Freedom Watch And It's Quater Billion Dollar Budget Against Obama Or Clinton In The GE

[KittyWampus]

talking about McCain v. Obama or Clinton. Obama should bloody well "waffle" on public financing and point out this fucked up attack group and it's
obscene budget that will spew out vile attack ads as it's already done.

By: Steve Benen on Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008 at 10:33 AM - PST

When looking ahead to November, one of the advantages Democrats enjoy over Republicans is financial — for the first time in modern political history, Dems are raising quite a bit more money than Republicans. The DCCC, for example, already has $31 million on hand for the cycle, while the NRCC has less than $3 million.

Great news, right? Well, yes, except “independent” right-wing entities are going to pick up the slack — and then some. Out in front will be our old friends at Freedom’s Watch.

When a group of former White House aides formed a political advocacy group called Freedom’s Watch last summer, its initial wave of ads featured battered Iraq war veterans pleading for support for President Bush’s “surge” of troops.

Last month, the theme changed dramatically as the same group splashed dark, grainy images of illegal immigrants across television screens in northern Ohio, attacking a Democratic candidate’s position on the divisive domestic issue.

Freedom’s Watch has loudly announced that there will be no limits to what it might do…. While initial reports suggested a budget of $200 million, people who have talked to the group in recent weeks say the figure is closer to $250 million, more than double the amount spent by the largest independent liberal groups in the 2004 election cycle.

The “no limits” phrase probably wasn’t intended this way, but it has two meanings. First, with a quarter-billion dollars, Freedom’s Watch will be able to do what it pleases. Second, driven by contemporary Republican norms, the range of Freedom’s Watch attacks with know “no limits,” because they’re unlikely to be concerned about pesky details (like decency and accuracy).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/22/freedoms-watch-and-its-quarter-billion-dollar-budget/

[K Gardner]

1. We ignore this at our own peril. Those here screaming about

Obama not willing to make a comittment NOW about what he will do in the GE against McCain are once again, cutting off the nose of the entire party to spite their face. There will be plenty of time for the party as a WHOLE, to figure out the best way to compete in the GE against the Republican machine. No need to skewer our best candidate and our only chance of winning back the WH over this issue now.

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. big whup, Obama could rase $250 in three months if he really wanted to

[KittyWampus]

3. The negative advertising Freedom Watch will generate requires additional money to counter the crap

this is in addition to money needed to get out a POSITIVE Democratic message

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. yes, but negative ads against Obama will backfire

people don't like to see someone they like get attacked.

Obama is too likeable to be swiftboated.

[KittyWampus]

5. they WILL push up Obama's negatives. That is an absolute. And that hurts with moderates/indies

[THUNDER HANDS]

6. his negatives are in the 30s

they might get pushed up into the low 40s, which would still be below McCain's, and astoundingly low for any presidential candidate.

[dsc]

7. oh really?

Christ Jesus on a shamrock have you been asleep for the past dozen years? Do any of the following names mean anything at all to you? Max Cleland, Jean Carnahan, Al Gore, John Kerry, and yes Bill Clinton? We could run Jesus and Ghandi with Mother Theresa as campaign manager and they would make you think we had run Hitler and Stalin with Geobbles as manager.

[KittyWampus]

8. that much money will be a steady drone of negativity. Distracting for either Clinton OR Obama

[dsc]

10. look I know Clinton will be affected as well

I don't pretend otherwise.

[THUNDER HANDS]

9. Obama is more likeable than them

much more likeable.

[dsc]

11. than Max Cleland

really? Cleland had been elected and reelected statewide in Georgia time and again.

[KittyWampus]

12. kick, since Clinton's campaign seems to think it's a good idea for Obama to automatically

agree to public funding.

[babylonsister]

13. VERY late recommend! nt

[blogslut]

14. I got my T. Boone Pickens ammo stocking up

I'm ready for em!

[TexasObserver]

15. It's a big concern, and they will start launching their negative ads as soon as we have a nominee.

The advantage of Obama is that he can raise a ton of money that Hillary can't raise, and the other side will have a much harder time raising money for Republicans if Hillary isn't the nominee.

I expect there to be some big money independent campaigns to counter the Freedom Watch group. Who knows, one guy might fund $250 million just to expose Freedom Watch and its funders, together with their shady histories.