Who's the problem, here, Nancy?

So, the New York Times in a typically balanced report described the protesters at the G20 in Pittsburgh in this way:

"PITTSBURGH — Several thousand demonstrators espousing and denouncing a host of causes converged on downtown Pittsburgh on Friday, chanting, pumping up signs and playing instruments in a peaceful and permitted march calling for solutions to a range of problems that they attributed to the economic policies of the world leaders at the Group of 20 meeting." The article goes on gushing about this cuddly protest in similarly nauseating prose and closes,

"After more than an hour, the crowd began to disperse, some wondering aloud if the G-20 leaders would hear their messages.

"Cory Perrotte, 20, a student from Duquesne University, was optimistic that it would be hard to ignore thousands in the street.

“'They will listen to a certain degree,' he said. 'They might not necessarily do anything.'”

Wow. Here's the part they left out of that story:

"A group of close to 500 left arsenal park about four miles north of the convention center and began an un-permitted march towards the convention center. They reached a police roadblock where an automated message was broadcast through speakers from a riot control vehicle. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/26/world/26pittsburgh.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=G20%20protests&st=cse)

"Marchers then rolled a dumpster down the street towards police who responded by firing tear gas. The crowd then broke up, retreating in the other direction." (http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/09/24/protestor-less-in-pittsburgh/) The latter report goes on to mention that there were likely far less anarchists present than reported.

Additionally, we've all seen the video clips of the clowns at that protest, jumping up and down on police cars, being gassed and arrested, etc. I haven't seen any photos of the aftermath, but I suspect the protestors left a bit of a mess, since they caused thousands in property damage.

Now, let's contrast that spectacle with the reporting and realities of the event in DC on 9/12. Here's the NY Times' take on it:

"WASHINGTON — A sea of protesters filled the west lawn of the Capitol and spilled onto the National Mall on Saturday in the largest rally against President Obama since he took office, a culmination of a summer-long season of protests that began with opposition to a health care overhaul and grew into a broader dissatisfaction with government. [Oh, horrors!]

...

"The atmosphere was rowdy at times, with signs and images casting Mr. Obama in a demeaning light. One sign called him the “parasite in chief.” Others likened him to Hitler. Several people held up preprinted signs saying, “Bury Obama Care with Kennedy,” a reference to the Massachusetts senator whose body passed by the Capitol two weeks earlier to be memorialized." (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/politics/13protestweb.html?scp=16&sq=Jeff%20Zeleny&st=cse) [insensitive rednecks!]

Interestingly, no matter what the estimates of attendance of the 9/12 event are, there were certainly more people there than at the G20 protests. More importantly, there were ZERO arrests and ZERO property destruction. The Obama Maniacs that attended the "immaculation" and the dawning era of hope, change and enviro-supremacy absolutely TRASHED the National Mall. Yet we left the place clean.

So, which group is the most sinister, more prone to violence and more deserving of Nancy Pelosi's hand-wringing and tears? Of course, she's welcome to weep all she wants when her "reign" is ended by these "maniacs" peacefully and quietly --maybe even smilingly--walking into the voting booth in November, 2010.