Two things struck me about last Saturday's huge "tea party" March on Washington: the way the media dismissed the event's importance and focused on the kooks (exactly as they used to do with gay protests), and the lack of an anti-gay message from among the marchers (a very good development).
As to the first point, Matt Welch, editor of the libertarian magazine Reason, observed in the New York Post, "How do you marginalize a significant protest against a politician or policy you support? Lowball the numbers, then dismiss participants as deranged and possibly dangerous kooks. In the case of Saturday's massive 9/12 protest in Washington, done and done." Just as was done with gays. The major media is rarely objective, it's just that its biases change.
Similarly, the Cato Institute's Gene Healy's recounted:
Judging by the massive crowd on Saturday that descended on Washington for the 9/12 March, you'd have to be deaf not to recognize that small-government conservatism remains a vital part of the national conversation.
If you've been fed a steady media diet of MSNBC over the last few months, though, you could be excused for fearing a Pennsylvania Avenue takeover by a rabble of pitchfork-wielding cranks and extras from "Deliverance." But the crowd - "in excess of 75,000 people," according to a D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services spokesman - was made up of orderly, pleasant, middle-class Americans from all across the country.
In my two hours at the protest, I didn't see a single "Birther" sign, and spied only one racially insensitive caricature. "Many of the signs," the liberal Center for American Progress alleges on its blog, "attacked President Obama using explicit racial and ethnic smears" - a claim that's simply false. . . . The gallery of "racist, radical portrayals" they posted after spending hours looking at tens of thousands of signs contains few that fit the bill.
And, somewhat surprisingly, there seems to be no evidence of anti-gay contingents at the protest, either. Even Andrew Sullivan, who posted every crazy or embarrassing sign that anyone saw at the March (how dare they criticize the Chosen One!), couldn't find any that were anti-gay. So I think we can assume there weren't any.
This was, in fact, a different group of right-wingers, as the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday:
"The demonstrators, who plan to march up Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol, are drawing their passion not from Bush-era fights over terrorism or gay marriage, but rather from Reagan-era debates over big government programs."
This could be partly because Obama has steered clear of social issues, such as marriage equality, and has instead worked hard to advance bigger-government programs, so that's where the country's focus is. But it's also true that the established groups that played some role in Saturday's march - National Taxpayers Union, Freedomworks, Americans for Prosperity - tend to be led by libertarians with no interest in the anti-gay agenda.
It's clear that the Bush-Obama bailouts and the larger Obama program have galvanized libertarian-leaning, anti-tax, anti-deficit, small-government people, and those are the issues being talked about this summer. And if the beltway LGBT movement wasn't run by Democratic party operatives, they might see that making common cause with pro-liberty groups on the right as well as with the pro-gay big-government left could create a movement that might have a fighting chance of achieving legal equality for gay people, rather than just delivering gay votes, and dollars, to Democrats.
10 Comments for “A Different ‘Right’?”
posted by Elizabeth on
I was there for 30 minutes on Saturday (primarily just passing through), and caught one anti-gay reference (a man wearing a t-shirt saying “Real Men Marry Women”). I’m sure the 2-3 “Christian Nation” signs sympathized. All in all, I suppose that is promising considering the turnout. Though it is not at all difficult to believe we could see similar angry protest of people “wanting their country back” if DOMA were overturned by either the Supreme Court or the Congress.
And contra Cato’s Gene Healy, I saw 3 birther signs, 1 racially insensitive sign, and close to 10 Socialist/Communist/Nazi/Tyrant signs (again, in just 30 minutes passing through)
posted by jpeckjr on
Make no mistake. These people are not supporters of gay and lesbian equality. When the Congress does begin to take up DOMA, DADT, and ENDA, and the President signs the legislation, the organizes of Saturday’s event will tell their constituents that it is more evidence their country is being taken away from them. Libertarian leanings or not, it will be another opportunity to scare the public and garner some contributions. And no such opportunity should ever go unseized.
posted by Travis on
I invite Stephen to attend the next scheduled tea party event, carry a sign that announces “Freedom Means My Right to Marry the Man I Love,” video tape the reactions, and come back to us. Until then, I cry b.s.
I live in rural Ohio, surrounded by the sentiments expressed last weekend in DC. At the local protest in my home town, around 50 people showed up, six of whom were waving Confederate flags. They quite literally and quite proudly despise us.
posted by Christopher? on
Stephen, you are being desperately naive if you think that the “teabaggers” aren’t anti-gay. The lack of anti-gay signs does NOT mean the lack of anti-gay animus.
Their current focus is against Obama in general and his health plan in particular. Trust me, if he was out in front supporting the repeal of DOMA–and just that *alone* with nary a peep about gay marriage–you would see lots of anti-gay signs out there, too.
The majority of these attendees aren’t true libertarians, either. Libertarian groups saw this as a rare golden opportunity to seize the anger of right wingers and use it to whip up numbers in support of their long-time pet causes. That’s all this was. In fact, the below video shows just how many attendees couldn’t rationally explain their opposition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUPMjC9mq5Y
These are the same kinds of illogical responses that we get from anti-gays. If this was an anti-gay marriage rally, trust me… many of the same people would be out there.
I know that our side is tired of fighting the ignorance and lies, and any respite from that fight is exceedingly welcome, but don’t misinterpret this event as any kind of positive sign for gay rights. It wasn’t, and anyone who thinks so is being foolish.
posted by avee on
Steve is not saying these these people are gay equality supporters. He’s saying they are against intrusive government and pro individual liberty, and thus we should make an effort to reach out to them, which of course none of the LGBT beltway Democratic operatives are interested in doing.
posted by JP on
I’m not sure I get the argument at all. Whether these people are anti gay or not is not relevant. These people showed up to rally on a completely different subject. End of Story. Were there some in the audience that held some anti-gay or life signs, I’m sure, but this is just a tactic to deter us from the real subject. Which at this point is not us. We can’t always be the center of every discussion, and we need to get over that fact.
Not all gays are pro-choice either. I’m not! I am pro-life with exceptions! It irritates me that I seem to always be lumped into a certain belief system just because I’m gay. The sad part, is that the gay community are the ones creating that illusion. I have beliefs on both sides of the fence, and in other places too, I’m sure. It’s called individuality. I fear this country is losing that and turning into a bunch of drones, built to fight each other based solely on whether they consider themselves left or right.
posted by tristram on
Tony Perkins and his fellow christianists were not in D.C. They were in Maine holding closed-door rallies and spreading falsehoods about the state marriage-equality law. At this point, Maine and Washington state (not D.C.) are the front lines of the lgbt battle for dignity and equality. The anti-gay forces know this and are pouring massive resources into those states (knowing that “a different group of right-wingers” has the President and the progressives tied down in D.C.).
But our lgbt “leaders” are all focused on their own October “tea party” in D.C. – mostly out of pique that Obama in his first 7 months in office has prioritized dealing with such minor matters as the recession, Iraq, Pakistan/Afghanistan and health care over pushing our issues at the federal level.
posted by Christopher? on
JR: It’s funny… no one, included Stephen, was saying we “wanted to be the center of every discussion,” but you sure tried to make yourself the center of this one! Your views on abortion have even less to do with this blog posting. Congrats.
Stephen is claiming that the group in Washington was a “different set of right-wingers.” I’m saying they’re not and he’s deeply mistaken to assume so. That was my only point.
posted by tikihead on
Yes, a big ol’ GLBT love-fest.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a3b_1252966753
posted by Craig2 on
…Which isn’t to say that Christian Right pressure groups aren’t being enlisted to oppose Obama’s healthcare reforms, however. I’m afraid that they might well have been told to stay underneath the radar…