Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Christian Disease or, the ... | Hey, All You Naysayers! »

Monday, October 22, 2007

MoveRed Rising

posted by on October 22 at 12:42 PM

posted by definitely unpaid intern Ryan S. Jackson

A fantastic evening of right wing t-shirts and signs will greet Hillary Clinton on her first Seattle visit of Campaign 2008, as Russell Johnson (yes, Mr. Poe!) and his MoveRed cadre will take to the streets in protest.

In reference to this earlier voice mail, the plucky Vanguard University student wants you to know that “the only thing scarier than Halloween is Hillary in ‘08.” The protest, which kicks off at 3:30 outside Benaroya Hall this afternoon, is promised by Johnson to be a vibrant coalition of Ron Paul supporters, Young Republicans, and disgruntled members of the Democratic Party.

“We’re protesting her in general,” Johnson said in a phone interview, reminding me once again that the only thing scarier than Halloween is Hillary in ‘08. This seemed to actually be the over arching theme of the conversation. That, and the preponderance of mind blowing signs and t-shirts, which if previous outing are any measure, seems all but certain.

LATE EDIT- It gets deeper, Via Postman:


State Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser says today “is a defining day for Republican in our state.” He says party members need to protest tonight’s visit by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to “to show how our principles and ideals differ from those of the Democrats.”

Esser sent out his call for protests in an e-mail to supporters this morning that said:

URGENT: Hillary Clinton In Seattle Today - Let’s Send Her A Message

But he’s also looking for money. And he’s taking a page from the liberal netroots.

When President Bush visited Seattle a month ago, Democrats raised over $100,000 in online contributions. Their most liberal elements called it a “show of strength” and we as Republicans need to take the left wing very, very seriously. The Democrats are thoroughly committed to an agenda of larger government and higher taxes, and will not give up their iron grip on state government voluntarily.

Today, grassroots Republicans can send a message right back to Hillary Clinton and Christine Gregoire by contributing here to help us spread the word about Hillary’s dismal record and the danger she poses to our state.

RSS icon Comments

1

Should I be happy or sad that I recognize that pro-GOP redhead kid in every pro-GOP protest photo around here?

Posted by matthew fisher wilder | October 22, 2007 12:32 PM
2

Please tell me this is really a clever piece of satirical anti-Bush agit-prop, like those "Billionaires For Bush" kids?

I mean, "Give War A Chance!" WTF!?!NOBODY could be THAT bone-headed!

Could they?

Posted by COMTE | October 22, 2007 12:34 PM
3

Yes, they could.

Today would be an excellent day for a Metro bus to lose steering and brakes and run up into the side of Benaroya.

Posted by Fnarf | October 22, 2007 12:38 PM
4

So we are protesting her just because we dont like her and not because of her actual policies? Awesome.

Posted by blaire | October 22, 2007 12:38 PM
5

Russell seems able bodied and willing to get his war on, so why has he yet to enlist?

Posted by Pro War Chickenhawks | October 22, 2007 12:41 PM
6

Oooh blaire, I love it when you're hot an bothered. Mmm rarr.

Posted by Amelia | October 22, 2007 12:42 PM
7

@3 How about just the sidewalk. I'd hate to see the building get hurt.

Posted by Chris | October 22, 2007 12:43 PM
8

Be sure to send him a super special Fuck you! for me. Thanks.

"We're protesting her in general."
Translation: Because she's a Democrat, and we're "Republicans".

Give war a chance? President Bush the greatest President? These are not real Republicans. Their parents are Republicans, and they're acting like typical kids who think they're right because they were raised to believe what their parents believe--not believing their right because they believe what they're dishing.

Fuck these morons. Hell, I give Ann Coulter more credit than these yo-yos.

Posted by Mr. Poe | October 22, 2007 12:48 PM
9

You know, Halloween is not exactly scary. The teletubbies are scarier than Halloween.

Posted by exelizabeth | October 22, 2007 12:49 PM
10

*they're. Fuck.

And I won't apologize for misspelling Russel's first name. He doesn't deserve that, anyway.

Posted by Mr. Poe | October 22, 2007 12:50 PM
11

Wait, I spelled his name correctly. You did not. The trickery!

Posted by Mr. Poe | October 22, 2007 12:55 PM
12

If these guys are not a joke, why are the quoting Stephen Colbert?

Posted by elenchos | October 22, 2007 12:57 PM
13

luke esser is a giant closeted homophobic queer. the end.

Posted by socialarsonist | October 22, 2007 12:59 PM
14

In what way are they retarded? They're just retarded in general.

Posted by skweetis | October 22, 2007 1:00 PM
15

He thinks Halloween is scary? What a little bitch.

Posted by what a pussy | October 22, 2007 1:04 PM
16

LATE EDIT = Update

Posted by n00b | October 22, 2007 1:09 PM
17

Hey Luke, while you're talking about the netroots response to the Bush visit, can you let us know how "much" (how little, actually) the WSRP received from that fundraiser? It would really help in the analysis of Reichert's Q3 FEC reports and his spokesman's unilluminating comments on it.

Posted by N in Seattle | October 22, 2007 1:09 PM
18

How many TENS OF BILLIONS did Comrade Bush want to spend in Iraq this year again?

Uh huh.

Don't think so!

Posted by Will in Seattle | October 22, 2007 1:19 PM
19

Oh, Russel! Hooray for the return of Russel! Back after he and his buddies' head-slapping appearance at the Bush-Reichert event in August, I mustered up what little indignation I have left to have a little myspace chat with him.

I was hoping for either a worthy adversary or at least a wink and a nod that the whole thing was a joke, but, alas, no; He and his buddies really are that stupid and his debate skillz are jaw-droppingly limited to repeated sound bytes. Now, bear in mind, I normally wouldn't repost a flame war between me and some college kid online, but this is educational in dispalying the stunning paucity of intellect we are dealing with here. Behold (spelling and grammar mistakes left intact for both of us):


Me: If you're so gonzo about this war, why not go enlist?

Russell: if you're so against this "illegal" war why don't you sign up to be a human shield in iraq? i hear they taking applications at moveon.org


Me: You didn't answer my question. If you are for this war, that inherently means that you are in favor of the tactic of a military response to the situation in Iraq. My opposition to the war doesn't inherently mean that I'm in favor of the tactic of human shields, which I don't think solves the problem.

So that still leaves the question, if you are willing to be a visible cheerleader for war from the sidelines, why aren't you willing to get your hands bloody and risk your own life? I honestly want to know what the rationale is behind this attitude. Explain it to me, I'm all ears.


Russell: you didn't answer my question either so i guess we are even. let me rephrase it for you. if you're so against this "illegal" war why don't you (insert "inherent" action here) in iraq? i hear they taking applications at moveon.org p.s. calling for bush to be impeached, smoking marijuana or abusing welfare doesn't count as legitimate "inherent" action.


Me: Actually, I think you'll find I did answer your question:

You asked why I wasn't volunteering to be a human shield in Iraq if I was against the war. My response is that I don't agree with human shieding as a tactic (as a side note, if you could point out to me where exactly ..On.org they are providing people the opportunity to volunter as human shields, it would help your argument a lot, because I certainly couldn't find it on their website).

You, however, are very publicly agreeing with and encouraging not only the idea of war as a solution to the problem posed by Iraq, but the expansion of that war into places like Iran. So my question remains, why aren't you taking part in that solution yourself by serving in a military capacity?

If you are going to appear publicly, positing yourself in a leadership or spokesperson position for the pro-war movement, you should be able to articulate the rationale behind your position. I'm just a random dude on the internet whose asking you to explain that rationale.

It's a very simple question. Can you give me an answer?
Are you capable of explaining why your position is not hypocritical?


Russell: i support nasa but im not signing up to be an astronaut. your illogical arguments and liberal talking points have lost their "pizazz". please for your sake stop trying.

Me: WOW. Okay, I'll take that as a resounding "no" in answer to my question.

Funny that you should be throwing around phrases like "illogical argument" and "talking points," when everything that's come from your end of this conversation so far has consisted of little more than one-liners that wouldn't cut in on the Colbert Report. Is that your idea of "pizzaz," by the way? If so, I'll stick with good old fashioned rational debate, boring as it may be for the low attention span set.

Pretty pathetic. I was expecting an argument and all I got was contradiciton.

You know, the worst part about all of this is that you are what a lot people think of when they think about Christians. Hell, the big bad Romans only killed Jesus the one time, people like you have been killing him ever since then.

Russell: ok

(END OF TRANSCRIPT)
I don't know if I should be comforted or terrified by the fact that this is all the smarts it takes to be a "leader" among young Christian conservatives.

Posted by BillyCorazon | October 22, 2007 1:36 PM
20

#12, There are a surprisingly large number of right wing idiots who aren't aware that Stephen Colbert is satire.

Posted by Cascadian | October 22, 2007 1:43 PM
21

@20,

Wait, let me correct that for you:

"There are an unsurprisingly large number of right wing idiots who aren't aware that Stephen Colbert is satire.

Posted by keshmeshi | October 22, 2007 1:54 PM
22

Is Hillary a danger to our state? Well, obviously!

But is she more dangerous than Global Warming? It's too soon to tell ... science still has a lot of work to do on that one.

And more dangerous than Islamo-Fascism-Awareness??? Not possible. NOTHING is more dangerous than Islamo-Fascism-Awareness.

Posted by RonK, Seattle | October 22, 2007 1:54 PM
23

I look at that picture and I just say for myself "hmmm, a lot of eligible cannon fodder that hasn't volunteered yet".

Time for a draft.

Posted by Will in Seattle | October 22, 2007 1:57 PM
24

Is that the same Russell Johnson from Gilligan's Island?

Posted by DOUG. | October 22, 2007 2:29 PM
25

these conservative protestors need to get a job!

Posted by maxsolomon | October 22, 2007 2:41 PM
26

The Army recuiters should get down to Benaroya this afternoon. I'm sure they'll find a bunch of willing volunteers who just haven't been able to find the time to get down to the recruitment office. What with all their pro-war protesting and frat parties.

Posted by elrider | October 22, 2007 2:56 PM
27

the world at large is scarier than halloween.

Posted by Kim | October 22, 2007 3:15 PM
28

I think that the chickenhawk "why don't you enlist" argument is fatally flawed.

When that argument is used, is presupposes that one cannot advocate for a particular policy position unless one actively and personally works to bring about that position.

To use an example that I suspect many readers will see as ridiculous, let's use the pro-choice policy position. In effect, the same rationale would have an argument saying, "Since you advocate for pro-choice policies, you must be willing to undergo medical training and actually perform abortions in order to have a leg to stand upon and advocate that position".

It ends up poisoning the debate on whether the policy in question is a good idea or not, and diverts attention from any merits one course of action may have over another. As such, it is not especially useful in constructive debate.

Now, I understand that protest placard slogans are not exactly deep sentiments usually, and it may presumptuous to think that the people employing the 'chickenhawk' style of argument actually want to have a debate. It is useful, however, to point out the rhetorical emptiness of that approach towards actual analysis of issues.


Posted by chunkstyle | October 22, 2007 3:42 PM
29

@7:

Ditto. I have friends who work at Benaroya.

I'll bet they're having a really "fun day" right now - assuming they didn't duck out early, of course.

Posted by COMTE | October 22, 2007 4:05 PM
30

The difference is that war supporters can really do something to help win the war by enlisting.

When the US military is saying explicitly that they have been having trouble meeting their recruiting goals, and we've all seen them lower their standards, it is clear that they need people in uniform. College Republicans in particular are just the kind of people they need. Desperately.

The space program is not in danger of failing because not enough astronauts are volunteering; if it was, then it would be somewhat hypocritical if a qualified astronaut viciously attacked those who don't support NASA. A qualified doctor who loudly complained about a lack of abortion providers in rural areas would look like a fool if they themselves were unable to go there.

So they want somebody to go risk dying over there, but they want that to be somebody other than their prime recruit material selves.

Posted by elenchos | October 22, 2007 4:06 PM
31

Wow.

Last time I advocated using SUVs to run down bicyclists that ignore traffic signals my post got pulled from slog (I assume for “inciting violence” or some such lame ass excuse) but it’s A-OK to advocate using a bus to run down a group of people exercising their right to free speech…

Way to keep it consistent!

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me | October 22, 2007 4:12 PM
32

@30 - yeah, but the Red Bushies would have to grow a pair to do that.

Posted by Will in Seattle | October 22, 2007 4:37 PM
33

I was just down there at 3rd and University. MoveRed gets my vote for Seattle's best public performance art project. They even had holla-backs.

Posted by K | October 22, 2007 4:42 PM
34

i also just saw these douchbags downtown. i kind of love them, only because they make republicans look even more stupid than usual.

Posted by kerri harrop | October 22, 2007 4:55 PM
35

@2: They had a "No Iran War" sign and a lot of Ron Paul signs out today. Go figure, eh.

Posted by k | October 22, 2007 5:01 PM
36

You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me @ 31

Last time I advocated using SUVs to run down bicyclists that ignore traffic signals my post got pulled from slog (I assume for “inciting violence” or some such lame ass excuse) but it’s A-OK to advocate using a bus to run down a group of people exercising their right to free speech…

Dude, we are consistent, this is the Stranger, it's not that we're against running people over, it's just that we're against running them over with pollution producing SUVs. Next time advocate running people over with a bus or light rail and we won't yank your post.

Posted by Dan Savage | October 22, 2007 5:15 PM
37

I was advocating an ACCIDENT, not a deliberate assault. My joy would come from hearing of their suffering, not of the commission of a crime to bring it about.

Posted by Fnarf | October 22, 2007 5:37 PM
38

Dan: Thanks for the clarification! I look forward to holding you to that position (though I'd look forward to holding you in any position...)

Fnarf: You're such a milk-toast pussy. Own your hate if your going to flaunt it.

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me | October 22, 2007 5:52 PM
39

@38

...what?

Posted by Mr. Poe | October 22, 2007 6:35 PM
40

you_gotta_be_kidding_me:

nope were not kidding you...and you are a doof, on all counts.

Posted by pissy mcslogbot | October 22, 2007 8:01 PM
41

No shit. I even defended you, You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me.

Come back and make some goddamn sense. Your #38 comment is either an incongruous effect, or it's simply retarded (for lack of better word). Fix.

Posted by Mr. Poe | October 22, 2007 8:41 PM
42

"Youth is so wonderful - too bad it's wasted on the young." (GBS) Don't like Hillary - don't vote for her. But it's easier to ride the horse in the direction the horse is going.

cc: Will-o-the-whisp(er)

Posted by RHETT ORACLE | October 23, 2007 12:06 AM
43

According to the morning P-I, Esser's appeal to the Republican Party's grassroots netted two dozen protesters. Guess the Rs are gearing up for another big loss at the polls in '08.

Posted by J.R. | October 23, 2007 8:40 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).