Rockwell My Ass

In keeping with the vein of RKB’s point that liberals were solidly behind President Bush after 9/11, I decided to look for an event I remembered that happened about a month after it. Sure enough, I found a link today with a photo.

Now, I will caveat this by saying that it’s from the World Socialist Web Site. However, anyone in New York at the time knows the size of this demonstration (for once, I’d reckon they didn’t inflate those numbers in their press release) because every news outlet covered it extensively, making sure to note that these were New Yorkers who were protesting the war that was started in our city.

New York City protest opposes war in Afghanistan
By our reporter
12 October 2001

Over 10,000 people turned out in New York City on Sunday, October 7 to oppose the Bush administration’s so-called war on terrorism. The demonstration, which had been planned for several weeks by a coalition of pacifist and activist groups, was expected to draw only a few thousand but grew in size as word spread that the US had begun bombing Afghanistan.

Marchers assembled at Union Square, which has been the site of an impromptu outdoor memorial to the victims of the World Trade Center attack. Speakers there included Ruben Schaffer, whose grandson Gregory Rodriguez was killed in the WTC collapse, reading a letter from Mr. Rodriguez’s parents to President Bush: “Your response to this attack does not make us feel better about our son’s death. It makes us feel worse. It makes us feel that our government is using our son’s memory as a justification to cause suffering for other sons and parents in other lands.” Rita Lasar, whose brother died at the World Trade Center when he stayed behind to help a wheelchair-bound friend, also spoke.

100,000 10,000 people. Heavy coverage in this city. One month later, the handwringing had already begun. It was around this time that NION (Not In Our Name) was formed, all the anti-war activity really picked up steam, and the Bush = Nazi comparisons really hit full stride.

Please don’t lecture me on the people of this country “fully supporting” Bush based on some polls taken ten days after the attacks. And don’t hand me legislation that was passed and has since been either disavowed or turned against the President despite a Democrat signature on it. If the extent of their support was signing the Patriot Act, which no one in Congress read before signing, then they’re in big trouble because they’ve all gone to herculean lengths to make sure they distance themselves from it.

I lived here. I saw the “support” first hand.

This entry was posted in Ironic. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.robertkbrown.com/ RKB

    Is that 100,000 or 10,000? The article says 10,000. And I’m sorry, Vinny, but even this is just an outlying blip that you’ll find on any bell curve. The actions of this group don’t represent “the vast majority” of liberal america any more than Fred Phelps represents conservative America.

    From an April 2002 CBS Poll.

    After more than three months of military attacks, the public remains overwhelmingly supportive of the war effort in Afghanistan and is ready and willing to expand the war on terrorism to other countries that are harboring terrorists. But even though support for the war is strong, Americans are not ready to declare victory in Afghanistan until Osama bin Laden is capture or killed.

    [...]

    Eighty-seven percent of Americans now approve of the military attacks against Afghanistan, a number that has not wavered since the start of the attacks in October. Less than one in ten disapprove of the attacks.

    So your protestors fall under that “less than one in ten” who disapprove category. Doesn’t change the fact that more than six months after 9/11, there was an amazing amount of support from liberals and conservatives alike for the war in Afghanistan. Also see this Fox News poll from April, 2003, stating that “a clear majority (81 percent) supports … military action in Iraq. The partisan gap remains wide, with 95 percent of Republicans in support of the war compared to 66 percent of Democrats.”

    A 2/3 majority of Democrats polled in 2003 supported war in Iraq, for chrissakes. Yes, some opposed it. But Rove’s statement continues to be demonstrably false, thanks to the intentional omission of that key word “some.” Some liberals might have wanted to offer therapy and so on, but clearly not most.

    Just isn’t as effective a way to feed the base to put in caveats like that, though.

  • http://www.robertkbrown.com/ RKB

    Doh. Sorry about the open tag.

  • http://www.hauntedparsonage.us/blog/ Chuck

    What percentage of Democrat are truly liberal. There’s some truth to the widely spoken idea that the majority of Americans fall towards the middle of the ideological spectrum. I’ve heard it said that roughly 20% are actually conservative, and 20% are liberal. That leaves 60% in the mid-range.

    Hmmm, 20% liberals, 13% opposing the war? Coincidence?

    Maybe.

    -cjb-

  • http://www.robertkbrown.com/ RKB

    Is that 100,000 or 10,000? The article says 10,000. And I’m sorry, Vinny, but even this is just an outlying blip that you’ll find on any bell curve. The actions of this group don’t represent “the vast majority” of liberal america any more than Fred Phelps represents conservative America.

    From an April 2002 CBS Poll.

    After more than three months of military attacks, the public remains overwhelmingly supportive of the war effort in Afghanistan and is ready and willing to expand the war on terrorism to other countries that are harboring terrorists. But even though support for the war is strong, Americans are not ready to declare victory in Afghanistan until Osama bin Laden is capture or killed.

    [...]

    Eighty-seven percent of Americans now approve of the military attacks against Afghanistan, a number that has not wavered since the start of the attacks in October. Less than one in ten disapprove of the attacks.

    So your protestors fall under that “less than one in ten” who disapprove category. Doesn’t change the fact that more than six months after 9/11, there was an amazing amount of support from liberals and conservatives alike for the war in Afghanistan. Also see this Fox News poll from April, 2003, stating that “a clear majority (81 percent) supports … military action in Iraq. The partisan gap remains wide, with 95 percent of Republicans in support of the war compared to 66 percent of Democrats.”

    A 2/3 majority of Democrats polled in 2003 supported war in Iraq, for chrissakes. Yes, some opposed it. But Rove’s statement continues to be demonstrably false, thanks to the intentional omission of that key word “some.” Some liberals might have wanted to offer therapy and so on, but clearly not most.

    Just isn’t as effective a way to feed the base to put in caveats like that, though.

  • http://www.robertkbrown.com/ RKB

    Doh. Sorry about the open tag.

  • http://www.hauntedparsonage.us/blog/ Chuck

    What percentage of Democrat are truly liberal. There’s some truth to the widely spoken idea that the majority of Americans fall towards the middle of the ideological spectrum. I’ve heard it said that roughly 20% are actually conservative, and 20% are liberal. That leaves 60% in the mid-range.

    Hmmm, 20% liberals, 13% opposing the war? Coincidence?

    Maybe.

    -cjb-