[Peace-discuss] How Obama Took Over the Peace Movement

[C. G. Estabrook]

"Some of us saw this unfolding years ago. Others are probably shocked watching 
their peace candidate escalating a war and sounding so much like the previous 
administration in his rationale for doing so."

	How Obama Took Over the Peace Movement
	Submitted by John Stauber on March 27, 2009 - 1:00pm.

John Podesta's liberal think tank the Center for American Progress strongly 
supports Barack Obama's escalation of the US wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan. 
This is best evidenced by "Sustainable Security in Afghanistan," a CAP report by 
Lawrence J. Korb. Podesta served as the head of Obama's transition team, and 
CAP's support for Obama's wars is the latest step in a successful co-option of 
the US peace movement by Obama's political aides and the Democratic Party.

CAP and the five million member liberal lobby group MoveOn were behind Americans 
Against Escalation in Iraq (AAEI), a coalition that spent tens of millions of 
dollars using Iraq as a political bludgeon against Republican politicians, while 
refusing to pressure the Democratic Congress to actually cut off funding for the 
war. AAEI was operated by two of Barack Obama's top political aids, Steve 
Hildebrand and Paul Tewes, and by Brad Woodhouse of Americans United for Change 
and USAction. Today Woodhouse is Obama's Director of Communications and Research 
for the Democratic National Committee. He controls the massive email list called 
Obama for America composed of the many millions of people who gave money and 
love to the Democratic peace candidate and might be wondering what the heck he 
is up to in Afghanistan and Pakistan. MoveOn built its list by organizing vigils 
and ads for peace and by then supporting Obama for president; today it operates 
as a full-time cheerleader supporting Obama's policy agenda. Some of us saw this 
unfolding years ago. Others are probably shocked watching their peace candidate 
escalating a war and sounding so much like the previous administration in his 
rationale for doing so.

http://www.prwatch.org/node/8297