Cooper's Eye on the Left: 'March' not quite as advertised

The March 24 "March for Our Lives" didn't turn out to be largely student-planned or student-attended, various sources have revealed.
The March 24 "March for Our Lives" didn't turn out to be largely student-planned or student-attended, various sources have revealed.

Students lacking

To listen to the national media, one might have thought the March 24 "March for Our Lives," purported to be a grassroots-led anti-gun event, was put together by students.

Well, not so much.

It was organized not by students but by, in part, many leftist groups from Everytown to Planned Parenthood, according to BuzzFeed. It eschewed students from Parkland High School in Florida, where 17 were killed on Feb. 14, and members of the families of slain students if their rhetoric didn't match that of organizers, various sources reported. And, according to the Washington Post, only about 10 percent of marchers were students under 18.

Indeed, the average age of adults in the crowd was just under 49, 60 percent of participants were experienced protesters and only 12 percent of those new to protesting were there because of the gun-control issue. New protesters, instead, just wanted to express their desire for peace (56 percent) or their hatred for President Trump (42 percent).

And, hardly shocking, 79 percent of protesters identified as "left-leaning," and 89 percent admitted they'd voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.

Now you tell us

Former Vice President Joe Biden said on a recent podcast he tried to convince former President Barack Obama to cut taxes for the middle class during his final years in the White House to prove how well the administration was handling the economy.

"We had the big debate about what our focus should be on the economy in the last two years," he said in an interview on Pod Save America, which was hosted by four Obama administration alumni. "The president let me come in with my team to make a presentation that we should have a middle class tax cut. The economists came in and said, 'well, that's not going to stimulate the economy.'"

Biden said he and his advisers made the argument for two days before being given a definitive "no."

"What I was trying to do," he said, "was actually demonstrate tangibly that we're listening."

He didn't say, but we assume he meant listening to the American people, who had indicated in every way they could that Obama's policies were not working for the country.

Biden might not ever have revealed the White House discussion had President Donald Trump not signed into law a tax cut for individuals and corporations in December that has been given credit for boosting the economy that took off after Trump was inaugurated.

Racist? Intolerant?

Four years ago, the first black female secretary of state, Condoleeza Rice, was invited to speak at Rutgers University's commencement, but faculty encouraged students to protest her and attend a "teach-in" instead and produced posters of her with images of torture and the coffins of American servicemen.

Last week, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was invited to speak at the school, and the news release lauding her visit referred to "her path-breaking political career and her singular role in shaping women's political history." One school official referred to her as "the most important American political woman of our time."

Hmm, what could be different?

Rice was secretary of state during part of the Iraq war, while Clinton, as a senator, voted for the resolution authorizing the use of military force against Iraq and was secretary of state during the embarrassing Benghazi raid in Libya in which four Americans were killed and which she and the administration blamed on a video.

Could it be that Rice is a Republican and Clinton a Democrat?

The Rutgers College Republicans, in pointing out the hypocrisy, said they didn't want to act like the liberal faculty did when Rice was invited to speak but wanted the contrast noted.

"We here at College Republicans strive to protect and promote free speech on and off campus," the group's news release said. "Today, we are challenging you to reflect on your own convictions and take responsibility for your own biases, as an individual and as a university community."

Planned Parenthood princesses?

Planned Parenthood, America's largest abortion provider, is hoping to reach your daughters through their love for Disney princesses.

Last week, one of their sites, in Keystone, Pa., tweeted just such an enticement.

"We need a disney princess who's had an abortion

"We need a disney princess who's pro-choice

"We need a disney princess who's an undocumented immigrant

"We need a disney princess who's actually a union worker

"We need a disney princess who's trans"

The affiliate deleted the tweet before the end of the day, but it does make one wonder why the organization - whose national president claims it is "non-partisan" - wants to infiltrate children's programming and indoctrinate young minds who understandably gravitate to Disney princesses with terms that don't have a place in a child's world.

And why involve Disney? The organization, if it believes what it tweets, should create its own line of Planned Parenthood princesses and films. Surely, abortions and the sale of fetal tissue don't always fill the coffers.

Upcoming Events