Yesterday I wrote a post on the steadily increasing physical and rhetorical violence happening on the right wing of the political spectrum. It is a sad and scary story, one that conservatives try to brush away by saying both sides are responsible when almost none of it is coming from the progressive side of the aisle. The ironic thing is that I underestimated the depth of violence and threats, as I have had many examples sent to me since I wrote the piece that I had forgotten or didn't know about it, plus it has since come out that the person who stomped on the MoveOn activist's head in Kentucky turns out to be closely affiliated with the Rand Paul campaign.
Today, though, I want to write about another form of thuggery, because I think this story is the biggest reason people should vote and vote Democratic. More about that in a moment. First, I think it's appropriate to quote Woody Guthrie's classic line:
Yes, as through this world I've wandered
I've seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen.
And as through your life you travel,
Yes, as through your life you roam,
You won't never see an outlaw
Drive a family from their home.
I think the lawlessness reflected in the physical violence on the campaign trail coming from so many on the right, and the blatant disregard for the rule of law by the big banks trying to railroad so many people out of their homes without the proper paper work, are more related than conventional wisdom would suggest. The fact that banks and their "servicers" have apparently committed massive document fraud and have in some cases actually hired thugs to break into people's homes and change their locks during foreclosure proceedings, and the fact that they lied to and bet against their own clients in investment deals is all part of a pattern: people with too much power and an Ayn Randian view of the world. Ayn Rand, the Social Darwinists of the 1880s, the big Wall Street banks, libertarian candidates like Rand Paul and these thugs who work on their campaigns all make the same arguments: power is morality, greed is good, compassion is weakness, buyer beware. While they call for civility, and argue against class warfare and populism, they believe in turning the Golden Rule of the bible on its head and replacing it with another one: he who has the gold, rules. And if the rule of law gets in their way, they just ignore it or use their political power to change the law. If politicians or public opinion create a problem for them, they use their money to dump millions into lobbying to change the law, or dump millions into secretive groups to buy elections.
Violence is just another means to a political end, and so is the lawlessness of falsified affidavits and paperwork to push massive numbers of people from their homes. Here's where my argument about politics comes in, and I know there are some of you who may find it ironic given that the administration (especially some of the folks at Treasury) has been closer to the big banks at times than it should have been. Here's the deal, though: the financial reform bill in the end got stronger as it went through the process rather than weaker only because the Democrats controlled Congress. Alan Grayson and Maria Cantwell and Sherrod Brown and Ted Kaufman were able to get concessions they would have never gotten had they been in the minority. Elizabeth Warren was able to out-negotiate Chris Dodd on the consumer protection agency only because the Democrats were in control- Richard Shelby only would have shut her down.
And speaking of Elizabeth Warren, who according to sources at the White House has done a superb job of quietly putting together the building blocks of that new agency, the Republicans will do everything in their power to make her job tougher if they take control of Congress. They will try to harass her and intimidate her every way they can. Fortunately, no one can intimidate Elizabeth Warren, and she will destroy them in the media when they try to take her on, but her work standing up for homeowners and consumers will be far easier if Wall Street's best friends don't run Congress. The hit jobs on her will keep coming (did you see this ridiculous piece on her aide Raj Date, who folks on Capitol Hill told me was one of the strongest advocates during the financial reform fight for a progressive financial reform bill), but her job is made easier if the Democrats stay in control.
The best argument for the Democrats in these elections is that the sharks are in the water, and the thugs are in the street. Democrats can and do drive us crazy sometimes, but when the Ayn Rand Social Darwinists on Wall Street and the streets of Kentucky argue that the strong should rule over the weak, it is better to strengthen the hand of our advocates like Warren and Grayson and Sherrod (rather than Scott) Brown. There are some who rob you with a gun, and some with a fountain pen- some who kick you in the head and some who throw you out of your home- and it is better to have a sheriff who will be on your side at least some of the time.
Okay, I'm very biased because I have been working with my friends at MoveOn for a while on their The Other 98% campaign to fight corporate corruption in our political system, but I couldn't be prouder of these ads that MoveOn members themselves are making and starring in. An example:
Check out Sam Stein's piece on the ad campaign. The amount of work it took to separately shoot each of these 28 ads with people from those districts and states was incredible, and they capture the spirit of the moment perfectly: regular citizens at the grassroots have to stand up to these incredibly wealthy special interests- the big Wall Street banks, big oil, the big insurance companies, and probably some foreign corporations as well- who are trying to buy this election for their friends in the Republican Party.
Democrats are up against formidable odds this cycle- secretive corporate slush funds busting every record known by far for spending on campaigns, self-funded candidates pouring huge sums of money into their own campaigns (Meg Whitman holds the record at $140 million so far, but many others are already deep into the 7 or 8 figures), an economy so deeply damaged by the profligacy of the Bush years that it will probably take a decade to recover)- but grassroots activists from the progressive movement are fighting back. The MoveOn campaign from day one has involved hundreds of thousands activists and contributors and local demonstrators at various events. The labor movement effort has been phenomenal- check out this memo from their political director Karen Ackerman. Immigration activists have mounted a major GOTV effort among Hispanics in key states and districts all over the country. Progressive organizations of all stripes have kicked things up a notch. The DailyKos community has already directly raised over $800,000 for candidates (not including the money raised by candidates after that first contribution). Blue America has raised almost $910,000.
But we are being badly outspent in this election, and the odds are against us for all the reasons above. We have groups like the Chamber and Rove's American Crossroads raising money from undisclosed donors and- as Think Progress has documented- probably foreign donors as well. We even have Republicans scheduling time with executives who run outsourcing companies in Beijing for conference call fundraisers, as Mark Kirk recently did. But our side keeps battling, knocking on doors, making calls, giving their $25 at a time online, going to rallies and demonstrations, never giving up, never giving in. It is inspiring to witness and be a part of.
Of course not everyone who says they are a Democrat is still fighting, not everyone is moving every last muscle to score an upset. Some have given up and are already gearing up the post-election why we lost spin battle. Check out this quote from Third Way Vice President Jim Kessler:
"A lot of the Democrats are resorting to economic populism, and the polling shows that voters aren't buying it," he said. " 'Corporate America' is a Washington term. Outside Washington, that's business and the people who employ you."
A couple of things, Jim. First of all, we haven't lost yet, and we still have a shot at this thing. Some of us are still fighting out here. Secondly, polling has been showing all cycle that a message about taking on wealthy special interests has been our best shot by far in this election, which is why a lot of Democrats are using it- including a lot of the candidates currently surging in spite of being badly outspent by those corporate interests you don't want us to speak badly of.
I'm looking at the Cook House race chart right now. They list 101 races that are still highly competitive. Lots of Senate, Gov, AG, Sec of State, state leg races in that category too. Many of these races will come down to one final thing: can Democrats turn out their votes. They'll be won or lost by 1 or 2 votes per precinct. Let's save the post-game spin for post-game, and keep at this thing. Let's keep standing tall and fighting back.
Remember how your mom used to tell you to go outside and play so you could get some fresh air and sunshine? That's kind of how I feel today. This old insider, who has had one foot outside for a while now, is going to play with the kids outside for a while.
When Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers and I decided to start OpenLeft a little over 3 years ago, we thought it would be worthwhile to have a site where there was some dialogue and interplay between an old DC insider like me and some of the really smart and strategic voices from the blogosphere. We've had more than our share of fascinating discussions, entertaining debates, and innovative activist projects, and I am very proud of the role OpenLeft has played in the blogosphere.
When Markos approached Chris and I to work with DailyKos and help turn it into, in Markos' words, "an activist powerhouse", we were excited to sign up. The potential for working with the DailyKos community to build a platform for citizen activism is enormous, and we are both looking forward to being a part of helping it blossom and grow. In addition to that, I am excited to help Markos continue to build a truly dynamic media platform. The opportunity to work with him, Chris, and the entire DailyKos community is extraordinary.
As for OpenLeft, we are exploring what will happen next. Chris needs to dive full-time into working at DailyKos, and he was our editor and heart and soul, so him being gone causes us to re-evaluate everything. I will continue to write some for OpenLeft, as will Adam Bink and some of our other talented writers, but I have never been even close to a full-time presence, and since I will be increasingly working with DailyKos, I will have less time at OpenLeft than before.
One final note about my work going forward: I have also begun work this summer with MoveOn.org on their exciting project to clean up the corporate corruption in DC. While this project is currently focused on shaping the 2010 electoral dialogue, it will be a campaign we will need to keep on for years to come. To be working with both DailyKos and MoveOn.org, two of the leading institutions in the world of the progressive netroots, is an honor and a privilege.
No matter what happens, I will however remain an insider. Once they inject you with the insider virus, it does change your DNA a bit. I know some folks think that makes me intrinsically evil (one of my all time favorite comments on a blog post came the other day when someone said that because I knew Rahm Emanuel, that automatically made me a bad guy). But I hope I can work with the DailyKos community, as well as with OpenLeft and MoveOn, to use my insider knowledge to help the entire movement get better at shaking up what happens inside, and to be a bridge between the other progressive insiders that are involved in national politics and the progressive netroots community. For all my insider-y status, my roots are in the deep and wonderful tradition of progressive movement politics- Alinsky-style community organizing, the labor movement, the movements of the 1960s. Building on that history and tradition, I look forward to working with all of you to create a stronger progressive movement in the future.
When I was at Netroots Nation on Thursday, I pointed out why a majority in the House of members with D's next to their names isn't as valuable as a majority populated by Better Democrats:
We currently hold a 37-vote-margin in the House. Yet 34 Democrats voted against the health care reform and 19 voted against financial reform. It doesn't take a genius to see that it barely matters what happens in November when that many Democrats are voting with - and voting like - Republicans.
That's why you were there for Donna Edwards when she took on Al Wynn. That's why you were there for Bill Halter when he took on Blanche Lincoln. And that's why you should be with me as I take on Stephen Lynch.
As a reminder, my opponent in the Democratic primary, incumbent Stephen Lynch, voted for the Iraq War and its continued funding, for the Patriot Act and its reauthorization, and against health care reform, and has voted to restrict a woman's right to choose.
The differences between my values and Stephen Lynch's values couldn't be clearer. Ilyse Hogue, Director of Political Advocacy and Communications for MoveOn.org, highlighted as much when she sat down with Amy Goodman for an episode of Democracy Now! taped on location at Netroots Nation:
Amy Goodman (52:33): Ilyse Hogue, what about other primaries that are taking place?
Ilyse Hogue (52:37): Well, I think Bill Halter was the precursor. What we saw was him embodying a very strong feeling that our members have, and we think is sweeping across the country, which is he was taking on Wall Street. But Blanche Lincoln was also showing a friendliness towards the HMO's during the health care fight. And, what we're seeing is the base - our members - saying, 'Enough with Democrats who think that they're more accountable to corporate powers in this country than they are to us.
So we're seeing that same thing play out with Stephen Lynch and Mac D'Alessandro in Massachusetts-09. That primary is September 14th. What's interesting about that is that that is largely believed to be a safe Democratic seat, so the primary is actually the election. And Stephen Lynch, who is the incumbent, voted against the health care bill even though, at the end of the day, most of the Democratic base thought it would provide some relief. He did not do it as a champion for the public option. He was not there for the public option fight.
Mac D'Alessandro has come in and he's said, 'You know what? If we really want this democracy to be owned by the people and work for the people, we've got to do things. We've got to overturn Citizens United. We've got to actually get public financing. We've got to get lobbyists out of D.C.' And, I think that most Americans are looking for action on specific legislation like financial regulations, but they're also looking for people who are going to challenge the system because the system is not working for most Americans.
The kind of grassroots campaign that I'm running is built upon reaching out to voters directly, on the phones and at the doors. With the help of enthusiastic supporters across the 9th district, we have built a grassroots army that has generated strong momentum.
Just today, it was announced that we finished in second place in Democracy for America's Grassroots All-Stars contest, a competition that began with ninety candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives from across the country. I was the top finishing candidate among those still in a primary campaign, and I was the only candidate among the top five finalists not from the state of California.
I am running against an entrenched incumbent who has a million dollar warchest lined with contributions from big corporations and special interests. But, if there's one thing I've heard over and over again from voters as I've gone door to door across the district, it's that the voters want someone who stands up to big corporations, not someone who is funded by them.
That's why I need your support and the support of the netroots. Like Ilyse Hogue said, this is a blue district, so we have an opportunity to focus on electing the best Democrat we can. I urge you to support my campaign so that Massachusetts' 9th can be represented by a Better Democrat.
While some establishment pundits and think tanks don't think populism is a good idea, check out what some candidates out in the field are doing:
1. This Andrew Romanoff ad kicks ass. People tell me he wasn't exactly a raving populist as a legislator, but he sure is a candidate.
2. Senate candidates like Roxanne Conlin and Robin Carnahan are banging away at their corporate backed opponents on the TARP issue.
3. Alexi Giannoulias just came out with this great campaign document which echoes the Moveon campaign's themes and message.
4. Look at what Tom Perriello is doing in a conservative district in Virginia.
5. More and more candidates are signing up for Moveon's anti-Washington corruption campaign, including Chris Murphy, Donna Edwards, Romanoff, Conlin, Perriello, Gian..., Mac D'allesandro, Raul Grijalva, and many more.
I could actually go on and on, but you get the idea. Progressive populism is spreading like wild fire because candidates are figuring out that it is the only message that can save them.
This public option fight has been a loooong fight. We've all been hit with numerous requests to sign petitions, make phone calls, attend rallies, give money, etc.
In our money-laden, lobbyist-laden political system, it's easy to wonder if grassroots pressure makes a difference. And as MLK said, "sometimes we get discouraged and sometimes disappointed with the slow pace of things."
The fight is not over. But today's New York Times had some very encouraging news for activists:
Senate Leader Takes Risk Pushing Public Insurance Plan
...lawmakers said Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) was increasingly leaning toward the idea of including a version of a public insurance option, albeit one that would allow states to opt out of such a system, in the chamber's bill.
...Mr. Reid's outlook was shaped, in part, by opinion polls showing public support for a government insurance plan, which would compete with private insurers.
..."There is a growing sense that we need to lead on this issue and not wait for it to be offered on the Senate floor," a senior Democratic aide said. "The idea is that it's better to show some fight."
Hmmm...polls are fueling a "growing sense" among Reid's crew that "its better to show some fight" than to cave quietly?
Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Stephanie Taylor immediately put out this response:
"The growing sense that it is time for Majority Leader Reid to be strong and lead comes after an intense week of grassroots activism -- and the release of our new poll showing that Reid's political survival in Nevada requires strong leadership on the public option.
Thousands of people donated this week at BoldProgressives.org to launch a TV ad in Nevada that asks 'if Harry Reid is strong and effective enough as a leader to pass a public health insurance option into law.'
Grassroots pressure is working, and we will continue to keep the pressure on until the insurance companies are defeated and a strong public option is passed into law."
A lot of other groups have also been keeping the pressure on Democrats for months and months: Democracy for America, MoveOn, Blue America, FDL, Credo, OpenLeft, and others. National and state bloggers -- and progressive media voices like The Young Turks -- have pushed politicians and gotten facts out there that the mass media consistently missed. And many local activists have started their own grassroots efforts to pressure their senators.
Sometimes we get discouraged. This fight has been long. It's not over yet. But it's important to take note of progress along the way and recognize that grassroots pressure works.
More and more former interrogators and counterinsurgency experts are using Dick Cheney's recent ubiquity to expose his iniquity regarding the torture and abuse of detainees. Earlier this week, I wrote about Major Matthew Alexander, the former Senior Interrogator who conducted over 300 interrogations in Iraq and supervised 1,000 more. Alexander relied upon conventional means of interrogation, and his efforts led to the capture and killing of al-Qaeda leader Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi. Yet Alexander also witnessed the perilous consequences of Cheney's torture policy.
In an exclusive interview with Brave New Foundation, Alexander said, "At the prison where I conducted interrogations, we heard day in and day out foreign fighters who had been captured state that the number one reason they had come to fight in Iraq was because of torture and abuse, what had happened at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib."
Today, MoveOn.org and VoteVets.org joined the growing movement to amplify the testimonies of former interrogators and reveal the repercussions of treating prisoners inhumanely. Their joint campaign features a video with Jay Bagwell, an Afghanistan veteran and counterintelligence agent, who reaffirmed Alexander's assessment of Cheney's torture policy. According to Bagwell, "Torture puts our troops in danger, torture makes our troops less safe, torture creates terrorists. It's used so widely as a propaganda tool now in Afghanistan. All too often, detainees have pamphlets on them, depicting what happened at Guantanamo."
While General David "Betray Us" Petraeus must be thrilled with his conversion from traitor to saint in the eyes of the pseudo-left and amazed that such things can be accomplished simply by changing the political party of the president, the group that formerly bashed him with an ad in the New York Times and now supports whatever Obama does is not as new to supporting wars as this simple story suggests.
I'm on a flight so there will be little blogging today, but I did read this piece on Moveon member priorities.
What they chose: universal health care; economic recovery and job creation; building a green economy; stopping climate change; and end the war in Iraq.
What they didn't: holding the Bush administration accountable; fighting for gay rights and LGBT equality; and reforming campaigns and elections.
MoveOn Executive Director Eli Pariser says that this happy alignment with Barack Obama's agenda - and fortuitous absence of conflict with same - comes in part because "the people he's listening to and the people we're listening to are the same people."
This is a very interesting problem. Moveon has never been a particularly left-wing organization, it's mostly a collection of base Democrats with moderately liberal sympathies. It collected people angry about Clinton's impeachment, 9/11, the war in Iraq, PBS, Bush, and now Obama supporters. This is a mainstream group, and it's going to continue to act like a mainstream group.
When San Francisco blogger Sasha McGee noticed that Gavin Newsom was being feted by PG&E and AT&T at the Denver convention, it wasn't much of a surprise to see a DLC candidate running for governor of the largest state. What was a surprise, was that Moveon was also listed as a sponsor.Moveon is Not Greenwashing Gavin Newsom's Corporate Party
I'll be on the Kojo Nnamdi Show at 1pm to discuss the emergence of the netroots and what it means for the political system. I'll be on with Patrick Ruffini of the Next Right, a very smart thinker on the other side of the divide. The Kojo Nnamdi Show is local to DC, and it was a very important part of the Donna Edwards versus Al Wynn race.
It's one of those 'where is the political system going' kind of discussions, which is something I blogged about last week at TPMCafe to 'celebrate' Moveon's ten year anniversary. The discussion was kicked off by Nation Editor Chris Hayes, and the interesting stuff (to me) was Justin Ruben and Ben Brandzel opened up the hood of the organization. It turns out that most Moveon activists were never activated before in any capacity and that the group has an elaborate volunteer structure. Meanwhile, organizing legend Marshall Ganz said it's not real organizing because it doesn't generate leadership (which he says the Obama campaign does). Labor lawyer Nathan Newman said Moveon leaders don't care about poor people, and John Stauber argues it is an anti-democratic marketing machine for the Democratic establishment. I tried to lay out a framework for understanding Moveon in the context of the rest of the professional advocacy groups that work on a national level.
Finally, I signed this letter put together by The Nation on Obama's move away from the core values that won him the primary. It's not just a group of lefties that signed it - so called 'radical centrist' Steve Clemons praised it effusively after adding his name. The aggressive turn of these left-wing organizations on the web towards a form of advocacy journalism and activism is part of the overall shift I'll be discussing on the show.
Part of Living Liberally's mission has been to promote engagement and collaboration among progressive organizations. To fulfill this goal we at Living Liberally have decided to feature interviews with people involved in different parts of the progressive movement. Hopefully, through these interviews, we can learn about what progressives are working on today, and get a little more in depth about what its like to be a part of the progressive movement.
Our first interviewee, Daniel Mintz, is in Research and Development at progressive powerhouse MoveOn.org Political Action. He currently lives in Brooklyn and every once in a while shows up at the Original Drinking Liberally. Enjoy!
Seth Pearce: So, what did your parents say when your organization was condemned by the US congress? Daniel Mintz: I think, they, like a lot of people, were just blown away that with so many huge problems to tackle, the US Congress decided to spend so much time talking about a newspaper ad. Just like, whether you agreed or disagreed with the ad, what a manufactured controversy.
SP: What exactly do you do at MoveOn? DM: Officially, I'm in charge of Research and Development, which is to say that I'm the R&D dept. (we're a pretty tiny shop). What that means in practice is that I get to have my hands in lots of cool stuff that we're trying out.
SP: Stuff John McCain would know how to use? DM: Not so much.
SP: People think of MoveOn as this big shadowy progressive organization, running some kind of secret progressive world order- what are some specific things that MoveOn is working on right now? DM: Ha. What are we working on right now?...Let's see...We're getting ready to run a massive get out the vote operation in the fall, hundreds of paid organizers working with tens of thousands of volunteers. We'll be essentially combining our 2004 program, Leave No Voter Behind, where people in swing states canvassed their neighbors, with our 2006 program, Call for Change, where MoveOn members across the country made more than 7 million calls to voters in key House and Senate races.
We're also working on FISA: Right now, we're asking thousands of MoveOn members to call their senators every day to tell them not to cave on the FISA "compromise".
And we're running a National Day of Action for an Oil-Free President at gas stations across the country in a few weeks. McCain is pretty darn tight with Big Oil. Many of the more than 100 lobbyists associated with his campaign are lobbyists for Big Oil. We wanted to highlight those ties and push for our next president to free himself and us of our dependence on foreign oil. So we're holding hundreds of gas station rallies where thousands of MoveOn members will show up at local gas stations to rally and call for a real, progressive solutions to the energy crisis.
I got an email today from Moveon asking me to sign this petition against various media outlets for distorting Wes Clark's words. The subtext here is that Moveon is standing by Clark while Obama disavowed him, an implicit statement from Moveon leaders that they've had enough triangulating nonsense from Obama. And Obama gets it, fortunately. Conservatives have been using Clark to attack Obama, and Obama responded by wisely bringing Clark in from the cold. This is very good on all counts. I'm impressed with Obama's reversal, I'm pleased that Clark stood up for himself, and of course, the subtext here was Moveon's savvy counterpunch against Obama for his patriotism dig yesterday at Moveon.
They couldn't respond directly, even if they wanted to. Obama's speech attacking Moveon for their Petraeus ad left the group vulnerable, because their members would probably prize loyalty to Obama over loyalty to a questionable campaign tactic. With FISA and Clark, Moveon is on more solid ground. It's good leadership on Moveon's part, and a nice tacit reversal from Obama.
A terrific surrogate in Wes Clark and a great possible cabinet appointee has been rescued from dumb media oblivion.
On a day in which Obama disavowed both Moveon and Wes Clark, it's worth making a few points. One, Barack Obama did not support Ned Lamont's campaign against Joe Lieberman, Wes Clark did. Two, Barack Obama did not bother to vote up or down on the resolution censuring Moveon for their Petraeus ad, which is part of a pattern of non-votes (Kyl-Lieberman anyone?). Three, in Obama's smear of Wes Clark, Obama actively took Clark's words out of context and then used them to disavow a military veteran who had served his country with great distinction, returning home from Vietnam after being riddled with bullets, and going on to stop a genocide in the Balkans as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Apparently going after a veteran is ok, as long it's a Democrat.
Obama's disavowal of Wes Clark is not a surprise if you were paying attention to his endorsement of Joe Lieberman in 2006, his wan opposition to the Military Commissions Act in 2006, and his vacillating conduct around Moveon and Petraeus. It doesn't make any sense, either. Despite Obama's handling of Lieberman with kid gloves, Lieberman is an implacable foe and will be speaking at the Republican National Convention.
Part of Obama's consolidation of the party is his consolidation of message. Today, he took two more steps towards his goal of centralizing all power through his internet-infused post-partisan machine. First, he's just gone after one of the top surrogate for Congressional Democrats in 2006 in the country, Wes Clark. Clark made an honest observation, that John McCain has no executive experience in national security, and though his heroism in Vietnam deserves respect, it is not a substitute for experience. Obama's spokesperson denounced the comments as impugning McCain's patriotism.
Meanwhile, Republicans tied Clark's comments to Obama anyway, alleging that Obama put him up to it. In addition, Obama rebuked Moveon in his speech on patriotism, bringing up the Betray Us ad and saying how everyone should respect military service under all circumstances. Moveon was not in the news, Petraeus was not in the news, Obama simply chose to bring this up today in his speech on patriotism.
Obama's consolidation of the party amounts to a desire to eliminate all vulnerable competing power centers, and this includes Moveon and Clark. Obama can't tell the big donors behind Moveon to close the spigot, because there are no big donors behind Moveon. Obama can try to sideswipe the group by communicating directly with Moveon members through the media and through his own internet operations. I wouldn't be surprised to see Moveon take a hit in donations and activism for this, but then, it's possible that the membership is frustrated over FISA and the opposite will occur. He can undermine Clark by damaging his reputation, taking Clark's comments out of context and then using a straw man to pretend like Clark had attacked McCain's service. Media Matters documents that this is not what Clark said, but Obama's imperative is not to the truth but to increase his own range of action within the party.
Obama has done so, hurting one of the top Democratic PACs and outside groups, and one of the top Democratic surrogates. He has also reduced his own range of actions in the general election and shouldered more of the burden on to his own campaign.
STATE BLOGS
Talking Liberally Progressive Parley