Anti-War Groups Seek To Make War Costs a Campaign Issue

[babylonsister]

Anti-War Groups Seek To Make War Costs a Campaign Issue


Anti-war groups announced Monday that they will kick off a campaign to tie the costs of the war in Iraq with domestic economic issues in a bid to build opposition to the president’s war policy before the November election.

In coming months, the groups plan to spend more than $20 million on grass-roots efforts and advertising targeting Republicans who have supported President Bush’s war policy and to make the cost of the war a central issue.

The move comes at a time when polls consistently show the economy, not the war, topping the list of voters’ concerns.

“People don’t understand why we’re spending $500 billion and counting in Iraq at the some time we’ve got 40 million plus Americans who don’t have any health care coverage, 37 million living in poverty, people terrified about being able to paying their bills,” said former Sen. John Edwards , D-N.C., who joined the groups in a conference call.

Among the groups involved in the new campaign effort are MoveOn.org, USAction, Americans United for Change, VoteVets.org, the Service Employees International Union and the Center for American Progress.

more...

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=cqmidday-000002676117

[LSparkle]

1. More good work being done by John Edwards

Great idea to keep this issue in front of people!

[Breeze54]

17. He's joining the anti-war groups... not the other way around.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. MoveOn has decided to join the anti-war movement

I applaud them. It's about time.

But let's not forget the groups who have been out there in the trenches all along: UFPJ, IVAW, VFP, Code Pink, Camp Casey Alumni and several others. They don't have the bank accounts the groups in the article have but they have done the lion's share of the work to date. And they are the groups my money goes to.

[babylonsister]

3. Very good point; I'm just glad it's going to be a major issue! I think

McCain will be going down in flames with the majority of voters the more comparisons are made.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. We absolutely MUST keep the war at the top of the page as much as possible

I am sick over the lack of coverage for the past several months.

BTW, have you heard about the new documentary 'Body of War'? Phil Donohue made it and it is about a soldier from here in KC who was injured the same day Casey Sheehan was killed. We are having a screening here tomorrow night. It opens in theaters nationwide in March.

[babylonsister]

9. Yes, I've heard of it. When is the official release, do you know? Lucky

you to be able to have an early viewing (that sounds ghastly out of context :hide:).

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. I think I heard March 8?

I am really excited about seeing it. Tomas is a neat kid. Paralyzed from the chest down yet speaking out as loudly and as he can. He does as much as he can with our groups here. I was thrilled to be invited to the screening.

Tomorrow is also the 5th anniversary of one of our weekly vigils. It will be an intense day.

[slipslidingaway]

4. Kick...

before it was an issue on which to win a campaign.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Yes good point

Although I do welcome the involvement of these new groups. The more the merrier.

[slipslidingaway]

10. But will they mention the companies moving in to profit

from the invasion and how the people in Iraq will suffer?

Oil giants are poised to move into Basra

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2920574&mesg_id=2920574

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. I sure hope they do

But trying to tell MoveOn what to do is futile. They are very much a top down organization, though they present themselves as grassroots.

[slipslidingaway]

18. Then Edwards should speak out on this issue??? n/t

[Breeze54]

20. You are full of it.

Nice try though. I'm a member and i vote on MoveOn's campaigns.

Stop spreading BS!

MoveOn had ads against the war back in 2003!!

THREATS AND RESPONSES: THE PROTESTERS;

Thousands March in Washington Against Going to War in Iraq

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9904E2DD163FF934A15753C1A9649C8B63

By LYNETTE CLEMETSON

Published: October 27, 2002

snip-->

MoveOn.org, another of the many groups taking part in the protests, also conducted an Internet-based organizing campaign, in response to the Congressional resolution on Iraq. The group said it raised $1.8 million in 11 days in an online campaign for the members of the House and Senate who voted against the resolution and for challengers in the election next month who have taken a stance against a pre-emptive strike.

Eli Pariser, 21, who directed international campaigns for MoveOn.org, said the Internet expanded the scope of organizing to people and places that marches can never reach. ''It's a safe and instant way of getting involved,'' he said.

Still, Mr. Pariser said hundreds who supported his group's fund-raising drive had made the trip to Washington to take part in the march.

More....

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. MoveOn has worked AGAINST the anti-war movement

If it isn't a MoveOn initiated event, they not only don't sign on to it, they work AGAINST it. They have done it to us here in my city and several other DUers have reported similar experiences with MoveOn.

Don't kid yourself. MoveOn signed on the anti-war movement a couple years too late. I welcome their involvement but the real workers are the groups I mentioned. IVAW, VFP and Code Pink have done far more to end this war than MoveOn has. MoveOn has money and a HUGE email list. But they haven't done a fraction of what the other groups have done. They now appear to share our agenda but it isn't fair to give them the steering wheel.

Look into who started MoveOn and who controls it now. It has an interesting history.

[Breeze54]

24. You are spreading baloney! MoveOn was there from the beginning.

You should stop sowing sour grapes.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. Are you forgetting their push poll last year?

I haven't.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/proud2Blib/25

[Breeze54]

26. That has been explained over and over and you're

repeating what was a lot of baloney! It was not a 'push poll' and I did answer the poll!
I was given the facts in two e-mails! Even though I already had a lot of the facts.
I forget the guy's name that was protesting the results. The results were based on
how many responded, not on how many members there were. That was the dispute in a nutshell.

----------------------------------

Edwards aligns himself with anti-war effort headed by supporters of Obama

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/edwards-aligns-himself-with-anti-war-effort-headed-by-supporters-of-obama-2008-02-25.html

By Walter Alarkon
Posted: 02/25/08 06:42 PM

Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards resurfaced Monday to join several supporters of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in pressing to end the Iraq war in order to salvage the U.S. economy.

Making his first public remarks since disbanding his campaign in January, Edwards appeared on a conference call with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and MoveOn.org — two groups that endorsed Obama in recent weeks — to make the connection between the two top issues in the campaign.

more....

[Breeze54]

16. WTF? It's "about time"? MoveOn was there in 2002, 2003 ....etc.!

:wtf:

SELLING THE WAR ON IRAQ

MoveOn Bulletin

http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin4.html

Wednesday, September 18, 2002 <---
Edited by Susan Thompson ([e-mail])

snjip-->

INTRODUCTION: BUYER BEWARE

The Bush administration is doing its best to sell the US and the world on a new attack on Iraq. The promise is that this time, the US will do what it couldn't or wouldn't the first time around, and go all the way to Baghdad to take out Saddam Hussein himself.

The reasons for a new attack on Iraq have been presented in a series of press-friendly promotional moments that have been long on promises and short on facts. Timing has been a critical factor -- it is no coincidence, for example, that the climax of the push has come immediately after the anniversary of Sept. 11, despite the fact that there is still no proven link between Iraq and the terrorist attacks of last year.

Given the big-business origins of most of the Bush Administration, it should come as no surprise that a new attack on Iraq is being promoted much like toothpaste or a soft drink. The Bush administration is planning on launching a $200 million dollar PR blitz this week that will be aimed at convincing US and international audiences to support a US-led attack on Iraq. The campaign will be overseen by the Office of Global Communications, and will "use advertising techniques to persuade crucial target groups that the Iraqi leader must be ousted" (see link in section 1 below).

The problem with marketing campaigns is that they're not about facts -- advertising usually centers around an emotional pitch that can have little to do with the product itself. But given the gravity of the situation, it's critical that we read the fine print. After all, even though many people in the world will agree that Saddam Hussein is a fearsome and despotic leader, there is still slim evidence the explains why he is suddenly so much more of a threat now than before. And there has been little or no solid evidence supporting any threat of an Iraqi attack on the West or link to Al Qaeda offered, and certainly nothing indicating any clear and present danger.

A war on Iraq is not inevitable and, right now, there's no evidence that it's necessary. It's time to cut through the marketing and ask the President some hard questions about what the real costs and aims of this war are. After all, if we buy Bush's rhetoric, we're going to be stuck with the bill.

---------------

Published on Thursday, January 16, 2003 by the Associated Press

Anti-War Group Revives 'Daisy' Ad Campaign
by Ian Stewart

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0116-06.htm


http://stream.realimpact.net/rihurl.ram?file=realimpact/moveon/DaisySS_gen.rm

Revisiting one of the most effective television commercials in the annals of U.S. politics, a grassroots anti-war group has produced a remake of the "Daisy" ad, warning that a war against Iraq could spark nuclear Armageddon.

The provocative 30-second commercial -- released to the media Wednesday and appearing in 13 major U.S. cities on Thursday at a cost of $400,000, was prepared with the help of thousands of donations to the Internet-based group MoveOn.org.

The new ad was scheduled to be shown in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland, Oregon, San Francisco and Seattle.

MoveOn.org also organized an online signature campaign against the war, and spent more than $300,000 on newspaper ads in December that also called on President Bush to "Let the Inspections Work."

more...

[slipslidingaway]

19. Thanks for posting this n/t

[Breeze54]

21. You're welcome...someone has to post the truth!

You can read all about MoveOn's Anti-War Actions and history here:

Anti-war organizing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MoveOn.org

[slipslidingaway]

28. It appears there is a bit more truth here as well...

I was only on their email list for a short while and then unsubscribed last year and this may have been the reason. If I am not mistaken this was the original supplemental bill that contained the benchmarks Bush wanted which included the draft Iraq Oil Law.

And read the last two paragraphs written last year and today we here how this will be used in the 2008 campaign.

:(


http://www.prwatch.org/node/5865

"...On Sunday, MoveOn distributed a survey asking its members to vote on three options: support the Pelosi bill; oppose it; or "not sure." MoveOn's Eli Pariser described the survey in an email as an opportunity for members to participate in "a big decision coming up this week. ... MoveOn is a member-directed organization — we believe that all of us, together, are smarter than any one of us." In fact, however, MoveOn's survey was designed to conceal from its members the option of supporting the stronger anti-war amendment put forth by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

There are, of course, other ways of running a survey. When TrueMajority.org recently surveyed its members about the best way forward, they offered three choices: the Lee plan, the Pelosi plan, and the option of demanding that Congress reject any further war funding, period. Only 24 percent of TrueMajority's members supported the Pelosi plan — which appears to be the reason why MoveOn's survey gave their members no choice but the Pelosi plan...


The Democrats, however, do have a choice, and the choice that they are making is to offer symbolic statements of opposition, while in practice allowing the war to continue, and funding it. This choice is based on their realization that the war has become a political liability for Republicans. If the war ends this year, the debate during the 2008 congressional and presidential elections will turn to "who lost Iraq." If the war continues into next year, however, Democrats will benefit as the de facto "anti-war party," no matter how feckless their opposition in the meantime...


What may seem like clever politics, therefore, produces horrible policy. When politicians and advocacy groups like MoveOn play anti-war games of political theater while effectively collaborating with the war's continuation, they merely add one more deception to the layers of lies in which this war has been wrapped. Like Bush and his supporters, they are sacrificing human lives simply for the sake of perpetuating an illusion."

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. Thank you

I also remember that Eli Pariser grossly misrepresented the results of that poll.

I am glad to see MoveOn involved but they aren't the be all and end all they are presented to be.

You do know who started MoveOn and why? The answer to those questions paints a very different picture from the one MoveOn has tried to paint.

[Breeze54]

30. Like nobody read all this a year and a half ago?

:shrug:

PDA sort of sucks too. All they ever do is send e-mails and have bake sales.

[slipslidingaway]

31. YW, looking back at the choice of questions in that poll

reminded me that it was probably the reason I unsubscribed to MoveOn. The supplemental bills of spring '07 contained the benchmark of passing the draft Iraq Oil Law.

Whether it's MoveOn or another organization we should be cautious that we are not led into narrowing the discussion or choosing the lesser of evils.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

5. anybody else remember the Peace Dividend?

The idea that Dennis Kucinich floated? All the money we'd have in the budget for peoples' needs instead of for fighting illegal wars?

[slipslidingaway]

14. Yes, that was a silly idea...

:sarcasm:

[Echo In Light]

7. Finance will weigh on them more so than their conscience? n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. It's smart to focus on the cost

$720 million a day. And we are borrowing most of that from China. We really can't afford this war.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

15. Recommended. The truth is that, the cost of an illegal occupation is draining our resources.

A quick view of history shows that all other nations attempting to achieve what this administration seeks not only failed but nearly destroyed their own nations.

But, why would BushCO and the neocons give a shit about history when they are so goshdamn good at covering their own personal arses?

[Karenina]

22. As it should be.

[w8liftinglady]

27. you can calculate the cost of war to your community

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home