Those protests will not be deemed worthy of lead story/front page attention by the national liberal Democrat media. For reasons that should be far beyond obvious.

Where did you hear about it? Oh, that's right, the first page of the the Bay Area section of the San Francisco Chronicle. I guess that paper is not part of the "national liberal Democrat media" -- until tomorrow, anyway.

Um... mantis, last I checked being placed as the "lead story/front page" in any paper meant just that the "lead story/front page."

Yet as you point out this story was buried on "first page of the the Bay Area section of the San Francisco Chronicle."

What's that... section C or D? You do gain points for noting it is the SF Chronicle but beyond that... not much.

It's section D, the local news section (hence the "Bay Area" name). I suppose that this liberal media Democrat commie terrorist paper decided to put the story about a local Baptist preacher and his local organization on the front page of the local section is clear cut evidence of their perfidy. If every little story that Joe Rightwing considers important is not the top story on A-1 of the New York Times, then the eeeevil em-ess-em is trying to deceive us all!

Btw, the amusing, and all to common on the right, assumption that newspaper readers a) don't read stories not on the front page, and b) never read past the first three grafs, is decidedly retarded. I expect no less from people eternally convinced that all news media are involved in a vast liberal conspiracy to brainwash the populace into a communist baby-killing frenzy, but it's still worth pointing out that most newspaper readers have attention spans somewhat larger than the gnat-sized ones of your typical cable news viewer.

". . utterly consumed by their self-loathing and racism."

Yes JJ the Bay area has long been know for intolerance towards others.

Aren't you needed to write tomorrow's sermon for the Westboro Baptist Church?

mantis - "I suppose that this liberal media Democrat commie terrorist paper decided to put the story about a local Baptist preacher and his local organization on the front page of the local section is clear cut evidence of their perfidy."

No, you would probably be wrong in that assumption also. As you were in trying to equate "lead story/front page" with something in section D, regardless of the political leanings of the newspaper.

"I expect no less from people eternally convinced that all news media are involved in a vast liberal conspiracy to brainwash the populace into a communist baby-killing frenzy,"

As you were in trying to equate "lead story/front page" with something in section D, regardless of the political leanings of the newspaper.

First of all, I was not equating the two, I was reminding Jason that he wouldn't even know about this story if it weren't for the "national liberal Democrat media." He was talking about the planned protests showing up as a lead/front page story. It's amusing that not only has Jason decided that the events planned by the organization will be worthy of lead story/front page coverage (no matter what else is going on that day or how newsworthy they actually turn out to be), but that they will not be given that coverage.

Anyway, even if the story is on the front page of section A, the goalposts will move yet again. There will be whining that some quote or detail was too far down in the story, or some other such nonsense.

Would that be the reverse of Shillary's Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?"

You are a child. Run along.

The "Bay Area section of the San Francisco Chronicle" is national media ? Odd choice to name if after one area of one city for a national media outlet.

"Would that be the reverse of Shillary's Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?"

You are a child. Run along.

Hilarious, Mantis.

It's a good thing we have Jayson here to remind us how "utterly consumed by their self-loathing and racism" Democrats are. Otherwise, I might actually think of them as people. It's a lot easier to marginalize the opinions of a whole group of people when you don't see them as entirely human.

I may not be a member of the Democratic party, but I'm sure as hell not a member of the Republic party either.

mantis - "Anyway, even if the story is on the front page of section A, the goalposts will move yet again. There will be whining that some quote or detail was too far down in the story, or some other such nonsense." "ou are a child. Run along."

Nice repartee mantis. Once again your true nature rears it's ugly head.

Hello knuckleheads! (Shhh..Eric & Mitchell)

Are you feeling the Obama fever?

"It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will"

Wink Wink! Have a good one!

LOL, yes -- the black preacher will have his hands full with brother Obama'scourageous voting record on behalf of the unborn.

wave,
Yup, Obama is an extreme pro-abortionist (100% rating from planned parenthood). Looks like he is a "perfect" candidate for the liberal ideology of "killing babies, not terrorists"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive

justice58... how's that Nifong thing going?

I see that Barney is demonstrating his failed understanding of the Bay area. And in other news, dog bites man.

I'd be surprised if they put important or "Lead" Local Stories in section C or D.

In fact from today's webpage, the Front Page Stories were
- A philanthropy group for Mexico run From SF
- Two SF Zoo Stories (who else is still talking about this as page 1?)
- Down on his luck War Vet with SF ties

"justice58... how's that Nifong thing going"?

Hi Marc!

Hell, I believe he got a public flogging because he dared to seek justice for a poor black woman!

Where are your knucklehead friends? They know who they are! Tell'em hi!

justice58 - Nifong got a public and LEGAL flogging for being a corrupt, incompetent A-HOLE.

"Nifong got a public and LEGAL flogging for being a corrupt, incompetent A-HOLE".
-----------------------------------------------
My eyes! My eyes!

Wash your mouth out with soap!

Wink!

"[Obama] voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive."

We call those babies here in Indiana.
We even give them protection under the Bill of Rights.

You right wingers make me laugh! You condemn abortion but support bombings of innocents in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. But, they don't count, they are brown-skinned Muslims!!!

Give me a break, you "Pro-Lifers" and not only anti-choice but also Pro-Death and Pro-Torture!
Hypocrites you all!

G. Razdin, I guess my post set you off, so I'll respond. There is a difference between innocent life and blood-thirty killers who are happy just to kill--civilians, Sunnis, Shia, Americans, children, old ladies--such as we see with the bombing of markets in Iraq. Holding someone's head under water is not torture. Hell, I used to do that to my little sister all the time. Gouging eyes, skinning alive, blow torches to the chest, disemboweling and the such ARE torture and are the stock and trade of the enemy that you apparently shed crocodile tears for.

While you are spending your time and energy hating Christians and those on the right, and arguing the sanctity of a woman's right to suck her baby out of the womb in pieces, the Islamofascists will continue their invasion of the west and one day you'll realise that it is fight, submit or die. Fortunately there will still be Marines and soldiers like my sons and nephews who will be there to protect your sorry ass.