The numbers are being wildly mis-reported along partisan lines. The Washington Post is calling it a laughable 'tens of thousands' while the cool aid drinkers on the web say that conservatives should "be glad you got 60,000 and quit trying to turn it into some big event." No agenda there I'm sure.
The thing to remember about liberals is that in the end they believe the truth is whatever they can convince the most people it is. It has nothing to do with empiricism. As far as they're concerned the actual number of people doesn't really matter as much as what they say the actual number of people is. It all depends on your definition of the word "is".
But for conservatives whose reality is based not on subjective redefinition but on observable and repeatable facts, the actual numbers do matter. So lets start with the photo above, as well as some others which have clearly shown the crowds occupying Pennsylvania Avenue end to end, and spilling out a little further past the Washington monument. If you apply to that the following schematic which was used by the Post and liberals to assess the size of the cheering throngs of 'people who matter' at the inauguration:
...to my eyes it works out to be about 1.6 million people... close to the 'reliable' estimates we've been seeing from the foreign media.
The threat to the MSM that comes from their trying to 'low ball' the attendance numbers for the benefit of the Whitehouse is that if I'm right and that crowd is roughly 1.6 million people, then that means that one American in every 200 attended the rally. So virtually everyone in America will have known someone who was there. The MSM has to try to convince people that they are somehow more reliable than people with whom America is personally acquainted. That's suicidal if you ask me.
Don't pay any attention to CNN and the Washington Post. Those are actual voters out there and if they all want to call it tens of thousands, let them. We just have to make sure we're there watching the ballots be counted.
3 comments:
Here's another estimate of the crowd size. I especially like the comparison to the crowd at Obama's inauguration.
http://www.gormogons.com/2009/09/how-many-people-were-at-big-912-tea.html
Even appreciating what an inexact science crowd estimation is, the MSM's bias is pretty outrageous. Calling it "thousands" is a lot like how Obama tries to sell his schemes: true in some narrow technical sense, but deliberately misleading.
No doubt. Between that and the lack of coverage on the ACORN story, it's pretty clear that they've chosen a side.
酒店上班
酒店兼職
台北酒店
打工兼差
酒店工作
酒店經紀
禮服店
酒店兼差
酒店打工
酒店PT
酒店正職
酒店賺錢
酒店日領
Post a Comment