Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.
Actually, Father, if you READ the article Krista herself didn't say there were "no young women" -- she quoted several people who had their heads up their butts.
It isn't Krista who is the baddie - but she shouldn't have even bothered with the two sources she quoted.
Thank you for the link to the Washington March. It's all the more remarkable when you realise how cold and snowy it can be in Washington at this time of the year.
I has found a report of this year's San Francisco march for life, where the prolifers outnumbered the opposition by about 500:1.
Gem - I just re-read it. Gesaman says "So this raises the question: where are the young, vibrant women supporting their pro-life or pro-choice positions?" and then quotes Kristy Maddux to explain. The article as a whole accepts the thesis that there were no young women on the march.
Oh, it's not good reporting...she went to the wrong two people BUT don't forget the title of an article isn't necessarily written by the writer. Sometimes that's done in the typesetting process. [Or what passes for typesetting these days.]
Just whistling in the dark on the part of the older faminazi crowd.
I expect Krista hadn't attended either a "prochoice" or a prolife rally....otherwise she would have known that what the "professor" said was codswallop.
As a side note, I can remember being in DC in Jan of 95 on "rally day." I couldn't go - because I was in DC to work at the Oentagon that week. But after work (and some hours after the rally) I went up via the metro to Union station, near where the rally had taken place. I was overjoyed to see hundreds of young college age prolife students about. They had their signs and were of good cheer. It was gratifying to see equal numbers of young men and women out in force and standing up for right.
Oh, and the writer didn't say "no young women" just fewer -- a lot of times beat writers have some sort of "go to" list for pro/anti any given issue, and "they" seem blind to the fact that some of these "go to" people will deliberately mislead. She had TWO misleading parties feed her info.
The rally hadn't taken place yet when the article was written.
I was a few minutes late on the Hill to catch the front of the March, but was there for quite some while waiting for the end of it to stream past. Teeming thousands...
I was particularly disappointed at the complete absence of counter-protesters. I had especially wanted to get some shots of them and perhaps even an interview, but even though I was v. close to the front of the March when I got to the Supreme Court building, there was nary a pro-abort to be found.
Later we discovered that the standard procedure for the counter-protesters is to show up well before the March begins so there are few or no pro-life people present. By pre-arrangement, the media come to film them and gather quotes and demonstrate that they are really the only ones there. Then they and the media take off, job done, while the teeming thousands are all still milling about on the Mall listening to the speeches.
By the time the teeming thousands of cheery pretty young pro-life girls come streaming past the court house, the pro-abortion counter-protesters (and probably their media buddies) are safely holed up in a pub somewhere near by.
Sometimes some of the media people will go down to the Mall to find the really stand-out cranks in the crowd, the old guys with the really strong southern accents croaking about God and doomsday, and make sure to give them lots of air time.
cf. the Washington Post video coverage, probably available on YouTube. It was a template of this procedure. Almost a caricature of the kind of coverage that has typified the media presence at the March for years.
12 comments:
http://theonetruefaith-faith.blogspot.com/2010/01/lies.html
This is a picture of the people on my bus.
This post from American Papist is great: Video: Media Malpractice at March for Life.
Actually, Father, if you READ the article Krista herself didn't say there were "no young women" -- she quoted several people who had their heads up their butts.
It isn't Krista who is the baddie - but she shouldn't have even bothered with the two sources she quoted.
Krista Gesaman reported in Newsweek that there were no young women at the recent March for Life in Washington.
You know a movement is dead when its adherents are incapable of smelling the stuff they are shoveling.
Father
Thank you for the link to the Washington March. It's all the more remarkable when you realise how cold and snowy it can be in Washington at this time of the year.
I has found a report of this year's San Francisco march for life, where the prolifers outnumbered the opposition by about 500:1.
The blogger calling himself "Zombie" posts an article which tries to give a balanced view, - a principle which has been lost by the liberal media.
It's worth a read
Gem - I just re-read it. Gesaman says "So this raises the question: where are the young, vibrant women supporting their pro-life or pro-choice positions?" and then quotes Kristy Maddux to explain. The article as a whole accepts the thesis that there were no young women on the march.
santeusebio - my email address is rosary@freeuk.com
Oh, it's not good reporting...she went to the wrong two people BUT don't forget the title of an article isn't necessarily written by the writer. Sometimes that's done in the typesetting process. [Or what passes for typesetting these days.]
Just whistling in the dark on the part of the older faminazi crowd.
I expect Krista hadn't attended either a "prochoice" or a prolife rally....otherwise she would have known that what the "professor" said was codswallop.
As a side note, I can remember being in DC in Jan of 95 on "rally day." I couldn't go - because I was in DC to work at the Oentagon that week. But after work (and some hours after the rally) I went up via the metro to Union station, near where the rally had taken place. I was overjoyed to see hundreds of young college age prolife students about. They had their signs and were of good cheer. It was gratifying to see equal numbers of young men and women out in force and standing up for right.
Oh, and the writer didn't say "no young women" just fewer -- a lot of times beat writers have some sort of "go to" list for pro/anti any given issue, and "they" seem blind to the fact that some of these "go to" people will deliberately mislead. She had TWO misleading parties feed her info.
The rally hadn't taken place yet when the article was written.
Unless at age 21 I am considered an old woman... :-P I went with a group of 80 college friends!
My favorite news lie was:
"Well... from our count there appeared to be a few more pro-life people then pro-choice people"
hahaha!
Maybe what they meant was that there were no young women priests???? LOL
Thanks for the link Father.
I was a few minutes late on the Hill to catch the front of the March, but was there for quite some while waiting for the end of it to stream past. Teeming thousands...
I was particularly disappointed at the complete absence of counter-protesters. I had especially wanted to get some shots of them and perhaps even an interview, but even though I was v. close to the front of the March when I got to the Supreme Court building, there was nary a pro-abort to be found.
Later we discovered that the standard procedure for the counter-protesters is to show up well before the March begins so there are few or no pro-life people present. By pre-arrangement, the media come to film them and gather quotes and demonstrate that they are really the only ones there. Then they and the media take off, job done, while the teeming thousands are all still milling about on the Mall listening to the speeches.
By the time the teeming thousands of cheery pretty young pro-life girls come streaming past the court house, the pro-abortion counter-protesters (and probably their media buddies) are safely holed up in a pub somewhere near by.
Sometimes some of the media people will go down to the Mall to find the really stand-out cranks in the crowd, the old guys with the really strong southern accents croaking about God and doomsday, and make sure to give them lots of air time.
cf. the Washington Post video coverage, probably available on YouTube. It was a template of this procedure. Almost a caricature of the kind of coverage that has typified the media presence at the March for years.
Post a Comment