MoveOn, you are pathetic. Pelosi says impeachment is off the table, so you won't even offer impeachment as an option on your membership surveys about what the organization's priorities should be. Pelosi says she won't cut funding for an illegal occupation and unconstitutional violations of the Bill of Rights at home, disingenuously referred to as "the war" or "money for the troops," so you couch an amateurish survey that is distributed and worded in such as way as to suggest your members are fine with sending another blank check to Bush to spend on military and domestic spying fiascos that we all know are illegal, immoral, and ruining and ending innocent lives when you know damn well the majority of the public, let alone your members, oppose funding such outrages. And now, you show up at the last minute to tell us to call our congressional representatives about a deal they have already worked out to send more than $100 billion for more "war" on us and the Middle East, and a paltry $20 billion for long neglected needs of ever poorer and indebted Americans.

Where were you when this train left the station? Where were you when we, the progressive public that helped put the Democrats in power, were being thrown under that train while war profiteers laughed all the way to the bank? I know where you were. You were doing the bidding for the sell-out Speaker of the House instead of speaking for us until Nancy Pelosi popped her head up to say she had worked out a way in which she could cast a phony vote against funding the "war" and yet be sure that the bill would pass and the war will not only continue but expand into Iran. And you think you are in some sort of position to tell us what we should say to our representatives? Tell ya what, why don't you list a phone number or publicly available e-mail address where we can reach you and we'll tell YOU what to say on our behalf if you want to do anything in out name ever again?

You are nothing but a worthless echo-chamber for the do-nothing Democrats, MoveOn. Any pretense you make of being a responsive grassroots organization is a sham, and this sell out of millions of innocent lives in the Middle East and America, to say nothing of hundreds of billions of dollars (so far) is but the latest and clearest example of your lack of spine, leadership, and effectiveness.

MoveOn, indeed! As in, get the heck out of our way, we're tired of looking at you.

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

I unsubscribed MOVE ON long time ago. They are so wimpy and dishonest when it comes to democratic standards, universal standards, that you wonder how they can still exist, with all they hypocrisy, and class whoring.

The pretense of opposition, like the democrats, reeks with their manipulation of polls, and their class appeasement, to class nationalism. BOYCOTT MOVE ON....THEY ARE SELL OUTS.

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

To counter the Blue Dog Democrats and DLC we need a new Caucus. We'll call it the REAL Democrats. It's time for an intervention.

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

The loudest command i have ever given when in harms way was a very loud .....F@&King..!!!!!MOVE!!!!!! prefixed with 'In an orderly manner'.....so what say YOU!

Captain OUT

iraq will be IRAQ only when YOU leave.

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

...please tell us what you're doing to hold the Democrats to their committments.

Sure, they're not great. Sure, they've done weak stuff. But they, at least, are trying to do something, however small, towards ending this obscene war.

So what are you doing?

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

I just posted the following to Rune, but it's really for all who expressing similar sentiments. So here ya go!

|/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/

I share your general frustrations, and agree with many of your particular criticisms. Yay!

But it seems to me that your expressive language has bled over into areas proper to description and analysis, distorting those.

Do you really think "You are nothing but a worthless echo-chamber for the do-nothing Democrats" is a comprehensively adequate characterization (as "nothing but" implies)?

All else being equal: would you prefer that MoveOn exist, or not?

All else being equal, I overwhelmingly prefer your passion to apathy. But it seems to me that your categorical and contemptuous dismissal of MoveOn is counter-productive: passion gone sloppy, critical and balanced observation gone weak.

As a rule, in contentious debate: if you give your opponents ammo and a target, they'll use it and hit it. In any case, I don't see how it helps your purposes, or those of the progressive movement.

Comments?

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

At the moment, the jury is still out on MoveOn...my frustration lies with Democratic members of Congress who ran on the provision that if elected, they'd get us out of Iraq and provide strong leadership.

Seeing these twatwaffle cowardly Dems cry and whine as they grovel and plead before the public as they cave in to Bush's demands, I'm so angry and disgusted I'd like to throttle them but good! They suck as leaders and are failures for not keeping their promises.!

Hey Democratic Congress members, if the job's too difficult for you to stand up with the courage of your convictions, you need to step down and let some real deep blue Yellow Dog Democrats step in who will behave as they promised and stand by their convictions!!

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

Secretary of Defense Feingold!

MAKE IT REALISTIC! IT'S UP TO US. NOT JUST ABOUT TYPING ANYMORE.

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

Just a few weeks ago, MoveOn was pushing its "members" to call Congress and urge a vote for $100 billion for the war, with a comically inadequate "withdrawal timetable", filled with loopholes. In doing this, they split with most of the peace movement, including United for Peace and Justice, Vets for Peace and Military Families Speak out.

Now, MoveOn is saying "no money for the war," exactly what those other peace groups were saying weeks ago. That's movement in the right direction, and I don't say that in praise of MoveOn, but as an indication of how far public opinion - and the debate - have shifted in favor of peace.

Same with the Dems. Eight months ago, Congress voted $70 billion for the war, and only a handful (less than 30) Representatives voted "no", and not a single Senator voted "no". Now we can expect many Senators (including probably all the Dem Presidential candidates, if they know what's good for them) to vote "no", and more than 100 Representatives to vote "no".

Again, I don't say that to praise the Dems, they're nothing more than a very imperfect weathervane. They help us see which way the wind is blowing, and not much more.

I make these observations because I believe, if you're serious about building a movement against the war, you have to be willing to recognize movement in your direction when you see it.

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

Now, MoveOn is saying "no money for the war," exactly what those other peace groups were saying weeks ago. That's movement in the right direction, and I don't say that in praise of MoveOn, but as an indication of how far public opinion - and the debate - have shifted in favor of peace.

You seem to have missed a few important details:

(1) MoveOn did not ask its "members" whether it should cut off funding for the "war," which the majority of mainstream Americans support, nor did it even provide a way to so indicate in the survey instruments it used to query its "members";

(2) MoveOn, instead, told its members a couple of months ago why it was naive and unrealistic to voice support for using the power of the purse to actually end the "was," which 70% of mainstream Americans want ended, and they went on to tell their members they were going to support language about a timetable for withdrawal--which turned out to be nothing but nonbinding window dressing, as part of their we-know-better-we're-insiders strategy;

(3) MoveOn then went along for the ride that the Democrats staked out and said nothing to represent the honest wishes of its members, nor did anything to alert its members that, from its insider's perspective, it was clear that the Democrats were caving in to Bush's demand for a blank check;

(4) MoveOn did not "move in the right direction" until Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats worked out a sham of a deal with the White House and Republicans that would allow her and a few other Democrats that overwhelmingly support cutting off funding for the war to vote against the funding with the full knowledge that the blank check will be written out to Bush and signed by him, against the will of most Americans and, I suspect, nearly on MoveOn members. That is not moving in the right direction, that isn't moving at all. That is providing cover for the sell-out Democrats by providing an echo chamber for them. Echo chamber: as in you don't hear from MoveOn until the top Democrats have spoken, then they repeat it as if it represents what MoveOn members want to lend their voice to.

It's perfectly clear which way progressive Democrats and independents want to move:

(1) Impeach Bush and Cheney (which Pelosi, and thus, MoveOn have taken "of the table");

(2) Cut off funding for the "war";

(3) Troops home now;

(4) Clean up and enforce fair elections;

(5) Throw all of the scurilous bums out who continue to support Illegal wars and violations of the Bill of Rights in our name, even if that means a wholesale turn toward third party candidates and the risk of providing an opening for Republicans (who are dividing along different lines) because, at this point, the Democrats and MoveOn have made it clear they are not going to follow through on points 1 through 4 above, and probably not any other major changes that are opposed by the Republicans but supported by a solid majority of the American people.

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

If only a few people (say, CongressCritters) are disappointing us, then it makes sense to consider the problem in terms of individuals. But that's not what we have here. Look at the language we're using: we're talking about "the Dems" as if they were a group, not just a collection of individuals. That suggests that, maybe, there's some value in looking at the problem NOT as a matter of several hundred personal failures, but as an deeply-institutionalized systemic problem: one that has been in place a long time, and can't be fixed just by attacking any one of the particular problems it generates (such as the resistance of so many "individual" Democrats to fighting fiercely for the will of the people, and their willingness to cave in to White House pressure).

Of course we know perfectly well how heavily pols are dependent on corporate money for getting and keeping office. But though we may be correct in assessing the spinelessness of Pols who play for political survival rather than for principle, it's still important to keep in mind that they *are* under intense, competing pressures, and not talk as if we believed otherwise.

Given the facts of realpolitik, in light of the Dems *lacking* a veto-proof majority, it should be utterly unsurprising that many would take what they see as the most politically workable/expedient solution for themselves, even though it win our scorn.

We may hate complacency and apathy, but doesn't mean we have to surrender our own capacity for sympathetic understanding and adaptable intelligence in favor of easy reactions, however well justified. Today the problem is the War, tomorrow it will be something else, but let's consider how the whole thing hangs together, seeing both big picture *and* detail.

Likewise, if we give more attention to *understanding* the realities of MoveOn, rather than to *judging* it for its disappointing results, I think we're more likely to be effective in whatever we say or do about it.

Could MoveOn just put the weight of their membership behind such positions as smaller, less "centrist" groups support (and shame on them if they don't!)? Or are there perfectly understandable reasons to be unsurprised if they don't, reasons why it might be unrealistic for us to expect it (say, the breadth and inclusiveness of MoveOn's membership, as well as concerns of realpolitik)?

I may work however hard to influence MoveOn into closer accord with my views: that's my business. But if they don't satisfy me, that's my problem.

Life, ya know? Work hard, work smart, hope for the best, sleep well at night.

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

MoveOn, like the Dems in Congress (except Kucinich, Waters and a handful of others) have sold out. And so what are we to do? Certainly the standard protests are not working, the media ignores them and the administration laughs at them. General strikes are like riots, they hurt those involved more than anyone else.

How about go slow protests, spread organically throughout the country? Rather than the big group in Washington getting a permit to loiter, when you go to work in your car, start a few minutes early, put a big banner on the back of your car, and spend a few extra seconds at the stop sign, making really sure you're fully stopped. When the light turns green, make extra sure no one is running the red the other way. And be safe by driving less than the speed limit. Shopping in a store, take your time (with an appropriate T shirt). Like the old work slowdowns that non-union shops would pull.

Anyone think we could get enough people to do that to make an impression on those greedy fast driving war mongers?

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

If you are frustrated like me and want to take action other than commenting on this thread, consider copying and pasting the text below into emails for your senators and representative in Congress.

Their email addresses can be found with the following link:

U.S. Government Email Addresses.

Here is the suggested wording:

SUBJECT:

The present Iraq War funding bill will cause additional American casualties.

TEXT:

Please don’t support an Iraq War funding bill that has no teeth -- such as a deadline for withdrawal. Without a deadline, the war will continue to the November 2008 election, costing more GI lives and limbs. If that happens, I will never vote for Democrats in Congress again.


God Bless America.

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

to follow ALL the funds that support MoveOn...the same way one researches who funds both political parties. When a grassroots organization becomes mainstream - something or someone, has tainted it.

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

I have been working on MoveOn.org activities for several years now and believe the organization has played a crucial role in maintaining opposition to Bush administration policies. Many new people, young and old, have been brought into the movement against the war in Iraq and for positive social change.

Week after week I have seen people, with no prior history of activism, get involved by writing letters, making phone calls, attending rallies, contacting congressional representatives, donating money and engaging friends and family in a debate of the issues. These are not people who have been pulled away from some other more progressive organization, they are largely brand-new or re-energized progressives. I don't think you can name ten other organizations, put together, that have been as successful as MoveOn.org in mobilizing for progressive political action in recent years.

There is no question that MoveOn.org is focused on a strategy for effecting political change through electoral politics. Many on the left have chosen to abandon electoral politics as a mechanism for change or have chosen third-party alternatives. Some of us believe that political change will come about as a result of activities both within and without the two-party system. MoveOn.org has amassed a great deal of political clout based on its ability to raise cash and mobilize many thousands of activists and voters. MoveOn.org has been principled and practical in a rapidly changing political environment. MoveOn.org has not attacked other progressive organizations or urged members to shun other forms of political action.

Despite past associations with Democratic Party leaders, MoveOn.org was firm in its condemnation of the devastating compromise that results in Bush being rewarded with an unencumbered military appropriation to continue the war. My guess is that MoveOn.org coordinated action will result in a very large portion of the phone calls and visits to Congressional offices urging a nay vote on the appropriation bill.

All of us are sickened by the betrayal of popular opposition to the war that was enabled by elements of the Democratica Party leadership. Without question, there will be serious examinations of how this happened and reappraisals of strategies and alliances. I find it sad that a number of comments in this discussion area are lashing out at MoveOn.org, an organization that opposes the supplemental appropriation bil today and is backing that opposition with action.

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

Remove the DOLLARS & keep the [common] SENSE.

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

The latest SURGE news. Thanks to Congress, Bush is moving on to the next phase, SURGE II, where he will request 200,000 more troops to Iraq by the end of 2007, at which time, he will ask for another war bill with no strings attached and expects Congress to "cave" once more and give him what he wants. Then will come SURGE III in May 2008, when Bush will demand another 200,000 troops to Iraq. A demand that conscription be reinstated will follow and further billions will be demanded from Congress, which will once again "cave in". By then, Bush will have declared the war a "national emergency" which, thanks to the May 9th NSA act he signed while the world wasn't looking, now gives him dictatorial powers. He uses Congress as a "formality" but doesn't really need them. He will have the Oval office for life, after which time his successor (there will be no elections) will be Alberto Gonzales.

Thank you all Republicans, Democrats, neocons, right wingers, religious bible-belters, big business, Rush Limbaugh, and Rupert Murdoch for taking what was the united states of America, back to Germany, 1937!

SIG HEIL, BUSH!

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

MoveOn is going to have to learn a simple lesson that even the French learned in WWII ---- that the government is now a 'Vichy' government installed by the occupying fascist Empire, and that attempting to deal with any party in a 'Vichy' government is more stupid and dangerous than Charlie Brown believing Lucy when she says, "No, Charlie, really, really, THIS time I'm not going to fool you again and pull away the football --- again."

It may be very up-setting to MoveOn and to the American people, BUT as American people, we have to face the real fact that we no longer live in either a supposedly 'exceptional' country, or even a normal country. We are faced with the reality that we live in a virtual "Vichy America" which has been fully taken over by a guileful and disguised global corporate Empire ---- just as France in WWII had been taken over by the Nazi Empire which installed the 'Vichy' government.

MoveOn has not yet faced this reality, nor dealt with the harsh reality that the ENTIRE government of "Vichy America", including; the presidency (of either party), Congress of both houses AND both parties, and the supposedly objective MSM are all conspiring con-artists running a 'game' of 'Three Card Monte' on the 'marks', suckers, and rubes of America.

Any organization, like MoveOn, that claims it can influence the global corporate fascist Empire that now fully controls "Vichy America" is both stupid, dangerous, and treasonous for 'sleeping, if not conspiring, with the enemy'.

Any organization, like MoveOn, in order to really level with people, and avoid conspiring with the enemy, must honestly say:

"The very most important question that the American people should ask is not, "Where do you stand on the war?", but, "Where do you stand on the EMPIRE that has taken over our country --- a fascist corporate Empire, hiding behind their facade of a two-party "Vichy America" --- of which the oil-war in Iraq is only its biggest and most visible crime, so far?"

To claim to be principled in their anti-war efforts without recognizing, confronting, and attacking the Empire behind wars is either extremely naive, or extremely duplicitous ---- and the powers behind MoveOn don't seem naive.

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

This is real folks.

"President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement, on May 9 signed a directive that granted near dictatorial powers to the office of the president in the event of a national emergency declared by the president.

The "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive," with the dual designation of NSPD-51, as a National Security Presidential Directive, and HSPD-20, as a Homeland Security Presidential Directive, establishes under the office of president a new National Continuity Coordinator.

That job, as the document describes, is to make plans for "National Essential Functions" of all federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal governments, as well as private sector organizations to continue functioning under the president's directives in the event of a national emergency.

The directive loosely defines "catastrophic emergency" as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."

(Column continues below)

When the president determines a catastrophic emergency has occurred, the president can take over all government functions and direct all private sector activities to ensure we will emerge from the emergency with an "enduring constitutional government."

Translated into layman's terms, when the president determines a national emergency has occurred, the president can declare to the office of the presidency powers usually assumed by dictators to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over." Am I wrong to be concerned about this?

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

I'm a 71-year-old Vietnam veteran, ex-Air Force pilot, former Vietnam War protestor and registered Republican who joined MoveOn.org in November 2003. The next month, I attended a MoveOn Christmas party. Had a merry time mixing with fellow Bushwhackers from both political parties plus independents, all of whom were gregarious, open-minded and fun to be around, unlike the stiff-lipped liberal-hating jerks attracted to George W. and the GOP.

As a sidebar to the Christmas bash, a female representative from the local Democratic Club showed up with a clipboard, pen and registration form to sign new members. When she announced her recruitment intentions, with overwhelming encouragement from the persons present, the party’s host politely showed her the door.

Obviously, the lady didn’t know that MoveOn is a bipartisan organization not associated with the Democratic Party, contrary to assertions by Republican muckrakers and a few AlterNet trolls.

In February 2004 while surfing the Internet for information about Dub-ya's National Guard record, I found a falsified official biography of his that someone in the White House had inadvertently posted on a U.S. State Department website.

To validate my discovery, I called the Boston Globe. Impressed, it ran the story the next morning, on 02/28/04, under the headline, “Bush Bio on Web Inflates Guard Service,” and gave me credit as the source.

Unfortunately for voters in 2004 who deserved to know about Shrub's phony flying history, no other paper or media outlet in the United States carried the story. Why? The only reason I can think is that the Globe published my scoop on a Saturday. Back then apparently, people in the news business took weekends off instead of serving the public good.

To make up for the media’s failure, I used to end all my AlterNet comments the same way:

Hugh E. Scott, editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

Because the brief addendum irritated some AlterNeters, I have cut back on its use.

Previously, in 2004, to spread the word about Bush’s fabricated Guard history, I wrote and self-published George Dub-ya Bush: THE PHONY FIGHTER PILOT. Today, I am 80% finished with my second Bushbashing book, “LIAR-in-CHIEF,” a sequel to the first work.

To avoid writer’s block, I comment on AlterNet starting around three a.m. local. Futhermore, to publicize the Boston Globe story, I attend various MoveOn meetings in Ventura and Los Angeles counties and tell members about Bush’s bogus bio.

I also pass out fliers at MoveOn-sponsored speeches in my community by notable persons like Scott Ritter and TruthDig’s Robert Scheer. As you might expect, I’m a huge MoveOn fan and participate in our local flag-waving curbside public rallies.

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

Let Move On speak. What are they facing? Why do they take the actions they do.

I can't believe these brave and visionary people are any 'less' than we. Perhaps less irrational. We'd like to kill the bastards outright. Perhaps it will come to that. Only revolution will stop the money grabbing, the hysterical fight for the life boats.

Is it all down hill from here on out?

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

Let's all take a deep breath, get a grip and think. The Democrats are useless. Just look at the headlines on this website.

I think we need to understand that this budget has to be slashed and this monstrous thing called a federal government has to be shrunk to a manageable size.

Progressives should put together a plan to cut $200 to $300 billion out of non-military spending and then approach Ron Paul. We will never get from here to a Libertarian Utopia in 4 years but if we show good faith in wanting to shrink the budget, the deal should be to support his candidacy in exchange for being able to set some priorities for order of disintegration of programs and departments.

This man has more integrity than the whole crew on both sides put together. Let's support grass roots democracy as Ron Paul does. No matter what you may disagree with him about, he's the only one who would really change foreign policy and slash the military. That in itself would be a massive project. Even more massive than auctioning off NASA to the highest bidder.

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

...why is the anger and venom pointed towards others who are also trying to stop the tragedy in Iraq. MoveOn is not perfect, nor have I always agreed with how they have pursued their mission, but kinda we're on the same side. The point is to stop W's war and to make it clear to the politicians who are enabling it that the people don't want it continued. I wrote to my representatives in congress and to the candidates for president in 08 that no democrat should vote for the bill. By withholding their "yeas" the Republicans would be forced to be the ones who rubber-stamped the failed policy (again). Obviously, more than a few Dems also approve of W's escapade enough to vote yes -- and they should be targeted for defeat in the next cycle. Or, as is more likely, their constituency will fade away and the wrong party will again hold majority. But, if the vote last week is any indication, it doesn't matter -- nothing changed even with a Democratic majority.

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

... made it's move on us.

Now it's our turn.

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