Did Obama Fund Web-based Smear Campaign Targeting Palin?

Updated: YouTube videos being pulled, accounts canceled within an hour of the post going up? Sounds like we hit a nerve. I'm thinking this may just get good. Everything is cached. I know Rusty should have copies, so do I ... everything - either screencapped or saved as web pages, or video files. I wonder who grew so concerned so quickly, hmm?

Given the facts turned up by The Jawa Report in this must read post, it seems fair to ask if the campaign of Barack Obama funded a malicious and deceptive web-based smear campaign against Republican Vice Presidential nominee, Governor Sarah Palin. Rusty's post is substantive and extensive. I'll provide a Cliff Notes version below. It's important to keep in mind that this played out while the candidate, Obama himself was attacking Palin every day on the stump, such was the threat Obama perceived from her nomination.

A false and misleading video of professional quality attacking Palin was uploaded to the web from an account that appears to be linked to a high profile, primarily Democrat-linked media consulting firm - Winner and Associates.

The quality and perhaps even the voice-over talent used to produce that video seems to mirror that commonly used by David Axelrod in a number of official Obama ads. The firm this appears to go back to, LA-based Winner and Associates, includes one Ethan Winner as a VP. There's good reason to believe it was his account through which the video was up-loaded to the Net.

Ethan Winner maintains a relatively low profile on Facebook. His account is blocked and numbers only 27 friends, several of them are family members. One notable exception is a Dr. David Washington. Various news accounts cite him as a senior adviser to Barack Obama.

Time: Feb 4, 2008 ... Obama's surge of celebrity backing turns the tables on the ... elbow to elbow with everyone," said David Washington, a senior adviser to the campaign in California.

These and other attacks not only appeared on the web, they seem to have been subsequently affirmed, though false, and supported with requests to "send this around" by other ID's associated with the firm.

From there they drove huge blog bursts on the Liberal side of the web and were picked up by the media for that reason. This process placed a series of lies, distortions and false allegations targeted at Palin in the mainstream news cycle - again, at the very same time Obama was attacking her daily on the stump.

Given the importance of Palin to Obama's campaign at the time, connections cited here and others detailed in Rusty's post, I'll re-state what I said at top - it seems fair to ask if Obama funded or knowingly supported what amounts to the politics of personal destruction version Web 2.0 against Palin. It certainly cannot be ruled out off-handedly given Obama's other thuggish tactics best left to the South-side of Chicago from where he recently sprang.

Politics aside, if this was the professional manipulation that it appears to be, it is not good for blogs, Left or Right. It undermines their credibility and makes them no better than a propaganda tool become smear merchant for whatever candidate they happen to support.

Read Rusty's post.

Comments

[SacTownMan]

Regardless of Xerxes or a Soro's front 527 the result is the same. Smeer, Smeer, Smeer!!

Chicago hack politics combined with the money from Soros.

We are seeing the main thrust of the leftist media smeer agenda that has been going on in earnest since the Republican convention.
When it all over and done there will have been more than 100 million spent for ads alone to shove Xerxes down our throats!

I've said it here for months that this onslaught was immanent. We are now seeing the full force and fury of the Socialist media campaign that is "the One".

It will most certainly get worse and it is up to the American people to not be influenced by the lies and deception from this hack and his cronnies.

[WJO]

Astroturfing only works if you can't figure out its origins. This was excellent sleuthing by bloggers. Irrespective of the legal ramifications, showing the links is a clarifying exercise.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant for corruption.

[mary]

Been meaning to write you an email dan but I guess I will address this here.
Michelle Obama made a comment the other day, can't remember the exact words but she said something about not voting for a candidate because they are cute. That was a watershed moment for me. There was something about the way the line was delivered, her body language and her immediate denial that told me that the senator's comment about "lipstick on a pig" was indeed leveled at Palin and here was good ole Michelle letting you know that they did mean it, they meant every word. You would think she would not have made that comment in the climate of the "pig comment" if it were not meant to give authentication of some sort to the "pig comment". She wanted, at that moment, to remind her audience of barack's horrific comment. She succeeded.

As regards the issue at hand. I stay tuned to a financial message board and peak in throughout the day to see how the market is doing. I happened to peak in and I was horrified by the posts that were literally taking over the board. Reading them as a woman my gut reaction was to fight back and fight I did. I fought a valiant fight that day, answering all their objections and turning a lot of their crap right back on them. Ultimately they crashed my computer, my clue that I had done a good job.

I clearly remember saying to these posters, "be careful, because what you are accusing this woman of, may backfire for your party". The comment only seemed to make them more brazen.

[Ozwitch]

"Politics aside, if this was the professional manipulation that it appears to be, it is not good for blogs, Left or Right. It undermines their credibility and makes them no better than a propaganda tool become smear merchant for whatever candidate they happen to support."

Well, maybe, but then the mainstream media are currently no more than a propaganda tool for Obama anyway. Alot of the astroturf type stuff was echoed in newspapers and on tv by various means - news, commentary, entertainment, you name it. The content is by humans, and humans can upload it to whichever medium serves them best. Doesn't mean you get rid of the medium.

But I disagree that it hurts blogging - if anything it proves that blogging has a role to play - doing the work that the MSM cannot or will not do. A la Rathergate in fact.

[Jim Treacher]

Yeah: How is it bad for blogs, when bloggers are the ones exposing it? It's bad for the people who are trying to EXPLOIT blogs. It's bad for the creeps trying to make us their unwitting dupes.

[Dan Riehl]

WHat I meant was if this went down, then the actions of the Lefty blogs are bad for blogs. It only makes it more difficult for any blog report to be trusted by the MSM. That's undeniable. I am not dissing Rusty's work, certainly. Heck, I found the connect on Facebook between the Obama adviser and Winner. I'm supportive ofr Rusty all the way. Doesn't mean I excuse what the Left, including Andi SUllivan have been doing.

[Ozwitch]

No, Dan I certainly wasn't accusing you of being soft on left blogs. But the MSM hate blogs anyway, and will not change their mindset anytime soon, so don't know that this expose is going to make the relationship much worse.

Agree that Rusty deserves a blog version of the Pulitzer for this work. Amazing stuff. Maybe we'd better invent the Rusty Award and he can be the 1st recipient!

[Jim Treacher]

Seems to me it's only bad for lefty blogs. And for the MSM (how I hate that acronym) outlets who've been running with every rumor put out by the lefty blogs for the last three weeks. In their zeal not to "get swiftboated."

[mary]

I understand what dan is saying. Heretofore, the blogosphere was populated by truth tellers sought after by truth seekers. I have been reading this blog for years and others too and have watched these journalists be meticulous with their sources, sometimes supporting their assertions with far more evidence than the MSM has ever had to do. Sadly, the revelation, taints all blogs as readers don't separate the right leaning blogs from the left leaning blogs or even the middle of the road blogs. They are all lumped together as the internet media.

[Jim Treacher]

So it's bad for blogs because blogs correct themselves? Works for me. Beats putting a correction at the bottom of B17.

[mary]

sorry to interrupt this discussion but I think everyone ought to read the new bill. Thoughts that come to mind are the fact that Paulson is appointed, not elected. Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the phrase "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely" appropriate here?

"Bailout Proposal
Posted by Bess Levin, Sep 20, 2008, 8:10pm

via AP

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

Would you attorney allow you to sign any contract containing this phrase?

http://dealbreaker.com/

[templar knight]

Bad bill, Mary, I totally agree. The Congress needs to rethink what they just did. I realize the pressure put on the politicians by the bankers to act to avert financial disaster was intense, but thinking about what you are doing is more important for the long term health of the economy.

[seekeronos]

Scary, that item is. I reckon that it means that not even the SCOTUS or the POTUS could review and/or reverse it?

[just_some_guy]

"Politics aside, if this was the professional manipulation that it appears to be, it is not good for blogs, Left or Right. It undermines their credibility and makes them no better than a propaganda tool become smear merchant for whatever candidate they happen to support."

Dan, I disagree. This would be true if all blogs were monolithic. But the beauty of blogs (and capitalism, in general) is that each makes its own brand and reputation. The credibility of your blog is not subject to the actions of another.

[mary]

"That implies some level of checks and balances which Hank does not feel he should be constrained with.

Notice the $700 billion is at any one time.
That means he could spend $700B above market, sell for nothing and then start over i.e. unlimited spending power."

This is another scary comment from the dealbreaker site, where they are really beginning to realize what this bill is accomplishing and wondering why it is even being entertained.

[S. Weasel]

I'm behind a firewall that blocks YouTube, so I haven't seen the ads this morning. But from the sound of it, they weren't very effective. Professional production values are one thing, but if you're peddling a story so old and stale that it bores the netroots, you fail.

This was clumsy. The sockpuppetry was appallingly poorly done (his own REAL name. REALLY?). It hurt no-one but the person it was intended to help. Though probably not much.

The incident is significant mostly through the opportunity to point and laugh at a big-time scary-smart PR firm with its pants around its ankles.

[Lala]

Quotes from Kos & DU on plans to spread their filth:

Nice independent YouTube attack ad. I don't know who made this, it arrived in my email inbox this morning from "A Group Of Concerned Americans."

Viral attacks are where it's at in 2008. Emails, blogs, online news sources. Content flows upstream in today's media environment.

We can be the gun.

Indeed, if Barack can't or won't do the dirty work, then we have to do it for him. No excuses. No more hand-wringing.

Let's get to work.

Note: If you don't believe in scorched-earth politics, no one is forcing you to join this effort, of course. We all contribute in our own way.

...the candidate him/herself can't fight dirty.

When Johnson wanted a rumor spread that his opponent f*cked farm animals, he didn't stand up and make a speech to that effect. He told his campaign manager to spread the word on the sly.

Johnson? Remember that guy, back from when the Democrats actually won elections?

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

[richard]

In case no one's noticed, we are facing a monumental crisis in America at this very instant. No one cares about the latest campaign gossip. So what if an Obama person was involved in this? Even if he were, that's nothing compared to McCain's catalog of falsehoods about Obama - and about Palin, from her saying "no" to the bridge to no where to claiming she's the most qualified person in the universe to be king of the world in case McCain dies in office. Come on - there are real issues out there. This is like trying to make noise about that congressman's intern who disappeared pre-911 (so insignificant a story I don't even remember the names) - no one cares about trivialities when they might lose their homes.

[Peter]

Ethan Winner may turn out to be the Bill Burkett of 2008.

[Peter]

This isn't a triviality, Richard. This is a smear campaign designed to destroy a candidate and her family orchestrated right out of the gutter. You've bought into the moonbattery, even repeating DUmmy talking points.

No one's lied about the Chocolate Jesus. If telling abut His connections to a racist, hate-filled anti-Semitic preacher and an unrepentant domestic terrorist aren't relevant to this election, than what is? It shaped his virulent "America sucks" campaign. It's what He believes, no matter who He throws under the bus.

[daveinboca]

The Dems know that they are likely to lose the election & are launching a dozen Hail Marys while the MSM bends backwards to say "look over there" away from the usual criminal conspiracy that the Dems are employing to steal the election. I worked in national Dem campaigns as national staff twice and the big-city machine-pol chicanery is small-time compared to the YouTube well-produced lies and gutter-sniping going on nowadays.

Gore tried to steal the election in 2000. The same people who say the Rosenbergs are innocent of treason are the ones claiming that Gore won. You connect the dots...

[Lala]

We could always talk about this

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

Commentary by Kevin Hassett

excerpt

Greenspan's Warning

The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''

What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

[ThomasD]

It undermines their credibility and makes them no better than a propaganda tool become smear merchant for whatever candidate they happen to support.

Gee, just like the MSM...

Wow, congrats. You've all hit the big time now.

[Dan]

Richard=Soros?

[Lala]

updated -

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194172.php

[mary]

I am very concerned about this subject. I have mailed around the story to everyone I know.

I am just adding comments from different sites about things connected with the bill. Hope you don't mind dan. Why do I feel like all these things are connected like pieces of a giant puzzle that we must solve before it is too late.

'"NASDAQ issuer Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc. (DHIL) has voluntarily opted-out of NASDAQ's list of Covered Securities under the SEC's Emergency Order, effective today, September 22, 2008. Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc. will not be subject to the restrictions of the Emergency Order."'

"Update: it's true."

http://dealbreaker.com/

Now, before a discussion could even begin about the topic, this was posted:

"Posted by guest, Sep 22, 2008 1:41PM

lets start some creative juices flowing...with SARAH PALIN JOKES

JOKE 1 :
===========
When Palin was asked what she'd do in a bear market.

She answered she would shoot and skin it.

PLS FEEL FREE TO CONTRIBUTE..(AND GET ACCESS TO HER ID)"

It seems that no site is safe from this kind of crap.

http://dealbreaker.com/2008/09/unfounded-rumor-of-the-day-dia.php#comments

[risbergs]

Nonsense:

"Politics aside, if this was the professional manipulation that it appears to be, it is not good for blogs, Left or Right. It undermines their credibility and makes them no better than a propaganda tool become smear merchant for whatever candidate they happen to support."

This is the *second best thing* that could have happened.

This is the best:

First, the DNC War Room...
Now, Palin-eMail-Gate...
Soon, the grim Electoral aftermath.

Do you know what happens on November 5th?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyhmdhZZHHE

Warning! Uncensored, un-bowdlerized - with language torn from the pages of the Daily Kos and Pamela Anderson’s Mensa International application.

NOW! With Bonus 2008 Electoral College Projection.
(Shocking Nostradamus prediction starts at 4:07)

Extra BONUS! George Santayana summarizes Senator Obama’s dilemma.

Do German words matter?

A secret meeting in Berlin.
The crowds are gone.
Only trusted party officials remain.
The imminent sense of defeat
rattles even the most battle hardened loyalists.
It all seemed so close,
so easy,
victory in sight.

What happened?

[mary]

OK. The price, per barrel of crude oil is rising again because they feel that the dollar is getting cheaper so they are going to run into commodities and we are headed back to where we were before oil took a precipitous drop. The trade is buy oil. It will then continue to buy commodities.

[M. Simon]

I like "Shrinking Media" i.e. SM - Or any one who still follows that stuff is in for a beating.

[mary]

risbergs, always wondered about the whirlwind tour of Europe. Just wish I could understand your post. I'm not so adept at reading between the lines. I really don't understand the post at all. Not that I'm any great genius but, if it is lost on me, perhaps it is lost on others.

[Lala]

Mary, I'm with you.

[risbergs]

Hello Mary & Lala,

I guess I need to apologize once for carelessness -
in posting twice -
which I did.

And a second time for confusion -
which I am doing now.

If you look at the YouTube video
(latest version has 3,791 views
First version has 17,234)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyhmdhZZHHE

You will see my "pre-enactment" of "Obama HQ" tumult on and before November 5th.
Also there are recent historic Electoral landslide maps as well as a "projected landslide" in 2008.
Finally, the Santayana quote is "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

As a personal note, the first time I ever voted - was eligible to vote - was in 1972.
I voted for George McGovern.
We lost.
17 - 520 Electoral votes.

By reading informative and authoritative blogs such as "Riehl World" I have learned that one reason a lot of people voted for Nixon or voted against McGovern - is that "my former side" acted like jerks and thugs and such.

Do you think something similar to that reaction could be going on now?
I predict 476 - 62 Electoral Votes for McCain/Palin.
Maybe 455 - 83 if Senator Obama carries Illinois.

Sorry again for the confusion.
Are these predictions too pessimistic?

[Jim Treacher]

"The incident is significant mostly through the opportunity to point and laugh at a big-time scary-smart PR firm with its pants around its ankles. Posted by: S. Weasel"

Not to mention its connection to the presidential campaign that has publicly condemned such smears.

"In case no one's noticed, we are facing a monumental crisis in America at this very instant. No one cares about the latest campaign gossip. Posted by: richard"

Then what are you doing here?

[SacTownMan]

Hey Jim,

Don't ask the trolls those tricky questions like;

"Then what are you doing here?"

It's called "lingering" and it's what Uncle Georgie pays them to do all day!!