Early Reactions to Saturday's Anti-War Rally

AP and Reuters are both using the figure "tens of thousands" to measure the number of protesters in Washington, DC today, quoting an unnamed DC parks police officer. How many people is that? Fewer than 100,000, or possibly more?

Let's not forget Matt Taibbi's 2003 article in which he berated the U.S. press for cravenly "hiding" 200,000+ people at the January 2003 anti-war rally. (This was before Bush's March invasion, you recall). The media drastically underestimated the protesters' numbers to as low as 30,000, whereas Metro Police Chief Ramsey said it was bigger than the anti-war rally in October 2002 rally that drew 100,000, and one of the "biggest...in recent times."

Yet even as Taibbi admits, "crowd counting is a tricky business." I'll be curious to read his Low Post blog reaction in Rolling Stone, because I'm sure he was there, counting.

But what I really wanted to mention was the unbelievable stupidity of the rally's organizers, United for Peace & Justice, which is a coalition of several hundred anti-war groups.

Yes, UPJ should be given all manner of kudos for organizing this timely anti-war event. So what did they do so stupidly wrong? Looking at the mainstream media coverage, any average American could tell you....

(AP): "Protesters energized by fresh congressional skepticism about the Iraq war demanded a withdrawal of U.S. troops in a demonstration Saturday that drew tens of thousands and brought Jane Fonda back to the streets." [Emphasis mine -- J]


(Reuters): "Veterans and military families joined some lawmakers, peace groups and actors including Vietnam war protester Jane Fonda to urge Congress and President George W. Bush to stop funding the war and pull troops from Iraq."

(AP): "Showcased speakers in addition to Fonda included actors Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins and Danny Glover.

"Fonda was a lightning rod in the Vietnam era for her outspoken opposition to that war, earning the derisive nickname ''Hanoi Jane'' from conservatives for traveling to North Vietnam during the height of that conflict 35 years ago. She had avoided anti-Iraq war appearances until now."

(Reuters): "Fonda, who was criticized for her opposition to the Vietnam war, drew huge cheers when she addressed the crowd. She noted that she had not spoken at an anti-war rally in 34 years."


(AP photo caption): "Actress Jane Fonda, right, smiles with Eve Ensler, author of 'The Vagina Monologues,' center, at the U.S. Navy Memorial as they participate in a protest against the war in Iraq, Saturday Jan. 27, 2007, in Washington. Actor Sean Penn can be seen at left."

IDIOTS! Every f-ing time they do this!! Who the hell invited these f-ing Hollywood celebrities? Why are they there? What possible "value" are they adding to this event?? And the most important rhetorical question: Where's Team America when you really need them to waste some sanctimonious, self-promoting, lefty-lib camera hogs?

Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Danny Glover, favorite conservative pinata "Hanoi Jane" Fonda and -- what the hell!? -- "Vagina Monologues" author Eve Ensler! That kind of lineup of usual liberal suspects needs no further mocking. They're a mockery unto themselves.

"But," pointed out a friend, "you don't seem to understand that, as long as Susan Sarandon and Sean Pean are showing up at a rally, the rally is guarenteed at least some press coverage; famous names attract journalists and attention."

To which I say: This was a planned rally that attracted tens of thousands of people. The media can't ignore it. So, all these celebrities' presence does is leave the media's viewers/readers the impression that this was some celebrity-orchestrated and dominated event, when it wasn't. It was dozens of grassroots organizations getting together, doing all the heavy lifting, making sure thousands of people would turn out, just so these f---ers could waltz in at the end and act like it was their show.

Their presence, at least according to the media, almost completely dominated the rally in Washington. Of course that's not true, but since most Americans weren't there, it doesn't matter. Perception is reality. And the MSM's reporting of this event would make any decent American think it was a no-good rally of dope-smoking, anti-American Hollywood liberals and lesbians.

But that's the media's job. Distortion, I mean. I'm not really mad at them. I'm mad at the anti-war rally's organizers for repeating this stupid mistake for the umpteenth time in recent years. Liberals fail to understand basic PR and marketing.

Listen, United for Peace & Justice: Jane Fonda needs you a hell of a lot more than you need her. She wasn't attending anti-war rallies when a majority of Americans still skeptically supported the war. No, she's glomming on to the anti-war crowd now to bask in the adulation of the majority.

Silly UPJ, you don't need B-list celebrities to attract attention or lend your event any credibility. About 70% of Americans already oppose the Iraq war; and almost 90% oppose sending more troops. In this political climate, rallying against the war should be a slam dunk! You've already got 70% of America on your side! Why f--- up a sure thing by inviting guests whom most Americans consider sniveling, immature, amoral traitors and idiots?

Here's some more unsolicited advice, UPJ: Next time Jane Fonda or Sean Penn calls up asking to speak at your anti-war rally just to get another mega-crowd orgasm, say, "Sure, great, thanks, we'd be honored! Just let me put you in touch with our event coordinator..." who will give them driving directions to an empty field somewhere in Maryland. I doubt they'll call back after that.

And while we're at it, let's turn away all the Usual Liberal Suspects who haunt these rallies. From now on, the list of guest speakers shall not include:

> Native Americans in costume, when the event has nothing to do with Indian affairs;
> Outspoken homosexuals whose only credentials are being outspoken, and homosexual;
> University professors;
> Anyone angry and black;
> Authors who aren't featured in Oprah's book club; and
> Bono.

I hate to be so discriminating, but the Left needs to wise up. Look at the Right. They don't parade guys like Jerry Falwell, Mark Foley, Richard Perle, and Steve Forbes at their rallies and events. No, they use guys like Steve Largent and JC Watts. And if a celebrity, like Tom Selleck or Bruce Willis, is ever invited to speak, you can be sure he's on the record saying only good things about America.

To be maximally effective in terms of PR, the guest speakers at today's rally should have included exclusively:

> Suburban soccer moms (preferably white and from the South);
> Some cute, sincere kid (preferably white) who wrote an anti-war essay or started a web site (there was one of these, thankfully);
> Iraq war vets (preferably white amputees in wheelchairs);
> Korea/Vietnam/WWII vets (preferably gray and wearing medals);
> Some firefighters or policemen (preferably from 9/11); and
> Maybe some actors like Bea Arthur and Wilford Brimley.

I hate to be so cynically calculating, my friends, but we can't afford not to be in such times. You either work the media, or you get worked over. Please, let's not repeat the same dumb mistakes again! Meaning well won't cut the mustard anymore.


Postscript: In a future post, I will share more of my thoughts on what effective liberal protests rallies & demonstrations should look like.

PPS: The International Herald Tribune on page 4 of its Tuesday edition after the Saturday anti-war rally quoted a UPJ organizer who said 400,000 protestors showed up in Washington, DC.