Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the OP would step away from Fox News every now and again; he would know that the march was carried on every major channel including Pence's religious fervor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
What the OP is really whining about is that there were only a handful of pro-forced-birthers who showed up compared to the massive turnout--all across the country--to the Women's March, an event which garnered a lot of media attention because of its size and scope. Unlike the pro-forced-birth march.
Suck it up, snowflakes. America just isn't that into you.
Not important to our elite / corporate media. Now Madonna making threats, that's (fake) news!
Elsewhere it was noted on this forum that the liberal event created 30 tons of trash, the conservative, zero tons of trash. This has been consistent for many events over many years, the pro environmental leftists are the biggest creators of trash by far of any organized group to protest.
Sources? "This forum" is not a valid source, as surely you must be aware. If you are counting trash which was disposed of properly, you might be somewhere in the ballpark, considering the vast numbers of participants in the Women's March.
If you are referring to the signs which were left along the White House fence following the Women's March, this was a deliberate display. Remember all those flowers left along the fence at Kensington Palace after Princess Diana was killed? They carried a message - so did the signs left at the White House. In neither case were the flowers or the signs "trash".
Please also cite your source for your other claim that "environmental leftists are the biggest creators of trash by far..." Thank you.
The March for Life was covered on page two of my moderate Democratic local Sunday paper, with an article that covered about half the page. It was also covered on network news, radio, and online.
I do not advocate for abortion, and am a strong supporter of adoption, in particular, special needs adoption. That said, I think abortion is sometimes a tragic necessity. Those who rail against it would have more credibility if they'd support birth control, adoption, child care, improved health care for women and children, education, stronger penalties for those who rape and abuse women and girls and abuse children, clearing up the shameful backlog of rape kits in many states, and if they would offer more sympathetic, respectful and practical support to those facing problem pregnancies. You can throw in more family-friendly/child-friendly policies at all levels of government to assure the best future for children.
So often, those who claim to be Pro-Life seem to forget about life after the womb. Supporting policies which help create the best possible future for children and families should be common ground, in order to minimize this agonizing choice.
Trump was sued for fraud by alums of his bogus "Trump University", but settled out of court, in New York in December, for twenty five million dollars, to avoid a trial.
I am surprised if you missed the story, which received major coverage for months, but you can always catch up online simply by searching "trump university lawsuit", at a search engine of your choice. Trump previously claimed that he never settled out of court - but he did in this very well-covered case.
You're right that technically, no court "found this to be the case" - but that was only because Trump settled out of court, as you probably know. Nice try at misleading, though.
This whole shabby situation certainly seems like an admission of wrong-doing to me.
It was covered. Quit whining. It was stupid anyway.
Please explain why marching for the rights of an unborn baby is stupid but a bunch of crude women marching for the right to end life is not stupid? Either they both are stupid or they both have the to right to be heard. Do you ever open your eyes long enough to see how rediculous some of your statements are?
BTW: no the march was not covered by the press the same way the march for women was covered. Maybe that was because there was the vulgarity we saw when some idouts chose to embarrass other women by what they wore and said.
Please explain why marching for the rights of an unborn baby is stupid but a bunch of crude women marching for the right to end life is not stupid? Either they both are stupid or they both have the to right to be heard. Do you ever open your eyes long enough to see how rediculous some of your statements are?
BTW: no the march was not covered by the press the same way the march for women was covered. Maybe that was because there was the vulgarity we saw when some idouts chose to embarrass other women by what they wore and said.
Every news network I saw did cover it. It was not covered in the same way because it was so much
smaller in size. When you have millions of people come together to March on a single day, it is a special news event. It was a historic event....doesn't happen every year.
Size and scope wise though...it's like comparing the Superbowl to the five hundred people who
came out to watch the state's middle school football championship. Yes, the Superbowl gets more media attention...one event(The Womens March) drew millions of people all over the planet...the other (Right to life March) was a small fraction of the size of the first.
Please explain why marching for the rights of an unborn baby is stupid but a bunch of crude women marching for the right to end life is not stupid? Either they both are stupid or they both have the to right to be heard. Do you ever open your eyes long enough to see how rediculous some of your statements are?
BTW: no the march was not covered by the press the same way the march for women was covered. Maybe that was because there was the vulgarity we saw when some idouts chose to embarrass other women by what they wore and said.
I don't think that participants in the march for life were 'stupid' they were showing up to promote their beliefs and that's never 'stupid', but to claim that a group of maybe 50,000 would or should get the same press coverage as one where 500,000 showed up just a few days earlier is baffling.
Please explain why marching for the rights of an unborn baby is stupid but a bunch of crude women marching for the right to end life is not stupid? Either they both are stupid or they both have the to right to be heard.
Did anyone stop the pro-forced-birthers from marching? Why no, they did not. You're just pissed because the pro-forced-birth march garnered a minuscule turnout compared to the Women's march. You don't have to admit it out loud, anyone reading your whiny post can see it quite easily enough.
It was covered but very shallowly compared to the coverage of the women's march. Maybe it has to do with entertainment factor involved? Some of the media probably felt the public would pay more attention to the showing of vagina costumes, questionable and I use the word questionable not lightly, entertainers who want to burn down the Whitehouse and a bunch of tampons laying all over the place?
It was covered but very shallowly compared to the coverage of the women's march. Maybe it has to do with entertainment factor involved? Some of the media probably felt the public would pay more attention to the showing of vagina costumes, questionable and I use the word questionable not lightly, entertainers who want to burn down the Whitehouse and a bunch of tampons laying all over the place?
Maybe because nearly three million turned out for the Woman's March, and a paltry couple thousand turned out for the pro-forced-birth march? Nah, couldn't be that. It has to be some kind of media conspiracy.
(Psst: Nita, there were no "vagina costumes." You make yourself look really silly and out of touch when you post stupid things like that.)
I saw some. The march has been a yearly event for a long time now. Nothing different about it this year than from all the others. The news goes were the new stuff abides.
I will agree with you on that. but with all the coverage on the Women's march, this event could have been given a little more. Had it only been the one march and nothing the following week would have been different.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
