home

Drudge Rules Their World: Kantor Video Doctored

Update: It appears the clip was doctored.

Update (TL): Lambert at Corrente: Smear #3: Hillary killed three Hoosiers in the Clinton Library with the Wrench! Then ate them!

****

No, not just the Media. The Obama blogs too (AmericaBlog pulls its Drudge following post.)

Atrios sez:

Okay, I think I've figured this out. The YouTube clip is crap. . . . I'm not going to try for a complete transcript, but basically Kantor gets polls from Indiana. They're close. He says even if they don't win the White House has got to be sh**ting themselves. Then what I think he says is something along the lines of "how would you like to be beaten by a worthless white n*****," presumably meaning Bill Clinton himself and referencing the Bush I campaign team's likely view of Clinton.

Moral of the story? The Left blogs have lost their way.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

< Rasmussen: 58% Say Obama Tossed Wright For Political Reasons | Obama's O'Reilly Whines >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The Lee Atwater wing. . . (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:34:10 AM EST
    of the Democratic party.

    Yup, Aravosis leads the way (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by andgarden on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:40:02 AM EST
    I think it was sad that even Atrios put it up in the first place. But I'm happy to see that he did his homework and quickly took it down.

    Parent
    Top of the wreck list (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:54:38 AM EST
    right now at DailyKos.

    Parent
    Along with Olbermann's whine (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by andgarden on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:56:27 AM EST
    and a misleading delegate counter at the top of the page.

    I don't even know why I give them hits anymore.

    Parent

    I almost never do (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:57:56 AM EST
    but I was curious today.

    Parent
    thats the price we pay for Republican turncoats (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:31:02 PM EST
    you can take the R outof the party but can you R out of the person? they have lost cred. forever. \

    Time for the grownups to take their computers away.

    Parent

    The story...not the truth is at the top (none / 0) (#22)
    by Shainzona on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:59:45 AM EST
    of the wreck list...wright (er, I mean, right?)

    Parent
    That Kos diary was just deleted. (none / 0) (#65)
    by Cassius Chaerea on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:27:37 PM EST
    But, there are still various secondary diaries cluttering the "recent" list.

    Parent
    the best one (none / 0) (#75)
    by Nasarius on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:34:13 PM EST
    Yes, they figured out a way to blame Clinton.

    Parent
    I thought they were blaming (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:39:34 PM EST
    KKKarl Rove.

    That's where the finger points, to me.

    Parent

    But notice how (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:43:07 PM EST
    the 'Clinton trolls' get mentioned in the first line. And aren't Karl Rove and Hillary Clinton the same person as far as big orange is concerned?

    Parent
    Heh. (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:44:34 PM EST
    It's been so long since I've gone to the Rotten Orange, I'm not up on their "special" terminology.

    You're probably right.

    IACF it is!

    Parent

    7/20/93, Never forget! (none / 0) (#142)
    by jerry on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:00:43 PM EST
    IACF n/t (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:40:37 PM EST
    Wow. (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Marco21 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:16:12 PM EST
    That's hilariously sad. I didn't know you could be hilariously sad till today, but that post proves it.

    Parent
    I swear that's the last time (none / 0) (#78)
    by andgarden on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:36:44 PM EST
    I'm clicking over there. Sorry mcjoan et al, but the bad WAY outweighs the good.

    Parent
    I'm going to wait ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Cassius Chaerea on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:42:05 PM EST
    and see if a statement is made. But if the official policy is to support the charges then there need to be front-pager resignations over there, now.

    Parent
    I would hope to see ... (none / 0) (#82)
    by Cassius Chaerea on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:38:55 PM EST
    an editorial statement over there later today.


    Parent
    I would hope to see ... (none / 0) (#164)
    by Nadai on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:57:32 PM EST
    the winning numbers on my Powerball ticket.  I suspect it's just about as likely.

    Parent
    Dailykos has become an ongoing farce (none / 0) (#169)
    by doyenne49 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:22:11 PM EST
    of epic proportions. And the idiocy starts at the top over there.

    Parent
    When BTD writes his book... (none / 0) (#178)
    by Oje on Fri May 02, 2008 at 06:36:52 PM EST
    Regarding the end of the progressive blogosphere, one key analytical piece to the puzzle is the moment that formerly principled bloggers signaled the end of their credibility when they first gratuitously linked to a Drudge story about the campaign. Not sure about dKos or Ameriblog (never went there), but TPM joined the world according to Drudge during the unsourced email with an image of the tribal-wearing Obama picture.

    More pathetically, Atrios marks his entry into the cycle of all-news-fit-for-Obama with evidence taken from a video in the public sector for 18+ years. Shorter Atrios: The Clintons are so calculating they began planting race-baiting material for Hillary's campaign before Bill even became president!

    Parent

    Amazing how they are always the first (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:03:21 PM EST
    to call HRC "Rovian."

    Projection, thy name is Kos, Aravosis, JMM...

    Parent

    that is a good one.... (none / 0) (#149)
    by kc on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:08:24 PM EST
    the Lee Attwater wing of the Democratic Party

    Parent
    Attwater Underground (none / 0) (#159)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:36:30 PM EST
    Their only ope in a year that Bush is at 25% is to infiltrate the Dems with doctored tapes.

    Parent
    This is about as much of an issue (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:35:42 AM EST
    as the phony HRC voter suppression/voter registration effort from a day ago.

    At this point, I think the Kool-Aid is laced with meth.

    Kudos to Atrios for keeping a relatively level head.

    He should never have put it up. (5.00 / 5) (#42)
    by Joan in VA on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:13:35 PM EST
    He gets no kudos from me for his CDS and for being fooled so easily.

    Parent
    He has a second correction up (more correct), (none / 0) (#119)
    by jawbone on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:07:59 PM EST
    and has bumped up his first correction.

    That is the first time I recall him having done such a thing.

    I hope he investigates a bit more in future. The Kool-Aid drinkers can no longer be trusted.

    He says he posted it when it came up on Drudge and he figured it would get into the MCM from there, so his post was to prepare people.

    I don't know when the actual investigating began, but it was done. Thank goodness. Not sure if it was MCMers who blog who did the digging, or bloggy bloggers. Anyone know?

    This is really tiring and tiresome.

    Unfortunately, I don't put it past the Obama camp beind behind this because of how they're played the race card over and over. Such a dangerous thing to do to the Democratic Party.  Talk about doing anything to win! Obviously, Axelrod thought charging the Clintons with race baiting would help his guy or it would not have been done and fed after it started.

    Parent

    He's human, he's partisan (as are we all), he made (none / 0) (#148)
    by jerry on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:05:20 PM EST
    a mistake.  Atrios has made them in the past and corrected them.  On occasion, he names himself wanker of the day.  That's one reason among many that I continue to admire the guy, regardless of how much his blog sucks.  (That's an Atrios in joke.)

    Regardless two things confuse me about Atrios:

    1.  He never responds to my emails any more, (or my IMs, or faxes, or tweets, or voice messages,)
    2.  His comment threads are absolutely worthless, which leaves me as an admirer and I am hopeful a bit of a free speech zealot, very puzzled and upset.  It's not just that the threads are filled with chat, it's worse, they are overrun with bullies eager to enforce groupthink.


    Parent
    this stuff.... (none / 0) (#151)
    by kc on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:13:45 PM EST
    always happens right before a heavily AA primary-I guess to pump up his votes. Almost like clockwork.

    Parent
    It's better to get it out there (none / 0) (#163)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:54:47 PM EST
    if it exists. I'm done with self censorship.

    We've nearly been destroyed by shut ourselves up this year.

    Parent

    And that story (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by vigkat on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:14:45 PM EST
    i.e., the voter suppression/voter registration nonsense is still on the wreck list.  I didn't read it, but it appears to be either the original or some evolving version of the original.  It's sad, it really is.

    Parent
    One real negative for those propagating (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by tree on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:34:53 PM EST
    or spreading these kind of baseless smears is that they have trashed their own credibility. Is anyone going to take their claims seriously in the general when they've been manufacturing outrage out of nothing all through the primary?

    Parent
    TIme to break out the Straterra! (none / 0) (#23)
    by Fabian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:59:59 AM EST
    (Straterra is a non-stimulant drug used for ADD/HD.  )

    Parent
    Debunked - Clip was Doctored (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by nell on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:38:56 AM EST
    From Pennebaker, the director of (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:16:38 PM EST
    "War Room"

    He does not say that. He does not say that," said Pennebaker, after viewing the clip.

    He said the initial expletive referred to the anticipated reaction in the Bush White House to the fact that Ross Perot's polling numbers were holding strong
    .
    "What he says is he's surprised Perot's numbers are holding," said Pennebaker in a brief phone interview. "He says they must be shi**ing in the White House."

    The second expletive, he said, appeared to have been entirely fabricated, with new audio dubbed onto the original movie.

    Political

    Parent

    don't jump the gun people... (1.00 / 0) (#141)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:59:51 PM EST
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/More_on_that_video.html

    doesn't matter whose side your on... at best, he insulted Indiana.   At worst.... well, you know.

    Parent

    AgreeToDisagree, this is crap (5.00 / 3) (#168)
    by lookoverthere on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:21:12 PM EST
    According to you, Kantor is guilty of either a bad thing or a worse thing. That's not fair.

    Kantor denies saying what he's been accused of saying. Pennebaker, guy who made the film---and who may still have the Nagra tapes---says Kantor didn't say what he's accused of saying. But you assume (and want everyone else to assume) Kantor is guilty of something, why exactly? Because you want to believe it?

    Are you hearing something in the audio snippet that Kantor and Pennebaker both say wasn't said?

    That's not an unusual occurence. Perception is complex. When people try to find audio patterns to make meaning out of, they are guided by what they expect to hear. From the CSICOP website:

    Indeed, it is relatively easy to demonstrate in a psychology laboratory that people can readily come to hear "clearly" even very muffled voices, so long as they have a printed version in front of them that tells them what words are being spoken. The brain puts together the visual cue and the auditory input, and we actually "hear" what we are informed is being said, even though without that information, we could discern nothing.

    This article from CSICOP is about Electronic Voice Phenomenon, but the comments apply here because this is about perception and expectation. The article continues on to discuss how the mental set someone is given determines what they're hearing, even when what's being played is static or hum.

    Depending on their emotional investment in the interpretation, it's extremely difficult to relieve them of the notion their listening to the voices of the dead or political opponents saying racist garbage. This is despite evidence to the contrary.

    I happened to know about the phenomenon and the article because I'm a member of and consultant for CSICOP and I do post-production work (picture and audio). I know there's some good research out there on this phenomenon because I did a Discovery channel show a couple years back about ghost-busting and we busted the EVP crap.

    I actually got the host to believe a bit of audio I created was someone saying , "Let's sell turkeys to Ashley." I also got the director to see a ghostly face in a bathroom door---same essential phenomenon. Apophenia and paradolia at work.

    Parent

    He insulted IN how, exactly? (none / 0) (#145)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:04:36 PM EST
    They were discussing how they were winning in IN.  Where is the insult?  Or are you just making stuff up?

    Parent
    OMG (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:39:15 AM EST
    I hope Kantor sues.

    huffpo article says he's talking to a liber lawyer (none / 0) (#74)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:33:00 PM EST
    I hope he sues but HUGE (5.00 / 4) (#84)
    by Cream City on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:40:37 PM EST
    as I have had it, had it, had it with the Obama fans spewing racism charges at many fine people.

    I have seen this done to colleagues, I have seen what it costs them in their careers even when inevitably cleared.  We are all imperiled.  It's the new McCarthyism.

    I am amending my classes to minimize discussion of race, and I am not alone.  I am considering taping myself in such classes, lest a doctored video done by cellphone (banned from my classes but we can't always see them) land on YouTube.  

    The result of the Obama campaign is less conversation about race in the very places where we were making progress -- in the classrooms of this country.

    Parent

    Google had better hope (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by andgarden on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:50:19 PM EST
    that no one watched that video in England. . .

    Parent
    It's not Axelrod (none / 0) (#97)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:47:13 PM EST
    He never did this with Edwards in 2004.

    I'd suggest Plouffe did it.  That's his MO.

    Parent

    I hold the candidate accountable (none / 0) (#114)
    by Cream City on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:00:16 PM EST
    as I do with all candidates.

    Parent
    GOOD. (5.00 / 0) (#87)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:41:42 PM EST
    It's about freaking time.

    These tactics are absolutely disgusting. Let the parties responsible be held accountable.

    Parent

    Watch original clip (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:42:27 AM EST
    Thanks for posting the original! (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by tree on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:51:47 PM EST
    Amazing that anyone would think that Kantor was dissing Indianans in that clip! For anyone who's too young to know or is suffering from Presidential Campaign Memory Loss (PCML) there is a very understandable reason why Kantor says the the WH should be "sh###ing themselves" after looking at the Indiana exit poll results. Indiana was the home state of Dan Quayle, Daddy Bush's VP. The idea that in the middle of jubilation about good exit polls Kantor should suddenly blurt some non sequitur  of a slur at Indianans can only be described as classic advanced CDS.

    CDS is a major health concern now but I think PCML is another little acknowledged condition that is seriously affecting  democratic primary mental health.  


    Parent

    Kantor wispers (5.00 / 3) (#131)
    by ding7777 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:44:28 PM EST
    the "sh*tting" and immediately apologizes to the camera person - hard to believe he would then say something even worse.

    Parent
    that's what struck me also (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by nycstray on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:17:06 PM EST
    Will these people stop at nothing? I'm still trying to digest that someone took this clip and tried to make something of it.

    Parent
    The Obama folks are desperate (none / 0) (#170)
    by doyenne49 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:24:22 PM EST
    They're slipping in NC, and they need to stir up racial animosities again to make sure they get 90% of the AA vote. Some polls have shown it down to 74% in the wake of the Wright fiasco.

    Parent
    And now we see that it was doctored (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by andgarden on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:49:28 AM EST
    If I wanted to be a hyperbolic a*s like you know who, I could demand that David Axelrod say publicly what if anything he had to do with this.

    Here's what I wish HRC would say, (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:06:39 PM EST
    in a very ironic tone, including air quotes:

    "As far as I know," the Obama campaign had nothing whatsoever to do with this.

    Of course, she won't. Too snarky for prime time. ;-)

    Parent

    They might not (none / 0) (#54)
    by cawaltz on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:20:49 PM EST
    This tactic smells like the GOP and I keep thinking they love to stir the pot. I would not be surprised in the least if it were to be found that it wasn't an Obama supporter but someone from GOP world. Anyway, I hope they uncover who put the video up and there is an accounting.  

    Parent
    Oh, I have no doubt (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:31:17 PM EST
    that the GOP are behind this. It came from Drudge.

    I was just saying that Obama supporters seem to accuse HRC baselessly all the time. You know, like when she denied that Obama was a Muslim several times, but all they heard was "as far as I know."

    Parent

    Hhmmm--Rove does like to get twofers out of slurs (none / 0) (#120)
    by jawbone on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:09:53 PM EST
    and this disses both camps now that the doctoring has been revealed.

    Parent
    The GOP has to be laughing hysterically (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by cawaltz on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:04:47 PM EST
    the dem base are doing all their wok for them.By the time the Obama half of the camp is done no one will trust Hillary for dogcatcher let alone President. By the time the Hillary camp is done no ne will have faith that Obama has the enough experience or judgement to be the President let alone dogcatcher. Both sides more vehement supporters need to tout their candidates positives instead increasig their opponents negatives or we need to start practicing saying President John McCain. I support Hillary now. I do so because I believe her health care policy is superior, her economic policy positions are more in line with mine, and I trust her judgement regarding a woman's right to choose(let's face it ladies we have LOST ground thanks to a male majority in all branches of our government). I disagree with her on Iraq and I disaree with her on Iran. Even though I believe being first lady gives you a diplomatic edge. I am not encouaged that our failed foreign policy will be new o different. I don't hate Obama though(I AM a little less than fond of a goodly amount of his supporters bullying ways). I feel he is more in line with me in regards to foreign policy. We need to stop looking at our decisions from just the perspective of here and now. We need to embrace the idea of being a global community member rather than a junkyard dog. I also admire that he talks about reforming a broken system(I don't see much of a plan on the hows which is why he loses points from me). I disagee with him vehemently on health care and the idea that we can somehow bring the GOP leadership on board. The GOP leaders will obstruct progress. It's what they do. They will stick a shiv in anyne who is naive enough to trust that aove all they want power back to continue the gimmees to corporate America that line their pockets. I'll vote for eiter because I don't want to be in Iraq for one hundred years or start another war because wars are inevitable. I don't want to line the pockets of the insurance industry at the expense of those unfortunate enough to be really ill(and a $5000 tax break ain't gonna cut it for them). I don't believe that Americans are "too soft" to work jobs when promised a reasonable wage. In short, I believe McCainis a disaster waiting to happen. Yet, I do believe he very well might happen if some folks don't stop getting their panties in a wad and stop the "cult of personality" attacks.

    Parent
    What I wish she would say (none / 0) (#138)
    by dianem on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:51:39 PM EST
    "It has been brought to my attention that there is a video on YouTube that has been modified to make it appear that a supporter of my campaign said some very offensive things about the citizen's of Indiana. This kind of attack must stop.  Too many good people have had their characters maligned becasue they chose to support my candidacy. Obama has said that he wants this campaign to be about substantive issues, not dirty tricks. I challenge him to ask his supporters to stop resorting to lies and inneuendo and to change their focus to who can best deal with the issues that currently challenge our nation".

    Parent
    Sam Stein (5.00 / 5) (#15)
    by standingup on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:51:25 AM EST
    has a denial from Kantor on Huff Post.

    "I've never used that word in my entire life, ever, under any circumstance, ever," an angry Kantor told The Huffington Post, citing his and his parent's work fighting for civil rights. "I have listened to [the video] and so have you. You can't tell what it is I'm saying in that second sentence, you can't decipher that."

    Indeed, a review of the original copy of the 1993 film The War Room, from which the excerpt was taken (around the 4:40 mark) is virtually inaudible. The sound suggests, if anything, that instead of saying "How would you like to be a worthless white n****r?" Kantor says, "How would you like to be in the White House right now?"

    I do not understand how or why we have so many people attempting to needlessly incite racial tensions in this primary.  It is disgusting.  

    Who doctor it? Who put it up at YT, do we know? (none / 0) (#18)
    by feet on earth on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:54:49 AM EST
    From what I can tell (none / 0) (#70)
    by standingup on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:30:16 PM EST
    The Jed Report was responsible for the YouTube clip.  Read his comment in the comment threads for more information where he states he did not dub anything from the original DVD.  I don't have any reason to believe he did anything to alter the audio.  But that does not excuse posting something that he did not attempt to verify with the original source first or having an expert check to confirm his interpretation of what was said on the video.  

    Parent
    Looks like an Obamacan site (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by jawbone on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:14:18 PM EST
    Seems quite proud of his work.

    Parent
    Who are they? (none / 0) (#91)
    by NWHiker on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:44:16 PM EST
    I don't want to give a click to some really objectionable site.

    Parent
    Pro-Obama but not (none / 0) (#121)
    by standingup on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:10:41 PM EST
    really objectionable.  I believe he posts on Dkos too.  Here is his description:

    A little about me: I'm 34, male, and live in Las Vegas. I'm a political junky, though I haven't worked in politics since 2004, when I was a senior staffer on the Hill. Now I write, blog, and post the occasional YouTube video. I'm also seeking representation for a recently completed political thriller set in Las Vegas and DC. You can reach me at JedReport at Gmail -- especially if you know any literary agents interested in a good read! -- Jed
     

    Parent
    Thanks! (none / 0) (#137)
    by NWHiker on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:51:20 PM EST
    I'll go read.

    Parent
    I went in (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:03:51 PM EST
    to flag the video as inappropriate (it was doctored to promote racial hate) and it's now been tagged "private".

    I hope that it's on it's way to being taken off the site.

    It's no longer (none / 0) (#41)
    by pie on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:13:27 PM EST
    available.

    Parent
    It's out there, though (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by dianem on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:54:23 PM EST
    You can't take back things like this. It has become part of the public meme that this was said. People will remember the charges much longer than they will remember that the charges were false.

    Parent
    It's Like Running Against Newt and DeLay (5.00 / 11) (#27)
    by BDB on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:04:08 PM EST
    all over again.  And to think it's the Obama folks who claim to want to move on from the 1990s.

    Let's see where we are, shall we?  In the last few days, they've called a voter registration effort by a well-known bipartisan group voter suppression, circulated a petition trying to split the party along racial lines, and are now pushing a doctored video clip.  

    I don't know if I can stand this much Unity.

    And Does Anyone Believe Obama (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by BDB on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:05:42 PM EST
    is going to denounce the video?  

    I'm guessing no since Mickey Kantor hasn't been dubbed so as to call Obama a politician.

    Parent

    You seem to be suffering from (none / 0) (#62)
    by libfighter on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:25:04 PM EST
    ODS, as there is no evidence that his campaign had anything to do with this in anyway.

    Parent
    You're right (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:31:03 PM EST
    but, I do seem to remember Obama being very irritated when Clinton wouldn't stand up for him during unfair, and inaccurate events of the past despite the fact she wasn't behind them.


    Parent
    I Didn't Say His Campaign Was Behind It (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by BDB on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:47:31 PM EST
    But I'll bet some part of his "movement" is.  Which makes running against Obama no different than running against the conservative movement in terms of the tactics the movement is willing to employ.  If you prefer I not reference elected officials (since Obama is running for office), how about it's just like The Arkansas Project all over again?  Because it's the same tactics and the same crap.

    Parent
    And if we had a media critique... (none / 0) (#135)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:49:04 PM EST
    ... people would be trying to find out, right? But n-o-o-o.

    Parent
    Bush had nothing to do with swift boaters (none / 0) (#155)
    by Manuel on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:20:51 PM EST
    Obama's camp want you to forget unity, look at (none / 0) (#77)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:36:18 PM EST
    new signs, something about the American dream.

    Can we get some down to earth slogans?

    Parent

    I went over to kos and saw that was at the top (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by cawaltz on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:05:39 PM EST
    of the rec list. It is totally disgusting how far some of the Democratic constituncy has sunk. Yuck. Makes me glad I changed my affiliation to independant because I just do not in any way shape or form want to be associated with someting like that. If kos wants to scor some browne points he needs to take down that diary and repudiate it. If not, I'm not sure I'm going back even after the rimary is over. That kind of behavior is what I'd expect from GOP operatives, not progressives. Double yuck.

    I Remember A Time When A "False" Diary (4.50 / 2) (#60)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:23:40 PM EST
    was removed by the Kos admins. Now nothing is too repulsive if it trashes Hillary.

    Parent
    The diary is gone now. (none / 0) (#69)
    by Cassius Chaerea on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:29:30 PM EST
    As it should be (5.00 / 0) (#110)
    by cawaltz on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:57:53 PM EST
    It makes me a tiny bit hopeful that he'll do the right thing and tell the masses that this sort of behavior is the opposite of what Democrats should be doing. There is nothing wrong with supporting Obama or Clinton but the trash talk needs to end and helping disseminate a video that turned out to be doctored is not what the site wants to do even if Hillary Clinton isn't their first choice. I'm not going to hold my breath though. I find it more likely they took it down because they don't want to worry about libel charges.

    Parent
    Where's the outrage (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by Katherine Graham Cracker on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:09:33 PM EST
    I'm glad Atrios corrected the story but it was as if this was spilled milk and not an attempt to a)falsely claim an insult to all Hoosiers and b) gin up some more racist claims.

    That's what the Kool-Aid does to you. (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:11:39 PM EST
    Everything Obama does is surrounded by a shiny nimbus of hope and change, whereas everything Hillary does is surrounded by an evil red glow containing vagina dentatae.

    Parent
    Hi madamb (none / 0) (#49)
    by Katherine Graham Cracker on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:16:32 PM EST
    It's me Liars for McCaca --I wondered where you were.

    Parent
    Hi Liars for McCaca! (none / 0) (#68)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:28:47 PM EST
    Good to see you! :-)

    Couldn't take the nastiness Over There.

    Parent

    Scary vagina (none / 0) (#96)
    by Arabella Trefoil on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:46:24 PM EST
    madamab - So sad what happened to eschaton. People went crazy on Obama Koolaid laced with meth. It took a while for me to find the ex-pats. How can atrios unring the bell?

    Parent
    Guilty Until Proven Innocent and (5.00 / 7) (#40)
    by santarita on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:11:40 PM EST
    even then, still guilty.  This is the  pattern that  I find the most offensive about what passes for political commentary especially on the internet.  People, primarily rabid supporters of a candidate, are willing to believe anything, the more scurrilous, the better, about the opposition.  Who cares if it is true, as long as it is shows negatively on the other?  And the truth, when it comes out, is never as loudly and as widely disseminated as the false accusation.  

    This pattern is why I have given up on some popular "progressive in name only" blogs and why I gave up on KO.  

    In The Old Days (5.00 / 11) (#43)
    by BDB on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:14:08 PM EST
    Josh Marshall would be investigating to see who doctored the video to smear a democrat.

    I'm guessing he's not going to have much interest in the answer to that question now.

    Heh (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:14:50 PM EST
    He would be puzzled at your suggestion that (5.00 / 7) (#56)
    by MarkL on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:22:01 PM EST
    the video smears a Democrat.

    Parent
    How stupid do they think people are? (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by ineedalife on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:22:33 PM EST
    Even sixteen years ago usage of the N-word would have caused all hell to break loose. This film came and went and hell is still around.

    I guess Obama's youth vote does not have a historical frame of reference.

    The Obama Bots Are Thorough (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by BDB on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:22:56 PM EST
    I'll give them that.  They've already edited Kantor's Wikipedia entry with the offending slur.

    But just like that, the entry has been edited again to include the info that the film was doctored.  Of course, the better course would be to take the entire thing off the entry since it kind of has the "people dispute world is flat" journalism feel to it.

    And I Love This (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by BDB on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:23:56 PM EST
    "MSNBC's online coverage was updated to state "it's not clear Kantor is referring to Indianans." ABC News's online coverage has been deleted."

    Wow you mean MSNBC didn't immediately take it down?  Shocking.

    Parent

    Slightly OT (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by ruffian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:28:07 PM EST
    since Marc Ambinder is not an Obama blog, in my opinion, but I just read the following :

    Further, based on a year's worth of conversations with uncommitted superdelegates, I've found that a good number of them just do not want another Clinton administration -- this is a psychic block for many of them. They are already predisposed to favor Obama. And they like him. And they have doubts about his general election viability. In their thinking, if he's going to be the nominee, he's going to need their support regardless of whether he earned their support.

    WTF?  Really, I have no idea what they are thinking anymore.  How about picking the person who would make the best president?

    Actually ,WAY OT. Sorry BTD (none / 0) (#79)
    by ruffian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:36:45 PM EST
    I was just in shock.

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#80)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:37:50 PM EST
    After I browsed the thread again (none / 0) (#122)
    by ruffian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:11:35 PM EST
    it seemed like I was changing your subject. Didn't mean to - just got frazzled by SD idiocy and the reporting thereof.

    Parent
    So even (none / 0) (#86)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:40:56 PM EST
    the superdelegates don't think he's electable. But they are knowingly going to endorse an unelectable candidate. Great thinking!

    Parent
    Pretty much. (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by NWHiker on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:45:57 PM EST
    That's the current Dem party: snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, to spite the Clintons and their supporters.

    Parent
    I never registered Dem (none / 0) (#125)
    by ruffian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:18:12 PM EST
    until this year, so I could vote in the primaries in FL (Yeah, joke is on me). I was always an Independent or no party affiliation. This is exactly why.

    Dean and Co. are bragging about all the new Dems they are bringing in - wait until they see how may they lose as well. The net gain will be negligible.

    Parent

    Yes. (none / 0) (#103)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:52:40 PM EST
    Like the way Japanese generals allowed underqualified 16 year old pilots to be wasted on Kamikaze missions.

    Or the Children's Crusade.

    I for one do not wish a Presidential bid to be shot down by radar controlled tomtoms or sold to corsairs in the Marsailles ports.

    Parent

    If we had a media critique (5.00 / 3) (#100)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:49:52 PM EST
    Questions like these would be asked. Quoting myself, er, liberally:

    [Here's] A splendid example of parsing from the unnamed [why?] smear artist [who created the video.] D.A. Pennebaker is the director of the "The War Room," from which the Kantor video was lifted; Ben Smith quotes him:


    The second expletive, he said, appeared to have been entirely fabricated, with new audio dubbed onto the original movie.

    In an earlier version posted yesterday, the clip was circulating with a subtitle indicating -- Pennebaker says inaccurately -- that Kantor had insulted Indianans; the racial slur appears to have been added to the second version.


    Smith then adds an update:

    UPDATE: I spoke to the editor of the video who said that he enhanced, but didn't alter, the audio in the second portion of the video.

    Well.

    1. We're really posing the old philosophical question of the identity of indiscernibles, aren't we? Can the viewer tell the difference between "new audio dubbed" and "enhanced, but didn't alter"? I'm guessing No. Perhaps we could settle on "digitally manipulated"?

    2. Obviously, the video was meant to hurt Clinton in IN; that's why the subtitle slurring IN was added. Oddly, or not, Smith doesn't cover who added the subtitle and why in his UPDATE.

    3. Why are there two versions of the video? Did the client request changes from "the editor of the video"?

    4. Why won't Smith name the editor? Is the editor from the Obama campaign? Affiliated with the Obama campaign? A member of the OFB? What other material has this editor dubbed enhanced?

    5. Who posted the video?

    6. Who blog-whored the video?

    And so on. If we had a functioning media critique, which we don't, those are exactly the kinds of questions I would expect our A listers to be taking up and resolving.


    Hit job? (none / 0) (#140)
    by JohnS on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:57:17 PM EST
    Ben Smith is not doing anybody any favors by hiding the editor's name, it creates more nasty, unfounded speculation.

    Note: There may not necessarily be a client (or director) involved. Anyone with an axe to grind who's fluent in Final Cut Pro, or even Flash for that matter, could have dubbed, added the subtitles, and put it up on you tube. It's how Drudge got the link that makes this all smell like a dirty tricks op.

    Parent

    I have been saying this for months (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by BevD on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:58:54 PM EST
    not that anyone should be listening to me in particular, but it doesn't matter in the least if you are a professional blogger, an amateur blogger or an average joe responding to blogs - you have a responsibility to get it right BEFORE you post.  

    Yes, we have the freedom to say anything we want, but along with that freedom comes a responsibility to perform due dilligence, research and source material.  Not everything we think is right, not everything we think should be posted and not everything we think is grist for the mill and deserving of dissection and parsing for meaning.

    Once it is published, it cannot be taken back, no matter how often we attempt to debunk it, or prove it wrong, or try to correct misperceptions bad information causes.  As democrats we have to think beyond the next primary or the convention and remind ourselves that getting a democrat in the White House is far more important to this nation than the immediate gratification of hurting the other candidate now.  

    For members of the service and their families this election truly is a matter of life and death, for those workers in this country who have been materially harmed by the new workers' regulations put in place by this current administration this election is of paramount importance, for those people without health care and access to it, this election can mean the difference between real suffering, physically and emotionally and for those who want a better future for their children, this election is the most important of their lives.  

    Since the election of 2000 and the candidacy of Al Gore, we have allowed ourselves to be our own worst enemy, not only tolerating inaccurate and smear tactics of the press, but joining in on them and helping to spread and disseminate the worst kinds of calumnies and rumours about our candidates.  Sadly, it's not getting better, it's getting worse, with reporters who have in the past been somewhat reliable, such as Josh Marshall, ( a site which has developed a prediliction for running with a story first and a check later and foregoing responsibility and the simple courtesy of apology) Kos, Atrios and Tapped now actively adding to the problem with ill sourced reports, inaccurate articles, a complete lack of integrity in some cases and the will and ethics to correct the record, apologize and move the discourse to a higher level.  

    And for what?  So that they can win the battle now and lose the war in November.

    BTD Gone Fishin' (5.00 / 0) (#126)
    by pluege on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:22:18 PM EST
    The Left blogs have lost their way.

    I think that's a bit broad. Certainly some left blogs including the "top librul, A-list bloggers" have lost there way. But many of the not quite so top bloggers continue to do invaluable work...and here it is (drum roll)
    ...like...
    "Talk Left"
    yeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaa.

    Absolutely (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:16:12 PM EST
    Thank you, TalkLeft.

    I know I can make my points here and if I'm wrong they'll be refuted and if I'm right they'll get kudos. So different! So like what it used to be...

    Parent

    Desperate and Pathetic (5.00 / 0) (#157)
    by stefystef on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:31:50 PM EST
    is the way that many left-leaning blogs and Obama shills have become.  They are even threatening revolution if the coronation of Obama is stolen from them.

    Taking anything from Drudge and believing it is a scandal in itself.

    This kind of smear campaigning will not help Obama one bit.  His fatigue is showing and his mask is still slipping.

    It will be the racial left that will destroy the party, if we let them.

    Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Addison on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:50:26 PM EST
    Huh?
    It will be the racial left that will destroy the party, if we let them.
    The "racial left?" What does that mean?

    Parent
    Typo... it was supposed to be RADICAL LEFT (5.00 / 4) (#172)
    by stefystef on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:41:25 PM EST
    Not racial left.  Sorry about the typo.

    I'm African American so I'm not talking about race and politics.  I was talking about the more RADICAL side of the Democratic Party.  IMHO, some so-called liberal groups who are so nasty and hostile to Clinton and her supporters are using the same tactics as Bush-ites did in 2000 to vilify opponents while acting "above" such tactics.

    I'm reading blogs like DailyKos and Democratic Underground and I'm reading some pretty hostile stuff out there.  Obama is slipping and they don't know what to do.  Obama's real self is showing and it's not as inspiring and messianic as they thought.  So these groups are going into attack mode.

    Parent

    Radical left (none / 0) (#177)
    by joanneleon on Fri May 02, 2008 at 05:40:04 PM EST
    In the sixties, the radical left was infiltrated by agents provacateur.  I feel strongly that this is happening again on a pretty large scale.

    Parent
    This is getting creepy (5.00 / 2) (#171)
    by dianem on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:32:43 PM EST
    I am ashamed of my past association with Daily Kos. Was it always this delusional, and I just didn't notice? Was I like them? I've read a lot about authoritarianism, but I never thought of it as a common characteristic of the left wing. But these people are acting like classic right wing authoritarian followers. They get an idea from their leaders (the front pagers and certain commonly rec'd posters) and they won't let go of it.

    They are still obsessed with the Women's Voices Women Vote "scandal". They truly believe that this organization has been set up for years, gaining the respect of GOTV coalitions everywhere, with the sole purpose of giving it legitimacy so that it could use that trust as cover for it's black voter supression efforts to help Clinton. The evidence: Some people associated with the group also have ties to the Clintons. The fact that many of these ties go back to Bill Clinton's campaign is irrelevant. The fact that other's associated with the group are Obama supporters is irrelevant. The fact that the company made robocalls to all kinds of people in dozens of states on the days in question is just proof that they will go to any length to provide cover for their nefarious dealings.

    Drudge articles frontpaged on progressive blogs. Repeated attacks charging racism on Democrats who support Clinton. The assumption that anyone who ever supported or worked for Bill Clinton is a subversive working for Hillary's election. Parroting right-wing talking points about the Clinton's. Either these sites are populated mostly by right wing trolls, or we are depending on the votes of a lot of completely irrational people to select our next Democratic Presidential candidate.

    Jonah Goldberg wrote a book... (none / 0) (#180)
    by diplomatic on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:49:38 AM EST
    I thought it had a crazy title.

    "Liberal Fascism"


    Parent

    Kantor needs to file suit (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:57:23 PM EST
    I googled the story again, and people just aren't getting that it's doctored.  They watch the DOCTORED video again (rather than the real video) and they're saying things like "it's true, I heard it!"  Well of course you heard it on the doctored video!

    Anyway, the damage is being done via the technophobes who just don't get that people doctor videos.  And even though the You-Tube is down, plenty of other copies of the doctored video are out there.  Kantor needs to sue and sue as publically as possible to save his own neck and to save Clinton from whoever the rabid Obama supporter is who doctored the video.

    Radio: Damage done (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 02, 2008 at 04:31:27 PM EST
    Fat windbag Schultz is calling it real and AA callers are saying the "will spread it around since the MISM will not"  Damage done.  Sorry, I will not give Axelrod and Obama campaign a pass on this one.  It happens every time.   What did Bush say:  "Fool me once (%#)$  T())_#.  

    Parent
    So, should we now (3.66 / 3) (#11)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:48:11 AM EST
    be all gettin all rabid and accusing the "Obamas" of perpetrating this smear because "the Obamas will do anything to win?"

    The answer is no.  I won't.

    please explain? (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by angie on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:51:18 AM EST
    What was the point of doctoring the clip? I don't follow what you are saying here.

    Parent
    The point is (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:59:19 PM EST
    that when the tables are turned, and say an awkward picture of Obama shows up on the interwebs, we should be better than what many Obamablogs started doing - blaming the "Clintons".  I am better than that.

    Parent
    And the way to handle the story (none / 0) (#129)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:42:10 PM EST
    is to ask questions and cover it. Or should we just STFU? How is that being "better than that"? It would be great to wait for, say, WKJM to cover it, but I checked TPM a few minutes ago, and there's nothing there. At all. Ben Smith knows who the editor is, because he quoted him. So, who's the editor? Or should I sit back and wait for someone else to ask qestions? How, again, is that "better"?

    Parent
    lambert (none / 0) (#134)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:47:29 PM EST
    I agree.  Covering it is fine.  I was just trying to, (poorly I guess) point out that what separates places like this and the Obama blogs is that we won't immediately infer that this smear was perpetrated by the Obama campaign itself.

    I didn't make myself clear.  I see nothing wrong with getting to the bottom of this.  It should be done.

    But I do like how it wasn't instant hysterics here about how the evil Obama campaign had planted a fake video.  It is a nice contrast with the way it would have been handled if the tables were turned.

    Parent

    Again, again, again (none / 0) (#143)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:00:46 PM EST
    Eric, good. I think I didn't take my anti-cranky pills today.

    We threw away the media critique.

    We threw away the media critique.

    We threw away the media critique.

    We threw away the media critique.

    We threw away the media critique.

    That's the problem here.

    Parent

    And the way to handle the story (none / 0) (#130)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:42:23 PM EST
    is to ask questions and cover it. Or should we just STFU? How is that being "better than that"? It would be great to wait for, say, WKJM to cover it, but I checked TPM a few minutes ago, and there's nothing there. At all. Ben Smith knows who the editor is, because he quoted him. So, who's the editor? Or should I sit back and wait for someone else to ask qestions? How, again, is that "better"?

    Parent
    Typical straw man argument. (none / 0) (#35)
    by madamab on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:09:14 PM EST
    Pretends that people are accusing Obama, then claims to be above such accusations.

    Yawn.

    Parent

    Nope (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:00:43 PM EST
    I think you missed the point.  I was saying that we are better than to jump into the blame game.

    Parent
    To show a Clinton associate saying the (none / 0) (#51)
    by Joan in VA on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:16:46 PM EST
    n-word.

    Parent
    Erk! (5.00 / 4) (#20)
    by Fabian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:56:30 AM EST
    I'm happy to let every single state hold their primaries and votes, but I will be ever so glad when this kind of OMG - Did you see this! detritus isn't a daily occurrence.

    Don't we have any issues to talk about?  I could have sworn that the Economy, Iraq and Further Bush High Crimes and Misdemeanors lead the news almost every day.  

    Parent

    Read the top recommended diary at Kos (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by lyzurgyk on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:08:28 PM EST
    They may or may not have perpetrated it, but they were sure damn excited about using it.   Repulsive.

    Parent
    I have no idea (1.00 / 1) (#81)
    by 1jpb on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:37:51 PM EST
    what Kantor is saying in the original video.  So, it's very unfair to assume the worst.  (It is true that even Kantor and Pennebaker disagree about what exactly Kantor said.  So, there is ambiguity, but I'm not jumping to conclusions.)

    But, I think this video is problematic for HRC folks because it emphasizes the bias of Stephanopoulos on the (near) eve of his no-charge HRC promotional town hall, which occurs right before an election (recall that last time HRC paid for this privilege on the Hallmark Channel.)

    This video reinforces the fact that George has demonstrated extremely close ties to the project of electioneering for the Clintons.  And, a lot of y'all get all worked up because Chris is tingling.  This would be an excellent opportunity for those folks to acknowledge this town hall has a smell about it, and they can demonstrate their previous outrage at claimed unfairness wasn't pure pro-HRC hackery.

    And, all those left wing bloggers and commenters (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by 1jpb on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:44:20 PM EST
    who went nuts over the finger incident, which was eventually shown (camera from behind/side) to very clearly be two fingers, should hold their fire here.

    Parent
    they sure should (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:55:40 PM EST
    Luckily for me and J, J debunked it.

    Parent
    my lord (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:58:20 PM EST
    that's how you do the gesture in class to a teacher or classmate.  You have to be able to plausibly deny you are doing it.  Cleaning the crap off his shoe and shoulder was insulting enough besides.

    you might cough b*llsh*t under your breathe as you do it for dramatic effect.

    Parent

    Bingo (none / 0) (#132)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:45:36 PM EST
    That's exactly what I think happened, and I believe audience reaction showed others thought the same. I know perfectly well how to do give the finger with plausible deniability. And, like a lot of people, I too collected all the videos, from all the different angles, played them, and put them up for side by side comparison -- with sourcing, which this video does not have. That's a little different from not even making a transcript, isn't it? Even if the outcome is wrong, the method still works.

    Parent
    Well, it looks like you (none / 0) (#179)
    by 1jpb on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:09:17 PM EST
    missed the video that shows what really happened.

    And, this link even has stills in addition to the video.  

    Sorry to burst your anti-BO bubble.

    Parent

    I agree. (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by Marco21 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 04:00:09 PM EST
    The finger thing was beyond silly. At least no one CGI'd Obama's hand to push that. :)

    Parent
    Obama declined the invitation (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by hitchhiker on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    the bias of Stephanopoulos on the (near) eve of his no-charge HRC promotional town hall,

    So it's not Stephanopoulos' fault that this will turn out to be a free Hillary promotional.  Obama appears to know that it would hurt him to be seen in public next to her--in fact he appears to fear it so much that he won't take advantage of free media.

    Possibly his fundraisers in SFO are going so well that he doesn't need free media.

    Parent

    Unlike you (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:10:41 PM EST
    apparently, the few people who remember Stephanopoulos was a part of the Clinton administration also remember they had a complete and very nasty breach over his unpleasant tell-all memoir published while Clinton was still in office.


    Parent
    Uh (none / 0) (#95)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:46:23 PM EST
    the real video was part of a movie released 15 years ago. But it's problematic for Clinton now. Sure, whatever.

    Parent
    Sure it is (none / 0) (#133)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:46:38 PM EST
    the original version has subtitles added insulting IN.

    And you think making that thing go viral right before IN isn't a potential problem?

    Parent

    I think he (none / 0) (#136)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:49:53 PM EST
    means about Stephy being in it.  The orig post was implying that this was letting some secret out about how Stephy is such a good friend of the "Clintons".

    Parent
    I don't mean to sound (none / 0) (#106)
    by eric on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:55:09 PM EST
    condescending, but how old are you?  It is common knowledge that Stephanopoulos was part of the Bill Clinton campaign.  He was also part of the administration.  He was, for a time, the press secretary.

    BTW, it is also well known that he resigned under less than friendly terms.  Stephy has been on TV ever since.  Don't you think that everyone knows all about this?

    Parent

    2, aka the terrible 2. Redemption expected @3 n/t (none / 0) (#124)
    by 1jpb on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:18:06 PM EST
    Exactly How Do Kantor And Pennebake Disagree (none / 0) (#176)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 02, 2008 at 04:31:58 PM EST
    with what was said? This is what Pennebaker said"

    He does not say that. He does not say that," said Pennebaker, after viewing the clip.
    He said the initial expletive referred to the anticipated reaction in the Bush White House to the fact that Ross Perot's polling numbers were holding strong.

    "What he says is he's surprised Perot's numbers are holding," said Pennebaker in a brief phone interview. "He says they must be shi**ing in the White House."

    The second expletive, he said, appeared to have been entirely fabricated, with new audio dubbed onto the original movie.

    Kantor says he never said what the fake video said so please show me how they contradict each other.

    And the only smell about the Town Hall Meeting is the smell of Obama's fear to debate.

    Parent

    Another molehill turned mountain (1.00 / 5) (#90)
    by AdrianLesher on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:44:15 PM EST
    Both of the cited blogs quickly announced the likelihood the video was doctored. Moreover, Atrios expressed skepticism when he initially posted it.

    Talk"left" is the left blog that lost its way.

    Still waitng for the repudiaton on (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by cawaltz on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:03:56 PM EST
    Daily kos. It means nothing if they took it down to escape libel charges(You act as if they were doing a favor to take it down). Particularly when the diary was around for hours encouraging people to do what they could to disseminate it instead of fact checking before it was posted.

    Parent
    Protecting a long term Dem (none / 0) (#99)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:49:07 PM EST
    from smears that he's a racist.  Yes that deserves the "" around the left.

    How very well done of you.

    Parent

    Hahahahahaha!!! (none / 0) (#104)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:54:44 PM EST
    what's happening? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:42:45 AM EST
    I don't follow.

    Who the hell is Kantor?

    Mickey Kantor (none / 0) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:47:49 AM EST
    Bill's campaign chair against Bush (none / 0) (#12)
    by angie on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:49:22 AM EST
    & then Trade Representative (or something like that -- def. related to trade) then US Sec. of Commerce.


    Parent
    how many campaign chairs did he have? (none / 0) (#26)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:03:51 PM EST
    I'd make sure he's kept off the campaign.

    This will be a pain in the arse.

    Parent

    Saul Goode posted here (none / 0) (#8)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:43:30 AM EST
    the clip, I googled Saul Goode, don't know if it's real name but he makes documentaries does video stuff.  If it's him, man makes me sick.  

    "Forced Language" is a cool brain hack (none / 0) (#16)
    by jerry on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:52:48 AM EST
    To show the power of suggestion in mishearing words,

    Via FARK,

    Awesome misheard lyrics (Meshuggah's Future Breed Machine)

    And the classic The Indian Song, "My bun is fine Benny Lava"  (Note, if you don't see the lyrics on the screen, the song is an Indian song, however, if your boss is actually reading the forced english translation over your shoulder, the lyrics are not safe for work.  Given that it's all actually Hindi (I think), the song itself probably is SFW.)

    Anyway... another day another dollar, I have to go to work.

    Inaggadda de vidda, (none / 0) (#31)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:05:46 PM EST
    But i'd keep Kantor out right now.

    Parent
    In the Garden of Eden. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:22:50 PM EST
    Inagadadavida.

    Parent
    A brother of mine, when a kid, thought (none / 0) (#53)
    by Cream City on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:20:10 PM EST
    that the Beatles were singing "VD Madonna," not "Lady Madonna," if you know the song.  Ever since hearing him sing it wrong, of course, the song has been ruined for me.  All I can hear is this kid who had too much sex ed class, and too little sense. :-)

    Parent
    'Scuse me while I kiss this guy (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by ruffian on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:25:28 PM EST
    Is the name of a book of misunderstood song lyrics.  Funniest dang thing I've ever read.

    Parent
    Noooo, Don't destroy my gay icon! (nt) (none / 0) (#160)
    by boredmpa on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:38:48 PM EST
    Then there's the famous line from (none / 0) (#165)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri May 02, 2008 at 03:03:52 PM EST
    the church services, "May good Mrs. Murphy follow you all the days of your lives."

    Parent
    Not hindi, (none / 0) (#64)
    by jerry on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:26:49 PM EST
    Thanks, my knowledge of Indian languages is woeful.

    My knowledge of Indian foods slightly better, and I hope to have another lesson this weekend.

    Parent

    Loved "Benny Lava"! (none / 0) (#109)
    by tree on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:57:09 PM EST
    Best laugh of the day! Thanks/

    Parent
    Had to laugh when someone said (none / 0) (#28)
    by MarkL on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:04:54 PM EST
    Aravosis needs to see an "audiologist".


    Remember the 1984 Apple advert? (none / 0) (#32)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:06:07 PM EST
    Smacks of this kind of thing.  A doctored video appears, becomes viral---oops, turned out to be connected to Axelrod.  

    Manipulation crosses all campaigns (none / 0) (#38)
    by 1jane on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:10:01 PM EST
    I can't help but notice that the words of Bill or Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, not to mention Reverend Wright when seen and read in context are nowhere near as outrageous as the manufactured soundbites. Nor does it escape my notice that these bites are chosen and manipulated for their ability to aggravate feelings and promote a fight. Antagonism reigns supreme and the docctored tape is just another example.  We need access to unfiltered news instead of trivial pursuit of words taken out of context.

    Um (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:15:56 PM EST
    The video is fake here.

    It seems incredible to me that you just can not deal with the post and have to inject some BS.

    Personally, I find you a terrible advocate for Obama because of that penchant.

    Parent

    definite audio doctoring? (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:21:20 PM EST
    It's a side show anyway, but your positive?

    Parent
    Definite (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:05:15 PM EST
    Well, if you regard Ben Smith as definite.

     Remember when we had a media critique? Now we're reduced to citing Politico. Good God.

    Parent

    I say roll with it. (none / 0) (#48)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:16:19 PM EST
    Go get Mickey Kantor. See where it leads.  Chinese wispers trumping a cultural faultline?

    Wright was REPUDIATED by Obama himself because he saw haemoraging poll numbers dragging his candidacy down to the gutter.  Wright probably crippled obama for the General.

    This vid gets Kantor fired at worst or best or however you like it.

    Parent

    What are the odds.... (none / 0) (#52)
    by ineedalife on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:17:03 PM EST
    of Tim Russert bringing this up on MTP to give Obama a chance to renounce and apologize for these tactics? 1000:1, 1,000,000:1?

    why should he apologize (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by libfighter on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:28:15 PM EST
    for something he had nothing to do with?

    Parent
    I forgot (5.00 / 0) (#108)
    by ineedalife on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:56:12 PM EST
    Obama has no leadership skills even though he wants to be leader of the free world. He can't even control the unruly mob he has let loose.

    Parent
    he might want to preemptively (none / 0) (#116)
    by Salo on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:01:57 PM EST
    Renounce this specific  of tactic.  The creative class are geting too creative and they will hurt us in the end.

    What's sad is that Clinton doesn't need this sort of wurlitzer to win a general election anyway.  She's quite able to fight alone and win her fights.  

    Parent

    tactic? (none / 0) (#144)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:01:09 PM EST
    Please, a little critical thinking here (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:13:07 PM EST
    The claim is that "Obama had nothing to do with it." Here's the quote that may, or may not, back that up. Link as above:

    ALSO: The second version of the video was posted, as far as I know, by an Obama supporter not affiliated with the campaign. An Obama campaign aide declined to comment on whether the campaign had any role.

    ALSO: The person who edited the video emails: "One thing that I should make clear is the Obama campaign had absolutely nothing to do with this whatsoever in any shape or form."


    Well.

    1. We have a denial from an unnamed. That proves nothing.

    2. We have a denial from an unnamed source. That proves less than nothing ("no source, no story").

    3. We have a non-denial denial from the Obama campaign.

    4. Obama's supporters, so far as I'm concerned, are part of the Obama campaign, either (1) because they pass the duck test in terms of co-ordinated message propagation*, or (2) because under the Hillary rules, Hillary is held responsible for everything her supporters say, so why isn't turnabout fair play?

    * Let's remember that Axelrod's day job is corporate astroturfing.

    Parent
    A Paste-oh (none / 0) (#152)
    by lambert on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:14:52 PM EST
    1. should read:

    2. We have a massive qualifier, "as far as I know," from Smith.


    Parent
    Timmeh would bring it up to slime Clinton and (none / 0) (#127)
    by jawbone on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:24:33 PM EST
    Kantor -- under the guise of asking a question of the Obama campaign. Might make it part of a question about Clyburn's charges of Clintonian racism.

    That's how it's done.

    So it can be put "out there."

    Even when Obama gets cred for denouncing such a tactic, the words are there, burrowing into some brains.

    Parent

    So I signed on to check the news for this huh? (none / 0) (#105)
    by Militarytracy on Fri May 02, 2008 at 12:55:01 PM EST
    GOD, it's so SAD!!!!!!!  I need to trim my cuticles I think, talk to ya'll later and hopefully there's something real to talk about.

    BTD, what should the Clinton camp do about this? (none / 0) (#128)
    by jawbone on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:34:54 PM EST
    You're politically savvy -- what's your take on what should, or should not, be done?

    How does any campaign fight things like this?

    We now know the truth (I think!), but how does it get "out there" after the lie has run around the political/media world?

    So now I'm (none / 0) (#156)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:22:51 PM EST
    looking for the headline:

    "Anonymous Obama supporter doctors video to smear Clinton"

    And of course, all I can hear is the little crickets.

    However, if the tables were turned, wouldn't the headline I'm proposing be everywhere?

    From MyDD, a diary (none / 0) (#158)
    by stefystef on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:33:56 PM EST
    about how "bitter" the liberal thinking Netroots and fly-by-night so-called progressive organizations have become.

    http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/2/13036/55377

    The desperate do and say crazy things.