MoveOn's Media Misstep
(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
In the three days since they originally took out a full-page ad in the New York Times deriding General David "Betray Us?" Petraeus, MoveOn.org is still the big media story of the week, nearly eclipsing the General's testimony. (Simply while writing this post, it's been covered on two of the three cable nets.)
It's a textbook case of media blowback, with the ad having given supporters of the "surge" a certain amount of rhetorical cover, or at least an opportunity to shift the focus of the discussion from the streets of Baghdad to the well-known activist group and bugaboo of the right.
Joe Klein at Time magazine wrote an article called "MoveOn.Infantile."
Chris Cilizza, Washington Post political wonk extraordinaire published a piece entitled "MoveOn.org: Momentum or Menace?"
Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) took time out of her questioning on Monday to lambaste the ad.
The Kansas City Star even felt compelled to publish an editorial demanding an apology from MoveOn, "General Petraeus Deserves an Apology."
And as if that wasn't enough, the ultimate proof that MoveOn had overshot their target? Stephen Colbert mocked them on "The Colbert Report" last night.
Regardless of your politics or position on America's military involvement in Iraq, it's clear that the MoveOn.org ad – whether on its own or through Republican counterarguments – was a tactical failure for the Democrats and left, with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) denouncing the ad in a nationally-televised interview.
In a week where Americans could have been focusing in on troop levels, progress and benchmarks, MoveOn.org gave the General's supporters a ready-made talking point. Rather than discuss how 53 percent of Americans expected Petraeus to give an overly rosy depiction of the surge, Petraeus and his supporters were able to get out of their defensive crouch and move the debate in their favor.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 30 CommentsIn a sane world, it probably wouldn''t hurt the cause near as much as Anne Coulter mokcing a triple amputee, saying, "no wonder you lost the war", then claiming he was drunk, which wasn''t true, and hadn''t earned his medals. It might set back the cause as much as Boehner saying American soldiers are a "small price to pay" for the success in Iraq, or the Bush campaign using McCain''s torture and internment to spread rumors he was a "Manchurian Candidate". Or, Coulter praising Timothy McVeigh for blowing up the Federal building, or Congressmen calling for the assassination of judges, or writing editorials, hopefully pining for another 9/11 to rally the Republican party. Or possibly Limbaugh''s on air fantasy of every opponent of Mr. Bush''s war getting their heads chopped off on insurgent videotape -- we''d love Bush''s war then! Or claiming Abu Ghraib is a result of women in the military. Or using the suicide to suggest murder.
However, the world is not sane, and you will back the party of this partisan venom for its politeness and bipartisanship because being polite, just as being patriotic, means obeying the Boy King and demonizing the heathens.
You know what gkc99. I''m going to do you a favor.
Your hatrid has blinded you to the results of your actions by posting the above. So, what do you think your party''s officals would think of the above post?
With CBS''s new format, do you think it will get more viewing by the public exploring the site ?
So, question is - did you further the cause for the left, or the right? You aren''t terribly bright are you ?
Thank-you Ms. Pelosi.
Next, Moveon needs to apologize, in a full page add.
I have stated the reasons for why I think Bush and the Republicans have created this situation in Iraq and continue their policy was to take (barrowed) $money from our Federal Treasury and divert it to the private sector at $12 Billion Dollars per week. That''s a *** load of cash unconceivable to most except to the Republican War Machine.
George Bush''s Profit Sharing Agreement was stifled yesterday by the Iraqi Parliament. The bill drafted by the US State Department (Richard Cheney) was to have the Iraqi Parliament approve the privatization of the Oil Production for all of Iraq. The PSA would''ve turned over 70% of oil profits to 4-5 Multinational Corporations for the next 30 years. In essence the Iraqi Government would have been working for the Oil Companies.
Instead the Kurdish Province from the North of Iraq abstained from turning their oil over to the Oil Companies and opted to enact contracts to have private companies work on their behalf to produce oil and gas.
Bush hasn''t given up on obtaining the oil from Iraq, our troops will never come home, and the cost will continue to register. The US Congress will not be able to change the policy in Iraq because of obstruction from the Republican Party and the Veto Powers of the President.
The only thing I can suggest is for Americans to preemptively impeach the next Republican President.
He dug that grave himself.
Run it again, MoveOn!
Posted by memekiller at 01:02 PM : Sep 13, 2007
Exactly - this guy thinks he is the next Eisenhower. - Didn''t he have the job of training the Iraqi Army and Security forces ? Where are they ? - Wasn''t there a GAO Report about 190,000 missing weapons under his watch ? Where are they ?
Where were you in 2002 ?
Cleland served in the United States Army during the Vietnam War, attaining the rank of Captain. He was awarded the Silver Star and the Bronze Star for valorous action in combat, including during the Battle of Khe Sanh on April 4th, 1968.
Running for Max Cleland''s Georgia Senate seat in 2002, the Republican Chambliss questioned his opponent''s patriotism. You may recall he even ran TV ads with photos of Cleland alongside those of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. The ads were roundly maligned at the time as a new low in political dirty tricks. But, of course, they had the desired effect...... Chambliss won.
Then you say I''m full of it because the link I gave you says the NYT''s doesn''t give out how much people pay. Which is what I said. Then you say I should just believe it''s low and based on partisanship because they have a policy of not disclosing that information based on... well, your partisan bias as an independent.
I would suggest that a news organization needs more than that to run the story, or should. Before they go on the air charging the NYTs with unfair charging based on partisanship, you would need a) how much MoveOn paid and b) how much other partisan organizations pay and c) clear data demonstrating a direct correlation between how much people pay and their partisan leanings, that can''t be explained by other objective criteria.
You have none of these, but we should report it as fact anyway merely because you love the nefarious implications. SBV 101.
You are full of ***, the link you suggested I read to get the "truth" does not dispell it at all.
It says the Times refused to say how much they charged MoveOn, and that their prices vary depending on several factors, I am sure one of which is what view (political) the ad is trying to convey!
I am not a Republican, I am Independent and think every issue should be looked at by itself.
You and Mattcat do nothing but spout the typical leftist view on every thing you write about.
For a complete debunking of this nonsense, go here: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12873.html#more-12873
You don''t know how much MoveOn paid. You have no idea. This was pulled out of thin air. That''s why you won''t see it reported by any reputable news org.
Even more interesting, after reading the major media websites (CBS, CNN, Fox and MSNBC), Fox is the only site that I have found that mentions this.
That is why "Fair and Balanced" really does only apply to Fox, the rest are just promoting the liberal viewpoint.
To be fair to One_American, we don''t know for certain he isn''t being entirely consistent here about his concern for our veterans. Can you say with absolute certainty he didn''t vote for Kerry out of anger over the Swiftboat Vets? I mean, maybe the fact that Kerry was a Democrat didn''t make any difference to him when delegates at the GOP convention wore bandages to mock his war wounds because he honors the service of any American who fights for our country, regardless of politics. His patriotism might have trumped partisanship when his party went after a triple-amputee, or a candidate who got her legs blown off. Conservative partisans can''t be so predictable that we can make those kinds of assumptions when we don''t know the facts.
I take One_Americans claims of genuin respect for the people who serve this country at a face value until One_American tells us otherwise.
Now THAT''S comedy gold!
Posted by One_American at 12:45 PM : Sep 13, 2007
Well said, now we need to get through making Politics of the United States interest in Iraq.
Our President will be speaking to the world tonight, and I hope that his bi-partisan desire is genuine, and he will be able to show us what direction the reconciliation, restoration, and conclusion to our involvement with Iraq will be.
"Now, anyone who has had the opportunity to meet the General, and anybody who has bothered to follow his career or his academic pursuits, knows that these are dangerous and unwarranted allegations. However, there might be a silver lining to this slander. Libel, really, because it was printed [in the] The New York Times. Now, all of America understands [why] MoveOn.org and other groups like it are called the nutroots of our society. These people are nuts and they don''t care who they hurt, they don''t care who they smear they don''t care who they libel. Politics is more important than anything else and power is the most important anything of all."
Priceless, Senator. And right on target.
"Now, anyone who has had the opportunity to meet the General, and anybody who has bothered to follow his career or his academic pursuits, knows that these are dangerous and unwarranted allegations. However, there might be a silver lining to this slander. Libel, really, because it was printed [in the] The New York Times. Now, all of America understands [why] MoveOn.org and other groups like it are called the nutroots of our society. These people are nuts and they don''t care who they hurt, they don''t care who they smear they don''t care who they libel. Politics is more important than anything else and power is the most important anything of all."
Priceless, Senator. And right on target.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 30 Comments