Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

patrice

(47,992 posts)
18. There were a bunch of us around MoveOn who began to worry about an influx of "peace"
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:21 PM
Oct 2012

activists as these last 2 wars started going bad. You'd hear them in the conference calls and could pretty well guess their level of understanding and length of commitment to peace/social-justice issues, but there were a bunch of them coming into the movement and they tended to be active in local politics, soooo . . .

Then I started running into some similar types near the end of the health care debate, there was at least one well-connected person who had attached herself to the Greens and was part of that kind of, part of it enough to be quite presumptuous and demanding of connections from OTHER people's contacts, REALLY clue-less or avoiding the actual in the trenches work of low-level organizing, NOT good with the leftier med-school students, who suddenly became this big MTA leader. I remember when she announced the change at a Green meeting. The Green leader was stunned. I was not, but I was furious, haven't had that much to do actively with the Greens ever since, for allowing themselves to get used that way.

Anyway, later, around our Occupy, the tension between the younger in-the-trenches student-activists and this MTA lady-leader (plus tons of Libertarians and Anarchists of various types that were around) was so thick it paralyzed us and caused the younger leftier crowd to just work with themselves and the rightier crowd to party hardy and showboat against local anti-racist efforts in the metro. It was a very confusing time, but later on, on FaceBook, I picked up on the MoveOn connections in the group, some of whom were some extremely MoveOn committed people I know and most of that stuff centered around MTA, but it was also pretty cold to or outright hostile toward the labor types amongst us, especially the poorer unions, and except for a couple of connections to some of the wealthiest unions in the region, who were also at least friendly with a local young (techie) Mormon leader, who may really just have been trying to get to know them better. Anyhow, that MoveOn contingent, through the agency of the ex-"health"-"care" reform activist, turned MTA advocate, made very consistent and strong proposals to basically take over the whole group/Occupy. Showed up at practically every big public thing we did with HUGE banners, making our poor Occupy look more like MTA than like an Occupy.

Hey glen two words. Supreme court still_one Oct 2012 #1
+ 15,467,823 11 Bravo Oct 2012 #11
my first thought nt marlakay Oct 2012 #16
No shit! The next Presidential term could see a dramatic remaking of the SCOTUS. Raster Oct 2012 #53
Libertarian Greenwald's strategy is to peel progressive votes from Obama in any way possible struggle4progress Oct 2012 #2
Greenwald, also a resident of Rio de Janeiro, is a "Libertarian" soon to become an Archipelagian . . patrice Oct 2012 #6
I'm lost. How is Greenwald an Archipelagian? grantcart Oct 2012 #47
Ad-hominem attack=attack on the man Blue Yorker Oct 2012 #22
No: I described the man's motives and behavior, with supporting links struggle4progress Oct 2012 #23
Right. Instead of what he said Blue Yorker Oct 2012 #24
After the 2010 election Greenwald expressed hope Democrats suffer the same fate in 2012: struggle4progress Oct 2012 #27
Can you quote Greenwald? Blue Yorker Oct 2012 #40
"Even though I know that by abstaining or supporting a third party, I’m going to be sacrificing struggle4progress Oct 2012 #42
Thanks. As soon as you quoted, you FAILED Blue Yorker Oct 2012 #43
If you can't be bothered to follow provided links, don't complain about the quality of excerpts struggle4progress Oct 2012 #44
this is not an ad-hominem attack on the man. grantcart Oct 2012 #48
Greenwald should return to Sesame Street flamingdem Oct 2012 #3
I don't trust Glenn Greenwald. Why do people assume he is a Liberal? because he defends neo-Nazis??? patrice Oct 2012 #4
Glenn Greenwald: Neither a Liberal Nor a Progressive struggle4progress Oct 2012 #45
Patrice, anyone who is not a civil libertarian is an authoritarian. There is no middle ground TheKentuckian Oct 2012 #60
Fuck Stupid Greenwald. Is that asshole Cha Oct 2012 #5
Plus he defected to the monarchy! flamingdem Oct 2012 #7
He has a cadre that is camoflaging itself inside of MoveOn, IMO. patrice Oct 2012 #8
Thanks for the tips on this flamingdem Oct 2012 #10
There were a bunch of us around MoveOn who began to worry about an influx of "peace" patrice Oct 2012 #18
Greenwald would be PPR'd if he tried to post that shit personally. sadbear Oct 2012 #9
lol quinnox Oct 2012 #13
I'm just saying that some of the stuff he writes isn't in line with the TOS. sadbear Oct 2012 #21
Was it Greenwald who was a favorite source for BBI? A-Schwarzenegger Oct 2012 #12
Well then I guess we should just vote for the third guy... Rex Oct 2012 #14
o jesus, not that shitter again. Whisp Oct 2012 #15
No discernable difference between Glen and a tree stump.. tho a tree stump is useful. nt progressivebydesign Oct 2012 #17
"in many issues" ..... The truth hurts. woo me with science Oct 2012 #19
Hey, Tweety, I didn't know you posted here. How's that meltdown coming along? nt. OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #26
I have yet to see one post that addresses what he wrote.... Junkdrawer Oct 2012 #30
that's because, as usual, he is right quinnox Oct 2012 #32
His objective is "to allow credible third-party candidates into the presidential debates and to give struggle4progress Oct 2012 #49
Absolutely - and do we handle the meme Sebass1271 Oct 2012 #61
Greenwald. LOL...nt SidDithers Oct 2012 #20
Idiot. CakeGrrl Oct 2012 #25
I'd say something mean about Greenwald, but he'd MineralMan Oct 2012 #28
He's incorrect - but he's usually right Taverner Oct 2012 #29
Nonsense. nt Honeycombe8 Oct 2012 #31
Voter Suppression abumbyanyothername Oct 2012 #33
Yea, remember how indistinguishable Bush and Gore were? fugop Oct 2012 #34
Glenn didn't think that election mattered, so he actually didn't bother to vote in it struggle4progress Oct 2012 #37
Greenwald is a douche...moving on. Romney said he'd kill Big Bird; Obama would not. vaberella Oct 2012 #35
That is correct. "On many issues." JackRiddler Oct 2012 #36
The do not have similar climate change policies muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #38
Obama's policy has also been 'dril, drill, drill'. girl gone mad Oct 2012 #59
Obviously Glen didn't sign the Loyalty Oath demanded by the 3rd Way. Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2012 #39
He was right freetrucker53 Oct 2012 #41
He's right ibegurpard Oct 2012 #46
LOTS of independents say this...maybe its a matter of perspective davidn3600 Oct 2012 #50
Medicare. Obamacare. Tax policy. LGBT rights. Reproductive health care rights. Supreme Court. Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #51
"No discernible difference" between Obama and which Romney? nt Xipe Totec Oct 2012 #52
if you believe that, vote for romney spanone Oct 2012 #54
Capitalism davidn3600 Oct 2012 #55
well that`s his opinion and i have mine madrchsod Oct 2012 #56
What the HELL has happened to him? Glitterati Oct 2012 #57
He's a libertarian: his basic strategy is to piss on whoever's in office, in hopes struggle4progress Oct 2012 #62
The permawar, civil liberties evaporation, and bankster forgiveness are nearly identical. Octafish Oct 2012 #58
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"No discernible diff...»Reply #18