April 15th Tea Party

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

She was obviously being confrontational, but that guy clearly has no idea how a TV reporter asking you a question works.

She was not asking for a ****ing dissertation, so I can hardly fault her for trying to get him to say something, ANYTHING, that mattered or was remotely relevant in the span of six minutes since she didn't have all day. If she had to instigate to try to get something out of him, so be it, because it doesn't take a partisan Democrat to realize he was just going to meander along about Lincoln and Liberty without actually saying anything any time soon (hey, isn't that what you guys say about Obama, that he just talks in vague generalities without saying anything of substance....you should totally have some sympathy for her!).

And I'm glad, no snark whatsoever, that you met thoughtful, smart people. I never doubted they were out there. I just highly doubt that they outnumber the idiots.

why should the guy care how the CNN reporter goes about her job. she sought him out, asked a question, he was less than 10 seconds into his answer and she started to debate him, she didn't ask him to speed it up for time. perhap he would have had time to get his answer out if she wasn't so antagonistic. perhaps if CNN was really interested in covering the story and understanding why people were there they would have spent more than a couple minutes interviewing two people from the crowd.

here's another idea if they wanted sound-bite style quotes, how about interviewing some of the speakers/organizers?

in my view, you can sum up the general theme of these rallies as people concerned that government is out of control, spending too much, acting in many cases outside of constitutional authority, that we won't be able to pay off these debts so in the future we will see a lower standard of living and higher taxes on everyone. i don't get why this concern is viewed as idiotic.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

why should the guy care how the CNN reporter goes about her job. she sought him out, asked a question, he was less than 10 seconds into his answer and she started to debate him, she didn't ask him to speed it up for time. perhap he would have had time to get his answer out if she wasn't so antagonistic. perhaps if CNN was really interested in covering the story and understanding why people were there they would have spent more than a couple minutes interviewing two people from the crowd.

here's another idea if they wanted sound-bite style quotes, how about interviewing some of the speakers/organizers?

in my view, you can sum up the general theme of these rallies as people concerned that government is out of control, spending too much, acting in many cases outside of constitutional authority, that we won't be able to pay off these debts so in the future we will see a lower standard of living and higher taxes on everyone. i don't get why this concern is viewed as idiotic.

It would be hypocritical to call them any more idiotic than other "demonstrators"...whether I agree with them or no...There is a lot I don't like about this country, but the ability to demonstrate without fear of reprisal ( other than on a message board) is not one of them.

But if that facist sound bite Spencer replayed was true, yeah..that was kind of idiotic, IMO I guess

[slotdirt]

The only complaint I really had with the CNN reporter was that she ended her report with some woe-is-me bit about how she didn't feel safe there because these events were being promoted by the right-wing Fox network. Really? Melodramatic much? Oh, and the fact that her rebuttal to her interviewee was that "the land of Lincoln was getting XXXX in stimulus dollars" - um, lady, isn't the point of these tea parties that the government is spending too much in the first place?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

why should the guy care how the CNN reporter goes about her job. she sought him out, asked a question, he was less than 10 seconds into his answer and she started to debate him, she didn't ask him to speed it up for time. perhap he would have had time to get his answer out if she wasn't so antagonistic. perhaps if CNN was really interested in covering the story and understanding why people were there they would have spent more than a couple minutes interviewing two people from the crowd.

here's another idea if they wanted sound-bite style quotes, how about interviewing some of the speakers/organizers?

in my view, you can sum up the general theme of these rallies as people concerned that government is out of control, spending too much, acting in many cases outside of constitutional authority, that we won't be able to pay off these debts so in the future we will see a lower standard of living and higher taxes on everyone. i don't get why this concern is viewed as idiotic.

Which goes straight to my point about how he obviously doesn't understand how a TV interview works. 10 seconds into an answer, you should already be into your point, onto something captivating...outside of having said "Lincoln" and "Liberty" six times apiece. Based on TV interviews, she gave him MORE than enough time to "get his answer out." Sorry to break it to you, Jim, that his Lincoln and Liberty answer was a meandering dead-end from the start. It doesn't take a partisan to see that. He had nothing at all to say that was remotely relevant....confrontational reporter or not. So you can blame the reporter for cutting him off, or you can blame him for being an idiot with nothing to say that could be summed up within five minutes....I'll take her side. You can be upset that she cut him off, but she has a job to do, and that's to get answers....which he was obviously not interested in giving unless she had a good seven minutes to spend with him. Blame him for not having a single answer that was remotely important....not her.

Originally Posted by GBBob

It would be hypocritical to call them any more idiotic than other "demonstrators"...whether I agree with them or no...There is a lot I don't like about this country, but the ability to demonstrate without fear of reprisal ( other than on a message board) is not one of them.

But if that facist sound bite Spencer replayed was true, yeah..that was kind of idiotic, IMO I guess

Yep. It wasn't a soundbite. It was a whole interview...and I transcribed it while listening to it. And I, as much as you, love that even idiots can protest without fear of reprisal. I just think some protesters are less with-it than others. At least Anti-war protesters know what they're against...WAR. These folks seem to be a sick melange of anti-tax, anti-gay, anti-black protestors that have no idea how to do much of anything but point you to michellemalkin.com and say the word fascist while hoping you won't know any better than to take their word for it.

Democratic WIN. Sorry teabaggers.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Which goes straight to my point about how he obviously doesn't understand how a TV interview works. 10 seconds into an answer, you should already be into your point, onto something captivating...outside of having said "Lincoln" and "Liberty" six times apiece. Based on TV interviews, she gave him MORE than enough time to "get his answer out." Sorry to break it to you, Jim, that his Lincoln and Liberty answer was a meandering dead-end from the start. It doesn't take a partisan to see that. He had nothing at all to say that was remotely relevant....confrontational reporter or not. So you can blame the reporter for cutting him off, or you can blame him for being an idiot with nothing to say that could be summed up within five minutes....I'll take her side. You can be upset that she cut him off, but she has a job to do, and that's to get answers....which he was obviously not interested in giving unless she had a good seven minutes to spend with him. Blame him for not having a single answer that was remotely important....not her.




Yep. It wasn't a soundbite. It was a whole interview...and I transcribed it while listening to it. And I, as much as you, love that even idiots can protest without fear of reprisal. I just think some protesters are less with-it than others. At least Anti-war protesters know what they're against...WAR. These folks seem to be a sick melange of anti-tax, anti-gay, anti-black protestors that have no idea how to do much of anything but point you to michellemalkin.com and say the word fascist while hoping you won't know any better than to take their word for it.

Democratic WIN. Sorry teabaggers.

[alysheba4]

you should have seen the chick i just teabagged

[Cannon Shell]

Interesting that we should respect the rights of gays, blacks, hispanics, anti war, anti trade, anti etc protesters but anti tax protesters are "radicals".

The CNN reporter should be fired for that 'performance'. In theory she is supposed to be a professional, yet people want to focus on the guys answer. If the guy had challenged her maybe a retort would be appropriate. But she simply wanted to editorialize instead of report. This is the crux of the problem with most of the mainstream media, the interjection of their own political view into "reporting". That woman was looking for a chance to voice her displeasure with the proceedings. She is a not only a biased shill, she is very bad at her job.

As for the protesters yesterday versus the traditional anti american (oops) war or anti something else left wing protesters is that most of the people yesterday were regular people with real jobs as opposed to the usual professional protesters or 'artistic' people who are so intellectually superior that they prefer socialism.

I'm not sure why Brian believed that that was a win for democrats but your boys ratings are falling every day. Guess that makes me anti-black?

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Interesting that we should respect the rights of gays, blacks, hispanics, anti war, anti trade, anti etc protesters but anti tax protesters are "radicals".

The CNN reporter should be fired for that 'performance'. In theory she is supposed to be a professional, yet people want to focus on the guys answer. If the guy had challenged her maybe a retort would be appropriate. But she simply wanted to editorialize instead of report. This is the crux of the problem with most of the mainstream media, the interjection of their own political view into "reporting". That woman was looking for a chance to voice her displeasure with the proceedings. She is a not only a biased shill, she is very bad at her job.

As for the protesters yesterday versus the traditional anti american (oops) war or anti something else left wing protesters is that most of the people yesterday were regular people with real jobs as opposed to the usual professional protesters or 'artistic' people who are so intellectually superior that they prefer socialism.

I'm not sure why Brian believed that that was a win for democrats but your boys ratings are falling every day. Guess that makes me anti-black?

as opposed to the fox anchor's that relentlessly flogged the events? or those regular fox personalities that actually appeared to address crowds from a speaker's platform?

i guess we need to avoid the biased mainstream media to get the straight story from these icon's of journalistic integrity.

i'm going to honor the memory of ed murrow by throwing up on his grave. he can't so i will.

the hypocrisy of suggesting someone else has a smudge of dirt on their shirt while you're wallowing in pigshit is astounding.

[hi_im_god]

btw: didn't mean to single you out. the same shout out goes to the arljim and everyone else leading with their chins on the subject.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

as opposed to the fox anchor's that relentlessly flogged the events? or those regular fox personalities that actually appeared to address crowds from a speaker's platform?

i guess we need to avoid the biased mainstream media to get the straight story from these icon's of journalistic integrity.

i'm going to honor the memory of ed murrow by throwing up on his grave. he can't so i will.

the hypocrisy of suggesting someone else has a smudge of dirt on their shirt while you're wallowing in pigshit is astounding.

Typical liberal response. Not addressing the issue at hand (the CNN reporter) but pointing fingers elsewhere.

I will give you guys credit, you are consistent. When you attempt to cast doubt on the fact that the mainstream media is biased in a thread where disgracefully biased behavior is exhibited by the supposed mainstream media you look mentally challenged.

What are you getting nervous that the "grassroots" stuff is now going to be used against your side?

Yeah real laughable, people who are against the growing role of the govt in their lives. If this was footage from China, the lefties would be applauding and cheering them on. Instead they use their supposed intellectual superiority to knock them as crazy. Socialism is a sickness not a cure.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

As for the protesters yesterday versus the traditional anti american (oops) war or anti something else left wing protesters is that most of the people yesterday were regular people with real jobs as opposed to the usual professional protesters or 'artistic' people who are so intellectually superior that they prefer socialism.

You know, I used to think that maybe I made too many generalizations and grouped people together too often.

Then I met Chuck.

"If you don't like war, you're anti-American! If you're smart, you're a fag! If you're artistic, you're even gayer!"

Benjamin Moore himself couldn't fathom a brush this broad.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

You know, I used to think that maybe I made too many generalizations and grouped people together too often.

Then I met Chuck.

"If you don't like war, you're anti-American! If you're smart, you're a fag! If you're artistic, you're even gayer!"

Benjamin Moore himself couldn't fathom a brush this broad.

Another liberal who seems to not actually like being called a liberal. Funny how BWS makes the generalizations about conservative=anti-black or anti-gay yet the ridiculousness is directed at me. Oh you idealistic intellectual you! Since journalism is seemingly dead you are already sharpening your skills to take over for Olberman when he gets canned! I knew you were sharp despite your implied left leanings.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Interesting that we should respect the rights of gays, blacks, hispanics, anti war, anti trade, anti etc protesters but anti tax protesters are "radicals".

The CNN reporter should be fired for that 'performance'. In theory she is supposed to be a professional, yet people want to focus on the guys answer. If the guy had challenged her maybe a retort would be appropriate. But she simply wanted to editorialize instead of report. This is the crux of the problem with most of the mainstream media, the interjection of their own political view into "reporting". That woman was looking for a chance to voice her displeasure with the proceedings. She is a not only a biased shill, she is very bad at her job.

As for the protesters yesterday versus the traditional anti american (oops) war or anti something else left wing protesters is that most of the people yesterday were regular people with real jobs as opposed to the usual professional protesters or 'artistic' people who are so intellectually superior that they prefer socialism.
I'm not sure why Brian believed that that was a win for democrats but your boys ratings are falling every day. Guess that makes me anti-black?

they were? i would have considered protesting but i was working, as was everybody else in my office, i haven't seen any pictures but i kind of assumed it would be a cross section of a college campus and an art gallery.

i lean liberal on a lot of things but taxes and government spending are not one of them. the rate of taxation in this country approaches that of socialistic countries without the benefits such as governmental health care and reasonably priced higher education. it isn't just dems or repubs being fiscally irresponsible... it's everyone, to the point that i consider them criminal for stealing from the American public.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

they were? i would have considered protesting but i was working, as was everybody else in my office, i haven't seen any pictures but i kind of assumed it would be a cross section of a college campus and an art gallery.

i lean liberal on a lot of things but taxes and government spending are not one of them. the rate of taxation in this country approaches that of socialistic countries without the benefits such as governmental health care and reasonably priced higher education. it isn't just dems or repubs being fiscally irresponsible... it's everyone, to the point that i consider them criminal for stealing from the American public.

Exactly, the usual protester types. From what i saw and was reported that wasnt the case.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Which goes straight to my point about how he obviously doesn't understand how a TV interview works. 10 seconds into an answer, you should already be into your point, onto something captivating...outside of having said "Lincoln" and "Liberty" six times apiece. Based on TV interviews, she gave him MORE than enough time to "get his answer out." Sorry to break it to you, Jim, that his Lincoln and Liberty answer was a meandering dead-end from the start. It doesn't take a partisan to see that. He had nothing at all to say that was remotely relevant....confrontational reporter or not. So you can blame the reporter for cutting him off, or you can blame him for being an idiot with nothing to say that could be summed up within five minutes....I'll take her side. You can be upset that she cut him off, but she has a job to do, and that's to get answers....which he was obviously not interested in giving unless she had a good seven minutes to spend with him. Blame him for not having a single answer that was remotely important....not her.

Brian this meandering response is beneath you. i know you know better.
that "interview" was a travesty. kinda judgemental of you to claim his reasoning for being there was "unimportant" and not "relevant".

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

. At least Anti-war protesters know what they're against...WAR. These folks seem to be a sick melange of anti-tax, anti-gay, anti-black protestors that have no idea how to do much of anything but point you to michellemalkin.com and say the word fascist while hoping you won't know any better than to take their word for it.

i have read some **** before, but that takes the cake. it says a lot about you and nothing about the folks i saw and witnessed with my own eyes, or about me.