Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiMoveOn Weighs In
MoveOn.org resumed its historical antiwar stance this week, symbolically breaking with the Obama administration for the first time.
After being criticized for abandoning the antiwar stance that won it millions of activist supporters, the organization sent targeted mailings supporting the demand for an Obama administration exit strategy report contained in HR 2404, by Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts.The measure, which requires the Pentagon to outline an exit strategy from Afghanistan by December 31, had only eighty-four co-sponsors last week, and was blocked by the House Democratic leadership from consideration as part of the supplemental military appropriation of $100 million. Currently it is pending in the House, still opposed by the Obama administration.
The bill represents an uncertain trumpet for Democrats who were willing to impose exit deadlines from Iraq on the outgoing Bush administration. Both President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have spoken in favor of an Afghanistan exit strategy in the past, which means their opposition to the McGovern legislation reflects a deep-running struggle between the executive and legislative branches over war-making powers. The White House was extremely active in lobbying Democrats to vote for the war supplemental without conditions. Only thirty-two Democrats were willing to stand up against the administration.
The refusal of MoveOn to engage in the supplemental fight, or oppose the escalation in Afghanistan, meant a reduction of grassroots antiwar pressure on wavering Congressional members. Until last week, Congressional antiwar leaders were questioning where MoveOn, with its 5 million members, stood on the vote.
Despite its modest nature, MoveOn's entry into the debate could be an important factor in legitimizing antiwar criticism of the Obama policies among Democrats. Antiwar sentiment at the grassroots is smothered by the unwillingness of several organizations to openly oppose the war escalation, despite their roots in the antiwar movement against Iraq.
The silent organizations thus far include Democracy for America and its founder, Howard Dean, Ben Cohen's True Majority, and the Obama campaign's offshoot, Organizing for America. The Feminist Majority even supported the $80 billion war supplemental with an amendment supporting women's programs in Afghanistan. The Feminist Majority argued against another antiwar organization, Win Without War, taking an oppositional stand on the supplemental. National Peace Action, while opposing the supplemental, also supported the Feminist Majority's amendment to the supplemental, which failed anyway in the end.
18 Comments so far
Show AllObama supporters MoveOn.org and Tom Hayden are both a day late and a dollar short. I've moved on. Thanks.
Obama has an exit strategy. First exit into Pakistan. Then Exit into Iran. Then Exit into Syria. Then Exit into Somalia. Then Exit into Iraq, Then Exit into Afghanistan.
Repeat as necessary.
Are we so dumb that we'd now embrace MoveOn, which has malleable principles when it comes to illegal wars? And why the hell is Tom Hayden stumping for MoveOn?
Let's face it. MoveOn is just a Dem Party fundraising organization. It doesn't stand for anything except excusing presidents for consensual blow jobs.
Hayden argues as if this is a practical matter, but MoveOn never challenges Dems in power because it funds Dem candidates. Please, people - this is not a practical matter. You're just being jerked around. By all means, oppose the wars, but not via MoveOn.
Check Hayden's article for any explanation as to why MoveOn changed its view. Nothing. Only loyalist Dems think there's some complex nuance here, rather than blatant manipulation.
-TIA
There really has to be an effort to unite all left leaning groups if we hope to save this planet. These are dangerous times.
The authentic left is united: we are united against the status quo and the pretenders like Hayden. When you wake up to that fact, suddenly you have empowered yourself against the type of tripe of perpetual excuses Hayden may dream up between his irrelevant 'articles.'
Without Move On;s effort McCain would probably be President and Palin next in line for the presidency. Move On has started speaking out against our costly wars. Let's encourage more of the same. Better Obama who needs our support than "bomb-bomb Iran" and Palin spying on Russia from her Alaskan perch.
Well, hallelujah.
Kudos to all who point out Moving-On's credibility issue, but one should ask oneself, "Credibility to whom?"
The very penney-ante, wishy-washy sycophancy that made Moving On part of the Demo campaign instead of a voice for change makes it part of Demo concerns when Obamaphiles discuss strats.
In a presidential election, when one votes Demo, one cannot vote progressive. However, one can ignore Moving On nonsense in one's inbox for months with little consequence, respond to genuine progressive organizations and donate to them, then RESPOND TO THOSE MOVING ON PEOPLE WHEN THEY ASK AND TELL THEM THAT YOU WILL NOT VOTE FOR A PRO-WAR PARTY.
Within seconds, you can be back with someone delivering genuinely progressive and do anything that requires commitment there.
Exit strategy? Ha.
The fate of the USA is sealed. The nation is on the road to ruin from economic bankruptcy because of the wars.
Kinda like the national "green" groups falling in line behind the sham Waxman-Markey cap and trade energy scam.
It didn't take me long to find out what 'moveon' was all about - moving on to another subject when they didn't want to face the ugly realities...
"The Song Remains The Same"
"What Were Once Vices Are Now Habits"
Moveon no longer has any credibility.
It's only for Obama supporters now.
Wouldn't "moveon" be more credible if it supported a party that was anti-war?
Moveon is moving on now that the war funding is over? Oh, I see. Must be time to build up the PR campaign to secure your loose change. I can hear it now,
"Gotta get dollars for Democrats! 2010 is just around the corner!"
"Someone find me a celebrity to sell this., I mean, uh, to bring the message to the people! Do it for the children?! Okay, yeah, that's a good one. We support war because we support woman and children. Moveon needs your support in becoming the light of hope for all the poor children of the world...."
Hayden notes,
"The bill represents an uncertain trumpet for Democrats who were willing to impose exit deadlines from Iraq on the outgoing Bush administration."
Yes, and we have learned that an "exit strategy" has no more binding force on Obama than it did with Bush. Exit strategies are always open ended and provide political refuge which is nothing more than a proxy promise, with no payoff at the end of the nightmare.
It is frustrating to watch Hayden capitulate on every issue of import to the left, wrapping his political two-step in obfuscations: and be sure that calling for an "exit strategy" is nothing more than kicking the can down the road to avoid accountability in the present moment.
Imposing a 'so called' exit strategy will constantly find itself being re-defined in a future that never arrives.
Moreover, Hayden has never been inside the Left-wing movement in any legitimate way. He has consistently shown his allegiance is to capitalism, state-corporate power nexus, careerism, and other right-wing values.
All the cliches one could use (and I have) are no longer adequate to describe Hayden's culpability/participation in perpetual war. The denial is too deeply rooted in his political mind set that has had a crippling effect on the way he views the world. In this sense, the only way left to define the man is to observe his handicap and dismiss his irrelevant ramblings under that rubric.
Oregoncharles
This just gets worse by the day. An exit strategy, more wasted hope, is what move-on will - very reluctantly - push for? We need our own organization with millions of steadfast voters. If move-on can form one, so can we genuine progressives. Move-on was formed as an arm of the Democratic party, nothing more.
Hayden has been a Democrat far longer than he was a "sixties radical." I remember a "radical professor" of mine from that era. When I saw him years later, his exact words, "How embarrassing. I was so naive." Of course, now he has good health care, has a cushy tenured job, slick car, makes no waves about anything anymore.
Even though Hayden is a centrist Democratic Party supporter (party of the sellouts), at least he does try to keep some of that sixties "magic" alive, a bit like 60's memorabilia we see in the retro shops. Not the real thing but it sells.
From the article:
"Despite its modest nature, MoveOn's entry into the debate could be an important factor in legitimizing antiwar criticism of the Obama policies among Democrats."
How about the Ds doing something to legitimize themeselves among antiwar voters?
If Obama will not embrace an exit strategy on his own then the DPRK or Pakistan might impose one on us. 10-9-8-7-...Daisy?