Sam Stein

BIO

Sam Stein

The Huffington Post

Edwards Insists Hands Are Tied Over Controversial Ad

December 26, 2007 01:52 PM


stumbleupon :Edwards Insists Hands Are Tied Over Controversial Ad   digg: Edwards Insists Hands Are Tied Over Controversial Ad   reddit: Edwards Insists Hands Are Tied Over Controversial Ad   del.icio.us: Edwards Insists Hands Are Tied Over Controversial Ad

Capping off a public squabble between Barack Obama and John Edwards, an outside group with ties to Edwards released television advertisements on Wednesday that touted the North Carolinian's campaign.

The Alliance for New America, the 527 behind the ads, has been at the center of controversy for several days after it was revealed that Nick Baldick, a former high-ranking Edwards' adviser, headed the organization. The disclosure, as well as revelations that the group planned to spend $750,000 in a home stretch Iowa media blitz, prompted complaints from Obama that Edwards was acting hypocritically, denouncing outside groups on one hand while allowing them to advertise at his behalf on the other.

The back-and-forth underscored not only the desperate desire of each candidate to be seen as the agent of reform, but also the arcane and confusing nature of Federal Election Commission regulations.

After he was called to put an end to the 527's ad campaign, Edwards said that he was legally prohibited from doing so.

''The way the law exists today is you have no control,'' he said this past Thursday. ''You're not allowed by law to have contact or to coordinate with 527s. So can you discourage it? Yes, and I do.''

And indeed, according to Bob Biersack, a spokesman at the FEC, it would venture on the illegal if a candidate were to "coordinate" with a 527. Coordinate, according to the law, is defined as "in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate, a candidate's authorized committee, or a political party committee."

That said, Biersack adds, "as long as the decision to continue or stop was made by the group, then candidates are free to speak as to what the group is doing or what they hope the group will do. That would not in and of itself be coordination either." So Edwards could say, publicly, that he didn't want the 527 to run the ads (which he technically has) and Baldick, whose firm was on the Edward's payroll as recently as the campaign's second quarter, could call them off (which he hasn't).

In 2004, ironically, Edwards was on the opposite side of the 527 debate, criticizing President Bush for not personally stopping Swift Boat Veterans for Truth from attacking John Kerry's Vietnam service.

"There's one person, one person who can put an end to this today if he had the backbone, the courage, the leadership to do it. And that person is George W. Bush," he said back then. "Every day that this goes on and the president refuses to say 'stop these ads,' we're learning more and more about the character of George W. Bush."

Of course, beyond the implications of a candidate meddling in 527 affairs, there are virtually no similarities between the Swift Boat episode and respective 2008 ads. The Alliance for New America has a policy agenda - the group has been hired by six local branches of the Service Employees International Union. And while it touts only Edwards as the candidate to solve health care, energy, and campaign finance issues, the group does not make individual political attacks in its advertising campaign.

We are "an issue organization with its own distinct agenda," said Shane Allers, the executive director of SEUI Local 284 out of Minnesota, "to ensure candidates are asked how they will make the middle class and issues like health care their top priority in Washington."

And as the New York Times columnist - and increasingly frequent Obama critic - Paul Krugman noted, if the other Democrats were on the benefiting end of the ad campaign, there would likely be no complaining. "It may be partisan to say that a 527 run by labor unions supporting health care reform isn't the same thing as a 527 run by insurance companies opposing it. But it's also the simple truth."

Comments for this post are now closed


 
Comments
148
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
photo

January 1, 2008 is World Day of Peace:

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace:
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
Where there is discord, harmony;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is error, truth;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
Where there is sadness, joy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:28 AM on 12/29/2007
photo

Edwards ex-campaign manager and good personal friend is running the 527. Funny, in 2004 one of his campaign aids quit the campaign to run another Pro-Edwards 527. Of course, they aren't required by law to show who donated the money to the 527's. They can donate any amount that they wish. How about that for getting rid of special influences from politics? He tells us he will fight the insurance companies, fight the oil companies, fight the health care industries but can't even persuade his good friend and ex campaign manager to stop using special interest money for his 527. How weak.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:19 PM on 12/28/2007

As I understand it, Obama's attack was, itself, dishonest because he was saying that Edwards' promise to break the everyday, all day, all year dominance of CORPORATE LOBBYISTS was somehow inconsistent with him being supported by a uniion 527 which is trying to get a better deal for working poor and middle class Americans. All so-called "special interests" are not the same. The lobbyists are representing a multitude of interests whose only job is to make money for their stockholders, like insurance companies and drug companies whose profits depend on preventing universal health care, arms manufacturers like GE whose profits balloon when the US is at war (any war will do),and giant media moguls like Murdoch whose Fox News pushes the warmongering Neocon agenda and sells it to people too lazy to read and learn about the issues for themselves. For those of you who can't see the difference, I recommend going to the NY Times website and reading Paul Krugman's column on Obama's "hypocrisy" attack. If Obama doesn't know the difference between one 527 which is running positive ads for Edwards which do not attack Obama or Hillary or any other candidate, and the K Street money grubbers for greedy corporate giants, then he isn't as intelligent as I gave him credit for being.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 PM on 12/27/2007

Watch "An Unreasonable Man," on PBS. This bio of Ralph Nader should convince anyone, even the Nader haters, that he is truly a great American and far and away a better choice than anyone we have now. So many people who were once on Nader"s bandwagon now despise and ridicule him claiming that he lost the election for Gore. If Gore couldn"t even carry his own state of Tennessee and Bill Clinton"s Arkansas, it is pretty shabby to try to blame Gore"s loss on Nader. Gore ran a lousy campaign and didn"t deserve to win. He presumed he would be the inevitable winner. Shades of Hillary without the guts, grit and hard work. He shunned Bill Clinton"s help and came across with the genuineness of a mannequin. He also aided and abetted in keeping Nader from participating in the debates. The DNC and RNC decide who does or doesn"t get to participate in the debates. So Nader"s percentages were not enough to allow him to debate but his percentages were enough to deny Gore"s victory. "Nice try."

Ralph Nader hasn"t endorsed Edwards, but says Edwards has the most progressive position and the one that appeals to him most¦.. Nuff said.

If the corporate owned status quo Republicans and Democrats will not allow Nader, who makes them look like Lilliputians, to participate in "their democracy," then I"m going with the guy Ralph likes. It takes a lot for Ralph to like you. Go John Edwards!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 PM on 12/27/2007

I AM AN INDEPENDENT VOTER BUT WAS A REPUBLICAN ONCE WHEN THE PARTY MEANT SOMETHING GOOD..NO MORE...I'M LEANING MORE AND MORE TOWARDS EDWARDS. ONE THING FOR SURE, I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR OBAMA EVEN IF HE WINS THE NOMINATION. IF HE DOES, I HAVEN'T DECIDED JUST WHAT I WILL DO.........AS I DON'T WANT ANOTHER BIG BUSINESS "AK" IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:14 AM on 12/27/2007

EDWARDS CANNOT "CONTROL" WHAT A VOTER DOES! IF THIS MAN WANTS TO SUPPORT EDWARDS HE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO DO SO....THIS, AFTER ALL, IS "SUPPOSED" TO BE A "FREE COUNTRY" BUT IT SEEMS TOO MANY REPUKES DON'T COMPREHEND THAT FACT.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:12 AM on 12/27/2007

If these ads are not attack ads slamming other candidates and all the statements in them are demonstrably true, where the hell is the foul? It is also true that Edwards cannot legally influence the sponsoring group, other than the comment he's already made. I'm sure that if Obama had unions willing to fund ads in his support, he'd be happy to accept the support. Again, the subject ads seem to be on issues of legitimat concern for their union members and not personal attacks on other candidates. Where's the foul?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 AM on 12/27/2007
photo

Wouldn't public funding for all Presidential campaigns ehlp this sort of thing, at least a little.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:36 AM on 12/27/2007

So, Edwards talks out of both sides of his mouth? He's a politician isn't he? - so what else is new?

Edwards' career is no more distinguished than Obama's. His rhetoric, however, is better and seems more realistic.

Edwards is the only candidate who talks about helping poor people even though he has never been poor - but he might recognize one in his soup! I am sure that he plans to use part of his estate to temporarily provide shelter for the homeless veterans about whom he is concerned.

Hypocrisy, thy name is politician!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:08 AM on 12/27/2007

It should be patently clear that there is a big difference between the Swift Boat smear ads to help George Bush and Labor Unions running ads supporting the best friend they have running for President! And for Obama to complain about it is hypocracy at its height. If Obama were to win the nomination he would welcome such support as the Unions are giving Edwards, because surely he must realize he will need their support if he is to win the general election (which would never happen with or without it). Edwards is the real deal; Obama is a charming, too-smooth career politician who will do whatever it takes to get elected. If Americans vote their own best interest, they will vote for John Edwards, because he is the only candidate who genuinely cares about them. He is the only candidate who has the courage and the strength to fight the fight and give Americans back their country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:52 AM on 12/27/2007

December 14, 2007
BIDEN-BROWNBACK Measure Calling for U.S. to Support a Federal Iraq Heads to President for his Signature and BIDEN Plan for Iraq Emerges as Consensus, Bipartisan Path toward Ending War

Biden Efforts to Bar Permanent Bases in Iraq and Protect Troops with Mine Resistant Vehicles Also Included in Report

Washington, DC " Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-DE) and Senator Sam Brownback"s (R-KS) legislation calling for the U.S. to support a decentralized Iraq passed today as part of the final Department of Defense Authorization report. The measure " which has garnered overwhelming bipartisan support in both Houses of Congress " calls on the President to make a major strategic shift in the Administration"s pursuit of a political settlement in Iraq.

"It"s time for this President to listen," said Senator Joe Biden. "We now have both sides of the aisle, both sides of the U.S. Capitol, saying to the President: abandon this flawed strategy of yours and change course. Everyone agrees that there is no pure military solution in Iraq. There has to be a political solution and that begs the question: what is it? Today, the Congress answered that question with one voice."...

Senator Biden has also been a long-time advocate of barring the construction of any permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq. Last year, he successfully passed two amendments as part of the Defense Authorization bill and Defense Appropriations bill, which prohibited using any funds to build permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq or to exercise American control over Iraqi oil. Both bills were signed into law, marking the first clear sign from Congress that the American military presence in Iraq would not be open-ended.

Senator Biden's effort to protect our troops by ensuring that the Pentagon builds and deploys more mine resistant vehicles " which are proven to decrease deaths and injuries from roadside bombs by 67 to 80 percent " also was successful.
http://biden.senate.gov/newsroom/details.cfm?id=289110&&&search_field=Iraq

www.planforiraq.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 AM on 12/27/2007
photo

John Edwards is the best choice for preisdent, besides Kucinich.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 AM on 12/27/2007

Edwards is supposed to denounce and stop 527 groups he is not allowed to even contact from benefitting him? And Obama is supposed to renounce Ophrah and make sure she doesn't help him anymore, too? I don't get it! What's the real difference?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:21 PM on 12/26/2007
photo

There are some things that you just don't do in a primary, and 527s need to back off and focus on the general election.

I'm sorry, but this is the kind of crap that burns out the excitement around a candidate. This is why the Democrats have had so much trouble electing a leader the past few years. Instead of debating the issues, they play dirty. The supporters of that other candidate know full well that the guy that won just threw mud at their guy, and when the general election comes around, it becomes awful hard to get excited about a guy who trashed on your favorite nominee.

I know that I personally will vote for whomever wins the general on the Democratic side, but I sure can't vouch for a lot of other people who will feel somewhat nauseous about voting for someone who sandbagged their favorite candidate...as I will casting my vote. However, other people might not be as motivated, and motivating them isn't going to be too easy. You can't motivate people to be less nauseous with gentle words if they're already throwing up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 12/26/2007

.Let me pose the argument: I John Edwards have little money for campaign ad, my good friend and campaign manager resign from my campaign and form a 527. Now I John Edwards am against 527"s and have spent a lifetime arguing against such funds.Now I John Edwards claim ignorance of such funds, but have no legal standing to stop the action of this 527.

Who here thinks that John Edwards is not complicit in the planning and formation of this fund.
Who here think John Edwards (Snow White) is ignorant of the formation of this fund..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 PM on 12/26/2007
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect