FIVE Teabaggers show up to sit in their Walmart lawnchairs, hold their misspelled signs, drink their Kool-aid, and bash the Wall Street protesters AND the media focuses on THEM!!!
Since September 17th there has been a protest taking place in
Liberty Plaza (Zuccotti Park), which is in the heart of New York City’s
Financial district. The protest has been called “Occupy Wall Street”. It
is a ”leaderless resistance movement” spearheaded by the activist
magazine Adbusters. They want to take to task the people responsible for
the meltdown of the national and world economy.
Up until now,
there has been virtually no press coverage for the event. Just a
smattering on some news outlets, with a little more coverage on liberal
news outlets such as MSNBC and Current. However in recent days, a group
of five Tea Party members have set up a lawn chairs directly across the
street from the Wall Street protesters, so that they can protest “this
liberal agenda of shutting down capitalism.” Since arriving on the
scene, news trucks from around the world have focused their attention on
this protest of the protest by these few Tea Party Patriots.
When
asking one of the Tea Party members why they were there he replied,
“Whenever I see these liberal progressive commies I assume it’s for a
bad reason, so I’m here to make sure they don’t get too riled up and
cause our economy to shut down completely.” When the Tea Party member
was informed that the protesters were there to make their voices heard
over the economic collapse, and want to hold the people to blame
accountable he said, “Then why isn’t they down at the White House
tellin’ that socialist Obama to stop tryin’ to regulate these here
people just tryin’ to do business.”
It was quite obvious that
the meaning of the protest was lost on these Tea Party members who were
there just to be angry at “the progressives” with no other apparent
cause to be sitting there all day every day. At least now the protest is
getting the news coverage it was failing to draw on its own.
Apparently, five Tea Party members is more news worthy than thousands of
protesters.
GO AWAY TEABAGGERS!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Where does this story come from? Whoever this guy is that was interviewed... he REALLY is a moron. Even for a teabagger.
Apparently he doesn't know that the Tea Party opposed the bank bailouts?
Or perhaps he does. There is a commenter on Will Hart's blog who says the housing bubble was caused by government over-regulation that forced banks to give loans to poor people who then could not pay them back.
You can't make this shit up! If you did nobody would believe it.
the link w-d...
http://www.freewoodpost.com/2011/09/23/tea-party-crashes-occupy-wall-street-protest-finally-brings-press-to-event/
the teabaggers are a bunch of old white folks duped by the Kochsuckers. I really believe they are so brainwashed by Fox they have lost the ability to think for themselves. It's a damn shame cuz they do vote...
And these same idiots accuse the press of liberal bias.
If shit were brains the tea baggers could fertilize the universe.
"...the teabaggers are a bunch of old white folks duped by the Kochsuckers..."
Apparently, the mega-wealthy Koch brothers were not averse to dealing with America's enemy in order to make more billions.
Do you think any of the conservative blogs will cover this shameful story?
Thanks Shaw, that is quite an amazing article, I'll have to divide it up because it is so long, but I'll get to the end.
The tea party of "patriots" are in serious need of a wake up call.
Truth, you think that the mainstream media, as typified by NBC News, The New York Times (who did a COVER ARTICLE on John McCain and some fictitious affair that he had), Newsweek (who had then-candidate Obama on THEIR cover 6-7 times in 2008), Time, and the Washington Post (have you taken a look at their editorial page lately?), has a CONSERVATIVE bias? Hm, that's interesting.
Two weeks the Wall St. protestors are out there and nothingWill.
You're talking about sensationalism and not politics with the McCain nonaffar. Look at all the press the Clinton/Lewinski scandal got.
And how many people are reading Newsweek? Plus, FOX goes to far mpre households than MSNBC> They are mainstream.
Nice try at "gotchaing" me Will.
From The Raw Story...
Van Jones:
“I’m not mad at [the tea party] for being so loud,” he said. “I’m mad at us for being so quiet the last two years.”
“Something just came across the news wire,” Jones announced. “It’s an extraordinary thing. We know we have the young folks and the struggling folks who are down there on Wall Street… They went down there to the scene of the crime against our future. They went down there and they have been camping in the rain. They’ve been beaten. They’ve been pepper-sprayed. They’ve been falsely arrested. And when they police were dragging them away, they said, We’re out here, the 99 percent, we’re fighting the one percent. You, officer, are part of the 99 percent. We’re fighting for your pensions too. We’re fighting for your pensions too.’ This is a new movement.”
“And because of their courage and the character they showed, today it was announced that in their dress blues, Marines are going to protect them and stand with them. In their dress blues! The Marines! The veterans!”
He added: “This is a movement moment! Something’s happening in America! Something’s happening in America! Don’t you give up on this country! Don’t you give up on this movement!”
“They’re going to stand out there with those young people in their dress uniforms. And one of them had a sign and the sign said, ‘This is the second time I fought for my country… It’s the first time I’ve known who my enemy was.’”
I'm interested in knowing how Will knows McCain's affair was "fictitious". He cheated on his first wife. The NYT was sued by Vicki Iseman (the lobbyist McCain had the affair with)... But the lawsuit was settled out of court, and according to "Dean Baquet, an assistant managing editor who runs the newspaper's Washington bureau and helped oversee reporting on the story... the Times paid no money, did not apologize and did not retract one word of the story".
"The New York Times (who did a COVER ARTICLE on John McCain and some fictitious affair that he had)..."
The New York Times pisses the right and left off. During the run-up to the Iraq war, they printed everything Judith Miller wrote and got from the Bush Administration. She later lost her job.
Also, when Hillary was running for the Democratic nomination in 2008, the NYTimes wrote a front page story on the Clinton's marital sleeping habits!
And they published every rumor that floated into the press room during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.
And lastly, almost every FAUX NOOZ program outpolls every other cable news program. IOW, FAUX NOOZ is the giant in cable news propaganda and reaches millions of people who can't think for themselves, so they let FAUX NOOZ do it for them.
Newsweek (who had then-candidate Obama on THEIR cover 6-7 times in 2008), Time, and the Washington Post (have you taken a look at their editorial page lately?),
Everybody points to that ONE example of the New York Times (in the form of that bimbo, Judy Miller) as an example of the New York Times's right-wing bias. First of all, war isn't a clear-cut left-right issue. Truman (Korea), Kennedy (the Bay of Pigs) LBJ (Vietnam), Clinton (Kosovo, Bosnia), Obama (Afghanistan, Libya). And, second of all, have you ever taken a look at that rag's editorial page? Are you folks telling me that none of that bias ever enters into the actual coverage....Yeah, the media covered Lewinsky but Michael Isikoff sat on that story for a long time before he literally had to release it. And, plus, it was titillation. The media loves titillation. The right-wing mainstream media. That is rich.
Truth,
FOX is the most popular cable news network if you can really call it news. That doesn't make it mainstream by any traditional definition. It's still extreme Limbaugh-style propaganda.
Will,
If the NYT has a conservative bias, we're all in trouble. They are partnering with WNYC on several local stories. I read the Times every Friday. I find them quite objective.
I quit reading the WaPo after I thought that they supported the war in Iraq a little too much. But I agree with you. War isn't left-right, it's hawk-dove.
I quit watching NBC after they disingenuously aired the Virginia Tech killer's home video manifesto. I tend to write off media outlets more or less permanently without much chance for forgiveness.
And Sue
Rock on! Let's take back the Boston Tea Party thing. Some day I'm going to get a "Join or Die" flag for my front yard! "Don't Tread on Me" indeed!
It's sad the Right's "liberal media" propaganda campaign, aka the Big Lie, has worked so well.
No wonder so many millions of Americans are so ignorant and fearful to think Obama is a foreign born Muslim socialist and...the Antichrist. There’s no liberal media campaign against that ignorance.
The vast portion of national media is corporate owned and corporate biased. How can corporate media be as liberal as the Right says it is? It is not.
When has anyone seen the NY Times or Washington Post advocate for cannabis de-criminalization?
When has anyone seen the NY Times or Washington Post advocate for investigation of Bush/Cheney torture, false statements leading to war, repeal of the Patriot Act, etc.?
When has anyone seen the NY Times or Washington Post advocate for the repeal of corporate personhood, for restoring Glass/Steagall, for public funded elections, for Medicare for all, for...you get the picture.
Sorry Dave,
The New York Times doesn't advocate. They report. If they did, it wouldn't be news. I don't read their opinion pieces and editorials very often. From what I generally see from the headers, the viewpoint is generally quite liberal. We don't need advocates to tell us what to think. I for one am thankful for everything they do.
Flying Junior
Post a Comment