The Republican Thread

[EvilMonkey]

http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/congressman.c...l.2.821541.html

 

SHOCKER: Rep. Rangel Calls Palin 'Disabled'

 

The question was simple: Why are the Democrats so afraid of Palin and her popularity?

 

The answer was astonishing.

 

"You got to be kind to the disabled," Rangel said.

 

That's right. The chairman of the powerful House Ways & Means Committee called Palin disabled -- even when CBS 2 HD called him on it.

 

CBS 2 HD: "You got to be kind to the disabled?"

 

Rangel: "Yes."

 

CBS 2 HD: "She's disabled?"

This from the Ways and means Chairman who didn't realize that rental income is taxable.

[Steve9347]

http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/congressman.c...l.2.821541.html

 

 

This from the Ways and means Chairman who didn't realize that rental income is taxable.

OMG.

 

Rental income is taxable? Anyone been to Blockbuster lately? No SH*T that sh*t be taxable!

[clyons]

OMG.

 

Rental income is taxable? Anyone been to Blockbuster lately? No SH*T that sh*t be taxable!

 

I don't want to come off as all hyper-pc, but with all due respect, using "be" as a verb in that context doesn't seem too cool.

[Steve9347]

I don't want to come off as all hyper-pc, but with all due respect, using "be" as a verb in that context doesn't seem too cool.

Oh goodness now that's quite the stretch. You owe the world an apology after that post.

[clyons]

Oh goodness now that's quite the stretch. You owe the world an apology after that post.

 

"That s*** be taxable" seemed like Eubonics to me, and I don't think that's cool. If it wasn't, then I apologize to you and the world for registering concern that some might be offended as politely and respectfully as possible.

[Steve9347]

"That s*** be taxable" seemed like Eubonics to me, and I don't think that's cool. If it wasn't, then I apologize to you and the world for registering concern that some might be offended as politely and respectfully as possible.

Awww hell naw!

 

Who cares if I typed in ebonics? It wasn't meant as a jab.

[clyons]

Awww hell naw!

 

Who cares if I typed in ebonics? It wasn't meant as a jab.

 

That's fine. It wasn't the verb per se, but its seeming connection to Charles Rangel that gave me pause. I certainly wasn't leveling any accusation. I hope we "be" cool.

[Steve9347]

That's fine. It wasn't the verb per se, but its seeming connection to Charles Rangel that gave me pause. I certainly wasn't leveling any accusation. I hope we "be" cool.

Yeah, we tight, dawg.

[EvilMonkey]

Since we all know the Democrats like to screw people out of thie rmoney, it looks like they finally just come out and say that with their new 800 number!

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/weird-news/story/690906.html

 

Headline = NJ callers dialing Dems get sex chat offer instead! Misprint, or or purpose?

[Cknolls]

http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/congressman.c...l.2.821541.html

 

 

This from the Ways and means Chairman who didn't realize that rental income is taxable.

 

 

Nothing to see here. Move along.

[Cknolls]

Michelle & Co. -

 

Looks like Joe Biden, in his interview with Katie Couric, was copying off the wrong classmate’s exam again. He said (video here):

 

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘look, here’s what happened.’”

 

My recollection is that the stock market crash was in 1929. Two problems here: Television did not even exist in 1929, and FDR was elected in 1932, so he wasn’t even the leader at the time of the crash. When Joe was in history class, was he cheating by looking over the class dunce’s shoulder, or does he just make this stuff up? Of course, TV celebrity Katie Couric also didn’t note that Biden’s statement was doubly incorrect. Her goal was a softball puff piece.”

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/po...0,1022367.story

 

Poll: Obama struggling to win over Clinton voters

 

By Alan Fram | The Associated Press

9:15 AM EDT, September 23, 2008

 

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's support from backers of Hillary Clinton is stuck smack where it was in June, a poll showed today, a stunning lack of progress that is weakening him with members of the Democratic Party in the close presidential race.

 

An Associated Press-Yahoo News poll shows that among adults who backed his rival during their bitter primary campaign, 58 percent now support Obama. That is the same percentage who said so in June, when Clinton ended her bid and urged her backers to line up behind the Democratic senator from Illinois.

 

The poll shows that while Obama has gained ground among Clinton's supporters -- 69 percent view him favorably now, up 9 percentage points from June -- this has yet to translate into more of their support.

 

In part, this is because their positive views of Republican presidential nominee John McCain have also improved during this period.

 

Those supporting McCain have also edged up from 21 percent to 28 percent, with the number of undecided staying constant, the survey showed.

 

Clinton backers' reluctance to support Obama helps explain why he is having a tougher time solidifying partisan supporters than McCain. Overall, 74 percent of Democrats say they will vote for Obama, compared with 87 percent of Republicans behind the Arizona senator. About nine in 10 Clinton supporters are Democrats.

 

The problem that supporters of Clinton, the New York senator, have with Obama seems to flow from their measure of him as a candidate, not from issues. From establishing a timeline for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq to abortion to canceling tax cuts on the rich, their views of the importance of issues are virtually identical to Democrats in general.

 

Yet they find Obama less likable, honest, experienced and inspiring than Democrats overall do, and have a better view of McCain. And while majorities of Clinton supporters say Obama shares their values and understands ordinary Americans, they're less likely to say so than Democrats overall.

 

"It's just a gut feeling, my gut tells me he's not it," Leslye Burgess, 53, a federal Treasury Department manager and Democrat from Fairfax, Va., said of Obama. The Clinton supporter added, "I'll have to fight with myself between now and November" about how she'll vote.

 

The GOP's selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate has had no net impact on Clinton loyalists -- a group Republicans were hoping to lure by picking the Alaska governor. Twenty-one percent in the poll said Palin on the ticket makes them likelier to back McCain, 21 percent said it makes them less likely, and 58 percent said it had no impact.

 

The choice of Joe Biden as Democratic vice presidential candidate makes them a bit likelier to vote for Obama, but seven in 10 said it won't be a factor.

 

Other September polls have shown Obama making progress in recent weeks with one-time Clinton backers and doing better with them than in the AP-Yahoo News survey. One by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center had Obama with 78 percent of their support and McCain with 18 percent; another by ABC News and The Washington Post showed Obama ahead 72 percent to 23 percent.

 

Those figures measured Clinton supporters who are registered voters -- who in the AP-Yahoo News poll leaned toward Obama over McCain 61 percent to 26 percent. The discrepancies in the polls might come from how they were conducted.

 

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Clinton supporters are turning to Obama "in huge numbers" and noted that the AP-Yahoo News data differed from other polls. He said strong feelings by Clinton supporters were understandable considering the length and intensity of the Democratic primaries and said of Clinton, "She's done everything we've asked her to do."

 

Clinton spokeswoman Kathleen Strand said the New York senator has campaigned in or planned to visit seven tightly contested states. Asked to explain why some of her supporters still oppose Obama, Strand said, "She's going to continue to do whatever she can to convince everyone, no matter who they supported, that Barack Obama must be our president."

 

The AP-Yahoo News poll has surveyed the same nationally representative group of about 2,000 adults seven times since November, in an effort to understand how individuals are reacting to the presidential race. Nine in 10 Clinton supporters who said in June they were backing Obama were still with him in September, while three-quarters of those with McCain stayed with him.

 

As during her primary battle against Obama, Clinton supporters are likelier to be female, white and less educated than those who did not back her.

 

They trust Obama more than McCain on important issues, though not by as much as Democrats overall do. They prefer Obama over McCain on the economy by 30 percentage points, compared with Obama's 50-point edge among all Democrats. They like Obama on Iraq by 17 points, while all Democrats give Obama a 40-point margin.

 

The starkest contrast comes from comparing Clinton backers still refusing to support Obama with other Democrats.

 

Just three in 10 Clinton supporters still not backing Obama view him favorably, compared with eight in 10 of all Democrats. While most Democrats and former Clinton supporters strongly prefer Obama over McCain to handle key issues, those Clinton voters still opposing Obama opt for McCain: On the economy by 32 points, and on Iraq by 47 points.

 

One in four Clinton backers say they've not yet locked into a candidate -- and far more of those supporting Obama than McCain say they support their candidate strongly. Many who have already decided to back Obama say the transition wasn't difficult.

 

Kathy McVeigh, 60, a nurse from Norwalk, Ohio, has moved from Clinton to Obama and said she would tell wavering Clinton voters "to get on the bandwagon because we need change, we better do something in a hurry because we're going down the tubes."

 

The AP-Yahoo News poll of 1,740 adults was conducted Sept. 5-15 and has an overall margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. It included interviews with 502 people who in AP-Yahoo News polls in January and April identified themselves as supporting Clinton in one or both of those months, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 4.4 points.

 

The survey was conducted over the Internet by Knowledge Networks, which initially contacted people using traditional telephone polling methods and followed with online interviews. People chosen for the study who had no Internet access were given it for free.

 

In contrast, the Pew and ABC-Post polls relied on people saying in September whether they supported Clinton earlier this year. Those polls were conducted by telephone; some studies have shown people can be less reluctant to disclose embarrassing behavior -- like not supporting their party's presidential nominee -- in an online survey than to a live telephone interviewer.

 

On the other hand, people in the AP-Yahoo News poll who backed Clinton in earlier waves of the survey might not want to appear inconsistent by suddenly backing a candidate -- Obama -- they opposed earlier.

[bmags]

Michelle & Co. -

 

Looks like Joe Biden, in his interview with Katie Couric, was copying off the wrong classmate’s exam again. He said (video here):

 

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘look, here’s what happened.’”

 

My recollection is that the stock market crash was in 1929. Two problems here: Television did not even exist in 1929, and FDR was elected in 1932, so he wasn’t even the leader at the time of the crash. When Joe was in history class, was he cheating by looking over the class dunce’s shoulder, or does he just make this stuff up? Of course, TV celebrity Katie Couric also didn’t note that Biden’s statement was doubly incorrect. Her goal was a softball puff piece.”

 

OMG A PUFFPIECE FROM KATIE COURIC

[Cknolls]

I'm posting this here instead of the DEM thread so as not to be politically incorrect. This follows SSk's piece in the Dem thread.

 

 

 

This is hilarious!:

 

 

These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Rep. Barney Frank, then ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

 

[mr_genius]

Michelle & Co. -

 

Looks like Joe Biden, in his interview with Katie Couric, was copying off the wrong classmate’s exam again. He said (video here):

 

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘look, here’s what happened.’”

 

My recollection is that the stock market crash was in 1929. Two problems here: Television did not even exist in 1929, and FDR was elected in 1932, so he wasn’t even the leader at the time of the crash. When Joe was in history class, was he cheating by looking over the class dunce’s shoulder, or does he just make this stuff up? Of course, TV celebrity Katie Couric also didn’t note that Biden’s statement was doubly incorrect. Her goal was a softball puff piece.”

 

haha imagine if Palin said that.

 

a complete MSM frenzy of attacks.

Edited September 23, 2008 by mr_genius

[EvilMonkey]

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q...zI4ZWE2OGUzOTU=

 

World Phenom

President Obama rocks the U.N.

 

By Robert Ferrigno

 

 

The applause from the members of the United Nations General Assembly rolled around President Obama, echoing off the vast expanse of wood and marble, a tidal wave of approval and acclaim, although . . . truth be told, it was a little less than he had expected. His first address to the world body and not even a standing-O?

 

President Obama held up his hands to acknowledge the applause and the diplomats must have misinterpreted him, must have thought that he was asking for silence, because they immediately stopped clapping, leaning back in their chairs, awaiting his speech. He cleared his throat, trying to hold back his annoyance.

 

“Thank you, thank you, really, no, thank you very much.” He grinned at the cameras that were broadcasting his address to the world, flashed the smile that had never failed him. “My name is BaraCk Obama, and I approve this message.”

 

Silence in the great hall. A few nervous titters from the aides that David Axelrod, his campaign strategist, had sprinkled throughout the room, but their attempt to jumpstart another round of applause fell flat. Note to self: Diplomats are harder to roll than journalists. He glanced over at the U.S. ambassador, Barbra Streisand, who gave him a thumbs up.

 

“But seriously,” said President Obama, his grin faltering. He cleared his throat. Wet his lips. The crowd shifted in their seats. “Well . . . um . . . as you know . . . people will try to scare you, warn you about me, because . . . I’ve got a Harvard law degree and a funny name, and uh, as you can see, I . . . I don’t look like any other president on the money.” He looked at the African diplomats in the front row. “The U.S. money — not your money, of course.”

 

The ambassador from the Congo looked quizzically at the ambassador from Zaire.

 

“So . . . so I guess what I’m saying is . . . don’t be afraid of me,” said President Obama.

 

The Russian ambassador threw his head back, roaring with laughter.

 

President Obama blinked, then realized what had happened. There must be a time-delay on the translation the Russian ambassador was hearing. He had just gotten the president’s introductory joke. The president beamed at the ambassador, who laughed even harder.

 

The Georgian ambassador, clearly overcome with the president’s message of hope, was weeping into his hands.

 

President Obama cleared his throat. Ambassador Streisand gave him another thumbs up. “Let’s be honest, folks, my country’s made some big mistakes these last few years. Really . . . really big mistakes. Words were said . . . not by me, but by the former administration, words that I think we all regret. Words like victory, axis of evil” — he threw his hands up to scare-quote evil — “honor . . . sacrifice . . . but those days are over. I don’t even know what the former administration was thinking. Certainly not about world opinion. Well, my fellow citizens of planet Earth, I’m here to tell you, it’s morning in America . . . and you’re all invited for breakfast.”

 

The Iranian ambassador yawned, showed off his gold fillings for a good ten seconds. That bit of tape was going to be all over Fox News tonight.

 

“Breakfast . . . breakfast is about to be served, and no one . . . not anyone will ever go hungry again,” purred the president.

 

The Iranian ambassador belched loudly, and the diplomats around him laughed. Even Streisand smiled. Fine. She could be replaced by another Hollywood idiot any time he felt like it. Send Babs back to Malibu and her tenth farewell tour.

 

President Obama saw a light flash from the rear of the hall, sensed the halo forming around his head. More of Axelrod’s genius. The tiny laser created a nimbus around him, gave him a heavenly glow not visible to the conscious mind, but one that the unconscious responded to. They had tried it the first time when he was interviewed by Charlie Gibson during the campaign, and the ABC anchor had practically wet himself, his half-glasses bobbing on the end of his nose like a fisherman getting a big strike. They hadn’t dared try it when he went on The View. One of the ladies might have exploded. The halo laser didn’t seem to be having as much effect on the diplomats at the U.N. though, they just . . . sat there. Heathens.

 

The teleprompter flickered, and went dark. The president felt it like a punch to the gut.

 

That laser . . . that contraption of Axelrod’s must have shorted something out. No lofty words in front of him, no soaring phrases — and probably no halo either. In the control room above the crowd, he could see the tech crew playing paperwad basketball, oblivious to his plight.

 

The president blotted his forehead with the back of his hand. He tried to remember the speech he was supposed to give, but all he could recall was something about brotherhood and community and $5-billion gifts to countries he couldn’t even pronounce. Right about now, President Obama would pay $5 billion for a cigarette.

 

“But . . . but enough about breakfast and the atrocities of the Bush cabal,” said President Obama. “I’m here to introduce myself and to let you know that there’s a new sheriff in town and he doesn’t carry a gun, but . . . but he’s got housing vouchers, and . . . and green cards for everyone . . . and solutions too. I’m the sheriff that when you’re driving around, lost, I can give you directions. You got a flat, I’ll change it. Or, my deputy Joe Biden will, anyway.”

 

The diplomats were muttering now, looking around. Clearly, he was going to have to dumb things down to be understood.

 

“You know, thanks to our affluent American lifestyle we have a problem with blubber butts and global warming.” The president tugged at his collar. “It feels a little warm in here right now, doesn’t it? Proof positive to all you doubters out there.” He cleared his throat. “Right now, at this very minute, somewhere in the Arctic Ocean there’s a polar bear doing the backstroke because the ice has all melted, and this . . . this polar bear, who never hurt anyone, his arms are getting really tired and he . . . he’s going to drown . . . unless . . . ”

 

President Obama stared at his reflection in the cameras, transfixed. Truth be told, he was one good-looking man. A healer. A uniter. Oil upon the troubled waters. He winked at himself. Better make room on Mount Rushmore. . . .

Barry! What are you doing, man?

 

It was Axelrod on his earpiece.

 

You’re zoning out, Barry. Sound of finger snapping. This is showtime, buddy. Charm the rubes.

 

President Obama tore himself away from his reflection, leaned over the podium. He tried to make eye contact with the crowd, but there were too many of them, and they looked so . . . different. Weird clothes, weird faces . . . it was like campaigning in Kentucky or rural Ohio.

 

“As the great philosopher John Lennon sang,” said President Obama, winging it, using one of his never-fail college town stump speeches, “imagine there’s no countries, it’s uh . . . it’s not hard to do.”

 

Most of the ambassadors looked confused. The Chinese ambassador removed his earpiece, rapped it on his desk and put it back in place.

 

President Obama’s tongue felt thick but he soldiered on. “Nothing . . . nothing to kill or die for. And no religion too.”

 

Great, Barry, said Axelrod, there goes any hope for the God, grits, and guns vote, next time.

 

“Imagine no possessions, I wonder if you can,” intoned President Obama. “No need for greed or hunger, a brotherhood of man . . . and women, men and women, and . . . and transgendered too.” He wiped his eyes, overcome for a moment with the beauty of the sentiments. “Imagine all the people, sharing all the world. . . . ”

 

The Russian ambassador was laughing again, some fat Cossack with beads of black Beluga caviar glistening on his thick moustache. The North Korean ambassador laughed along with him.

 

“You may say I’m a dreamer,” said President Obama, raising his voice, refusing to back down. He had faced rednecks and street toughs in his years as a community organizer, and had won them over with his unflinching optimism, his smooth oratory and the promise of government checks. The only difference was that the Russians and North Koreans had nukes. “You can go ahead and say, hey, President Obama is just a dreamer, but . . . but listen people, I’m not the only one. I’m really not —”

 

Ambassador Streisand jumped up, wildly applauding. Axelrod’s shills did their best to jumpstart a standing-O, but the effort died.

 

“Thank you very much, Mr. President,” said Secretary General Jimmy Carter, entering from stage left. “Ladies and gentlemen of the Assembly, I give you President Barack Hussein Obama.”

 

“But, I’m . . . I’m not finished,” sputtered President Obama.

 

“Let’s give a warm welcome to the president of the United States!” said the Secretary General.

 

President Obama listened as the applause thundered around the room like a waterfall, drowning him his protests. He closed his eyes, bowed to the assembled multitude. Tears leaked down his cheeks. Finally, finally, they understood him.

 

— Robert Ferrigno is author, most recently, of Sins of the Assassin.

[southsider2k5]

More of Joe being Joe, er maybe Hillary... Seriously when does Biden start getting hammered for being an idiot ala Dan Quayle?

 

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...tory-behin.html

 

The Story Behind Biden's Emergency Helicopter Landing in Afghanistan

 

September 22, 2008 6:19 PM

 

"Ladies and gentlemen, where are we now? Where are we now?" Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., said to the National Guard Association today, talking about the war in Afghanistan.

 

"If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where Bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden said. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

 

Biden said that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., "says he’ll follow them to the gates of hell. You don’t have to go to hell. Just go to Pakistan. Just go to that area. That superhighway of terror that exists between Afghanistan and Pakistan."

 

We hadn't heard before about Biden's helicopter being forced down, so we did some Googling.

 

After all, earlier this month at a fundraiser, he made a similar remark, when discussing how he doesn't care about the Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's controversies like whether she sold a state plane on eBay, or when she went from supporting to opposing the Bridge to Nowhere.

 

"What I care about is: What in God's name is she going to do -- along with John McCain -- about the thousands of people who don't have health care?" Biden said according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Biden said he would ask Palin about "The superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan where my helicopter was forced down...John McCain wants to know where Bin Laden and the gates of Hell are? I can tell him where. That's where Al Qaeda is. That's where Bin Laden is. It's not in the country of Iraq."

 

In February 2008, Biden -- along with Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. -- was on a chopper that made an emergency landing in the mountains of Afghanistan.

 

A snowstorm had forced them down.

 

No one was injured, and the Associated Press reported at the time that "the senators and their delegation returned to Bagram Air Base in a motor convoy, and left for Turkey.

 

"The weather closed in on us," Kerry told the AP at the time in a phone interview from Turkey. "It went pretty blind, pretty fast and we were around some pretty dangerous ridges. So the pilot exercised his judgment that we were better off putting down there, and we all agreed...We sat up there and traded stories."

 

Kerry joked, "We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to do it…Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."

[southsider2k5]

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194057.php

 

Hope, Change, & Lies: Orchestrated "Grassroots" Smear Campaigns & the People that Run Them [updated]

 

***Sticky***Scroll past on main page for newer posts***Updates sprinkled throughout post and summarized at end***

 

TOP OF POST UPDATE: Nailed! Ethan Winner confesses he was behind video!

TOP OF POST UPDATE II: Obama campaign denies involvement, says McCain behind accusations. Wrong, we were.

----------

 

Extensive research was conducted by the Jawa Report to determine the source of smears directed toward Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Those smears included false allegations that she belonged to a secessionist political party and that she has radical anti-American views.

 

Our research suggests that a subdivision of one of the largest public relations firms in the world most likely started and promulgated rumors about Sarah Palin that were known to be false. These rumors were spread in a surreptitious manner to avoid exposure.

 

It is also likely that the PR firm was paid by outside sources to run the smear campaign. While not conclusive, evidence suggests a link to the Barack Obama campaign. Namely:

 

* Evidence suggests that a YouTube video with false claims about Palin was uploaded and promoted by members of a professional PR firm.

 

* The family that runs the PR firm has extensive ties to the Democratic Party, the netroots, and are staunch Obama supporters.

 

* Evidence suggests that the firm engaged in a concerted effort to distribute the video in such a way that it would appear to have gone viral on its own. Yet this effort took place on company time.

 

* Evidence suggests that these distribution efforts included actions by at least one employee of the firm who is unconnected with the family running the company.

 

* The voice-over artist used in this supposedly amateur video is a professional.

 

* This same voice-over artist has worked extensively with David Axelrod's firm, which has a history of engaging in phony grassroots efforts, otherwise known as "astroturfing."

 

* David Axelrod is Barack Obama's chief media strategist.

 

* The same voice-over artist has worked directly for the Barack Obama campaign.

 

This suggests that false rumors and outright lies about Sarah Palin and John McCain being spread on the internet are being orchestrated by political partisans and are not an organic grassroots phenomenon led by the left wing fringe. Our findings follow.

 

WHO PRODUCED THE VIDEO?

 

[uPDATE: Within 1 hour of posting, "eswinner" has removed all videos from YouTube and began removing any traces of his activities. But we have the video and all relevant websites backed up.

 

If "eswinner" isn't Ethan Winner of the Publicis Groupe, then why did "eswinner" yank the video so quickly? Or if this was just an innocent homemade ad, then what does he have to hide? You'd think he'd want more attention for it.

 

I uploaded it to my YouTube acount from the original unwatermarked Google version (see below for explanation) and that is the version you now see embedded below. Here's a screenshot of the "eswinner" account before it was taken down.]

 

Who is behind this video against Sarah Palin? It alleges:

 

Sarah Palin was a member of an Anti-American separatist organization.

 

It claims that Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party and cites The New York Times for that source. Then it quotes the founder of that Party with some pretty outrageous statements.

 

But here's what FactCheck.org says about that:

 

[sarah Palin] was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

 

And The New York Times was forced to retract their earlier claim that Palin was a member of the party, blaming the error on the party's chair. That retraction was published Sept. 3rd, 8 days before the video was first made publicly available.

 

Sarah Palin wasn't even physically at the party's convention. The clip you see is part of Palin's videotaped welcome for the convention's opening in which she gives some general remarks about the need for party competition and then tries to draw some common ground on the need to reel in government spending. Hardly evidence of extremism or anti-American sentiment.

 

In our opinion the Palin smear video appears professionally produced. Especially revealing is the voice over, which has a ring of familiarity to it and which also sounds professional.

 

If we are correct, that means that someone paid for the ad and for the talent behind it. Yet no one identifies themselves as being behind the video.

 

Using techniques that we've used in the past to find the identity of online terrorist supporters, the Jawa team went to work trying to figure out who was behind what appeared, in our opinion, to be a professionally orchestrated smear campaign aimed at Sarah Palin with the ultimate goal of electing Barack Obama.

 

VIOLATION OF FEC RULES?

 

Federal election law requires that a disclaimer from those paying for campaign ads, "must appear on any "electioneering communication" and on any public communication by any person that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate or solicits funds in connection with a federal election." Even when the ad is not paid for nor coordinated with the candidates election committee, "the disclaimer notice must identify who paid for the message, state that it was not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee and list the permanent street address, telephone number or World Wide Web address of the person who paid for the communication."

 

No such disclaimer appears on the ad in question. However, "General public political advertising does not include Internet ads, except for communications placed for a fee on another person’s web site." It is not clear to us whether a video is considered an "internet ad" or if the wording only meant to include banner ads or other more common forms of internet advertising.

 

All of the web only video ads that we could find produced by the Obama campaign carried the disclosure or some other clearly identifiable notice that they were responsible for its content.

 

It would appear that the ad, while professionally produced, was put on YouTube and then spread in such a way as to make it seem like amateurs had made it and spread it. We can't help but wonder if the missing disclaimer on the video was an intentional exploitation of a loophole meant to distance the people behind the ad from its outright lies?

 

We also can't help but wonder if maybe those who produced the ad believed that the lack of disclaimer constituted an FEC violation? Which would be an alternative explanation for why they did not wish to be connected to it.

 

Beyond the disclaimer, though, our reading of FEC regulations suggests that political campaign and 527 groups, such as Moveon.org, are required to report money spent on advertising opposing a candidate for public office. We can find no exception for advertising intended for web only campaigns.

 

We assume that if some group paid for the production of the video, that it would be reported to the FEC. Not doing so, we believe, would constitute a breach of federal campaign law.

 

PR FIRM BEHIND THE VIDEO?

 

The YouTube poster who uploaded the video did so under the account name "eswinner" [bACKUP SCREENSHOT]. He names his channel "AGroupofConcernedAmericans". The goal of his channel, says "eswinner", is:

 

Offering a fair and unbiased view towards life and politics...

 

I try to give an unbiased account of all things American.

 

The video was uploaded four times under the "eswinner" account, using different titles for each video. The video was also uploaded to Google Video on the same day and with the same title.

 

A Google search of other people using the nickname or account name “eswinner” reveals that someone very interested in yachts also goes by that name. There is, for example, a Picasa page under the account name “eswinner”. I won't link to that page because it also has pictures of his family, but I will include a screenshot here.

 

picassa_page_eswinner_screenshot.gif

 

That Picasa page [update: page disappeared] of "eswinner" is used by an "Ethan" advertising on Craig's List that he will rent out his yacht to interested parties. But "Ethan" also leaves his e-mail account: ewinner@winnr.com.

 

And just what is winnr.com? An alternate dns designation for Winner & Associates. A firm that employs one Ethan S. Winner.

 

Hundreds of pictures on the Picassa page belonging to "eswinner" show that the page belongs to the same Ethan S. Winner that is employed by the public relations firm of Winner & Associates.

 

[update: To clarify, the images are of the whole Winner family, including the many family members who work for the company. But also young children, hence why I did not link the page. But there is no doubt that the "eswinner" who owned the Picassa page is the same Ethan Winner of Winner & Associates. None. I have the images backed up, but because many include images of children, I choose not to show them here.]

 

Other instances of an "eswinner" or "ewinner" posting on the internet are found sprinkled here and there. All of those postings seem to fit the profile of Ethan S. Winner and suggest that eswinner and Ethan Winner are one and the same.

 

The company he works for, Winner & Associates, is one of the largest PR firms in the country and part of an even larger international conglomerate Publicis Groupe, which is, "one the world's top 10 advertising and communications firms."

 

A firm that specializes in "helping companies survive and succeed" a "controversial issue such as a lawsuit, a government investigation, a political protest, a labor dispute, or a defective product or recall."

 

A firm that also happens to produce TV ads. And owns a number of affiliated firms which do similar work.

 

These people are professional guns for hire. Looking at their portfolio makes that clear. And they only work for big clients. The kind of clients that pay big bucks. The kind of people hired by Exxon to convince people that the effects of the Valdez spill were over. The kind of people hired to help push through oil fields in Chad and Cameroon or help companies respond to boycott threats over the Beijing Olympics.

 

The kind of people who would have an in-house attorney to handle PR for Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. And get them a movie deal.

 

Also the kind of people hired by the European Union to help sell the new EU treaty. Who was the lead in that effort? Ethan S. Winner.

 

Winner_Ethan.jpg

 

In other words, probably not the kind of people who make anti-Palin advertisements with professional voiceovers in their spare time. But also not the kind of people to be averse to running a seemingly grassroots Palin smear campaign .

 

What I am told by a friend in the business is called "cyber ambuscade" when done by corporations. Apparently it is common practice for corporations to try to plant untraceable rumors about their competitors. In other words some corporations pay professionals to slime the competitors.

 

While it is clear that W&A are very big guns for hire, those that run it have been strong financial supporters of Democrat candidates and have links to the leftist netroots that first championed Barack Obama.

 

TIES TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND LIBERAL CAUSES

 

This is Charles "Chuck" N. Winner, the President of the company.

 

chuck_winner.jpg

 

Charles "Chuck" Winner was once described as:

 

A revered political consultant, Winner began his career working for California Gov. Pat Brown in 1958; he later worked for President John F. Kennedy. Winner is frequently called upon by a wide range of political groups, candidates and organizations for his unparalleled skills as an adviser, planner and strategic thinker.

 

Chuck owns $23,000 court-side seats for UCLA basketball. He's the type of guy who own horses that have raced at the Kentucky Derby.

 

He is a Barack Obama contributor. As are the rest of the Winner & Associate employees who share the family name. Chuck Winner contributed to Obama as early as February of 2007, which means he was a supporter from the beginning.

 

As have many of the employees of Strategy Workshop, headed by Leslie Song Winner and which once employed Ethan Winner who appears to have been in charge of their internet strategy. Leslie is Charles Winner's former wife, mother of Ethan, and the daughter of Alfred Song--who was California's first Asian-American legislator and a Democrat.

 

A cursory inquiry into the political contributions of the Winner clan--including Ethan-- also shows that they collectively contributed to: Max Baucus (D-Montana); John Morrison (D-Montana-ran for Senate); Claire McKaskill (D-MO); Democratic National Congressional Committee; Howard Berman (D-CA); Amy Klobuchar (D-MN); Albert Robles (D-CA); Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA); Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; Sherrod Brown (D-OH); John Kerry (Pres campaign); Chris Dodd (D-CT); Wesley Clark (Presidential campaign); Diane Feinstein (D-CA); Maxine Waters (D-CA); Katrina Swett (D-NH ran against Sununu); John Dingell (D-MI)

 

Partner in their subsidiary of Winner & Mandabach Campaigns, Paul J. Mandabach, is an Al Franken (DFL-MN) contributor. He also contributed to Hillary, Edwards, Kerry, and Clark.

 

Notice a pattern here? These aren't just local Democrats, but are big name Democrats in big name races. All over the country.

 

But more importantly, look who else Charles Winner contributed to: ACTBLUE, "the nation's largest source of funds for Democrats" and which is "particularly favored by the netroots and left-leaning bloggers."

 

THE SOCKPUPPET GOES CORPORATE

 

Can we be sure, based on the above, that Ethan S. Winner and/or Winner & Associates was involved in production and/or promotion of the ad? No, but there’s even more evidence than what we've presented so far tending to indicate that Ethan S. Winner, Winner & Associates, and/or the Winner family are connected to this video.

 

As of the first draft writing of this report (9/12/2008) YouTube user "eswinner" had exactly three subscribers. One of them just happened to create a YouTube account on the very day the video was uploaded: "cnwinner".

[Cknolls]

haha imagine if Palin said that.

 

a complete MSM frenzy of attacks.

 

 

What about the senile 13 car driving, 7 home owning old geezer?

[Cknolls]

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194057.php

 

 

I'm sure the MSM is waiting to run this story for their weekend editions to maximize their exposure.

[clyons]

Michelle & Co. -

 

Looks like Joe Biden, in his interview with Katie Couric, was copying off the wrong classmate’s exam again. He said (video here):

 

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘look, here’s what happened.’”

 

My recollection is that the stock market crash was in 1929. Two problems here: Television did not even exist in 1929, and FDR was elected in 1932, so he wasn’t even the leader at the time of the crash. When Joe was in history class, was he cheating by looking over the class dunce’s shoulder, or does he just make this stuff up? Of course, TV celebrity Katie Couric also didn’t note that Biden’s statement was doubly incorrect. Her goal was a softball puff piece.”

 

Looks like there might be a few problems with this post, too:

 

Television was around back then, as the first station license was granted in 1928.

 

http://inventors.about.com/od/tstartinvent...sion_Time_3.htm

 

Furthermore, although the "Great Crash" occurred in 1929, another extremely severe crash occurred in 1939, during the heart of FDR's presidency and the rise of television.

 

http://mutualfunds.about.com/cs/history/p/crash8.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cknolls]

Looks like there might be a few problems with this post, too:

 

Television was around back then, as the first station license was granted in 1928.

 

http://inventors.about.com/od/tstartinvent...sion_Time_3.htm

 

Furthermore, although the "Great Crash" occurred in 1929, another extremely severe crash occurred in 1939, during the heart of FDR's presidency and the rise of television.

 

http://mutualfunds.about.com/cs/history/p/crash8.htm

 

I'm surprised the MSM didn't lay that cover for Joey boy.

[Cknolls]

And a crash in the stock market does not last 3 YEARS.

[clyons]

And a crash in the stock market does not last 3 YEARS.

You have heard of the "Great Depression," right? Not to hijack the thread or make excuses for Joe Biden, but that comment is just flat wrong.

[NorthSideSox72]

You have heard of the "Great Depression," right? Not to hijack the thread or make excuses for Joe Biden, but that comment is just flat wrong.

Actually, his comment is correct. A depression is not a crash. A crash is a crash.