• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

MoveOn.org ... "Shut UP!"

skeptigirl said:
With apologies to Oliver for the hijack, Facts Belie Petraeus' Case, Say Humanitarian Groups.

So, direct me to the thread this belongs in and I'll take my toys and go there. ;)
Click to expand...

We wouldn't want the facts to get in the way of worshiping a "straight shooter" like Petraeus, would we? So what if he's lied and misrepresented all the way? He's got the spiffy uniform, and the chicks dig him, so let's keep pumping that "straight shooter" script, no matter what.
 
skeptigirl said:
The straw man (gosh I can't believe this isn't more obvious) is about the attack strategy here both against Moveon and the NYTs.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is a straw man. What you have described is actually changing the subject to avoid a debate they do not want to have (attempting to win an argument by non-sequiter may be the correct term).

skeptigirl said:
With apologies to Oliver for the hijack, Facts Belie Petraeus' Case, Say Humanitarian Groups.

So, direct me to the thread this belongs in and I'll take my toys and go there. ;)
Click to expand...

Well, now that is a strawman :). I was merely pointing out that Joe was wrong to say

"this entire thread changes the subject"
 
gtc said:
I don't think that is a straw man. What you have described is actually changing the subject to avoid a debate they do not want to have (attempting to win an argument by non-sequiter may be the correct term).



Well, now that is a strawman :). I was merely pointing out that Joe was wrong to say

"this entire thread changes the subject"
Click to expand...
But I was right! :cool:
 
JoeEllison said:
But I was right! :cool:
Click to expand...

Do you know who Oliver is? No one has ever accussed Oliver of being in line with Right Wing talking points.

Anyway, I do not want to derail this thread so I won't post anything more on this topic and I have made my position clear - the NYT was in the wrong but the rule itself is silly.
 
JoeEllison said:
We wouldn't want the facts to get in the way of worshiping a "straight shooter" like Petraeus, would we? So what if he's lied and misrepresented all the way? He's got the spiffy uniform, and the chicks dig him, so let's keep pumping that "straight shooter" script, no matter what.
Click to expand...

I am glad to see you adhere to your hate Right wingers script so tightly. :rolleyes:

Instead of addressing Petreaus' report, the Republican spin machine has managed to attack the messenger. Instead of addressing what Moveon was charging, that Petreaus' report was merely a Bush suck up rather than an honest assessment, the Republican spin has re-directed the focus to be about the ad. The spinners have also managed to make the argument about election campaign finance loopholes and the (phantom) bias of the NYTs.

Republican talking points have clearly been, "act outraged" "declare Moveon to be too radical to be taken seriously", and "portray the NYTs as being biased liberal media". So where in that do you see the content of Petreaus' report being defended?
Click to expand...

Well, they took a political action and got a political response. Secondly, the NYT is sorta liberal. Not much. Thirdly, MoveOn IS radical. It's like LGF, they're both on the radical side of their respective wing. Or spectra. Whatever.

Finally, your link actually doesn't refute his report except in one section.

"One of the most cynical things General Petraeus did was celebrate the fact that there's a decline in sectarian violence," Susskind said. "But that drop reflects the success of ethnic cleansing rather than anything the U.S. military has done. The reality is that there are places where killing is down because there's nobody left to kill."
Click to expand...

And you know, I'm going to be cynical here and suggest they're spinning it too. I know, I know. You're going to accuse me of being a right wing smear artist (well, maybe you won't, I'm being cynical again.) But I think that your deep, automatic, skepticism of the Bush adminstration, when applied to this, makes it just as bad-wrong.
 
skeptigirl said:
And what do you mean motive isn't relevant? That's absurd!
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. If I were to give you $1 million as a gift, would the IRS consider the fact that I intended it as a gift and not as income for any products or services you gave me make any difference? No, it would not. The money would be classified as income. Likewise, the reason the NYT gave Moveon the discounted rate is irrelevant: it remains a political contribution. Movite really doesn't matter.
 
Oliver said:
What does "Freedom from Ridicule mean"?
Click to expand...

My point is that Person A is free to speak their mind.

Person B is free to ridicule what Person A said.

Congress is NOT allowed to make a LAW stating that Person A can not say what they said.

See the difference?

Freedom of Speech is a 2 way street. There are many people who scream their opinion and then seem appalled that anyone could possibly disagree with them, and then want any differing opinion kept quiet.
 
If the NYT game MoveOn a break on the ad rate then they're helping the GOP in the long run considering the kinds of ads MoveOn comes up with. I'd like to know who in MoveOn came up with the idea "I've got it, we'll make a play on Petreaus' name...like Petraeus, Betray Us" and then who else in MoveOn said "Great idea, that'll work." What planet are they living on? They're obviously completely out touch with the mindset of the people that they're trying to persuade.

People are getting on the GOP for twisting this issue but MoveOn threw a straight ball right over the plate and all the GOP had to do was swing the bat for an easy home run. I think instead of blaming the GOP, the left should try coming up with a new pitch, perhaps one that won't have a visceral negative reaction in their target audience.

People wonder why Republicans keep getting elected and one reason is that as bad as the Republicans are at governing, Democrats are even worse at campaigning.
 
Number Six said:
They're obviously completely out touch with the mindset of the people that they're trying to persuade.
Click to expand...
MoveOn.org is only trying to persuade the base -- who gives them they're donations -- that they are ballsy liberals who don't take crap from nobody. They are not geared towards converting the middle.

They are trying to be the counterpoint to the rabid right-wingers.
 
Last edited:
So they solicit donations from their base so they can buy ads that their base likes in order to get more donations from their base? What's the point? And why would they try to persuade people that already agree with them? And why would they not try to convert the middle since whoever gets the most of the middle ultimately wins?

People in the MoveOn camp are going to be with them no matter what. Rabid right wingers are going to be against them no matter what. The middle is persuadable, theoretically at least, but not if you use tactics that turn them off to your message before the message is even delivered.
 
Number Six said:
So they solicit donations from their base so they can buy ads that their base likes in order to get more donations from their base? What's the point?
Click to expand...
More money, with the idea that by making the base polarized and active, Democratic candidates will have to shift leftward in order to get the party nomination, just like the right-wing tries to force Republican candidates to shift rightward to get their party nomination.

And why would they try to persuade people that already agree with them?
Click to expand...
They're trying to persuade them to get involved in the process. To vote in the primary. That way, candidates have to appeal to them for votes and the candidates are closer to their policies.

And why would they not try to convert the middle since whoever gets the most of the middle ultimately wins?
Click to expand...
I agree. I think MoveOn.org's philosophy is fundamentally flawed. However, they think centrist candidates are sell-outs. They'd rather continue to lose elections that have a centrist candidate. They also buy in to the notion that a sufficiently energized base will provide the votes they will miss by alienating the center.

People in the MoveOn camp are going to be with them no matter what.
Click to expand...
But in what numbers? Many lefties stay home on election day. Their base is college students and the poor. These demographics tend to have the worst voting attendance. They believe that if they can aggressively energize these voters, they will turn out in greater numbers and then the Democrats won't need to court the centrists.

That's the theory, though it has never worked in any election of which I am aware.
 
I thought that the last election would have taught the Democratic left that they don't have a big enough base to win an election.But apparetnly not.
The issue is if the Democrats have learned to manage thier extreme wing as well as the GOP has managed theirs;Use them but keep them sort of out of sight in the general election.
 
dudalb said:
I thought that the last election would have taught the Democratic left that they don't have a big enough base to win an election.But apparetnly not.
The issue is if the Democrats have learned to manage thier extreme wing as well as the GOP has managed theirs;Use them but keep them sort of out of sight in the general election.
Click to expand...
Neither side wins with their base alone. Both need the middle to swing their way. From my perspective the extreme wing is running the right wing or at least they have considerable influence. In the Democratic Party the middle is running the show which is why they come across as so wishy-washy. The Progressive Democrats are trying to change the party but have yet to do so at the top despite Howard Dean now being in the top party job.

And Moveon is not extreme or radical. Being against the Iraq war does not automatically make one extreme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom