Replies

When I used the phrase "big victory," I was referring to one of the points in discussion throughout the thread, not to anything specific you said.

Many seemed to approach these protests as if they were the be-all and end-all of the pro-life movement. Indeed, as if even questioning whether this was an effective way to protest this candidate would spell the end to the First Amendment and the pro-life cause.

So, while I engaged that point as part of the larger context of the discussion, I was not attributing it to you.

Your main point in this post was:

But Giuliani stiffing the entire crowd is the real story here, IMO.

I agree with you on that, but have a little different take on it than most people here. I'm a long-term pro-life advocate and I constantly have dealt with how the opposition spins things.

As I've said elsewhere on the thread, it wouldn't surprise me at all that what we might view as "Giuliani stiffing the entire crowd" comes off to the opposition as Giuliani standing up to the "kooks" (their word) and refusing to give them national media exposure.

Clearly, there are two ways of looking at this. I'm just suggesting let's look at it from the pro-life perspective and the perspective of our political opponents---for the purpose of evaluating the effect of various methods of protest in meeting certain goals.

Here's an example:

The title of this article, put out by a Christian news organization, is Giuliani Rattled, Cancels Remarks as Pro-Lifers Disrupt Sunday Bus Tour Stop.

The title of an article with similar facts posted recently is Pope Cancels Visit "La Sapienza" University in Rome (Leftist Hecklers' Veto) [here].

One of the reasons given in the latter article for the Pope cancelling his speech was the desire to avoid giving the hecklers international media coverage.

IOW, both speakers here could be seen as standing up to the hecklers by saying, essentially, "I'm not going to let you use me to advance your cause and obtain publicity."

In addition, when campaign events are abruptly cancelled because of "disruptions" (the description used in the Giuliani headline), frankly, there is always the implication of a *possible* security threat.

I'm not suggesting there was a security threat in either case; I have no knowledge of anything like that. I'm simply pointing out that this question crosses people's mind in a case like this. And that inclination to wonder "was there more going on here that caused the speaker/police to pull the plug" gets played into very well by the opposition.