Obama: Union Advertising Is "Underhanded" "Misleading"

The Nation   |  Ari Melber   |   December 30, 2007 11:33 AM


stumbleupon :Obama: Union Advertising Is "Underhanded" "Misleading"   digg: Obama: Union Advertising Is "Underhanded" "Misleading"   reddit: Obama: Union Advertising Is "Underhanded" "Misleading"   del.icio.us: Obama: Union Advertising Is "Underhanded" "Misleading"

Barack Obama's presidential campaign is circulating an unusual memo complaining that "unprecedented" spending by Democratic groups could "impact the outcome" in next week's Iowa Caucuses. Campaign Manager David Plouffe does not allege any illegal activity by other candidates, but he claims that some of the advertising by unions and liberal organizations is "underhanded," "negative," and "misleading." The Edwards Campaign fired back this weekend, arguing that Obama's "desperate, false attacks" showed that Edwards was surging in Iowa - and touting his record of declining any contributions from Washington lobbyists or PACs.

If Obama's aides were confident about Iowa, it's hard to imagine their ideal closing argument would be railing against the legal spending of groups that other candidates do not control. Yet as The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza reports, Obama has spent "much of the last week" on this point -- a "major gamble," since campaign spending is "a topic that usually glazes over the eyes of the average voter." But if the hyper-informed activists who caucus do dig into the topic, they might not like what they find.

Obama is basically complaining about the political activities of union-affiliated groups, which are strongly supported by many Democratic voters. All the candidates seek union endorsements in the primaries -- and rely on their spending and mobilization efforts in the general election. (Unions spent over $60 million on the midterms.) So it's hard to take Obama's complaint seriously, as Paul Krugman noted, when the road to the White House includes plenty more spending by outside groups. And even putting aside the general election, outside groups are currently backing Obama, including a California organization registered as a "527" and a PAC. So Obama's concerns sound more like sour grapes -- AFSCME and SEIU would probably face little criticism if they were spending money on him. (They are helping Clinton and Edwards, respectively.)

Click here to continue reading Ari Melber's "Obama: Mo Money, Mo Problems."

For the rest of HuffPost's Iowa coverage, go here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/iowa

Comments for this post are now closed


 
Comments
14
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:
- tbone99 I'm a Fan of tbone99 91 fans permalink

As Paul Krugman recently confirmed in his column for the New York Times, Obama is attempting to compare labor unions and progressive interests with groups that advocate for corporations as he criticizes Edwards, tries to link Edwards to Washington lobbyists.

But by doing just this, Obama glaringly leaves the door wide open on his own involvement with big business lobbyists .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 PM on 12/30/2007

"So it's hard to take Obama's complaint seriously"

For me, it's been hard to take Obama's whole campaign, seriously.

I have listened to Obama all through this election, and every time I hear him speak, two important questions come to mind:

1. Where is the walk of his, 'talk?'

I just don't see it.

2. Where's the Beef?

Hope is NOT a concrete plan.

Obama seems like a nice enough guy, but he just doesn't appear to me to be a 'real' leader. He's definitely got the gift, but in my opinion, he is not ready to be our next president.

Making history is just NOT important to me. I want a REAL leader in the White House. For me, 'the real leader in this election is John Edwards'; my vote is going to John Edwards.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 PM on 12/30/2007
- kuvasz I'm a Fan of kuvasz 3 fans permalink

going after unions is a republican thing to do. the guy is in the wrong primary.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 12/30/2007
- vernonbc I'm a Fan of vernonbc 2 fans permalink

You're missing the point Ari. Edwards is basing his campaign on fighting corporations and big money but he is strangely silent when those corporations and that big money is helping him. He was very vocal about decrying the influence of 527's when they worked against him in 2004 but is very happy to take their ads and their money now. How hypocritical, but still very typical of a man who has changed his message now trying to get elected.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:26 PM on 12/30/2007

A corporate candidate is pissed at unions. Gee what surprise is that?

Unions, when at their best, are 'polarizing'. Unions act in the interest of working people.

Obama isn't running against Alan Keyes, how can he win? (Bobby Rush kicked his ass.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:22 PM on 12/30/2007
- dutchess2 I'm a Fan of dutchess2 17 fans permalink

Just between you and me, I'm not voting for anyone who uses negative ads, negative oppo or any of that other crap...bush, rove and cheney, all lower case because they are lower case types, have refined it to a science. It is dirty, underhanded, and divisive..and any candidate that does it, or allows it to be done on his or her behalf is out of the race as far as I am concerned.

Every day the current occupant of our White House reminds us those who use dishonesty to achieve something will be dishonest when they get it...



    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:00 PM on 12/30/2007
- doglove I'm a Fan of doglove 35 fans permalink
photo

SUCK WIND OBAMA, YOU'RE HISTORY.

Go away now, Hillary Lite.

Edwards can bring back America and will.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:56 PM on 12/30/2007
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect