RECENT POSTS
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
UNITE HERE Divides
January 17, 2008 7:28 PM
"Hillary Clinton does not respect our people," the Spanish voice says in the Nevada radio ad. "Hillary Clinton supporters went to court to prevent working people to vote this Saturday -- that is an embarrassment."
As reported by Kate Snow and Eloise Harper, the ad calls Clinton "shameless" and says "Senator Obama is defending our right to vote. Senator Obama wants our votes. He respects our votes, our community, and our people."
The ad -- decried by the Clinton campaign -- is from the union UNITE HERE, representing 440,000 textile, hotel and restaurant workers, which endorsed Sen. Barack Obama last week.
John Edwards campaign's deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince, pointed out the hypocrisy of this, considering Obama's anger about the unions helping Edwards back in Iowa. (Remember THAT?)
"When Senator Obama says turn the page, he obviously means turn to whatever page is most convenient," Prince said. "He loudly and repeatedly attacked independent ads by unions in Iowa as the product of special interests. But when a different outside group starts running ads on his behalf in Nevada, there's not a peep from him or his campaign. It must be because he's burning up the phone lines calling the head of UNITE HERE personally to demand he pulls the ads down right away."
Added Clinton spokesman Phil Singer, "In Iowa, Senator Obama and his campaign went out of his way to attack labor unions for independently promoting other candidates. But in Nevada, he’s looking the other way as they falsely attack his opponents. That's wrong. Senator Obama shouldn't be saying one thing about independent groups in Iowa and another in Nevada. While we clearly disagree with the attacks being made against us, we do respect the right of labor unions to participate in the process. Senator Obama apparently has no problem with groups running ads as long as they attack others.
"While that’s audacious, it’s certainly not hopeful."
Said Obama spokesman Bill Burton, "Senator Obama believes, and has said clearly, that campaigns should fund themselves and discourages supporters from spending outside the campaign. But no one should be confused about the effort that was run on behalf of John Edwards in Iowa. In that case, it was not the independent speech of individual union members, each contributing small amounts to amplify their voices. It was a special project of outside donors funding a massive 527 effort run by one of Edwards’ top political lieutenants.
"As for the Clinton campaign's comment, coming from a campaign that is repeatedly launching absolutely false attacks against Senator Obama, it takes some chutzpah. The facts is their camp clearly would like to have worker's voices silences and they need to live with that unfortunate position."
What do you think of it all?
-- jpt
January 17, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (28)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Obama is for anything that promotes Obama and is against anything that promotes the other candidates. And now he has the unions running negative ads. The group that supported Edwards only ran positive ads. Obama is also running ads to have Republicans vote in Democratic caucuses because he can't convince enough Democrats to vote for him. I think he will divide the Democratic party.
Posted by: Rene | Jan 17, 2008 10:21:57 PM
Whats new with the libs they love Hypocrisy.
Unions running caucuses, so if the union member does not go for Obama does the union fire them?
Are they Citizens? Probably not!
I say send ICES there to watch, so only Citizens vote!
It seems that Obama is using Mob techniques since Union leaders who usually support not who the unions members support can watch and intimidate the members!
Obama must be proud!!
Again are they citizens?
Posted by: spock | Jan 17, 2008 10:05:52 PM
Barack Obama for President of the UNITED States of America.
Posted by: PulSamsara | Jan 17, 2008 9:42:49 PM
billary put down that crown! no more status quo, dynasties have got to go! ABH! ANYone but hilary
Posted by: teopa | Jan 17, 2008 9:36:07 PM
No one cared back in March when they could have contested the casino caucuses. It wasn't until the casino workers union endorsed Obama that all of a sudden the Clinton-backing teachers union got up in arms about it. Fact is, with NAFTA and everything else, the Clintons have never been a friend of the American worker.
Posted by: Brook Black | Jan 17, 2008 8:40:42 PM
"Hillary Clinton does not respect our people". That's the truth, in any language!
Posted by: Bob, DC | Jan 17, 2008 8:38:26 PM
Senator Obama was referring to the 527 that was headed up by Edwards' former campaign manager in 2004 that ran the ads in Iowa. This is different. What about all the negative ads and mailings that the Clinton union supporters did against Obama in Iowa and New Hampshire. Saying that he wasn't pro-choice, etc. The Clintons can't have it both ways. Sorry.
Posted by: Carolyn Grace | Jan 17, 2008 8:24:42 PM
The truth is the truth. Hillary and her supporters tried to silence the voices of hispanics, blacks, asians and whites that planned to vote in the casinos. NOT JUST UNION MEMBERS......EVERYONE! Those ads in Iowa that were supporting John Edwards didnot come from union members, they were from 527's...that is completely different. Edwards campaign has no right to complain, isnt he a big supporter of unions, now he wants to silence them as well?
Posted by: VAmon | Jan 17, 2008 7:40:37 PM
Post a comment
