Saturday, January 16, 2010

Obama to Campaign Against a Monster

This was too long in coming.

coakley President Obama will campaign in Massachusetts for Martha Coakley on Sunday, White House and Democratic Party sources tell TPMDC.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is set to announce the news at today's press briefing, This past Monday, Gibbs had said that there were no plans to visit Massachusetts.

The polls have been all over the place on this election, but are in general agreement in the sense that the turnout model matters very seriously. If younger voters and more committed Democrats turn out, Coakley will win. If older and less Democratic voters make up a greater part of the electorate, Republican nominee Scott Brown will win. Obama's involvement could potentially make the difference for Coakley in turning out his natural support base -- and if it doesn't, expect a lot of talk in the press about how Obama couldn't win the race.

Late Update: As expected, Gibbs announced that Obama will stop in Boston Sunday after a visit to a Washington D.C. church earlier in the day.

Gibbs also took a swipe at Brown using the latest Democratic party talking points, and said Obama "sees a pretty clear distinction" between Coakley who he views as a fighter for Massachusetts and "a candidate on the other side who feels comfortable fighting for the insurance industry and big banks."

Asked about Coakley's tanking poll numbers, Gibbs said Obama was "happy to have a campaign on whether you're for the status quo, protecting insurance company profits, bank company profits."… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <TPM>

In my view, Coakley made the same error Hillary Clinton made, early in the Democratic primaries: she assumed the job was already hers.  I certainly hope her campaign can be salvaged, because there can be nothing accomplished in the Senate if Brown wins.  All our progressive causes will be dead in the water.

Let’s examine Brown’s support.

browncontributions Major U.S. banks which instigated the financial crisis are set to pay out “record” bonuses and compensation — $145 billion by some estimates. State Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), the Republican candidate running for the special U.S. Senate election next week, announced yesterday that he would oppose the recently announced financial crisis responsibility fee on large banks.

Brown’s defense of the financial industry has not been ignored by Wall Street. Wall Street’s two largest political enforcers are also out fighting to elect him:

The Wall Street front group FreedomWorks is mobilizing get out the vote efforts for Brown this weekend. FreedomWorks organized the very first tea party protests, and has used its extensive staff and resources to mobilize rallies and advocacy campaigns on behalf of corporate interests. Dick Armey, who as a corporate lobbyist represented AIG, Lehman Brothers, and Merrill Lynch during the bailouit, is the leader of FreedomWorks. FreedomWorks is also funded and chaired by Steve Forbes and Frank Sands of Sands Capital Management.

The Wall Street front group Club for Growth is strongly “boosting” Brown and is expected to run ads in support for him. According to recent disclosures, the Club for Growth is funded by a $1.4 million dollar donation from investor Stephen Jacksons of Stephens Groups Inc, a $1.4 million dollar donation from broker Richard Gilder, and $210,000-$630,000 donations from at least 10 other investors and financial industry professionals. The Club is also supporting a slate of candidates to repeal health reform, while its other endorsed candidates have opposed a financial truth commission.

According to a ThinkProgress analysis of Brown’s latest Federal Elections Commission disclosures (part 1, part 2, part 3), filed on Jan. 8 and 11, business executives and Wall Street executives have lavished Brown’s campaign coffers with 11th hour contributions… [emphasis original]

Inserted from <Think Progress>

Brown is the paid mouthpiece for the banksters and baggers, opposed to all things progressive, but to see just how far to the extremely ideologue right he is, consider this.

brown-scott One month after the September 11th attacks, Scott Brown was one of only three Massachusetts State Representatives to vote against a bill to provide financial assistance to Red Cross workers who had volunteered with 9/11 recovery efforts, we’ve learned.

The Brown campaign acknowledged the vote to us, claiming the measure would have taxed already-strained state finances.

The 9/11 attacks flared as an issue in the Massachusetts race today. The NRSC sharply criticized Democrat Martha Coaxley over a DSCC ad, first reported by Politico, that flashed an image of the Twin Towers. Rudy Giuliani, who stumped for Brown today, also slammed Coakley over the ad, saying it was “unthinkable” and “offensive.”

On October 17th, 2001, Brown voted against a bill that would authorize “leaves of absence for certain Red Cross employees participating in Red Cross emergencies.” The bill gave 15 days of paid leave each year to state workers called up by the Red Cross to respond to disasters. At the time, state workers called for such emergencies were required to use sick and vacation days… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <The Plumline>

What a creep!  It’s hard to goose-step with stiffer knees than this.  The notion that this scum could win the Senate seat held for decades by Teddy Kennedy boggles the mind.  Do you know anyone in Massachusetts?  If so, please call them.  Ask them to vote for Coakley.  Ask them to contact all their local friends to vote for her.


libhom said...

Obama, Reid, and Pelosi have done so much to depress and alienate Democrats that a ex porn star Gopper might win Teddy Kennedy's Senate seat. This should be a wake up call for them.

Jack Jodell said...

While Oakley will never be a Ted Kennedy, here is a perfect example of why progressives and liberals cannot afford to sit on their asses in this or in the November mid-term elections. The Republicans are always waiting in the wings ready to sneak in some corporatist, Wall Street, Bush-style free market enemy of the people who will only advance the interests of big business and will screw the average citizen in the process. DOWN WITH BROIWN!

Jack Jodell said...

Ooops---meant "Coakley" instead of Oakley!

the walking man said...

It is rapidly beginning to appear it is time to get off the grid. How do you fight a war when the weapon is $$$ and they have the arsenal and all I have is my granddaddy's old smith and wesson? I tried to pawn it but it was only worth four bucks.

SJ said...

Good grief. Scott Brown?

Lisa G. said...

Brown also was interviewed about a teabagger fundraiser held 3 days before the interview and denied knowing anything about the teabaggers, including what the movement stood for. Seriously? You LIE. If you're a republican and don't know what the teabaggers are then you're either stupid, living under a rock, and/or lying. I vote for all of the above.

Holte Ender said...

Depending on what poll you read, Brown is creeping ahead, but most polls say it is too close to call. The next three days are crucial for the Republicans because they are fired up for this and a Democratic win, no matter how close, could be seen as a big defeat for the GOP.

Gwendolyn H. Barry said...

TC, I voted for Ted Kennedy when I was living in MA. Friends tell me they are rather apathetic over this, as MA has its' own health care, its' own fiscal solvency...they feed back to the Fed. I hope Obama can turn it for the Democrat, yet I have to say, I don't like her and I was for the other Dem. She supported the Patriot Act as 'it streamlined prosecutions' and she was wane on supporting gay marriage, etc. She a real 'blue dog'... not a liberal.
But for the Senate, I'm hoping she wins. (equally if she does win, I hope she will vote for the progressive agenda... wait and see) And then is trounced by a liberal Dem in the next election. Republicans only use MA as a spring board to national political goals... take the case of that arsehole Romney. And that's just how fickle the voters of MA can get when they are sick and tired of status quo politics. They WILL vote in an idiot Republican. (while not all Repubs are ... most who show up in MA are). It's always :-)

Stimpson said...

Another example of Brown's dishonesty: He asserts that Coakley cited travelling to Europe to visit her sister as "foreign policy experience," but the YouTube video his campaign posted very clearly has her answering a question about whether she's travelled abroad. She did not equate travels to visit family with foreign policy experience.

TomCat said...

Libhom, you're quite correct. Also health care is not such an issue there. They have universal coverage in their state.

Jack, I agree. While some on the far left scream that the lesser of two evils isn't good enough, often the greater of two evils is so bad that the lesser seems angelic by comparison. Consider Slick Willie and GW ChickenHawk.

Mark, while I have breath and a keyboard, I will go on fighting, right here.

SJ, yes, seriously!

Lisa, I know. Disgusting, isn't it.

Holte, it may not be quite that bad. Opinion research was my field, before I became disabled. I dug into the American Research poll and found it flawed. That only 1% of independent voters are undecided is a huge red flag.

TomCat said...

Sorry I missed you two. You posted while I was typing.

Gwen, I hear you. Se my reply to Jack.

Thanks, Stimpson. Lying is what Republicans do best.

Sue said...

TC I have been reading alot of blogs posting on this subject and all the comments from Mass. are saying they are voting because they know the seriousness of this election. Oh and yes they are voting for Coakley! I believe in the end Coakley will be victorious. Democrats outnumber repubs in the state, they will not let the country down!

Miss Welby said...

You are simply great. Thank you on behalf of Rebecca from Kenya

TRUTH 101 said...

I don't know how long this term is for but I could see many that are disappointed that Coakley isn't progressive enough letting Brown have the seat. Then taking him out in two or four years.

I long for a day when Democrats have the same party discipline as Republicans. We'd have 65 to 70 seats in the senate but alas. Everybody wants to rule the world.

TRUTH 101 said...

I missed Sue's comment. I agree with her. And I don't trust polls. I've had too much experience with well organized members of the opposition being ably to skew numbers. If there is a group of naer do well's in a small town like mine that can figure out how to do that, I would think there are right wingers in mass. clever enough to pull this off as well.

TomCat said...

Sue, I just talked to a man in Massachusets, and he is not so optomistic. I pray you are right.

Miss W, you're most welcome. Sorry it took so long for me to respond.

Truth, Kennedy was last elected in 2006, so the next election for that seat is in 2011, with the term beginning in 2012.

Distributorcap said...

if coakley loses - expect months and months of the pundits vomiting their garbage about how great the GOP is at organizing and getting the vote out

and porn -

TomCat said...

DC, you're so right. It would be pathetic.