In Defense of MoveOn -- No More Arrows in the Back

There is a huge problem of "risk aversion" in progressive culture, and nothing exemplefies that more clearly than what happened to MoveOn in the wake of their Petraeus/Betray Us ad in the New York Times. Matt Stoller points to one particularly infuriatingly yet typical email from The Truman Project, in which they encourage their progressive veterans to denounce MoveOn:

Those of you who saw the NYTimes today saw that MoveOn took out a full page ad equating Petraeus with "Betray Us" and accusing him of politicizing the military.

In one fell swoop, they have undone massive work by countless progressives trying to bridge the gap with the military and reconnect.

What's this "we," kemosabe? MoveOn is always out there, fighting the good fight, they've done more to move the anti-war dialog in this country than just about any organization I know. They will, as a result, inevitably be a target of the right. I do think it's possible to have differences of opinion in good faith about the ad, but when people start to claim the progress made by "progressives" as their own, and MoveOn is somehow suddenly outside of that, it's just arrogant, spurious nonsense.

I'm sorry, John Kerry, but you don't help the right wing out. Ever. Now they've got Diaper Dave Vitter out there leading the battle cry, trying to reclaim himself by introducing resolutions to denounce MoveOn. Does Kerry really not know how it works at this point? Paul Krugman does, and he lays it out extremely well in a review of Jon Chiat's new book:

Jon talks at some length about the media, and in particular about the Republican ability to get journalists to harp endlessly on supposed character flaws of Democrats, while their own candidates get a free pass. He emphasizes the right-wing echo chamber, but there's more to it than that. It's also - as I can report from my own experience - a result of asymmetrical intimidation. Quite simply, if you point out character flaws in a conservative, there will be an all-out effort, involving major media as well as blogs and talk radio, to discredit and ruin you, personally. This just doesn't happen on the other side.

So journalists feel that it's safe to ridicule Democrats, even if the supposed character-defining episode never happened; they choke up and shy away when it comes to Republicans. That's why even the most grotesque stuff, like Giuliani's claim that he's a rescue worker too, or Romney's remark that his sons are serving the country by helping him become president, doesn't get picked up.

One of the most frustrating things about getting involved in the political process as part of the Blue America PAC is that we have to confront on a daily basis how little our representatives know about how the media works, how thoroughly it has been gamed by conservatives and how easily they get played. They're so anxious to please, to seem "reasonable," that their reflex is to repeat canards about "those crazy blogs" (or MoveOn or anybody else trying to build progressive infrastructure) without any awareness that they are planting a knife squarely in the back of the only message machine that exists to combat a rabid right wing that doesn't just want to see them disempowered, it wants them destroyed. Permanently.

I realize many Democrats are just as frightened of the progressive movement as they are of the Republicans and were probably quite gleeful about getting to take MoveOn down a peg, but this only goes to underscore how woefully out of touch they are with what is going on in this country and how distant the perspective of the voting public is from the wisdom of the beltway brahmins. Markos Moulitsas fielded the question of the MoveOn ad beautifully on Hardball:

To me, you know, way out in California, it's almost amusing to see how in Washington DC, everybody is all up in arms over an ad. You know, we're in the middle of this bloody war, almost 4,000 dead, half a trillion dollars spent, and people are going to talk about how inappropriate an ad is? I think it's patently ridiculous. And most people, outside of this sort of Beltway environment really don't care about an ad. They want to see our men and women coming home, safe and sound to their families.

The MoveOn ad said what Democrats could not and survive politically -- Petraeus is acting as a politician, doing a politician's job of spinning and his actions are not above criticism just because he's got a bunch of ribbons on his chest that George Bush would like to hide behind. And it traveled. To join with the right and start firing arrows into their backs is both destructive from a movement perspective and displays tremendous naiveté about what it's going to take to end this war.

So unless there is some mysterious wisdom in taking one's messaging cues from Diaper Dave, people who want to be part of the solution and not a part of the problem should find another way to engage in this conversation. One that doesn't leave progressive fighters fearful that their own side will turn on them when the GOP attack dogs decide to lunge.

Jane Hamsher blogs at firedoglake.com.

Follow Jane Hamsher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janehamsher

Comments

[live by the golden rule]

Moveon certainly is entitled to be as shrill as it wants, as shrill as the extremely-off putting extreme right wing nuts.
But the question is: what's the goal?
Over the summer, I thought Moveon had realized that to end the war, rather than just get things off our chest, the way to do it was to convince a few additional Republicans and their Republican-voting constituents to vote for a timeline. To convince someone, you have to see the world through their eyes, not your own. Moveon had all the right facts to present, but the way they presented it has the opposite effect--- yes, the right will use anything they can against us, but why gift wrap something for them to use? Now all anyone hears about is the shrillness, not the content of the ad.

[aspen]

I have contributed to MoveOn for ads and will continue to do so when I like the ad. I thought the Petraeus ad was counterproductive. The ad hominen attack became the focus which undermined the more important issue of the Iraq war. The same thing could have been said in a much more effective way. Something like "there they go again" or "Fool me once, shame on you etc." could have indirectly pointed out that Petraeus is Bush's flunky without the controversy.

The MoveOn ad turned off many Americans, who could otherwise be persuaded to MoveOn's position on the Iraq issue. The ad became the issue not the Iraq war. It flunked marketing 101. MoveOn can do better than that and I will be delighted to support them in their efforts.

[pros54]

I have not sent move on a donation in a long time but now I find ample reason to do so. Who wants to support people who cannot fight for themselves aka John Kerry and co. John kerry can go to hell with his supplications people fought for him when he would not fight for himself any wonder he lost but he had his senate job to go back to so it was no big loss to him and people kept on dying in Iraq and our freedoms stolen and he has the guts to comment oabout move on? What leaders we liberals have.

[Zorbathe]

Move On is the only group that tells the truth & the ad in the New York Times spells out the outrage at the betrayal,deception & dishonor wrought upon American citizens not only by Petraeus but by all the members of the present administration. If the Democrats can not take on the fight ahead & it must be a fight to restore our honor for ourselves & to show the world of nations that we are worthy of their trust; then Move On must lead the way. Right on, Move On! I'll help to pay for more ads; whatever it takes. Our fight is a fight of honor & our weapon is the truth. With the truth we must open the hearts & minds of both the Republicans & the Democrats.

[sabocat]

According to a commentary by Ted Rall titled "The War party", Rall dissects the democrats' seeming inability to do anything to stop the war in Iraq. Moveon, with its ties to the democrats, has done more to weaken the antiwar movement in this country than any other organization, because the democrats really do support the war. If moveon was seriius about trying to end the war, they would break their incestuous ties to the dems and go after both establishment pro-war parties. See the quote below:

"In June Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting’s Extra! Magazine wrote: “If
the Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to force the Bush administration
to accept a bill with a withdrawal timeline, it didn’t have to pass the
bill over Bush’s veto–it just had to make clear that no Iraq War
spending bill without a timeline would be forthcomin­g.”

Democratic leaders know that. And here’s how I know they know: days
after taking control of Congress, on January 30, they invited five
constitutional law experts to testify before the Senate Judiciary
Committee to ask them how they could end the war. Four out of five of
the experts swore that the Democrats could stop the Iraq War just…like…that.

“Today we’ve heard convincing testimony and analysis that Congress has
the power to stop the war if it wants to,” said Senator Russ Feingold
(D-WI). Yet eight months later, there’s still no end in sight."

[splashy]

I agree wholeheartedly. The right wingers are bullies, who want everyone to parrot their viewpoint and will attack anyone that doesn't. Therefore, they will attack any liberal that says anything.

So, just tell them to bug off, and let them stew in their own juices. The Dems that did not do that fell into the right wingers' trap.

I thought the MoveOn ad was brilliant. It got everyone thinking about how they were being lied to, in a way that sticks, and REALLY sidetracked the right wingers into their knee jerkiness. Well done!

[strangelet]

Obviously, the headline and general tone of the MoveOn ad are going to turn off some people (and thrill others, of course). Given the rich history of attacks on Democrats and other non-right-wingers BY right-wingers and the MSM (e.g., Swift Boats, "Al Gore said he invented the Internet"), it is hard for me to be very upset at the fact that MoveOn was impolite to another 4-star asskisser.

The one side-effect of the ad that I am worried about (as I have mentioned elsewhere) is that by focussing on St. Petraeus, it may unintentionally reinforce the notion that he is the "main guy" for evaluating the situation in Iraq. The Democratic leadership made a huge mistake early in the year when they bought into the notion that this September review by Petraeus was crucial decision point. They know better now, but it is always hard to back away from what you previously accepted. If the ad enhances DP's stature as "the evaluator", it could have an overall negative effect. We'll see.

So, on a related note -- does anybody on this thread live in Kentucky or in the 6th Congressional District in Pennsylvania? If so, could you please try to do something to prevent the re-election of, respectively, Mitch McConnell and Jim Gerlach? Ultimately, in a representative democracy, the government we get is determined by the votes of people in relatively small areas.

[tgd10]

Dear Jane,
Right on, Sister!
Regards,
tgd10

[shengirl]

It's all part of the right's political playbook. They can trash the reputation of Viet Nam war vets [and heroes] like Max Clelland, John Kerry and even McCain [his adopted child became his 'mixed race illegitimate child'], and you can hardly get mainstream media to utter a sound. But let MoveOn or any other progressive group dare to make a point, and they are all over it, aghast at the nerve of these people. Once again, the media lets themselves be played by the right. When will they learn?Probably never. It's always much safer [and easier] to run with the bullies.

[realpolitic]

Journalists are really afraid of the right-wing echo chamber. They will not attack those on the right. The right nevers forgets and never forgives.

[Azirona]

Mud slinging and name calling is nothing more than high school mentallity. Attacking a military commander is nothing more than a diversion by the simple minded. If MoveOn is so credible and righteous why don't they address the real problem this country faces which, for those of you that haven't figured it out; our nation is controlled by the military industrial complex, multinational corporations, and special interest money.

All our politicians are bought and paid for by same, with a few exceptions. Nothing will change until we elect a bonifide patriot and hero (black white, male female, it doesn't matter) that will stand up and take the power away from those who control the puppets by their purse strings. Vote for Hillery, Obama, Richardson, Dodd, Biden or any of the republicans and you get another dose of the same old thing. A Congress and Senate that plays partisan politics and gets nothing meaningful done.

Eisenhower warned the nation in his farewell speech to watch out for exactly what has happened to us.

Tell me who amoung you is willing to put at risk your mortgage, career, childrens college fund, 401K and safety net that you falsely call security blanket. Not many of you I suspect.

This nation can not survive without visionary leadership of quality like that of the founding fathers, and a grass roots revolution where all citizens are willing to sacrifice their personal security for the sake returning our constitutional rights in the true form it was written. A government of the people and for the people.

Anything less is just whitewash and bullshit to the flavor of ones choosing.

[Qbear]

Cheney/Bush/FOX News/Gergen/Chris Matthews

betray us....pfff­fffft

You're luck I don't have 70 grand, and that there are still a couple words the NYT won't print.

[SeekTruth]

I sent the following comment to Moveon: "I have supported MoveOn's types of causes since before most of Moveon's adherents were born, but your tactics in dealing with Petraeus are infuriating. Petraeus' character is not the issue. Insofar as you make it the issue, you will lose. We all will lose, including the additional soldiers and Iraqis who will lose their lives because you have chosen such an ineffective and distracting tactic. Grant the integrity of Petraeus' character and demonstrate how his testimony is irrelevant to the question of the political policies we should follow in regard to Iraq. Your approach not only discredits your (and my) Iraq stands, but undermines legitimacy we sorely need in the domestic area and in supporting candidates. Now every candidate you support is going to have to exempt himself or herself from your ad hominem attacks on Petraeus. You are undermining the legitimacy of your own organizati­on."

It is morally incumbent on us to use tactics that are as effective as possible. In this instance, MoveOn's tactic stank.

[MmeFlutterbye]

Only the truly naive do not know that if Petraeus were not a hand puppet of George Bush, he would have lost his job and probably been demoted long ago. I wish the Democrats had the spine of those in MOveon. Moveon.org has my full support.

[RogerHWerner]

Jane is of course completely accurate in what she says here about the right wing's gaming of the media (anyone want details read Eric Alterman's "What Liberal Media?" or any one of Eric Boelter's columns on the subject of media bias).

It is also true that centrist Democrats, those who climbed aboard the Bill Clinton special in 1992 in the hopes of regaining power behind the Beltway are terrified of progressives because we don't support the DLC/Clinton agenda, which is a little to the right the policies espoused by the old Rockefeller wing of the GOP. This county doesn't need a GOP lite. What it needs is a true opposition party and to create that it will take time and require some sacrifice. It took conservatives 20 years to create the set up they have today and progressive have to begin somewhere. That said however, I seriously doubt many politicians in DC would be willing to sacrifice their political power/jobs for the good of the Democratic party, progressivism, or America.

While it may seem difficult to understand why any Democrat would attack moveon.org, which has done more to advance a progressive agenda than perhaps any other entity certainly far more than the DLC or the National Democratic Party, it isn't hard to understand if one believes that many Democrats prefer the status quo with a little more power sharing on the part of the GOP. Perhaps I'm cynical but I don't see the majority of Democrats jumping on a progressive bandwagon.

Finally, I would to ask how many conservatives pointing the figure at moveon.org failed to denounce Anne Coulter after her many politically incorrect gaffs? Not very many. If the GOP doesn't like what moveon.org has to say that's too bad. They might consider compelling their pea-wit of a president to alter his indefensible policies.