|
|
<< GOP Assault on Union Pensions | Main | 9th Circuit "Activism" on Medical Pot? >> December 16, 2003Machinists Denounce Ad They FundedThis is classy. Unions who funded the group that produced the Dean-Osama ads have demanded their money back. One of the unions, the International Association of Machinists, called Tuesday for the group, Americans for Jobs, Healthcare and Progressive Values, to pull the ad and release the names of its financial backers...The Laborers union was slightly less emphatic but not happy with the ads they also funded: Donald Kaniewski, political director of the Laborers union, said unions gave money to the group because "we wanted to highlight issues we think matter in this debate about who should be standard-bearer for the Democratic Party."Here is the basic principle I am happily going to support-- if you as a candidate have even a tangential connection to an "independent group" running disgusting ads, you get denounced and vilified for the ads until you as a candidate publicly and loudly condemn the ads. Same goes for any group that's connected to such groups as well. So kudos to the Machinists for a strong statement-- and a tiny kudo to the Laborers for their wimpier condemnation. Posted by Nathan at December 16, 2003 09:04 PM Related posts:
Trackback PingsTrackBack URL for this entry: CommentsKudos to the unions. Does the "Nathan Principle" apply during the general election, or just during the primary? (I'm genuinely curious, not trying to make you look like a hypocrite here. My own instinct is to fight slime with slime when we're up against Bush.) Posted by: Kevin Block-Schwenk at December 16, 2003 11:26 PM I generally believe that real substantive attacks are better in any case. We don't need to manufacture stuff to hit Bush hard-- his policy is enough if highlighted right to take him down. So I'd rather use his slime against him as evidence of his and his allies sickness. We should respond with hardball, but hardball based on substance not personal crap. Posted by: Nathan at December 17, 2003 06:42 AM Nathan, Posted by: SteveC at December 17, 2003 11:04 AM That reads to me like the Machinists' union feels cheated because the ads damaged their man Gephardt, not because the ads are despicable. And note the use of the word "ought." It's a nice way of seeming outraged while not really putting your money where your mouth is, as in, 'I ought to ask McDonald's for my money back because their delicious Big Macs are making me fat [but I'm not actually going to ask for a refund].' Posted by: John McCrory at December 17, 2003 12:03 PM Well Nathan if you need any help rearranging those deck chairs to meet your rigorous stds of PC, you'll have plenty of deandroids to help you. But flaying Kerry with the sins of the layout dept seems awfully trivial to the rest of us, and more likely to suppress needed debate. Posted by: uncle mort at December 17, 2003 11:56 PM COME ON! If nominated, Dean will lose, and the Repubs will probably get a supermajority in the senate! Stop the madness. Get Clark as the nominee. He's the only one wiht any chance of beating bush. DEAN = MCGOVERN + MONDALE SOLVE THE EQUATION--DEAN IS A DEATHWISH FOR DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Posted by: Frank at December 18, 2003 05:04 PM Time for an apology to Kerry? Posted by: Leo Casey at December 22, 2003 02:28 PM Post a comment
|
Series-
Social Security
Past Series
Current Weblog
January 04, 2005 January 03, 2005 January 02, 2005 January 01, 2005 ... and Why That's a Good Thing - Judge Richard Posner is guest blogging at Leiter Reports and has a post on why morality has to influence politics... MORE... December 31, 2004 December 30, 2004 December 29, 2004 December 28, 2004 December 24, 2004 December 22, 2004 December 21, 2004 December 20, 2004 December 18, 2004 December 17, 2004 December 16, 2004
Referrers to site
|