Antiwar ad: Them's fightin' words
PETER D. FEAVER likens the recent MoveOn ad attacking the credibility of General David Petraeus to the McCarthy witch hunts of the 1950s ("MoveOn's McCarthy moment," Op-ed, Sept. 11). Please give us a break.
Senator Joseph McCarthy imposed the oppressive weight of the US government to the malign purpose of destroying scores of careers and reputations based on cooked-up evidence, prejudice, and the blind distribution of official venom.
Not only does MoveOn.org have no link to any branch of the US government, it is not even affiliated with either of the major political parties. It has no standing beyond the voice it presents to the nation by the media coverage it secures through perfectly legitimate means.
Its latest shot may have been nasty, but MoveOn did not invent nastiness. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were no less nasty, and they were sanctioned and supported by the campaign apparatus of a sitting president. Creating parallels between the MoveOn rant and McCarthyism is ludicrous, and I think that Mr. Feaver knows it.
JOHN LeBARON
Cullowhee, N.C.
FEAVER'S OP-ED regarding MoveOn's ad prolongs the "remarkable political theater" he decries. He concludes his otherwise well-reasoned argument by condemning the path the antiwar faction has chosen. Unless he was referring specifically to MoveOn, Feaver ambiguously conflates a host of positions under the label "antiwar faction." Opinion polls suggest that most of the American public, not a mere faction, has come around to an antiwar position on Iraq. And as the public repudiation of many high-profile Democrats suggests, many of those opposed to the war find this particular ad in as poor taste as Feaver.
MARK DUBOI
Durham, N.C. 