The Declarer (Floyd McWilliams' Blog)

Thursday, January 16, 2003 is the perfect expression of the modern Democratic party: It is scummy, dishonest, insults one's intelligence, and is ashamed of itself to boot. MoveOn got started in the Clinton impeachment era; it claimed to be a non-partisan group which wanted the country to move past the Lewinsky scandal. As the impeachment hearings progressed, MoveOn's strategy for closure was to threaten to oppose elected officials who voted for impeachment or conviction.

Four years ago the Senate took its vote, and most Americans were pretty sick of the scandal and ready to move on. Did MoveOn shut itself down and pay a few bucks a year to maintain a website that said only "We told you so"? Is there still a Rural Electrification Act? MoveOn now became a non-partisan group which involved itself in non-partisan activities like electing Democrats.

I Googled MoveOn and found that in the 2000 election they were paying people to vote:

Dear Friend of MoveOn,

In the last few days before the election, is sponsoring a revolutionary online get-out-the-vote campaign called To encourage this important work, we are underwriting a $10,000 AWARD for the most effective campaigner. This could be you. We need your help.

Add your name to our simple, non-partisan, confidential pledge to vote. Then use to encourage your friends and colleagues to do the same. We'll tell you how many pledges result from your work in spreading the word. If you recruit the most pledges to vote before the polls close on November 7th, you will WIN THE $10,000 VOTEPLEDGE DEMOCRACY AWARD.


- Wes Boyd

P.S. has created and is sponsoring the $10,000 VOTEPLEDGE DEMOCRACY AWARD as a public service. is scrupulously non-partisan.

Here's another email from four days earlier in which the "non-partisan" folks at MoveOn begged people not to vote for Nader:

> Dear Friend of MoveOn,
> It now looks like Nader will cost Gore the presidency. In key swing
> states -- Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Maine, New Mexico -- Nader
> has garnered enough support to throw the electoral votes to Bush.
> And those votes could very likely make the difference. Even in key
> battleground states where Nader support is thin, like Florida,
> Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania, he could take enough votes from
> Gore to swing the electoral votes to Bush. Latest polls even show
> Gore at risk of losing California with Nader pulling away 6% of the
> vote. With the election tightening in every state of the union, no
> state is safe.
> We've been flooded by emails asking what we can do. The Nader camp
> is deeply divided over whether they should endorse Gore -- at least
> in swing states. Many say they never got into the race to play the
> spoiler. What was positioned as a safe protest vote has now become a
> kind of kamikaze vote. The specter of a Bush presidency looms large.


> Sincerely,
> - Wes Boyd

Notice that it's the same-person, Wes Boyd, who authored both messages! Special Clinton-era "that depends on the meaning of 'is'" award for MoveOn's interpretation of "non-partisan".

Last night on the radio I heard that MoveOn was going to sponsor a TV ad opposing war with Iraq. This ad is none other than the infamous "Daisy" ad that LBJ ran against Barry Goldwater in 1964 -- a young girl picks daisies as a voice counts down to a nuclear explosion. "Daisy" was probably the single sleaziest ad in the history of politics; you have to admire MoveOn for faithfulness to their core values of dishonesty and deception.



Post a Comment