As their apparent Happy Birthday present to Medea Benjamin, MoveOn sent notice of its intentions to join her and Code Pink in the crevasse of political irrelevance. Yesterday’s “Betray Us” ad (really, word play on Patraeus’ name is the hijinks MoveOn members paid for?) in the NYT saddled congressional Democrats with the added obligation of disowning another group on the left, while trying to manage a committee hearing that was already tilted by the administration and the media (CNN did a bangup job, putting the General’s buddy David Gergen front and center all day long). All of this was punctuated by the constant whaling of protestors from the back of the room, whose presence makes it appear that Dems can’t keep order in government. So Happy Birthday, Susie. I hope it was worth it.
Your support of the increasingly pro-war candidate in 2004, John Kerry, makes your cries for peace seem hypocritical. When it was expedient, you vociferously opposed the only candidate calling for impeachment and pulling the troops out (Nader), and supported one who called for more troops and assured victory in Iraq. Yet now, you and your cohorts throw hissy fits at hearings and meetings with congressional leaders because they won’t do what you wouldn’t do in ’04; impeach and end the war. The July assault you waged on the credibility of John Conyers, whose vocal opposition to the war and every other position of the Bush administration was the only light at the end of the six-year tunnel we were in, demonstrates your sense of entitlement and lack of political awareness. Believe me, when the votes for impeachment are there, when they are even an outside possibility, Conyers will push it.
This “Tantrum” Left, as I call it, is not unfamiliar. It was this kind of public fit that characterized the anti-war movement in the 1960’s, and gave Nixon the openings he needed to keep the Viet Nam War going. First, it split the Democratic Party in 1968 and hobbled the nomination prospects of Gene McCarthy, who would have ended the war, and gave the nomination to a thump-able Humphrey. Then, it produced the McGovern nomination in 1972, which is exactly the kind of weak and self-undermining opponent that Nixon needed to win back the White House in spite of overwhelming opposition to the war. And when Nixon put up the hippies as the personification of the anti-war sentiment, he was able to keep control of the “silent majority” that actually opposed the war, but wasn’t going to give control of our foreign policy over to a bunch of rioting teenagers.
In effect, this massive anti-war movement, headed up by the likes of Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, extended our involvement in Viet Nam. I know Nixon credited them (the movement, that is, not them personally) with forcing him to end the war, but the fact is he shouldn’t have been in office to drag it out another 5 years, and his own arrogance prevented him from recognizing that. This same condition exists now, as Democrats look for ways to end the war, a “movement” undermines them at every turn, by making the party seem weak, entitled, fussy, whiny, divided, and committed to failure. When there’s an obvious approach to this issue, that we’ve done all we can and it’s time for Iraq to resolve its issues politically, quickly, there’s no time for screams from the back of the room about impeachment.
The issue is separate, Medea, as much as you refuse to admit it. To get the war debate bogged down in an almost impossible attempt to “put an elephant head on a pike”, would be irresponsible and counter-productive. It is time for your “movement” to start writing letters, paying visits, making phone calls, and do it all without getting arrested or yelling at congressional allies. Cindy Sheehan was a political force until she started hanging out with you, and her message has since been lost in the annoying white noise of the Tantrum Left. We can’t allow you to do this to the rest of the 60% who oppose this war. Do us all a favor and stop handing Republicans the brush with which to paint all of us. Don’t go away mad, just go away.
Your support of the increasingly pro-war candidate in 2004, John Kerry, makes your cries for peace seem hypocritical. When it was expedient, you vociferously opposed the only candidate calling for impeachment and pulling the troops out (Nader), and supported one who called for more troops and assured victory in Iraq. Yet now, you and your cohorts throw hissy fits at hearings and meetings with congressional leaders because they won’t do what you wouldn’t do in ’04; impeach and end the war. The July assault you waged on the credibility of John Conyers, whose vocal opposition to the war and every other position of the Bush administration was the only light at the end of the six-year tunnel we were in, demonstrates your sense of entitlement and lack of political awareness. Believe me, when the votes for impeachment are there, when they are even an outside possibility, Conyers will push it.
This “Tantrum” Left, as I call it, is not unfamiliar. It was this kind of public fit that characterized the anti-war movement in the 1960’s, and gave Nixon the openings he needed to keep the Viet Nam War going. First, it split the Democratic Party in 1968 and hobbled the nomination prospects of Gene McCarthy, who would have ended the war, and gave the nomination to a thump-able Humphrey. Then, it produced the McGovern nomination in 1972, which is exactly the kind of weak and self-undermining opponent that Nixon needed to win back the White House in spite of overwhelming opposition to the war. And when Nixon put up the hippies as the personification of the anti-war sentiment, he was able to keep control of the “silent majority” that actually opposed the war, but wasn’t going to give control of our foreign policy over to a bunch of rioting teenagers.
In effect, this massive anti-war movement, headed up by the likes of Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, extended our involvement in Viet Nam. I know Nixon credited them (the movement, that is, not them personally) with forcing him to end the war, but the fact is he shouldn’t have been in office to drag it out another 5 years, and his own arrogance prevented him from recognizing that. This same condition exists now, as Democrats look for ways to end the war, a “movement” undermines them at every turn, by making the party seem weak, entitled, fussy, whiny, divided, and committed to failure. When there’s an obvious approach to this issue, that we’ve done all we can and it’s time for Iraq to resolve its issues politically, quickly, there’s no time for screams from the back of the room about impeachment.
The issue is separate, Medea, as much as you refuse to admit it. To get the war debate bogged down in an almost impossible attempt to “put an elephant head on a pike”, would be irresponsible and counter-productive. It is time for your “movement” to start writing letters, paying visits, making phone calls, and do it all without getting arrested or yelling at congressional allies. Cindy Sheehan was a political force until she started hanging out with you, and her message has since been lost in the annoying white noise of the Tantrum Left. We can’t allow you to do this to the rest of the 60% who oppose this war. Do us all a favor and stop handing Republicans the brush with which to paint all of us. Don’t go away mad, just go away.
No comments:
Post a Comment