September 21, 2007
The Big Distraction Called MoveOn (Bill Press)
Let me shout this from the rooftops: THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT MOVEON.ORG AD.
Isn’t it obvious? The whole flap over the ad is a brilliantly orchestrated campaign by the Bush White House — with the help of Fox News — to change the subject. Of course! They’d much rather attack MoveOn.org, which is easy, than defend the war in Iraq, which is impossible.
Despite all the hysteria from Republican hucksters, there are three things to keep in mind about this ad:
1. We still have free speech in this country. True or not, it’s still OK to call Hillary Clinton a hypocrite; George Bush an idiot; or Gen. Petraeus "General Betray-Us."
2. Whether Gen. Petraeus can be counted on to tell the truth is a legitimate question. He’s no sacred cow. He’s clearly part of the Bush team. His independence and accuracy are fair game. Just like Colin Powell’s truth-telling was fair game.
3. MoveOn.org is an independent organization, in no way connected to the Democratic Party. There’s no need for Democrats to apologize for the ad, because they had nothing to do with it.
After all, George Bush never apologized for the Swift Boat ads against John Kerry. Dick Cheney never apologized for the ads comparing Tom Daschle to Saddam Hussein. Republicans never apologized for the ads trying Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden.
And Democrats should never apologize for MoveOn.org.
12 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
We all know Bush is trying to play to his crazy, brainwashed base. The repugs fear loosing thier reptilian base, therefore picking at MoveOn is another pitiful attemp to find those crazies that vorted for him and rally them for 2008.
Comment by Chris in NM — September 21, 2007 @ 7:38 am
I think the Democrats have missed a great opportunity to capitalize on the Republicans' use of the MoveOn.org ad to change the subject from the tragic misadventure in Iraq. As much as I deplore "nasty" politics on both sides, this is a free speech issue and I completely agree with your analysis.
I wrote both of my Texas senators about the Senate wasting tax dollars and time and violating free speech concepts on their vote to censure MoveOn.org.
(Ms)Ollie Rivers
Comment by Ollie Rivers — September 21, 2007 @ 8:08 am
Bill, is it your assertion that Moveon.Org supports Republicans? If they are not supporters of the Democratic Party then who do they support? Your statement is ridiculous. They hijacked the election in Connecticut when Joe Lieberman was thrown under the train by the Democratic party. They are certainly affiliated with the Democratic Party and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Democratic leadership in Congress reviewed the ad before it ran. Your posturing over this issue is ridiculous. If they had the right to run the ad, then the public, including the President and other members of government, certainly had the right to comment on it. And since it is a political issue, as you so adroitly point out, what is the problem with the politicians pushing the issue to see where Democrats stand on the issue? It's through the exchange of ideas that the public forms an opinion. What are you afraid of? That the public might realize there is an association between the concepts pushed by Moveon.Org and the Democrats?
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — September 21, 2007 @ 9:33 am
Hey Bill, you actually said that, "MoveOn.org is an independent organization, in no way connected to the Democratic Party. There’s no need for Democrats to apologize for the ad, because they had nothing to do with it." How did you manage to say that without your tongue snapping out of your mouth? Please, MoveOn.org and people of their ilk OWN the Democratic party. They bought it, they paid for it, now they want a return on their investment. Why else would Hillary Clinton, Obama, and "Pretty Girl" Edwards not denounce the ad? They either agreed with it (which would be bad enough), or they were afraid to say anything about it (which would actually be worse). The Democratic candidates (except Joe Biden) seem to be terrified of the Liberal Loons from the Left and it was disgraceful of them for piling onto a four-star general who is trying, yes he's actually trying, to win the War in Iraq. When was the last time any Democrat (except Joe Leiberman, who was actually forced out of your party) ever come up with an idea to win the war? Instead of constantly whining about "When can we leave," when was the last time any of you demand that we win? And if you're so dissatisfied with the President's performance, why didn't one, not one single Democrat, come up with their own plan to achieve victory? I know, it's because from day one of this war all Liberal Loons from the Left (like you) were part of the Teddy "I killed a woman at Chappaquiddick" Kennedy school of thought, that we would always lose, that the war was always a failure, and that we could never win. You people really hate this country so much that you'd rather see us fail in a war rather than be part of a team to win the war. How disgusting is that?
And, by the way, I thought you'd be thrilled with both the President and Petraeus. We're probably going to reduce the number of our troops in Iraq by over 30,000 by next year, more if the situation improves faster than we expect. It could just be me, but that sounds like good news, right? How come Liberals can't even accept any good news? Oh, I know, because only a quick and decisive loss in Iraq would make you people happy.
Comment by Libertyship46 — September 21, 2007 @ 10:25 am
Yes, there is free speach in this country until you guys install the Fairness Doctrine. MoveOn is a bunch of crazed leftwingers keeping the Dems under their thumb. Independent my foot. Traitors supporting traitors, not that there is anything wrong with that.
Comment by Igor R. — September 21, 2007 @ 12:20 pm
Ship;
Did the RNC or Bush apologize for the Swiftboat ads? Has any Republican condemned Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, Sean Hanity, Bill O'Reilly and the rest of their ilk? No they haven't. Why should the Dem condemn MoveOn? Also, I volunteer for MoveOn and because of last night, I will work even harder with them to get hacks in both parties out of congress.
Comment by Mike Coleman — September 21, 2007 @ 1:04 pm
Enough already. Let's solve the War in Iraq - forget about all these Swift Boat ads and MoveOn ads.
They are bought and paid for by each side of the spectrum.
The WAR is the issue - not Democrats and not even Republicans.
Get to WORK…solve the real issues.
Comment by Coonsey — September 21, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
I think MoveOn should change it's name to Mooven. Why? It's a vowel movement.
Comment by Igor R. — September 21, 2007 @ 7:00 pm
MoveOn is a group of people who want the troops treated fairly (rest between tours), and wants the troops out of the civil war Bush has created in his pursuit of Iraq's oil. It is clear the republicans are stubborn rubberstampers who will stand in the way of helping the troops eagerly in order to follow their party leaders. The have done what Bush/Cheney tells them to do for so many years, that now they can't think for themselves. The other option is that they just don't care about the men and women who are going back and forth to war in Iraq endlessly. With the possibility that they may not make it home the next tour. Republicans in the
Senate and Congress are bringing shame on the republicans that do care about the military.
Comment by Vicki — September 21, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
Hey Mike Coleman, last time I checked John Kerry wasn't a four-star general currently serving in uniform trying to win a war for this country. The Swiftboat ads were about an event that took place over 30 years ago and, I might ad, were done by men who were actually at the scene of the incident. And, the last time I checked, John Kerry was running for public office (why he would want to is anybody's guess). General Petraeus isn't running for anything and he is trying to give recommendations on how to actually win the war, something the Democrats seem to have absolutely no interest in. In fact, the Democrats were already dismissing the General even before he opened his mouth and uttered one word. Now that is objectivity, isn't it?
As for Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, Sean Hanity, and Bill O’Reilly, the last time I checked they actually wanted this country to win the war and were supporting the people who were trying to fight it (like General Petraeus), not like the loony liberal left like you who wants us to actually lose. I don't know which is more disgusting, seeing people like you trying to tear down a guy like Petraeus or people like you willing to see this country lose a war just to win the next election.
You ask, "Why should the Democrats condemn MoveOn?" Oh, I don't know, maybe because it's the right thing to do? Maybe because it would show that even Democrats know the difference between a General who is trying his best to win a war as apposed to some jerk like Harry Reid who keeps saying we've already lost the war? Or maybe, just maybe, because you could set aside party politics for once in your miserable lives for something more important, which is to see this country succeed in a war that is taking place in a very important and dangerous part of the world? No, I don't think the people like you at MoveOn would have the smarts, let alone the patriotism, to do that. "Cut, run, and lose," should be your battle cry. You people make me sick.
Comment by Libertyship46 — September 21, 2007 @ 10:23 pm
The neocons are really worked up here Bill. Great post.
Comment by Chris in NM — September 24, 2007 @ 12:58 pm
Vicki, cut the crap! Anybody who knows anything about MoveOn knows they don't give a damn about the troops. They only want to install a Socialist dictatorship in the US, the rest is window-dressing.
Comment by Igor R. — September 24, 2007 @ 5:25 pm