Why I Left MoveOn, and Why Their Censure Doesn't Matter

MoveOn is a member-driven organization (4.00 / 1)

Their members (and I'm one of them) want an end to the occupation of Iraq.

The Democratic leadership has decided not to fight Bush, and to continue to rubberstamp his policies in Iraq. Albeit with considerably more hand-wringing than the previous Republican-controlled congress, but the effect is mostly the same.

Therefore, Democrats in Congress shouldn't be surprised when MoveOn applies some pressure.

As for the Petraeus ad, they knew it would be controversial, they knew it would hurt Democrats who have stood with them and their causes, even the ones that have shown them as an organization good faith in the past, and they knew Dems would have to distance themselves from it, but they did it anyway.

Do you have any evidence to back up those claims? My impression is that MoveOn wanted the ad to be controversial, but didn't really expect the firestorm that occurred. I do know that MoveOn has raised millions to help put Democrats in office (including over $150,000 to Paul Hodes in 2006).

As far as forcing Democrats to distance themselves, the Democrats have only themselves to blame for playing into the right-wing propaganda.

---

by: dweingart @ Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 22:17:15 PM CDT

Thank you... (0.00 / 0)

That's precisely the point I'm trying to make. I thought I was in the minorty here. Glad there's two of us!

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 22:30:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

They're professionals; (0.00 / 0)

they knew what it meant to attack Petraeus.  My point is not that they're wrong, it's that when it comes time for the election, it takes more work and more money to support candidates on our side if people are hard at work attacking them, no matter which side they're being attacked from.  Let's not forget, the alternative to Congressional Democrats isn't more liberal Congresspeople, it's Congressional Republicans.  Like it or not, we have one-or-the-other elections, so when you have an incumbent on your side of the aisle, and nobody else in your party strong enough to defeat them in a primary, support your incumbent unless they've doing something so heinous as to make it worth installing a Republican in their place.

The Congressional Democratic leaders are trying to end the war, though I will cede they could push harder--don't forget, they have to answer to their caucuses.  The best way to support the end-the-war effort is to decry the Senate Republicans who are blocking it and show solidarity with Democrats in Congress.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 23:17:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

At $ 67 Million (0.00 / 0)

They are a force to be reckoned with. That is the haul that MoveOn has pulled in.

Next time, there may be no next time.

---

by: Jon Bresler @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 06:05:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not saying they don't do good work, (0.00 / 0)

they do, I'm just frustrated by the fact that they also do things that result in the need for more work and more money.  I saw a MoveOn ad on TV last night and thought it was great; like I said before, I agree with them on a great deal of things, it just frustrates me when they give our side a hard time--because it's tantamount to a gift to the other side.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 06:46:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I disagree... (0.00 / 0)

It is of UTMOST importance that we give our side a hard time when they deserve it. It's what sets us apart from Republicans. If we don't we're going to go back to the political wilderness again and get stuck with a bunch of DLC "centrists" who accomplish nothing but bend over for the GOP. If we don't give them a hard time and push them our way, the only people who will are the GOP, and will push them their way. No thanks.

You can read more of JDRyan at five before chaos. But why would you go and do something like that?

---

by: JDRyan @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 07:56:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think that (0.00 / 0)

it would do more to run an ad saying "Stand with Congressional Democrats to end the war" or something.  Don't get me wrong, I'm for Richardson, so I'm as anti-war as anyone, but that ad was counterproductive.  If you can find better candidates to challenge incumbents in primaries, go for it.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 09:00:57 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, (0.00 / 0)

After this 'firestorm', I wrote a 50 dollar check to MoveOn. Somebody's gotta say what they're saying. A few Dems are, but not enough, and not forcefully enough

You can read more of JDRyan at five before chaos. But why would you go and do something like that?

---

by: JDRyan @ Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 23:16:51 PM CDT

Ne Desit Virtus (0.00 / 0)

This bears repeating:

From Stench of negligent, complicity

***
2)I have heard that some troops refer to Gen. Patraaus, as Gen. Betray-us and that is where the MoveOn Banner came from. Having been an Infantry grunt, I have little doubt that the scuttle-butt has merit. Troops are bored, except when they are "dancing with the devil", so they pass time with such, as I and my team members did. Move On can hang their Kevlars on that, but on a larger scale, I think they "screwed the pooch, bigtime" and have said the same:O Captain! my Captain! (this post is more related to Gen. Clark's HRC endorsement)

Spin away O' Duantless Supporter of Bill MoveOn.org, but you will be hard pressed to pursuade anyone, that really does serious work with our Uniformed Leadership, to clearly side with MoveON on this matter. Furthermore, the Repugs love this distraction and as long as it lives in the RAM, they will ride it, beat it, work it, twist it...Sununu IT!

Iraq is a failure of Policy. Uniforms at every level, march to the drum of their civilian chain-of-command. Gen.Patraeus will lose sleep over many things, MoveOn's slight will unlikely be one of them. One day he will join the ranks of those under the white stone. Those ranks alone are fit to call Gen. Patraeus to provide a full report. Don't you or anyone else think that Gen.Patraeus does not live every second of his command with that in mind.

SGS is Jack Mitchell of Lowell, MA. The symbolism of the "sleeping giant" is based on my HOPE for America.

---

by: Sleeping Giant Stirs @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 16:18:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So you, or the author of that post, (4.00 / 1)

don't believe Congress has the right to "call Gen. Petraeus to provide a full report"?

There is a distinct line between respecting members of our armed forces and advocating military supremacy.  There's a reason the civilians give the orders, and everyone is accountable to the people.  In government, that means everyone who works for the government is accountable to the Congress.

I think it's reprehensible that under this administration, military officers and others are kept from sharing their true feelings about controversial topics with the Congress and the people, and I believe it is the President who is responsible for defending his strategy; it's unfair for him to delegate that burden to a more credible inferior in an establishment where one has no choice but to stand by what his superiors want.  This is worse than putting Colin Powell's face on the argument for war; Powell could more easily have walked away.  Petraeus' job is to execute orders by issuing more specific ones, not to justify the decisions of his less popular Commander-in-Chief.

The crucial thing is, though, that the General's accountability is primarily to Congress and the American people.  Soldiers may judge him, but is for the people and their representatives to judge the merit of his actions.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 20:33:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I fully concur (0.00 / 0)

I was speaking more to the sanctimony purported by moveon and that Gen.Patraeus lives with a burden that few would know.

Yes, unequivocably; the General must report to his civilian leadership. It was not my intent to suggest different.

Having performed numerous burial details in Arlington National Cemetary, I am keenly aware of the burden that combat leaders bear. Having been an Infantry Team Leader in Desert Storm, I too was responsible for the joint responsibility of completing the mission and returning my soldiers to their loved ones.

I take objection to the "war pigs" label that the ignorant are so quick to paste on leaders in uniform. It is a nice stereotype that sells movies and provides convenient scapegoats.

My personal experience is that most commanders, dread the prospect of cultivating the "Gardens of Stone". I don't know Patraeus, but I do know his type. I wish the "shakers and movers" at moveon.org could see what I see.

If the General truly is "betray-us" then he will answer to the men under his command. I don't know if that resonates with you, but I know it does with Gen. Patraeus.

SGS is Jack Mitchell of Lowell, MA. The symbolism of the "sleeping giant" is based on my HOPE for America.

---

by: Sleeping Giant Stirs @ Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 21:19:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]