About This Blog
Anti-war protesting is just so boring. That must be why the Knee Pad U.S. MSM didn't much cover this weekend's protests. If an anti-war protest isn't heard or seen, did it really happen at all?
Tens of thousands of people have taken part in demonstrations against the war in Iraq in cities across the US.
Rallies took place in a dozen cities, with the biggest crowds gathering in New York, Chicago and San Francisco.
They were timed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of a vote by the US Senate to authorise the Iraq invasion.
Those taking part, who included relatives of servicemen fighting in Iraq, urged the US congress to cut off funding for the war.
The 'national day of action' was called by the United for Peace and Justice coalition. Link
Why, do you think, would major U.S.media outlets not want to cover anti-war protests where "tens of thousands" of Americans came out to voice their opinions against the Bush/Cheney war cabal? Is it because the major media outlets are so liberal? Could that be it?
I know that the MSM is liberal because my wingnut conservative associates keep insisting they are. So....if the major media is so liberal....like wingnuts continue to say....why wouldn't a "liberal" media cover "tens of thousands" of Americans protesting in a dozen American cities?
Does anyone have an answer here? I must admit, I'm completely baffled. I mean, normally, if indeed the MSM was liberal, you would expect a liberal media to be all over an anti-war protest by "tens of thousands" of Americans in a dozen cities. Because as we have come to find out from those wise, wily, wascal, wingnuts.....those who are against the LONG WAR are loony liberals....America haters, really.
So one would expect a loony liberal MSM to cover something that was a visible objection to the Long War.
But alas, one would be mistaken. I had to find my excerpt from the BBC.
Anyone care to explain this apparent conundrum?
- 2013 (117)
- 2012 (265)
- 2011 (254)
- 2010 (274)
- 2009 (302)
- 2008 (331)
- 2007 (305)