NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

Immense crowd comes to Washington, DC to commemorate 41st anniversary of Roe and to celebrate Life

by | Jan 23, 2014

 

By Dave Andrusko

March20145

Photo Credit: Andrew Bair

The only “downside” to reporting on the March for Life is that by the time the huge throng walks up Constitution Avenue and hangs a right leading to the Supreme Court, there is always a limited amount of time left in the day for me to get back to the office, organize my thoughts, and write. So, we’re catching up today, January 23.

Writing for over three decades for National Right to Life News (which is now available online at www.nrlc.org/uploads/NRLNews/NRLNewsJan2014.pdf) and in more recent years in National Right to Life News Today as well, I have the experience to place what happens in context. Hint: yesterday’s rally was a big success.

You don’t expect the local paper, the Washington Post, to lavish praise. It is a pro-abortion newspaper and makes no apologies. But you can kind of anticipate the depths to which it will sink by the story (or stories) they run in advance.

In this case, there was just an awful hit job yesterday morning on two prominent young female pro-life leaders, Lila Rose of Live Action, and Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life. As Tim Graham at Newsbusters.org observed, the same newspaper that could not find a single negative thing to say about pro-abortion icon Gloria Steinem in the same edition, was replete with slams at these two young pro-life women.

March20146

Photo Credit: Andrew Bair

Even when reporter Krissah Thompson made a nod in the direction of telling the reader what Live Action found in its undercover investigation of abortion clinics, she would diminish the power and the gravity by having pro-abortionists denounce Ms. Rose.

Let’s talk about what really happened on the Mall.

Were there fewer people than last year? Of course. It was 5 degrees above zero the day after a winter storm. Lots of buses couldn’t get there, flights were cancelled, and many local schools were closed.

That gave reporters the excuse to radically undercount the number who did attend: “about 25,000,” according to a snarky column written by the Post’s Dana Milbank. That was preposterously low, but, guess what? Check out these two preceding sentences:

“Crowd estimates for last year’s event, the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, went above half a million. The march routinely draws hundreds of thousands. “

Click here to read the January issue of National Right to Life News, the “pro-life newspaper of record.”

What? The Washington Post—which routinely uses the idiom “tens of thousands” in attendance–now admits that the March for Life routinely draws hundreds of thousands and a half-million plus last year?!

There are no official figures—the Park Service decided a while back estimates were too controversial—but yesterday’s gathering was still immense. Just stand, as I do, at the top of the hill on Constitution Avenue and you can see block after block after block of marchers.

And, as commonsense would suggest, as people (who were practically frozen in place) were able to move, the excitement and the cheers and the volume of the pro-life chants dramatically increased.

The Post’s article this morning started with a slam, before getting to the obvious truth: the March is dominated by young people, which is why downplaying the attendance and the response is imperative to pro-abortionists and pro-abortion publications that fear losing the future.

A more honest account would be that an immense number of people fought through cold and snow and blistery winds and school closings and cancelled airplane flights to come to our nation’s capital to express their solidarity with pro-lifers around the nation (many of whom met at their own state capitols) and the vulnerable unborn child and her mother.

Hats off to them, to the speakers, and to the organizers of the March for Life who announced the day before the March that it would not be cancelled.

Of course not. These are pro-lifers we are talking about.

Categories: Roe v. Wade