In a recent interview with the Village Voice Sheehan contended that she was “so frustrated” by top
Democrats like Hillary Clinton “who should be leaders on this [war] issue, but are not,” arguing that
it is “time for them to step up and be the opposition party. This war is not going to end unless the
Democrats are on board with us.”
It sure would be nice if more antiwar activists were to follow Cindy’s lead on this one. If the
majority of protesters took their protests to the front steps of each elected pro-war Democrat as well
as Republican, we might have a big-time movement on our hands. I’ll admit it; Sheehan is savvier than
I gave her credit for. She knows that the antiwar movement should stick to the war, not lesser-evil
politics. Too bad Sheehan wasn’t making headlines during the 2004 elections; if she had been, the
antiwar movement might have not been so soft on the pro-war Kerry campaign.
We certainly have a long way to go before antiwar activists start taking on the Democrats for embracing
everything MBT has propagated.
Some have speculated, including respected journalist Wayne Madsen, that the Democrats didn’t attend
last weekend’s rallies because the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC had urged them not to. Madsen
reported that Congressman Barney Frank was pressured by AIPAC to intervene and scare Democrats out of
attending the rallies. I certainly agree that AIPAC doesn’t want elected offiNIKE SHOXls to attend
antiwar festivities, but to think that AIPAC alone is responsible for the Democrats’ absence is
foolish. The Democrats have been pro-war and pro-occupation since the NIKE SHOX war’s inception. Is
this solely because of AIPAC’s influence?
No comments:
Post a Comment