Liberals That Bash Moveon

by: Matt Stoller

Sun Sep 16, 2007 at 14:38


Taylor Marsh and Jane Hamsher write compelling posts about Elizabeth Edwards, who blasted Moveon earlier this week.  She joins Democratic 'strategist' Peter Fenn who blasted Moveon on MSNBC yesterday, and Laura Schwartz, a fellow 'Democratic strategist', who did so on Fox News, and John Kerry, who argued that Petraeus ought not be criticized.  And then there's 'liberal' commentator Mark Shields who went after Moveon with a vicious and dishonest smear.

MARK SHIELDS: The activist antiwar wing of the Democratic -- I won't even call it the Democratic Party, because they're not Democrats, but particularized by MoveOn.org this week, with it's just offensive and tasteless full-page ad in the New York Times, playing a pun on General Petraeus' name, "General Betray Us."

I think, in a strange way, it did two things. One, it gave the Republicans something to talk about all week, rather than trying to defend the president's policy, which many of them are uncomfortable doing. But it also may very well liberate the Democrats, that they don't -- from that antiwar base. And they say, "Look, I think there's a chance of a compromise."

There are many ways to disagree with this ad without undermining your allies.  Lowell Feld, for instance, called it a 'big mistake' without raising hackles.  Part of building an effective movement is knowing when an attack is an attack on surrogates, and when it's an attack on ideas.  Moveon and its 3 million members were standing up for integrity in military leadership, public debate, and Congressional oversight. 

There's a reflexive instinct to shy away from heated arguments among Democrats, so I'm sympathetic to those who threw Moveon under the bus, as I have been thrown under the bus by good people at certain points.  It happens.  It's politics.  Still, it's important to recognize this as an error, and not do it again.
Matt Stoller :: Liberals That Bash Moveon

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Liberals That Bash Moveon | 29 comments
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
How is what EE said different from what Lowell said?

Join us at the Missouri community blog Show Me Progress!
huh (0.00 / 0)
I am a VIETNAM Vveteran and it is outrageous to question General Petreaus's patriotisim.

I dis-agree with his  positions and am against this war FROM THE GIT GO. However, I think he is telling the truth from his perspective.

EE is correct to call out this part of the AD

We certainly should train our fire on the Bush administration and their policies of continuing the war in Iraq with no end in sight.

[ Parent ]
Patriotism.... (0.00 / 0)
The last refuge of thieves and scoundrels.
  ---------Mark Twain

And he never wrote truer words.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Patriotism? (4.00 / 1)
Where exactly does the ad question his patriotism?  Seems to me that you've fallen into the right-wing frame that MoveOn is calling Petreus a "traitor."  There's nothing in the ad that says either. It says that he's likely to betray us by not telling the truth; that's very different.

And you know what, MoveOn is right.  He didn't tell us the truth.  His perspective is that there's progress, and that the escalation (oh, I'm sorry, the surge) is working. That's either delusional or simply a lie, and frankly, I'm not sure which is worse.

[ Parent ]
The actions of these 'Liberal' mouthpieces show.... (4.00 / 1)
....why liberalism is being replaced by the progressive movement. Liberals can no longer recognize the truth and thus are incapable of effective action.

Americans have already rejected General Petreaus's testimony and false and misleading.

The real fear here on the part of Shields, a man who's job description is to make David Brooks look like something other than an idiot, is simply this:

MoveOn's ad attacked the priesthood of our culture, the military. By naming Petreaus for what he is, a liar. Since the ad tells the citizenry what it already knows it weakens the MI complex's hold on public discourse. The very idea that a serving general's probity on matters military would be questioned, much less proven non-existent, must not be allowed to occur.

It has been and continues to be essential to the MI game plan for Americans to implicitly accept the word of uniformed officers speaking on military matter as being the truth. This has worked for over 50 years and the visible cracks in this meme are spreading panic in the ranks of those who view the U.S. Treasury and foreign policy as their tickets to the good life.

For progressives this kerfuffle is useful in that it flushes the MI complex fellow travelers out into the light.

Where they can be seen and targeted for action.

Kerry is one of those. A man who couldn't be bothered to protect his own reputation when the Presidency was on the line but who now defends the....

Ass-kissing little chicken shit, Petraeus.

Thought provoking I'd say.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

Chris Bowers had it right (0.00 / 0)
As did Jane.

Movement people like MoveOn and the ideological, activist netroots build the movement, then the party hacks, Propecia princelings like Joe Klein, corrupt profiteers like Rahm Emanuel, loafered consultants like Mark Shoen and right wing cowboy cartoon hucksters like Mudcat Saunders take all the credit and shoot arrows in our backs.

That won't stand for much longer, I don't expect.  But whatever befalls, either the Democratic Party will continue to be GOP light and write off the populist base, or it will become in fact the people's party.

 

Good Ad, Bad Title (4.00 / 2)
I thought the MoveOn ad was great. But I think the "Betray-Us" title was a mistake -- it resorted to Coulter-like name-calling. We can never win in a name-calling war -- the Right has a lot more resources to win that game. But we can win on the basis of facts. The MoveOn ad rightly criticized Petraeus's testimony and backed it up with facts (though MoveOn didn't put the substantiating references in the ad, which I think was a mistake). If MoveOn had just titled the ad "General Petraeus: At War with the Facts," the emphasis would have been on his false/misleading testimony instead of on name-calling.

I also think it is fine for liberal pundits to acknowledge that the MoveOn ad stepped over the boundary line a bit, but as Jane Hamsher says, they should immediately turn it around to bolstering the main message which is that Petraeus was lying and MoveOn was correct. Instead, Shields used it to attack everyone to his left (which given how "moderate" he is, is almost everyone in the Democratic Party). And what was Elizabeth Edwards thinking?

It is fine for us to criticize in private, but in public we need to be very careful. The Right can take anything we say, distort it, and broadcast it 24/7 in 500 media markets. Until we have some control over the mainstream media (or at least control over some of it), we must be careful.

Bingo. (0.00 / 0)
It's okay for us to criticize in private, but our leaders shouldn't be undermining MoveOn right now and bolstering the Republican assault on it.
[ Parent ]
Dems need help with their media appearances (4.00 / 2)
I don't mean talking points, I think it's good that Dems don't have a monolithic set of ideas. I do think Dems should follow a few simple rules.

1) Don't take the bait. Asked to denounce X, reply "Denounce the First Amendment? What do you have against the First Amendment?". NEVER take up a difficult political debate on terms unfavorable to your side.

2) Be positive about America. If Republicans are calling the party traitors and commies for having an affiliation with MoveOn say 'isn't it a great country that we have a free press that both quotes the administration and Gen. Petraeus in their own own words again and again on the front page AND accepts ads  critical of the same using the harshest language? We live in a great country!"

3) Don't reuse GOP terms. We don't need a "surge of diplomacy". We need diplomacy, full stop. You can't poison the word 'surge' and recycle it at the same time.

I can say MoveOn acted like dopes (attack Edger Bergen, not Charlie McCarthy) with their ad because I'm nobody. Power brokers need to go out of their way not to weaken their own power base for something as fleeting as an easier media Q&A session or a pat on the back from Tim Russert or Wolf Blitzer.

John McCain

[ Parent ]
Nonsense (0.00 / 0)
The idea that I should somehow hold my criticism is nonsense. 

This ad was a disaster.  It has done two things:
1.  Allowed the GOP to change the subject
2.  Allowed the Elite DC Types to belittle opponents to the War.

The title of this ad does not represent me. I do not want to be associated with an obvious attempt to question the partiotism of Patreaus. 

[ Parent ]
Bravery on the field not the same as bravery off the field (0.00 / 0)
There is bravery on the field and off the field. And often, we have had instances throughout history, where on the field bravery does not translate to bravery in the civilian sector. While I would not have put out the ad, there is a need for a good cop - bad cop dynamic. MoveOn is the bad cop that will make senators questioning Petreus forcefully, but in a polite tone look very reasonable by comparison. The plan breaks down when you get Dems bashing MoveOn as an entity rather than express a asentiment that  better tact should have been used. The important distinction between MoveOn and SwiftBoaters is that while both have criticised military people, MoveOn didn't invent lies about it. You may disagree with the tone and choice of words.

Republicans have been bashing military people who are on the Democratic side frequently. But they are not defensive about it and that is why they do not suffer the consequences.

[ Parent ]
be critical here all you want (0.00 / 0)
Don't go mouthing off to the Des Moines Register or on cable tv.
[ Parent ]
I Have Worked for Moveon.org on Kerry's Campaign (0.00 / 0)
I have always been proud of Moveon.org, but they made a bad error with this ad.  I have said that Bush is the betrayer, and I am glad to see that they are going after the real target.  The general is after all a soldier when all is said and done.  He has spent his whole life in the military and his son is in the military and may very well end up in Iraq.  There are many families who are making a sacrifice with thier son or daughter serving in Iraq, some are repugs, and some are democrats, but we have to be smart about calling a soldier during wartime who is fighting in Iraq a traitor.  In my heart I think that Patraeus is not telling the bad news and is only painiting a rosy picture to give cover to Bush, but if he is trying to keep the killing down if we have to be in Iraq than I am glad he is there doing the job.  I hope that the general gets some backbone and next time stands up to Bush and tells it like it is.  He probably thinks that if he does stand up to Bush he will be fired just like all the other generals.  I think that EE did the right thing in speaking up for all military and retired military who don't always do the right thing, but who have served their country in the best way they can.
MoveOn did not call him a traitor (4.00 / 2)
Please point out where in the ad they said that.  That's a right-wing lie about MoveOn's actual words.  What the ad said is that Petreus is betraying us by not telling the truth.  You want to disagree with that?  Fine, but disagree with their words, not the right wing's twist of their words.

Oh, and if he's trying to keep the killing down, he's doing a lousy job. 

[ Parent ]
I sent MoveOn some cash yesterday (4.00 / 4)
  They moved the Overton window. The idea that a military uniform is a magic coat of teflon that confers automatic credibility upon its wearer and absolves him from all challenges should have died with that filthy liar Oliver North, if not William Westmoreland. I'm glad MoveOn took another stab at it.

  MoveOn is not the Democratic Party. MoveOn is an independent activist organization with gumption and guts and the courage to tell it like it is. How would anybody confuse MoveOn with the Democratic Party?

  The Democrats weren't asked by MoveOn to own this ad. Whenever questioned about it, all they had to answer was "That's MoveOn's ad. Why don't you ask THEM about it?" But by "apologizing" and blasting MoveOn, which was doing the Democrats a service by taking the heat for what needed to be said, the Democrats DID take ownership of the ad, however indirectly.

  And if they HAD to acknowledge the ad lest David Broder cock an eyebrow, why not answer, "when the Republicans apologize for Max Cleland and Jack Murtha, we'll apologize for Petraeus."

  Man, do the Dems SUCK at politics.
 

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

A rookie's mistake (4.00 / 3)
Jane Hamsher got it exactly right; she is pitch perfect.  The Democratic party machine should sign her up.  MoveOn threw a hell of a pass from deep down court right into the hands of a Democratic point guard standing directly under the Democrat's basket.  And, what does that guard do?  They immediately drop kick the ball out of bounds because they didn't like the spin on the pass.  We're fielding a team of rank rookies.  Talk about missed opportunities.  Doesn't anyone there know how to play this game?
Here's the problem... (4.00 / 1)
I think that the politics of name calling diminish the argument and distract from the debate.  MoveOn could have done a -much- better job by not playing into the right-wing game of making the argument about the name calling as opposed to the content and I find it difficult to blame anyone who -is- offended by the name calling.  Whether it's "Slick Willie," "Hanoi John" or "General Betray Us," the line does a good job of saying "I'm not nearly as interested in any argument as I am in sounding clever."  The MoveOn ad did a great job of giving people an excuse to -avoid- the contents of the ad as opposed to calling attention to them.

Maybe that's just me, but I'm sick of -all- the name calling in what is allegedly political discourse, and I think it needs to stop (with the possible exception of "Darth Cheney."  I think maybe that one should stay).



I probably have better things to do with my time than this.

'Name calling' as you label it.... (0.00 / 0)
...is not going to stop. Framing the other side with good rhetoric is a permanent part of politics and has been for thousands of years. What MoveOn.org said of General Petraeus was the simple truth. Something the 'conservative' noise machine never likes to see or hear.

Progressives know how to fight back on this front.

Sadly, Democrats are still clueless.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
The Truth... (0.00 / 0)
is better spoken clearly and in a straightforward fashion -without- embracing right-wing rhetorical devices.

I probably have better things to do with my time than this.
[ Parent ]
Framing is... (0.00 / 0)
...not, I repeat, not an exclusively right wing device. Go over to Liberal Oasis and read what Bill Scher has written on this. It's a tool; not an idealogical 'device'.

Unless you believe that General Petreaus told Congress the truth I fail to understand your criticism of MoveOn's ad.

General Petreaus did in fact betray his uniform and his country when he lied, repeatedly, to Congress. If the Democrats cannot set the record straight then it's up to us to do so. Naming a person's actions in a manner that gets people's attention and is truthful is neither immoral nor bad tactics.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Exactly (0.00 / 0)
1) Like you said, the content of the ad was completely honest.
2) Unlike Petraeus.
3) In our system of government, ultimate loyalty of those serving it is supposed to be to the Constitution and the people. 
By cooking the numbers to give a disastrous policy the sheen of tenability, Petraeus furthers his own career, and keeps Bush's war continuing full-throttle, by lying to the people he's really supposed to be serving.  That's a betrayal.
4) Hundreds of young men and women will die unnecessarily because of the continuation of this policy, the 'surge.'  Thousands will be seriously injured.  Petraeus has betrayed them.
5) The 'Betray Us' header was an attention-grabber, and if it hadn't been for that header, we wouldn't even be talking about the ad, because nobody would have noticed it.
6) But the header, too, was spot on.
[ Parent ]
Name calling. (4.00 / 1)
If you're sick of name calling now, you might want to book a trip to where there is no teevee, radio, or print/electronic media until after November '08.  I believe you still have plenty of time to register for an absentee ballot.  I expect this national campaign to be one of the ugliest yet.  And, I don't think I'm alone in thinking that way.  We're all going to need much thicker hides to get through it (particularly, if Hillary is the candidate) and it's not too soon to begin growing one.
[ Parent ]
Shields (4.00 / 1)
Who died and left that jowly batarde in change of the flap on the Democratic big tent???  Shields has become increasingly irrelevant and only the dead-TV, talking-head, no-issues-of-substance-discussed-here media would keep him around.
But....You need somebody to make.... (0.00 / 0)
...David Brooks to appear to have a functioning mind!

I stopped listening to this ClownShow years ago. Both of them simply read their scripts which were written by the corporatist media. The Bush 'takeover' of 'National Propaganda Radio'  didn't give the ReThugs another megaphone for the Noise Machine.

It just made NPR irrelevant.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Iraqnam, Moveon & what works (0.00 / 0)
I'm also a Vietnam veteran; I saw the same crap there- bogus CIA intelligence and generals reporting inflated body counts and optimistic guesses that were misused by the Pentagon. We never had any honest public discussion about Vietnam after the war ended. We had J Kerry saying things like most troops have committed war crimes, throwing away his medals and never going public with the idea, 'the war was wrong and stupid, and it's not surprising that GIs were trigger-happy when they couldn't tell who was friend/foe and I (Kerry) went over the top in denouncing GIs rather than the military-industrial complex that supported this war and still claims that we would have won if only Congress had not panicked.'

What were the lessons of Vietnam? The warmongers, buttressed by a group of mostly Southern military historians, draw a very different conclusion than I do. From what I saw, we could never have won real support from the Vietnamese people because of the way we treated them and their land. I believe that is equally true in Iraq today.

Petraeus is a smart guy, swollen with pride, hoping to be President someday. He's no Eisenhower. Ike said in 1953 ""All of us have heard this term 'preventative war' since the earliest days of Hitler. I recall that is about the first time I heard it. In this day and time... I don't believe there is such a thing; and, frankly, I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."

Until I hear Hillary Clinton and other tough Democratic machos renounce preventative war and strikes against Iran, Syria etc. I will vote against them and work against them. Defense spending is bankrupting our country, especially when coupled with Bush's tax cuts for the rich. We can't afford more wars. Borrowers can't be superpowers.

Considering MoveOn, I think that their big ads are a waste of money, regardless of what they say. Everybody has heard about Bush's lies and Petraeus' shading the truth, but not everyone can hear. The country is divided into three groups who won't see the needs and problems of one another. Most Americans have given up on politics, rarely vote and are very cynical- whatever a politician says is false. In fact, much of what Democratic & Republican politicians say is false- we must figure out ways to hold them to their promises, and change our system, but not voting is stupid. Bush-haters cheer for the MoveOn ads, but they were already convinced. A third group longs for authoritarian discipline and a cleansing holy war. They believe that we were on the verge of Victory in Nam and are now on the verge of Victory in Iraq. "America can only lose a war if we are betrayed by traitors". They don't want to hear how badly things are going in A'stan and how we lack the money and troops to continue the present pace in both Iraqnam and A'stan.

Best thing would be to start leaving Iraq this fall, send some additional men and money to A'stan and renounce the idea that we have the right to attack any country that doesn't admire us. No ad, print or video, will bridge this gap down the heart of America, or make the warmongers accept Bush's defeat, which has already occurred. Only personal contact at the local level can do it, but few in either ideological camp, left or right, are interested in personal contact and working to solve local problems, of which we have many.

Banana Man (0.00 / 0)
Well said.  I heard pretty much the same things from my younger brother who was a medic in Vietnam.  I was fortunate to finish my enlistment early in 1964. I'm also looking for a candidate who will renounce "preemptive" war. 

Doc Rock
http://squidjig.blog...

My points (0.00 / 0)
1) Elizabeth Edwards gets a pass from me because she attacked the ad and not the organization. I do not agree with her, but given her outspokenness in the past, I am willing to agreee to disagree with her.

2) Laura Schwartz. I added a provocative diary on MYDD oh Friday which is kind of rude to her because she doesnt earn a pass from me. http://www.mydd.com/...
Her attitude towards progressive democrats goes beyond agreeing to disagreeing. She seems to enjoy bashing lefty or even progressive anti war dems. I got into a heated argument with some establishment guy DemDem who refuses to divulge his name but has no problem challenging me to a fight. This is sickening how people think of her as one of their own. I have nothing but contempt for her and it reflects in one of my rudest diaries ever.

3) This is IMPORTANT to know. It is fair to criticize military guys by either side. But do not lie. Republicans got away with smearing Democratic military veterans like Cleland and Kerry not with mere criticisms but including lies.  So Democrats are suposedly out of line when they refuse to condemn MoveOn? And here is the big difference. MoveOn did not include lies in their character bashing of Petreus. I can understand how some of you may not like the latest attack. Fair enough. I can see how some might be offended. But MoveOn wont be seen as a liablity as long as candidates woh disagree with them limit their criticism to this one issue. One of the MYDDers(a Hillary shill named AreYouReady) tried to smear Moveon as being opposed to all wars at any cost. I set him straight by doing a simple google lookup and giving them a response.

The MoveOn ad help to ensnare the Republicans? (0.00 / 0)
Take a look at Digby's post here:

http://digbysblog.bl...

The hook appears at the end.

Betray-us, betray-us, betray-us - (0.00 / 0)
I like the sound of that.  It just fits so nicely.  In fact, how can anyone who understands the Iraq occupation disagree with it?

I don't think that people who dislike the MoveOn ad title understand how far down the tubes we are.  We are circling the toilet bowl, folks; we've been flushed.  If we can't see that, we are the Republican-base-lite.  If you can't fight back under these conditions, I just don't know what to say - except I'm going to the barricades with the MoveOn types.

If the progressive movement's appeal, if the Democratic alliance, is so fragile that we can't include some warriors, singing on their way to battle, then SCREW IT and the horse it rode in on.  Let the silly Bushits rule the country until they destroy it.  Better that than trying to work with people who squeal like a bunch of prissy pundits any time somebody says truth.

By the way - did I mention that I'm running for president?

Liberals That Bash Moveon | 29 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox