"The Left" has been properly chastised and sent to bed without their supper.

[madfloridian]

Many times lately "The Left" has been properly chastised and sent to bed without their supper. We really did nothing very wrong, just a little too outspoken. The Senate did it first, and we had high hopes the House would not do it...Pelosi said she had other things to do.

But today the House censured the speech of MoveOn as well. I don't have the wording yet, but here is an article. The vote was pretty overwhelming.

House Condemns MoveOn.org Attack

The House on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to condemn the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org for a recent advertisement attacking the top U.S. general in Iraq.

By a 341-79 vote, the House passed a resolution praising the patriotism Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and condemning a MoveOn.org ad that referred to Petraeus as "General Betray Us."

The article originally said it was attached to the stopgap funding measure, but they took that sentence out. Don't know why.

So now we have both the Senate and the House on record of chastising a group that has worked hard for Democratic values. They stood with the right wing against their anti-war base.

They have done this for years, though. Nothing new. The centrist Democrats called us "fringe activists" way back in 2003.

Activists are out of step and are not the real soul of the party

There's one big problem with this strategy: Most of those party activists the candidates are trying so hard to please are wildly out of touch not only with middle America but with the Democratic rank and file. The great myth of the campaign is the misguided notion that the hopes and dreams of party activists and single-issue groups represent the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. They don't.

The fact is, "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," as former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean likes to call it, is an aberration, a modern-day version of the old McGovern wing of the party, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist interest-group liberalism at home. That wing lost the party 49 states in two elections and turned a powerful national organization into a much weaker, regional one. ....."END SNIP

..."SNIP.."But the great myth of the current cycle is the misguided notion that the hopes and dreams of activists represent the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. Real Democrats are real people, not activist elites. The mission of the Democratic Party, as Bill Clinton pledged in 1992, is to provide "real answers to the real problems of real people." Real Democrats who champion the mainstream values, national pride, and economic aspirations of middle-class and working people are the real soul of the Democratic Party, not activists and interest groups with narrow agendas.

One of their bloggers called us lefty loonies and chattering nutroots.

I don't have the wording of the House censure but here is a paragraph from the Senate resolution.

The "sense of the senate" measure "strongly condemns any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the member of the United States Armed Forces; and to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org."
First Read MSNBC

That came after the Republicans stopped them from admonishing the right wing groups for their attacks. This article agrees it was not a good moment but excuses it on the grounds of the power of the right wing noise machine.

The furor over MoveOn.org’s silly “General Betray Us” ad – which led to a bipartisan Senate condemnation of MoveOn after Republicans blocked a move to include right-wing smears against military veterans like Democrats Max Cleland and John Kerry – carries a bitter lesson for the American Left.

The author excuses the Senators who voted for the condemnation because the machine would have been after them.

Yes, it’s true that many Democratic senators behaved spinelessly, but a leading reason for their political cowardice is the Republicans’ extraordinary ability to whip up national frenzies over anything that can be portrayed as an affront to them or their allies.

Hard Lessons

Mr. Parry, we have a pretty good sized noise machine on the left that can fight very hard. There is only one problem. The big boys of the blogs chose not to stand with MoveOn. It was a choice they made to not take sides. So in effect they were really of no good at all. That happens a lot with the major bloggers. One can only surmise the reason.

I think we need to stop excusing and start fighting back. Speak to the people in real terms in true terms.

Here is some text from the message part of the ad...maybe it stung a little to read it since so many were advocates of the war from the beginning in 2002 or earlier.

The Petraeus ad

Every independent report on the ground situation in Iraq shows that the surge strategy has failed. Yet the General claims a reduction in violence. That’s because, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon has adopted a bizarre formula for keeping tabs on violence. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count. The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you’re shot in the back of the head — not the front. According to the Associated Press, there have been more civilian deaths and more American soldier deaths in the past three months than in any other summer we’ve been there. We’ll hear of neighborhoods where violence has decreased. But we won’t hear that those neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed.

Most importantly, General Petraeus will not admit what everyone knows: Iraq is mired in an unwinnable religious civil war. We may hear of a plan to withdraw a few thousand American troops. But we won’t hear what Americans are desperate to hear: a timetable for withdrawing all our troops. General Petraeus has actually said American troops will need to stay in Iraq for as long as ten years.

Maybe too much truth and too painful.

George Lakoff really spoke well on this issue at Huffington Post. He put it in clear words.
Whose Betrayal

MoveOn's "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" ad has raised vital questions that need a thorough and open discussion. The ad worked brilliantly to reveal, via its framing, an essential but previously hidden truth: the Bush Administration and its active supporters have betrayed the trust of the troops and the American people.

Lakoff asks another vital question, one that gets to the heart of why so many in both parties could not deal with the words "betray us".

The issue is this: Who has been betraying the trust of the American people -- including our troops -- in bringing about the American invasion of Iraq and in continuing the occupation? What were the acts of betrayal and with what consequences? And is a betrayal of trust still going on, and if so where, how, and by whom?

There is no one in the party speaking out for the major part of the Democratic base. No one. They talk about being on message, but their message seems to be more of what the right wing desires. They all parrot words...all of them.

Some here say we should not criticize our party, that it is tiring. I agree. But what is the alternative? The GOP did not criticize their own when they could and look where they are.

Being on message means nothing if it is the wrong message.

[porphyrian]

1. The Democratic party is only interested in my money and my vote, and they take both for granted.

How much of this am I supposed to take?

[Somawas]

32. I have told them that they can no longer take mine for granted.

The last time a fundraiser called wanting money for the DCCC, I said, "When impeachment comes off the table, give me a call."

[porphyrian]

38. Good. - n/t

[Tesha]

36. We all should have taken a lot less than we've already taken.

We all should have shown by now that our votes are
*NOT* to be taken for granted.

Tesha

[porphyrian]

39. They're hoping our hatred/fear of another republican admin. trumps our disgust with them.

I'm not sure how much longer they can play that card.

[Virginia Dare]

44. It's an Ace as far as I'm concerned..

I'm personally much more afraid of another repub administration than I am of a centrist Democrat. We lived through the first Clinton very nicely, we can live through another one. I'm not so sure about a Rudy or a Mitt or a Fred.

[porphyrian]

49. Maybe, maybe not.

If you are the one whose child will die in an illegal war if the next President doesn't end it, do the other differences really matter to you? The issues and differences are relative to each of us, as is what is utterly unacceptable. It would not be a minority getting thrown under the bus this time, and they are either too incompetent to know or too hostile to care.

[Virginia Dare]

52. I think that we will all find..

if it does in fact come to pass, that the differences will REALLY matter to us, especially if we are able to get a stronger majority in both House and Senate. Are you willing to tell me this will be no different than having Bush, Frist, and Hastert in charge?

[porphyrian]

54. I didn't say that at all, you didn't read what I wrote.

What I'm saying is that the differences are not created equal. In fact, they all have relative priority to each individual. A tart with only a little bit of rat in it is still a rat tart, and some people refuse to eat rat at all. Just because that tart may be easier to eat than a tart chock full o' rat doesn't mean it's edible.

[Virginia Dare]

55. True, we've got rat tart regardless of who is elected..

but I'm not a single issue voter, I look at the big picture.

There are certain things that are going to be hard to swallow whether it's a repub, Hillary or any other Democrat. Personally, I'd feel better if it were the Democrats at the helm than the repubs, because it's going to be some stormy seas on the horizon.

[porphyrian]

57. Right, your individual priorities aren't necessarily the same as those of others.

And probably only a few are actually single issue, though a bunch of people feel there is only one correct stand on certain issues.

Personally, I'm sick of being expected to eat rat tart. I have greater self-respect than that.

[Tesha]

60. But see, we *DIDN'T* live through the first Clinton.

> We lived through the first Clinton very nicely, ...

But see, we *DIDN'T* live through the first Clinton,
not really.

Bill's actions (and inactions as well) are directly
responsible for the fact that we now have Bush for
eight years. We could have chosen a better candidate
in '92 and fared far better in the long run. We
probably could have *LOST* '92 and still fared better
in the long run than we did by electing Clinton and
his DLC attitudes and personal peccadilos.

His election made the DLC think that their shitty
"I'm a Democrat who's ashamed to be a Democrat"
policies worked and resonated with the public.
But all they did is make the public become completely
confused about what Democrats stand for.

And Clinton's personal failings provided the Reich
Wing with endless fodder which they're still
shoving down our throats.

I wish we'd never heard of that third-rate governor
of a second-rate state.

Tesha

[txaslftist]

62. Don't give them either one.

We keep hearing that we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good and our only alternative is the GOP and all that. Heck, I used to be a disciple of that school myself.

Not anymore. Both parties want the same thing, which is a piece of my paycheck and a pint of my blood. The Democrats who voted to censure MoveOn.org might as well be Republicans, as far as I'm concerned. I'm no longer going to back anyone based on their claim to be a Democrat.

I'm not voting for anyone who I haven't researched, and I'm no longer confining my vote to Democrats.

And there's no way the Democratic party gets another nickel from me.

[porphyrian]

65. You can't count on anyone standing up for you but yourself.

That might seem an obvious thing to any adult, but it may not be apparent that this also applies to our relationship with those we elect as our representatives. Good for you for figuring it out, sad as it is.

[Harmonicaman]

2. The Who

"Meet the new boss, Same as the old boss"

The Who - Won't Get Fooled Again



If the Democratic Party aren't careful it could become the unnofficial anthem for the 2008 Presdintial Election - at least amongst the online community

[Hydra]

3. People will call you the "looney left" even here

They keep telling us to shut up and do what we're told. Some of us have been polite and given the Dems time to work....and boy have they surpassed all expectations of making things worse for us!

I'm done being quiet!

[truedelphi]

12. You know it is bad when you cannot even post

The only logical step if we want to preserve this nation.

[Hydra]

15. Apparently some people want this system to run its course until it breaks

Because Impeachment or a new constitutional convention is too radical a solution for blatant abuse of power.

Fine. I don't care if it breaks. At least capitalism and central gov't will be dirty words for 2 or more generations afterward.

[monktonman]

30. I was called internet lefty crazy yesterday

Right here on DU?
my jaw dropped. I just couldnt believe it. I was gonna reply "well your here two"
but I didnt need the hassle.
Un-believable

[Virginia Dare]

34. There are lots of freeper trolls masquerading as Democrats here..

I recently had an exchange with somebody who was supposedly a Kucinich supporter but basically parrotted word for word something that Laura Ingraham later said on Hardball. Some of them are more subtle than others.

[kenfrequed]

37. Who was it

I AM a kucinich supporter and I had a similar experience recently. Why does the right fear Kucinich so much?

(a stupid question I know)

[Virginia Dare]

40. Sorry I don't remember..

and I couldn't call them out even if I did, but I think the right views Kucinich as a convenient wedge to use between Democrats. I've been hearing lots of talk from the right about how "angry" Democrats are with their own party.

[kenfrequed]

51. Now

Wait a minute. Kucinich is not a wedge. He is a viable candidate that has not gotten much press.

Whereas "the Hill" has had at least 2 years of lead up coverage to her presidential run.

Personally I think 'the right' would just as soon move the democrats to the center to discourage the democratic base. I think the Right wants to run against Hillary because she has the best chance of reinvigorating their own values voters into actually showing up.

Hillary is a win-win for the right. She is by far the most moderate of the Dem candidates (barring Biden) so it is unlikely to inspire a New Deal kind of generational Democratic trend (which I think, barring a revolution, is percisely what is needed). Paradoxically she is the most vulnerable to defeat since there is no Perot running to pull votes and she has the highest negatives of any candidate. (Then again trusting polls this far out is kind of a mistake in my mind)

[Virginia Dare]

53. True, it's kind of silly to be talking about hypotheticals..

like they're already done deals. Lots of things could happen. Bloomberg could run. Something explosive might come out about Rudy. Who knows.

I think the right views Kucinich as "Naderesque" and they get the sense that if (as expected) he doesn't get the nomination his supporters will stay home or vote 3rd party. Whether that's enough people to make a difference in the election or not, who knows.

I think there also might be some Greens here trying to stir up the shit and get Kucinich supporters to abandon the Democratic party too.

[kenfrequed]

56. I think

that unless our party starts incorporating some of these wild green ideas we are the road to decline.

We have an oppurtunity at this moment in history to get our nation back on track and back to the left. But if those greedy corporations that have benefited so thoroughly from the last 6 years of Bush-shit (and maybe even some of Clinton too) then we are not going to have any real meaningful change and this opportunity will be effectively squandered.

[Virginia Dare]

58. We ARE on the road to decline...

but unless and until Americans are willing to accept the TRUTH from their politicians, it will be thus. The TRUTH is not pretty, and there's no way to sugar-coat it. There is no morning in America anymore. Could be why Kucinich, Gravel and Paul are polling in the 2% range.

[monktonman]

42. I dont think that was it.

I think there is a huge and growing chasm not only here at DU
but within the part itself.
I think this person was one of these self described "centrist's"
that I describe as being more like Repuke-lite.

[Virginia Dare]

43. Or maybe somebody..

who just has an interest in driving a wedge between Democrats?

[monktonman]

45. I still dont think so........

I never believed there were as many freeps and trolls on this board as some would have us believe.
I think this person was just being a jerk and when asked about it he launched into this thing about how the lefties were an embarrassment to the party and metioned Cindy Sheehan a bunch of times etc., etc.
I'm sure you get the picture.

[stimbox]

46. or maybe

an interest in highlighting the wedge that the centrist dlc bushdogs have driven in the party, yet deflect blame onto the Repukes.

[Virginia Dare]

47. Why is it in the so-called "DLC Bushdog's" interest

to drive a wedge in the Democratic party, unless by the name you suggest they are actually Republicans, in which I suppose the deflection would be apt.

[stimbox]

48. I suggest that there are spies in our midst

The corporatists win when DLCers and/or Repukes are elected. Our party has been co-opted.
Our base loses. Drive the left out of the party, take the party to the mythical center...
But I don't have to tell you these things, they are happening right before our eyes.

[goodhue]

4. Obey compares "juvenile" left to McCarthyism!?

I don't care how long he has been a good and now powerful democrat, the dude is a jerk . . .

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1447553.html

Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, a veteran Democrat, recounted how he left the Republican Party during the era of Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis., and said that lawmakers have an obligation to criticize their allies as well as their enemies when they go too far.

"I've got an obligation to be equally upset when that kind of juvenile debate emanates from the left," Obey said.

"With every passing day, more American soldiers and Iraqi civilians lose their lives in this unwinnable civil war," said Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action. "It is unconscionable and outrageous that instead of doing the people's work and ending this war, Congress chooses meaningless and distracting gestures."

[OzarkDem]

9. I really dislike Obey

They need to replace him in leadership, he's an a** and seems pretty ineffective, too.

[LibDemAlways]

59. Can you imagine a repuke, any repuke, openly

criticizing a voting segment of the repuke party, calling fellow repukes "juvenile"? That would happen after hell freezes over.

The MoveOn ad spoke the plain, unvarnished truth. It criticized no one except Patreaus, who deserved every bit of criticism he got for carrying water for the Bush Crime Family and allowing his position to be politicized.

This was a no-brainer. Point out the accuracy of the ad and be done with it. Instead the spineless wimps bend over, once again, to their repuke masters, who are in the minority. It boggles the mind.

[EFerrari]

5. If this doesn't stop, I'm just staying home.

I don't need this. And meanwhile, every Democratic fundraising group with an email account is spamming my mailbox.

[regnaD kciN]

7. I'm going to donate to MoveOn and other such groups, PERIOD...

If they choose to give some of that to Democratic politicians, fine. But I'm not giving one red cent to any Democratic incumbent who has participated in this sorry, pathetic display of spinelessness we've seen since the approval of additional funding for the Iraq War.

Until the Congressional Democrats grow a pair, they're no better than the "moderate" Republicans who, while issuing mewling little dissents (to "prove their independence"), still give Bush everything he desires.

Won't get fooled again...!

[bobbolink]

11. Please don't forget some of those donations would be MORE help to USians who are homeless and hungry

I agree that since so many of these politicians are clearly getting big bucks from corporations, it makes more sense to give to other entitities.

Just please don't forget poor folk in all that!

Thank you.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

10. I will not give a cent to the national party

What's the use of having a Democratic majority if you don't USE it for something constructive?

They diddle around with stupid symbolic measures like this (measures that say, "Yes, Republicans, you're right and we're wrong") but "can't get the votes" to end the war or do something about homelessness, the country's finances, the environment, or anything else of substance.

Yes, there IS a difference between the two parties, but increasing numbers of elected officials are pretending that there isn't.

I was afraid this would happen if the Dems won control of Congress in 2006. I hoped it wouldn't happen, but my fears were correct.

There are still individual candidates I like, but the national party is not on my holiday gift giving list at all.

[Hekate]

6. Rec 5 from me. My country is dying, being killed in front of my eyes

Buffy St Marie had a song in the '60s that went "My country 'tis of my people are dying," and I know it was about the Native Americans --

But there you have it.

:cry:

Hekate

[ljm2002]

20. It was "My country 'tis of thy people you're dying"...

...great song, and it still applies today.

Thanks for the reminder, time to get out the old vinyl...

Ah, no need, here's a link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl08n8_b3Sw

Here's another one, The Universal Soldier:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg0LOzCkxxE -- Buffy's version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohXsdbF-7jc -- Donovan's version

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Another "Sistah Souljah" moment for us. Please, sir, may I have more?

Got to keep them loudmouthed lefties in line.

[Vincardog]

13. Note to DLC and "centrist" corporatist shills: MOVEON speaks for Me and 80% of all America

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. And when the next REPUBLICAN President is sworn

in, and you ask why? This is why

When the house and the senate go to Republicans, don't ask why, this is why.

Me, not giving one red cent to the Democratic Party... or the Republican Party.

Perhaps that caller on the Shultz show had it right... what will it take? A Revolution?

[Arugula Latte]

19. Republican or Hillary Clinton ... And she'll be the New Boss, same as the Old Boss. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Bill and Hillary would have been moderate

republicans in another era...

Ok let me qualify this, when the next pro war president pro empire president, does that help?

[madfloridian]

16. The worst part...

of all that has been going on in congress lately is that I don't trust and don't want to listen to talking points anymore.

Governor Dean is on Hardball's 7:00 hour tonight, and I don't think I will watch. He will have to stay on message with the congressional leaders and tonight I can't take it.

Today has been overload. Someone needs to say things that mean something or we are going to lose.

[truedelphi]

68. I'd let you cry on my shoulder but it is already

Sopping wet from all my tears.

Bastards. Evil friggin' bastards. Or sniveling, no account, know nothing bastards.

It all amounts to the same thing.

[Lerkfish]

17. Moveon worked hard to elect the same people censuring them now.

Base? what base?

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. They propved that they don't care for the base

We have two parties, the war party and the not so war party

It is clear now, and we don't matter

[Lerkfish]

21. damn skippy!

we're left with nothing.

I just wish they'd stop pissing on our legs and calling it rain

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. They won't stop until... we show some teeth

perhaps, a third party... or perhaps something more radical

The word revolution has now made it to the public discourse in a national show

And I quote

What will it take Ed, a Revolution?

For once Ed Shultz wasn't fully clueless, in fact he realized this today.

Am sure there are calls being placed as I type but you know what I mean

[Le Taz Hot]

35. Yes! Thank you.

It's the reason I don't donate to them. MoveOn is actually not a leftist organization AT all. During the 2006 election they were hawking pretty much ALL Democrats, regardless of how abysmal their voting records were.

[provis99]

22. Congress didn't just condemn the "Betrayus" part

They condemned the whole ad. To hell with every Congress person who voted to condemn the whole ad.

[madfloridian]

23. DLC features Brooks' article front page center....sends a clear message.

They will take us to war in order to show the other side that they will not pay attention to their own activists. What a scary and sad thought.

As if the David Brooks op ed were not insulting enough to grassroots, it was made more so by having his picture near the top of the DLC website.

http://dlc.org/

The worst part of the Op ed.

"And while Clinton may not go out of her way to offend the MoveOn types, on her TV rounds on Sunday she made it obvious that she’s not singing their tune.

On “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” Clinton could have vowed to vacate Iraq. Instead, she delivered hawkish mini-speeches that few Republicans would object to. She listed a series of threats and interests in the region and made it clear that she’d be willing to keep U.S. troops there to handle them.

The fact is, many Democratic politicians privately detest the netroots’ self-righteousness and bullying. They also know their party has a historic opportunity to pick up disaffected Republicans and moderates, so long as they don’t blow it by drifting into cuckoo landThey also know that a Democratic president is going to face challenges from Iran and elsewhere that are going to require hard-line, hawkish responses.

Finally, these Democrats understand their victory formula is not brain surgery. You have to be moderate on social issues, activist but not statist on domestic issues and hawkish on foreign policy. This time they’re not going to self-destructively deviate from that."

Self righteous? Bullying

[kenfrequed]

41. Gods I despise these lying DLC jerks

Somehow they presume that the Net-roots are out of line with the majority of America. What a friggin bunch of crap. I mean this is the kind of argumentation we have come to expect from republicans.

[KatyaR]

24. Wow, you know, I feel so bad because I sent MoveOn $50.

I think I need to send another 50 to properly punish myself.

(What a bunch of worthless twits . . . . )

[KatyaR]

26. Oh, and one more thing--

when are the Democrats going to censure a Republican organization for disgraceful behavior? I'd like to make sure I'm available to see that happen. Surely they can find one or two that fit the bill.

Not . . . .

[mzmolly]

28. And the "Swift Boat Vets" remain officially unchallenged by our great gumment.

Pathetic.

[madfloridian]

29. I can't find the House censure wording.

I did a search on every possible term. Anyone see it yet?

[mhatrw]

31. The message is that the dog and pony show must go on as planned and

WE THE PEOPLE are not allowed to interrupt it.

[madfloridian]

69. Your sig line: Iran war now. Good one but so on target.

Maybe get that one right. :shrug:

[ananda]

33. Reptile brains most of them!

nt

[rucky]

50. I'll give the Democrats my vote in 2008

and that's about it.

We have 4 years to find a real alternative.

[rhett o rick]

61. Does anyone have a list of how the HOR voted?? nm

[madfloridian]

63. More votes for condemning MoveOn than for children's health care.

Amazing when you look at it that way.

From Huffington Post:

House Dems Sell-Out MoveOn, Condemnation of Free Speech Gets More Votes than Children

The United States House of Representatives just voted to condemn Moveon.org for an ad, which ran in last Monday's New York Times. The vote was 341-79.

Yesterday, the House passed legislation that will increase health care coverage to an additional 3.5 million children. That vote was 265-159.

By an embarrassingly significant margin, the House of Representatives favors condemning the Constitutional right of free speech over providing health care to children. This is about as bad as it gets. How can these people sleep at night?

I'm beside myself.

[Time for change]

64. I agree with you, and I have a thought about MoveOn's ad

I wonder if MoveOn had put out basically the same message but left out the pun, how this may have played out differently?

Would that have left the message just as strong, but less at risk for being attacked and condemned? If so, maybe that's one lesson that we can learn from this.

I don't know if that's right, just a thought.

[madfloridian]

66. I think it was not so much the pun, as the criticism of a general

I think the Democrats are still very fearful, and the picture in the ad and the criticism just scared them.

They should have stood up and pointed out that the media had been saying that Petraeus was coordinating his report with the White House.

It is easier not to speak out, just to tell the left to hush. That's the sad part.

The same thing happened about Iraq. Afraid to speak out.

[Time for change]

67. I agree that it was the criticism of a general that made the right wing apoplectic about this

Yet the criticisms of Petraeus by MoveOn were all right on target. It's hard to see how they could be condemned for what they said about him.

I was just thinking though that the pun might have made MoveOn look a little less professional and serious in the eyes of some, and that that could have opened up the opportunity to condemn them.

You're right, this is very sad. The same thing happened with Iraq, and it led to a disastrous war.

[madfloridian]

70. So you are saying MoveOn was not cautious enough in their language?

I have learned that it is impossible for anyone whom they consider remotely left to say things correctly.

I have learned a lot about my party since Florida started propaganda against the DNC. I spoke out carefully to some of the leaders. The fact I disagreed at all was too much for them.

I think the MoveOn ad had wording that was fine. Maybe the words hit too close to home for the ones who voted for Iraq and will vote to give Bush power to attack Iran.

They are going to continue the Middle East power play. All of them.

They tried to affect the power of MoveOn. Perhaps they have since so many question it now.

They never in all the years of my life called a vote like that. Rush, all the right wing groups...never condemned like that.

They are going to go ahead with war, and they are appealing to Bush's base. They do not especially want us in the party. It may well be they don't even need our votes now. :shrug:

I think what MoveOn said was fine. I find what Congress did contemptible.