And nobody really cares.
Estimates are in the tens of thousands - similar to what was estimated for tea parties - but it isn't exactly dominating the next-day news cycle.
The "liberal media:" not actually all that liberal. But very willing to put a mic to the mouth of people spouting right-wing hissy fits. Not so much with liberals who do the same.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Socialism?! Oh no!
I think that's a completely reasonable thing to march for, even if it is off-message. People are allowed to express opinions you find (very) distasteful. I don't think there's a visceral hatred of socialism like you think there is. Sure, many people disagree with it--and I'm one of them. But I don't hate it. I don't think it's something that's so beyond the pale that a couple of people holding up GO SOCIALISM signs at a rally should merit a mention in the New York Times.
A march showing pictures of Barack Obama as an African witch doctor, or as a Nazi, I don't think are nearly as reasonable, even if they are of course perfectly legal. I think they merit mention, because it's a testament to an undercurrent in America of anger and fear and hatred that's (in my opinion) notable. It isn't like those people co-opted the Tea Party message, a random, ridiculous set of outliers...the whole event was just one big outlet for hatred and fear and discontent. Those people were simply taking the event to its extreme, but very logical, conclusion.
A note on your correction (which I didn't see while typing up my post): 9/12 march was a Saturday, so the Tea Parties would be mentioned in the very large Sunday paper. The gay rights march occurred on a Sunday, so it gets shoved into the exceptionally small Monday paper. Saying "page A37 vs. page A12" isn't really a fair comparison.
If I'm so wrong about what the tea parties were about, enlighten me.
Also, saying that gay people (or supporters of gays) are acting against their self-interest by supporting socialism, well, is historical precedent any reason to necessarily support a cause or ideology? Civil rights was once a Republican issue, but Republicans now have an awful record on civil rights. Socialism may have been bad to the LGBT community at one point in time; is that a reason for gays to not support it today, if they feel it'll advance their objectives?
Post a Comment