Veterans pursued by a pair of policy ads

Posted to: Elections Iraq Military

WASHINGTON

Hampton Roads voters, particularly veterans, are being targeted by a pair of television ad campaigns designed to rekindle the national debate over the future of the U.S. mission in Iraq.

Vets for Freedom, a 2-year-old group that claims membership of 25,000 veterans nationwide, on Wednesday launched a five-state, $1.5 million ad effort that attacks the positions taken by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama on the Iraq war. It argues that the next president should "finish the job" in Iraq.

The AFL-CIO, the organized labor powerhouse that has been a player in national political campaigns for decades, said Wednesday it will begin airing an ad in Virginia and five other states today that attacks Republican candidate Sen. John McCain's support for the Bush administration's war policies.

The 30-second television spot produced by Vets for Freedom is the forerunner of what the group expects to be a national campaign that will cost in excess of $10 million, said Pete Hegseth, the group's chairman.

Most of the effort, including promotions on talk-radio programs, mailings and grassroots organizing, will be focused in 12 states, Hegseth said, particularly areas with large numbers of veterans.

In Virginia, the group's current ad is running in Hampton Roads and the Washington suburbs. The group is spending only $76,000 on air time in the state.

Vets for Freedom's efforts are being fueled by donations from thousands of people nationwide, Hegseth said. He said the group will not release donors' names nor the size of their donations. The group is registered under a section of federal tax law that allows it to advertise and organize on behalf of particular policies while maintaining the confidentiality of its donors.

Donations to political campaigns or political action committees, by contrast, generally must be reported and are limited by law.

"I don't want to have to print out names of thousands of Americans for everyone to dish through.... We've been very straightforward with our donors - that if they give, their names aren't disclosed," Hegseth said.

Steve Weissman, associate director of the Campaign Finance Institute at George Washington University, said a growing number of issue activists are using the tax provision to shield their donors.

The groups risk losing their tax-exempt status if they engage in advocacy on behalf of or against a specific candidate, Weissman said. But if the groups direct their advocacy to particular policies, donors "can influence an election without anyone knowing who is doing it."

Groups including Planned Parenthood and the National Rifle Association have used the tax provision for years, Weissman said.

The new Vets for Freedom commercial does not mention any candidate, but its upbeat view of the security situation in Iraq closely tracks that of Republicans such as U.S. Rep. Thelma Drake of Norfolk, who is being challenged this fall by Democrat Glenn Nye.

The commercial features veterans proclaiming the success of the troop surge into Iraq that began last year.

"Casualties are at an all-time low. Al-Qaida in Iraq is decimated.... We changed strategy in Iraq and the surge worked. Now that's change we can believe in," the vets argue.

The ad's punch line is an echo of Obama's campaign slogan. Its use seems likely to rekindle questions about Vets for Freedom's connections to the McCain campaign.

While Hegseth stressed the group's non partisanship and noted that its political action arm has endorsed several Democrats, he has acknowledged in the past that it's pro-surge views parallel McCain's.

Vets for Freedom also operates a political action committee that attacked Obama directly this spring over his failure to visit Iraq since January 2006, before the surge began.

Obama opposed the surge and has promised to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq within 16 months of his election. Hegseth stressed repeatedly Wednesday that Vets for Freedom opposes such timelines.

Two of McCain's most prominent supporters and occasional surrogates, Sens. Joe Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., gave up positions on Vets for Freedom's advisory board last month because their involvement violated the McCain campaign's conflict-of-interest guidelines.

While the Vets for Freedom ads avoid mentioning Obama, the AFL-CIO, which operates under different legal restrictions, has endorsed the Democrat and goes after McCain aggressively in its new commercial. The union has pledged to spend up to $50 million to aid Obama.

"Every vet respects John McCain's war record," Navy vet Jim Wasser says in the ad. "It's his record in the Senate that I have a problem with."

Dale Eisman, (703) 913-9872, dale.eisman@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

I take back what I said

about the pilot getting it right...while the original title of the article may not have captured the nuances of the resons for the commercial, to change the title of the article in an obvious bow to pressure after it was posted is rather cowardly. If you're wrong then print a retraction but otherwise stand by what you said and what some people leaped to defend.

RE: I'll tell you

"We need to fight the terrorists on a battlefield we set, we can't let them chose where to fight, so we picked Iraq to bring them together to eliminate them in one place."

I think that's a total pipe dream, and therefore we let Bin Ladden get away with mass murder??????? WOW! What a plan Bush had!

I'll tell you

Saddam kept Iran in check? I think the US was pulling the strings of the Iraq puppet, in response to the hostage situation. By going through Iraq it looked a lot better than the US invading Iran. After we left, Saddam got a little arrogant and tried to work on his own(Kuwait). The US was disappointed by his actions and stopped him.
We need to fight the terrorists on a battlefield we set, we can't let them chose where to fight, so we picked Iraq to bring them together to eliminate them in one place.
North Korea will do nothing without an ok from China.

clarification

Actually, Saddam stoked religious fervor in Iraq in 1990 to turn the Gulf War into a jihad - he put "Allah Akbar" on the Iraqi flag in '91 (in his own handwriting, no less). He started the movement away from secularism and it caused him a lot of internal problems. Are there terrorists there, you ask? What do you call people who bomb mosques, markets and job centers with nary an American in sight? Attacking American soldiers could be defended as patriotic, but their fellow citizens? And contrary to popular opinion it isn't because of religious reasons, per se. Sunnis attack Shi'a and vice versa for political / power reasons, not because they have different views on Islamic succession.

As for NK? If by "messing with them" you mean military action, it is precisely because they already have nukes and missiles that can hit Japan that we don't.

Notice Headline Changed?

I noticed the "Pro-war" banner is gone from this article...

Saddam might have been a dictator...but...

he kept Iran occupied in a stalemate and he kept Iraq secular. Now, it's well on its way to becoming another Iran. Further, there weren't terrorists (and are there terrorists there really?) until after we went in there and they started flooding over the border to "help" their brothers fight the "infidel".

The 9/11 terrorists were overwhelmingly from Saudi. Many of the Taliban were educated in Saudi-financed madrassas in Pakistan.

We did the right thing by going after them in Afghanistan...but Iraq? We were sold a bill of goods.

As for NK? They have a nuclear program and they fire off test missiles at will that could easily hit Japan. Their dictator is a nut job and their people are starving. While they are influenced by China, they are a loose cannon and a destabilizing force in the region. But...we don't mess with them. Why?

Facts? Let's talk facts.

dano65: Fact: The National Debt is now at $9,495,420,401,638.92 Every person (citizen) in these United States would have to pay $31,200.69 to pay it off. Most of it is owed to foreign countries, like China, whom we borrowed it from. Fact: Abu Duabi recently bought the Chrysler Building in New York. Apparently it was up for sale pretty cheap, since the dollar is so weak and all.
Fact: It's been SEVEN YEARS since this war started. I think it's about time Iraq takes care of Iraq. We train our troops in what? 8 week boot camp? Then some schooling after? Just how long does it take THEM to get trained? Of course the rampant coruption in their government, military, etc could be the problem. And that is a part of their culture. Don't see it going away anytime soon. I would rather stop paying for it. I agreed with going into Afghanistan. We should STILL be concentrating on that country since the terrorists se

Who to vote for???

This will be a difficult decision because I don't like either candidate. The hot-head McCain is just like Bush and Obama can't possibly make all the changes he thinks he can, and there is something about him that I just don't trust. While I don't like McCain at least I KNOW he's a jerk. Obama, scares the heck out of me.

Censored

Wow, I must have hurt someone’s feelings. My "Objectivity" post has been removed. I don't know why. It stayed within the posting guidelines for the post. I did not insult anyone (directly) and it was on topic (one sentence).
I did notice that the article has changed and the AFL-CIO is conducting their direct attack against McCain. At lease the Vets For Freedom had a message that was directed to “no matter who is the next president".
The Vets for Freedom ad was NOT an attack ad. The AFL-CIO promises theirs will be.
The Vets for Freedom used real people that are/have been involved in real world contingencies.
The AFL-CIO will most likely use actors that are willing to spew lies and deceit.
I definitely believe these real heroes in the Vets for Freedom ad over the typical blather from AFL-CIO.

"after he realized that he wasn't smart enough..."

Really objective there, phrog. 1987 was before 2001 so it has nothing to do with the book in question. Webb became a democrat about 2006 so when did you complain about your "blatant pedophilia"? So far you have only shown that it bothers you only after he became a democrat but it did not bother you when he was a republican.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: Elections rss feed    Iraq rss feed    Military rss feed   



Toolbox


 

special features