November 28, 2007
The Anti-War Movement Moves On
In the weeks and months following the much-anticipated congressional testimony from Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker on the progress of the Iraq war, the anti-war movement has been eerily silent.
Compared with the outcry that accompanied previous failed attempts by Congress to pass a timetable for withdrawal, the most recent vote came and went without much noise from MoveOn.org, Americans United for Change and the umbrella group Americans Against Escalation in Iraq. Aside from the occasional Code Pink outburst and angry op-ed, liberal activists seem to have refocused their energies on health care and other domestic issues.
Nowhere is this retreat more noticeable than on the airwaves. After a relentless ad push beginning in midsummer and continuing in the days immediately following the Petraeus and Crocker report, anti-war interest groups largely fell off the radar this fall. According to NationalJournal.com's Ad Spotlight archives (subscription), the most recent broadcast issue ad focused on ending the Iraq war aired in early October as a response to conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh's charge that anti-war veterans were "phony soldiers."
Speaking of phonies, at least one of those anti-war soldiers is none too pleased with how anti-war groups like AAEI have been operating of late. In a scathing Philadelphia Daily News op-ed titled, "The Anti-War Phonies," Iraq war veteran John Bruhns lamented his involvement with special-interest groups that he said seemed "to be in place simply to smear those who disagree with their political agenda" and used the war "as ammunition against political foes -- primarily Republicans."
Although Bruhns, who has worked for AAEI and appeared in ads by MoveOn.org and VoteVets.org, said he considers himself a Democrat, he blasted the partisan approach he perceives these groups are taking to the war issue. "There ARE anti-war resolutions still floating out there that call for a real end to the war," Bruhns wrote, "but the groups I worked for wouldn't spend one dime to promote legislation considered out of the mainstream of the Democratic Party."
Adding fuel to the fire for outraged activists like Bruhns, it looks as though congressional Democrats will be putting all Iraq-related legislation on the back burner when they return from the Thanksgiving recess next week. The Hill reports that leaders will shift their focus to domestic issues, such as the "long-awaited energy bill" and the economy.
The switch in priorities may be attributed to a number of factors. Surveys have shown the economy rising in importance as an issue on voters' minds; a recent Gallup poll (subscription) had economic issues topping Iraq as the "most important problem" facing America for the first time in months. In addition, recent military and media reports coming out of Iraq have cited significant security gains and reductions in casualties, leading Americans to begin acknowledging that some progress is being made there.
Democrats are aware that the anti-war wing of the party is still hungry for change and wants to see troops coming home sooner rather than later (as do a majority of Americans). But while they have promised to continue trying to wield the power of the purse, Democratic leaders remain keenly aware of the political dangers of withholding funds from the troops. "Democrats say they will hang firm for now against additional war funding that doesn't include a goal for withdrawing troops by Christmas 2008," Roll Call (subscription) reported earlier this week. "But they have continued to provide money through the back door that will keep the war going for months, and they promise that in the end the troops will get whatever they need."
With 2008 being an election year, it seems likely that most anti-war efforts, both on the part of activists and lawmakers, will be focused on getting certain candidates elected, not on forcing a withdrawal by the end of President Bush's term. For now, the top-tier presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle appear to be in agreement with each other on the issue. The next great Iraq debate, therefore, may not come until each party has decided upon a nominee.
Photo: Wikipedia user Arcaheradel
Posted at 4:01 PM
Posted to:
Campaigns, Congress, Iraq
Share via
