''Misdirecting the Anti-War Movement"

In this article in CounterPunch, subtitled "The Perfidy of the Democratic Party's Puppets," John Walsh takes on The Nation, the Greens, MoveOn, Al Franken, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean for their positions on the Iraq war. In a follow-up email to me, Welsh says: "...Dean himself is pro-war. He advocates sending MORE troops to Iraq and has since the war began. That was clear in his interview with NPR and his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations. But Dean did not make that clear to the constituents who supported him because they thought he remained against the war. He WAS against the war - as were 21 Democratic and 2 Republican Senators - BEFORE it started. But once under way, he favored it and advocated sending more troops - just like Kerry. And he remains that way today. ...you might want to reconsider your support for Howard Dean." In the interest of promoting "vigorous discussion," I have decided to post this, even though I usually don't indulge in what I refer to as "blather" about who is more anti-war or less grassroots, etc. In one of my responses to Welsh, I wrote: "I appreciate your criticism of some of Dean's positions, which I don't necessary disagree with. Overall, however, I think he remains a progressive force in removing the current regime from power. For that reason, I attempt to unite the opposition to what I call "the rovians." I don't see how your point of view contributes to building a progressive force, since it serves to divide the opposition forces."