So what was your point? Did these people NOT petition for a redress of grievances, so what if it was a lobbyist planned "assembly" if the people were truly aggrieved.Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
You haven't given anything credible, and again, the onus is on you to prove that somehow these protests were "illegitimate" because they were organized, so far you have failed miserably in that responsibility.Look bud, I have given you everything you need to know. If you will not bother to educate yourself, then just end it ok. You had your opportunity to dispute, was it you who said something about people just accepting an argument because they said so? Well, go learn about the players involved and then come back.
Wow, what an uninformed generalization, I guess you missed the sociological study that showed conservatives to generally be happier, feel more empowered, etc., and you say others need to get educated.What you say? Conservatives angry? That is shocking....when are they not angry about something? Isn't anger a core requirement to become one? Seriously, I am not arguing that some may or may not genuinely be angry. Do read the argument please.
Kid, I've done plenty of research, which is why I am being so hard on you. You're coming at this from a position of trying to mold the reality to your side in the debate, and the fact is there is nothing there for you, so far I've seen from you: Biased sources, flawed anaysis from those sources, and anger. Seriously chill and absorb for once.Dat der is sum funny math you have. Ok, what exactly have YOU shown to refute? Besides the whole "Because I says so.." (sound familiar} you have done zero research.