Code Pink Looked like absolute idiots today. If they conducted themselves with dignity and

didn't dress in clown outfits they might accomplish a great deal.They are correct in their anti-war positions but they make the anti war movement look like loons.They are an embarrassment.Appropriately dressed people either standing in silence carrying signs or even speaking or chanting articulately would have gotten respect.Out of control "screamers" in stupid pink costumes diminish the whole movement!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Maybe you can point out their failings to them and get them to change their tactics?

Just kidding.;)

If she joined, she wouldn't get anywhere near the attention she gets by starting a thread like this on DU.

Haven't seen video of the testimony yet, so I can only imagine the scene. At the very least this might break through the media blockade of the idea that the majority in this country want us out of Iraq.

and it is presented to them as the face of the antiwar movement, the majority recoil from the antiwar movement and reject it instead of joining it or feeling closer to it.

The majority of public opinion may be against the war, but they need to come together and make their sentiment felt by the DC establishment which wants to ignore them. The mass of public opinion turned the Republican majority out of the House, partly due to disgust for the war, but they have yet to join the antiwar movement. When the public face of the antiwar movement is Code Pink and that ilk, the majority are repelled & alienated from the "antiwar movement" not added to it and energized by it. Compared to Code Pink, even the most swinish Republican bastards who would continue the war for another million Iraqi deaths and 10,000 more US kia's will appear sane, credible, and responsible to the ordinary people out there in TVland. People please don't tell me that all appearances notwithstanding, the Code Pink side is sane & credible and the other isn't--I'm totally not interested. I'm interested in the RESULT ONLY. The result is that people we need to reach are put off and appalled. That's more or less how Nixon put together his "Silent Majority" back in the late 1960s--ordinary people were conned into voting against their own interests because they rejected the highly visible fringes of the political Left, which whatever internal differences might divide them by name or ideology was united in being against the Vietnam War. Thus began a habit of identification and voting that would blossom into "Reagan Democrats" and enshrine permanent wedge issue agitation as the fixed center in GOP strategy. It's a perennial tragedy for our side.

People seem to forget that Nixon won in "68 at the height of the anti war movement.

Humphrey, Johnson's Vice President, won the Democratic nomination, and was in comparison "pro-war". That's why there were riots at the Democratic convention in Chicago that year.

Nixon promised "peace with honor" and left it at that, he was very vague about how he planned on bringing that about.He was also secretly negotiating with the South Vietnamese in a successful attempt to keep them out of peace talks with Johnson.

...but in 1968, of the two candidates, Nixon was the more anti-war.

LBJ stated as his reason for not running that he needed to dedicate his time working for peace. (Which might have been been something Kissinger worked against.) There were riots at the Democratic convention because they were in power.

The Democrats had NO credibility on the war, in spite of Goldwater's nuke plan for Vietnam in '64, which helped Johnson the "reasonable" one who wasn't going to escalate, win that race.

It was a big f***ing war machine then, as now.

At least, this time, the Democrats have the opportunity to be the war machine opposition party.

MKJ

edited to add: Nixon, in great Republican tradition, snookered those who saw gray instead of black and white. And, the Chicago police were given carte blanc to beat the shit out of the demonstrators at the DEMOCRATIC convention.

As a Denverite, hoping not to see that pattern repeated.

And seriously, they aren't the ones "out of control."

inside the the senate or house hearings is`t one of those times or places.

and lack of presentation! LOL!

I am appaled at your words. Code Pink is doing something and they deserve our applause for action.

Of course, your words are just what the republicans and warmongers love to hear, did you ever think of that?

Code Pink is just what the Republicans and warmongers use to make us look like loons.Did you ever think of that? Many "respectable' people who oppose the war do not want to be associated with such lunacy.It might surprise you but many moderate Repugs who are against the war and have considered switching parties have been driven away by just this type of thing. I resent that CP makes Democrats look bad when Democrats have nothing to do with them.

Code Pink hasn't turned away one true anti-war person. Where do you come up with that crap?

and the murder of more than a million people based on the actions of Code Pink, than I seriously doubt they were very committed to ending the war in the first place. Sounds to me like a convenient cop out. A way to avoid critical thinking, and human compassion.

MKJ

on edit, probably won't be solved on an internet message board.

:shrug: MKJ

Generally, putting 'true' in front of an ordinary noun is like putting 'food' after cheese; an indication something very different than the usual meaning is being stated....

The largest voting bloc in the country at present comprises persons who supported or acquiesced in the invasion of Iraq initially, and now feel that was a mistake. Remove these from the equation, and opposition to the venture goes back its low levels of early '03, insufficient to command more than a handful of votes in the Congress.

I am truly an anti-war person. Those who supported the invasion - the 10 percenters - are truly anti-war. Those that now see what has transpired and recently become sick of it are not true anti-war folks.

Indeed, we are a minority, but the question before us in this thread are just who does CP represent, and it surely is not those who have just recently become wiser.

The question is: is CP alienating those noobs? Who cares? It is not CP's job to represent those, but to represent the true anti-war folks like me. And in my book CP is doing great.

The point of any political action must be to gain mass support, and it should be tailored to that end. What you are describing is not political action, but the sort of posturing known as 'preaching to the choir', which, when the choir amounts to one in ten, by your own count, can never achieve any real effect in political life. The point is not to make a small number of people feel good about themselves, but to get the largest possible number to oppose or agree with certain views....

People don't follow the careful, conservative strategist. They follow the visionary, the ones with passion, the ones who truly believe in a better world and convince others that it's possible. It's those people that are remembered long after the play it safe types are gone. And it's those people, more than any other, that have effected the greatest change.

And throughout high school participated in anti war marches andI also marched against hunger and poverty!I have marched against this war since before Cindy Sheehan, and I have even marched beside her and have the pics to prove it.I no longer support her but there was a time I did.I was also a member of Code Pink when their actions were confined to rallies and other events.

"On Monday, May 3rd, 1971 one of the most disruptive actions of the Vietnam War era occurred in Washington, DC, when thousands of anti-war activists tried to shut down the Federal government in protest of the Vietnam War. The threat caused by the May Day Protests forced the Nixon Administration to create a virtual state of siege in the Nation’s Capital. Thousands of Federal and National Guard troops, along with local police, suppressed the disorder and by the time it was over several days later, over 10,000 would be arrested. It would be the largest mass arrest in U.S. history."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_Day_Protests_1971

That was fun. You had to be quick on your feet or you ended up a statistic. Is that your model? Or did you go for the "polite protests"?

It was we refused to be polite that the cost of domestic disturbance at home became unacceptible. It is because even after they shot us down like dogs, we refused to behave, that the same fucking establishment we are up against now did an about face and GOT THE FUCK OUT OF VIETNAM.

the operative word here. because marching has been so effective. :sarcasm:

I'm fascinated. Were they polite well dressed appropriate protests?

I was there as well as marches on poverty and hunger and protested this war before Cindy Sheehan. And there were all kinds of protestors, not all "polite and well dressed'. but it was a "March" , I was never dressed like an idiot.Ever. But as I said, there is a time and place for these manner of protests.I was a member of Code Pink when they confined themselves to rallies and marches.I also enjoyed Billionaires for Bush.But Code Pink has now made itself ineffective by the misapplication of their presentation

The ones I went to involved a lot of tear gas, a lot of disorderly conduct, and not so much orderly marches.

People took the issue seriously.Code Pink does nmot "look" serious.I know they are.I just question their manner of presenting themselves!

I believe you went to a vietnam protest march. I think you were probably quite young. You aren't quite sure if it was in the 70's or 60's. I went to many protests events in that era, quite a few of which were best described as 'riots'. Some of them started out as orderly events, but after Kent State the chance of any given protest not turning ugly was pretty slim. In fact, after the police riot in Chicago in 68, all bets were off.

I did not say that was "orderly" I also attended NY protest events in the 70's.They were not"orderly" These were protests and marches not events such as a hearing! Big differnce from clowns bursting into a hearing in DC!

Protests and tea! Protests and tea!

"Love me, love me, love me , I'm a liberal"
-Phil Ochs-

more people will get turned off--especially if Republicans manage to look more adult and reasonable.

Everyone who cares about ending the war and challenging this war crimes administration should be out there calling attention to themselves and the issues, in whatever way they can. So, you don't like their fashion or tactics. Do it your way.

Come on, people. Make room for everyone to use their voice. I didn't hear about any other individuals or groups protest of the hearings. CP and Moveon know how to get a camera and a story.

Go with what works. I don't think Average Americans base their support/opposition to illegal occupations on PR stunts.

among the wackaloons. It may not change one's war position, but it weakens our arguments.

They are a passionate group getting results. I like them for the sole reason of them making the suits squirm.

I think the only people who think that CP represents the Entire Anti-war movement are the fox-watchers.

The majority, 70+ percent, know that they are the anti-war movement themselves. We're all against it. So, of course whackaloons will be included in that 70+.

Dignified, intelligent, common people are against this war. Also, crazies are against it. Lazy hippies are against it. Minorities are against. Christians are against it. We are all against it. And we are all against it in our own way for our own reasons. CP does what it does because they believe they are making a difference, and they are doing what they know.

We should all be so confident and strong to shout at our elected reps., especially where they work......in funny costumes.

that's stupid. You can let them know how you feel without verbally harassing or being disrespectful.

I thought the chairman did a pretty good job of throwing out the Code Pink disruptors, calling them "intolerable". These Dems are against the war, too, but are quick to speak up when anti-war lefties get out of hand.

The Republicans have no credibility, the moveon types are over the edge, and the Democrats seem (to me) to be just right.

Hope you're right about this having not much impact on the Dems.

We should all sit quietly. If you feel you must say something, do it where nobody can hear you or see you.

to be seen and heard in this country. That ain't one of them.

I think you meant that you think one shouldn't do this. I suggest that by all means, if that is your opinion, then you should not be down there in Washington disrupting these important hearings that will be used to provide cover for another refunding of the illegal and immoral occupation of Iraq.

AND I think it's dumb. It's not YOUR proceeding, or mine--it's not OUR stage. It's our representatives' stage--that's why we put them there.

I know since I worked with them.

We shouldn't forget that.

I think that might be the basic difference between us.

We both oppose the war, but you are loonable.

I'm not.

It must be a burden.....

someone who gets it.

;)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

internet petitions?

DU posts?

Angry eMails to our corporate owned congresscritters?

What do you suggest?

It would have been really effective to stand in silence with signs and refuse to move.And they would have looked serious if they were dressed nicely or at least "normally".

help people take you seriously.

The treats will be handed out to the good dogs only.

ways to make your voice heard--the number one way is through the ballot box. You can write a letter to the editor. You can make a you-tube video, or launch your own website. You can film a documentary. You can arrange a meeting with your elected officials, or attend town-hall meetings, or call or e-mail them. You can put up signs, hold a demonstration. But putting on loud, disruptive drama for the cameras inside a very serious, important hearing is NOT an effective way to get your message across--unless your message happens to be, "Look at me! I'm an ass!"

You mean that electronic machine with no verifiable paper trail that's made by a corporation with strong ties to the Republican Party and that's highly susceptible to hacking? Oh boy! Thank God I have that to make my voice heard!

And this "very important hearing?" I'm sorry, but the mere fact that you call it that just proves to me how much you "respectable" types just don't get it. This hearing is a fucking joke. A farce, a sham, a bullshit con job, an insult to everything that really is decent and respectable. My God, after all the lies and crap we've been fed over the past seven years, you actually still have faith that any truth is going to come out of that asshole General's mouth? This hearing is designed to do one thing and one thing only: spit out enough horseshit so that the American people will believe that the surge is working so that the presidential candidates can feel safe enough to not support a full withdrawl during the presidential campaign. PERIOD.

Wake up!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

GEEZ, you don't really believe that shit, do you????

-------------------

The political theater that the Congress put on Monday was a bullshit dog and pony show. The outcome and content of that show was all carefully choreographed and planned behind closed doors.

It was a foregone conclusion that the entire farce would allow the bushies to parrot their tired propagandistic mantra of "Iraq, 9/11, Al Qaeda, Iraq, 9/11, Al Qaeda, Iraq, 9/11, Al Qaeda" and most of the Dems would intone their little mealy mouthed objections and business (Big Corporate Business, that is) can go on as usual and the Dems have their little cover for the next election...

Meanwhile, they'll pass the next supplemental and a huge whopping bloated war budget so that the f*cking military-industrial complex can keep rolling along...

-------------------

Code Pink's crime was disrupting the well oiled machine of obfuscation, pandering and war mongering...

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcx9BJRadfw )

reasonable way. :shrug:


Seems like that was pretty common in the 70s. I kind of like the Raging Grannies, for a start. And I admire Code Pink, in the same way that I admired Act Up and feminist rabble rousers back in the day. What they did at the time had a powerful effect.

Ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

I think saracat has a hard time with the color pink. Because these ladies are certainly doing a bang up job and getting their point across. But then again that's why they make different favors of ice cream.

They aren't ending the war.

or what their position is. You know the news media isn't going to ask their opinions after the hearings. imho

their name once on MSNBC, referrring to them otherwise as 'those people in the back dressed in pink.'

That's where all the real clowns and absolute idiots are.

Where they were was Position A. That is where the best place to dissent is.

For people to have the unfortunate judgment to think that some protestors took up a minute of time to just stop the lies and bullshit are the bad people boggles my mind.

Is there ever a "good time" to protest a quagmire? Is there a "dress code"?

that's the PERFECT place for theater.

The committee hearing IS the ultimate theater of the absurd...

It DESERVES ridicule!!

Abbie Hoffman, one of the greatest clown-princes of all time, would have been there in an Uncle Sam suit clowning with the best of them.


Geez, decorum over protest. If the People had listened to that crap we'd all still be singing "God Save the Queen" instead of that egregious old English drinking song forced upon us at ballgames...

You, sir, are correct.

Sometimes the protestors are the only ones who tell the truth within earshot of our leaders.

“Irony is a disciplinarian feared only by those who do not know it, but cherished by those who do”

-- Soren Kierkegaard

someone has to do something. Every time someone posed a question of meaning, betrayus dodged it like a politician and made some talking points to help with the presidents propaganda, not his fellow soldiers. I wish someone were in the building with them that would have screamed out , your not answering their questions and they wont hold you accountable so we will. ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTIONS! But hey, let them govern the way they have been and they wont even have hearings in the future because they wont have to.

Oh wait. You weren't there were you?


How freaking typical.

What were you doing?Cheering on the CP and their ineffective disturbance by keyboard?

got your attention :shrug:

But that's just me.

like digg etc.

I love it!!

Ignored by the Congress
Ignored by the media
Ignored by the people

None of us, including you, would have been aware of their presence if they stood respectfully in the back with signs.

Now America knows that not everyone is swallowing this enormous bitter pill that is "The Petreous/Buxh Report".

My only disappointment is that the anti-war flag seems to be hoisted only by a group of middle aged men and women.

No offense meant, I only disagree with you on the impact of civil disobedience.

I thought they did great. And, I admire them for their courage and their passion.

TC

Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.
- Mahatma Gandhi

"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce and brave man, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
- Mark Twain

After seeing Cindy Sheehan standing right next to me a couple days ago at the Fighting Bob Fest, it really dawned on me that she has a lot of courage to do what she has done. To see someone right there next to you and see the fragility of life and limb in all its glory and never be able to know what she has gone through, it can only be known truthfully that any of our Founding Fathers and Mothers would be damn proud of her.

Do I agree with everything she says? No. Do I agree with everything anyone says? No.

What Code Pink did and what Cindy has done are nothing less than truly American. Dissent ain't pretty and it never has a "right time" to do it.

campaigning for Kerry/against Bush, NH would still be a red state. If they had been here campaigning in 2006 we would not have unseated two repub congressmen. And please, don't tell me to get out there and do something because I am out there doing something...I just don't dress up as a clown.

Thanks, BrklynLib!

:toast:

:hi:

has been there from the beginning, fighting this administration and this illegal, immoral war.

During the Vietnam war, Congress only really started listening and pressuring the administration when mothers, vets, and men in jackets and ties began visiting congressional offices and demanding an end to the war.

The political theater by the Yippies, the closest thing of that era to Code PInk, garnered publicity, almost all negative, and did very little to change minds. On the other hand, peaceful mass demonstrations such as those that occurred between 1969 and 1971, with hundreds of thousands of participants, which showed the nation (and members of Congress) how widespread opposition to the war had become and helped turn sentiment against the war.

vote.

If it were not for the attention brought to the subject by the loud mouthed "fools", the people in ties and suits would never have even known about it, much less have demonstrated against it. That goes for the vote for blacks, women, and the Viet Nam war...
Quietly asking for something from those who want to deny it to you NEVER works.

mass protests that were attended by well dressed moms did more to end the war than any of the political theater staged by the Yippies.

it had not for the "theatre" that woke them up to what was going on there.

And that, frighteningly, seems to be what it will finally take here. Their kids. Their grandkids and neighbor kids. Rich people's kids suddenly having to scramble for deferments or relocations to Canada.

That, and gas rationing schemes and long, long lines at the gas stations.

It was their sons coming home in boxes( or the threat of it) that brought them to the marches. That and the nightly carnage on the news.You think it took "theater" to make them aware of their own circumstances??

They paved the way.........just as brave people like Cindy are doing now.

:crazy:

Those who think you should worry about decorum when you're trying to save lives, should have their heads examined...

are the ones that need to have their heads examined.

there is a very large and passionate group of dissenters who are being silenced. It's designed to let those who don't know what's going on that there is another side to the story.
If the protestors just sat down and acted polite, no one would ever know that they were there. Then those uninformed who were watching would certainly think: "Well, no one's disagreeing, it must be true.".

do the General must be right? Sheesh!Nothing wrong with protesting but there is something wrong with looking like an idiot with a pink crown on your head while trying to get people to take you seriously!

wonderful, and I don't even like the color pink...
Like I said in a previous post, when the protestors are given the same national stage as the war-mongers, I'll expect them to tone down a bit. Unless they just happen to like dressing up of course because after all, it used to be a free country.
I think this debate is a ridiculous time waster. Find me someone who was neutral on the issue and was swayed to support the war by a pink crown on the head of an anti-war protestor and I'll concede the issue.
You can't do it.

Until then I hope no one finds your supposedly respectable clothes ridiculous.

:rofl:



http://www.fiftiesweb.com/fashion/album/50s%20clothes/index.html

and a bustle so that I can look just right at the protest on Saturday...
:freak"

seriously until suburban Moms with strollers and men and women in "suits" joined them? That is just a fact.

I see your point on your OP.

I do think that what Code Pink did today was one of the few events I agree with them on. Today was the perfect day for them to dissent in my view. It didn't take long and it brought a voice to what is basically going to be another event where Bush and Patraeus will get their way.

For Code Pink to disrupt the Bush War enablers for a minute or two is worth it. If they weren't there, I'd be more worried. It's got to be loud...it has to be "odd"... it has to happen.

Suburban Moms with strollers and men and women in "suits" are not going to show up at the protests like today. Hopefully they will come out again in the streets like they did before the Iraq War was started, no thanks to politicians who co-sponsored and/or signed the Iraq War Resolution to give Bush a free pass to start the very war Code Pink did actions today for.

lives this time ARE THEY?

If this were any other discussion I would likely agree with you, but there are thousands(at least) of lives at stake. We cannot afford manners. Manners suggest we respect those we are being mannerly toward. I don't. Do you? Do you respect Congress? Do you respect Bush? Petraeus? I don't and I'll shout it as loud as I like, wherever I like. That is my right and I will not allow you to take it from Code Pink anymore than I will allow you to take it from me.

here's my theory: the antiwar movement was taken seriously when the draft broke. The draft broke sometime between 67 and 70, probably late 68 was when it went disfunctional. When they couldn't find the bodies to continue the war they had to change the strategy. We created a climate of dissidence and disobedience and disrespect for authority that enabled millions of kids to NOT OBEY. We broke the fucking draft. We derailed their war machine at home and over in vietnam the vietnamese refused to submit despite the serious genocide we were inflicting on them. The assholes in washington ran out of bodies and ran out of time. Fuck propriety.

The draft was dysfunctional for a very long time before 1968 in the sense that those with the means to avoid it generally were able to (by leaving the country, by finding a friendly 'draft doctor', by getting a deferment). And I'm not sure why you think that they weren't able "to find enough bodies". While there certainly were a lot of deserters (probably around 500,000 over the course of the war, and another 100,000 or so who left the country -- the number inducted was around 231,000 in 1965, 382,000 in 1966, 228,000 in 1967, 296,000 in 1968, 283,586 in 1969, and 162,000 in 1970. The commencement of troop withdrawals in 1969 wasn't because there weren't enough bodies to draft -- it was because opposition to the war had grown to the point that nixon needed to shift to his "vietnamization" strategy during the 1968 presidential campaign.

did not end until 1973.

Foley also lauds the movement for its effectiveness. For one thing, he asserts that draft resisters played a far more central role in the broader antiwar movement than historians of the movement have usually allowed. Draft resisters were, Foley writes, "the leading edge of opposition to the war in 1967 and 1968" and "the antiwar movement's equivalent to the civil rights movement's Freedom Riders and lunch-counter sit-in participants" (p. 9). They were, in short, the perpetrators of the most confrontational acts that fueled the entire movement.

Those acts, Foley adds, also did more than any other antiwar activities to impress upon government officials the seriousness of popular discontent and to force them to recognize constraints on their ability to wage war in Vietnam as they saw fit. More than most other historians of the antiwar movement, Foley posits a causal relationship between protest and government action--a fact that makes the book important for students of U.S. policymaking as well as the antiwar movement. To be sure, Foley acknowledges that resisters failed in their ambition to cripple the U.S. judicial system by overwhelming it with thousands of prosecutions. Federal authorities simply refused to play the part scripted for them by the resisters. But in other ways, Foley argues, draft resisters got results. The prospect of massive resistance against the draft, he contends, ranked among the main reasons that Lyndon Johnson rejected proposals for a new troop buildup in Vietnam after the Tet Offensive, a key moment in the U.S. shift toward de-escalation of the war. Foley also argues that draft resistance forced the Nixon administration to abandon the complicated draft system that provided various categories of deferments and to adopt a lottery system in 1969. Even as draft resistance faded after that year, Foley writes, resisters could take "some satisfaction in the fact that, try as it might, the government had not been able to ignore them" (p. 338).

http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=138991094183304

From the Selective Service web page -

RESULTS FROM LOTTERY FOR MEN FACING THE DRAFT IN 1973

The lottery drawing held February 2, 1972, determined the order in which men born in 1953 were called to report for induction into the military.

How to read this chart: This chart shows all the birth dates in a given year and the lottery numbers assigned to those dates. Read this chart like a multiplication table. At the top of the chart are the months of the year. On the far left are the dates of the month. The numbers in the center represent lottery numbers. For example: To find the lottery number assigned to July 15, look down from "July" till it matches up with the number "15" on the left side of the table. The corresponding number in the middle is "359." This means that all men born on July 15, 1953, were assigned the lottery number 359.

This lottery was conducted for men who would have been called in 1973; however, no new draft orders were issued after 1972

Link -
http://www.sss.gov/lotter4.htm

The history of the Vietnam War draft lottery can be found here -
http://www.sss.gov/lotter1.htm

I provided the link here so that you could go to that web page and see for yourself the history of the Vietnam War draft lottery. There are links on that page to the other years that the Vietnam War draft lottery was held. The draft system was changed in 1969 to this Vietnam War draft lottery system because some people felt the previous draft system was unfair to men who had to endure facing the annual drawing each year until they were 26 years of age.

The war was so unpopular by 1968 that voluntary enlistment into the Army had fallen off to almost 50% of the previous year's level because the soldiers had been coming back telling their friends and relatives their stories of horror from the rice paddies of Vietnam.

I will never forget, nor will I ever be able to repay, the men who went to Vietnam and then had the courage and the guts to stand up when they came back to tell their stories to the folks back home in order to get that "meat grinder" of a war stopped.
They saved me from being sent to the hellhole known as Vietnam.

I would have been eligible for the draft in 1974.
I was already worried about getting drafted for the Vietnam War 2 years earlier, in 1972.

A major factor that turned the tide of public opinion was the Tet Offensive of 1968. It pretty much proved that S. Vietnam was unable to stand up so we'd stand down.

men with suits, grandparents, kids both young and old and every other type of person marching right along with the costumed protestors. Yet they still didn't take us seriously.

The only thing left short of pitchforks and torches is political theater. Kudos Code Pink!

credibility.

Maybe Martin Luther King should have worn a coconut bra. That would've helped get the cause some attention.

Its hardly a surprise that someone who aleady agrees with CodePink's position on the war would have no problem with their tactics. BUt how they can think it helps with people who, despite all the information out there are still uncertain as to what action should be taken to end the war, would be convinced by people who dress like they don't take themselves or the issue seriously.

people who speak out in the face of arrest and prosecution then those people are idiots who are Certainly going to miss the subtleties of serious attire.

In this situation MLK and Rosa Parks have already been hung without a murmur.

Back then, there were plenty of people complaining, just like you, about the "lack of decorum" Parks and King were showing. In that day what they did was exactly wearing a "chartreuse tutu and a coconut bra".

And the fact is that by dressing up like clowns, CodePink makes it easy for them to stick to their positions. And if you don't think that anything can change their minds, then you are essentially admitting defeat.

And your comment about Rosa Parks and MLK is too absurd to warrant a response.

at the front of the bus, they were figuratively wearing pink and making themselves the object of hate and ridicule. They were attacked by fire hoses and police dogs. They did not have to dress up to attract attention. Their mere presence did the trick...as did that of those women who fought for the right to vote.
Nowadays, it takes a bit more to be seen and to be heard.

Why don't you educate yourself before spouting your nonsense, K?

It's easy. Google is your friend.

http://www.codepink4peace.org/article.php?list=type&type=3

"CODEPINK came to the face and space of the national leadership to protest the pre-emptive strike in Iraq. Medea Benjamin, Starhawk, Jodie Evans, Diane Wilson and approximately 100 other women kicked off this new women's initiative on November 17, 2002. They marched through the streets of Washington, DC and set up for a four month vigil in front of the White House. The name CODEPINK plays on the Bush Administration’s color-coded homeland security advisory system that signals terrorist threats. While Bush’s color coded alerts are based on fear, the CODEPINK alert is based on compassion and is a feisty call for women and men to “wage peace.”

So they dress in pink...

They call far less attention to their message than they simply do to themselves in their little girl dress-up outfits dug out of Mommy's attic from her 50's prom-queen days.

It does nothing for the anti-war movement's image, does nothing for the image of women within it who deserve to be taken far more seriously.


Jeezus, the least they could do is all yell at once with a clear, distinct audible message. Or dress up like Hell's Angels or wear a color like black which would at least clarify the non-verbals a hell of a lot better-- since their scattered words of protest were mostly lost and garbled along with the entertaining but obscure meaning of their geddups.

As it is now, CP only preaches to the choir. However, they also give Bill-O all the ammunition he needs to demonize the anti-war movement and the people CP who is supposed to be winning over will completely buy into the Falafel-master's crap.

a normal, pro-choice, feminist who is also a professional woman, mom and wife.

But I proudly wear my Pink Code Pink pro-choice t-shirt. And I support women and men who are willing to make others uncomfortable to make a point.

Why do we care what Bill, etc. think? They are wrong. Why should we pretend that the Emperor is wearing clothes?

:shrug:

No one will hear a quiet protest over the cacophony of war.
The supporters are a minority, but that 32% always make a lot of noise

Providing society's wisdom.

I am in awe of their quiet dignity.

even without the smilie

they must do EVERYTHING in their power to draw attention.

These are people's LIVES at stake here. People with no voice of their own. People who will die, or be hurt very badly if they speak out. Code Pink are amazing heroes to take such a stand.
You should be ashamed of yourself for denigrating them and wasting time that should be spent standing at their shoulder with a big pink crown on screaming at the top of your lungs for an end to this horror that has been caused by those like you being "appropriate"...

It just trivializes the seriousness of the issue.

protest should be decorous and "positive". It should be as loud, attention-grabbing, and jarring as possible.

No one who has died, or will die over this farcical horror of a money grab, is ever going to care what those trying to save their lives are wearing!

Anyone who might die over this farcical horror should want those fighting to stop it to do so in ways that are effective, not in ways where attention is placed on the messenger rather than the message.

I didn't get the memo.

Should they be dressed like Pickles or Condi?

Americans also oppose this war?

been driven to the brink of insanity by the 1984 esque bullshit of this government?

I say desperate times call for desperate measures. You won't necessarily find my dressed like Code Pink, but I support their right and admire their dedication in doing so.
Few others have that level of dedication.

means nothing without an effective, persuasive game plan that changes minds to our side. Shrieking, wearing silly costumes and making an ass of oneself in a Congressional hearing takes away from the dignity of the proceedings and from the protestors themselves, and buries the message under the farce.

When Congress starts acting dignified and ends the war, I'll support your concern. This war is the farce and that is the message. Those who are so very concerned about "silly costumes" are the ones truly burying the message.

with pink crowns. This is the Congress. You may not agree with how your representatives vote, or how the General conducts the war, but behaving like this hearing is a theater stage for anyone with an axe to grind to jump up on and throw a tantrum is a childish worldview.

to know.

and
NO
They
are
NOT
dignified proceedings.

There is NOTHING dignified about justifying more war and more death.

Talk about misrepresenting someone's posts...


Let me ask you something -- do you think it would be appropriate for a bunch of CodePink crown wearing protesters to interrupt a military funeral of someone who volunteered for a second tour of duty and then was killed in action? After all, why should someone who volunteered to fight after knowing what was going on be given a "dignified burial." And, boy would it ever get some attention....

the war does it? A vet who wants to protect his buddies has little or nothing to do with continuing the war.

Spare me. I don't have time to answer such silliness.

and theater, go join the local improv troupe.

exactly how they operate.

and Congressmen appear in anything but business dress and act with anything less than civility, (occasional argument excepted), regardless of how one feels about what they're actually saying.

do their sworn duty to uphold the constitution and protect the interests of their constituents are far from civil. No coat and tie can make up for that in my mind. Oh, and yes there is plenty of hollering, and screeching going on in Congress, not to mention more than a few cursewords. I guess if you're wearing a tie it's considered "passionate".
Let me know when lives, healthcare, social security, etc. etc.(It all comes back to lives.) are more important to you than decorum. Until then, I don't think I want to know you.

that alienates people and trivializes an important cause.

Did it persuade more people than it alienated? Or did it alienate more people than it persuaded?

suffering? Or, did it put those in power on notice that they can't ignore those few of us who refuse to stand idly by and allow murder to be carried out in our names without a murmer because some deem it impolite???

I can't answer whether this protest's positive "firing up" and "giving hope" outweighed any negative effects. I don't think it put any politicians "on notice" about anything, though. Yes, they can ignore "those few of us," because a FEW are always easy to ignore. That's the point.

A majority of the American people want the US involvement in Iraq to end, pronto. It's those constituents the politicians feel most compelled to listen to. I'm just not sure protests like the one today serve those people or encourage them to become more active.

definitely has emboldened me and those who already cared. Those who don't, still don't.
I think I just answered the rest of your post in another reply.

If you would though, please answer me this: Do you think CodePink is more or less "effective" inside the hearings being watched by probably hundreds of thousands than those penned up down the street in a "free-speech zone"?

I don't know the balance between how many people they moved in a positive way, and how many they moved in a counterproductive way.

to end this horror.
I assure you that I'm not doing as much as CodePink, and I'm willing to lay money on the fact that they aren't either.

Please see post #200 if you need more clarification of my stance.

So why attack those who question whether Code Pink did more damage than good?

calling those from CodePink "Loons", "Idiots", and "Asses". They are denigrating their character and intimating that their tactics (Oft-used and proven in the arena of peaceful protest.) are helping the enemy. (A more offensive statement I can not imagine to those who fly across country and work so hard at ending this horror. Especially when those making it are likely doing little themselves.)
That's far beyond "questioning". That's attacking. When lives and future are at stake, decorum should take a back seat. I fully understand the argument of "Turning off our supporters.", but we are way, way beyond that. Which you and they should know. So now, not only do we have Bush, terrorists, Repugs and the like coming at us, we have to worry about people on our own side attacking us for using time-honored non-violent protest tactics? I'm sorry if you disagree, but I found those attacks horribly petty, unnecessary, and counterproductive to say the least.

obviously you don't like how they're doing, so write, call, vote--but don't expect me to go along with activities meant to disrupt or make a mockery of Congressional business. The fact that YOU have deemed them uncivil, incompetent, whatever--DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE for anyone but you. Your opinion, Code Pink's opinion--there are appropriate venues and methods to express them. These hearings are NOT the time and place for it.

while over over on the other side of the world, the results of their civility are playing out. And the result is a horrific bloodbath.

How often do you go to meetings on Capitol Hill? How often do you attend hearings? If you think that there is a lot screeching and emotional theater comparable to clowns in pink tiaras, you are simply demonstrating conclusively that you don't know what you're talking about.

Code Pink has done far more to end this war than you or Congress have and that's what matters. When history judges us I'll happily stand with a pink tiara on my head. It's far better than blood on my hands.

But you are far more interested in making a statement than achieving results. Indeed, I have to wonder whether you really want the war to end, since if it ends, then you have to retire your tiara.

PS - Cite one thing...anything ... to support your contention that CodePink has helped end the war.

a good citizen can and should do.

Staying quiet, because it's the polite thing to do or any other reason, is what allows the war to continue.

Is the goal to change the minds of Congress or of the public? If its to change the minds of Congress, you can't seriously think that disrupting a hearing and dressing like a clown is going to make any elected official change his/her position.

NOw, if you think that the goal is to raise awareness among the public at large, then you ought to be in support of any gesture by the CodePinkers that gets them the maximum attention for their message. Such as protesting at a funeral. But you've already indicated that you don't think that would help. But if it "raises awareness and sentiment against it" why not?

Or is it just possible that raising awareness doesn't automatically raise sentiment against the war and that the way in which one pursues raising awareness can impact whether one succeeds in raising sentiment against the war.

hearing designed to effect the decision. You're comparing apples to asshole oranges. It's not even close. Plus you're assuming that the CodePinkers are stupid as well, they're not.


Oh, and yes, if a few more Congress persons get voted out, and it is in any way attributable to this war, then it will come to a "screeching" halt.
At which time CodePink will deserve some credit for helping to tip the balance and save lives.
You and the other obsequious hand-wringers will only get credit for prolonging it.

Getting in their face and making the opposition a constant reminder is one way to make sure they can't.

because it marginalizes and trivializes the opposition.

But go ahead and keep complaining. I'm sure your polite and timid disagreements will bring this war machine to a screeching halt.

I wish i lived on your planet.

We elected the opposition party to Congress, that sure hasn't done shit. We've marched peacefully for years now, that sure hasn't done shit. We even never elected Bush to the presidency at all, but he's there anyway. Sometimes you got to get a little creative and a little aggressive when all other options fail.

If I was an Iraqi, living under the U.S. occupation, and assuming I could see anything that happens over here in the states, I would probably draw more inspiration from what Code Pink did today than from anything most of these middle Americans that are being lauded as the ultimate authority on the legitimacy of protest movements have done. At least it would say to me that there are Americans that are aware of their suffering and willing to take a stand.

And organizations like Code Pink might actually be able to make more of a dent if more people joined them in their civil disobedience instead of sitting back behind their computers criticizing everything they do. In fact, maybe I'll give them a call and join up. You've inspired me to do more. Thanks for the insight!

If the method of protest alienates people who might otherwise be persuaded -- because they can't or don't want to identify with the protesters -- the sincerity, effort, and good intentions of the protesters is irrelevant compared with effectiveness.

"rude", or "hippies" or whatever phrase denotes societal anathema at the time. One of the points of protest is to discomfort people, specifically those in power. I'm not saying to go out of your way to piss people off, but every protest ever done has pissed someone off and been deemed rude by some of those who claim to support the protestor(s).

I think it's about how many people feel influenced to get on board, isn't it? (Both those with power and citizens who vote, speak, donate, organize, etc.)

I think people who saw many effective protesters and leaders felt inspired to be like them and join them -- they felt, "I can do that too! I want to be a part of that!" etc... There will always be some who can't see themselves doing anything out of certain boundaries they've set up, but if maximizing numbers are important to a movement, then easing those boundaries is part of it.

On the other hand, if people see protests and can't identify with it, thinking "If that's what it means to be an anti-war activist I want no part of it," then it's counterproductive.

And for a number of reasons (including such perceptions from their constituents), I don't think it sways the people in power one iota.

That's the worst reason I've ever heard. I don't know anyone else(besides wienerdog and a couple of others) who are actually more concerned about image than lives. I oppose the war because I oppose killing. Especially killing that I'm being forced to pay for. That trumps manners and image any day. If someone doesn't want to stand by my side because I don't look right to them then too bad. Good riddance. Otherwise, I wouldn't be worthy of respect. Real respect, not the fake stuff you get because you're dressed nice and speak softly.

I respect those who stand up for what they believe in. Stand up wherever they are, whenever they must. Stand up regardless of popularity.

On the one hand, I'm talking about whether such protests are effective in persuading other people to oppose the war. Some here have stated that as a reason for the protests.

On the other hand, I'm talking about whether such protests are effective in encouraging more people to become actively involved with organizing, protesting, fundraising, campaigning, etc. in an effort to move politics toward an end of US involvement in Iraq.

Nobody is saying they're "more concerned about image than lives."
Nobody is saying they're concerned about "manners and image" over opposition to killing.
Nobody is saying respect is about people who are "dressed nice and speak softly."

I don't think any debate can further an understanding between people if either side makes an effort to misconstrue what the other is saying. Hopefully I've been clear about what I am, and am not, saying.

As you have learned, if you suggest that the CodePink protesters don't actually help the antiwar cause because it allows the members of Congress who are not leaning our way to respond that those opposing the war are "out of the mainstream" and (bc) presents a picture to the public that appears to confirm that view, you get accused of being more concerned about fashion than lives. When, in fact, the opposite is more likely true. Those who engage in the kind of protests that CodePink is engaging in are more interested in drawing attention to themselves than in actually accomplishing the job of persuading people to open their eyes.

Some have suggested that its important to draw attention to the antiwar movement. But if that was the case, then CodePink should take a page from Fred Phelps and start having protests at funerals. Of course, what Phelps has proven is that drawing attention is not always productive -- it can alienate when its done in a way that turns people off. And if disrupting Congressional hearings wearing silly outfits turns off DUers who already are part of the antiwar movement, you can only imagine how unhelpful it is with folks who are not as committed.

that.

Otherwise what is the problem?

Although I see some dissident pink there.

...a Code Pink lady? They just took her away.

I tuned in late, and she is the only person I saw taken away.

The anti-war movement needs women and men interrupting official BS sessions.

I saw a woman thrown out who was not wearing pink.

But, I do agree that dressing silly isn't effective. It gives too much fodder to the opposition. I definitely believe in political theater, but, I agree with a previous post that there is a time and place. Women have enough problems with being taken seriously.

:wow:

Makes more sense.

You can bet that would be the lead story.

:sarcasm:

The media and panenlists don't make a mad dash to the exits.:eyes:

well away from the serious business of lying to the american people while continuing a massive war crime that has killed over 1,000,000 people so far with no end in sight. All of those unpleasant disrupters could do their idiotic disruptions in the free speech zones. It would be good. Tidy too.

They're telling America, "Hey! Look at us! We're the anti-war movement! The pro-war people are those nice respectable-looking men in suits! We're the crazy-looking people in pink! Who do you identify with: the people in suits talking in polite voices, or the screaming people in pink?"

I just don't think most people will.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

to protest this organize crime family that loves to murder and loot.

These ladies care about you saracat, so don't knock it!