The Atheist Communist Caliphate Made Flesh, Spread the Clusterfuck Around Thread

[Oleg]

  If that were true, would Soros's various left-wing pet groups all be lapdogs of his?

Yes. MoveOn is bullshit.

No, it's not.

They're jagoffs. They just happen to be OUR jagoffs.

For a long time, Republicans controlled the message.  It's easy for conservatives, all they have to talk about is maintaining the status quo, and voila.

I used to get despondent when I'd walk around a demonstration or some sort of a leftist gathering and notice that there were a hundred different groups with a hundred different agendas, and they couldn't seem to find a way to come together and pool their resources to come up with one consistent message that resonated with a bunch of progressives all at once.  It was annoying.  All these groups were afraid of alienating one demographic or another.  The environmentalists were afraid of aligning with the "legalize drugs" crowd because they didn't want to turn off anyone from their message.

This created a disparate groups of people, none of whom wanted to work with anyone else.  It turned the progressive landscape into a bunch of groups who didn't have the resources, on their own, to make any headway with any of their beliefs.  Sure, you had Greenpeace and the ACLU and the unions, etc., but at a grassroots level, it was a no win situation.

On the right, it was simple.  Pro-war, pro-military, anti-immigration...it all lined up so nicely, and since the more affluent tended to be conservative, there was no shortage of funding.

When Soros came along, all of a sudden you had an organization that was able to speak to all these different groups with one voice.  All of a sudden, there was a clear path to fund raising, coalition building, and a way to get your message out, all through one "portal".

At its heart, there is a definite agenda.  But, d'ur.  That's what it's there for.

The difference between moveon and Scaife is that moveon is still a political organization, and they make no bones about it.  Scaife is a media tycoon.  He pretends that his message is non-partisan, because he uses the media, his media, to send it out.  It's still an area where the conservatives have an edge ont he progressives, using the media.  The internet has evened the playing field, but it's still not there.

So, there you have it.  My long-winded defense of moveon.org.

GO HAWKS!

[Quality Start Machine]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

[RV]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I'm guessing that whole 'campaigning against Obama' thing may have been a factor.

[Brownie]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I'm guessing that whole 'campaigning against Obama' thing may have been a factor.

He didn't campaign against Obama until after Moveon helped give Lamont the nomination in 2006.

[Quality Start Machine]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I'm guessing that whole 'campaigning against Obama' thing may have been a factor.

He didn't campaign against Obama until after Moveon helped give Lamont the nomination in 2006.

And he still caucuses with the Democrats.

[Oleg]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I suppose, but couldn't you boil down any organization to that level.  After all, we really do have only two political parties.  As much as we'd like to think so, even the blogosphere goes beyond BCB and Desipio.

The war was an awful idea from the beginning.  Lieberman's support for it, especially as late as 2006, was unacceptable.  It has nothing to do with any sort of groupthink.  Also, consider that moveon really grew out of the anti-war movement, and there you go.

(Before anyone wants to start any sort of judgment argument about the war, please note I am only talking about the war from the point of view of the left, for the sake of discussing the fall of Joe Lieberman in the eyes of the left.  Thank you.)

edit: Changed date of support to 2006, to cover TJ's post.

[morpheus]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I suppose, but couldn't you boil down any organization to that level.  After all, we really do have only two political parties.  As much as we'd like to think so, even the blogosphere goes beyond BCB and Desipio.

The war was an awful idea from the beginning.  Lieberman's support for it, especially as late as 2006, was unacceptable.  It has nothing to do with any sort of groupthink.  Also, consider that moveon really grew out of the anti-war movement, and there you go.

(Before anyone wants to start any sort of judgment argument about the war, please note I am only talking about the war from the point of view of the left, for the sake of discussing the fall of Joe Lieberman in the eyes of the left.  Thank you.)

edit: Changed date of support to 2006, to cover TJ's post.

I thought moveon was started in response to THAT WHOLE impeachment THING, based on the idea that we should all just "Move On" from the highest law enforcement executive in the country defying the laws of said country.  Yeah, it later shifted to the anti-war movement, but that's not where it "grew out of."  Unless you meant that further growth in the organization could be tied to the anti-war movement, in which case you can put [ s ] tags around this post.

[RV]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I'm guessing that whole 'campaigning against Obama' thing may have been a factor.

He didn't campaign against Obama until after Moveon helped give Lamont the nomination in 2006.

Ah, I'm a moran.

Speaking of cluelessness, can we build a consensus on Todd Stroger being a douchesquirt? Gil if you're going to run for Board President in 2010 we need to get the ball rolling.

[RV]

I thought moveon was started in response to THAT WHOLE impeachment THING, based on the idea that we should all just "Move On" from the highest law enforcement executive in the country defying the laws of said country.

Clinton should've just had someone from the OLC write a memo stating that it was legal to lie under oath about humjobs. Problem solved! [/provocative]

[Chuck to Chuck]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I'm guessing that whole 'campaigning against Obama' thing may have been a factor.

He didn't campaign against Obama until after Moveon helped give Lamont the nomination in 2006.

But Obama campaigned for Lieberman in person during the primary.

[Oleg]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I suppose, but couldn't you boil down any organization to that level.  After all, we really do have only two political parties.  As much as we'd like to think so, even the blogosphere goes beyond BCB and Desipio.

The war was an awful idea from the beginning.  Lieberman's support for it, especially as late as 2006, was unacceptable.  It has nothing to do with any sort of groupthink.  Also, consider that moveon really grew out of the anti-war movement, and there you go.

(Before anyone wants to start any sort of judgment argument about the war, please note I am only talking about the war from the point of view of the left, for the sake of discussing the fall of Joe Lieberman in the eyes of the left.  Thank you.)

edit: Changed date of support to 2006, to cover TJ's post.

I thought moveon was started in response to THAT WHOLE impeachment THING, based on the idea that we should all just "Move On" from the highest law enforcement executive in the country defying the laws of said country.  Yeah, it later shifted to the anti-war movement, but that's not where it "grew out of."  Unless you meant that further growth in the organization could be tied to the anti-war movement, in which case you can put [ s ] tags around this post.

OK...whatever.  I have no idea what an [ s ] tag is, so if you feel it's appropriate, sure.

[Brownie]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

Even though I think Lieberman is pretty douchey, the fact is, he's a Liberal Democrat through-and-through, with the one exception being his support of the War. That was enough.

As Chuck said, they're like BCB, they want groupthink to prevail. Even when you agree with most of it, it's a bad idea.

I'm guessing that whole 'campaigning against Obama' thing may have been a factor.

He didn't campaign against Obama until after Moveon helped give Lamont the nomination in 2006.

But Obama campaigned for Lieberman in person during the primary.

And Lieberman has carried some water for Obama this legislative session.

Bush campaigned for Specter during the 2004 primary and for what?

[Chuck to Chuck]

And Lieberman has carried some water for Obama this legislative session.

But he did not reciprocate during the campaign.  I mean, the guy took the lectern at the RNC.

Bush campaigned for Specter during the 2004 primary and for what?

I don't recall Specter campaigning for Kerry.

[Tank]

My beef with moveon is they started with good intentions, but have now decided getting Liberals elected isn't enough, they need to be Liberal to their liking, and must adhere to every box on the checklist.

They're a liberal policy advocacy group.

Yes, they help push to get liberals into elected office in furtherance of their particular policy goals.

But they also push liberals who've been elected to office to actually support these particular policy goals, and seek to challenge those that don't. The policy's the thing.

Crazy, I know.

But you can't have an international Jew money-changer conspiracy without breaking a few eggs.

[Tank]

Bush campaigned for Specter during the 2004 primary and for what?

Is Specter's move to the Dem Party thwarting the post-White House Bush administration's carefully laid strategy to crush some brews and dominate with the bros down in Crawford?