Progressive blogger on Sheehan: Chants drown out the message

[wyldwolf]

Chants that drown out the message
by Welshman
Wed Jan 03, 2007 at 09:13:49 PM EST

I don't have to demonstrate my anti-Iraq war credentials on here nor my absolute belief in bringing the troops home.

It is necessary to say this, however, because I am critical of a story that is about to break that I feel certain will get the cheers on our progressive blogs - the stupid, unthinking and politically naive cheers.

On this, the day before Pelosi picks up the gavel for the first time, and at a press conference of the Democrats who wanted to unveil their first initiative to meet what was at the very top of the exit poll list of voters' concerns, it is hijacked by peace protesters.

And the progressives will cheer.

I am sorry, I don't buy it. I want a massive world-wide protest if Bush escalates this war. I do not want the Democrats thrown into apparent public confusion by those who should be their supporters.

I am sure that as in the UK, the quiet majority of Americans are always a bit nervous of protests. A handful shouting in a room does not usually win their approval. But why choose the Democratic press briefing? What have they done - what could they possibly have done yet - to warrant the need for their feet to be held to the fire in this particular way and for a few people to stop them getting out their message?

This is just more of the negativity that will kill the Dems in two years time that underlies my comments about the approach to issues on progressive blogs.

Please Cindy Sheehan, you have magnificently helped bring these issues to public attention. Yet it is not you that was voted into office. Nor is there evidence that the grassroots got these good people into power alone. It was achieved because a a group in the centre ground got fed up with Bush. They are as skittish as a thorough bred race horse in their affiliations. You do not have the experience to know how not to frighten them off. Frighten them off before the Democrats have even taken their seats.

http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2007/1/3/211349/8928

[Radical Activist]

1. She needs to do it because of that spin.

Even before Democrats took office, people like Rahm and the corporate media are spinning the election results into something meaningless. They would have us believe that the public wants the war to continue, despite public opinion polls telling us otherwise.

The Democratic Party has shown no loyalty to the anti-war movement and no backbone standing up to Bush. Most Democratic leaders will never take a strong stand against the war unless they are pressured by the public to do so. Cindy smartly understands that and I'm glad she's doing what she's doing.

We tried the, "play it safe" and run a better war approach with Kerry and it attracted no one. The approach you are suggesting has already failed.

[Hippo_Tron]

2. I'm waiting before I judge Cindy on this one

I was pleased by Pelosi and Reid's statement today and I doubt that it was motivated by Cindy's antics. But a statement doesn't mean action. We'll see what happens.

[beaconess]

3. This wasn't a mere statement - it WAS action

They are calling bullshit on the president.

[cleveramerican]

4. shouting down Rahm Emmanuel is shooting themselves in the foot

Who exactly are these protesters against?

[Radical Activist]

5. They're against people who support the war

like Rahm Emmanuel. Some people won't support a war hawk just because you put a D next to his name.