Yeah, that struck me too. I'm glad you mentioned it. The utility, for the Republicans, of having a bipartisan condemnation of MoveOn, is just staggering. EVERY time they run an ad, all the Republicans have to do is point to this and the debate switches from whatever the issue du jour is to MoveOn's character. EVERY time. Is there any other grassroots organization, for either side, that has been similarly treated? This is just so mind-bogglingly obvious that it's hard not to suspect that it was part of the political calculus on the part of those Dems who do hate the base. If you really think you can win without an ally, and you really hate that ally, then why not try to destroy that ally?

For no other reason than to avoid crippling a major organ of their grassroots, the Dems should have found some way to scuttle this vote.

I didn't have great hopes in November - it was an improvement, sure, and winning one for once was great. But I had no illusions about how tough it was going to be. I knew that a lot of the Dems were to the right of me, but I had hoped that they might at least show some savy when it came to the political game. Our team sucks, frankly.

...much richer and more powerful. Kind of hard to call them "fringe" when they're buying pricey TV ads.

MoveOn is 3.4 million Americans strong who do not like being called traitors.

They've done more than attack a political movement - they've lit the hornet's nest and started the war.

“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”

Charles Darwin

...(seen on Americablog)

The focus of the United States Senate should be on ending this war, not on criticizing newspaper advertisements. This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq. It's precisely this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington's ability to solve America's problems. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics. I registered my views on the ad itself the day it appeared.

All of us respect the service of General Petraeus and all of our brave men and women in uniform. The way to honor that service is to give them a mission that is responsible, not to vote on amendments like the Cornyn amendment while we continue to pursue the wrong policy in Iraq.

beieves that Bush's earlier lashout at MoveOn is a MoveOn win, but it does:(and notice Bush's use of the "Democrat" party)

The Nation..... - Bush did on Thursday in what will rank as one of the more remarkable -- and politically petty -- moments of a remarkable and politically-petty presidency.

Tossed a typical soft-ball question at a presidential press conference Thursday morning, Bush responded by saying, "I thought that the ad was disgusting. I felt like the ad was an attack, not only on General Petraeus, but on the U.S. military. And I was disappointed that not more leaders in the Democrat Party spoke out strongly against that kind of ad. That leads me to come to this conclusion: that most Democrats are afraid of irritating a left-wing group like MoveOn.org -- are more afraid of irritating them than they are of irritating the United States military. That was a sorry deal. And it's one thing to attack me. It's another thing to attack somebody like General Petraeus."

Bush's obviously prepared statement was a clumsy attempt to attack Democratic presidential candidates and congressional leaders. But it created an opening for an unprecedented back-and-forth between the most powerful man in the world and his most aggressive critics. It was hardly necessary on the day when Senate Republicans were engineering a symbolic 72-25 vote rebuking the MoveOn ad that referred to Petraeus as "Betray Us." Had Bush simply offered the standard "I'm not going to get into these political fights" line, or even a pithier "I think the Senate will have something appropriate to say about that," he would have mastered the moment.

Instead, the president handed the loudest microphone in the land to MoveOn. And MoveOn.org Political Action Committee executive director Eli Pariser grabbed it with gusto.

"What's disgusting is that the President has more interest in political attacks than developing an exit strategy to get our troops out of Iraq and end this awful war," said Pariser ...

_{1."George Washington did not cross the Delaware for Capitalism," -Shmuley Boteach.
2.The Dems haven't punished the GOP enough, so you're going to reward the Republicans?}

One thing MoveOn knows now is who not to support in the next cycle. Feinstein, my senator is an enabler, she could have stopped the wiretap bill just before recess in August, her vote was number 60, if she would have held her vote this new repressive law would not be on the books. I am still waiting on an answer from her on why she chose to blindly support people who just lie and are traitors.

"There are two types of folk music:
quiet folk music and loud folk music.
I play both."

Dave Alvin

very nice job. the part about the "bipartisan bill" is the killer. nice job, senate dems!

the 23 who voted for it are dead to me.

(h/t FDL):

I commend MoveOn for their ad and for speaking truth to power. Up is not down, the earth is not flat, and the surge is not working. General Petreaus betrayed his own reputation by standing with George Bush in opposition to the timely withdrawal of all of our brave men and women from Iraq. I thank MoveOn for their patriotic ad and call on Petreaus to help Bush end a war the President should have never started.

Yeah.

vote for this bill?

No one is allowed to criticize the military in the U.S. The military is beyond reproach because they are willing to sacrifice their lives for each of us so we can live in freedom. How can you possibly criticize someone who will lay down their life for you, especially at a time when thousands of soldiers and marines have died in Iraq?

Except - we all know that the ones doing the dying are the young men, the volunteers from small towns, the immigrants seeking a green card, the non-officers, the National Guard and Reserve men who wanted a college education and never expected to be in combat. Career officers in the Pentagon don't die in combat, and certainly no General or Admiral has died in Iraq or any recent war.

Sure, General Petraeus is out in the field and is exposed to gunfire and mortar shells, like the journalists who venture out into Iraq, the aid workers, and millions of Iraqis who have to navigate from work to home every day under incredibly dangerous conditions. At least Petraeus has Blackwater to guard him and is highly unlikely to be injured.

The fact is, neither Petraeus nor any other Pentagon career officer is seriously risking their life for their country. Maybe some of them did when they were younger and in Vietnam, but none of them are doing so now. They are responsible for decisions that affect the lives of our troops in Iraq, and they damn well better be subject to criticism and accountable for their mistakes, or this country is really failing the troops.

Do you want to know who is really risking their life for you to preserve your liberties and protect your safety? Look to the police force. Every year over 150 policemen die in the line of duty. More than 65,000 are assaulted each year, and 23,000 are wounded annually. Your odds of being killed or injured as a policeman are, over time, higher than if you were in the military. This doesn't count the firemen killed each year, the rescue workers like those at the Utah mine who died trying to save others, or many others who are injured or killed while serving their fellow citizens.

Yes, it is awe-inspiring that our military is willing to die for us, but is it so awesome that we cannot criticize the generals? This is the same military that lost the war in Vietnam, did nothing to protect us from the 9/11 attacks (which hit the Pentagon, after all), and have now lost the Iraq War. The same military costs this nation half a trillion dollars a year and is slowly bankrupting this country.

If we are going to worship the military and exempt them from any criticism, let us not be hypocrites about it. Let us worship the police who are at greater risk, who actually provide effective protection, and who don't have massive corporations behind them lobbying for useless, expensive toys. Or we can worship firemen, or many others in dangerous and sometimes fatal jobs.

Alternatively, we can approach the military, and especially the Pentagon brass, with respect but with honest criticism. They are certainly used to receiving deference, but they could use the criticism much more.

initiative from the get-go. They have been hammering the NYT since the ad appeared claiming that the "far left" NYT gave MoveOn a discount. The Times explained that the rate was their standard for full page ads that don't require a specific day of the week. Nonetheless, Bill O'Reilly, appropos of his lack of understanding of irony exhibited in my sig, claimed that the NYT "discount" amounted to "soft money" for the Dems. Hey Bill, your whole damn enterprise is soft money for the extreme right. If nothing else, the Senate vote is a scorecard showing which Democrats should face primary challenges when they come up for re-election.

I wonder if the current financial crisis will end the war. Bush has run the Fed's credit card up. What happens when the combination of domestic recession and massive borrowing collide with the creditors say "no thanks" to more US debt? Why lend money to people who can't repay?

Currently looks to me like the Federal Reserve in between a rock & a hard place - can't cut rates any more becuase overseas creditors will abandon the dollar (the forecast run on the dollar may just have started), and can't raise interest rates becuase of foreclosures & very large bankrupcies...

Well I see a strange attractor in our future, and I cant predict what it looks like. If things go badly, then the result will make 1929 look like a mild recesion, as they is an enormous amount of consumer debt overhanging us all...most of which could become non-performing very quickly...

The financial crash possible will damage us all - and will probably end the Iraq adventure - How will Bush pay for his war if he can't borrow? Raise taxes (LAMO)?

That would be a highpoint of the Bush presidency - a really major depression...we're certainly at the end of the US as the world's reserve currency...

Oh well, I'm off to pick out my subway bridge which will be my future home...I want to find a nice spot before the rush:-)

Because when there's nowhere for this Administration and the movement for which it is schrwerpunkt to turn, they have one hell of a lot of firepower at their fingertips. And to their eyes, anything that thwarts their will is enemy action.

there were two amendments that condemned moveon, Cornyn Amdt. No. 2934 and Boxer Amdt. No. 2947

listening to statements made on the senate floor (via c-span2), the boxer amendment condemned moveon as well as the swiftboating of senator kerry, etc.

every D senator voted for the boxer amendment except senator feingold.

so, just to be clear on which democratic senators voted to condemn moveon - it was all of them except feingold.

MoveOn’s Executive Director Eli Pariser joined David Shuster –filling in for Tucker Carlson– to discuss MoveOn’s factual Petraeus ad last week and the giant distraction non-binding resolution passed yesterday in the Senate condemning it.

At C&L

"You know something is wrong when the New England Patriots face stiffer penalties for spying on innocent Americans than Dick Cheney and George Bush." - Bill Richardson

and it is that the money from labor and trial lawyers was tainted money (does anyone think that the mob never mixed in with unions or that trial lawyers can't be a bit ... uh, sue happy?) Moveon.org is squeaky clean (as faras we know) and moreover, they might be proven right that Peatreus betrayed our trust.

So really this is a double-edged sword that once swung, might come back to cut all those "yes" voters. Because they have made it very public and if (over the next year) the people feel Moveon was correct in their ad, it might improve their public standing instead of lessen it. It's sort of like the stock market, the method you use to make money always works right up until the day it doesn't, then it's rat poison. Sooner or later Americans might decide Republicans (or attack ads in genernal) are rat poison.

Moveon might weather this better than we anticipate, I wouldn't despair just yet.