Moveon

Auto Industry Bailout

music8200 — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:54:07 -0500

Congress will take up the Auto Industry Bailout when they re-convene this week. There is no better time than this moment to PUSH for concessions from the Auto Industry. Time is short. Democrat.com, can you help us act NOW? Here's a copy of a letter I just mailed to Speaker Pelosi: Dear Madam Speaker,

Please make the FLEXFUEL component a MANDATORY requirement for any Auto Industry bailout.
IT ONLY COSTS $100 to install this component on a vehicle during the manufacturing process. The only EPA approved retrofit costs $1300. All cars sold in Brazil are flexfuel ready. All cars that GM sells in Brazil are flexfuel compatible. There is no excuse and there should be no delay in making all cars sold in America flexfuel capable.
THIS IS THE QUICKEST CHEAPEST EASIEST WAY to make rapid reductions in our foreign oil imports.
If ALL cars sold in the US were Flexfuel compatible, alternative fuel manufacturers would gear up without the need for incentives because they would know they have a market for their fuel products.
THEN please help remove the $0.54 a gallon tariff on imported ethanol. That would allow foreign ethanol products to compete in the American market. The American consumer would benefit. We could even lift the economies of Third World Countries by contracting them to grow switchgrass or sugarcane for ethanol fuel.
Ultimately, let's provide incentives for the production of flexfuel plug-in hybrids. These cars would get 500 MILES ON A GALLON OF GASOLINE! We would never need OPEC oil ever again! Perhaps no imported oil at all.
PLEASE PLEASE make the flexfuel component a MANDATORY part of any Automobile Industry Bailout.
If you want good references on this topic, read the testimony of Anne Korin (of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security) before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs of May 22, 2008:http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/110/kor052208.htm(see in particular the section entitled "17x17")
read R. James Woolsey (former director of the CIA) and Anne Korin's article in the National Review:http://energy.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTlmMjFjYWRjOWI3ZGI0MzUxZDJjYTBlMmUzOTc2Mzc=
or watch Anne Korin's lecture on CSPAN:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MVwL2PcCG8(highly recommended)
watch Robert Zubrin's FEW Keynote Address:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0O2YZwSkgM
Thank you and your staff for your time and attention,Scott Lawrence

Obama, don't follow McCain into the mud

mr_twist — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:02:14 -0400

Please help unite
Obama supporters in rejecting McCain’s
negative campaign style. We must clean up politics if things are ever to get
better. We have a chance to be so much more than the same old attack politics,
but Obama must hear the voices of his supporters on this.

Please read the message to Obama on the following blog and
help spread it to others.

http://manyhands.blogspot.com/

Senator Barack Obama,

I realize that you have already endured
much since the start of your campaign for the presidency. Along with
the grueling schedules, lack of sleep, and time away from your family,
you have had to deal with being the target of racial slurs, hateful jokes, untrue attacks on your faith, and even slander against your loved ones. All of us who support your bid for president and many of those who do not condemn such unethical political trash.

I call upon you to recognize in these difficult times that the Obama campaign belongs to its supporters. It belongs to all of us. We want to support what we have seen in you. Maybe it was something we read in one of your books, a rousing speech
you made at a huge rally, or a small commitment you expressed in a more
personal setting. Regardless, we all found something to believe in that
we share. We found a hope for something better in the potential that
you contain and in what we have seen from your best moments. Do not
forget this. Even when you falter you must still be committed to the
steady course of something new, something positive, and something which
makes you capable of inspiring and leading millions.

This needs
to be said in light of McCain deciding recently that there is only one
way for him to defeat you: by drawing you into his mud. Unable to rally
the enthusiasm and hope that you stir in people McCain has decided
instead to take the low road and lash out
at you for inspiring so many to believe in and work for change in their
country. These are McCain's politics, do not let them become yours. Our
country does not need a second McCain campaign, we need something
different, something new, and something better.

I am not asking you to be soft and avoid holding people accountable, asking tough questions, or defending yourself from lies.
I am asking you to not be drawn into the negative campaigning that your
opponent so wishes to see you engage in. There is a difference between
hard politics and dirty politics. Do not become a mudslinger instead of
a "hope monger". Many of us want something different and you are our
best hope for that. Please Sen. Obama, do not walk into the politics of
anger and spite.

--- One of your inspired supporters

"Obamacan" Wins Moveon Ad Contest

Bob Fertik — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:44:06 -0400

Moveon just announced the winner of its "Obama in 30 Seconds" contest, and the winner was "Obamacan" by David Gaw & Lance Mungia of Monrovia, CA. Congratulations!

Moveon Clones MyDem

Bob Fertik — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:41:03 -0500

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then I am most sincerely flattered that Moveon unveiled VotePoke.org as a clone of the voter registration verification system we created before the 2006 election at MyDem.com.

Our system was a big success and nearly 20,000 voters used it despite little publicity.

If you read carefully enough, you'll discover Moveon even plagiarized our exact language: "Are you registered to vote? Are you sure?"

Of course Moveon raises million$$ each year and we raise ... ten$$. But who's counting?

Still it would have been nice if Moveon had credited us with showing them how to do it, or sent a personal note of thanks. Just sayin'.

Moveon has copied Democrats.com many times on many issues, but there is one issue they simply refuse to touch - impeachment. This is a good opportunity to ask them once again to do what their members overwhelmingly want:
http://www.democrats.com/moveon-impeachment-petition

Moveon.TV

Bob Fertik — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:51:59 -0400

For entirely crazy reasons, the biggest news story of last week was Moveon.org's ad in the NY Times.

Was it the biggest news story because Moveon questioned a sacred General? Hardly. American generals have been questioned throughout American history, starting with Gen. George Washington's defeat at Brandywine Creek.

The only reason is because FOX News created a Shitstorm (TM) over the ad.

What is a Shitstorm (TM)? It's when FOX News takes a bullshit topic and turns it into a tornado by pumping it full of bullshit for a major chunk of each news cycle for day after day.

There have been innumerable Shitstorms since FOX went on the air. FOX actually has two going right now - the Moveon ad and the visit of Ahmedinejad to Columbia. If you tune in for any given hour you'll get at least 10 minutes of both.

As I said, the core of a Shitstorm is bullshit. It is always a direct or indirect attack on Democrats and liberals, taking some small "fact" and twisting it to suit their partisan purposes. The most infamous Shitstorms were Al Gore's "sigh" (like George Bush's debate bullshit didn't deserve it?), Howard Dean's "Scream" (which was just Dean yelling over a noisy crowd, distorted for TV by the mic) and John Kerry's "botched joke" (which was an joke against Bush, not the troops), but there have been countless others.

And FOX doesn't end its Shitstorms until its victim is crushed - just ask Gore, Dean and Kerry. (That's why Hillary was so good with Chris Wallace - her laugh made Wallace look like the fool that he is and crushed his attacks.)

So what is the solution to Fox's Shitstorms? We have to fight fire with fire.

Moveon.org must become Moveon.TV

How? I'm not one of those who blithely says Moveon can easily raise hundreds of millions and create its own TV network. First of all they can't, and secondly you can't build a successful business with capital alone - Air America Radio blew through $25 million with little to show for it, and that's just audio on low-wattage AM stations, which costs a whole lot less than TV.

So here's an alternative plan: start with a half hour evening broadcast on Al Gore's Current.tv, and gradually build from there.

Moveon.TV would start with a priceless asset - brand identity. Moveon has always represented idealistic progressive activism, but thanks to George Bush's attacks, Moveon now represents the overwhelming majority of Americans who oppose George Bush.

Moveon.TV would also have a built-in audience of 3 million people. And we're not just any 3 million people - we're the most influential people in America, the people who put Democrats in charge of Congress by beating Karl Rove, George Bush and the vast White House/Republican political machine.

The key to success is terrific energetic TV personalities like Taylor Marsh, Randi Rhodes, Sam Seder, Cliff Shecter, and Nancy Skinner. Give them producers, scriptwriters, editors, and guest bookers. Let them file reports on topics in each day's news and weave them together into a show that has passion, guts, conviction, and a focus on taking action.

Current.tv is already available on many cable networks. Progressives have nothing to watch between Keith Olberman and Jon Stewart, so pick a half-hour between 9 p.m. and 11 p.m. and let it roll.

How could it fail?

Moveon Prepares for Bush Dog Primaries

Bob Fertik — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:19:35 -0400

Well whaddya know - I just got an email from Nita Chaudhary and the good people at Moveon.org, who are considering primary challenges against Bush Dog Democrats - an idea I first proposed on 5/30/07. (On 8/22/07 I threw my support behind the excellent Bush Dog campaign led by OpenLeft.com because they were doing in-depth research on which incumbents to challenge.)

Dear MoveOn member,

We've all heard it from the Democratic leadership over and over again: "we don't have the votes."

Hundreds of thousands of us worked to get Democratic majorities elected. So why don't they have the votes? One reason is that there are a set of weak Democrats who side with the president--especially on Iraq. They're too scared to fight for what's right and what they were elected to fight for.

This fall, we face a pivotal series of votes on Iraq--votes that, if we win, could spell the end of the Iraq war. MoveOn members have made phone calls. We've held town meetings. We've run ads and written letters to the editor. But now, given this big moment, we have an important decision to make together.

Should we support primary challengers against some Democrats who side with the president on Iraq? It's a tough question, and one we need everybody's input on. Click below to fill out our survey and let us know what you think:

http://pol.moveon.org/primary07/

Polls show that a majority of voters everywhere support an exit from Iraq. That means that there isn't a single Democratic member of Congress whose constituents don't want to bring our troops home. Representatives who vote with President Bush on Iraq are voting against their districts.

But deciding to support primary challenges is a big step--some folks have argued that we should keep our focus on Republicans, the primary architects and supporters of the war.

There are a few key things to keep in mind. We would only get involved in a primary race if MoveOn members in the district or state wanted to--and a majority supported that primary challenger. And we'd focus on races where a progressive had a good chance of beating the sitting Democrat and also winning the general election.

Why now? There are a lot of Democrats in Congress who are Democrats In Name Only (DINOs)--they don't represent their constituents, a lot of them have been in office for years and they think that they can vote however they want. That's just wrong. Their job is to represent their constituents.

Back in January, many of us were excited about the new Democratic Congress and all the progress we could make. And together, we have made real progress on minimum wage, children's health care and even renewable energy.

But in some critical issue areas the Democrats have failed us--usually because too many of them were afraid to fight. Just last month, Congress capitulated to President Bush and politics of fear over wiretapping. And we've all been disappointed and frustrated by the way Iraq policy has been handled.

We have to work together to make sure that Democrats are held accountable to their voters. But the question is, should we use primary challenges as a way to hold them accountable?

This is a really big decision, and we need your input before we go forward. Please click below to tell us what you think:

http://pol.moveon.org/primary07/

We'll report back to you next week on the results of the survey. Thanks for taking the time to think through this important question and for all you do.

Sincerely,

--Nita, Eli, Justin, Jennifer and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team Thursday, September 6th, 2007

Here are the questions in the Moveon survey. (If you're a Moveon member you'll get the email with a personalized link, otherwise you can sign up at http://pol.moveon.org/primary07/)

Should we support primary challengers against some Democrats who side with the President on Iraq?
Would you pledge money to support progressive challengers to these Democrats?
How much would you pledge?

I answered Yes and Yes and pledged $100. How about you?

Move on to impeachment

richardmathews — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:49:16 -0400

MoveOn is finally moving on to talk about the possibility of impeachment proceedings!

Sign their petition:
http://pol.moveon.org/subpoena/

It states:

"Congress must force Vice President Cheney to respond to its subpoenas. If he continues to obstruct justice and disregard the rule of law, Congress has no choice but to begin impeachment proceedings against him."

Richard M. Mathews

Why Moveon Isn't Moving On Impeachment

Bob Fertik — Mon, 21 May 2007 12:39:40 -0400

This weekend I bumped into Eli Pariser, Executive Director of Moveon.org Political Action, and we had a friendly chat about our efforts to persuade Moveon to support impeachment, which includes this petition:
http://www.democrats.com/moveon-impeachment-petition

Eli sent me the FAQ reply Moveon sends members who ask about impeachment. In the interests of transparency, I'll post it here (emphasis added):

Thank you for your recent message on impeachment. We take your opinion-and all feedback from MoveOn members-very seriously.

A number of MoveOn members have contacted us to encourage us to work on impeachment and/or to ask that we survey MoveOn members on the issue.

We've actually added an impeachment question to our tracking poll, which goes out to a random sample of members every couple weeks. We've also done several other surveys to dig into MoveOn members' attitudes on this question.*

It turns out that in general, while the majority of MoveOn members think President Bush deserves to be impeached, as a group, they don't particularly want MoveOn to work on it right now.

In fact, they think it should be a much lower priority for MoveOn than every single other issue we poll on.

You can see a graph of results since we added it to the tracking poll here:**
http://pol.moveon.org/tracking_poll.jpg

MoveOn is a member-driven organization. So right now we're focused on the issues that the membership as a whole says should be priorities, including Iraq, Iran, energy policy, global warming, health care, civil liberties, and voter protection. MoveOn is not engaging on impeachment at the moment.

We'll continue to survey on this issue in our tracking poll, in case member attitudes change-which could well happen, depending on the outcome of ongoing investigations.

Some of our allies-and a substantial group of MoveOn members-think impeachment is a strategic imperative. That's not the view shared by the majority of MoveOn members, but we encourage folks who do want to work on impeachment to support the groups that are taking the lead on this issue.

If you're not sure who that is, a good place to start is this list of links maintained on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush#External_links
The whole Wikipedia impeachment page has lots of helpful info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush

Thanks again for contacting us, and for the work you do to make this country more progressive.

Best,

Eli Pariser

Executive Director

MoveOn.org Political Action

*The reason we poll a random sample vs. the whole membership is because we do many such surveys and if we consistently polled the whole membership we would bury people in emails. Surveys of large, random samples give us an accurate picture of where MoveOn members stand. And this system also allows us to keep surveying on an ongoing basis, since sentiment on the issue could change.

**We tested both "Impeach President Bush" and "Impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney"-both yielded similar results.

P.S. If you're wondering why so many members don't feel this is a priority, here are some typical survey responses:

Too many other things are out there to waste our time pointing fingers.

Not until the results of congressional hearings indicate that Bush's transgressions were willful rather than incompetent. If we try before that, the effort will fail and we will have destroyed our chance for impeachment in the future.

There's no realistic prospect that this will succeed given the narrow Democratic majorities in both chambers.

First, you are unlikely to succeed, so you will be wasting resources, Second, such a move could backfire against Democrats in the next election cycle as they are seen as vindictive. If all we are is against the war and against Bush we will not retain the majority for long. We need to focus on education, economy, environment, health care, homeland security, and a fair compromise on immigration.

Not worth the time or money. MoveOn should be supporting alternative candidates and putting forth new acceptable policies.

Much as I'd like nothing better than to get his butt kicked out, I'd hate to see energy wasted on it. Anything that can be done to keep pushing an agenda that emphasizes ending the war and funding issues like health care, education, and support for programs that don't help the wealthy would be more positive energy spent.

Although I would love to see him impeached, I think it would be more effective and in the better interests of the country for Congress to focus on ending the war, eliminating Bush's obscene tax cuts, and passing progressive social legislation.

It won't happen and will be a waste of time. Instead, you should encourage Democratic senators and congressmen to have some spine and push a progressive agenda.

While the idea of impeaching Bush is a wonderful thought, there are higher priorities. Better to continue to make the fool irrelevant. Keep focusing on alternatives to the war's execution and other of our core values.

Republicans moved to impeach Clinton because they lacked ideas. Let's not stoop to their level.

Losing battle, not enough people have the outrage to really push for this, divisive and waste of time.

We have much more important things like single payer health care, a reasonable energy plan and ending the war to take care of rather than clogging our system with the impeachment. Not that he doesn't deserve it.

While there are details I could quibble with - including Moveon's refusal to include impeachment in its polls earlier, and the exclusion of impeachment from house party discussions a year ago - overall this statement appears reasonable to me.

In particular, I welcome the fact that Moveon is monitoring its polls over time to see if priorities change. In the interest of transparency, I'd love to see Moveon's tracking poll turned into a line graph with the calendar as the x-axis and support for each issue on the y-axis.

Of course there is a chicken-and-egg dimension to this situation: if Moveon explained the arguments for working on impeachment to its members, the polling results would change.

There is also an important strategic argument for Moveon to work on impeachment: it's the best way to win the battles that rank higher in Moveon's poll:

Stop an invasion of Iran: no one in Congress is more passionately opposed to such an invasion than Rep. Dennis Kucinich, and he believes the threat of impeachment is the only thing that can stop it.
Exit strategy for Iraq: the new Democratic Congress has spent months trying to force Bush to negotiate a change in his Iraq strategy, but those efforts have run into a brick wall. It is now clear that the only way to get Bush to negotiate with Congress is to threaten him with impeachment.
Advance energy independence through clean renewable resources: as long as ExxonMobilChevronTexaco is in the White House, there will be no significant progress on ending our addiction to oil. Again, impeachment is the only way to end the veto of the Big Oil over energy policy.
Stop global warming and solve the climate crisis. See #3 because it's the same problem - Big Oil wants us to stay addicted to oil.
Take back the White House in 2008: one of the main reasons Bush was able to get close enough to Gore to steal the 2000 election was the "cloud" over Bill Clinton resulting from his impeachment by the GOP in 1998, which extended over Gore just enough to hurt him. Of course Bill Clinton did not deserve impeachment, which is why hundreds of thousands signed the "Censure and Move On" petition that created Moveon.org. But a majority of Americans believe Bush committed impeachable offenses.

I would also add that there is an intensity factor at play: while a larger number of Moveon members may rank other issues higher, those Moveon members who support impeachment are probably willing to get out and do more, as we can infer from the tremendous amount of grassroots activism around impeachment, which isn't happening at comparable levels on the other issues.

So I hope Moveon will consider these points - as well as the changing views of its members - as support for impeachment grows every day.

Moveon Warns Democrats Against Capitulation on Iraq

Bob Fertik — Sat, 05 May 2007 15:04:27 -0400

Here's a remarkable story from the NY Times entitled "With New Clout, Antiwar Groups Push Democrats." I believe it's the first article in the Corporate Media that acknowledges the clout, sophistication, and determination of the progressive anti-war movement:

On Thursday, leaders of the liberal group MoveOn.org, including Tom Matzzie, the group’s Washington director who also serves as the campaign manager for the coalition, sent a harshly worded warning to the Democratic leadership.

“In the past few days, we have seen what appear to be trial balloons signaling a significant weakening of the Democratic position,” the letter read. “On this, we want to be perfectly clear: if Democrats appear to capitulate to Bush — passing a bill without measures to end the war — the unity Democrats have enjoyed and Democratic leadership has so expertly built, will immediately disappear.”

The letter went on to say that if Democrats passed a bill “without a timeline and with all five months of funding,” they would essentially be endorsing a “war without end.” MoveOn, it said, “will move to a position of opposition.”

That's excellent news! And Moveon's new-found hardball position is driven by groups (including Democrats.com) that refuse to compromise on Iraq. We harshly criticized Moveon in March for sabotaging Barbara Lee's amendment for a fully-funded withdrawal.

The alliance, including MoveOn, chose to stick with Ms. Pelosi as she ushered through a war financing bill that included a timeline for withdrawal, but many peace advocates called the measure too timid. Some critics accused the alliance of becoming too cozy with the Democratic leadership and selling out the cause.

“There’s a dividing line between those groups who feel the most important thing is to be clear on bringing the troops home as soon as possible, and the groups that feel that unity within the Democratic Party is most important and the most important thing is for the Democrats to win the White House,” said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of Code Pink, an antiwar group that is not part of the alliance. “So the groups who feel the most important thing is to win the White House would naturally be more inclined to listening to Speaker Nancy Pelosi when she says the only way we can get a vote through is if we water it down.”

Moveon's sophisticated tactics (including union-supplied phone banks calling into swing districts) are great, and so is Moveon's tough talk:

Mr. Matzzie, of MoveOn, was clear about the stakes in the coming weeks, saying his group was only getting started. He emphasized that the next emergency spending bill must be one “to end the war.”

“This is act one of a three-act play,” he said. “Act two will be the summer. During the summer, our job is to create a firestorm of opposition.”

Let's do it.

Move Over, MoveOn

Bob Fertik — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:51:31 -0400

I don't like to attack progressive allies, but it's hard not to agree with Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber who found today's Moveon survey utterly dishonest:

Iraq: Why Won't MoveOn Move Forward?

MoveOn's 3.2 million members strongly oppose any continuation of the war, and the language above seems to suggest that MoveOn's leadership agrees. But MoveOn's organizing around Iraq has become notably ambiguous lately. Although it talks in general terms about bringing the troops home, specific timetables or meaningful steps in that direction are nowhere discussed. Most strikingly, MoveOn has adamantly refused to support the Iraq amendment from Congressional Progressive Caucus leaders Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters, which calls for "a fully funded, and systematic, withdrawal of U.S. soldiers and military contractors from Iraq" by the end of 2007...

On Sunday, MoveOn distributed a survey asking its members to vote on three options: support the Pelosi bill; oppose it; or "not sure." MoveOn's Eli Pariser described the survey in an email as an opportunity for members to participate in "a big decision coming up this week. ... MoveOn is a member-directed organization — we believe that all of us, together, are smarter than any one of us." In fact, however, MoveOn's survey was designed to conceal from its members the option of supporting the stronger anti-war amendment put forth by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

There are, of course, other ways of running a survey. When TrueMajority.org recently surveyed its members about the best way forward, they offered three choices: the Lee plan, the Pelosi plan, and the option of demanding that Congress reject any further war funding, period. Only 24 percent of TrueMajority's members supported the Pelosi plan — which appears to be the reason why MoveOn's survey gave their members no choice but the Pelosi plan.

Rampton and Stauber blame Moveon's dishonesty on "some breathtakingly cynical political calculations by the leadership of the Democratic Party, with which MoveOn has aligned itself."

If the war ends this year, the debate during the 2008 congressional and presidential elections will turn to "who lost Iraq." If the war continues into next year, however, Democrats will benefit as the de facto "anti-war party," no matter how feckless their opposition in the meantime.

Part of this calculation is based on a common expectation, expressed by many analysts, that a U.S. withdrawal will be followed by an explosion of Iraqi-on-Iraqi bloodletting that is even worse than the current violence...

In the short run, a U.S. withdrawal followed by the expected Iraqi national implosion will be spinnable by conservative pundits as proof that the war should have continued, and this is what Democratic politicians fear. Instead of campaigning as the party that will end the war, they are afraid that they may be labeled responsible for allowing a bloodbath to happen.

While this analysis is plausible, Rampton and Stauber offer no evidence to support it.

A less conspiratorial explanation is that the ideologically diverse Democratic Caucus is simply divided on Iraq. A few Bluedogs still support the war, while others do not believe Congress should "micromanage" a war (even though Newt Gingrich's Republicans "micromanaged" President Clinton's war in Kosovo). To avoid dividing the Caucus in public, Speaker Pelosi let the Bluedogs remove all "teeth" from her bill.

But Rampton and Stauber are right about Moveon - they should not conceal the true progressive position (Barbara Lee's amendment) from their 3.2 million supporters to protect Speaker Pelosi from their wrath.

Moveon became a powerhouse because it embraced the political passions of its members while Democrats were out of power. Now that Democrats are in power, Moveon is embracing Pelosi's sellout of Moveon's members.

If that doesn't change immediately, it's time for Moveon to Move Over and let more progressive groups like Democrats.com and Progressive Democrats of America lead the netroots in the historic battle to bring our troops safely home from Iraq.