Rusty Shackleford has been doing a lot of research. If this can be traced to the Obama campaign, the FEC should be interested. But they probably won't be. And neither will the MSM.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Dan Riehl has more. And like roaches fleeing when the lights come on, the perps have pulled down the sites. Not in time, though--they've been cached.
You know, this could be a really big story for an enterprising investigative reporter at someplace like the New York Times. Unfortunately, when it comes to Barack Obama, such creatures don't seem to exist.
[Update mid morning]
Ace has more:
Tomorrow they will claim this was all inadvertent, etc. They'll say they did produce the ad, and sent it to Winner and Associates to, um, focus-group or something, then decided not to run it, but that dirty Winner family and its employees attempted to get it to go viral without their authorization.
Whatever.
If this is all so innocent, why are the videos being yanked even as we speak?
Just about one hour after the post went up, "cnwinner," "eswinner" and the rest of the winner gang are yanking their videos.
Almost as if... I don't know, some kind of major campaign organization was patrolling the internet 24/7.
Can we believe "cnwinner," "eswinner," and etc. just all suddenly were monitoring the internet and decided to take their videos down simultaneously?
No, we cannot.
Can we believe Winner & Associates scours the internet 24 hours a day for derogatory stories about them?
No, we cannot.
But -- can we believe the Obama campaign has people watching the internet 24/7 and just sent out the call to Winner & Associates to bury the evidence?
Yes we can, friends.
Yes we can, even if the Gray Lady can't.
Wow... talk about read the whole thing. Unfortunately, it will drive more people to be unanimous in their posting.
Rand
Yea I have been noticing this on Newsvine as well. There are a group of people, who met at the dem convention with the Kos crowd and since have been a conduit for spreading the Kos bs that comes from the sources mentioned in your article here.
Good work.
Rats indeed.
life is good, back, back in the ussa.
Apparently, the guy who made this ad has come forward. Per Politico.com, he's not on the Obama payroll.
Per Politico.com, he's not on the Obama payroll.
No, not per Politico.com. Per his word.
Why should we believe him?
Why should we believe him?
Why shouldn't we believe him?
Why shouldn't we believe him?
Because he put out a demonstrably false campaign video?
Why should we believe him?
First, I have the same problem with Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party as y'all do with Bill Ayers. In her case, she's (literally) in bed with somebody who's a member of a party that advocates seccession. (For the record, I thought that the US Civil War established that seccession = treason.)
Second, why would Obama pay for this ad, then franticly take it down? The simpler explanation is that this guy did a free-lance ad and got caught.
For the record, I thought that the US Civil War established that seccession = treason.
Only to people who agree with that notion.
Sorry, but I just can't get as upset about secession as hyperventilaters on the left insist that I must.
...why would Obama pay for this ad, then franticly take it down?
In the hope that after it came down it would eliminate the evidence that might allow it to be traced it back to him?
In the hope that after it came down it would eliminate the evidence that might allow it to be traced it back to him?
So a campaign that has watched people spend months doing armchair forensics on his birth certificate, and has shown quite a bit of intelligence managing things Internet, suddenly got stupid and forgot about Google cache and ip geo-locate?
If they really wanted the thing done, they could have told the PR firm to create a 527 and it would be perfectly legal. No, unless you believe in black UN helicopters, this is a simple case of a fairly young man getting carried away.
I have the same problem with Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party as y'all do with Bill Ayers.
What problem with Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party? That she was never affiliated with it? There is no logical means to compare Sarah Palin and AIP with Obama and Bill Ayers.
Leland - Obama was never a member of the Weathermen, but since he hung around with Ayers, we get to talk about him. Palin's sleeping with somebody from the AIP.
Seriously, if Joe Biden's wife was a member of the "Delaware Independence Party" and Biden gave a videotaped speach at their convention, would you be okay with that?
...if Joe Biden's wife was a member of the "Delaware Independence Party" and Biden gave a videotaped speach at their convention, would you be okay with that?
It depends on the precise nature of the "Delaware Independence Party," and why it wants to be independent, but heck, it might actually increase him in my esteem (admittedly a low bar).
Sorry, but this is another hilarious case of projection, in which "liberals" assume that others get outraged by the same things that outrage them.
Quoting Ethan Winner:
"Contrary to the allegation in the Jawa Report, the voice-over artist has never done any work for the Obama campaign."
Ethan Winner should provide name and contact information for the woman doing the voice-over if he wants to strengthen his case. Simple right?
One could hire her for voice print analysis and compare it with existing material including the Obama campaign ads. This would be in the interest of Ethan Winner if he is speaking the truth. He could make his case with proof rather than assertions.
Quoting Ethan Winner:
"...I produced this video as an expression of my right to free speech, which is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution."
and
"Following the posting of personal information about me by the Jawa Report, my family began to receive threatening and abusive phone calls and emails."
Since he allegedly received something that was bad enough as to make him decide to stop his free speech has he contacted the police and filed a complaint, requested protection, investigation, or similar? If not then why not?
Second, why would Obama pay for this ad, then franticly take it down?
This is a variety of the ol' Pillar of the Community argument to the jury, about why Mr. Rich CEO couldn't possibly have ordered the hit on the embarassing minority agitator. Why, he's much to smart to do something dumb like that, ladies and gentlemen. And how do you know that? Because he's never been caught doing something as dumb as this before! QED.
Sure. But leaving aside that lovely piece of circular reasoning, youalso have to consider the "trial balloon" possibility, that is, that the campaign might have said sure, go ahead, only if it goes wrong we don't know you, 'mkay? The Secretary will disavow all knowledge of your activities, Mr. Phelps...
Because if the balloon floats and takes off, the mud sticks, well, no harm done, and we can step out of the closet and take credit. But on the other hand, if it sinks and smells, we've got that ol' "plausible deniability."
You don't think Axelrod works like this? The master of corporate astroturfing? And you don't think Mr. Chicago Machine Politics doesn't have the cynicism to approve it? The same guy who took down his Republican opponent for US Senator by digging up embarassing sexcapades from his divorce papers? Then I've got a bridge -- or a President -- to sell you.
I have to say, I think the people who are going to be most bitterly disappointed and outraged by an Obama Presidency are going to be his starry-eyed college-student supporters, who expect a second coming of JFK and are going to get the second coming of LBJ.
Todd Palin is a member of the AIP? Oh wait, you mean he's a former member of AIP, just like Bill Ayers was the former leader of the Weatherman. Perhaps you'll provide us with the AIP Wasilla convention platform and the specific passages you deem treasonous? With that, you can provide the quotes in which Todd Palin claimed the AIP didn't go far enough in committing acts against the US government. Finally, I hope you'll show where Sarah Palin tried to pass of Todd as just a guy she slept next to in bed, and not someone she had a formal relation with for several years.
You do that, and then I might see how you can equate Sarah Palin association with AIP to anything remotely similar to Billy Ayers' Weather Underground. Until then, I'm skeptical of your cognitive skills. In the meantime, since Todd Palin attended the 2008 Republican National Convention, I guess your logic suggests he no longer supports the AIP and fully supports the GOP?
Rand - I guess I'm confused. The Republican Party calls itself (rightly) "The Party of Lincoln." Lincoln fought a war to prevent states from leaving the Union. One would think that, as a result, the Republicans would be uncomfortable with any affliation to potentially successionist sentiments. Not sure where my logic ran off the rails, but if it doesn't bother you, fine.
Habitat - Ethan Winter should provide the public with the name of the voice-over person so she can be publicly harrassed as well?
Carl Pham - except that even if they wanted to launch a trial balloon, telling the PR firm to form a 527 would be easier. A 527 would be easier to astroturf - Winter could claim to merely be a paid PR rep for them. It's not "pillar of the community," it's "Occam's Razor."
Although on the subject of "projection" I kind of liked LBJ - he got JFK's ideas actually implemented. And you keep arguing that Obama's people dug up the dirt on Jack Ryan. As an Illinois resident, I recall the Chicago Tribune, a paper which endorsed Bush that year, as being the driving force.
Leland - To answer your first question, the "Sovereignty" clause calls for succession from the Union and the "Dissolution of the United States Government" calls for, well, the dissolution of the government.
The AIP platform clauses cited above look like a modernized version of the same logic used by Confederate states to attempt to leave the Union. We fought a war over that, and the winners (the North) defined the loosers (the South) as traitors.
Your second question seems to be "what is Todd Palin's past and current level of involvement with the AIP?" Well, I have no idea. For all I know, he's some kind of radical sleeper agent. I suspect not, but I have no way to determine that. I would like to know, but since he's not taking questions, it doesn't look like we'll know.
Merely attending an event doesn't mean you agree with the event's sponsors. I've been to church services in Baptist and Episcopalian churches, but I am not a member of either church.
Not sure where my logic ran off the rails, but if it doesn't bother you, fine.
Does it help if I tell you that I'm not a Republican?
Chris,
To answer your first question, the "Sovereignty" clause calls for succession from the Union and the "Dissolution of the United States Government" calls for, well, the dissolution of the government.
I see you are practicing your fiction writing. Neither of your comments are true. "Sovereignty" affirms the freedoms directly defined by the US Declaration of Independence. "Dissolution" says "when or if" the US Constitution is first dissolved by the US.
Merely attending an event doesn't mean you agree with the event's sponsors.
Indeed, so why are you claiming that Sarah agrees with AIP?
Rand - I forget you're not a Republican - probably because of all the time you spend defending the Republican presidential candidate and attacking the Democratic one. ;-)
Leland - well, the sovereignty language "merely" sounds something like what came out of the South Carolina Legislature circa 1861. Since we're agreed that attendance doesn't signify agreement, then Obama attending meetings with Ayers doesn't signify he agrees with him. (Sauce for the goose...)
Seriously, the question for both Todd Palin and Obama is, "what are their beliefs?" Since I've been familiar with Obama since he became my Senator in 2004, I am comfortable with his. Having not been able to pick Todd Palin out of a line-up three weeks ago, I am not comfortable with his.
Rand - I forget you're not a Republican - probably because of all the time you spend defending the Republican presidential candidate and attacking the Democratic one.
You can only write that because you don't read very carefully. I do attack the Democrat candidate a lot, but I attack the Republican one as well, and rarely defend him. I just balance the latter a little more. But I suspect that, my posts against him are more numerous than my posts in favor, historically. But I can't think of a single reason to support Barack Obama. That doesn't make me a Republican. It just makes me a non-koolaid drinker.
And FWIW I blasted McCain just a couple days ago for his idiotic notion of appointing Andrew Cuomo to become head of the SEC. I am no fan of John McCain. I just view him as the lesser of two evils.
Seriously, the question for both Todd Palin and Obama is, "what are their beliefs?"
Wow. Now you are no longer comparing the top of the Democrat ticket to the second spot on the Republican ticket, but rather to the spouse of the VP candidate. You think this is rational?
Since I've been familiar with Obama since he became my Senator in 2004, I am comfortable with his. Having not been able to pick Todd Palin out of a line-up three weeks ago, I am not comfortable with his.
Ok, so you are ignorant. You won't be the first person to base your vote on ignorance, though you might be the first to base your vote on your ignorance of the VP candidate's spouse. I guess that's a strategy. Good luck with it.
I think I owe this blog an apology. I've been arguing about what color the magician's cape is, while I should have been paying attention to where he moved the elephant.
The original post, "who smeared Sarah Palin?" is a distraction. All that has been proven is that an Obama supporter uploaded a video supporting Obama. There is zero point zero evidence that the Obama campaign even saw, let alone approved, the video.
While I've been arguing, John McCain has said he's going to clean out lobbyists from Washington. Except his campaign manager took $15K a month trhough August 08 from Freddie Mac for lobbying.
While I've been arguing, John McCain has decided he can't promise to meet Spain's Prime Minister, even though that NATO ally has troops in Afghanistan and their frigate provided air defense for the NATO task
force sent to help Georgia.
"Who smeared Sarah Palin" is the distraction. The real issue is "should McCain be President?"
I think I owe this blog an apology. I've been arguing about what color the magician's cape is, while I should have been paying attention to where he moved the elephant.
Well, if you owe this blog an apology, it is for completely changing the subject of a post, and complaining that we're talking about what we want to talk about, and not what you want us to talk about.
Here's an idea. You have a blog. You can post on any topic you want there. This isn't a community bulletin board.
Whoa... Chris Gerrib is criticizing Chris Gerrib? Somehow, I don't think this is schizophrenia.
No, that was me. I forgot to change the fields when I posted it.
Chris Gerrib wrote:
"Habitat - Ethan Winter should provide the public with the name of the voice-over person so she can be publicly harrassed as well?"
I assume she just did a honest job and if she's anything like other voice actors (pretty tough business as far as I know) she'll want to get credit for it to put on her CV. She's been compared to an established, highly professional, and sought after voice and that's good stuff.
If she receives harassment she can use it to land jobs with those sympathetic to her plight, if she doesn't receive harassment she can still pretend to do the same if she thinks it's worth it.
If she ends up in the kind of situation Ethan Winner claims to be in then the following advice applies equally to her.
And do you have any kind of proof that Ethan Winner was actually harassed? Nobody should accept stuff that reaches the kind of serious level that Ethan Winner implies has been brought upon him (hey it curbed his freedom of expression by threats), one should:
- Contact the law authority even if one doesn't believe they will have the time or resources to do anything about it just so as to make sure there exists a record on their end.
- Get in touch with whatever phone companies one uses and have them send detailed lists of calls received.
- Hire a computer forensics company to back up the relevant mail in a judicially valid manner as well as get logs of traffic from your Internet Service Provider.
- (This should probably go first). Contact a lawyer (good free ones exists too if you can't afford paying) if there is truly worrisome content and get their opinion on the above, additional advice, the opportunities for bringing it to court, and possibly do just that.
This is the way anyone who gets really nasty stuff should act. I'm not a lawyer and I've never had to ask any about this kind of stuff but I believe any lawyer remotely fit to act as one would give advice such as this, I would except a police department to give advice like this, I would expect anyone at least somewhat experienced with the systems in question (POTS and ICT experience --hey that used to be me!) would give advice like this, I would expect a lot of grown up adults who know a thing or two about life and the world to give advice like this, I would expect any person who works with truly abused people of all/any kind to give advice like this.
I would expect Ethan Winner to give advice like this if a Democrat client asked him.
I would also expect Ethan Winner to milk such evidence to the last drop in order to strike back.
Game, set, match.
P.S. Sorry about any typos etc., haven't slept for an awfully long time.