TV Spot to Viewers: ‘Tell Coleman It’s Time to End the War’ –updated
Monday, July 09, 2007 at 1:25 pm
- 14 Comments
A new 30-second TV spot pressuring Sen. Norm Coleman to come out against the continuation of the Iraq war hits Minnesota air today and was released for preview at a 1 p.m. news conference.
There’s a link below so you can check it out yourself.
The ad, by Americans United for Change, doesn’t contain any surprising new facts or arguments. It says that the war has been a disaster, that Coleman has supported Bush’s policy, and it shows, in addition to pictures of death and destruction, images of Bush and Coleman together — images that are likely to follow Coleman throughout the 2008 campaign.
It ends: “Norm Coleman is still standing with President Bush on Iraq, voting time and again against bringing our troops home. Tell Norm Coleman, after four years, it’s time to end the war.”
Jeremy Funk, spokester for Americans United for Change, said Coleman was the latest member of Congress on a list of “people that we think, because they are up for election, are most likely to succumb to pressure and vote the right way to bring an end to the war in Iraq.”
Iraq war critics have been heartened by three Senate Republicans and former war supporters — Richard Lugar of Indiana, George Voinovich of Ohio and Pete Domenici of New Mexico, who have recently called for a
change in Iraq policy. But Funk noted that none of them committed to specifically vote for the kind of measures that would force a change.
He said anti-war groups are anticipating that this week and next, consideration of amendments to the Defense Appropriations Bill will provide opportunities for members of Congress to take concrete stands in favor of winding down the war.
“They can talk tough, but you can’t then vote for a toothless resolution,” Funk said. “They have to vote for some amendments that are binding and set deadlines for withdrawal.”
Previous Senate targets of nearly identical ads have been Republican Sens. John Sununu of New Hampshire and Susan Collins of Maine, along with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Six House members have also received the treatment.
Americans United is part of a coalition of anti-war groups, operating as Americans Against Escalation in Iraq. One of the other member organizations, Vote Vets, has already run a similar ad pressuring Coleman to change sides. The complete list of the 11 organizations is here
Coleman has supported the Bush Iraq policy since the 2002 campaign, when he supported the congressional actions and presidential decisions that led to the war. But he did not agree with Bush’s decision in January to send additional U.S. troops into Baghdad. And he has said repeatedly that he is open to a new approach in Iraq after he hears the September report of Gen. David Petraeus about how the “surge” strategy is working.
Americans United for Change is a labor-funded group, formerly called Americans United to Protect Social Security from an earlier period when it concentrated on opposing President Bush’s proposal to partially privatize Social Security. The Minnesota GOP put out a press release today calling it a “shadowy liberal front group that won’t disclose its donors.” Americans United for Change does not disclose its donors and is not required to do so.
The ad, titled “Still” and backed by a $100,000 buy, is viewable below. I’ve called Coleman’s office to seek his response to the ad and will add his quotes here when I get them.
updated to add paragraph about funding for Americans United
14 Comments
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
Thanks. It’s great to see you resurface, Eric. Keep up the good work.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
Great head shot Was that the same one they had at the Strib? I forget. It’s gone now, over there. Eric Black is no more.
Meaning, by the way, that when you dig into the BQ archives, back to when there was only one host and posts were offered in the first person singular with no clarification of author, all those old posts appear with DJ’s photo and bio and nothing else. Oh well.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
As for Iraq and politicians I continue to assume that most of the anti-current-strategy politicians – especially the newly-minted ones, whether Republican or Democrat – have still not squared the circle of “What then?” in their minds.
Is it really a good idea to try to force an actual departure, as opposed to some kind of phased and conditional draw-down? Will it lead to chaos in Iraq and more deaths? Would that be our responsibility in a moral sense? Blithe assurances that it can’t get any worse, or that we’re the cause of the violence, must eventually run up against “what do I really think?” for any serious politician.
Especially since recent events in England and Scotland seem to have severely dented another blithe assurance out there, that it’s ridiculous to assert that terrorism will ever follow us home from Iraq.
(“The terrorists in England and Scotland were enraged by our presence, not our leaving!” Maybe. The bottom line, it has followed our allies home. Anger at our presence is one possible motivation for that to take place. There are others.)
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
thank you I just spent 20 minutes trying to scan that stupid photo, so I’m pleased someone likes the headshot…
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
You’re welcome Dashing, intellectual, thoughtful – it all comes across.
Is a Powerliberal to be understood in contrast to one of the old fashioned, hand-operated variety?
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 4:00 pm
if by hand operated you are implying crank you may indeed be correct.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
Waiting for GOPot…. So now some heroic far-sighted GOoPers are supposedly going to “demand” that the Iraq Study Group recommendations be Bush’s new strategy. It’s almost comic—In February, the GOP pack backs Cheney/Bush’s absurd escalation, and derides ISG. Four months and 600 US deaths later, GOoPers decide to back the ISG like it’s a fabulous new plan that they’d never heard of before.
And what about Gen Petraeus’s already-telegraphed “mixed-signals” Sept report? I thought the GOP pack was all singing “See you in September”?
Should be fun to watch the pressure build on Coleman. Rove and the money machine still hold a lot of cards for these unhappy GOoPers having to face the irascible voters in 08. And Coleman doesn’t cross Cheney.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 9:37 am
Thanks. It's great to see you resurface, Eric. Keep up the good work.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 10:03 am
Great head shot Was that the same one they had at the Strib? I forget. It's gone now, over there. Eric Black is no more.
Meaning, by the way, that when you dig into the BQ archives, back to when there was only one host and posts were offered in the first person singular with no clarification of author, all those old posts appear with DJ's photo and bio and nothing else. Oh well.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 10:04 am
As for Iraq and politicians I continue to assume that most of the anti-current-strategy politicians – especially the newly-minted ones, whether Republican or Democrat – have still not squared the circle of “What then?” in their minds.
Is it really a good idea to try to force an actual departure, as opposed to some kind of phased and conditional draw-down? Will it lead to chaos in Iraq and more deaths? Would that be our responsibility in a moral sense? Blithe assurances that it can't get any worse, or that we're the cause of the violence, must eventually run up against “what do I really think?” for any serious politician.
Especially since recent events in England and Scotland seem to have severely dented another blithe assurance out there, that it's ridiculous to assert that terrorism will ever follow us home from Iraq.
(“The terrorists in England and Scotland were enraged by our presence, not our leaving!” Maybe. The bottom line, it has followed our allies home. Anger at our presence is one possible motivation for that to take place. There are others.)
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 10:05 am
thank you I just spent 20 minutes trying to scan that stupid photo, so I'm pleased someone likes the headshot…
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 10:19 am
You're welcome Dashing, intellectual, thoughtful – it all comes across.
Is a Powerliberal to be understood in contrast to one of the old fashioned, hand-operated variety?
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 11:00 am
if by hand operated you are implying crank you may indeed be correct.
Comment posted July 9, 2007 @ 11:17 am
Waiting for GOPot…. So now some heroic far-sighted GOoPers are supposedly going to “demand” that the Iraq Study Group recommendations be Bush's new strategy. It's almost comic—In February, the GOP pack backs Cheney/Bush's absurd escalation, and derides ISG. Four months and 600 US deaths later, GOoPers decide to back the ISG like it's a fabulous new plan that they'd never heard of before.
And what about Gen Petraeus's already-telegraphed “mixed-signals” Sept report? I thought the GOP pack was all singing “See you in September”?
Should be fun to watch the pressure build on Coleman. Rove and the money machine still hold a lot of cards for these unhappy GOoPers having to face the irascible voters in 08. And Coleman doesn't cross Cheney.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
