You may recall how, on the verge of Obama's three-state swing with Oprah Winfrey, a single, anonymous post to an obscure Chicago production industry rag set off charges that Oprah was "virulently anti-union" and "refused to allow unions to operate inside the doors of Harpo Productions."
Taylor Marsh, a Clinton hack, spread this "news" far and wide by repeating it on her blog, in her column at Huffington Post and on her radio show.
The problem was, it was a lie. And a vile, filthy, nasty lie, at that.
Today, we're treated to a diary by rabid Clinton backer, campskunk, that includes this claim (in bold no less! Heh!):
Obama's campaign is attacking labor unions, teachers and EMILY’S LIST.
"Attacking?" Really? So Obama is anti-union, too, just like Oprah?
Whatever you do, don't let the truth or facts interrupt your trumped-up hysteria...
(more)
First, let's recall what happened last week in Iowa. AFSCME distributed a flier that questions Obama's health plan, but made it appear as if the flier was coming from the Edwards campaign:
As mentioned last night and earlier today, NBC/NJ's Carrie Dann reported on a flier by the pro-Clinton labor union AFSCME that hits Obama on his health-care plan. The catch, however, is that the flier appears disguised as an Edwards attack -- since he is the only candidate mentioned in it criticizing Obama.
Now the Edwards campaign weighs in on the flier. Jennifer O'Malley Dillon, the Edwards campaign's Iowa state director, says in a statement: "There have been a lot of misleading tactics and tricks in the last few weeks, but we've just never seen anything like this before."
...
She continues, "It's fine to have an honest debate about policy, but Iowans deserve better than planted questions and campaign fliers designed to fool them."
Wait... Does that make Edwards anti-AFSCME, too? Judging by the definition applied in campskunk's diary, it certainly does.
Now, why would AFSCME attack Obama and try and make it look like it was from Edwards? That's an easy one... It killed two birds with one stone:
- Iowa voters are notoriously sensitive to negative campaigning. So it paints Edwards as an attacker (thus, driving down his likability), while, simultaneously.
- protecting Clinton who already has a problem with high negatives.
I don't condemn AFSCME for questioning Obama's health plan. And I don't question their backing of their endorsed candidate (Clinton). After all, they have a big bet riding on her winning. They bet wrong in 2004 (as did SEIU), and it cost them. Dearly. (More about that, below.)
Pointing out that some union-sponsored 527s are spending money on attack pieces or ads is, in itself, simply a recitation of facts. God knows, the Clinton camp can't attack directly for fear of driving up Hillary's already high negatives.
Obama has, in fact, enjoyed strong relationships with unions in Illinois and unions, generally. Early this year when it appeared Hillary was "inevitable," the SEIU and AFSCME decided to back the "sure bet." Why would they do that? Union leadership wanted to lay its money on a sure thing. In 2004, AFSCME and SEIU jointly endorsed Howard Dean, only to watch their money, efforts and candidate go down in flames.
Not this year. Hillary was the consensus candidate and she snared the union endorsements with Edwards garnering many endorsements with his populist, anti-free-trade stances. (And good for Edwards. Based on policy, alone, he should have nabbed every union endorsement. The only reason he didn't is because some unions wanted to lay their money on the "sure thing.")
But let's take a look at how the unions in question rated Obama and Clinton over Obama's time in the Senate:
Project Vote Smart - Barack Obama
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 94 percent in 2006.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 92 percent in 2005.
Let's look at Clinton's ratings from the same unions over the same time period:
2006 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 94 percent in 2006.
2005 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 88 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 100 percent in 2005.
In addition, Obama enjoyed a strong working relationship with unions during his time in the Illinois Senate and was enthusiastically endorsed by every major labor union during his Senate run. In fact, I worked the polls with a number of AFSCME volunteers on election day in November 2004.
If you want to cheerlead a misguided swipe at Obama and proclaim him "anti-union" and "anti-worker," knock yourselves out. But you'll be promoting a falsehood, joining those (well, actually, many of the same Hillary backers) who cheerleaded the false charges against Winfrey.
Get your facts straight. Obama has a long, positive relationship with unions. And that doesn't go away simply because some unions want to make sure that their big bets pay off. The dollars that unions are spending in Iowa highlighted in campskunk's post show you just how much is at stake in Iowa for these folks.
They saw it all go up in flames on caucus night in 2004 when Dean sunk like a rock. They are determined not make that mistake again, and as the air leaked out of the "Hillary-is-inevitable" balloon, these unions are deciding to make damn sure they don't burn through mountains of cash and time supporting someone who flames out in the first three states.
Pointing out that fact doesn't make Obama's campaign anti-union. It simply makes voters aware of why this stuff is happening.
Update [2007-12-21 18:40:52 by Bob Johnson]:
Looks like some AFSCME locals aren't too happy with the slimy mailer put out by national AFSCME to benefit Clinton and tarnish Obama and Edwards...
Unionists Slam "Hypocritical" Leaders for Anti-Obama Mailer
Union members in Illinois and Iowa are denouncing their national leaders as hypocrites for sending out a deceptive campaign mailer aimed this week at Barack Obama. They are livid that the political arm of their 1.4 million member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) financed a mailer to Iowa voters slamming Obama for opposing individual health care mandates - the same sort of mandates long opposed by the union.
"This is definitely hypocritical, absolutely," said Carter Woodruff, an activist with Iowa AFSCME and a former official of the union state council. "It's a desperate attempt to attack [Obama] for unfounded reasons. It's a shame they stooped so low."
The union's direct mail flyer was written in a disguised manner that suggested it came from the John Edwards campaign and not from AFSCME and it slapped Obama for taking what it called "the timid way out, offering yet another band-aid solution."
...
Woodruff along with Henry Bayer, Executive Director of Illinois-based AFSCME Council 31, spoke to reporters on a conference call organized by the Obama campaign. Council 31, representing 75,000 Illinois public employees, endorsed Obama this month. "Senator Obama has fought like hell for working people," said Bayer. "His health care plan is most in line with that of our national union."
The dissident union members, indeed, pointed out that AFSCME's national health care resolution passed earlier this year declared that individual mandates are "incompatible" with the principles and interests of the union membership.
And in congressional testimony last April, AFSCME President Gerald McEntee also denounced individual mandates as they would force families to "pay much higher prices" for health care policies.
And who look who parrots this crap here... The Clinton zealots.
Jeez...