Hackett's research targeted Brown (Hackett's research leaked to paper)

[Algorem]

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060220/NEWS09/602200340

Article published Monday, February 20, 2006


U.S. SENATE RACE

Hackett's research targeted Brown

Votes to cut funding for intelligence cited


By JIM TANKERSLEY
BLADE POLITICS WRITER

Congressman and U.S. Senate candidate Sherrod Brown voted to cut intelligence funding more than a dozen times before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a record that Paul Hackett's campaign advisers called proof that Mr. Brown could not win in November.

A consultant hired by Mr. Hackett, Mr. Brown's onetime Democratic opponent for Senate, estimated the funding cuts would have totaled billions of dollars if enacted. None were. The consultant called Mr. Brown's votes on those proposals and a dozen more recent national security issues "toxic in today's political environment," according to campaign research documents obtained by The Blade.

Mr. Hackett quit the race last week, leaving Mr. Brown as the near-certain Democratic nominee against incumbent Republican Sen. Mike DeWine. But not before his campaign paid more than $5,000 to comb Mr. Brown's background for political weakness.

The research concluded it was unwise to attack Mr. Brown's career voting record in a Democratic primary, because he toed the party line faithfully. It also predicts Republican attacks on Mr. Brown this fall...


http://www.davidsirota.com/2006/02/who-is-really-weak-on-national.html

Monday, February 20, 2006


Who Is Really "Weak" On National Security?

by David Sirota

Karl Rove has made no secret of his desire to try to ramrod the 2006 elections into a debate over who is "tough" on national security. And it seems more and more Democrats are frightened to actually have the debate. Oh sure, these Democrats wouldn't tell you that - in fact, many are posturing as tough guys even as they cower in fear of Rove. A few weeks back, it was Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), self-servingly reinforcing Rove's dishonest storyline of Democrats as "weak" on national security. And now today in the Toledo Blade, it's failed Ohio Senate candidate Paul Hackett.

Yes, you read that correctly. A week AFTER Hackett got out of the race, Hackett's campaign - now in the process of closing down - leaked all of its "opposition research" on Rep. Sherrod Brown (D) to the Toledo Blade - opposition research that regurgitates the same Karl-Rove-esque "weak on national security" lies that have eroded Democrats' image over the years.

Clearly, Hackett's move is disgusting on many levels. First and foremost, is the sheer pathetic, sore-loserish quality of it. A week ago, it was Hackett who appeared on Air America radio saying: "I’d rather see Sherrod Brown as my next Senator …Why do I want to hurt him if we can get him elected...I’m proud to say that I’m a team player...Everybody who is upset about this, get over it now and let’s work hard to get Democrats on the ticket elected." Now, this "team player" is out spreading GOP propaganda. Classy.

But let's just look at the Toledo Blade story and what it represents at a deeper level. Hackett's campaign tries to attack Brown for voting against the Patriot Act - even though polls show the public has serious reservations about the law, and want it to be changed (see question 19 of this USA Today/CNN poll from last month for reference)...

[4morewars]

1. Convene the circular firing squad !

Fire! Aim ! Ready !

[stray cat]

30. I love your statement - perfect for how dems sometimes operate

[crispini]

2. Just lost all of my respect for Hackett.

[ClassWarrior]

4. Amen.

NGU.

[MercutioATC]

7. Why?

Because he researched an opponent's voting record? From what Hackett has said, I'd be surprised if he authorized the leak. I want to know who actually gave it to the Blade before I start blaming people.

[ClassWarrior]

8. Because he released it.

NGU.

[MercutioATC]

13. I edited my post above. I want to know WHO released it.

If Hackett authorized it, he's to blame. From what he's said, however, it doesn't seem to me to be something he'd do.

Hackett's staffers no longer work for him. It's possible (probable) that one of them was upset with Brown and gave the info to the Blade.

Either way, it's wrong. I'm waiting to find out who actually did it, though, before I start slinging accusations.

[ClassWarrior]

17. Fair enough.

NGU.

[crispini]

18. Fine, I agree. nt

[mzmolly]

50. Hackett holds Brown personally responsible for the "swiftboat"

schpeal even though it is said to be a "staffer" who made the controversial claims.

:shrug:

Democrats are so frikking politically ignorant. Why can't we run above board primary campaigns so the ultimate nominee has a shot in hell? @$%

[mzmolly]

51. Both mens campaigns disgust me to no end if what was said is true.

IF Brown's camp spread LIES about Hackett to get ahead politically, that's despicable. If Hacketts campaign played dirty pool to "get even" without regard for the nation - it's loathsome.

Accidentally replied to my own post :blush:

[stepnw1f]

11. Because They Were Leaked

and now the opposition can further divide the dems, and highlight something that may cost Brown his election.

[OhioBlue]

23. that would have nothing to do with Hackett

as far as the opposition being able to highlight something that may cost Brown the election. For chrissakes, these are public record votes - no big freakin' secrets. DeWine would have the info ANYWAY. I'm fairly certain that the Brown camp is already prepared for attacks against his voting record.

[stepnw1f]

38. Yes... But this ISsue is Being Highlighted by the Leak

I do not know who the leaker was, and in another post I said as much. Either way, without placing blame on anyone, this is not going to be good for Brown. I hope people see through this.

[OhioBlue]

40. I don't really think it is that big of a deal

In the history of primaries - all kinds of mud have been slung to give the general opponent ammo - this is a story about his public record votes - not really earth shattering IMO - it's not like they falsely accused him of something underhanded or dug up some long ago personal situation. I don't condone one of Hackett's former staffers going to the Blade with the story but I seriously doubt it is a make it or break it issue for Brown's campaign.

Hell, the repugs were all pissed off and critical of DeWine for his gang of 14 participation and the fact that he came out against the gay marriage ban in '04. I'm sure the Brown camp could dig up plenty of crap the ultra conservatives were saying against DeWine.

[Zhade]

45. For me, it's because this record is seen as bad by Hackett.

Meanwhile, in reality, funding could have been cut and the attacks still stopped, if only the administration hadn't been so keen on deliberately ignoring what was coming.

This guy's buying into the whole GWOT scam. Reprehensible as the actions taken to get him out of the race were (and they were decidedly undemocratic), I'm not so sure getting stuck with Brown is trading down.

[EFerrari]

3. Why do you want to keep this stuff going?

Really, I don't get it.

[stepnw1f]

5. I'm Lost for Words

I want to hear or see Hacket comment on this himself. Can I trust this info?

[Southsideirish]

6. I never went for this guy. Now he ought to be ostracized forever.

[liberal N proud]

9. Why did Hackett let this out to be published?

It is tough enough to beat the crooks without being attacked from within your own party.

If Hackett would have been interested in beating Deswine, he would have turned the information over to Browns office and said, heads up, this is what Deswine might use for November.

This is bull shit.

[zulchzulu]

10. That old chestnut: "voted to cut intelligence funding more than a..."

Without digging into Brown's voting record, I'm sure the dozen votes were against some monstrous omnibus bill loaded with Repug pork, making abortion illegal...blah, blah, blah... before it went back for another vote.

This type of "issue" is always used against Senators with any record and appeal to those clueless about the senatorial voting process...

[Zhade]

46. Good point.

NT!

[mdmc]

12. ugly

who cares?

[NashVegas]

14. Pathetic on Hackett's Part, BUT

I'm sure it's nothing DeWine and Rove couldn't have/wouldn't have come up with on their own.

[OhioBlue]

19. I wouldn't say pathetic on Hackett's part

it was probably one of his former staffers that are pissed off.

and I agree - it isn't earth shaking news for chrissakes - of course DeWine would've come up with it. they will find all kinds of BS to throw at him about his voting record. They always do - and it is just that - BS.

[w4rma]

15. So Hackett's last political move is to stab his own Democratic supporters

in the back. I used to respect that guy.

[OhioBlue]

20. Don't know that Hackett was behind it

and, it isn't exactly HUGE news - it's about Brown's public record votes - DeWine would have used it anyway. It was probably a former campaign person that is pissed off at the Brown camp for the underhanded way Hackett was forced out.

and..... HEY NOW.... ;)

[regnaD kciN]

22. The point is that HE would have used it...

In other words, had Hackett not "taken his ball and gone home," we could have expected primary ads blasting Brown for being "soft on terror" and not backing the Patriot Act.

What a jerk.

[OhioBlue]

25. That is completely hypothetical

We don't know that he would have used it. It would have been irresponsible not to do research on one's opponent - just b/c they did the research doesn't lead me to a conclusion that I know what his primary ads would have looked like.

[enlightenment]

53. Thank you.

A little common sense is nice -- if Hackett had stayed in the race, he would have run against Brown, not with him, for pete's sake.

And there is nothing in the Toledo Blade article that SAYS Hackett released, or authorized the release of this data.

I like David Sirota, but he was playing a little loose with the original article. Perhaps his support of Brown (the campaign ad on Sirota's blog) might have contributed to his opinion of Hackett?

[merci_me]

47. I don't think it would have worked for him.........

we have a guy like that running here. Smearing his primary opponent with crap that. In our case, it's someone who was never really involved in Democratic politics over the years, infact admits he didn't vote before 1998 and he's 36!!! So, he's trying to use something that will not play with the traditional activist Dems who turn out for primaries, especially off year primaries.

I think Hackett may have discovered the samething. You can't smear Brown with voting against the Patriot Act and think it's going to hurt him with the traditional activist Democratic primary voter.

I think he saw the handwriting on the wall and decided to take his ball and pitch it to the Repukes. I'll watch Hardball today. I could be wrong on this one. I'm very colored by what I'm seeing locally.

[progressivebydesign]

27. yes, he was behind it. He paid for it and leaked in.

Why are you trying to rationalize this scummy behavior?

[OhioBlue]

31. He paid for research

of course he did - it would be stupid not to. And, we don't know that he personally leaked it - it came from his former campaign - which is over. Isn't it possible that an independent person formerly affiliated with his campaign is pissed off at the way Hackett was treated and took it upon themselves to give the info to the Blade?

I'm not going to transfer that responsibility to Hackett just the same as I am making a constant effort not to let the fact that I'm increasingly frustrated that Algorem and others from the Ohio forum continue to try and make Hackett look bad transfer into me attacking Brown.

[Toucano]

16. This isn't a big deal.

If Hackett's people knew this, then DeWine's people know it. Opposition research is necessary. It doesn't matter if the public hears this in February or October, from Hackett or DeWine.

Brown's people are well aware of it, too, and probably have a strategy to counter it.

The only thing that's a little sucky is it leaking after Hackett has dropped out and the filing deadline is closed.

[Terry_M]

21. This is from 5,000$ of research...

Do any of you think that anyone in the republican party machine that actually cares doesn't ALREADY know this? This isn't helping Republicans one bit. This is letting the rest of us know what is coming.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[progressivebydesign]

26. What a vindictive asshole. n /t

[AndyTiedye]

28. For All We Know, Karl Rove Might Have Released It

and blamed it on the Hackett campaign.

[progressivebydesign]

29. C'mon. Hackett paid for the research and had it released.

We can't blame everything on Rove.. much as we'd like to. Truth his Hackett dropped out of the raise in a really tacky fashion, claiming all kids of abuse.. now this. There is always a tendency, especially in post 9/11, to see every candidate with military service as some sort of mythical hero. Hackett, from what I've observed, either isn't ready for prime time, or has some serious anger issues.

[confludemocrat]

32. Remember he was a PR flack for the military at Fallujah. nuff said. n/t

[KittyWampus]

33. WHAT! You mean Hackett was playing politics just like Brown & every

other freaking candidate that ever ran for office?

[Garbo 2004]

34. Kos says Hackett isn't behind this. Former staffers did it, he says:

Former Hackett staffers are now releasing oppo research against Brown for Republicans to use against him and other Ohio Democrats.

To be very, very clear -- this isn't Hackett's doing. This is the work of bitter former staffers who saw Hackett as a job through November and even perhaps their ticket to DC.

That was always one of Hackett's biggest liabilities -- his inexperienced team. (Even outsiders need people who know how to put together a field plan and run a political communications office.) Now we find out that they are far worse than simply inexperienced.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/20/102123/992

[stepnw1f]

39. The Staffer is an ASSHOLE! (nt)

[Algorem]

49. How does Kos know it wasn't Hackett?

[Kolesar]

35. Who says the voters will approve of the gop's military record?

This moment in time reminds me a lot of all the hatred against Nixon for invading Cambodia, killing people, and prolonging that war.

[robcon]

36. If a candidate can't research an opponent...

and leak the contents of that research, we are really are screwed as a country. As far as I can see, there were no untrue statements in the leak, and I admire Hackett for that.

That's standard politics, good politics, and I'm sure Brown and every other politician does the same thing.

[Pithy Cherub]

41. Exactly!

Each and every campaign does it. Hackett would not have been running a campaign if it hadn't been done. I wonder who started the whispering campaign against Hackett? :shrug:

[carpe diem]

37. maybe WHOEVER leaked it did Brown a favor...

if Hackett had it, I guarantee the Dewine campaign had it and were prepared to start using it to morph Brown into Osama around September/October just in time for maximum possible effect for November...better to neutralize/explain/put it in proper context NOW rather than have to deal with it on the Dewine campaign's time table.

Also, I am intrigued by folks like Sirota continuing to pick over the bones of the Hackett campaign and smearing Paul Hackett...if they think that trying to make Hackett look bad is going to make Brown look better by comparison...that only works in the primary which Hackett is no longer in...it's not going to do a damn thing for Brown against Dewine and it allows Dewine say 'Look at the Dems devouring their own again and look at how they treat veterans'...that's not going to help Brown in the general.

I almost get the feeling that they know they may have made a mistake in how they handled Hackett, and whatever his flaws as a candidate, having the rug of party support and money pulled out from under him was the nail in the coffin for his campaign and he and they know it however anyone tries to spin it as 'Hackett was a weasel' and demean his character and integrity now. What is the point of this? He is history, he's done, stick the fork in, etc...there was a Rassmussan poll done a few days ago that suggests that Brown and his supporters don't have time to waste making their case FOR Brown and AGAINST DEWINE....Hackett is not the opposition anymore and the Republicans aren't going to just hand this thing over whatever problems they have in Ohio...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/February%202006/Ohio%20Senate%20February.htm

Maybe the reality of having to get the independent and Republican votes that are absolutely necessary to win a general election in a red state like Ohio is looking the Brown campain squarely in the face and they are preparing the excuses already to blame Hackett and his supporters for their eventual loss...otherwise it makes no sense to still be bitching almost a week later about a guy that's NOT RUNNING for ANYTHING anymore when the guy they are running against has a 9pt lead and hasn't even begun the attack yet that you KNOW is coming...there is NO TIME TO WASTE wallowing in this BS...it's over, Brown is the candidate, start attacking the real enemy, November isn't as far away as we might like to think...

[rexcat]

42. Your last paragraph sums up the campaign of Brown here in Ohio...

I have stated this before and if Brown does not pull over the independent voters, who voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, here in Ohio Brown can just hang it up.

DeWine is also no shoe-in for the repuke primary. He is not liked by many conservatives in this state. That being said, if DeWine does win the primary those conservatives will not vote for Brown. What we can hope for is they won't vote for anyone in the general election.

This allegation has more to do with the quality of people who support Brown more than with Paul Hackett. The Brown supporters have gone to great lengths to smear Hackett at every opportunity, even after he left the race. What everyone needs to concentrate on is getting Brown in the Senate. If the Brown supporters don't give up on smearing Hackett and get going on Brown's race in the general election there is no chance Brown will win. It is still an uphill battle for Brown.

[still_one]

43. I would like to hear what hackett says about this story

I will NOT take ANY newspapers word for anything today, and want to hear it from the horses mouth

Don't forget it was the wonderful press that helped spread the lies about Iraq...

If Hackett did authorize this story to the press it is disgusting, however, why should a person be afraid to stand on their record. Is it true that Brown voted the way the article says, and if it is then it is public record

Frankly, the democrats have screwed up big time since 2000. They are constantly running trying to distance themseleves from liberal issues, that many people find their positions ambiguous at best

I AM A LIBERAL AND PROUD OF IT!!!

Let me here the DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS SAY THAT

[LiberalAndProud]

44. Wow. Sherrod Brown is a Democrat! (who knew?)

I wish I could vote for him instead of Mr. Ben Nelson.

I really really do.

[merci_me]

48. You bet he his!

I've known Sherrod Brown since he was a very young man, driving around Ohio working hard with the idealism that we all had, for George McGovern. I think the first time I met him was in the middle of the night, at a highway truckstop, to switch piles of McGovern signs between cars.

I watched him move on to become a very young member of the Ohio House, then to a few terms as Ohio Secretary of State. Later, I was transfered to Texas, but I still had the pleasure over the years, to watch his progressive stance on C-Span as a member of the Ohio Democratic Delegation to Congress.

I'm not THAT much older than Sherrod, but back in the McG days, even though we were all young, being almost 30 and a mom of 4, I looked on him as one of the McG kids (probably about 20). Watching him staying with it and moving on, I have a real sense of pride.

[JNelson6563]

52. Shameful

Whatever happened to a graceful exit? :shrug:

[ecstatic]

54. So, its a double knockout? Both Brown and Hackett have no chance? nt

[Guaranteed]

55. So, as Pink Floyd would say....the Dems turned their back on him,

and he stuck the knife in.

[IndianaGreen]

56. It's payback time for Sherrod Brown

According to Tweety tonight (he had Hackett on) it was Brown's people that tried to swiftboat him.

You know, it not so much what you do in politics but how you do them that always comes back to haunt you.

I will continue to maintain that Schumer and Reid made a blunder when they decided to sabotage Hackett rather than trust the Ohio voters make their choice during the primary.

[cmd]

57. What amazes me

Is that I am in Ohio. I spend time every day reading Ohio political news. I work regularly with my county Democrats. I didn't hear of the so-called Swiftboating of Hackett until I read about it in the Ohio forum from some of his supporters. If the Swiftboaters were out, they certainly weren't doing a very effective job. I do not for a minute believe that Sherrod Brown was behind this. I know Sherrod. That's not the way he operates.

[izzybeans]

58. It seems he retained some of his republican qualities

Amateur politician and the emotional stability of a fire ant.

Thanks for running the republican campaign for them mister hackett.

Bye.