Group with SBVT ties working for Lieberman in CT

[TayTay]

From the Stamford Advocate:

George Jepsen, former state Democratic Party chairman and a Lamont supporter, yesterday compared Vets For Freedom to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. That group attacked Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's decorated Vietnam War record.

"This is a familiar process where the far right uses their money to tear down a Democrat," Jepsen said. "They did it to John Kerry on his war record two years ago. They're doing it to Ned Lamont now on the war in Iraq."

One of the first organizations to find Vets for Freedom's ties to prominent Republicans was the Center for Media and Democracy, a nonprofit group that does investigative reporting on corporate and governmental spin campaigns.

Center founder John Stauber said Vets For Freedom's advisers, including Dan Senor, formerly of the Iraq Provisional Authority, and Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, are proof "these guys are a front group for the Republican agenda for November."

More at: http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-vets2aug15,0,43712.story?coll=stam-news-local-headlines

The Center for Media and Democracy had this post on their web site about the Vets for Freedom group and their Republican ties:

"Vets for Freedom" Fight for Rove and Lieberman
Submitted by John Stauber on Fri, 08/11/2006 - 11:03.

The Republican lobby group Vets for Freedom is the 2006 equivalent of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the Republican 527 committee whose attack advertisements in battleground states helped sink John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race by smearing him as a phony war hero and a traitor to his country.

Vets for Freedom (VFF) made lame claims to be "non-partisan" when in early 2006 it first appeared out of the blue online and in op-ed pieces in the New York Times and other major papers and in TV interviews. An investigation of the group by citizen journalists at SourceWatch and by the Buffalo News blew the VFF claim of non-partisanship out of the water. For instance, the Buffalo News revealed in June that former White House flack Taylor Gross, who left Scott McClellan's office in 2005 to start his own PR firm, represented VFF and pitched them to papers as non-partisan journalists who would embed for these newspapers and report accurately and cheaply for them from Iraq. Now the camouflage has fallen completely off. Vets for Freedom has registered itself as a 527 committee and is going to run a full page advertisement in Connecticut's Hartford Courant on behalf of Joe Lieberman's renegade run for re-election to the US Senate as a 'stay the course in Iraq' candidate.

The Wall Street Journal reports that VFF is being handled now by Republican strategist Dan Senor and that it "hopes to run other print and radio ads in the fall, and is also planning on campaign door-to-door for Mr. Lieberman and holding a rally on his behalf."

Connecticut is a heavily Democratic state, and normally any Democrat who wins the nomination would be expected to cruise to victory in the general election this November. However, Lieberman's refusal to bow out after losing to Ned Lamont in last Tuesday's primary creates a window of opportunity for a Republican victory. By supporting Lieberman, the Republicans hope to split the Democratic vote so that their candidate can get elected. This strategy is bound to produce an ugly and divisive political campaign, another advantage for the Republican cause nationally as Tony Snow and others in the White House paint pro-peace Democrats as a party of appeasement in the war on terror.

More at: http://www.prwatch.org/node/5077

So, just whose side is Lieberman on? He was backed by the entire Democratic establishment in 2000 when he ran for President. He repays that by allowing a viciously anti-Democratic group to work for him in his re-election race. Democrats should shun this self-serving opportunist and send a message that it's not okay to 'do anything to win,' and it's certainly not okay to accept help from the liars associated with the SBVT.


Posted in GD Politics: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2780378&mesg_id=2780378

[wisteria]

1. I have lost all respect for Lieberman. He seems to think he is as

much of a crusader as Bush. Lieberman thinks he is going to save the Democrats from themselves, and he is going to do it with Re pub money and Swift Boat help, all in the name of moderation and stay the course. He is getting to a point of no return in the Democratic party and if he continues to run and he wins, he won't be welcomed back into the fold. He just might have to become a Re pub in order to get some respect. It is obvious that he and his ego are living inside a bubble.

[fedupinBushcountry]

Delete

dupe- my anger was showing in my fingers.

[karynnj]

Lieberman needs to denounce this group

and instead he sounds just like them. I really don't want to hear about his afability again. Did he fight 1/10 th as hard as the VP nominee? Couldn't he have attacked Cheney for voting against school lunches for poor kids, and being against Nelson Mandella with some of the animousity he used on Lamont? This shows what is important to him and it isn't pretty.

[fedupinBushcountry]

2. More on this bogus group

Fundraising: Swift Boat Connection
An internet search for "Vets for Freedom" + fundraising arrives at a donation page bearing the same logos and information as other VFF web pages. However, the web address is that for DonationReport.com (https://www.donationreport.com/init/controller/ProcessEntryCmd?key=D1I9J9C3Q2) (plus an extension code for VFF).

The connection for the DonationReport.com website (http://www.donationreport.com) arrives at a Login (https://admin.donationreport.com/init/controller/LoginView) page?requiring both a User ID and Password?which belongs to eDonation.com, a member of The Donatelli Group, a fundraising company that has raised campaign funds for the Republican National Committee, Republican National Convention, Bush-Cheney '04 Inc., John McCain, the NRA <13> (http://www.campaignline.com/webedition/page.cfm?pageid=401&navid=51), and an exhaustive list of Republican members of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, as well as other political organizations. <14> (http://www.campaignsolutions.com/contents/clients/)

The Donatelli Group, using its "primary segment" Campaign Solutions <15> (http://www.edonation.com), is associated with Creative Response Concepts, the public relations firm that advised Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the "organization that accused Kerry of inflating his Vietnam War record" during the 2004 presidential campaign. <16> (http://committeeforjustice.org/cgi-data/news/files/72.shtml)

The Donatelli Group, which produced the RNC website <17> (http://onepeoplesproject.com/site/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=488), also created the SWIFTBOATVETSFORTRUTH.ORG website July 30, 2004, with Connell Donatelli Inc. (http://www.connelldonatelli.com/) (a.k.a. The Donatelli Group) as Registrant. Connell Donatelli Inc. was also listed as both Administrator and the Tech Organization for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth website. <18> (http://mailgate.supereva.com/soc/soc.veterans/msg45136.html)

more>

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Vets_for_Freedom#Fundraising:_Swift_Boat_Connection

[ProSense]

4. Excellent!

It's appalling how many organizations/websites they've launch with the single purpose of spreading lies.

[ProSense]

3. Arrrrgh!

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Blaukraut]

5. Almost makes you wonder about Lieberman in '00

Just how serious was he about winning then? Was he even back then in bed with the Bushies and was urged not to put up a fight with a promise of future rewards? It's hard to know anymore in light of the way he has been conducting himself for the entirety of his past term, and especially since the primaries.

[kerrygoddess]

6. More here

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3881

[kerrygoddess]

9. And more

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3886

[ProSense]

10. The Dan Senor/Bush connection

The Republican lobby group Vets for Freedom is the 2006 equivalent of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the Republican 527 committee whose attack advertisements in battleground states helped sink John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race by smearing him as a phony war hero and a traitor to his country.

Snip...

The Wall Street Journal reports that VFF is being handled now by Republican strategist Dan Senor and that it "hopes to run other print and radio ads in the fall, and is also planning on campaign door-to-door for Mr. Lieberman and holding a rally on his behalf."

http://www.prwatch.org/node/5077

Another great post with many links:

GOP Swiftboaters Aiming Next for Ned Lamont

[beachmom]

7. I'm from Conn. originally, but I have to say I'm confused . . .

Why isn't Lieberman dead on arrival? I don't understand why Lamont isn't the frontrunner now? THAT makes me very angry -- why are my fellow Conn. residents still polling for Lieberman, when he has behaved like such an ass? I don't get it. Lamont should definitely get some ads that equate Lieberman with SBVT. But, once again, why won't Lieberman go away, either literally or at least in polls? This story is really getting me angry!!

[karynnj]

8. Possibly because the Republicans have such a poor candidate

It seems he is polling less than 10% of the vote - which has to mean Lieberman is getting that vote.

Apparently the Independents are the biggest group. I'm surprised that Lamont is so close at that point - immediately after the primary. He won only slightly more than half of the Democratic primary vote. Even if you assume the Democrats who didn't vote in the primary are just like those that did, it would mean they are even on the Democratic vote. Lieberman has to have the Republicans (who chose a candidate) who didn't select Scheslinger. This has to mean that Lamont is at least even with the Independents.

Lieberman's post election behavior has been disgusting. I don't think he needed to make a graceful exit. Lieberman was in a strange position - favored by about 75% of the voters a year or so ago. I assume some Democrats liked him as a person and a familiar leader who they had been proud of and ignored his increasing movement on an over-riding issue. A few months ago, he was said to be more "approved" among the Republicans than among the Democrats. Going into the election - polls showed him winning the general election in a 3 way race(in a poll over all registered voters) while losing in the primary.

That would make it hard to quit, but if you believe in political parties - quitting is what you should do. If he wanted to run, he should have given a graceful consession speech - congratulating Lamont on winning and then said that he intended to run because their was no other candidate running on his positions. (yeah - I know that's true of ALL losers) He could then have stated his positions emphasizing where he differs from Lamont and Scheslinger. There, of course, should have been NO NASTINESS - such as essentially calling Lamont close to terrorist sympathiser. (Was his concession to Kerry this pathetic?)

I think these numbers are ok for Lamont at this point. They were before this nastiness that might swing some Democrats and Independents who were still for him in spite of misgivings on Iraq. He has clearly lost the nice guy vote - even as pundits call him a saint. Bush's support won't help - most Republicans are running from him. I would bet the next poll will show at least some improvement for Lamont - which might set off more bad behavior. I don't think American likes poor sportsmanship - and Lieberman has shown that, not in running but in spewing mostly rejected RW talking points.