Nathan Newman:
>No-- since the American people have voted to give those folks the power
>to invade, the burden is on the opposition whether you like it or not.
The American people? The majority of that much-abused group didn't drag themselves to the polls, since both parties tried to obscure distinctions and the media deliberately make elections--and politics in general--confusing, abstract, and irrelevant.
>I think some left folks feel that being right is enough, so dealing with
>bad convincing arguments are beneath them.
Sure, the general burden is on us to argue for the anti-war position, but if they're going to claim that the U.S. is suddenly a champion of democracy in the region, they should be challenged to provide evidence of that.
>It is exactly the swing pro-war Dems and moderate Repubicans who the antiwar
>movement has to convince.
That's a legislative strategy. We should be thinking street strategy about now. And in a street strategy it's the people who are leaning against the war--whether they voted or not--who need to continue to hear strong arguments and see enough cohesion that they can have a reasonable expectation that their participation is not pointless. Focus on the 3s and 4s not the 2s. Those carrying out the war policy also need to be convinced, not through logic, but by finding out that the country's going to get out of hand if they go ahead.
Jenny Brown