MyDD :: Obama hits Edwards on 527

Obama hits Edwards on 527

by aiko, Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 11:52:18 AM EST

According to Ben Smith:

In Oskaloosa, Iowa this morning, in response to a questioner who said he saw Hillary fading and the choice as between Obama and Edwards, the Illinois Senator suggested that outside spending on Edwards' behalf is part of a broader pattern with his rival.

"I don't just talk the talk, I walk the walk, I've been doing this all my life, and John has not had that same record," he said.

"John yesterday said that he didn't believe in 527s," he said. "We found out today that there's an outside group spending $750,000...and the individual who's running the group used to be John Edwards' campaign manager."

"You can't say yesterday you don't believe in them and today you're having three quarters of a million dollars being spent for you," he said.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1 207/Obama_hits_Edwards_on_527.html

Tags: obama, clinton, 2008, edwards (all tags)

Permalink :: 32 Comments :: Post a Comment

those Union folks (none / 0)

like SEIU are really bad.

way to take it to Unions

McCain - a serial Opportunist, from marriage to policy positions

by TarHeel on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:09:09 PM EST

Re: those Union folks (2.00 / 1)

In this case, the Union leadership is acting in bad faith. We are not going to be able to change our politics if the Unions still cling to the old ways and people defend them for it. Let the Union use it's power to get out the vote. But to use it's money to tear down other democrats through negative advertising is not something I support and it is a way the Unions seek to disenfranchise people like me who are self-employed.

by Piuma on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:16:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh GEEZ... (1.00 / 1)

first of all "politics" are not ever and do not need to change. What can change is the law and when that happens everyone will have to live with it. Until then it is major bullshit to pick and chose how other candidates should behave.
Both Obama and Edwards are full of shit. They are pandering to the purist crowd and going ahead and breaking their own standards. Obama doesn't believe in PAC money except when it is HIS PAC and he is using it to buy influence. Either PACS are okay or they are not.
Edwards doesn't like 527s but is allowing them to work for him and then pretending he has no control over that.

And Unions do not seek nor have they disenfranchised you in any way. Just because you are self employed doesn't mean you can not organize with like minded groups of people. Don't hold it against unions because they have the balls to organize and understand collective action and you can't be bothered.

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 04:11:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: those Union folks (none / 0)

Plus it steps all over his 'Edwards can't compete' talking points.

by MassEyesandEars on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:42:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: those Union folks (none / 0)

Oh yeah, and ALL MY LIFE, is bs too. Unless Obama believes life begins at 46, because he's taken PAC and lobbyist money in every single campaign until this one.

by MassEyesandEars on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

wow (1.00 / 1)

except here is where you make no sense. Edwards has said he doesn't approve of 527s and the republicans will call him on that every day. In addition, there will not be enough outside groups in the world to compete with the republican. In addition, it will look like Edwards is not running his own campaign.

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 04:15:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: those Union folks (none / 0)

People who live in glass houses ....

If you talk the talk you need to walk the walk. Special interests = special interests. Period.

What's good for Edwards and Clinton will also be good for the GOP.

by aiko on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:01:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If PACS are bad (1.00 / 1)

why is passing out PAC money okay? Do you think the republicans are going to ignore that?
Obama would be fine with Union support and them running commercials for him if he could get any of that to happen.
Unions and Emily's list are the good guys. They are an important part of the party power. Who else is Obama going to object to? Maybe next he will want to throw African Americans and women out of the big tent? How about the arts community, Hollywood?

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 04:23:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (2.00 / 1)

That ad is going to do more harm than good for Edwards. And it's not just the hypocrite factor. He and Obama have been successfully railing against this type of thing and they are doing well in the polls because people agree with them. They don't like it and they know they are trying to be tricked and manipulated.

by Piuma on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:10:21 PM EST

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

SEIU - standing up for Janitors, CNAs and Nurses. Working on healthcare...
http://www.seiu.org/property/janitors/

Janitors' Victory Brings Hope to Cincinnati Families
On the heels of recent high-profile contract victories that made dramatic gains for thousands of working families in Houston and Miami, Cincinnati janitors have won higher wages, more work hours, and health insurance in their first-ever city-wide union contract.

The groundbreaking agreement will help lift more than a thousand janitors out of poverty, increasing the income of the majority of workers by an incredible 129 percent over the course of the contract

damned special interests...

UP News, news from the people, not the corporations

by wade norris on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:37:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

All he has to do is call up his friend, Nick Baldick, and say STOP. Its easy. But we all know that he won't do that.

Its a cat and mouse game that Edwards is playing. He is not pure.

by aiko on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:55:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama attacks SEIU? (none / 0)

I wonder what psericks thinks of his buddy Andy Stern now?

This is pretty insane, Obama is running out of progressives and progressive organizations to attack.

by souvarine on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:57:26 PM EST

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

Um, what "individual" is he talking about? I think he's referring to a mistaken report that Steve Jarding had started a 527 to support Edwards but which turned out to be more or less a clerical error. Ambinder has reported this.

Piuma, what ad are you talking about? The Friends of the Earth radio ad? The Democratic Courage web thingy that no one will see?

by desmoulins on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:58:48 PM EST

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

According to the linked article by Ben Smith, they are talking about "The "Alliance for a New America" is said to be funded by the Service Employees International Union and is run by a longtime close aide to John Edwards, Nick Baldick.", which is planning on spending 3/4 of a million dollars on advertising. Is this Edwards plan, to take federal matching funds and have 527s do the heavy lifting?

by Piuma on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 01:08:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

An important distinction: These large unions are not the solid monoliths many assume them to be. While national AFSCME endorsed Sen. Clinton. Council 31 AFSCME endorsed Sen. Obama.

As for the funders of this 527, Ambinder reported it as, "funded by wealthy SEIU branches".

How many union members that really represents is anybody's guess until we get some facts and not just speculation out in the open.

by Satya on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 01:47:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

Presumably Ambinder meant the twelve SEIU state councils (what are "branches"? does he thiink SEIU is a franchise chain?) have endorsed Edwards, totalling about 600,000 members -- the largest being California and Massachusetts.

By the way, what the hell is Ambinder talking about "wealthy"? Compared with bogus multi-million dollar operations like the right wing "Freedom's Watch" which has a budget of about $15m and no members?

by desmoulins on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 03:26:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

Ambinder's blog on this is here:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arch ives/2007/12/whos_behind_a_third_proedwa rds.php

It's an interesting development and I also would like more specifics on what Sen. Obama is referring to.

by Satya on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 01:17:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (2.00 / 0)

but obama will receive bundled donations from the insurance industry and from various hedgefunds. just bundle the money. but please, do not create a 527.

he is a liar and a hypocrite. he is a career politician who makes empty promises.

by truthteller2007 on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 01:33:26 PM EST

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

Claim Edwards is a product of 527, but hide behind the skirts of Planned Parenthood when your are asked to account for your "present" votes.

the hypocrite really needs to take a hike.

by truthteller2007 on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 01:51:24 PM EST

Edwards reply to Obama (none / 0)

Des Moines, Iowa - Today, Senator John Edwards released the following statement in response to attacks from Senator Obama:

"Senator Obama's attacks seem to increase as momentum for our campaign grows. The truth is I am the only candidate in this race who has never taken a dime of PAC or Washington lobbyist money - ever. And, it's why I support public financing of federal elections.

"As for outside groups, unfortunately, you can't control them, but let me make it clear - I think money has corrupted our politics and these groups should not be a part of the political process.

"Of course, if Senator Obama is serious about real change, I hope he and Senator Clinton will finally end their silence and join with me in calling on the Democratic Party to end the influence of Washington lobbyists by once and for all rejecting their money

by Chaoslillith on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:12:14 PM EST

Re: Edwards reply to Obama (none / 0)

Good lord, Edwards doesn't have a lick of political sense. He's campaigned as the union's boy for a year. So why doesn't he hammer Obama for attacking unions and other bedrock Democratic groups. Come on. Trippi's whole staff is union political hacks. Wake up.

Maybe Trippi really is working for Obama.

by hwc on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:19:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Also he can't outwardly approve (none / 0)

of what they are doing because that would lead to attacks of coordination. Trippi is a lot smarter than you think he is.

And the Edwards campaign knows that Clinton will attack Obama anyways so why should Edwards waste his time on that?

by okamichan13 on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:27:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards reply to Obama (none / 0)

I would have liked to have seen Edwards say that he's glad to have the support of unions and environmentalists.

No kidding. That's what I'm saying. Obama is the one out there attacking unions and seeking the support of "Obama Republicans".

by hwc on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:38:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards reply to Obama (none / 0)

Edwards: I can't control my former deputy campaign manager who just happens to run the 527 spending $750,000 on my behalf in Iowa.....I can't control the former deputy campaign manager who left my campaign and ran a 527 in Iowa in 2003....I can't control my friends/former staff is a bullshit argument.

If Edwards wanted to call them up and say STOP. He could. And everyone knows it.

by aiko on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:21:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards reply to Obama (none / 0)

call them up and say STOP.

That would violate federal campaign finance law. Edwards has not only called for that law to be changed but proposed significant change in the law that would, among other things, outlaw 527s.

IF you want that law to change, as I do, then we need the Democratic party to push for such a change. Only Edwards has proposed a significant change in cmapaign finance alw.

by desmoulins on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 03:29:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards reply to Obama (none / 0)

You don't really believe that Edwards is powerless to stop a 527 from spending money on his behalf?

by aiko on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 04:31:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

bullshit (1.00 / 1)

what he can not do is call up and send them the copy he wants in the commercial. He can't have his GOTV split districts with them and decide who is canvassing what block. He can't send them the picture he wants on front of the literature.
But he can ask them to stop running this 527 for his benefit. He can call them and ask them to stop and at the very least he could make a public statement either written or verbal asking them to stop.
But Framecop seems to think this is a great thing. All these 527s will provide his campaign for him and pretending he cant' stop them is just a clever clever move on Trippi's part.

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 04:50:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

so , in other words (1.00 / 1)

Edwards' word can not be trusted. He says one thing and means another? So why should anyone believe any of his campaign rhetoric or promises? Why would anyone support a candidate who can not be trusted to mean what he says?

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 04:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama wishes he had this kind of support (none / 0)

but wishing won't make it happen. Unfortunately for Obama he still has no national union edorsements and no endorsements from progressive groups like Emily's List or Friends of the Earth. The local and regional endorsements he has received can't even do anything in Iowa because they are blocked by other union endorsements from coming in.

So I can certainly see why he's complaining. But from someone who's done just about everything they possibly can to bring in fat check donations from the networks of lobbyists, and even has lobbyists working on his campaign, it seems pretty hollow.

by okamichan13 on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 02:25:28 PM EST

Re: Obama hits Edwards on 527 (none / 0)

Why doesn't Obama ask Oprah to quit campaigning for him? She is worth a lot more than 750k. Or better yet, why doesn't he quit crying like a baby because a lot of people believe Edwards offers a lot more hope. One thing I can assure about the upcoming election: Americans don't like crybabys!!

by RDemocrat on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 05:15:25 PM EST

Obama's weakness in Iowa (none / 0)

He has no outside help.

Clinton as the most and Edwards has a bunch. That will help make the difference (that and the fact that Clinton and Edwards are going after the Democratic base).

by dpANDREWS on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 07:20:38 PM EST

Re: Obama's weakness in Iowa (none / 0)

Notice Obama only complained when he became the subject of Democratic Courage's advertisements. Did he utter a sound when Hillary was attacked on television by 527s? No.

by truthteller2007 on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 08:00:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.