September 14, 2007
Mr. Pariser,
This week, congressional Democrats were given a difficult challenge. Without the votes to override a Presidential veto, without even the votes to break a filibuster in the Senate, the Democrats in congress were challenged by their base to finally end the war in Iraq. It is an appropriate objective for them, given that they were elected to do just that, and I believe it is one that most of them want to achieve.
This specific opportunity was provided by this administration’s callously scheduling the report of General Patraeus over the 9/11 anniversary, and what we knew would be a factually weak argument for keeping American troops in Iraq through 2008. That the Iraqi government had taken a vacation, despite the pressure from American people to end our presence their, was proof that the surge had not worked and could not work towards its stated political objectives, regardless of any disputable improvement in the security conditions.
The task of countering the image presented by the report was simple. To undermine the political cover invariably given to military personnel, question why the administration would send a bureaucrat and a military officer to justify the policy of the Bush administration. To refute the argument that our pullout would lead to disaster, point out the “shining example” of new security cooperation in Anbar, which only came about after our withdrawal and subsequent diplomatic efforts in the province. The help provided by retiring Senators Hagel and Warner would raise the possibility that “moderate” Republicans could be brought over to help in ending, or at least limiting, our involvement in Iraq.
Only after carefully addressing the report could we try several options. Senator Webb’s proposal that we limit deployment time in relation to down time is well-suited to bringing a veto-proof majority to the aid of our military personnel, and while it isn’t ideal, it is a huge wrench in the administration’s war engine. The coming request for $50 billion to continue the war provides us an opportunity to give the President his money in a way that forces him to de-fund the operation or accept limits that move troops out of Iraq in clear stages, set diplomatic requirements on his lazy State Department appointees, and impose regional cooperation on this President.
But that’s not what we’re talking about this week, is it? That’s not what every news network is covering right now. It’s not what’s on the minds of “moderate” Republicans whose votes we need to accomplish anything in the Senate. What we’re talking about, what they’re covering, what’s on their minds, is how fast every Democratic candidate for office is going to have to run away from you and your organization.
The ad you took out in the NYT on Monday was a tactical disaster. Though the text of the advertisement was accurate and perfectly within the scope of our political objective, the tacky and childish wordplay “Betray Us” has set up every Democrat opposed to the war as a punching bag for the White House and other pro-war Republicans. It has given the GOP an opportunity to resurrect one of their favorites, that we “don’t support the troops”, all because you weren’t creative enough to come up with a better lead-in than rhyming. “General Ordered to Take the Hill” is better, as it allows you to focus on his representation of a political ideology, not the facts on the ground. It even lets you do a cartoon with him charging up the steps of congress. Alas, we’ll never know if that would’ve been effective, because now we have to spend this weekend preparing for shots from Giuliani and McCain, rather than focusing on ending the war.
Move On is tainted by this, likely for the remainder of the 2008 election cycle. So, I’m requesting that you do not make contributions to Democratic candidates or committees. Take the money you raise and push a message that will help Democratic candidates. But don’t tie any of our campaigns up in the cloth of “Not supporting our troops” that you’ve re-woven for us. It’s been a long political fight to get to where those of us against the war are not automatically “commie coward soldier-haters”. We need to end this war, and that takes precedent over your antics and position as a political force. Stay out of 2008 so we can focus on what’s important.
Sincerely,
The War Mule
No comments:
Post a Comment