Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 29, 2007

THE RIGHT'S MOVEON.ORG....For years, one of the principal concerns on the left was creating a political and intellectual infrastructure that the right developed over decades. Conservatives had the think tanks, the massive membership organizations, the media outlets, the conferences, the deep-pocketed benefactors, etc. The left scrambled to catch up in the late '90s, but the right has a big head start.

But as it turns out, the envious looks cut both ways. The right wants its own MoveOn.org.

Veteran Republicans say they have quietly raised millions of dollars for a pair of nonprofit organizations that will launch this fall with the ambitious aim of providing a conservative counterweight to the liberal MoveOn.org, Politico.com has learned.

The issues and education group, which has a plan to enlist hundreds of thousands of small donors, aims to be active in the 2008 presidential election, according to Republicans involved in the effort. Organizers, who include veterans of the last three Republican White Houses, would not give specifics on how much money the group has raised so far or who its donor base is.

Bradley Blakeman, a former aide in Bush's White House said, "We're in the formative stages of creating a new group that will give voice and hope to conservatives everywhere who believe in peace through strength and limited government. We expect to have more to announce sometime down the road."

We'll see what Blakeman and his team can pull together, but I'm skeptical it'll amount to much, at least for a long while. For one thing, this still-unnamed group will have plenty of competition. The Vanguard says it's "intended to be a right-wing version of the leftist MoveOn.Org." Tom DeLay says he's in the process of "building a conservative grass-roots equivalent of MoveOn.org." In the last couple of cycles, a right-wing 527 group called Progress for America Voter Fund has already positioned itself as a far-right version of MoveOn.org. I think Blakeman's group will have to get in line.

For that matter, I think the right's been confused about MoveOn's appeal for a while. The group doesn't follow a top-down model; it's the other way around. Loyal Bushies can raise some money and form yet another conservative activist group, but that's hardly a recipe for success.

MoveOn drew support because it had a cause (Clinton impeachment). It showed staying power when new causes (Iraq war) emerged. This wasn't an instance in which a bunch of liberals got together and said, "Wouldn't it be great to form some kind of organization to advance a progressive agenda?" It was a far more natural evolution, a fact that seems to elude those who want to emulate it.

But that won't stop them from trying. We'll see what happens.

Steve Benen 7:19 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (112)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

It will definitely be interesting to see if they can really build a grassroots movement from the top down. I wonder what cause(s) they will pick? It's a lot easier to do this when you've got the outrage working for you. What do they really have to be outraged about? Immigration, maybe?

Posted by: PaulB on June 29, 2007 at 7:24 PM | PERMALINK

I expect it'll be another pathetic example of how ineffectual the Right is in cyberspace. Lots of expensive kickoff hoopla, lots of echo-chamber astroturf, a couple of marquee events, and then a slow slide into obscurity, followed by quiet dissolution.

On the plus side, it'll be great Wingnut Welfare for 20-something and 30-something scions of Good People from the Right Families. Beats having them run our Baghdad embassy, I suppose.

Posted by: bleh on June 29, 2007 at 7:27 PM | PERMALINK

There's a word for this - astroturfing.

Leave it to the Republicans to think that the way to go about building a grass roots organization is to first raise venture capital.

Posted by: Disputo on June 29, 2007 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

There are quite a few deep pockets to fund such a venture. I'd look for Scaife to be involved.

Posted by: TJM on June 29, 2007 at 7:36 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, Kevin.

Sour grapes, Kevin. I believe this will be a great success, and I have every reason to believe that it will be more powerful than MoveOn. I will contribute to this.

MoveOver MoveOn! That'd make a great bumbersticker.

Posted by: egbert on June 29, 2007 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

MoveOver MoveOn! That'd make a great bumbersticker.

Proof positive that a right-wing grassroots will never accomplish anything without being spoon-fed and hand-held.

Posted by: Fred on June 29, 2007 at 7:54 PM | PERMALINK

Will this be as much fun as the freepers? Do they promise?

Posted by: Northzax on June 29, 2007 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

Steve Benen >"...a fact that seems to elude those who want to emulate it..."

Not, by any means, the only fact that seems to elude them...

"...playin with matches in a pool of gasoline..." - Swamp Mama Johnson

Posted by: daCascadian on June 29, 2007 at 8:05 PM | PERMALINK

Politic.com is a shill for the right.

Posted by: Sertius on June 29, 2007 at 8:11 PM | PERMALINK

"Limited Government" Wha??? Blakeman must have slept through the last 6 years. The GOP stands for anything BUT limited government now.

Congratulations! Tell the GOP what they've won, Bob!
No Child Left Behind, Prescription Drugs, No Immigration Enforcement, Bankruptcy Reform and an unpopular war.

Posted by: arteclectic on June 29, 2007 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK

God Speaks to Tom Delay. Again.
"God has spoken to me," Delay said. "I listen to God, and what I've heard is that I'm supposed to devote myself to rebuilding the conservative base of the Republican Party, and I think we shouldn't be underestimated."

Posted by: AngryOne on June 29, 2007 at 8:15 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with god, actually. Please, tommy delay, go work on rebuilding the base, and GET THE FUCK OUT of our faces and our gubmint.

tom, god wants you to do this so he doesn't have to pay any attention to you anymore. It's his way of saying 'go away and stop embarassing me by pretending you care.'

Posted by: Northzax on June 29, 2007 at 8:26 PM | PERMALINK

Ah now it becomes clear why we have no peace.....the right wing explains it so clearly....yes the right wing who profess themselves to believe fervently "in peace through strength and limited government."

Well we certainly ain't got the strength....our military is being run into the ground and stretched far too thin and we've totally destroyed our moral strength with the rest of the world.....

and limited government? Yeah right!!!!!

No strength...no limited government....no peace!!!

Posted by: dweb on June 29, 2007 at 8:44 PM | PERMALINK

I can't decide what's funnier.

"We're in the formative stages of creating a new group that will give voice and hope to conservatives everywhere who believe in peace through strength and limited government.

OR

Posted by: mhr on June 29, 2007 at 8:37 PM

Posted by: AkaDad on June 29, 2007 at 8:58 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican campaign model really isn't about bringing new or disaffected people into the process. It is about depressing turnout, alienating unaligned voters, and whipping the base into a frenzy of fear, loathing and resentment, hoping that what is probably no more than 1/4 of the country squeaks by with a 50.1% majority of voters. It's hard to see what use someone like Lee Atwater or Karl Rove would have for a righty netroots, other than to disseminate talking points. But they already have talk radio for that.

Posted by: kth on June 29, 2007 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

So mhr, how are those dates w/Ann Coulter going ? You two are made for each other. Best wishes & may you both go down together.

(and I mean waaaaayyyy down to where it is really, really warm)

Enjoy your ride !

"The water won't clear up 'til we get the hogs out of the creek." - Jim Hightower

Posted by: daCascadian on June 29, 2007 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK

Veteran Republicans say they have quietly raised millions of dollars for a pair of nonprofit organizations that will launch this fall with the ambitious aim of providing a conservative counterweight to the liberal MoveOn.org...

...Which was started by two or three people who scraped together eighty-six bucks to register the domain name and started it from the seat of their pants, filling a void that had existed for some time.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on June 29, 2007 at 9:11 PM | PERMALINK

Please tell me they're going to name it BlackWhite.org.

Posted by: Saam Barrager on June 29, 2007 at 9:15 PM | PERMALINK

It seems the Right is interested in creating its own Center for American Progress than Move On. Of course, the Right already has its own CAP: AEI, Heritage, etc.

One reason Move On exists is because the DNC had done nothing for years to mobilize the grassroots. The RNC was actually quite effective at mobilize grassroots conservatives, even if it did so in a top-down manner. Move On was partially a liberal response to RNC activism, but with a bottom-up approach.

I think the real story here is that conservatives don't trust the RNC anymore to mobilize conservative voters.

Posted by: Elrod on June 29, 2007 at 9:57 PM | PERMALINK

In terms of building a new organization, I suspect it will partly on the outcome of future elections: if you control the Presidency and both houses of Congress, it would be pretty stupid to spend a lot of time building up a network of blog readers. Now that the Republicans have lost the one, and look in danger of losing the former, they may do better. I hardly think that the Republicans are, generally, hopeless in cyberspace: Glenn Reynolds, for example, does pretty well. Bill Gates too, for that matter.

Posted by: y81 on June 29, 2007 at 10:21 PM | PERMALINK

...Which was started by two or three people who scraped together eighty-six bucks to register the domain name and started it from the seat of their pants, filling a void that had existed for some time.

Moveon.org was created by the founders of Berkeley Systems, who had just sold their company for about $14 million. Their current funding isn't exactly coming from grade schoolers sending in their pennies, either.

Of course, your version makes a much better story.

Posted by: elmendorf on June 29, 2007 at 10:24 PM | PERMALINK

The right's MoveOn.org

The Sturmabteilung?

Posted by: Swan on June 29, 2007 at 11:12 PM | PERMALINK

Sturmabteilung

Posted by: Swan on June 29, 2007 at 11:15 PM | PERMALINK

Whenever you try to emulate something you don't understand you are bound to fail. It is sort of like the left trying to emulate Rush Limbaugh. Can't be done. Same with the right trying to emulate Jon Stewart. As Fox proved it can't be done.

Conservatives would be better off to figure out a goal without reference to moveon.org and then build a structure to accomplish that goal. If their goal is a "right wing" moveon.org they are screwed.

Posted by: corpus juris on June 29, 2007 at 11:29 PM | PERMALINK

I'm perfectly happy to let a few deep pocketed right wing asshats waste their money trying to recreate the brownshirts.

Posted by: Col Bat Guano on June 29, 2007 at 11:30 PM | PERMALINK

Mass movements and collectivism come a lot more naturally to the Left than to the Right.

Posted by: rnc on June 29, 2007 at 11:48 PM | PERMALINK

I'm over hear clutching my head like a stunned monkey, reading all these reactions to this news. Do you people really not understand what function the "grass roots" performs in conservative politics? Do not delude yourselves into believing that the people behind this effort are clueless about that. They aren't.

They don't want to build another bottom-up right-wing jackfest like Freeperville or Grassfire. What they want is an efficient Internet-enabled method for collecting and focusing the attention of right-wing authoritarian followers. If they do this "properly," then you will be looking at a powerful recruiting tool for right-wing political issues campaigns. Of course, it won't resemble MoveOn.Org in the slightest, but that shouldn't be a surprise— which is one reason why they say they want to build a conservative answer to MoveOn.Org: it's a total lie, and they lie like fish breathe water.

They want to build an American völkisch movement for the 21st century, one that actually understands power and how to mobilize its population for direct, mass political action. I think they can do it, but it remains to be seen how large it can really grow. Demographics are a head-wind for them.

Posted by: s9 on June 29, 2007 at 11:55 PM | PERMALINK

There seem to be an awful lot of gratuitous Nazi references here.

It's odd. Every major government in the past century that killed hundreds of thousands to millions of its own citizens as a matter of official policy...

...called itself "socialist."

Posted by: hqt on June 30, 2007 at 12:01 AM | PERMALINK

Elmendorf,
as a former employee at BerkSys, I'll tell you:
1) the 14 Million didn't just go to them. (but, well, a bunch of it. )
2) Wes & Joan, while not perfect bosses, are earnest and honest. A good start for any endeavor.
3) They saw the potential for an internet based political movement far before the rest of the pack.
4) It was built from the bottom, using their own money, not some sugar daddy trying to puff an idea from above.

Posted by: MobiusKlein on June 30, 2007 at 12:07 AM | PERMALINK

Of course, your version makes a much better story.

Jeez - I thought I had been here long enough that the snark would be apparent. Or are you just obtuse?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on June 30, 2007 at 12:23 AM | PERMALINK

Conservatives defend their ideology better than we defend ours. It might work better than you imagine.

Unfortunately.

Posted by: KBusch on June 30, 2007 at 12:44 AM | PERMALINK

I expect it to have the same success as the left's efforts to duplicate the right's talk radio, i.e., a miserable failure.

Posted by: Red State Mover Oner on June 30, 2007 at 12:52 AM | PERMALINK

Every major government in the past century that killed hundreds of thousands to millions of its own citizens as a matter of official policy... ...called itself "socialist."

Are you really so dumb that you don't know what happened to the German Jews during WWII, or are you one of those ignoramuses who insist that the Nazis were socialists and not fascists?

Not to mention the Armenia genocide, the Guatemalan genocide, East Timor, Bangladesh, Rwanda, and Darfur, just to name a few that had nothing to do with socialist gvmts.

Posted by: Disputo on June 30, 2007 at 1:02 AM | PERMALINK

Are you really so dumb that you don't know what happened to the German Jews during WWII, or are you one of those ignoramuses who insist that the Nazis were socialists and not fascists?

I are good conservative. me know the nazi mean National Socialist. libruls kill de jooos.

Posted by: meep on June 30, 2007 at 1:12 AM | PERMALINK

hqt:
The Japanese never called themselves socialists. (cf. The Rape of Nanking)
There's no 'Socialist' in the name Rwandan Patriotic Front.
And, oh yeah, what part of the term 'pogrom' do you not understand?

Posted by: pbg on June 30, 2007 at 1:16 AM | PERMALINK

The right wants its own MoveOn.org

Bring. It. On....Please. I asked nicely?

Posted by: elmo on June 30, 2007 at 1:28 AM | PERMALINK

That Anne Frank reference is worth at least five points.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on June 30, 2007 at 1:56 AM | PERMALINK

For that matter, I think the right's been confused about MoveOn's appeal for a while. The group doesn't follow a top-down model; it's the other way around.

The right doesn't understand grass roots movements at all. They are the German generals in 1914 who could only believe that the French and Belgian citizens sniping from their kitchen windows were organized and controlled by the central governments.

Posted by: Boronx on June 30, 2007 at 2:27 AM | PERMALINK

egbert: "MoveOver MoveOn! That'd make a great bumbersticker."

Funny: that's exactly how Dick Cheney refers to your ass.

Posted by: Kenji on June 30, 2007 at 2:46 AM | PERMALINK

What? Al doesn't work weekends? He's such a sad little bastard, living here day after day with his sad refutations based on semi-hidden right wing mouthpieces. C'mon, you idiot, you have to respond to this. It just wouldn't be the same.

Posted by: Toodle on June 30, 2007 at 2:58 AM | PERMALINK

Spooked by MoveOn.org, conservative movement seeks to emulate liberal powerhouse

http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=177

Where the Money Leads

http://www.mediatransparency.org/wherethemoneyleads.php

Posted by: YouSendMe on June 30, 2007 at 3:41 AM | PERMALINK

i certainly hope tom delay stays involved in whatever project they decide on. i mean after all, his previous cyberspace endeavors have proven to be so successful. what, his 'grass roots" personal blog lasted all of 15 minutes.

keep up the good work tom!

Posted by: bama_barrron on June 30, 2007 at 3:43 AM | PERMALINK

There seem to be an awful lot of gratuitous Nazi references here.

It's odd. Every major government in the past century that killed hundreds of thousands to millions of its own citizens as a matter of official policy...

...called itself "socialist."

Except for all the ones that didn't...

And according to our own CIA, the worst mass murder of the last century where a government killed it's own people (with our help) occured in Indonesia in 1965. You asshats are history. Wake up and die right.

A CIA study of the events in Indonesia assessed that "In terms of the numbers killed the anti-PKI massacres in Indonesia rank as one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century..."

Posted by: LWM on June 30, 2007 at 3:47 AM | PERMALINK

Every major government in the past century that killed hundreds of thousands to millions of its own citizens as a matter of official policy... ...called itself "socialist."

Of course, the Nazis were "socialist" in the same sense that the government of German Democratic Republic was "democratic".

Rightards buy into marketing so fucking easily.

Posted by: Apprentice to Darth Holden on June 30, 2007 at 4:13 AM | PERMALINK

This really isn't your problem, but it appears that a fairly scary bunch has hijacked ThinkProgress. I really have no idea how you guys monitor your blogs or websites, but things have skewed downhill over there. Threats of violence, etc. do your fellow blogger a favor and figure out just what's going on over there. It appears these folks know eachother, but they may be in separate jail cells, in which case, I suppose, no worries.

Posted by: Ut-oh on June 30, 2007 at 4:55 AM | PERMALINK

What Moveon.org has is George Soros who has been willing to spend the billions he made attacking the British Pound and the Hong Kong dollar on his crusade (pardon the pun) to remake the US in some image that exists only in his mind. You can think grassroots but it is Astroturf.

Posted by: Mike K on June 30, 2007 at 5:37 AM | PERMALINK

While I've recovered from the fear of imminent danger that I felt when I posted the above. My awareness of the stewing violence hasn't waivered. Kind of odd, I've got no-one to tell, but I see an enormous change . . . gangs using the internet. The internet as a radical, forceful mechanism for change, and not in a good way. Changing this inevitability requires more vision and courage than anyone I can think of in government has. Unfortunately, it's like a tidal wave. It's coming.

Posted by: Ut-oh on June 30, 2007 at 5:37 AM | PERMALINK

Check out "City of Fear." Vanity Fair, April 2007. "Operating by cell phone, a highly organized prison gang launched an attack that shut down Brazil's largest city last May, with authorities powerless to stop it. For many in Sao Paulo, this vast, amorphous criminal network is the only government they know." By William Langewiesche.

It could never happen here. . . Give me a break, Bush & Cheney happened here.

Posted by: Ut-oh on June 30, 2007 at 5:45 AM | PERMALINK

George Soros is brilliant. We owe him thanks.

Thank you Mr. Soros. After traveling to Hungary and enjoying so many extraordinary experiences in Budapest (sp?), I am pleased to let you know that it was a great trip. From the Hell House and cemetaries to the enchanting beauty, grace and hospitality that your friends and countrymen so graciously shared, I am forever enriched for having had the experience. Emotions ranged from one end of the spectrum to the other. I am horribly, beautifully aware. Enchante.

Again Mr. Soros, thank you.

Posted by: Ut-oh on June 30, 2007 at 6:12 AM | PERMALINK

The trouble with this concept is that conservative viewpoints are generally not very popular when explicitly stated. Most people hold liberal viewpoints (i.e. they want universal payer health care, a clean environment, privacy in their sexual preferences, etc.), even though they may claim to be conservative politically. As a result, conservatives only win national elections through massive voter fraud as we saw in Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 and deception and misdirection, such as marketing George W. Bush as a "compassionate conservative" when he was nothing of the sort.

Conservatism is sort of like that green slime that grows under the rim of your toilet bowl. It grows just fine in the warm darkness, but drag it into the bright sunlight and it withers and dies.

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on June 30, 2007 at 6:27 AM | PERMALINK

Conservative Deflator:

I'm bored so I'll bite.

#1 The trouble with the concept - #1 Concept? Please refreash. I have no idea what concept you're all upset about.

#2. Identify a conservative? Which allegedly liberal viewpoints do you find not so great? Not a big deal, but unless I know how I'm being a left-wing "nut case", I can hardly defend against it.

FYI, I really like Bald Eagles, Springer Spaniels, and Yorkies.

but . . what's wrong with people?

Posted by: Green Acres on June 30, 2007 at 7:15 AM | PERMALINK

Ahhh yes... the old "George Soros runs everything" bit.
The right can't understand people having an opinion without being told what to think by some leader.

Posted by: craig on June 30, 2007 at 7:17 AM | PERMALINK

Look, I'm going to help you out. You've got views, but need to frame answers.. . .

I have always just been so lucky.

Mom and Dad are great, they love me, love eachother.

Dad's kind of a hottie. We live in N. Dakota. He was a rodeo rider, ma was a groupie. of course they had hot kids.

Daddy got hurt and bought a McDonald's franchise, and who knew, ole rodeo rider bought a couple more. Mom was tall so she entered the Ms. Nebraska contest and won. Ma and Pa look like identical Quepe dolls. How do you spell that ? Kweppi dolls? any way, they are so in love with the way they look, when they saw their mirror image, Kweppi doll loves mirror image Kweppi doll. I just want to run away from home. Ugh. can't be here any more.

Posted by: Yale on June 30, 2007 at 7:25 AM | PERMALINK

don't freak. life is good. I'm happily at home.

Posted by: Yale on June 30, 2007 at 7:29 AM | PERMALINK

Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that right-wingers think that the grassroots group MoveOn.org was founded by George Soros?

Posted by: Avedon on June 30, 2007 at 7:32 AM | PERMALINK

Craig,

Eh?

Posted by: Green Acres on June 30, 2007 at 7:36 AM | PERMALINK

Avedon,

Not really sure where you're comming from, but I, while certainly deferring to the man himself, wouldn't call Soros a liberal, or an anti republican. He's my sort of role-model and right is right, wrong is wrong and labels are irrelevent. If forced to classify the man, I would say liberal, just because he suffered at the hands of wing-nuts.

Posted by: Green Acres on June 30, 2007 at 7:44 AM | PERMALINK

That response is flaky.

Soros is a man of principle, not lables. Lables are meaningless.

He watched the murders of people he loved in the name of wretched politics. He watched people flee, too much to get into.

He has spent a lifetime trying to insure that this fate does not befall you, me, our parents, sisters, brothers, neices and nephews. My god, to think that others lost these people.

I really can't go on. Too painful. Soros knows and has invested his soul to insure it doesn't happen again.

Posted by: Green Acres on June 30, 2007 at 7:51 AM | PERMALINK

MoveOn drew support because it had a cause

that and a party/leader to rally behind, and supporters! Doesn`t the abysmal GOP polling suggest that maybe this isn`t the right time? Don`t those remaining +/-35% supporters GOPers may be:
A. not that enthusiastic (center)

B. not flexible enough to build a cohesive social system with? The right, minuteman could clash with the corporate GOP funding and Latino Christian right. OTOH The white christian right demonstrably swallows everything for the voice of Bush on an anti-abortion rally, right Foley?

c. with 41% thinking there is a 9/11 Saddam link, not in tune with politics enough to know there is such a thing as moveon-from-the-katrina-cheney-wmd-thing-already.org?

But a top down approach might work. It has some sort of effct for Putin and his Nashi Putin youth. (BBC video, translation of the manifesto) And reading the presidential advance team manual about organizing a Bush speech I would say the GOP is well on its way.

Posted by: asdf on June 30, 2007 at 8:04 AM | PERMALINK

Welcome to iraq.

Posted by: Green Acres on June 30, 2007 at 8:06 AM | PERMALINK

Isn't it interesting how presidential candidates without a prayer of being nominated, let alone elected, continue to get good press.

Think John McCain and John Edwards, whose campaigns tanked months ago.

Think Barack Obama who gets fantastic press even though he's been stuck in the mud ever since he became a candidate.

The press just cannot give up its toys, even when they're broken. Well, maybe, just maybe, someone will come along with some glue and and and . . .

Posted by: giveitup on June 30, 2007 at 8:28 AM | PERMALINK

Green Acres, I'm coming from the knowledge that MoveOn.org had existed for years before Soros decided to give them some money - the reverse of the right-wing process in which the whole conservative movement has largely been funded top-to-bottom by a small number of extremely rich extremists like Scaife et al.

(Huh. I assumed that if a reader wanted to know where I was coming from, they could click on my name and go to my web page, but I just noticed that it only gives my e-mail address. I wonder what the point of asking for my URL in the info fields is if it's not going to show up in the post. You can find out where I'm coming from at http://sideshow.me.uk

Posted by: Avedon on June 30, 2007 at 8:39 AM | PERMALINK

I got glue@ McCain, you're kinda sol, my glue don't work for you. Obama, I got glue, but what's happened to you? No glue till you explain hou Cheney's bad acts are not so grave that the fail to raise to the level of an impeachable offense.

WTF do you gotta do? Kill 3,500 soldiers? Lie about nuclear weapons in order to get us into a war? Out a lovely CIA agent, thereby, possibly getting her killed, but no doubt leaving her without a job? Makint more than $300 million in Halliburton stock while giving the ole Halliburton no-bid contracts and just plain profiteering off the war in the first place, Oh, so many more places for me to show how you screwed America, but attention spans run short . . .

Posted by: Santa's Elf on June 30, 2007 at 8:39 AM | PERMALINK

Look, anyone with a functioning brain realizes how the "right" works...they want all the toots and whistles for themselves but NO ONE else. I could care less if they fund their propaganda groups (they always have, btw)...but as with the "fairness doctrine" issue they spin and skew facts to make themselves the VICTIMS of all situations. Listening to Richard Viguery (?) on AAR last week give every response to questions asked that poor conservatives couldn't be heard on radio while the FD was in effect...so, their answer to that, take over AM RADIO (by having corporations consolidate the markets - thanks BILL) and deny that to the other side all the while saying it's only fair because of what they went through! UGH! They care NOTHING about America/free speech/facts/information...it's all about MONEY, GAYS, OIL, and ABORTION...and meanwhile their little brains shrink even more down to only their talking points!!!

Posted by: Dancer on June 30, 2007 at 8:47 AM | PERMALINK

It actually would be great for dems if that lonesome 15% pooled all their money together and spouted off on National TV.

My guess is that the backwash will be hard to swallow.

Posted by: B on June 30, 2007 at 9:02 AM | PERMALINK

Moveon? Republicans will MOVE OUT (ha ha) in 2009 when dems control the House, the Senate and win the presidency.
Too late for the right wing noise machine

Posted by: consider wisely on June 30, 2007 at 9:07 AM | PERMALINK

Actually if they want a rightwing version of MoveOn why don't they just give a ton of money to the Minutemen or Operation Rescue?

Posted by: B on June 30, 2007 at 9:11 AM | PERMALINK

Seems to be a lot of substance abusers posting this morning or just the chronically insane...

Posted by: Joe Bob Briggs on June 30, 2007 at 9:33 AM | PERMALINK

There seem to be an awful lot of gratuitous Nazi references here.

It's odd. Every major government in the past century that killed hundreds of thousands to millions of its own citizens as a matter of official policy...

...called itself "socialist."

The Nazis included the word socialist in their name as a matter of showmanship, not as a relefection of policy. They worked to defeat the power of unions, they shot communists in the street even well before Hitler became the ruler of Germany (months and years preceding his assuming chancellorship), they always publicly derided communists and socialists. It was well-known what they stood for. Hitler was a dedicated right-ringer and the party he joined, took control of, and and eventually changed the name of to the National Socialist German Workers' Party was a hard-right group principally distinguished for its anti-semitism before and after he joined it.

The Nazis appealed to a broad spectrum of society, because they thought it was the easiest way to get powerful. Their base was middle-class assholes, like the Republicans' is in the U.S. But communism was fairly powerful in Germany, and communist and socialist parties always commanded a sizeable pluarlity of the pre-Hitler voters, so Hitler included the "socialist" word in the name to make the party sound like there was something working-classy about it, and because he did at times find it convenient to form alliances with the communist party to get things going in the Reichstag (parliament). For their part, the German commies only worked with the Nazis (when the SA weren't throwing rocks at them in the street) as purely a matter of convenience, and at the direction of the COMINTERN- even though some people could see Hitler for the dangerous demagogue he was before he assumed power, the international communist party advise its people in Germany to work with Hitler for basically the same reasons he was working with them: purely as a self-interested matter of convenience. They incorrectly thought the Nazis were just a passing fad, and because of the Nazis' perennial command of a fair pluarlity of reichstag votes, the commies found it convenient to form intermittent alliances with them to advance a reichstag agenda, when they couldn't form an alliance with popular parties like the old conservative party (fat chance of being able to form an alliance with them).

The Nazis were nothing like German socialists and everyone knew it. Using the word socialist just gave them a whiff of working-class street cred. Hitler even turned on the working class, (relatively, for Nazis) left portion of his party and squashed their pro-worker agenda.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 9:47 AM | PERMALINK

I'm pretty liberal but I did find this a bit ironic. Couldn't the same be said for Air America? I mean, I was really excited when Gore was talking about getting involved in this years ago but in the back of my mind, I thought...hrm...we're creating something to counter something rather than it coming about on its own. That's not a recipe for success..just as this venture by the wingnuts will surely fail.

Posted by: Dandaman on June 30, 2007 at 10:04 AM | PERMALINK

Oh yeah, don't forget the Nazis sent thousands of people to concentration camps just for being communists.

Hostility to coomunism was actually one of the pricipal selling points of Nazi propaganda (i.e., Nazi speeches in their run-up to power) and Nazi propaganda assoicated communism with the Jews.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK

I say we help them out by impeaching Cheney. We need to provide fodder for the reich-wing nut fascist wackos.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 10:56 AM | PERMALINK

A right-wing MoveOn.org? Why don't they call it the Pansy Division?

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

"Hostility to coomunism was actually one of the pricipal selling points of Nazi propaganda (i.e., Nazi speeches in their run-up to power) and Nazi propaganda assoicated communism with the Jews."

Very correct and true. In many of Hitler's speeches, he very tightly conflates Jews and Bolshevism. He considered Bolshevism a Jewish plot.

This fact, the hatred of Bolshevism and the conflation of Bolshevism and Jewishness, is one reason why morons like Jonah Goldberg is such a fucking idiot. He is apparently schlepping some book around in which he tries to make the case that the left is fascist. This is so fucking stupid that I am amazed that anyone would even try to write it, but that is Jonah Goldberg for you - the demonstration that today's conservatives are deliberately and totally idiotic.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 11:00 AM | PERMALINK

The big question I want to ask this or any "conservative organization": What are you really trying to achieve? I mean, is it really populist minimal government in principle, or just a cover for pro-capital owners/financiers/developers/christianists/Israel lobby/Republican establishment forces to get what they want by any means available?

Posted by: Neil B. on June 30, 2007 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK

Democrats, in 2008, are going to do the following, and Dickless Mike should write this down:

1) Hold 80 % of the HoR seats newly won in 2006.

2) Gain 4-5 new HoR seats from Repukeliscum. In particular, we will gain the following: CT-02, FL-13, IL-10, CA-04, CA-Miller, CA-Lewis. That's six, now that I count.

3) Hold all senate seats.

4) Win 2-3 Senate seats. NH, CO, MN, possibly KY, TX and NM.

5) Win POTUS.

So, dream on, Boz. We're gonna kick your skanky little butt in 2008. We are POed, and it's our time. You fuckoffs have tried your ideas, and they have been total failures.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

"The Nazis included the word socialist in their name as a matter of showmanship, not as a relefection of policy. They worked to defeat the power of unions, they shot communists in the street even well before Hitler became the ruler of Germany (months and years preceding his assuming chancellorship), they always publicly derided communists and socialists. It was well-known what they stood for. Hitler was a dedicated right-ringer and the party he joined, took control of, and and eventually changed the name of to the National Socialist German Workers' Party was a hard-right group principally distinguished for its anti-semitism before and after he joined it."

Very true, again. Hitler's character, and the overall policy direction of the NSDAP was forged in two events: WWI and the little German civil war following the Peace of Versailles. There were pitched battles in many cities between the communists (many of them in the armed forces) and the anti-communist forces (some of them home guard). Germany was very close to becoming a communist state at that point.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK

When Repubs meet up on the Internet, the only ideas that are shared are usually hate speech, personal attacks (some bordering on violence) directed at Democrats, and the issuing of right wing Fatwahs against the target of the day (see Dixie Chicks, Michael Moore, Dan Rather and the woman who committed suicide after Michele Malkin sicced her thugs on her).
That's why you read about so many fake anthrax letters getting mailed to "Libruls". They caught one of the wingnuts mailing those letters and it turned out he was a 35 year old Freeper who lived in his Mom's basement.

Posted by: OxyCon on June 30, 2007 at 12:10 PM | PERMALINK

There were pitched battles in many cities between the communists (many of them in the armed forces) and the anti-communist forces (some of them home guard). Germany was very close to becoming a communist state at that point.

Maybe you know more than me, but according to what I read, it was more like the commies were an under-25% plurality for all of the post-WWI/pre-Reich days- not on the verge of taking over, just an influence. Also, the anti-communists who physically fought the communists were principally the Stahlhelm (think of an ultra-right version of the American Legion) and the SA. And, the Stahlhelm and the SA were the ones picking the fights- it wasn't a civil war, more like the SA starting street violence for its propaganda purposes.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Rightards buy into marketing so fucking easily.

That explains me!!

Posted by: "W" on June 30, 2007 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Also, my comment should have said "Hitler was a dedicated right-winger" not "Hitler was a dedicated right-ringer."

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK

"Stahlhelm" = "Steel Helmet," for the German-challenged.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 12:26 PM | PERMALINK

I have no idea what Soros has in mind for the country other than his hatred for Bush.

That's a good place to start. I should think that anyone that loves this country would hate what Bush has done to it. If you're still a Bush lickspittle Mike - I'm afraid I know what you have in mind for this country.

Posted by: ckelly on June 30, 2007 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Swan:

I am reading the new Hitler biography by Ian Kershaw. I highly recommend, although it is very long (2 volumes of 1000 pages each). Excellent, detailed, very thorough.

Volume 1, page 110-114, discusses the German Revolution of 1919. There was an uprising in Bavaria, with 15000 or so discharged veterans. The leader, Rosa Luxemborg, is a well known name, she was murdered. In Munich, there was a rising. The problem with it occurred because there were great pushes for land reform, which immediately set the countryside against the workers in the cities, and the whole movement collapsed very quickly when the Prussian troops arrived.

It ended in May 1919. But Hitler was right there, and it was an important influence.

People today do not understand the extreme reactions in 1918-1919-1920 about events in the Soviet Union. Very powerful on Hitler.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 12:52 PM | PERMALINK

"That's a good place to start. I should think that anyone that loves this country would hate what Bush has done to it. If you're still a Bush lickspittle Mike - I'm afraid I know what you have in mind for this country."

If you don't hate Bush, you are an idiot. He is a fascist, and has done impeachable things to the country. He is shielding Cheney and this guy should be tried for treason and appropriately handled following his conviction.

Hatred of Bush is the ONLY possible response by a person who is awake.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

Swan:

You are probably correct in most of your details.

Posted by: POed Lib on June 30, 2007 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

Hitler dallied a bit with socialism before he opted for nationalism. He was heavily influenced by Mussolini in 1922 to switch to the far right and after the Putsch, retained little socialism and much hyped-up nationalism in his "Staatsrecht."

And Disputo, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Kim Jung-Il, Stalin, Mao are all examples of "socialist leadership" that killed or is killing dozens of millions of people. You just can't dispute those facts.

Posted by: daveinboca on June 30, 2007 at 1:14 PM | PERMALINK

Going over some of the delusional ditherings of nutrooters on top-down versus the "grass roots" of the left----anyone familiar with Soros and the university campus networks co-opting their students into agitprop for Eur-utopian "models" knows that the elitists are running the ultra-left agenda.

Not to mention free PR from MSM and cash donations from mindless Hollyweirdo GED's with money.

Posted by: daveinboca on June 30, 2007 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK

POed Liberal, I am reading Nazi Germany & World War II by Donald D. Wall. Recommended, but I can't figure out if he's a closet-Nazi or not yet. A little too gushing in some of his praise for Hitler, in my opinion. I can't figure out why you're bothering to read a whole long biography of Hitler. You might as well talk to your local nutcase homeless man if you want to figure out Hitler.

I don't know about your claim that Rosa Luxemburg led 15,000 troops, but maybe you're correct. According to the book I'm reading, the little communist uprisings were put down by the Freikorps, a little gang of ultra-right wing veterans, vigilantes- not Prussian troops.

But what I think you're omitting is that the SA and the Stahlhelm basically rioted in the streets against communists continually and well after the little uprisings you're talking about.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 1:42 PM | PERMALINK

"socialist leadership"

Socialist in name only, maybe, but no more truly socialist than Pat Robertson is a true Christian and not a heretic.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINK

It's amazing the amount of work leftists will go to to distance their own collectivist philosophy from fascist collectivist philosophy.

It's all the same thing when it ends up at the extremes. The absolute primacy of the State/Collective over the individual, and destruction of individual rights. What follows is always the inevitable treatment of individuals as dispensable cogs, and whether a Party is running the death camps or some Leader is doing it makes no difference to the victims.

Stalin and Hitler were not even two sides of the same coin. They were on the same side.

So Hitler and Stalin fought bitterly (after an earlier alliance that had the American Left pushing against a war). That doesn't place them on opposite philosophical poles any more than gang wars between the Crips and the Bloods shows they're any different from each other.

Posted by: hqt on June 30, 2007 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

"Conservatives had the think tanks, the massive membership organizations, the media outlets...."

The Media Outlets? In what Bizzaro World, Steve-o?

Posted by: Brian on June 30, 2007 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

And Disputo, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Kim Jung-Il, Stalin, Mao are all examples of "socialist leadership" that killed or is killing dozens of millions of people. You just can't dispute those facts.

Cough cough Sweden ahem

Posted by: MillionthMonkey on June 30, 2007 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

the media outlets: Faux News, which is just a Republican mouthpiece, more biased than the SCLM despite it's claims of being fair and balanced.

Posted by: Neil B. on June 30, 2007 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

Brian, even Bill the bloody Kristol and Pat Buchanan admit that the liberal media is a myth, but one they are gleefully willing to exploit to further their ends. Here is a link that backs up the assertion that the bias is the other way.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on June 30, 2007 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

Brian, even Bill the bloody Kristol and Pat Buchanan admit that the liberal media is a myth, but one they are gleefully willing to exploit to further their ends. Here is a link that backs up the assertion that the bias is the other way.

Now go down that list again and tick off those who are regularly shown on network news, cable news (other than Fox), or routinely in mainstream papers like the New York Times. It's a bit shorter, isn't it?

Redefining the term "liberal" as "left wing pundits" who are "advocates for progressive causes" kind of tilts the balance a bit, too. It sweeps a whole load of Democrats off the table who would certainly consider themselves liberals if you asked them. Certainly John Leo is no further right than Michael Kinsley is left.

The number of Democrats and liberals working in the news media dwarfs the number of Republicans. You might say that's unimportant, but if the number were the other way around, I suspect you'd feel differently.

Posted by: elmendorf on June 30, 2007 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

Millionthmonkey:

That Sweden is an exception doesn't change the rule.

Posted by: elmendorf on June 30, 2007 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

hqt:

Then are you against taking things to extremes, or are you against the collectivist mentality? Because Stalin and Hitler's crimes are goods examples of taking things to extremes, but they're not good examples of the collectivist mentality- unless they're used as examples of taking collectivism to an extreme.

Your last sentence about Hitler and Stalin is a strawman- no one would seriously argue that because Hitler and Stalin fought each other, Stalin was not like Hitler. You just made that up + put words in my mouth to try to make your arguments look better. Of course, I didn't write anything like your strawman argument, as checking out my comments will prove.

Your use of a strawman proves that you are a deceiver and probably more like Hitler than you are like George W. Bush.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 3:51 PM | PERMALINK

While Hitler and Stalin's regimes may be examples of bad that have coincided with collectivism being taken to extremes, this does not mean that larger doses of collectivism than we have now- say, state-run health care- would not be good, or even that collectivism taken to extremes would never be good, so long as it was not run by a Hitler or a Stalin and not taken to the kinds of extremes that they took it to.

Posted by: Swan on June 30, 2007 at 4:10 PM | PERMALINK

POed Lib: "If you don't hate Bush, you are an idiot."

I don't "hate" Bush, and I'm not an idiot. I simply despise the man, and refuse to let my emotions cloud my judgment of what needs to be done to reverse course.

There will indeed be a day of reckoning for these people, and our revenge will be a dish that's best served ice cold.

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on June 30, 2007 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK
he left's efforts to duplicate the right's talk radio… Red State Mover Oner at 12:52 AM
Right wing talk radio is based on deception, resentment, racism, and inchoate rage. Rightwing radio relies sound bites, 10-second cures for complex issues, name calling and creating an enemy out there, an enemy that blocks the utopian Republican State.
What Moveon.org has is George Soros….Mike Kook at 5:37 AM
Another tired old canard. Soros has nothing to do with founding Move On or Media Matters. If you want to whine about foreign influence in American politics, look to your Rev Moon and his media or Murdock and his. Posted by: Mike on June 30, 2007 at 5:12 PM | PERMALINK

To raise funds, the neocons could start up a guns for cash exchange in cities with buy-back programs. Surely, Gonzales' DoJ would support such a program. Walk in armed and loaded, exit thru the rear with cash and buy back "used government surplus" at a discount. Heck, upgrade. It's a win-win.

They could even set up an army recruiting station in the back lot. Too much fun!

Posted by: enuf on June 30, 2007 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK

"Another tired old canard. Soros has nothing to do with founding Move On or Media Matters. "

If you are trying to carry on a debate, it helps to respond to the points made, not what you imagine someone said. Soros has taken over Moveon and he has coopted the UN through Mark Malloch Brown who is his creature. Unfortunately, Gordon Brown has just raised Malloch Brown to the peerage and placed him in the foreign policy establishment of the new government. This is ominous unless you approve of his role in Oil-for-palaces. Britain is far closer to a fascist dictatorship than we are or will ever be. As George Orwell pointed out, his 1984 was based on his experience at the BBC with left wing dogooders, not the Nazis or communists.

Posted by: Mike K on July 1, 2007 at 3:51 AM | PERMALINK

"...so Hitler included the "socialist" word in the name to make the party sound like there was something working-classy about it, and because he did at times find it convenient to form alliances with the communist party to get things going in the Reichstag (parliament)."

So most of what Swan's said is correct, but the existence of a Nazi party predates Hitler joining, and it sold itself as a socialist party from the beginning.

Hitler purged most of the older, more left-leaning elements once he took power.

It's also true that the Nazis (and the Italian Fascists) introduced a number of socialist policies, like public works programs and financial support for new families.

I'm not entirely sure what this is meant to prove though. The Nazis also developed the first modern highway system in Germany-- does this mean everyone who wants to build highways in the US is secretly planning genocide? Should we force regime change on the next African president who promises to improve his country's roads?

Posted by: DBake on July 1, 2007 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

daveinboca spews:

And Disputo, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Kim Jung-Il, Stalin, Mao are all examples of "socialist leadership" that killed or is killing dozens of millions of people.

Congrats. That's got to be the worse ad hominem ever directed at me. It is certainly the first time anyone has ever accused me of killing dozens of millions of people.

You people are beyond shame.

Posted by: Disputo on July 1, 2007 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

Blue Girl,

That link is evidence of exactly nothing. The MSM is mostly liberal - that's all there is to it. It's not as biased as was, but it is still biased.

Posted by: Brian on July 1, 2007 at 6:56 PM | PERMALINK

A right-wing MoveOn.org, eh? What will they call it?

MoveBackwards.org?
MoveAway.org?
MoveNowhere.org?
MoveInCircles.org?

Verily, the mind doth boggle,
-Z

Posted by: Adam on July 1, 2007 at 9:19 PM | PERMALINK

That link is evidence of exactly nothing. The MSM is mostly liberal - that's all there is to it. It's not as biased as was, but it is still biased.

And this is why any attempt to create a right-wing MoveOn will fail. Those of us who care whether or not the information we are receiving is -- what's the word? ah, yes... "true" -- tend to require some sort of evidence. Responding to a supported argument with denial and "and that's all there is to it" doesn't cut it.

But since the right seems to think that MoveOn is nothing more than a propaganda machine, churning out the same kind of empty talking points on which they themselves make their bread and butter, I have not doubt they will succeed in spending lots of money on an online forum to do just that. Whether anyone is actually listening, well...

Posted by: Jeremy on July 2, 2007 at 9:59 AM | PERMALINK

Remember Stephen Colbert: "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

-Z

Posted by: Adam on July 2, 2007 at 10:29 AM | PERMALINK

I say good luck to them. Facts have a well-known liberal bias, and the conservative movement is bankrupt, which are two compelling reasons why any mirror-images of MoveOn ain't going to cut it.

Posted by: Xanthippas on July 2, 2007 at 11:28 AM | PERMALINK

This effort at grassroots internet action from the so-called right won't work for the same reason Air America didn't work, because it's an effort to creat something from the top down rather than the bottom up.

The RNC and or big heeled donors did not create Rush Limbaugh. He became big because he's good at what he does (or at least he used to be) and when he became popular it convinced other dying AM radio stations his format could work for them with similar kinds of hosts.

Now there are liberals that are good at that format as well but there's just not a lot of them because they are not interested in such a format and because NPR and FM takes up much of the potential audience for such shows. It's not a conspiracy, it's just the way the market has sorted itself out, driven consumer tastes and attitudes.

The same goes for internet activism. No group of big donors or politicos started MoveOn.org or Daily Kos, they sprung from the ground up and became popular because it fit the tastes and attitudes of many people on the web.

It's interesting to note that the first such politically driven website to engage in real activism was Free Republic.com during the late 1990s. That was an organically created website too by a man named Jim Robinson who, ticked off that the old Prodigy web boards kept censoring his comments about Bill Clinton, started his own site and it became very popular and very effective. I doubt if Bill Clinton's impeachment would have taken place without Free Republic and that group of activists that helped stop the a Miami re-count in the 2000 elections came from Freeperville as well.

But then came the Bush Presidency and that copyright lawsuit against FR by the Washington Post. Pretty soon Robinson was hustling for big money to pay his site's bills and GOP flunkies and donors took over the place. Those who didn't toe the party line like myself were thrown out. Then came 9-11 and the war in Iraq and Freeperville then became Jonestown (or should I say Bushtown) and its organic nature was lost forever in groupthink and offical propaganda.

It's not that conservatives are not on the web, they're all over it just as liberal are. It's just that the decentralized nature of the web unsettles and even offends them as leats from a political activist standpoint. They like things done from the top-down in a structured setting. I'm sorry but I doubt if a lot of activists in the hinterlands are waiting to take orders from Tom DeLay. It's amazing how little the GOP and or conservative politicians utilize the web either for raising money or to organize campaigns. For people who supposedly believe in the free market, they certainly do prefer corpratism.

Do you think it's a coincidence that the lone GOP candidate who any kind of web presence whatsoever outside of official channels is the paleolibertarian Ron Paul? I don't.

Posted by: Sean Scallon on July 2, 2007 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

Hello, my name is Jessica, I like yours blog, i with pleasure shall support a theme.

Posted by: christmas stockings on November 9, 2007 at 1:54 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly