<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">["Pwogs," as Alex Cockburn used to say... --CGE]<div><p style="text-align: center;"><strong>- <a href="http://Antiwar.com">Antiwar.com</a> Blog - <span dir="ltr"><a href="http://antiwar.com/blog">http://antiwar.com/blog</a></span> -</strong></p>
<div class="Center">
<div id="Outline"><p id="BlogTitle"><b>Is MoveOn Less Progressive Than the <i>New York Times</i> Editorial Board?</b></p><p id="BlogTitle">Posted By <u>Norman Solomon</u> On December 23, 2013 @ 7:40 am In <u>News</u> | <u><a href="http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/12/23/is-moveon-less-progressive-than-the-newyorktimes-editorial-board/print/#comments_controls">9 Comments</a></u></p>
<div id="BlogContent"><p>The <i>New York Times</i> is hardly a
progressive newspaper – but when it comes to the surveillance state and
ongoing militarism of the Obama White House, the establishment’s "paper
of record" puts <a href="http://MoveOn.org">MoveOn.org</a> to shame.</p><p>And so, the same day that the <i>Times</i> editorialized to excoriate
President Obama for his latest betrayal of civil liberties, MoveOn sent
out a huge email blast sucking up to Obama.</p><p>The <i>Times</i> was blunt in its Saturday editorial: "By the time
President Obama gave his news conference on Friday, there was really
only one course to take on surveillance policy from an ethical, moral,
constitutional and even political point of view. And that was to embrace
the recommendations of his handpicked panel on government spying – and
bills pending in Congress – to end the obvious excesses. He could have
started by suspending the constitutionally questionable (and evidently
pointless) collection of data on every phone call and email that
Americans make."</p><p>But, the newspaper added: "He did not do any of that."</p><p>As the <i>Times</i><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/opinion/mr-obamas-disappointing-response.html" rel="external">editorial</a> <sup>[1]</sup>
went on to say, "any actions that Mr. Obama may announce next month
would certainly not be adequate. Congress has to rewrite the relevant
passage in the Patriot Act that George W. Bush and then Mr. Obama
claimed – in secret – as the justification for the data vacuuming."</p><p>Let’s reiterate that the <i>Times</i> is far from a progressive
outlet. It serves as a highly important megaphone for key sectors of
corporate/political elites. Voicing the newspaper’s official stance, its
editorials are often deferential to spin and half-truths from favored
political figures. And much of the paper’s news coverage feeds off the
kind of newspeak that spews out of the Executive Branch and Congress.</p><p>But on crucial matters of foreign policy, militarism and surveillance, the contrast between <i>Times</i>
editorials and MoveOn is stunning. The "progressive" netroots
organization has rarely managed to clear a low bar of independence from
reprehensible Obama policies.</p><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p>Instead, millions of people on MoveOn’s list are continually deluged
with emails pretending that Republicans are the only major problem in
Washington – while nearly always ignoring Obama administration policies
that are antithetical to basic progressive values.</p><p>And so, on the same day the <i>New York Times</i> was ripping into
Obama’s latest affront to civil liberties and privacy rights, MoveOn was
sending out a mass email that began by quoting from Obama’s 2008
convention acceptance speech – as though his five-year record as
president still makes him an apt source of inspiration: <i>"The change we need doesn’t come from Washington. Change comes to Washington."</i></p><p>After five years, MoveOn seems not to have noticed what the <i>New York Times</i>
editorial board has often pointed out: that some of the change Obama
has brought to Washington has not been in a progressive direction. As
the <i>Times</i> put it in a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/opinion/sunday/bad-times-for-big-brother.html" rel="external">follow-up editorial</a> <sup>[2]</sup>
Sunday, at his latest news conference Obama "insisted that there was no
evidence that the phone surveillance program was being abused – a truly
disturbing assessment given all the revelations since June."</p><p>As usual, the MoveOn email did not include a single word of
criticism, much less challenge, of Obama. Instead, the email blamed
Congress for all the political obstacles to needed "change."</p><p>This is typical. Year after year of the Obama presidency, MoveOn has
been routinely silent on such crucial matters as U.S. drone and cruise
missile strikes across borders, war in Afghanistan, assaults on press
freedom and whistleblowers, and methodical undermining of precious civil
liberties.</p><p>The intertwined warfare state and surveillance state have little to fear from MoveOn. And that’s tragic.</p><p><i>Norman Solomon is co-founder of <a href="http://RootsAction.org">RootsAction.org</a> and founding director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. His books include</i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/War-Made-Easy-Presidents-Spinning/dp/047179001X/antiwarbookstore" rel="external">War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death</a> <sup>[3]</sup><i>. Information on the documentary based on the book is at <a href="http://www.warmadeeasythemovie.org/" rel="external">www.WarMadeEasyTheMovie.org</a> <sup>[4]</sup>.</i></p>
</div>
<hr class="Divider" style="text-align: center;"><p>Article printed from <a href="http://Antiwar.com">Antiwar.com</a> Blog: <strong dir="ltr"><a href="http://antiwar.com/blog">http://antiwar.com/blog</a></strong></p><p>URL to article: <strong dir="ltr"><a href="http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/12/23/is-moveon-less-progressive-than-the-newyorktimes-editorial-board/">http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/12/23/is-moveon-less-progressive-than-the-newyorktimes-editorial-board/</a></strong></p><p>URLs in this post:</p><p style="margin: 2px 0;">[1] editorial: <b><span dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/opinion/mr-obamas-disappointing-response.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/opinion/mr-obamas-disappointing-response.html</a></span></b></p><p style="margin: 2px 0;">[2] follow-up editorial: <b><span dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/opinion/sunday/bad-times-for-big-brother.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/opinion/sunday/bad-times-for-big-brother.html</a></span></b></p><p style="margin: 2px 0;">[3] War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death: <b><span dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/War-Made-Easy-Presidents-Spinning/dp/047179001X/antiwarbookstore">http://www.amazon.com/War-Made-Easy-Presidents-Spinning/dp/047179001X/antiwarbookstore</a></span></b></p><p style="margin: 2px 0;">[4] <a href="http://www.WarMadeEasyTheMovie.org">www.WarMadeEasyTheMovie.org</a>: <b><span dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.warmadeeasythemovie.org/">http://www.warmadeeasythemovie.org/</a></span></b></p><div><br></div></div></div></div></body></html>