Thank You, MoveOn.org

Watching the lead-up to General Petraeus giving his Iraq report on CNN, I expected the Democrats to do their usual wimp out. I expected them to shuck and jive and eventually go along with whatever George Bush wanted, as they inevitably do.

Rep. Skelton, D-Mo, made critical remarks about the Iraq catastrophe that were worth hearing, though he delivered them snoozily. After that, Democrat Tom Lantos aggressively continued to find fault with the current administration and its war. I found myself becoming engaged. This was going better than I thought. Then Republicans Duncan Hunter and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen began the typical GOP march toward wrong-headed righteousness with comments about how upset they were about MoveOn.org's Petraeus/Betray Us ad -- how this ad was going too far and besmirching the honor of the excellent general. Cha-Ching! Now things were really picking up.

I hadn't seen the ad in The New York Times, but I'd caught it on the Internet. I'd thought that at least somebody in this country -- thank you MoveOn.org! -- wasn't going to lean over and take it anymore in the wham-bam-without-any-thank- you-ma'am way the American people have been treated since the Bush/Cheney duo has been in power. Most particularly since the president and vice president maneuvered the United States into this war for which they lusted -- and even after the ineffective Democrats took control of Congress after the last election.

With MoveOn.org's Petraeus ad, I thought that at least someone somewhere was doing his and her job of telling the facts to the public's face without a load of doublespeak as camouflage. It's a job others could and should be doing.

Speaking of which, during the problem with the general's microphone, I was listening to, though sporadically watching, the network commentary. The way the dialogue was going I was curious about who was mouthing the Bush administration's talking points to the CNN anchor, although I'd missed her credentials. My husband informed me she was with CNN. Ah, yes. This was more reporting of spin being presented as news, which I call news-speak in honor of George Orwell. If only we could track the percentage of actual news compared to news-speak that's produced by the traditional media. I'm afraid we'd find it frightening.

In last week's New York Times, Frank Rich had yet another incisive column in which he wrote about this, what I consider, national humiliation, "...What's surprising is not that this White House makes stuff up, but that even after all the journalistic embarrassments in the run-up to the war its fictions can still infiltrate the real news...Anchoring the CBS Evening News from Iraq last week, Katie Couric seemed to be drinking the same Kool-Aid (or eating the same lobster tortellini) as Mr. O'Hanlon. As "a snapshot of what's going right," she cited Falluja, a bombed-out city with 80 percent unemployment, and she repeatedly spoke of American victories against "Al Qaeda." Channeling the president's bait-and-switch, she never differentiated between that local group he calls "Al Qaeda in Iraq" and the Qaeda that attacked America on 9/11. Al Qaeda in Iraq, which didn't even exist on 9/11, may represent as little as two to give percent of the Sunni insurgency, according to a new investigation in The Washington Monthly by Andrew Tilghman, a former Iraq correspondent for Stars and Stripes. Next to such "real" news from CBS, the "fake" news at the network's corporate sibling Comedy Central was, not for the first time, more trustworthy."

Besides that, what a lucky "coincidence" that Katie and the president happened to be in Iraq at the same time. That war reporter Ka-Ka-Ka-Katie.

In Huff Post, former Sen. Gary Hart wrote, "This administration stands indicted for incompetence and mendacity. That it still commands the loyalty of even a quarter of our fellow citizens is testament to the persistence of willful ignorance...That the media still treat these operatives and spokespersons, and indeed the president himself, seriously is witness to their desire for "access" and "sources" rather than their commitment to the truth.

The traditional American media has failed and keeps on failing. It's quite stunning to think of this, especially as our society and press were formerly known and highly regarded throughout the world as free. No longer -- even among our citizens. The compromise of the mainstream media in no small way contributes to the fact that our nation's checks and balances aren't working -- and this is really saying something -- though I find some justice in the books being written by Republican insiders like Jack Goldsmith. I feel some consolation that even American conservatives are disturbed about this administration's desire for absolute power over rule of law. Mr. Goldsmith evidently felt it was important to write his book The Terror Presidency. This is an example of an absence of doublespeak or gobbledygook.

As for General Petraeus, this New York Times article points out part of the problem with his version of the surge in Iraq. "And General Petraeus formalized the widely anticipated reduction by announcing that American forces would be at the "pre-surge" level of 15 combat brigades by mid-July 2008...General Petraeus declined to say what additional cuts would be carried out after that point, saying he would revisit the issue in March."

In my experience of people using the phrase "revisiting the issue," it's actually doublespeak meaning that nothing will change. The point for the person who says this is to get his way and stall for time -- to diffuse the immediate confrontation whatever it is and to lead the audience of the speaker to false hope.

So again, I want to say thanks to MoveOn.org for saying something that needed to be said -- without camouflage.

Comments

[Dap]

Move-On was Spot-On!

Thank you Move-On and Thank you Beth for a fine essay/post.

[marvc]

The MoveOn ad contained not one lie, unlike Petraeus' "report" to Congress, and of course, unlikek anything that ever comes out of Bush's mouth. So since when is truth not allowed, but LIES are ok?

[ceu]

I wasn't thrilled with the MoveOn.org ad (full disclosure: I'm a member) - thought it was a bit childish...right up until I caught someone representing the rightwing on one of MSNBC's shows saying, "MoveOn.org needs to sit down and shut up". Wow!
This is how the left had been talked to for years - the "grown-ups" will handle the problems & those who disagree with the solutions can keep their opinions to themselves - and I was very, very glad that some group on the left had finally stooped to the right's level and told them flat out how a lot of us view Petraeus.

[Podewumun]

It's like I keep sayin', "I've had it up to my ass with sedate!".

Now here's something to think about.

Bush's 'strategy' ISN'T WORKING, but he refuses to change it.

When our strategy (of being TOO POLITE) ISN'T WORKING, are we supposed to emulate Bush's obstinance and 'stay the course'?

When it DOESN'T WORK, you have to try something else! Or book a rubber room!

The MoveOn ad, call it what you like, was a long-overdue change in OUR strategy. There.

[FearlessFreep]

If the Right is telling you to shut up, you must be doing something right!

[oldpotsmuggler]

I guess that a Medal of Freedom is out of the question for MoveOn, so is there anything else we can put them in for? Putting it out in the cold, unvarnished form among lefties is one thing, but to lay it all out there for the whole country in a place like The New York Times is a truly admirable feat. One has the sense that there will be more progress to be made once we stop being polite about wanton and unjustified murder.

The shooting of civilians by Blackwater is called murder, and the company is sent packing from Iran. Where, however, is the substantive difference between Blackwater and the U.S. military when it comes to civilian deaths. We have clearly created a "might makes right" situation, and I see it as being based on an artifical construct. The majority of Iraqis want us to stop killing them (it might even be 100% of the dead ones in opposition). The majority of Americans want us to stop killing innocent Iraqis (at a minimum). Is there anything horrible enough that can be said for those people who find our performance to be acceptable?

There was a real divide in our country formed over the killing in Viet Nam, and, when that happened, the killing ultimately was brought to an end. It sure as hell seems to me like there's a lesson there somewhere.

[Aquarius52]

I was pleasantly surprised that the Democrats actually acted with cojones during the Petraeus
report/hearing. So often they have fallen for the Republican red herring yells of lack of patriotism directed at anyone who dares critisize the Bush administration policies.

Then there is the general outrage about the MoveOn.Org ad. Republican politicians and right wing talking heads came out of the woodwork to feign horror at this "attack on a patriotic American". Some predictably called it an attack on the troops and an endorsement of Al-Qaeda!! Even some Democrats timidly called the "over the top".

Since when is it outrageous, unpatriotic and sacriligious to disagree with someone who predictably and consistently presents a too rosy picture of a ghastly war gone bad? Wasnt it Petraeus who insinuted himself into politics by public comments supporting Bush's actions?

Even Rudy (America's not so great mayor) has started a campaign to tie Democrats like Clinton to the dastardly MoveOn.Org ad. After all, no red blooded American could support a candidate who could vaguely be associated with the same politics as MoveOn. That's a bad, bad move on his part. His dismal performance during the 911 crisis and his blowing off all serious attempts to fight terrorism wil be easy fodder for the press. I wouldnt start what I cant finish, Rudy!

It is naive at best and disengenious at worst to get all pissy and faint at people who choose to practice their First Amendment rights and actually use critical thinking skills.

[RobertPaul]

The thing that I felt amazing is that no one asked the General about some of the facts quoted in the MoveOn article.

For example: General, I find this ad distasteful, so I want to ask you a question. Has the means of counting the dead in Iraq changed since last year...which would account for the drops you show on the handsome charts?

You know he would have to say No and then we could PROVE the bastard was lying and MoveOn would have been heroes.

But no. The Dems were too afraid to question the great man who had already been identified as a "Chicken-shit-little-ass-kisser" by none other than his own boss, Adm. Fallon!