SC Dems Apologize to Sanford Over False Union Attack | April 9th, 2013

The Colbert Busch campaign is in complete disarray!

Earlier today Elizabeth Colbert Busch, in an attempt to back track on her extreme support of unions, put out a statement on Boeing’s latest announcement that an additional 2,000 jobs will be coming to the Lowcountry. But we all know if Elizabeth Colbert Busch and her campaign funders had their way, Boeing would have never been in South Carolina in the first place.

To make matters worse, the South Carolina Democrat Party on behalf of Colbert Busch falsely attacked Mark Sanford, claiming that he took campaign funds in the 1998 and 2000 election cycles from unions. They were wrong and their desperate attempt to distract from Colbert Busch’s allegiance to unions came back to bite them.

Apology from the SCDP:

“We learned this evening that the information posted on OpenSecrets.org…is incorrect. We relied on an independent organization used by many journalism organizations and it’s disappointing and unfortunate that the source appears to be in error. We apologize for any confusion that this error has caused.”

In case you missed it… 

Colbert Busch and Sanford Trade Barbs Over Boeing
But SCDP appears to have wrongly accused Sanford of talking specific donations.
By Shawn Drury – Mount Pleasant Patch
 

On Tuesday, shortly after Boeing announced the details of its Phase II expansion, which will mean an additional 2,000 jobs for the Lowcountry and a $1 billion investment.

The candidates for the First Congressional District weighed in almost immediately.

Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch issued the following statement:

“This is a wonderful day for the hardworking people of South Carolina, and it just goes to show the success we can have when the public and private sectors work together. As a businesswoman who supports and is committed to workforce development, this is exactly the kind of project we need. As your member of Congress, I’ll work to make sure even more employers come to our state.

“I applaud Boeing for its investment in South Carolina, and I am confident that the quality of our workforce, our business climate and our prospects will only encourage more employers to come here and expand their operations. With Boeing’s growth and the investments in South Carolina from the energy economic cluster that we teamed up to build, we have the opportunity for tremendous synergy to create good jobs here.

“Boeing is a tremendous partner, whether it’s investing in research or collaborating with the community. They are committed to our children and continuing education to ensure the South Carolina workforce is prepared for the 21st century economy.”

Mark Sanford’s campaign then issued a statement of its own:

“With Boeing now looking to add another 2,000 jobs in North Charleston, South Carolina simply cannot afford to gamble on a Congresswoman with such close ties to the very people who sought to have Boeing pack up and leave town,” Sanford said. “I think Elizabeth Colbert Busch owes it to the district to let people know whose side she is on – the side of those who would create jobs in South Carolina, or the side of those who would take them away. Further, to remove any cloud about the influence of anti-Boeing special interests in the race, I call on my opponent to return all the contributions she has received from these unions, and not accept any more. I would normally not call for such an action, but given the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) was the very union to bring the complaint against Boeing to the NLRB, I don’t know how you could be pro-jobs, while accepting IAMAW money, given their stand against Boeing here in Charleston.”

The South Carolina Democratic Party responding with a demand for an apology and then a reminder of its own about campaign contributions:

“Just when you thought Mark Sanford’s strained relationship with the truth couldn’t get any worse, we learn that he’s criticizing Elizabeth Colbert Busch for something he’s done,” said SCDP Chairman Dick Harpootlian. “Mark owes Elizabeth an apology for this ugly attack, but we won’t hold our breath for him to do the right thing. Only a colossal hypocrite like Mark Sanford thinks he can operate outside the truth and play by his own rules.” 

Background: 

Sanford took at Least $9,000 from Labor While in Congress

  • 1998: Took $3,000 from Labor. In the 1998 election cycle, Sanford accepted $3,000 from labor, including $2,500 from the United Transportation Union and $500 from the Seafarers International Union. 
  • 2000: Took $6,000 from Labor. In the 2000 election cycle, Sanford accepted $6,000 from labor, including $1,000 from the Ironworkers Union, $4,000 from the Laborers Union, and $1,000 from United Transportation Union. 

The only problem for the Democrats is the donations the SCDP cites were given to Sanford Bishop, a politician from Georgia.

After noting that this information was readily available on the Federal Election Commission website, the Sanford campaign’s spokesperson Joel Sawyer said:

“This is yet another example of Democrats playing fast and loose with the facts in an effort to distract from their candidate being beholden to the union that tried to shutter Boeing, and ship 1,000 jobs from Charleston off to Washington State,” Sawyer said. “Mr. Harpootlian owes voters, and for that matter Governor Sanford, an apology for disseminating this false and misleading information. And while he’s at it, maybe he can explain to voters why they are fielding a candidate for the First District who is so cozy with the very people who want to take jobs from South Carolinians. This disagreement is about one thing – how can you be for jobs in the first district of South Carolina, and at the same be aligned with the very union that brought the case against Boeing before the National Labor Relations Board.”

The Democrats did apologize:

“We learned this evening that the information posted on OpenSecrets.org…is incorrect. We relied on an independent organization used by many journalism organizations and it’s disappointing and unfortunate that the source appears to be in error. We apologize for any confusion that this error has caused.”

The Colbert Busch campaign is in complete disarray! Earlier today Elizabeth Colbert Busch, in an attempt to back track on her extreme support of unions, put out a statement on Boeing’s latest announcement that an additional 2,000 jobs will be coming to the Lowcountry. But we all know if Elizabeth Colbert Busch and her campaign funders had their way, Boeing would have never been in South Carolina in the first place. To make matters worse, the South Carolina Democrat Party on behalf of Colbert Busch falsely attacked Mark Sanford, claiming that he took campaign funds in the 1998 and 2000 election cycles from unions. They were wrong and their desperate attempt to distract from Colbert Busch’s allegiance to unions came back to bite them. Apology from the SCDP: "We learned this evening that the information posted on OpenSecrets.org...is incorrect. We relied on an independent organization used by many journalism organizations and it's disappointing and unfortunate that the source appears to be in error. We apologize for any confusion that this error has caused."

In case you missed it… 

Colbert Busch and Sanford Trade Barbs Over Boeing But SCDP appears to have wrongly accused Sanford of talking specific donations. By Shawn Drury – Mount Pleasant Patch 

On Tuesday, shortly after Boeing announced the details of its Phase II expansion, which will mean an additional 2,000 jobs for the Lowcountry and a $1 billion investment. The candidates for the First Congressional District weighed in almost immediately. Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch issued the following statement: “This is a wonderful day for the hardworking people of South Carolina, and it just goes to show the success we can have when the public and private sectors work together. As a businesswoman who supports and is committed to workforce development, this is exactly the kind of project we need. As your member of Congress, I’ll work to make sure even more employers come to our state. “I applaud Boeing for its investment in South Carolina, and I am confident that the quality of our workforce, our business climate and our prospects will only encourage more employers to come here and expand their operations. With Boeing’s growth and the investments in South Carolina from the energy economic cluster that we teamed up to build, we have the opportunity for tremendous synergy to create good jobs here. “Boeing is a tremendous partner, whether it’s investing in research or collaborating with the community. They are committed to our children and continuing education to ensure the South Carolina workforce is prepared for the 21st century economy.” Mark Sanford's campaign then issued a statement of its own: "With Boeing now looking to add another 2,000 jobs in North Charleston, South Carolina simply cannot afford to gamble on a Congresswoman with such close ties to the very people who sought to have Boeing pack up and leave town," Sanford said. "I think Elizabeth Colbert Busch owes it to the district to let people know whose side she is on - the side of those who would create jobs in South Carolina, or the side of those who would take them away. Further, to remove any cloud about the influence of anti-Boeing special interests in the race, I call on my opponent to return all the contributions she has received from these unions, and not accept any more. I would normally not call for such an action, but given the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) was the very union to bring the complaint against Boeing to the NLRB, I don't know how you could be pro-jobs, while accepting IAMAW money, given their stand against Boeing here in Charleston." The South Carolina Democratic Party responding with a demand for an apology and then a reminder of its own about campaign contributions: "Just when you thought Mark Sanford's strained relationship with the truth couldn't get any worse, we learn that he's criticizing Elizabeth Colbert Busch for something he's done,” said SCDP Chairman Dick Harpootlian. “Mark owes Elizabeth an apology for this ugly attack, but we won't hold our breath for him to do the right thing. Only a colossal hypocrite like Mark Sanford thinks he can operate outside the truth and play by his own rules."  Background:  Sanford took at Least $9,000 from Labor While in Congress
  • 1998: Took $3,000 from Labor. In the 1998 election cycle, Sanford accepted $3,000 from labor, including $2,500 from the United Transportation Union and $500 from the Seafarers International Union. 
  • 2000: Took $6,000 from Labor. In the 2000 election cycle, Sanford accepted $6,000 from labor, including $1,000 from the Ironworkers Union, $4,000 from the Laborers Union, and $1,000 from United Transportation Union. 
The only problem for the Democrats is the donations the SCDP cites were given to Sanford Bishop, a politician from Georgia. After noting that this information was readily available on the Federal Election Commission website, the Sanford campaign's spokesperson Joel Sawyer said: "This is yet another example of Democrats playing fast and loose with the facts in an effort to distract from their candidate being beholden to the union that tried to shutter Boeing, and ship 1,000 jobs from Charleston off to Washington State," Sawyer said. "Mr. Harpootlian owes voters, and for that matter Governor Sanford, an apology for disseminating this false and misleading information. And while he's at it, maybe he can explain to voters why they are fielding a candidate for the First District who is so cozy with the very people who want to take jobs from South Carolinians. This disagreement is about one thing - how can you be for jobs in the first district of South Carolina, and at the same be aligned with the very union that brought the case against Boeing before the National Labor Relations Board." The Democrats did apologize: "We learned this evening that the information posted on OpenSecrets.org...is incorrect. We relied on an independent organization used by many journalism organizations and it's disappointing and unfortunate that the source appears to be in error. We apologize for any confusion that this error has caused."