Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Anti-war groups pushing Dems

Posted by Guest Blogger at 8:08 AM on May 7, 2007.


Jane Hamsher: Grass-roots pressure mounts ...
antiwar1

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Also in PEEK

The Fraud Of Fraud
Digby Hullabaloo

Broken Glass
DCap DistributorCap

Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
Emptywheel Firedoglake

Editor's note: This originally appeared on Firedoglake.

This is significant:

Antiwar Groups Use New Clout to Influence Democrats on Iraq

WASHINGTON, May 4 — Every morning, representatives from a cluster of antiwar groups gather for a conference call with Democratic leadership staff members in the House and the Senate.

Shortly after, in a cramped meeting room here, they convene for a call with organizers across the country. They hash out plans for rallies. They sketch out talking points for “rapid response” news conferences. They discuss polls they have conducted in several dozen crucial Congressional districts and states across the country.

Over the last four months, the Iraq deliberations in Congress have lurched from a purely symbolic resolution rebuking the president’s strategy to timetables for the withdrawal of American troops. Behind the scenes, an elaborate political operation, organized by a coalition of antiwar groups and fine-tuned to wrestle members of Congress into place one by one, has helped nudge the debate forward.

[]

On Thursday, leaders of the liberal group MoveOn.org, including Tom Matzzie, the group’s Washington director who also serves as the campaign manager for the coalition, sent a harshly worded warning to the Democratic leadership.

“In the past few days, we have seen what appear to be trial balloons signaling a significant weakening of the Democratic position,” the letter read. “On this, we want to be perfectly clear: if Democrats appear to capitulate to Bush — passing a bill without measures to end the war — the unity Democrats have enjoyed and Democratic leadership has so expertly built, will immediately disappear.”

The letter went on to say that if Democrats passed a bill “without a timeline and with all five months of funding,” they would essentially be endorsing a “war without end.” MoveOn, it said, “will move to a position of opposition.”

The antiwar coalition combines the online mobilization capabilities of MoveOn with the old-school political muscle of organized labor. They have been working in tandem with Democratic leadership in both the House and the Senate on a systematic strategy to unify Democrats, divide Republicans and isolate the president.

For the past six years we've been playing defense and moving to an affirmative position is painful.

The sausage making, the compromises, the nudging and shoving of individuals and coalitions into place is a wholly different game than just saying "Bush sucks and here's why" as you stand by powerless to do much about it. It's impressive that many groups not accustomed to collaboration are coming together to lend their collective strengths to ending the war and pushing the Democrats into holding their position on withdrawal.

Last week Steny Hoyer's plan to collaborate with Republicans and save Dubya's ass by calling for timetables for the Iraqi government seemed to be gaining ground. I have no idea where that stands as of this moment, but very much appreciate everyone who took the time to call Hoyer's office and express their opinon on the matter. It looks like contra Hoyer, Murtha's plan for short-term funding may be coming to the fore:

“The latest word from them is they are talking more and more about a short-leash option,” [Tara McGuinness, the coalition’s deputy campaign manager] said, referring to a plan in the House that would finance the war for only about three more months and require the administration to report back on progress being made by the Iraqi government. Congress would then vote again on the rest of the money requested by Mr. Bush.

Members of the Senate appear to be cool to the idea, but it has currency among some liberal advocates and members of the coalition.

Mr. Matzzie, of MoveOn, was clear about the stakes in the coming weeks, saying his group was only getting started. He emphasized that the next emergency spending bill must be one “to end the war.”

“This is act one of a three-act play,” he said. “Act two will be the summer. During the summer, our job is to create a firestorm of opposition.”

A similar coalition of groups got together to fight Alito and it did not go smoothly. It is to the credit of everyone involved that they are working together, evidently with some success, to enourage Democrats to hang together and oppose Bush and bring the war to an end in a fundamental way.

Count us in as part of the firestorm.


The Fraud Of Fraud
The process of turning ACORN into a terrorist sleeper cell has begun and I see little hope that they aren't going to be successful.
Post by Digby. October 11, 2008.
Broken Glass
This is no doubt one of the ugliest periods in American political history.
Post by DCap. October 11, 2008.
Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
"I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate ..."
Post by Emptywheel. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
This says a whole lot...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on May 7, 2007 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... that over 4 years of protest is FINALLY starting to make some sort of vague change... which has yet to amount to anything because, of course, Democrats have to worry about 08 for their party.. which means they will not take risks like pulling out of Iraq because if things do go south they will take the blame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, but ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» I'd like to know more... Posted by: SteveB
» People who just gripe Posted by: sheena2u
» RE: People who just gripe Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: talon53
» Ah, the inevitable ... Posted by: CounterCorp
» RE: Ah, the inevitable ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» DING DING DING!!! Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: DING DING DING!!! Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Democratic leaders a victim of their own deception...
Posted by: SteveB on May 7, 2007 12:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They offered up a bill that they falsely claimed was going to "end the war". In fact, their vaunted "timetables" were full of holes, but the public didn't hear about that, because the media was too lazy to read the damn bill.

But here's the kicker: that lazy media coverage, which created the false impression that the Democrats were doing something to end the war, had the effect of raising public expectations. The public, having been told that Congress passed a bill to end the war, now expects exactly that. Now what are the Democrats to do?

Some Democratic leaders, having exploited antiwar sentiment to win back Congress, now want to put that sentiment back in a box, so they can take it back out in time for the '08 elections. That's not going to work, as MoveOn's willingness to threaten a split with the Dems shows.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Your explanation explains a lot Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Why be merely difficult... Posted by: SteveB
» fixed that link... Posted by: SteveB
» And I'm still waiting to hear... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: And I'm still waiting to hear... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» You remind me of Nixon... Posted by: SteveB
» Ludd, go take a pill Posted by: sheena2u
» More cutting edge analysis ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: More cutting edge analysis ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
Hope is on the horizon. Former Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska is running for President.
Posted by: johngary66 on May 7, 2007 12:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He would actually be a president we could be proud of. The media will continue to ignore him until progressives on the Internet get behind his candidacy. He makes a great case for getting out of Irag immediately. Please check out some of his speeches available on you tube. If you like what you hear, talk it up on the blogs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU EXPECT ?
Posted by: VZEQICVA on May 7, 2007 1:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A nutcase president starts a war just because he feels like it and years later people decide it wasn't a good idea afterall. Where was everyone when the whole country bought into the WMD Bull---t? Rummy, Powell, Tenet, Rice, Cheney: all liars. The few of us who questioned them were unpatriotic among other things. I lost friends over it. I wasn't behind the president. I'm proud of that. Dems are doing the best they can. This could have been prevented. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If all you want is "Peace and Freedom Lite," Vote Democrat
Posted by: Rebel with a cause on May 8, 2007 5:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hate to see intelligent people fall for the Democrats' co-option of the anti-Iraq war position. If you're satisfied with lip service to your issues, but not real response to the root of the problems, a vote for the Dems in '08 will do.

If you want to see what the Dems are like down deep, check out the AIPAC Web site and read Senator Reid's speach, promising his everlasting support for Israel as they cluster bomb Lebanese civilians! Pelosi was there, too, kissing up to give our money to the biggest oppressor in the Middle East: Israel.

The Dems brought us the big expansion of Vietnam War: they are not the party of peace.

If you want some real action on the root causes of war and American imperialism, check out the Libertarian Party. A whole lot of issues the Dems have been testing the waters on would be a "done deal" with some more Libertarians in office.

If you want REAL CHANGE, not mealy-mouthin' - Join the Libertarian Coalition and let's get 'er done!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

frank67
Posted by: frank67 on May 9, 2007 1:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's well past time for Bush and his bobble-heads to go. If the Democrats won't do it, then we'd better get marching! Let's protest the whole damn bunch of them. I hate to use a George Wallace statement, but he had it right - "If you put the Democrats and the Republicans in a bag, and shake it, out come Tweedledum and Tweedledee." My take is not new - the Money party against the People party. What in hell do the Democrats think we elected them for?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]