This is their crowd:
Posted on 09/25/2005 12:12:33 PM PDT by Simmy2.5
(09-25) 11:49 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --
Support for U.S. troops fighting abroad mixed with anger toward anti-war demonstrators at home as hundreds of people, far fewer than organizers had expected, rallied Sunday on the National Mall just a day after a massive protest against the war in Iraq.
"No matter what your ideals are, our sons and daughters are fighting for our freedom," said Marilyn Faatz, who drove from New Jersey to attend the rally. "We are making a mockery out of this. And we need to stand united, but we are not."
About 400 people gathered near a stage on an eastern segment of the mall, a large photo of an American flag serving as a backdrop. Amid banners and signs proclaiming support for U.S. troops, several speakers hailed the effort to bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan and denounced those who protest it.
Many demonstrators focused their ire at Cindy Sheehan, the California woman whose protest near President Bush's Texas home last summer galvanized the anti-war movement. Sheehan was among the speakers at Saturday's rally near the Washington Monument on the western part of the mall, an event that attracted an estimated 100,000 people.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Pro-War And Anti-Sheehan
you beat me to it...
400 people was more than expected huh?
Galvanized WHAT anti-war movement? The only 'movement' I've see is Camp Casey and that weak protest in DC yesterday. The only thing driving it is the MSM, who desperately wants to do ANYTHING it can to minimize President Bush's effectiveness in anything he wants to do.
anger????
Funny they didn't say anything about anger when the anti-war protesters were spewing their hate.
Do you know how many people made the Anti-American hate rally yesterday?
How big is the counter-protest by the good guys?
Yesterday vs. today.
What really matters is the quality of the people who show up for an event -- as well as how well the event is presented. It's a first rate operation, with very thoughtful and articulate speakers. There wasn't a one worth listening to or being on the same platform with in yesterday's rant/yellfest. Besides the number of people actually showing up, they're doing a television production that is effectively reaching a broader audience -- which is just as important.
Before the age of television, the actual numbers attending an event might have been relevant but if one has to ability to attend a faithful rendering of the event, it's obvious to even casual observers of the differences in the quality of both participations and presentations. These people are doing honor and justice to those they are honoring -- while yesterday's rabble, do dishonor for all those associated with such embarrassments.
What's disturbing is the media's attempt to mislead. They quote that the organizers' grossly exaggerated estimates for crowd size yesterday as 100,000 and then corroborate by adding the officials don't provide their own independent estimates-- but then provide their own precise observation that the crowd at today's pro-rally is 100. Why not the organizer's estimate of what the crowd is now? And then when writing of yesterday's participation, use subjective terms like "massive," "vast," "sea," while referring to today's, note "smaller," "sparse," "sober," and "circumspect," as their loaded terms.
But who really takes the "media" seriously anymore -- but the most gullible, and I think even they are onto them? Even the poor and homeless can be heard to think, "Here comes those assholes again."
Pro-war Rally: "About 400 people gathered"
Anti-war Rally: "an event that attracted an estimated 100,000 people"
Somebody forgot to divide by 100 when reporting the number of treasonous people in DC yesterday.
"far fewer than organizers had expected..."
The mass media is only about quantity -- and really, the significance of anything, is the quality.
That's what is so striking about today's freerepublic event and yesterday's example of how badly one can run a rally. Even the sound system seems like the difference between today's state of the art microphony and yelling on bullhorns. Yesterday's speeches were like people yelling on bullhorns -- instead of speaking civilly with those they respected. Their whole manner of relating to one another was as though they were idiots -- as anybody there in their company would have to be. That's quite in contrast to today's respectful tones and regard for one another.
But can the media report on those significant differences? They're so used to being yelled at disrespectfully and contemptuously that they don't realize people can, and do speak civilly and respectfully to one another.
Most rational people who support the military and its mission have jobs to go to and families to care for. Rent-a-mobs, on the other hand, can be ginned up overnight to protest anything a conservative administration does with a single check from George Soros.
Yes, the MSM will distort the whole beautiful happening, but I truly believe most Americans are disgusted with our media. Witness the latest firings at the New York Slimes, etc.
And it isn't all MSM bias. I saw the thousands in Chicago and S.F. marching against the war, dwarfing our patriotic counter-protests. They are exercising their rights, and there is no excuse for us not having crowds that dwarf theirs.
Maybe our side feels complacent, now that we have Congress and the WH. But nothing stays the same, and we can take nothing for granted. Demonizing Cindy Sheehan is only giving her free publicity - like it or not, it is very difficult with the general, politically apathetic public to trump a grieving mother on the PR front. She is kept alive partly because we keep carping on her.
We need to be staging massive rallies of our own - and NOT just in response to THEIRS. Certainly we can get half a million people to Washington D.C. before the holiday season.
Bingo! Soros
The joke about the mass media crowd is that they are so quantity-oriented rather than quality-oriented, that as soon as the union gets them their raises for doing less work, they immediately go and eat two loaves of white bread for breakfast instead of one, to consolidate their new affluence.
Which editor hard at work is this?
RE: photo in post #17
What is that pink think protruding from below her skirt?Could that be her stomach and belly button? Is she giving birth?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.