Media doesn’t cover Town Hall metting in Liberal Districts

This post was written by marc on August 16, 2009
Posted Under: Letters to the Editor

Letter to the Editor

Yesterday I went to a town hall meeting in Fremont California conducted by Congressman Pete Stark and one thing in particular was different than what I see in the news. There were no reporters there. It seems the the “legitimate news media” only covers town hall meetings in conservative areas. It seems that the news media is still a puppet organization of the right. During the Bush administration I remember being at protests in San Francisco that had over 100,000 people that got no national coverage at all. I think the insurance companies are not only funding the town hall protesters, but also the news media that covers them.

Reader Comments

Dear Marc,

Conflict is always covered more. Frankly, conflict is more interesting. If the protests in SF were part of what appeared to be a nation-wide set of protests, it might have gotten more coverage. In any case, protests in SF may not be news if they are too common. How did you get the 100K number. Many times organizers tend to be too optimistic as to attendance numbers.

You say you think that the insurance companies are funding the town hall protesters. Care to offer any evidence that this is true for a majority or significant fraction of the town hall protesters? It seems that the signs from protesters are homemade and the ones from Obama plan supporters tend to be professionally made — suggesting more organization. May I respectfully suggest that your assertion about the protesters may say more about your perspective than it does about the protesters.

-Frank

#1 
Written By fmonaldo on August 29th, 2009 @ 6:50 am

When I protested Bush in 2001 there were hundreds and thousands of us. There was virtually no media coverage whatsoever. It was essentially a media blackout. No town hall meetings for discussion. Where there was the smallest bit of unruliness the protesters were maced, roughed up and arrested. Later protesters were only allowed in so-called “free speech zones” literally miles away from the event. All through this, media was nonexistent. Now a few insurance goons, misinformed lunatics and gun toting nutcases show up at the liberal events and its a major media event. So much for a “liberal” media. Why do neo-conservatives use “liberal” so disparagingly? Liberal means free, I guess they hate freedom. If you neo-cons hate Obama and freedom so much why don’t you get the hell out of America and make your totalitarian 3rd world country somewhere else.

#2 
Written By Chris on September 5th, 2009 @ 11:10 am

Dear Marc,

I note in passing you never offered evidence for your assertion that insurance companies are funding a significant portion of town hall protesters. I assume you are withdrawing that assertion.

I also note in passing that there is thuggery on the Left. See http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/health-care-activist-bites-off-the-finger-of-a-counter-demonstrator.html. Though I am sure we could find bad behavior on every side.

Classic “liberalism” is indeed about “freedom.” Part of that freedom is protesting for good or bad reasons, which seems to bend you out of shape when practiced by people who disagree with you.

I do not hate Obama. Indeed, he would probably be a pleasant person to have a beer with. My guess is that he is polite enough and respectful enough to avoid suggesting that people who disagree with him “get the hell out of America.” Your suggestion in this regard suggests more about your perspective than it does about me or Obama. It would be to your advantage you take your cues from Obama’s demeanor.

PS: Could you give me a specific date and place for your 2001 Bush protest. I would like to research the coverage for my education.

#3 
Written By fmonaldo on September 5th, 2009 @ 11:53 am

Dear Marc,

I just did a quick Wikipedia search and they have protests in SF on inauguration day 2001 and subsequent anti-war protests numbering 10,000 each. Although there were subsequent larger ones in later years, where there are SF protests I am missing? What were the date (in 2001) and time for “hundreds of thousands.”

Frank

#4 
Written By fmonaldo on September 6th, 2009 @ 8:56 am

The point being that the media doesn’t cover Liberal districts since they know the meetings will be mostly civil. Conservative districts, on the other hand, are up in a lather, thanks in large part to foaming-at-the-mouth pundits like Limbaugh and Beck, combined with a self-imposed stupidity, laziness, and utter disregard for the truth … tell a lie enough times and the idiots will hold it as written in stone. Why else do these right-wing religious nut-jobs show up toting semi-automatic rifles and intimidating everyone present? Perhaps the left should take-up the gun toting practices of the Black Panthers to get their own message out: if you can’t play civil, speak civil, be civil, we’re here to play hard-ball, and refuse to be bullied by you degenerates any longer!

#5 
Written By JC Vikram on September 9th, 2009 @ 10:39 am

Let me see: Marc suggested that I “get the hell out of America” and JC suggests that I am degenerate, all the while hearing about how “civil” Liberals are in discourse. I couldn’t make this stuff up 🙂

-Frank

#6 
Written By fmonaldo on September 9th, 2009 @ 2:58 pm

As with most Right-wing Conservatives of the day, Frank focuses on a single word from the whole of the paragraph, takes it out of context, construes his own meaning from now false premises, and rails to the new “point” ad nauseum. I wonder how many knuckle-draggers will now latch onto your misrepresentation and parrot in unison? No need for reply. The question is, of course, rhetorical. Let me clarify things for those who have difficulties with the native language. We’re (meaning the general, non fringe, rationally thinking public) fed-up with your always-shouted discourse and in-your-face tactics. We’re not prepared to let you take over public meetings with your thinly veiled threats, by which I mean your accompanying automatic weapons (or weapons of any kind). We are prepared to point out, in no uncertain terms, the obviousness of your tactics, and return them in kind. We are prepared to borrow your own weapons from you and use them against you (figuratively speaking, since we’re actually bright enough to understand that real weapons are in no way apropos to town meetings). Yes, only degenerates would carry a pistol or rifle to a town-hall meeting with the President of the United States. Yes, only knuckle-draggers would protest with signs supporting the violent overthrow of the government. You’ve made your bed, but don’t plan on sleeping well.

#7 
Written By JC Vikram on September 10th, 2009 @ 7:50 am

Dear JC,

I think you re-enforce my previous observation better than I could. QED.

Frank

#8 
Written By fmonaldo on September 10th, 2009 @ 5:09 pm

Dear Frank:
How clever of you to have proven your minor point, though you still, and consistently, manage to miss the broader question; a mostly meaningless QED if I may say. As for myself, I remain wholly uninterested in the argumentative trifles of your nit-picking. The query remains: why the general media seems to gravitate toward more Conservative districts for their Town Hall coverage, for which my answer has already been given. Beyond that, and once again for clarification and perhaps a little enlightenment, it is obvious that we to the left of center have become somewhat more than irritated and not a little suspicious of virtually anything spoken from the Right. Considering what has become of our country under the previous administration, I’m astonished the Right has been included in the decision making process at all. We need only recall the hugely diminished economy, the high unemployment rate, the international consensus against us, involvement in two unwinable wars, the reversal of many of our own Constitutional rights, and our self-managed addition to the short list of nations protecting their own war criminals, by which I mean Bush, et al. How can we not be incensed as a responsible populace? The answer is a simple one. Because many only believe whomever is yelling the loudest. Because many don’t care to read between the lines or even look past their noses for the truth of a thing. Because some who have been chosen to lead have no compunction against lying bold-faced to their constituents as a means to an end. Fear is a powerful weapon against the uneducated masses. Just ask your old buddy Cheney. My point? Don’t expect many more feel-good discussions from we on the Left now that you’ve managed to take us so low. You may cling to the bottom if you prefer, but don’t expect a helping hand in return for dragged feet. You’re more likely to be bitten. QED.

PS. Thanks for the discussion. I’ve enjoyed it. Really. Only, don’t be quite so laconic. I’m always interested in a good read.
~Vikram

#9 
Written By JC Vikram on September 10th, 2009 @ 11:42 pm

Police Experiment With New Weapon on Protesters During G-20
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allison-kilkenny/police-experiment-with-ne_b_301169.html

Where were these guys during the “tea bagger” protests in which loaded guns were being brought to forums the President was appearing at?

I guess some protesters have “freer speech” than others!

#10 
Written By Chris on September 29th, 2009 @ 10:23 am

The G20 protestors carried no high-powered weapons, unfortunately they are not funded and organized by Fox News, Big Insurance and Big Pharma:

Fox News Producer Caught Rallying 9/12 Protest Crowd In Behind-The-Scenes Video

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/19/fox-news-producer-caught_n_292529.html

#11 
Written By Chris on September 29th, 2009 @ 10:31 am

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.