AAEI - How Democrats Took Over and Betrayed the Peace Movement

by John Stauber — February 9, 2008 - 7:32pm
Share/Save Share this

Matt Taibbi analyzes how "Democrats have surrendered to Bush on Iraq and betrayed the peace movement for their own political ends." He faults the MoveOn-led Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, "a political tool for the Democrats -- one operated from inside the Beltway and devoted primarily to targeting Republicans. ... At the forefront of the groups are Thomas Matzzie and Brad Woodhouse... [M]uch of the anti-war group's leadership hails from a consulting firm called Hildebrand Tewes -- whose partners Steve Hildebrand and Paul Tewes served as staffers for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. ... This is the kind of conflict of interest that would normally be an embarrassment in the activist community. ... The really tragic thing about the Democratic surrender on Iraq is that it's now all but guaranteed that the war will be off the table during the presidential campaign. Once again ... the Democrats have ... done nothing but vote for war and cough up every dime they've been asked to give, every step of the way." Besides MoveOn others in the AAEI coalition include Americans United for Change, Campaign for America's Future, Center for American Progress, SEIU, USAction, VoteVets.org, Win Without War and Working Assets. Both Hildebrand and Tewes are "senior strategists" for presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Main Source: 
Rolling Stone, February 21, 2008

Comments

What I think all this shows...

Submitted by Mutternich on February 11, 2008 - 11:36am.

...is that no one knows about everything going on everywhere. I myself didn't know about either "the struggling event by a group whose previous efforts struggled" or "the big even in March" until I read about them here.

Perhaps this isn't how you meant it, but your choice of words suggests to me that you don't consider the "struggling event" worthy of attention -- sort of like Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel being thought of as not meriting inclusion in the televised debates because their candidacies were struggling. As I see it, the more attention any such event gets, the better for everyone.

If I have any problem with Matt Taibbi, it's that he tries too hard to channel Hunter Thompson.

David Swanson comments on Taibbi's article...

Submitted by John Stauber on February 9, 2008 - 10:34pm.

After I posted Taibbi's article I came across this commentary from peace activist David Swanson:

http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30906

In "Chicken Doves" Matt Taibbi correctly denounces the phony, monied, Democratic-front antiwar movement without acknowledging the real one. United for Peace and Justice, and other organizations serious about peace, struggle against a corrupt Congress, a pseudo peace movement with lots more money than we have, and reporters like Taibbi who pretend that a major movement that is actually working for peace with projects like this one upcoming in March: http://resistinmarch.org does not exist.

Taibbi correctly condemns the Democrats' past year of not really trying to end the occupation of Iraq. But he fails to acknowledge that they still have almost another whole year left in which they could quite easily act if they wanted to. Millions of us will continue pushing them to cut off the funding, with no help from Taibbi and other journalists who buy into the pretense that it is already 2009.

Swanson's piece continues at: http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30906