Clinton, Edwards campaigns blast radio ads backing Obama

[DeepModem Mom]

CNN: January 17, 2008
Clinton, Edwards campaigns blast radio ads backing Obama



WASHINGTON (CNN) — The campaigns of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards took aim at Barack Obama Thursday over radio ads in Nevada funded by a third-party group that is backing his candidacy. The spot, running on Spanish-language radio in the state, criticizes Clinton for a lawsuit filed by some of her Nevada supporters that sought new restrictions workplace caucus sites this Saturday. The buy is allegedly being funded by the Unite Here Campaign Committee on behalf of the Culinary Workers Union, which has endorsed Obama.

“Hillary Clinton does not respect our people. Hillary Clinton supporters went to court to prevent working people to vote this Saturday – that is an embarrassment,” says the announcer, according to a translation of the script sent to reporters by the Clinton campaign. “Hillary Clinton supporters want to prevent people from voting in their workplace on Saturday. This is unforgivable. Hillary Clinton is shameless. Hillary Clinton should not allow her friends to attack our people’s right to vote this Saturday. This is unforgivable, there’s no respect. “Sen. Obama is defending our right to vote. Sen. Obama wants our votes. He respects our votes, our community, and our people. Sen. Obama’s campaign slogan is “Si Se Puede” (“Yes We Can”). Vote for a president that respects us, and that respects our right to vote. Obama for president.”

On a conference call with reporters late this afternoon, Hispanic supporters of Clinton’s presidential candidacy criticized the union for incorrectly implying that “Si Se Puede” – a slogan associated with the late activist Cesar Chavez – was also the Obama campaign’s official slogan. The Clinton campaign also expressed frustration with the fact that the spots are continuing to run, even though a judge ruled against the suit today, the ad has continued to air.

John Edwards was criticized by Obama in Iowa for not calling an independent group that supported the former North Carolina senator to demand they pull ads they were running in support of his candidacy. “When Sen. Obama says ‘turn the page,’ he obviously means turn to whatever page is most convenient. He loudly and repeatedly attacked independent ads by unions in Iowa as the product of special interests,” said Edwards Deputy Campaign Manager Jonathan Prince....

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/17/clinton-edwards-campaigns-blast-radio-ads-backing-obama/#more-4528

[skipos]

1. Edwards attacks Hillary 99 times for every 1 attack on Obama

Go get her John! Say no to the status quo!

[babylonsister]

2. When I first read your header, I kept shaking my head.

Why are they advertising for Obama? Duh! Blast as in criticize. NOW I get it! :think:

[DeepModem Mom]

6. I see how you read it that way! Poor choice of words by CNN. nt

[Scriptor Ignotus]

17. lazy journalism again..eom

[robbedvoter]

7. The title is so F8ed up!

[MethuenProgressive]

3. "“Hillary Clinton does not respect our people." - In Spanish...

Obama is over playing the Race Card, in my opinion.

[BootinUp]

5. Obama is not behind that ad. But he should try to

get it taken off the air.

[MethuenProgressive]

10. DU's ObamaBots insist HRC is personally behind every 'attack' on Obama.

I'm sure you've noticed? I'm just climbing aboard their Swiftboat.
Obama is personally behind these commercials.

[stillcool]

23. I'm sure you know...

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/obama_labor_ally_spending_nearly_14000_on_new_tv_attack_ad_in_nevada.php
Obama Labor Ally Spending Nearly $14,000 On New TV Ad In Nevada
By Greg Sargent - January 18, 2008, 11:14AM

UNITE -- the Obama labor ally that stirred controversy yesterday by airing a radio ad in Nevada attacking Hillary for not respecting Latinos -- has just laid out nearly $14,000 for a new TV ad in the state, according to records filed with the FEC today.

Is it another negative hit?

The filing says that UNITE spent $13,645 on an ad that "supports" Obama, which suggests that it might be a positive spot.

But here's the thing. That radio ad hitting Hillary referenced above was also described in the FEC filings by the group as merely being supportive of Obama, even though it was a pretty hard hit on Hillary. The justification for this is presumably that the ad also praised Obama.

So it's fair to ask whether the new TV spot will do the same -- combine praise of Obama with a negative slam on Hillary. If so, look for it to become an issue today.

We're checking in with UNITE about the ad and will keep you posted.

Late Update: In terms of the size of the buy, it's worth keeping in mind that it's one day and it's on Univision, according to the filing.

Late Late Update: It turns out that the ad is all positive. Here's the full text, emailed over by a union official:

Together we built our Culinary Union and together we are winning the Las Vegas Dream.

The companies can't divide us by race or by casino or by the job we do.

Senator Barack Obama believes that the way to change America is by bringing all people together.

Together we can elect a President who will unite people.

Barack Obama for President.

Together we win. Como Siempre.

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. I find it unbelievable that he hasn't at the very least

called the language of that ad regrettable. His campaign didn't write it, but it is in support of him. I understand that the union in question has a bone which many find legitimate to pick with Hillary - but this ad went beyond that into racial politics. Even those who try to explain it away as not being about race after all have to realize how easy it is for this ad to be heard that way. I think the implication is intentional but ultimately it doesn't matter if it was or not. Those implications need to be disavowed and I am bothered that Obama's spokesperson pointedly refused to disavow it when given that opportunity.

[cloudythescribbler]

24. Fair is fair, and I wonder what Obama's response will be

He has nothing whatsoever to lose by noting that the ad clashes with the approach he has taken. And Obama has only one more news cycle before the caucusing tomorrow.

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. This issue is out there now

It is getting play in enough blogs and news reports, not to mention mass emails, that ignoring it would be an intentional act and not an oversight. And if Obama waits until after the caucusing is well under way to comment that won't wash with me either.

Geeze, I'm not blaming Obama for the ad. I'm not blaming the union for taking out an ad against Clinton either. I am only asking that Obama disavow the racial implications of the ad. He doesn't even have to blast the union as far as I'm concerned. I'd let him claim it was an innocent error, a poor choice of words. I'd let him attack Hillary again for the lawsuit at the same time also if he wants. But this undertow of race baiting in the Democratic primaries has to stop. Obama needs to step up here since that ad is in support of him.

Clinton was accused of dissing Blacks when she commented on the liimits of what MLK Jr. was able to accomplish on his own. Now Clinton seemingly to many is being accused of not respecting the Spanish speaking hispanic community. Who are next, Native Americans?

[Barack_America]

28. I predict that he'll condemn the ads...

...In about 3 or 4 days, which is just about how long it took Hillary to condemn Johnson's remarks, even though she was sharing a stage with him at the time.

[Tom Rinaldo]

30. There was no primary scheduled between Johnson's remarks

and Hillary's disavowal though, was there? The sole purpose of that ad was to influence the outcome of the Nevada caucus this weekend, that union would not have spent good money on it for any other reason. I would have less respect for Obama if he waits until after the vote to comment than if he never comments at all.

[papau]

14. I agree - but Obama playing the race card via HC supportrr's gaffes working in SC - why not in NV?

[Catchawave]

4. More hypocrisy from Obama ?

I'm convinced, he's totally lost control of his campaign staff, as in, the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing anymore.

Sigh.

Here's an email I just received:

EDWARDS CALLS ON SENATOR OBAMA TO DENOUNCE UNITE HERE RADIO ADS

Las Vegas, Nevada – During a “Get Out the Caucus” rally in Las Vegas today, John Edwards made the following statement calling on Senator Obama to denounce the UNITE HERE radio ads.

“Just a few days ago, on a stage where all three of us were participating in the debate, there was a discussion of putting behind us and stopping the race politics that had been going on for a few days before that between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. And everyone pledged that this kind of divisive politics that divides the Democratic Party and could divide America would come to an end.

“Senator Obama made that pledge. I was sitting five feet from him when I heard him say it. And now it turns out that in the last twenty-four hours, there's a radio ad that's being run—a malicious radio ad attacking Senator Clinton. That is exactly that kind of divisive politics. It's being run right here in Las Vegas.

“I denounce it. This kind of ad, I don't care who's doing it—in this case it's Senator Obama's supporters—but this sort of thing needs to stop. And from what I've seen, Senator Obama has not said a single word about this. Nothing…when two days ago, three days ago, he sat on a stage in front of America and said this kind of politics had no place in America. That is divides America. It divides the Democratic Party. And he denounced it. Well, now it's happening…by his supporters…right here in this campaign twenty-four hours before the caucuses. And what I have to say is he should speak up. If he really means what he says—and this is not just talk—he should speak up and denounce this kind of divisive politics. It is not what the Democratic Party needs. It is not what America needs. And let me say this very clearly, vis-a-vis Senator Obama, I will not divide America. I will unite America.”

[ccpup]

8. and this from the man who assures us he'll surround himself

with "smart people" to craft his "big vision" or whatever it was.

Now, where have we heard that before? :eyes:

[Tom Rinaldo]

9. Thank you John Edwards. Someone had to say this, but you did n/t

[indimuse]

11. Obama...The "Divider!!!"

Just like BUSHY BOY...The guys is is NOT what he claims.

[Barack_America]

13. Hillary's campaign distributes false fliers. Edwards' campaign manufactures false quotes.

Those are what the CAMPAIGNS did, people...

These ads are from a union whose members were almost stripped of their right to caucus because of a lawsuit backed by Clinton-endorsers and supported by Bill Clinton himself (from his remarks to that TV reporter yesterday). This union is pissed, and they have every right to be.

But, even if they didn't, the tactics of a campaign are much, much more serious than a supporter. If Hillary couldn't control what Bob Johnson said when he was sharing a stage with her, how is Obama supposed to control what this union does? And for those of you who will claim that Hillary "denounced" Johnson's remarks, well, she did that days after they were uttered (not when she took the stage immediately he made them). So, by that logic, I'm sure that Obama will have his apology ready for you in a few days.

[SIMPLYB1980]

15. False flayers like this one.

Who's campaign did this come from?

[Barack_America]

20. That is not false. Independents and Republicans do have the ability...

...to become Democrats in caucus day. That is correct information. You can argue that it is "negative", but it is not "false".

[ursi]

16. give me a break. Hillary has spanish ads.

[Tom Rinaldo]

18. It's not the LANGUAGE that's a problem

It's the words.

[robbedvoter]

19. Do they say Hispanics shouldn't vote for a black man? Cuz that was the issue

not advertising in Spanish

[Barack_America]

21. None of the ads said that they shouldn't caucus...

...for a white woman (that I'm aware of). They said that they shouldn't caucus for Hillary because of her ties to the lawsuit that attempted to take away their votes.

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. They said she doesn't respect "our people." They said she doesn't respect "our community"

No direct mention of the caucus lawsuit was made. It is being used as a jumping off point to play a racial card against Clinton in this ad. The Chavez slogan has nothing to do with that union either, and it is not an official Obama campaign slogan. This whole ad is an appeal to hispanic pride and a claim that Clinton has no respect for the Hispanic community.

And even if only 1/3rd of the people who hear that ad think it is about disrespect for latinos rather than a dust up over caucus sites, do you find that acceptable?

[Barack_America]

25. Right. She doesn't respect "our people", the culinary workers...

40% of which are Hispanic. Just because something is said in Spanish doesn't mean that it's a message to Hispanics everywhere.

Sheesh.

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. And Johnson was only talking about Obama's community organizing

...that he wrote about in his book. Sheesh.

Are you really so willfully blind that you can't at least see how this ad gives the appearance of race baiting even if somehow it is all a big misunderstanding?

[Barack_America]

29. Yeah, I can see your point, I think it's right in line with...

"Shuck n' jive", "imaginary hip black friend" and, possibly "it took a president to get it done".

There have been many examples of statements *maybe, kinda, sorta* giving the appearance of race baiting without actually definitely doing so.

The only thing that can truly be said about these ads by the Culinary Workers are that they're negative.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. Please understand that I was not looking for an issue to attack Obama on.

He is not responsible for everything done in his name. Important fine lines get crossed in the heat of battle sometimes and it only becomes clear that they were definately crossed some times after the fact. Or sometimes maybe it is intentional and clear from the get go.

But the point is that all of our candidates took a positive public step together at the last debate to tamp down racial tensions threatening to cause splits in the Democratic Party. They all pledged to try harder, to act sooner, to prevent things from getting out of hand. They did so because it was becoming apparent that damage was being done to our Party if it continued.

I honestly expected Obama to distance himself from the language used in that ad sooner than this. I didn't expect or need for him to blast the union while doing so, or back away from accusing the Clinton campaign from supporting voter disenfranchisement. That part is valid politics, I understand that part.

[Tom Rinaldo]

32. P,S. I agree with you that the examples you mention...

...are other valid examples (the last one the least so). It all has to stop.

[Barack_America]

33. It won't stop.

We have seen ample evidence that supporters/surrogates are just really hard to control. They have their own agendas too, after all.

I honestly think that Hillary really pissed off the union. And the Culinary Workers obviously have a lot invested in delivering the state for their candidate (what Obama promised them, I don't know). I feel badly for Obama because it seems his hands are tied by this. This is not the campaign he wants to run, but he can't afford to anger the union. Hopefully he finds a way to address this. I don't deny that the ads are too negative.

But I think that, realistically, we might just have to accept that, in this particularly competitive primary, these things are going to happen from time-to-time. And we'll have to suck it up and be a little forgiving of the other sides. In Nevada it's for Obama, but I have no doubt that the scales will be turned elsewhere. As long as the campaigns themselves stay clean, we might just have to be a little accepting of the rest.