Audacity of Truth
Rahmbo:
"Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil's spawn. He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive."
-Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) on Obama's COS, 3/7/10
Velvet Lair- Legends March 18, 2010
- Some things are just not cute March 18, 2010
- The adventures of the lady spider killer continue March 11, 2010
- Intermission February 19, 2010
- People who allow their dogs to poop in other people’s yards February 16, 2010
- Big Government
- Hot Air
- Kitchen sink: GOP claims Senate parliamentarian will throw out House reconciliation bill
- Whip count from “The Hill”: Everything depends on Stupak; Update: Stupak reaches deal with White House; Update: Eight or nine to vote yes; Update: Obama releases draft of executive order
- Alcee Hastings on openness and transparency
- Michelle Malkin
- Jake Tapper
- Legal Insurrection
- Lynn Sweet
Obama campaign calls on DOJ to pull Ayers ad off the air
What the hell?
Sen. Barack Obama has launched an all-out effort to block a Republican billionaire’s efforts to tie him to domestic and foreign terrorists in a wave of negative television ads.
Obama’s campaign has written the Department of Justice demanding a criminal investigation of the “American Issues Project” the vehicle through which Dallas investor Harold Simmons is financing the advertisements. The Obama campaign — and tens of thousands of supporters — also is pressuring television networks and affiliates to reject the ads. The effort has met with some success: CNN and Fox News are not airing the attacks.
Obama has also launched his own response ad, directly addressing Simmons’ attempt to link him to domestic terror.
The project is “a knowing and willful attempt to violate the strictures of federal election law” Obama general counsel Bob Bauer wrote to Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Keeney last week in a letter provided to Politico. Bauer argued that by advocating Obama’s defeat, the ad should be subject to the contribution limits of federal campaign law, not the anything-goes regime of issue advocacy.
Ok, legal beagles familiar with election laws, does Obama have a case here, or is this nothing more than a blatant attempt by the Obama campaign at trying to silence the free speech rights of a group that opposes his candidacy?
Prior:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
16 Responses to “Obama campaign calls on DOJ to pull Ayers ad off the air”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Heh. I wish him luck with that one. NOT!!!
Quick, call a wahmbulance! I think this hits a little too close to home, so he’s trying to stifle it by stifling the free speech of others.
Maybe, if he was so concerned about things like this, he shouldn’t have allied himself with these kinds of people in the first place.
Ah yes, the first reaction of the tolerant left to anything they disagree with: use the power of the government to muzzle it. The last time they tried this was over The Path to 9/11.
I guess Obama’s idea of “change” doesn’t include free speech. Big surprise there, huh?
I am with Sev. Maybe Obama shouldn’t be so proud of his friendship with a known terrorist, or maybe he shouldn’t call racists, his mentors.
What Obama is saying could be true, if they are directly telling people that they should not vote for BO, then the ad could be illegal, so to speak. But all they have to do is change that section of the ad, and just bring into question his relationship with Ayers and that would make the ad legal.
It is really stupid of Barack to complain now about people using his past against him. Clinton addressed his past head on, and got elected. Why Barack needs to hide behind the law is just damn foolishness. Nothing in my believes that come this November Barry will be on that ticket, and his cry baby antics only prove just how weak this man is as a candidate. – Lorica
Lorica, I’ve watched the ad several times, carefully. It never directly urges people not to vote for Obama. He’s wrong.
Here’s the exact text of every place in the ad where Obama is named:
All it does is remind people of the Dalai Bama’s associations, and ask if they know enough about him. That’s not nearly the same as telling people not to vote for him.
I agree GWR. As long as they are not telling people not to vote for BO, there is nothing they should be able to do about that commercial, but who actually knows what the FEC will do. – Lorica
I haven’t been able to find the ad, so can’t comment. I do wonder how many non-politically savy people know who Ayers is? Do they identify his crimes in the ad?
Same problem with McCain and the Keating scandal… I’m not sure it works as an argument if the general public doesn’t remember what the keating scandal was.
Alchemist, ST linked up the ad right here just a few days ago. Judge for yourself.
Nice equavilance. Scandal = Terrorist
Whatever Alchemist. The Keating 5 is nothing compared to being a terrorist. Also McCain was exonorated for his part in the Keating 5, so your point is nothing more than the usual party clap trap.
Ayers and his ilk are going to “advise” Obama if he gets the presidency. This is the very last thing that America needs. Someone who committed terrorist acts is now a good friend of the President??? God Help Us All. – Lorica
Missed that ad before. Yup,certainly says enough to be dangerous. I can see why they’d want to keep it under wraps.
I think it will probably get out anyway, even if they try and cover it. Attacking the non-profit credentials of the group is probably the safest legal way to go about it (whether or not is moral, is certainly a different question…), but it certainly could cause blow back at some point in time.
Still, George Stephanopolous (sp?) handled the issue in the democratic primaries, and the issue was a non-starter. Primary voters tended to be more left-leaning individuals anyway, but I’m unsure what reaction the public will have…. it’s likely to be either disinterest or outrage.
I haven’t seen any evidence that Ayers and Obama are so close that he would use them as an advisor. They served together on Chicago political committees… for all we know they could have used each other as a political connection while quietly hating each others guts.
Now, I wish Obama had come clean about this whole issue, but I’m not really concerned about it either. I’m much more concerned about the corrosive effects of party politics (today) than about a connection he had to Ayers 10 years ago, and a crime committed 40 years ago.
Final note: I didn’t say scandal=terrorist, I did say that some will use this connection to scandal to attack McCain’s “Maverick” status. I don’t think it’s a fair attack, I also (as represented before) don’t think it will work.
We shall see Alchemist, but there in lies the very problem. We just don’t know how close Ayers is to Obama. But they have had known each other for sometime, and since Obama seems to surround himself with some pretty extreme people, it is rather worrysome. – Lorica
Oh, I dunno, Alchemist I think things are becoming more clear about their relationship.
Ayers Unrepentant for Radical Group’s Violence in 1960s, 1970s
A little more than just an odd meeting here and there, huh?
This Ayers is such a scumbag.
Interesting spin there, alchemist. Unfortunately for you, AIP took pains to carefully document every statement in that ad. The research behind it is in a 167-page document posted here.
But let’s examine your spin on this. If you’re speculation is correct, then why would Obama’s web site, as recently as this June, include a defense that described Ayers and Dohrn as “respectable figures of the mainstream in Chicago”? And why would they suddenly remove it?
And if you’re wrong, and Obama meant what was posted on his campaign web site, then we’re back to questioning his execrable choice of associates – and whether he truly believes that unrepentant terrorists are “respectable” and “mainstream” in Democrat politics, at least in Chicago.
Based on the affinity within the Democrat party – and especially within the Obama acolytes – for anti-American tyrants and mass murderers, I’d say the second option is far more likely.
It’s really sad for your candidate when the best way you can spin this is that he’s simply a liar and an opportunist.
I don’t get it. You can run ads to encourage people to vote for one guy, but you can’t run ads encouraging people NOT to vote for the other? I never knew that. Doesn’t make sense. Any comment regarding the problem with the policies and positions of a given candidate is a call to avoid the guy, ain’t it? And I walk around proudly sporting my new NOBAMA t-shirt. Am I in trouble?
Expect a knock on your door one quiet night. You will be rushed away to a re-education camp and punished for your insolence.
You have been warned……..