CNN: "Most Crowds During Bush* Visit 'VERY SUPPORTIVE'"

[matcom]

continued....

"While there were SOME who voiced opposition to the war in Iraq, MOST of the crowds that gathered during pResident Bush's visit showed SUPPORT for the pResident and his policies...."

i'm going to rake leaves now..... :grr: :argh:

[rjbcar27]

1. Utter crap

:eyes:

You guys have no chance with journalism like that.

[eyeontheprize]

23. Can I move in with you,

I gotta get out of here!

Every second it gets worse, there is really no hope for November ’04. How is the weather over there?

[MoonRiver]

37. Pity US fools. Wish George Soros would spend his money taking

over a network or two. THEN we might see some truth in advertising.

[opihimoimoi]

2. A blatant LIE, the man was never in any "crowds", public ones that is

He was protected at all times during his stay there, kept from the masses in seclusion.

[Generic Other]

44. I saw him wearing his kevlar jacket looking lke the mouse that roared

He looked like warmed over chickenshit on a shingle.

[qanda]

3. Unbelievable!

I guess the 200,000 protesting Bush* on a weekday were just a small focus group.

[Woodstock]

35. Mirror reported 200,000

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=13645118_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-200%2D000%2DMARCH%2DAGAINST%2DBUSH%2DIN%2DLONDON-name_page.html

I looked at all the Yahoo pictures that day - must have been close to 100 pictures.
There were teeming masses of people.
The signs they held were ALL negative toward Bush - and there were many.

Am trying to find the Yahoo pics.
The only slideshow they seem to have archived is the one the day after with pics of Bush's ugly mug standing next to his Stepford wife.

Here are some photos of the protests:
http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=london+protests

One caption says it all: "A lone protestor supporting U.S. President George W. Bush , foreground, holds a placard as other demonstrators marching in protest against Bush's state visit to Britain, pass the closed security gates of Downing Street, background, in London, Thursday Nov. 20, 2003."

CSPAN coverage:
rtsp://video.c-span.org/archive/iraq/iraq112003_england.rm

Whoever said the crowds were mostly supportive of Bush is a bald faced liar on the take. If a few silly people were allowed to get close to him and showed support (no doubt Rove flew the stooges over on Bush's dime), that was nothing compared to the turnout Thursday.

[hadrons]

4. well, its true ....

see:

100,000+ protest against Bush = one crowd
Tony Blair standing alone = one crowd
Jack Straw standing alone = one crowd
Laura Bush standing alone = one crowd

You see, 3 supportive crowds Vs. one negative one

Definitions provided by Newspeaks

[_NorCal_D_]

45. Yep,

looks like CNN was right after all! :eyes: B-)

[Jacobin]

5. The Alternative Universe of the American Paparrazi

If they say it, it must be true.

[Karenina]

7. Shut down the American media!

They assume the citizenry is DEAD are nailing the coffin shut!

[JanMichael]

16. How do we do that? I have no idea where the power cord is.

If I did I would've unplugged the bastards years ago.

[TankLV]

27. Hint: Take over the broadcast centers.

Storm the buildings, occupy them. That is the only way.

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

[screembloodymurder]

29. The internet is a start

as more and more get on-line and realize that the media is nothing but lies.

[xchrom]

6. alternate reality

that's all i could think of to say -- what can you say?
sigh

[blm]

8. Get used to Campaign 2004. Anyone think the media will tell the truth?

Anyone think that teflon will NOT be draped over Bush when he needs it?

[lefty_mcduff]

9. I have noticed that the Alphabet whores

MSNBC, CNN and FOX have changed in recent days from 'spin' to absolute out-and-out lies. FOX was claiming 25,000 protestors in the UK a few days ago.

[ibegurpard]

10. I see that CNN is still trying to outFAUX FAUX.

n/t

[pearl]

11. I almost threw up

when I heard that come out of her mouth.

:puke:

[DemExpat]

12. British news was also quite positive about Bush visit too.......

but the only friendly 'crowds' shown on BBC were the pub visitors where Bush had lunch in Tony Blair's hometown.....

Still....I was also disappointed in BBC's coverage and analysis.

Dutch news is much more realistic about Bush IMO.....

:kick:
DemEx

[Capt_Nemo]

13. Wow!

US mainstream media has now the accuracy of soviet propaganda!

[Skwmom]

14. When you get angry at CNN

just think about the great press they've been giving your candidate. Woodruff was basically gushing over Dean yesterday, repeating the 2 million people at $100 dollars mantra (which we have yet to see any evidence of though in all honesty I think that ANY democratic nominee will get money because of the anti-bush feeling that is out there).

It's a lot harder to take CNN when they unfairly trash you're candidate and build up Bush. I think the Dean supporters should brace themselves for the general election if Dean is the nominee because I'm willing to bet that CNN will do a 360 on Dean.

[AmericanDem]

19. No way

As she has been gushing over Dean for the past 1.5 months. She has also done everything she could to show Clark in a bad light and distract away from him whenever he really came out swinging.

I don't know what really goes on behind closed doors at CNN ( Crooked News Network ) but there is apparently big brass meetings to slant the news to suit their own agenda.

Woodruff, Crowley, have been doing just that on "Inside Politics" for awhile now. Don't be surprised if it was gently told to them that they and their show can easily disappear if things werent reported as such.

[DeepModem Mom]

21. I'll ask again about CNN's political director, Tom Hannon --

Can anyone find any information on the man identified in articles as CNN's political director, Tom Hannon? Googling gets nothing but someone with his name as a "member participant" at a 1984 conference of the right-wing outfit founded by the Hunt brothers in Texas, Council for National Policy. Surely, it's not the same man -- although some posters have surmised it is.

http://www.namebase.org/sources/NV.html

Who is this guy, who, I assume, assigns Candy Crowley to Democratic candidates, enables Judy Woodruff, gives Novak air time, and employs, as CNN's "senior political analyst" a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, Bill Schneider (assuming on the payrolls of both CNN and AEI)? Anybody?

[blm]

32. CNP is the ROOT of all GOP evil. Tim LaHaye and RevMoon are topdogs there.

If CNN's political director is with CNP then THAT right there tells the story. No wonder Dean gets pushed while all others get pushed OUT with NO substantive coverage.

Didn't anyone get a clue when Frank Luntz was marveling at Dean after a debate where even his supporters here at DU said he had a bad night? Does anyone think Luntz was EVER honest?

[blm]

30. You mean a 180....

as soon as they feel secure Dean will be the nominee the press strips that teflon off faster than you can say Gypsy Rose Lee. All the stuff that's been ignored, the inconsistencies and the election year repositioning and policy changes will come cascading down to reflect on the entire Dem party.

[Scott Lee]

38. And you'll be overjoyed!

In fact, I suggest stocking up on champagne now to avoid the rush.

[BuelahWitch]

40. Uh, what about the debate Woodruff hosted??

Where she couldn't wait to read that fax showing Dean in a bad light?
Crowley and Woodruff are IN NO WAY gushing over Howard Dean!

[democratreformed]

15. IIIIEEEEE!!!

It is so frustrating these days. Can you believe the crap they try to feed us?

[AmericanDem]

17. LIES

That is all we see from major media. They are trying to transform with the White House the direction this country goes. No lie is outa bounds in doing it.

:puke:

[DeepModem Mom]

18. Who made the statement on air, matcom?

I was in London during Bush's visit, and I want to call CNN.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

20. Do it!

And write a letter to your local paper (or the New York Times--they take letters from out of their area) while you're at it.

[camero]

22. Was this wolfie?

Sounds like it was Blitzer that made that report. I don't watch him. He always looks and sounds like he is scared shitless about everything. There was a bombing today...aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh.

That's Wolfie reporting.

[NashVegas]

24. Maybe If They Hadn't Spent So Much Time on Bloody Michael Jackson

they'd have their heads out of their ass.

[Q]

25. 1

9
8
4

[Room101]

26. 2+2=5 and don't you forget it

It is the media's job to manufacture consent and lie.

[Kool Kitty]

28. I've got just two words for this-

horse + shit.

[rumguy]

31. Who on CNN said this and when?

Which whore was it this time?

[AmericanDem]

34. I wish someone can finally answer this.

Any further details?

[Scott Lee]

39. CNN tried to "nuance" Bush-holes visit

It was a darling piece. Supposed "spot" interviews with a variety of Londoners about the issue, which showed some anti-war sentiment, but some apathy and much "American" (Bush) support. The opinion makers at CNN even sought to put a lot of dark faces in there to make it look like a real cross section of opinion. It was almost convincing.

Of course, this was after one of their articles that stated the anti-Bush demonstrations were "marginalised" by the events in Turkey. Wow, marginalize over a hundred thousand people that mobilized in London, and play up a half dozen "citizens on the street".

We can see what's going on here, CNN. You still suck.

[chookie]

33. Back in the USSR

Gee -- when polls show that only 25% of British citizens support His Chimperial Highness -- it seems strange that *most* of the people who turned out to see his sorry ass did so to glorify him.

(Did Tom Delay send his staff over or something?)

Just as the statues of Saddam come down, the Cult of Personality surrounding George W Bush is rising. It is eerily reminiscent of the Socialist Realism of the USSR, and the Cultural Revolution of China. Instead of crowds of nearly identical Chinese girls with pigtails in blue Mao suits, we see bleached blondes in mini skirts and big teeth in orgasmic frenzy over the macho imperial majesty of God's Chosen Warlord, George W. Maybe they should start waving copies of "A Pledge to Keep" at rallies.

[Woodstock]

36. Stepford wife Laura Bush said this

http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Nov/11222003/nation_w/113327.asp

The first lady said she and her husband were nonplussed by the tens of thousands of protesters who demonstrated against the war while Bush was here -- most of whom the couple never saw. Police said the massive march and rally mobilized between 100,000 and 110,000 people.

"I don't think the protests are near as large as everyone was predicting before we got there," Laura Bush said. "We've seen plenty of American flags, we've seen plenty of people who were waving to us -- many, many more people, in fact, than we've seen protesters."


BARF!

I guess her programming doesn't accept that the American flag does not equal George W. Bush.

Nor that, like an ostrich, if one hides one's head in the sand, it doesn't mean there is not a lot of things going on on the ground above.

[Malva Zebrina]

47. Laura is as dumb as a box of doorknobs

and will say anything she is ordered to say. Period.

Her outlandish display of trashy, frumpy looking, although quite expensive,(someone is ripping off someone here) clothing in this trip is an indication of her lack of finesse,sophistication and nuance and I would venture to say, her pathetic lack of self esteem, which she willing gave up in order to be a participant in this phoney, but opulent,very rich, lifestyle.


Does she ever look in the mirror and see that her choices in her dress make her look like an aging, broad hipped, cheap little trailer trashed woman--a woman without intelligence or class--without upbringing and proper training in manners and elegant, appropriate dress? Does she think wearing gloves will forgive her lack of sophistication in her choices? Most likely, given her lack of intelligence.

(Would not really matter for most of us, except she is representing American women and American wives and then it becomes personal) She thinks she needs to look young and sexy? Texas sowgirl? or something,

so we see little twelve year old girl, short waisted, velvet bodices that are bulging at the side seams with mature woman fat and whose waistline meets the aging mature woman's sagging breasts, and skirts of yards of satin attached to that little girl velvet bodice, that is tight around her rather ample, protruding, mature woman, belly, and she has the nerve to arrive before the cameras smiling like Jack Nicholson's Joker, as if she were in the body of a twenty year old and looking as smart as ever!!, because, well because she is wearing white garden gloves!!! And further--there are kick pleats--kick pleats spreading out beneath that opulent belly in a definate Barbie doll creation!! My, what a picture perfect frump!

This is really the prototype of the famous concubine and wife of Louis the XVI, Marie Antoinette--who is reported, although it may not be true, but anyhow, the myth can also be applied to this dumassed woman Laura, to say "Let them eat cake" in her complete lack of connection with the human being, as she surveyed the crowds below her yelling and protesting their lack of food and nutritional subsistence. I can very much imagine this vain, vacant woman,Laura, so far removed, so , perhaps drugged up, or smoking too many packs of cigarettes, saying that, or the modern equivalent,like, "let them eat Duncan Doughnuts", in front of the White House.

Protests? What protests? ( did I get the talking point right this time, she asks behind the hand hiding her mouth) (Yes!! she says to herself--thankfully, I did!!! Let them eat cake--Bwhahahahahah) and let me please go on yet another trip to Europe on the taxpayer money--I do so enjoy the shopping and the eating, the pomp and the toasts to my beauty and the adoration and the attention given to me . YOU can find something serious to connect me to, such as reading to little ten and twelve year old black kids who (do not tell anyone--cannot read a story suitable for first grade pupils) are apparently in need of someone to read to them, instead of them reading to someone. this is my contribution--reading to twelve year old little black kids--they do need someone to read TO them, you know.

[htuttle]

41. Who are you going to believe?

CNN or your lying eyes?

[Generic Other]

42. I saw them erect a statue to Bush only someone put the film in backwards

He crashed to the ground and they pelted him with shoes! Clever special effects. Tricky liberal media!

[_NorCal_D_]

43. Ah, the liberal media strikes again!

:grr: :mad:

[ljm2002]

46. Well, I'm sure that's true...

... most of the crowds he saw probably were supportive.

Since they controlled who he saw.

Of course there was that one kinda *big* crowd, that wasn't supportive, but it was just *one* crowd, and he didn't actually appear in front of that crowd, so...

Yeah, that's the ticket.

[Cat Atomic]

48. Who said it? I'm sorry, but this is just too crazy to believe without

a name and a time or something.