C-Span Will Not Be Covering the Gathering of Eagles

C-Span ^ | 3/16/2007 | armymarinemom

[armymarinemom]

C-Span is not covering the Gathering of Eagles but they are covering the ANSWER rally in spite of time allowance. If you are unhappy about this, as you should be, contact Brain Lamb at C-Span

a href="http://www.c-span.org/about/contact.asp?code=About" target="_blank">C-Span Contact page

[Txsleuth]

Thanks...I am going to call C-span...and I am going to call Fox News...they are the only news network that has live news all day on Saturday...

I am going to suggest that they send people to the Vietnam Memorial.

[Drango]

NPR, however is giving great coverage...to the left.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1801632/posts

[kAcknor]

You're wrong.

I'm right.

[Heavy Fuel]

CSCAM is probably well paid by the left wing scum to ignore the GOE. Depsicable. I emailed and tried calling but offices closed.

[Heavy Fuel]

Ramsey Clark cant possible still be with the DOJ right????

[JarhedAirmanPatriot]

Typical leftist pigs, here is a copy of my email to them

I understand that you are going to be covering the answer rally on Sat the 17th, but not the GATHERING OF EAGLES. So to my understanding you are going to cover people who desacrate the monuments to all of our veterans but you will not cover the men and women who will be protecting the monuments from the communist pigs. I have got to tell you that you are the most bias new agency and might as well be Stallinists. New is supposed to show both sides and the truth not a liberal one sided new story...... you disgust me and yes you have your freedom of speech and press, thanks to the lifes of men and women like myself who serve this country and protect them.......... So you are welcome and thanks for not showing my brothers and sisters in arms protecting the monuments you Facist Pigs.

[NYFreeper]

E-mail sent.

[brityank]

Old Democrats don't die -- they putrify!

WashPost Hypes Pentagon Protest With Ramsey Clark, Leaves Out His Saddam Lawyering

Posted by Tim Graham on March 16, 2007 - 07:43.

The Washington Post's reverence for protests -- the leftist ones, that is -- is clearly on display on the front of Friday's Metro section, with advance publicity for a Saturday "peace" march on the Pentagon starring Ramsey Clark, fresh from his unsuccessful defense lawyering for Saddam Hussein. (That fact is never mentioned in Steve Vogel's article.) On roughly the fourth anniversary of the initial blitz on Baghdad and forty years after the violent "levitate the Pentagon" protests of 1967, the Post splashes photographs down most of the front page of Metro, of 1967 at the top and 2007 at the bottom. The story sprawled out across most of B-3, and included another story by Michael Ruane on Christian "peace witness" at the White House.

NewsBusters ^

[JulieRNR21]

Just sent an email.....BUMP

[Heavy Fuel]

Ive said it before but Ramsey should be charged with treason for defending the enemy...Thanks for the link, sickening as always

[ohioWfan]

That felt good. :)

[ohioWfan]

What is your explanation for the reason that the 'paragon of virtue,' and the object of your worship, C Span, is honoring the traitors tomorrow and ignoring the patriots who are honoring our troops and our veterans, and protecting the war memorials from communists?

Not bias, I know (according to you). But what is it? Just a little mix up?

When the network takes sides against our veterans, I'd think that even you, a C Span apologist extraordinaire, would be a little miffed.

[leadpenny]

Drivel! Slobbering slimy sputum.

It's still on your chin. Get a Kleenex.

Then, when you get a chance, thank your cable or satellite provider, and your lucky stars, for paying $0.06 per month in your name in support of C-SPAN.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

C-Span became irrelevant to me years ago when they changed the open to everyone east coast/west coast phone in lines to Democrat/Republican. It effectively skewed the results and opinions by not effectively representing the majority of those who wished to call.

I agree, I watch far less C-Span now than I did before that change. When I think of it on weekends, I'll tune to see if they have an interesting book author talking.

But Washington Journal is hopeless. The reason is not simply that I think conservative viewers are underrepresented, but that the program features journalists - and "liberals" are simply "objective journalists" who are not employed in journalism.

When the lines were open, callers balanced the "objective" reporter significantly. With conservative calls being screened censored, it's the next thing to Air America.

[Trteamer]

I e-mailed them that I would be contacting my representatives about their funding.

[leadpenny]

C-SPAN's funding is between you, your cable or satellite company, and C-SPAN. The only thing congress has to do with C-SPAN is they decide where the cameras can be placed and aimed in the respective Houses.

[jonrick46]

I heard that there will be an effort by the Gathering of Eagles to protect the Viet Nam War Memorial. They are concerned that Commie protesters want to throw paint on it or somehow deface the Memorial. Anyone hear such information?

[ohioWfan]

So I presume from that answer that you also support cspan's covering Ramsey Clark instead of our veterans and fellow freepers?

(Is it possible to have a rational discussion with you on this subject? Looks like the answer to that is "No.")

[leadpenny]

You wanted a rational discussion? You need to be rational first.

[ohioWfan]

I asked you a rational question and you responded with your typical 13 year old "I think I'm funny. Look at me!" nonsense.

As a veteran, doesn't it bother you that cspan is not covering our patriots who are defending the monuments against marxist hippy anti-American slime, but are covering the slime?

Answer that very rational question rationally, if you are able.