Moe Lane in the comments asks:
Which leads one to an interesting question: which defining image shall they ever use to properly encapsulate the antiwar movement?
– The fellow waving the ‘Peace in our Time’ placard?
– The fellows brandishing the ‘We support our troops when they shoot their officers’ banner?
– The Vomiters for Peace?
– The Strip Naked And Form Out The Word ‘Peace’ On Some Muddy Hillside people?
– Or would just a montage of all those Bush = Hitler signs do the trick?
It’s a puzzler.
Indeed. I say all of them, and before liberals start screaming that this is not fair, that this is the mainstream Democrats, let’s remember a few things:
1.) These ARE the same people who are now donating to the Dean campaign and being hailed as ‘ordinary people’ (as opposed to all the unordinary or extraordinary people who are contributing to Bush or the other Democrats).
2.) Democrats have no problem attempting to attach anything said by any Republican to George Bush. They will smear him with anything, as has been noted before. You haven’t forgotten the ridiculous “Bigot Eruption” meme that was attempted last week, with Oliver adding evidence that Bush is a bigot because of the comments of a COUNTY official in Florida.
3.) Is it really unfair to show people as they have actually behaved? Did they not do these things? Did they not say these things? Of course they did, and now they can live with it.
Moe Lane
Damm*t, you would have to pick a comment where I spelled ‘vomiters’ incorrectly.
Still: kewl.
M. Scott Eiland
*snicker*
I can see what the next hot Washington PAC is going to be:
“Pukers and Poopers for Dean.”
Jonas
Do you think you could let me know where you’re getting your info about who is supporting Dean? I might head out to one of those meetups if the naked chicks will be there, but if it’s only going to be the vomiters, I’ll stay away.
J
Since you expect some liberals to start screaming, I’ll oblige (although I’m not screaming).
Indeed. I say all of them, and before liberals start screaming that this is not fair, that this is the mainstream Democrats…
First of all, most liberals would accurately point out that any one who protests is not average — most people don’t care about politics. Second, why don’t you include “Mainstream White Guys for Peace.” I am not making this up, just google it. My point? To the chagrin of the right, many of the anti-war protesters were pretty normal — first time at a protest and such. Press coverage, of course, focused on the extremists (who were naked or had bizarre signs), and the organizers, such as ANSWER, were less concerned with making cogent arguments than trying to get people to support their agenda. I couldn’t stand the one protest I went to. Not because of the people — most were just regular types who opposed or were ambivalent about the war for many reasons (didn’t trust Bush admin to do it right, pacifists, didn’t think Iraq was a threat, or wanted UN involvement, etc). I was sickened by the fact that about 6 people from the Spartacus League were marching around with posters proclaiming in Chinese (which I could read) that North Korea has the right to nuclear arms. (Why in Chinese? China certainly doesn’t want Korea to have nukes). The people giving speeches were also mediocre, and often were not even speaking about the war, but about ridiculous demands. Most of the regular types left after an hour of this.
A reminder: Spartacus Leaguers, and those on the far left aren’t liberals.
These ARE the same people who are now donating to the Dean campaign and being hailed as ‘ordinary people’
Got any figures on that? I think they’re more likely to support Kucinich.
J
Since you expect some liberals to start screaming, I’ll oblige (although I’m not screaming).
Indeed. I say all of them, and before liberals start screaming that this is not fair, that this is the mainstream Democrats…
First of all, most liberals would accurately point out that any one who protests is not average — most people don’t care about politics. Second, why don’t you include “Mainstream White Guys for Peace.” I am not making this up, just google it. My point? To the chagrin of the right, many of the anti-war protesters were pretty normal — first time at a protest and such. Press coverage, of course, focused on the extremists (who were naked or had bizarre signs), and the organizers, such as ANSWER, were less concerned with making cogent arguments than trying to get people to support their agenda. I couldn’t stand the one protest I went to. Not because of the people — most were just regular types who opposed or were ambivalent about the war for many reasons (didn’t trust Bush admin to do it right, pacifists, didn’t think Iraq was a threat, or wanted UN involvement, etc). I was sickened by the fact that about 6 people from the Spartacus League were marching around with posters proclaiming in Chinese (which I could read) that North Korea has the right to nuclear arms. (Why in Chinese? China certainly doesn’t want Korea to have nukes). The people giving speeches were also mediocre, and often were not even speaking about the war, but about ridiculous demands. Most of the regular types left after an hour of this.
A reminder: Spartacus Leaguers, and those on the far left aren’t liberals.
These ARE the same people who are now donating to the Dean campaign and being hailed as ‘ordinary people’
Got any figures on that? I think they’re more likely to support Kucinich.
Stentor
(Why in Chinese? China certainly doesn’t want Korea to have nukes).
Maybe they were afraid of being ridiculed by folks like you (and me) who were sickened by their proposal, but still wanted to march with their message. So they compromised and wrote it in a language they figured most people wouldn’t be able to read.
Barney Gumble
We certainly know which image encmapsulates the pro-war rallies: link
A. How many of you knew without looking it would be the morans picture?
B. How many of you know the picture as soon as you saw ‘morans’?
The Mighty Reason Man
Cole-
Yes, those are some very provocative and true images of Left wing extremists and assorted crackpots.
Boy, they sure do look stupid!
And now for our images of Right wing extremism, we present: the smoking ruin of the Alfred Murrah Federal Building.
So let’s not play “your extremists are crazier than ours”, hmm?
John Cole
Show me one mainstream Republican who embraced those villains.
I don;t have to work too hard to show you mainstream Democrats who embraced and carried water for the Answer crowd.
The Mighty Reason Man
Ah, so you mean that, while some people may commit stupid/evil acts in service of a particular ideology, that doesn’t necessarily mean that all followers of said ideology should be associated with those acts unless they specifically embrace them?
Because I think that you WILL have to work rather hard to find a mainstream Democrat who endorsed the “We support our troops when they shoot their officers” slogan. I’m also having a hard time recalling the press conference in which Carl Levin suggested people “vomit for peace”, or the one where Howard Dean stripped naked to form the word “peace” on a muddy hillside.
(and as an aside, can we all just agree that the “peace in our time” fellow in that photo you pro-war types love so much was most likely a pro-war prankster? “Peace in our time” is an unusual sentence formulation, and it’s rather unlikely that some anti-war type just made it up)
The Mighty Reason Man
Ah, so you mean that, while some people may commit stupid/evil acts in service of a particular ideology, that doesn’t necessarily mean that all followers of said ideology should be associated with those acts unless they specifically embrace them?
Because I think that you WILL have to work rather hard to find a mainstream Democrat who endorsed the “We support our troops when they shoot their officers” slogan. I’m also having a hard time recalling the press conference in which Carl Levin suggested people “vomit for peace”, or the one where Howard Dean stripped naked to form the word “peace” on a muddy hillside.
(and as an aside, can we all just agree that the “peace in our time” fellow in that photo you pro-war types love so much was most likely a pro-war prankster? “Peace in our time” is an unusual sentence formulation, and it’s rather unlikely that some anti-war type just made it up)
David Perron
No, but I think it’s safe to say that two people who decide to blow up buildings represent a particular ideology (which doesn’t really overlap that of 99% of the political right of center to any non-negligible degree) rather a lot less than the thousands of idiots of whom Moe spoke. Just a guess.
The Mighty Reason Man
David-
That would be a very astute observation had there actually been thousands of people doing the things of which Moe spoke.
Maybe you were watching a different channel (and I think I know which one it was), but from where I sat, it looked like most of the anti-war protestors were doing just that- marching along, protesting the war. The vomiting folk, the silly nudists, and the anarchists were a very tiny minority.
The point, gentlemen, is that it is rather dishonest to smear an entire group based on the idiot actions of a tiny minority, but if that’s the game you want to play, your crowd will come out looking the worse for it.
Moe Lane
“That would be a very astute observation had there actually been thousands of people doing the things of which Moe spoke.”
Naah. You (generic) just let them play in your sandbox… and never said a word in protest when they went off on their lunacy. You (generic) -didn’t- have to let them march alongside, after all: you (could) have made the decision that what you (generic) were trying to do didn’t need the presence of a bunch of fools at best and utter knaves at worst.
But that decision was made the other way… and if you really do think that very loudly pointing all of this out is going to /benefit/ your side – well, I guess we’ll let the voters decide that one, eh?
Moe
Moe Lane
Just to be on the safe side: the previous post was written while making the assumption that you were an active member of the antiwar movement re Iraq: if this is not the case, please accept my apologies for my implicit association of you with that… ah, ‘entity’ is nice and nonjudgemental.
The Mighty Reason Man
Moe-
While I wasn’t active in the anti-war movement (no marching), I pretty much fell in line with the Kevin Drum/DSquared contingent that felt that war could bring several overall benefits but didn’t trust Bush to not fuck up the aftermath.
That being said, what do you suggest the mainstream protestors should have done? Kick the goofy-looking folk out of the marches? Hurl vile epithets at the nudists?
I mean, most people who opposed the war thought those few people were rather silly, but essentially harmless. So who cares?
The exceptions were people who crossed the line (“support troops when they shoot their officers”), who were roundly condemned on all sides. No, no one held a press conference about it, but I hardly think a couple idiots with posterboard and sharpies deserve anything other than to be ignored by the mainstream media.
The big thing that you (generic) seem to want to gloss over is just how many regular, non-crazy-hippie people were involved in those protests. Don’t get me wrong, I understand perfectly why this is so- by focusing on a few idiots, it is a lot easier to marginalize the entire movement and write it off as irrelevent. But how about we stop pretending that that particular brand of spin is actual reality?
And, similar to what I said above, I don’t think that Right wingers want to get into a serious discussion about crazy people each side lets play in their sandbox.
(as a rather irrelevent aside, I’m a regualr Tacitus lurker, and while I usually disagree with damn near everything you say, Moe, I appreciate your at least being civil [usually])
Moe Lane
“That being said, what do you suggest the mainstream protestors should have done? Kick the goofy-looking folk out of the marches?”
Yes.
Moe
Jonas
Moe
I’ll make a deal with you. We on the left will make sure we keep the goofy folk out of our marches, if you on the right can stop electing bigots like Lott, Santorum, Sessions, Chenoweth, etc.
Moe Lane
“I’ll make a deal with you.”
No deals. This isn’t a deal situation. Also, I don’t really /care/ about what your mad-on is with the Right and its moral failings, both real and perceived. This was a post about reality*. Reality is, your side screwed up, and it’s going to spill on the Democratic Party. You can either keep doing what you’re doing and disagree and/or ignore this, in which case don’t come crying to me when it bites you on the a*s this time next year, or you can start damage control now. If you want a shot at winning this election, I’d recommend the latter – because, frankly, once the primaries start your options start shrinking, shrinking, shrinking.
Free advice, honestly meant. Take it or leave it: my conscience is clear either way.
Moe
*Yes, yes, reality as I see it. Happy?
David Perron
I’m still a little confused as to how a couple of guys who blew up a building have anything whatever to do with hundreds or even thousands of various geeks who do stupid shit in the name of the political Left.
The Right does actively reject such people. In fact, the Right doesn’t really NEED to reject such people because their goals have exactly zero overlap with the goals of the rest of us. So in that sense, I think your analogy is not well made.
Jonas
Moe
In Sacramento four stores in the “French Cleaners” drycleaning chain were firebombed in one night. French restaurants here have closed due to repeated vandalism. French residents here in the US have had the homes vandalised. Should the pro-war crowd take responsibility for its anti-French rhetoric, which has occurred even here on this site? I think you need to weed these people out of your movement.
Moe Lane
Jonas, I will take this then as an indication that you either: do not consider the problem that I have postulated as facing the Democratic Party to actually exist; or that it exists, but is safely ignorable.
Your problem, not mine.
Moe
PS: “In Sacramento four stores in the “French Cleaners” drycleaning chain were firebombed in one night.”
Unless this happened, say, last night, the location was Modesto CA and there was one store burned (two others were vandalized). Article found here:
Now, arson is a crime and hate crime arson is vile, but does that /really/ excuse not doing even the most elementary fact-checking before you post?
Jonas
Moe
I don’t see a problem here. I don’t think the American people are stupid. If Republicans bash anonymous people on the left, while Democrats bash elected Republican officials, I don’t see how Republicans come out ahead.
And I apologize for not doing the most elementary fact checking before my last post, I read articles about it a couple of months ago. You know Modesto, Sacramamento, it’s all the same to a Midwesterner. And I’m glad to see you think hate crime arson is wrong. And I think that most people would think that hate crime arson is worse than naked chicks spelling peace, ‘Peace in our time’, etc.
Moe Lane
“I don’t see a problem here. I don’t think the American people are stupid.”
Agreed on the nonstupidity of Americans part. Well, I guess that I agree that you don’t see a problem here, too, but that’s sort of irrelevant.
“If Republicans bash anonymous people on the left, while Democrats bash elected Republican officials, I don’t see how Republicans come out ahead.”
I’d dispute that… but we’ll just have to wait and see.
“And I apologize for not doing the most elementary fact checking before my last post, I read articles about it a couple of months ago. You know Modesto, Sacramamento, it’s all the same to a Midwesterner.”
Well, to be fair nobody can know everything about -everything-. Heck, I had to refresh my memory on the matter myself: I suspect that without Google the blogosphere would quickly implode. They should put up a Paypal button, or something.
“And I’m glad to see you think hate crime arson is wrong.”
Most civilized people do, even on the Right. :)
“And I think that most people would think that hate crime arson is worse than naked chicks spelling peace, ‘Peace in our time’, etc.”
Of course, but I sincerely doubt that an attempt to pin this particular incident on the Republican candidate will be successful… but, depending on who the Democrats nominate, a link between him (very unlikely to be her) and the antiwar lunatics will be much, much easier to establish.
It -will- happen. The question is what the Left is going to do about it. If the answer is ‘Nothing’, sobeit.
The Mighty Reason Man
Perron-
“I’m still a little confused as to how a couple of guys who blew up a building have anything whatever to do with hundreds or even thousands of various geeks who do stupid shit in the name of the political Left.”
Well, then, I’m here for you friend!
The reason the parralel can be drawn is because the ideology in whose name McVeigh blew up that building was one of harsh anti-government rhetoric, fanatical opposition to taxes, and an overwhelming fear that the Constitution is being subverted by a radical, dictatorial government. Basically, an only marginally more extreme version of the stuff that comes out of Newt Gingrich and Grover Norquist.
Does this mean that Grover n’ Newt (which would make a great cartoon, by the way) are going to blow something up? No, and that’s exactly the point. They may share various parts of their ideology with McVeigh, but it is really rather unfair to equate them with him. In the same way, it is hideously dishonest to smear the entire Left for sharing parts of their ideology (or in this case, a single policy position) with the handful of buffoons referred to above.
Mighty Mighty Bosstones
Apparently the man with might of reason is missing the point. By his ruler, the Left has more in common with McVeigh than the Right.
Or don’t “harsh anti-government rhetoric” and “an overwhelming fear that the Constitution is being subverted by a radical, dictatorial government” sound all that familiar? It’s practically all I hear out of the Left these days.
In any case, I think Moe’s point is that fringe-baiting can be even more fun when we get to do it, too.
Moe Lane
“In any case, I think Moe’s point is that fringe-baiting can be even more fun when we get to do it, too.”
More like that it’s going to happen, as things stand right now it’s going to -work-, and that I (and I suspect, most of the Right) will officially have zero sympathy for anybody complaining about it.