There’s no doubt that antiwar activism among the left has declined substantially since Barack Obama became president. That has led many people to claim that the apparent antiwar views of many on the left were not so much antiwar as anti-Bush. I’m sure that there’s something to that, but there’s also a more nuanced explanation. Many on the left probably are still very antiwar, but the fact that they identify with President Obama makes it hard for them to criticize his actions. One of the easiest things to do is oppose a particular policy when you detest both the policy and the policymaker; it’s harder for most people to vocally oppose a policy they don’t like when they like the policymaker.
Yet my own impression of antiwar activism in Monterey County, where I live, is that although it has fallen off since the Bush years, there is still a lot of antiwar sentiment among the antiwar leftists who were so vocal during the Bush years. I gave Exhibit A for my case two years ago in “A Coalition’s Progress: Monterey’s Anti-Afghan War Demonstration.” In that article, I documented how successful the libertarian/left coalition had been at organizing a well-attended October 2009 demonstration against Barack Obama’s favorite war: the one in Afghanistan. Exhibit B is the positive reaction of two prominent local antiwar leftists to my letter published in the Monterey Herald last week.
To understand the context, you need to know two things. The first is that the most prominent local politician in the Monterey area is Leon Panetta, a long-time Democratic congressman, then director of President Clinton’s Office of Management and Budget, then Clinton’s chief of staff, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and now secretary of defense. As you can imagine, many people in Monterey County think of him as the local boy who made good. I don’t. I think of him as the local boy who made bad. (I have already written about some of my views on Panetta in “Is Leon Panetta a Saint—Or a War Criminal?”)
The second thing to know is that another Monterey politician, Democratic Assemblyman Bill Monning, has spoken out strongly against the various wars during both the Bush and Obama administrations. In fact, we both spoke at a well-attended local antiwar rally on Nov. 13 last year.
On Sunday, July 10, I opened that day’s Monterey Herald and saw a large ad praising Leon Panetta. The ad states:
Congratulations Leon Panetta. Our new Secretary of Defense.
Mr. Secretary, Thank you for your service to the Monterey Peninsula, the nation, and the world.
You are a great public servant, a great American, and a great friend!
Imagine my surprise when I saw that one of the signers was Bill Monning. I was disappointed.
Bill and I have gotten along well, though, so I thought I owed him a letter to give him a chance to explain himself before I went public. So the next day, after I had cooled off, I wrote the following:
Dear Bill,
I was very disappointed to see your name on the encomium to Leon Panetta in the Herald the other day. Whatever our other disagreements, you and I have, as long as I’ve known you, been against the wars the United States is now in. What’s even worse is a war without congressional consent, let alone congressional declaration. Leon conducted an illegal war against Pakistan, and, because much of it was conducted by the CIA, that makes him and those under him who were involved war criminals.
Best,
David
Six days later, he still had not responded, so I wrote the following letter to the Monterey Herald:
I was disappointed to see the praising ad for Leon Panetta in the Herald on July 10. I wasn’t surprised that it was paid for by the Democratic Women of Monterey County. I was disappointed that Assembly Member Bill Monning signed it. Monning and I spoke at an end-the-Afghan-war rally in Monterey last November. He was, like me, against that war and critical of the other wars that Bush and Obama have got the United States into. So how can he reconcile his antiwar views with his praise of Leon Panetta?
As head of the CIA, Panetta participated in the drone program that killed many innocent people in Pakistan. Lawyer Philip Crawford and I pointed out in an article in May that under the Geneva Conventions and other international laws, it is a war crime to launch indiscriminate attacks affecting the civilian population with the knowledge that such attacks will cause excessive loss of life, injury to civilians, or damage to civilian objects. Leon Panetta is no friend of peace.
If Bill Monning wants to be serious about his antiwar views, he needs to judge politicians not on whether they are Republicans or Democrats, but on their actual policies.
I e-mailed the letter on July 17. On July 19, I got up early and checked my email. In my inbox was an email titled “Great Letter in Today’s Herald,” in which Hal Ginsberg, the owner of the local left-wing radio station, KRXA, invited me to come on his show that morning. I did and we had a great discussion that lasted about 20 minutes. Hal was on my side of the issue. Like me, he finds Panetta to be “ no man of peace,” and he was also disappointed at Bill Monning’s action. What makes this all the more striking is that Hal has Monning as a guest on his show every Monday morning. Hal also noted, which I hadn’t, the conspicuous absence on the ad of Monterey’s member of the House of Representatives: Democrat Sam Farr. I would bet Sam was asked and said no. I gave Sam his due.
A day or two later, I received a call from an antiwar activist who is thought of as an institution in the Monterey County antiwar movement. She thanked me for my Herald letter and told me to expect something in the mail. In the next day’s mail came a note from her saying, “Thanks for your letter in the paper — right on!”
Has the left part of the antiwar movement been quieter since Barack Obama’s election? Yes, and that’s too bad. But in Monterey County, it is not silent.
Copyright © 2011 by David R. Henderson. Requests for permission to reprint should be directed to the author or Antiwar.com.
Read more by David R. Henderson
- Rand’s Stand – March 12th, 2013
- Is Iran a Threat? – February 5th, 2012
- What Is War Good For? – January 20th, 2012
- Is Leon Panetta a Saint—or a War Criminal? – May 16th, 2011
- Adm. Mullen’s Spinning vs. Prof. Hayek’s Insight – November 28th, 2010





paul
July 24th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
I hear the unwillingness in this writer's voice to break with many friends on the Left. I understand it. I feel the same. But we can not make any excuses for what now can only be seen as the vicious and brutal partisanship of lefties who continue to make excuses for Obama and the Dems. We need to remember that there were a lot of nice people in Nazi Germany, who nicely went along with evil. Niceness has next to nothing to do with ethics. Yet it's often equated with ethics. I was taking with a very very nice Dem the other day, who was saddened by Obama's bad tactics. I truly could not believe the nearly insane delusion of this very nice person. Obama's tactics aren't bad. They are brilliant. They just have nothing to do with Dem, progressive or Left agendas. THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR ANYONE NOT SEEING THAT AT THIS POINT.
Hondo69
July 25th, 2011 at 4:35 am
It make me sad when people store their values in the closet if "their guy" is in office. It tells me one thing – to these people the #1 priority is constantly damn the other side, which is obviously much more important than standing by so called principles.
Brad_Smith2
July 25th, 2011 at 3:59 pm
Half of my family lives in or around Monterey. I met my wife on Cannery Row. I spent over a decade living there. The democrats that I know who live in Monterey, Salinas and Castroville will not openly protest Obama. I don't consider being a closet anti-war activist as being anti-war at all. If you refuse to speak out because your team is in charge then you are really not anti-war.
If you are actually anti-war you wouldn't care what initial comes behind their name "R" or "D" doesn't change what bombs do to the human body.
"many on the left were not so much antiwar as anti-Bush. I’m sure that there’s something to that, but there’s also a more nuanced explanation".
This is the problem with party identity. The first thing people need to realize is that there is no such thing as "Good" government. We might consider the state to be a necessary evil but don't for one second ever consider that it's good.
Brad_Smith2
July 25th, 2011 at 4:05 pm
Being in the closet is the best way to put it. I think that a person is either anti-war or pro-war. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Brad_Smith2
July 25th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
"although it has fallen off since the Bush years, there is still a lot of antiwar sentiment"
A fat lot of good sentiment does. What is sentiment good for, if you still go out and vote for a warmonger? Obama didn't even lie about Afghanistan and Pakistan. He is doing exactly what he said he was going to do. Americans voted him in so who is to blame?