She’s a Fake: Sandra Fluke is Roxana Mayer

Hot Air’s Tina Korbe has put up a post regarding Sandra Fluke’s rejection of Rush Limbaugh’s apology. Does this really surprise anyone? Does anyone think that a woman who spoke before a Democrat-only Congressional hearing and lied that she and her friends spent nearly a thousand dollars a year (three-thousand during her time in law school) on contraceptives, would show the slightest bit of class and accept Rush’s apology? Let’s be honest, she’s a political prostitute. She’s willing to sell herself to push a radical feminist agenda, and to accept Rush’s apology now would not be in her interests.

Before discussing this point further, let’s go back to who Sandra Fluke actually is. Despite what we’ve been hearing in the media, as Jammie Wearing Fools uncovered, Fluke is a 30-year-old political activist, more specifically, a radical feminist, who targeted Georgetown Law because its insurance didn’t cover contraceptives. She’s the former president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, a pro-abortion group that is dedicated to fighting the “criminalization of abortion.” If you want to know what that means, give some of their writings a read. Here’s a quote from Mallory Carlberg, a member of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, responding to a pro-life rally at the University of Oklahoma College of Law.

I was so glad that OU LSRJ was able to take part in bringing conversations about the potential for State abuse to the law school. Unfortunately, the student population at most law schools is still overwhelmingly white and middle to upper class. For most, privilege allows us to ignore the ways state policies like the drug war are being used in a racist and classist manner to target certain populations for control. We are more likely to trust state actors because our experiences with police and judges are often positive. It is critically important that we be exposed to discussions on ways State power can be used to oppress not protect people since we are the next generation of policy makers. It is unlikely that many law students will ever experience this oppression firsthand, but it is a reality for countless people in this country. Ignoring this reality perpetuates an unjust judicial system – an unjust judicial system that, as last night’s talk and the recent push for personhood amendments across the nation show, has the potential to be used to strip anyone of their status as a full Constitutional person upon becoming pregnant.

An “unjust judicial system” that oppresses non-whites and the poor? Being “white and middle to upper class,” we can’t understand the tyranny of “State power”? This group is anything but mainstream. This kind of nonsense is fringe-left radicalism. As Mark Levin said last Friday, Sandra Fluke and this group represent the radical feminism of the 1960s. This has nothing to do with “women’s rights.” It’s about forwarding a radical pro-abortion agenda.

Now who is Roxana Mayer? How does she fit into this? Patterico’s Pontifications exposed her as a political prostitute. She pretended to be a pediatric primary care physician at a town hall event hosted by Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee. She didn’t even live in Jackson Lee’s district, and yet, went to the event, pretended to be a doctor to provide the Houstan Democrat cover for supporting ObamaCare. Just like now with Sandra Fluke, the media wasn’t willing to challenge her claims, let alone do their jobs in determining whether she was who she claimed to be. It was only when those like Patterico exposed Mayer as a fake, that the media took steps in corrected their stories.

As of now, the media still pretends that Sandra Fluke is a young student who is somehow being put upon by Georgetown Law. Why haven’t they asked her about her being the former president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice? Why haven’t they questioned her claim about the cost for contraception she quoted before Congress? Why haven’t they asked why she was brought before Congress in the first place? As HowTheWorldWork’s Lee Doren asked, why didn’t the media investigate her extrodinary claims?

I’m sure Lee knows why there were no follow-up questions. As with Roxana Mayer, the truth doesn’t matter when it could jeopardize their political agenda.

In the end, I don’t think Rush Limbaugh should have apologized. His point was clear, he repeated it to make sure it was clear, and yet it was twisted by Democrats and the media to portray him, as well as all conservatives commentators (as per Sandra Fluke’s statements on ‘The View’ concerning a “a segment of our political commentators” hat-tip NewsBusters.org) as misogynists. Apologizing, even the way he did, is a surrender. Rush wasn’t mistaken in his argument, and while his choice of words may be offensive to the easily-offended (are they also offender when Ed Shultz and Bill Maher insult women or just when conservatives use certain words?), he was correct in his assessment of Fluke’s character.

If the media wasn’t dedicated to discrediting conservatives and forwarding Barack Obama’s radical agenda, maybe they would have done their job and exposed Sandra Fluke. All this fiasco really does is prove that many of them are also political prostitutes. Pathetic…

UPDATE: Robert Stacy McCain at The Other McCain has uncovered even more about Sandra Fluke. As Byron York at the Washington Examiner stated, Fluke was added to February 16 House hearing on the contraceptive mandate issue at the last minute without the mandatory 72-hour advanced notice, and thus wasn’t allowed to testify. We are now beginning to understand why Democrats wouldn’t want Republicans to challenge Fluke’s claim to expertise relevant to the subject of the hearing. The 30-year-old activist, it seems, not only wants contraceptives covered by private insurers, but “gender reassignment” surgeries too. I wonder what else she would want taxpayers to pay for eh?

Funeral or Campaign Rally? Inappropriate Tone at Service for Tucson Shooting Victims

I was going to let this go. I was going to write about something else instead, but the more clips I listen to, the more I think about this whole situation, the more disgusted I am. Mark Levin made the point on his talk radio show last night that Barack Obama’s leadership was needed when this incident occurred, and instead Americans got a speech four days after the event. That’s four days too long, especially with death threats against Sarah Palin reaching, as her aide put it, an “unprecedented level” (hat-tip Hot Air’s Allahpundit).

An aide close to Sarah Palin says death threats and security threats have increased to an unprecedented level since the shooting in Arizona, and the former Alaska governor’s team has been talking to security professionals.

Since the shooting in Tucson, Palin has taken much heat for her “crosshairs” map that targeted 20 congressional Democrats in the 2010 mid-term election, including that of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was the main target of Saturday’s attack.

Friends say Palin, a possible 2012 contender, was galled as suggestions of her role in the tragedy have swirled.

Palin responded in detail today to the attacks leveled against her, but while her intentions may have been to shift the blame away from herself, she instead put her in the hot seat again…

The article then goes on to spend another page discussing the use of the term “blood libel.” No surprise though, this is the same network that attacked Palin for defending herself against vicious allegation that she was somehow to blame for the shooting. You would think that, with all this discussion of a word that is, as National Review Online’s Jim Geraghty pointed out, is used often on both sides of the aisle, that Sarah Palin simply put out a video which had her saying “blood libel” for more then seven-and-a-half minutes. She said a lot more then that, and, in my opinion, it sounds far more presidential than anything Barack Obama had put out since taking office. Thanks to Fearless Conservative for positing the video.

That sets the right tone. That is a speech Obama should have given, but instead, he attends a political rally and shows us once again why he shouldn’t be sitting in the Oval Office.

To respond to comments made by Hot Air’s Allahpundit who said the speech was excellent and that it played well among conservative pundits, I believe the reason for this positive response is because it is far better than previous funeral services. Many expected this to be a replay of the memorial service for Paul Wellstone, but, with the bar set so low, they were pleasantly surprised that it wasn’t blatantly politically partisan. Don’t get me wrong though, this was political and it showed.

Michelle Malkin has a great breakdown of the yesterday’s service and I would recommend my modest readership give it a read. The first issue raised is that this service was actually branded, the “Together We Thrive” rally. How many funeral services have you been to where they gave out t-shirts? Who thought this was in anyway appropriate? Never have I approved of funeral services being anything but somber events where people gather to remember those lost. When I was in high school, a classmate of mine was killed in an automobile accident. His was the first funeral I attended, but even then I knew what was and wasn’t appropriate, and it disgusted me that the pastor to use it as an opportunity to sell his book. This service was, in comparison, was no better. This helped set an inappropriate tone right away, showing just how political this event was.

The second issue is the location. Who thought the University of Arizona campus would be an appropriate location? If it is the only place largest enough to hold the event, then it’s okay, but it wasn’t the location of the tragedy, the reason why the the memorial service for the victims of the Virginia Tech massacre was held at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University campus. As many have stated, including Sean Hannity, the tone of this event was set by the audience, one filled with university students. In the words of Fox News’ Brit Hume, this was a “pep rally.” Thank to The Daily Caller for the video.

Is it what the community of Tucson wanted? Maybe, maybe not. I am pretty sure, however, that loud cheers and shouts of “WE LOVE YOU!” from some audience members when the President took the stage is far from appropriate behaviour for funeral attendees. As well, it was grossly inappropriate that some audience members to booed Arizona Governor Jan Brewer when she took the stage. That is downright disgraceful conduct.

The third issue is Obama’s speech. Returning to Mark Levin’s comments, why did it take four days for him to make such a statement? It is fairly politically neutral and doesn’t take direct aim at those on the left who have been blaming the right’s “heated rhetoric” for this tragedy. In fact, it is so whitewashed that The New York Time’s believes he was referring to Palin’s response to their smears against her (hat-tip Hot Air’s Allahpundit). Is this the best he and his writing staff could come up with? Giving speeches and leadership aren’t the same, and if this is all he can say after four days of vicious attacks on conservatives, Palin in particular, then why couldn’t he have asked for time on television and/or radio and make these statements. This wait-and-see approach, as we saw with the election protests in Iran, demonstrates his weakness.

In conclusion, I would like to point to a letter sent to Michelle Malkin by one of her readers, Joshua Jones, who compared President George W. Bush’s speech at the Virginia Tech memorial service to the Obama’s at last night’s event.

Mrs. Malkin,

My background:

I was in the audience in Cassel Coliseum on April 17, 2007. I heard President Bush speak after a crazy b@st@rd (Seung-Hui Cho) shot up my college.

In a few days I would bury a man whom I had last seen when he came up to me the week earlier to congratulate me on my baptism and entry into the Catholic Church over Easter Weekend. It would be my first military funeral, but not my last.

His name was Matthew Joseph La Porte.

I was a sophomore member of the Virginia Tech Corps of Cadets (VTCC). Several of my friends and the woman I love most dearly were supposed to be in Norris Hall. Thankfully none of them were due to being late, ill, or simply choosing to skip classes. I was sequestered in the Pamplin College of Business building during the attack.

President Bush spoke for barely 10 minutes if that. He was solemn, dignified and respectful-although the microphone that broadcast into the rest of the coliseum was barely working and we could barely hear and understand him as a result-we got the point he made.

President Obama’s disgusting attempt at what appears to be a political rally in the wake of a similar massacre is beyond reprehensible.

Joshua also sent a video of Bush’s speech and how the audience behaved during it. Suffice to say, they were far more dignified than those at the University of Arizona.

That was a memorial service, that couldn’t be mistaken for a campaign rally. Last night’s event was inappropriate, but considering the behaviour this week, it’s no surprise. Pathetic…

UPDATE: Audio of ‘The Bob & Mark Show’ from Alaska’s KWHL 106.5. Bob and Mark are discussing yesterday’s memorial service. Thank to uffdamega52 for the clip.

I completely agree. There is a vastly different standard by which Barack Obama and Sarah Palin are judged. All I have heard today, even in the Canadian media, was how great the event and Obama’s speech was.

Sarah Palin is blasted for defending herself and using the term “blood libel,” while Barack Obama is praised for turning last night’s memorial service into a campaign rally. Am I missing something here?

UPDATE: More audio from uffdamega52. John Ziegler being interviewed on ‘The Bob & Mark Show’ about his latest column, “A Tale of Two Speeches: Sarah Palin and Barack Obama on the Tragedy in Tucson.”

Suffice to say, it is pretty clear that there are different standards. This is why I disagree completely with New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s comments today (hat-tip Hot Air’s Allahpundit). No matter what Barack Obama does, he will be praised. On the other hand, Sarah Palin’s could have given an unscripted speech and she would have been criticized for not thinking through he response to the allegations that she was somehow to blame for this tragedy. The President was speaking to an adoring crowd while the former Alaskan Governor was trying address her critics, both in the media and public, many of whom are not only blaming her for the Jared Lee Loughner’s actions, but want to see her punished for her supposed involvement.

What could have Sarah Palin done to appease these people? Nothing. I don’t see how she how she could have acted any differently during this fiasco. As John Ziegler states in his post, she is guilty no matter what she does.

UPDATE: Mark Levin made the point on his show tonight that Barack Obama should have called for an end to the attacks on Sarah Palin and other conservatives. My question here is why didn’t he? Does he enjoy watching his base viciously assault his critics? I really don’t know, but I will say that I am still waiting for Obama to actually be presidential. Until then, he just sounds like any other politician on the campaign trial, just like he always does.

UPDATE: Hot Air’s Allahpundit has a new post up concerning the media’s comparison between Barack Obama’s speech and Sarah Palin’s. While I made a comparison between the tone of both myself, I at least could understand the differences between each speech. Most of those in the media, however, either couldn’t or simply didn’t want to.

Much like John Ziegler’s column, Allahpundit discusses the different standard by which the two are judged, pointing out how reporters missed the point of Palin’s speech. The former Alaskan Governor was, unlike the President, defending herself from vicious allegations that somehow she was responsible for Jared Lee Loughner’s actions. I’m sure that if I was accused of being involved in the shooting in Tucson, my response would also sound aggrieved. This is much like the attack on Palin for injecting herself into a story about how she is somehow to blame for the tragedy in Tucson, Arizona. Once again, how can she inject herself into a story that it centered around her?

Not only is the post quite funny, but it is very well documented. I recommend my modest readership give it a look.

Michael Coren on the Tucson, Arizona shootings

While I am thinking about whether or not to put up another post, I have to say that today’s episode of ‘The Michael Coren Show’ definitely covers all the important issues I wanted to raise. Thanks to SDAMatt2 for posting this video.

In this instance, Michael Coren, who’s not a fan, comes to the defense of Sarah Palin like Barbara Walters did today on ‘The View’ (hat-tip to Hot Air’s Allahpundit). Noel Sheppard has the full story and a clip from the segment on ‘The View’ if anyone is interested. I have to say that I am upset that it took such a tragedy to get them to come to Palin’s defense against a media which has done everything to demonize her. As Michelle Malkin stated last night on her blog, this is a continuing campaign to smear those on the right, a vicious campaign that has become very ugly in the last few years. I think Tarek Fatah should have given it a read before ranting about the whitewashing of the left’s involvement in tragedy. Same goes for his ignorant and hateful comments about the people of Arizona. If he is concerned with hateful rhetoric, he shouldn’t have made those comments.

As for the comments about this not being political, I both agree and disagree with this. I agree that this is the work of a deranged individual so it doesn’t matter what Jared Lee Loughner’s political affiliation is. This is an individual who was obsessed with conspiracy theories, most notably the conspiracy theories involving the September 11 attacks (hat-tip to Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey). On the other hand, I disagree. As Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters.org reported last weekend, ABC interviewed people who know Loughner and, according to Caitlin Parker, someone who spoke at length with him, he was “left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy.” This does seem to be the source of Loughner’s hatred towards Giffords as he felt she wasn’t informed enough on the issues, as Parker stated in the ABC interview. The vast majority of this deranged individual’s beliefs are shared by those on the left. There hasn’t been any discussion on this in the media has there? Am I saying the left is to blame for this? Of course not. As with Dr. Amy Bishop and Joseph Andrew Stack, Loughner is a crazy person and crazy people will do crazy things. What I am saying though is that the vast majority of these people, despite claims to the contrary, come from the left, so if those like “Hanoi Jane” Fonda, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, and those at CNN and The New York Times really want to play this game, they won’t like the outcome.

As for the rest of the comments, as a Canadian, I don’t begrudge the gun culture of the United States. If we did carry firearms like they do in America, we might not have had the massacre at École Polytechnique, the tragedy briefly discussed on today’s show. This nonsense about the difference between our countries frustrates me as those who are obsessed with the idea that Canada and the United States are vastly different seem to forget centuries of shared history and an almost identical political and social culture. Let’s also not pretend that Canadian politics are anymore proper than American politics. Have we already forgotten Libby Davies’ rant about Israel?

In any event, this story is far from over. The weekend has just ended but it seems that the fallout from the shootings in Tucson, Arizona has just begun. Let’s remember that it is Jared Lee Loughner who committed this horrible act, not Sarah Palin nor anyone else on the right, and let’s also remember to pray for the victims of this horrible attack. That is what really matters, not trying to figure out who should be blamed for the actions of a deranged individual.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey at Hot Air has a post up about comments made by Time magazine’s Mark Halperin about conservatives defending themselves. Video via The Daily Caller.

What did I say about Canadian politics being no different. This is the exact same approach Tarek Fatah took in condemning Sarah Palin for removing the much discussed crosshairs map from her website, that by defending themselves they are contributing to the problem. Huh? It doesn’t make sense, but this seems to be the newest line of attack on the former Alaskan Governor and those who share her political views.

In any event, I recommend my readership give Ed Morrissey’s post a read, especially since he also reports on the reaction by right-leaning pundits to Mark Halperin’s comments.

More on the Stewart/Colbert rally: Attendence Numbers and ‘Drinking with Bob’

I had said in the previous post, I was waiting on something more official than earlier estimates on the crowd size of the ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear’, the event Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert had on Saturday. CBS is reporting 215,000 but there is reason to doubt their numbers. Aaron Worthing at Patterico’s Pontifications has a post up saying that CBS’ numbers, and Little Green Footballs’ Charles Johnson’s support for said numbers, are wrong and that more people did attend Glenn Beck’s ‘Restoring Honor Rally’, providing photographic evidence to back up his claim.

And the latest from Johnson is now he is bull___ting about Stewart’s rally. Like I said, I don’t care about crowd size at these things, but I do expect honesty on the subject. So as of now, Johnson has a post that proclaims that 215K attended the Stewart rally….

…Well, which should we believe, Charles? CBS news or our lying eyes?

As stated previously, NBC’s Domenico Montanaro tweeted that officials estimated that 300,000-325,000 people attended the Beck rally, which is still considerably higher than the 215,000 estimated to have attended the Stewart rally. Still, I have trouble trusting CBS’ estimate, especially given how partisan their station and its affiliates have become. Today it came out that reporters from KTVA, CBS’ affiliate in Alaska, accidentally left a voice mail for Republican Alaska Senate candidate Joe Miller which reveals they were going to attempt to smear him by locating a child molester at his rally. Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey has been covering this story since this morning, posting on KTVA’s disingenuous admission of half-guilt, in which they claimed that while the reporters did in fact work for them, the recording wasn’t as it sounded. Suffice to say, CBS’ bias towards Democrats, as well as their bias towards the Stewart/Colbert rally, is hard to ignore so whatever they report now shouldn’t be accepted without serious scrutiny.

Aside from the number of attendees, what about the who these people were that attended the rally? The Daily Caller’s Matthew Boyle and Laura Donovan covered this, pointing out that not only did most of them not know who was running in their districts, but they were going to vote Democrat. NewsBusters.org’s Matthew Sheffield reported on the attendees’ hatred of Glenn Beck and Fox News, as well as the signs they were carrying around, some with “Adolph Hitler mustaches” on prominent Republicans and conservatives like Sarah Palin, John Boehner and Rush Limbaugh. Reason TV’s Nick Gillespie and Michael Moynihan also attended the event, discovering, as Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey pointed out, that “sanity” was a relative term.

Suffice to say, these people are definitely different then those who attended Beck’s rally. As shown in Reason TV’s video, many of them were typical “drones”, people who were unable to accept that Barack Obama and the Democrats were in any way responsible for the situation America was in. Why is this? As ‘Drinking with Bob’ points out, they were told previously by Jon Stewart that “The One” was the one to vote for, and while many of them can no longer trust the man they helped put in the White House, they continue to trust the person who told them who to elect him.

It is any wonder why Arianna Huffington and Oprah Winfrey paid for the buses to get these people to the rally? As Doug Powers at Michelle Malkin’s blog stated, there is a noticeable lack of support for the Democrats with midterm elections two days away.

Even with CBS spinning the attendance numbers, the truth is that rally was a failure. Sure it was mildly entertaining for those who attended, but it didn’t give attendees any real reason vote on November 2nd. They know who they are supposed to vote for, though I have a hard time believing that they will be at the polls in significant enough numbers to make any noticeable impact on the elections’ results. Democrats are going to suffer significant loses and there nothing Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and CBS can do to change that.

UPDATE: What did I say about “drones”? Michelle Malkin has a post up looking at Obama’s most dedicated and delusional followers from before the last election and now as “Hope and Change” will be voted down tomorrow. One has to wonder if “Nameless the Begger” was at the ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear’ eh?

UPDATE: Hot Air’s Allahpundit has a post up concerning Glenn Beck’s response to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear.’ While Beck take a few shots at Stewart, more of his criticism is for Colbert who “jumped the shark” with his antics. TheRightscoop.com has the video up of the discussion on Beck’s show about the event and I recommend my modest readership give it a watch.

Anything But Sanity: Stewart/Colbert Rally and Radical Muslim Yusuf Islam

Hat tip to Blazing Cat Fur for this story. Those who haven’t already donated to Blazing Cat Fur’s legal fund, please visit his website and help out as best you can. This from Aaron Worthing at Patterico’s Pontifications…

…I have been watching the Jon Stewart rally and my Tivo’s running a bit behind because I have been pausing to deal with life, but my jaw dropped wide open when Stewart introduced a man named “Yusuf.” That would be Yusuf Islam, the man formerly known as Cat Stevens, who then played a rendition of his song “Peace Train.”

That would be the same Yusuf Islam/Cat Stevens who endorsed the Fatwah against Salman Rushdie… And this ___hole is in the rally to restore sanity?!

Worthing includes a links to a New York Times story from 1989 about Yusuf Islam’s support of for the call Salman Rushdie’s death, and another from Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs, outlining among other things, Yusuf being arrested, deported and barred from entering Israel for donating thousands of dollars to Hamas, an Islamic terrorist organization. How is having an Islamic radical like this supposed to help in restoring “sanity”?

As many bloggers, including Doug Powers and Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey have pointed out, this event is a joke. Call it “Irony-Stock” or “LOLapalooza” (I am more preferable to “Rally to Secure the Drones”), but instead of being a meaningful event about specific issues or simply to demonstrated American voter frustration with the “ruling elites” in Washington, what we have here is not only political laziness, but a desperate act to round up support for the Democrats through, as Bill Press so “eloquently” put it, a “Big Masturbation Festival”, where those attending are made to believe that they are “free-thinking and unique individuals”, not “drones” who’s votes are need to hold back what appears now to be a Republican sweep, in Congress at least. The inclusion of an Islamic radical as entertainment for this event highlights this point as it shows that Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are very out of touch with what the average American, especially when it comes to fears of Muslim fundamentalism. What could be more inappropriate after yesterday’s terrorist scare concerning the explosive devices found aboard cargo planes bound to the United States from Yemen than to invite an individual who supports and promotes such radicalism to perform at your event? Were they out of their minds?

If anything, Yusuf Islam’s appearance at Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear’ demonstrates just how little thinking had gone into this event. There is nothing “sane” about this. Yes, this event was a joke, a very unfunny one directed at youth who couldn’t care less about the real problems America is facing, but it is also more than that. It is a clear example of just how irrelevant and offensive these comedians have become. If it isn’t Colbert making a mockery of himself and the Congressional Democrats, it is this ill-conceived publicity stunt. This shtick just isn’t funny anymore…

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey from Hot Air has posted about Yusuf Islam’s appearance at the “Rally to Restore Sanity.” While Yusuf would like people to believe that he was simply joking about wanting Salman Rushdie dead, Ed isn’t buying it. Morrissey also goes on to say that Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have turned a “waste of time” into a “despicable, offensive embarrassment.” So what is the Comedy Central’s position on this? As Ed points out, they had previously censored South Park in fear of Muslim’s reaction to the cartoon portrayal of Mohammend, something which the show’s creators received death threats for. So has Comedy Central made the leap from appeasement of fundamentalist Muslims to condoning Islamic radicalism? If I were them, I would be drafting a statement condemning this nonsense right now.

UPDATE: Hat tip to Hot Air’s Allahpundit for the link. The Daily Caller’s Matthew Boyle and Laura Donovan were at the ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear’ and discovered what should have been obvious. They found that the attendees were going to, more of less, vote Democrat, no matter who is running.

…For instance, Liz Pifer, a student at Robert Morris University in Pittsburgh, Pa., told TheDC that though she plans to vote in the midterm elections on Tuesday, she didn’t know who was running for Pennsylvania’s open Senate seat. She later said that she thought Joe Sestak was running, and that she’ll probably vote for him because he’s a Democrat. As for House candidates, she said, “I don’t know who’s running”…

…McIntosh, who is registered in Virginia, said he plans vote Tuesday for Democratic candidates down the line, even though he doesn’t know who they are.

Melissa Miller, who came to rally from Texas with her husband Tom, said, told TheDC she’s voting for the Democrat
House candidate, but couldn’t name the candidate from her district.

“I was mostly paying attention to the governor’s race,” Miller said.

Anti-Tea-Party-ness and anger toward Fox News dominated most signs at the rally on the National Mall, a clear fit for comedian Stewart’s jabs at what he calls extremism.

Shoshana Senn, 15, of Arlington, Va., thinks Tea Partiers are “dumb.”

Senn made the trek to the rally from DC’s suburbs with her mom, who she said dressed up like a “zombie Tea Partier” for Halloween.

Elwin Guild, who currently live in Connecticut but lived in the District for 30 years before, said he was pleased with the rally’s outcome…

I recommend that my modest readership give Boyle and Donovan’s article a full read as it has a fair bit more than I posted here. Is anyone really surprised about this? The average attendee has no idea who is running in their district, has an ill-informed position on the Tea Party, calling them “dumb” and “extremist”, and don’t want to vote for Republicans. I would also imagine that they had no idea who Yusuf Islam was when he got up on stage to perform. I don’t think they would have enjoyed his music knowing he believes that Islamic apostates, those who convert away from Islam, should be killed. What did I say about the “Rally to Secure the Drones”?

As for numbers, I am going to wait for more information on that. All I am reading so far is biased accounts from media outlets which are purposefully low-balling Glenn Beck’s ‘Restoring Honor Rally’ (CBS’ 87,000 instead of NBC’s Domenico Montanaro’s 300,000-325,000). Seeing how Arianna Huffington and Oprah Winfrey paid for buses to get people to today’s rally, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was more, but I seriously doubt the figures I am seeing concerning attendance.

UPDATE: I have a new post up on Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear’. Give it a look, it has new reports on attendance and impressions of those who attended from various political pundits.

UPDATE: Aaron Worthing at Patterico’s Pontifications has two posts up concerning Salman Rushdie’s thoughts on Yusuf Islam performing at Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear.’ This first post is about Rushdie’s response to the news that the man who had supported calls for his death was at the event, while the second is a follow-up with Stewart’s comments after being questioned by Rushdie about having this Islamic radical at his rally. In short, Rushdie wasn’t impressed and Stewart really couldn’t care how he felt about this Yusuf being at the event.

It is moments like these that expose Jon Stewart’s lack of integrity. It doesn’t matter who is threatened by Islamic fundamentalists like Yusuf Islam, Stewart really wanted to hear Peace Train performed at his ill-conceived and poorly executed rally… Pathetic…

UPDATE: Now Hot Air’s Allahpundit is weighing in on Jon Stewart’s comments to Salman Rushdie about Yusuf Islam performing at the ‘Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear.’ He doesn’t appear to be anymore impressed than the rest of us about Stewart’s comments, but spends the majority of his post disproving the belief that Yusuf either didn’t mean what he said or that he has apologized to Rushdie for supporting calls for the author’s murder. I recommend my modest readership give the post a read as Allahpundit does take a fair bit of time debunking this myth.