear that claim about The News all the time, as well as other publications. But I never hear any specifics.

BTW: Sunday's News is my favorite. I love the coupons! Also Dave Barry.

[speaker]

buffnut, I honestly don't care what you think,either, so it's totally mutual. The point is, I do think, which is more than what you do. LGF should just put it all in liquid form and then you could just pour it in your ear every night.
Sounds like you have NEVER moved on and I like progressive thinkers.
Sounds like this whole protest thing really has you bothered. You keep coming back to it.
The question that we really should think about is, just exactly your question. Where are the pictures and why was the protest hushed up and by WHOM? Like a lot of other stuff.

[speaker]

I guess if "friendly" news can be bought, the same goes for "unfriendly"

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/01/politics/01educ.html?hp&ex=1128225600&en=ed2345e1f9cc06db&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[therising]

Buffnut - it seems that you want to see a picture where you can actualy count 100,000 people. That's not gonna happen.

I suppose you think the 2,800 people didn't reallly die at the World Trade Center either, because you've never seen photos of 2,800 corpses.

In this day of PhotoShop, if you rely on photographs for verification of facts, then you're really setting yourself up to be fooled.

Look, here: A picture of the Great Chicago Flood - Was this on Little Green Footballs:

http://static.flickr.com/26/47403857_8f71c7047e_m.jpg

And how come this story about singing Cat People never made the Snooze:
http://static.flickr.com/28/48128072_392e7e3dac_m.jpg

[speaker]

lol :D

rising, where do you gettem?
I know,OFF TOPIC:o