But he won't denounce it, just like Bush 41 and Willy Horton.

Obama never renounced the ad. Obama could have had youtube pull the ad, since the ad used Obama campaign logos without permission, but he never did.

What did Obama know and when did he know it?

Gee what a shock. Let me get this straight: Someone who worked for the company that Obama hired to work for his campaign put out an ad that benefitted Obama and trashed his opponent. Let me guess Obama had nothing to do with it. Anything negative that happens around Obama is just a coincidence right?

Campaign logos are not copyrighted for some reason

Why should he denounce it? Why should he ask youtube to pull the ad? Someone has made an opinion about Clinton. It is their right to do so and it is our right to hear their opinion if we chose to.

Whether or not Obama agrees or disagrees with the content of the ad is irrelevant.

NBT

Renounce what? Willy Horton? Are you on drugs, where is the moral equivalence between this video and the extremely despicable and underhanded WH ad?

Admittedly I am a Republican and can't stand HRC, but that said, I don't understand what everyone is so up in arms about. I thought the video was funny and creative.

"...Huffington Post, a liberal-leaning news and opinion web site..."

Wow, Mike; really out on a limb there. How about "a fever swamp for the lunatic leftist fringe"? Or maybe "a chat site for vacationing anarchists"?

Wait, I've got it: "...where Hollywood goes to talk politics"!

What a breath of fresh air. SO above dirty campaigning. Remember that many of us asked why he didn't ask youtube to pull the ad weeks ago for using his campaign URL without permission.

I could never vote for him now! I had some issues with him regarding his middle name being "HUSSEIN," his former cocain use,shady land deals,but this is indefensible,taking advantage of a woman,a former first lady.
Sick...Sick...Sick!
Paulo

Obama is green behind the ears, has vertualy no experiance which would qualify him to be president...it obviously shows in his campaign.

Dan, Obama's campaign URL is copyrighted. He could've asked youTube to pull the ad for using it without permission. But he didn't, he rather basked in the traffic it brought to his site. It was a creative ad, but the idea that Obama's campaign had no knowledge of it and nothing to do with it is shot pretty full of holes right now, don't you think?

Hillary can't win on this one. The more her campaign talks about the ad the more people want to see it. The more people see it the worse she looks.

Hey Paulo:

You forgot to include your other regular insult about the size of his ears.

BTW, when are YOU going to take responsibility for your promoting the smear against Obama regarding his going to a "madrassa" school coming from the Hillary Clinton campaign staff? CNN proved that the facts of the story are wrong, but haters of Democratic politicians like you don't have the spine to admit to your FALSE ALLEGATIONS.

Perhaps Phillip de Vellis will do a video about Paulo & Friends. That should convince voters that just about any Democratic candidate is preferable to what apparently now passes for a Republican.

The most interesting thing about this story -- but which is rarely being reported upon -- is how easy it now is for ANYONE to reach a world wide audience through YouTube and still remain completely anonymous. If the maker of the ad had chosen to, he could have gone to his grave with this secret. And there's no way on earth for congress to try and regulate this sort of political speech-- which is going to drive them crazy!

The video is great. The guy who made it should get an award. It expressses my thinking about Hillary exactly. Especially that she is going to keep talking until we get it. Her arrogant nature shines through in this video.

Good call! We need to vote a boy scout into office to go and deal with all the other boy scouts running the rest of the world - a world who hates us right now.
Give me somebody who's savvy, shrewd and clever and put them on my side. I'll vote for that person.
As far as the issue with his name - we're showing pure ignorance by citing that as an issue.
Good luck!

Back to the original video. As Phillip de Vellis stated in his posting, he's not anti-Hillary and he would support her if she won the primary.

Phillip is clearly anti top-down campaigning, and pro inter-active campaigning. What part of that don't you get? He's a campaign techie making a statement about campaigning techniques. His mistake was not realizing some (most?) people would only pay attention to the two pictures and claim it was a personal attack.

I expect he had a few beers on that Sunday afternoon he was making the video. Otherwise he might have been less carried away and substituted 'Campaign Different' for 'Vote Different' (and skipped the website link). That might have helped clarify his message.

I love the fact that Osama and Shrillary are at each others throats!

Go pop some popcorn, get a soft drink or some beer and make yourself comfortable. There is a pattern developing that's only going to grow over time.
On Obama's campaign hitting back at Hillary's criticism on Geffen's remarks(they did over react),he said "I know nothing about what my campaign people said".

Asked about overdue parking tickets, "I forgot".

Asked why his campaign made New Jersey fund donors who were willing to support him wait 6 weeks to get back to them (he lost their support and $2 mil), "I don't know anything about that."

Asked about not so blind trust, in essence he voted yes before he voted no (that's my analysis not his statement).

Embellished parts of his book (he lied)in terms of what he really did in Altgeld Gardens.

Am I the only one who sees a pattern developing? Not!

So far Edwards has my vote

So what, it is just a Youtube gig. Indignant self-rightousness is not becoming or believable from the Clinton camp. Let it go and move on to salient political issues.

Jeff,
Has John McCain consulted his pollsters and come back w/ an answer on what his position regarding HIV prevention should be?

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/mccain-stumbles-on-hiv-prevention/

Paulo,

You used the past tense "had" referring to your difficulty in dealing with Barack Obama's middle name. How did you get over it?

Regarding cocaine use. Obama has said it was a mistake, but Bush has never fessed up to his use of booger sugar.

Which man is more trustworthy? The one who owns up to it or the whose act of ommission is the same as a lie?

Anyone holding this against Obama and his campaign is just stupid, plain and simple. Everyone in this country is entitled to free speech, and guess what, people that have worked for Obama and/or any company affiliated with him or his campaign has that right too. No campaign can control everyone that is affiliated with them.

At this point who cares who knew what and when. It's going to be a long campaign and I sure the current front runners will be replaced by the highest court in the land...Public opinion. Thomas Jefferson once said that "God grant that men of principle shall be our principal men". I don't think that the democrats can muster enough character to overcome their character flaws. God save us all!

This is much ado about nothing. This is a great ad, which, let's face it, hits right on Hilary's weak spot -- she is a robotron. She's memorizing her talking points on this whole issue right now.

But most important, whatever the connection people are allowed to post whatever they want on Youtube. Why should the obama campaign denounce it. Youtube is a reflection of free speech. If it had inaccuracies, then that would be different.

Btw, there are other ads supporting Hilary and knocking Obama that on Youtube and they are not being pulled down, mostly because they are lame and therefore no one cares.

Yeah, you got me there. Honestly I like McCain, but he's too old to get elected. I think if the GOP has a chance (slim anyway after 8 years of Dubya) we have to go with a centrist candidate like Guliani.

The Shrillary machine may be unstoppable. She's been planning this for 30 odd years at least.

Edwards is nuts and Osama is too green...
Maybe Owl Gore can jump in and shake things up.

Anybody can make an ad and put it on the internet.

The point is who is going to watch it?

Only a clever ad like this one is going to be seen by lots of people.

one had to know if there was any link between Obama and that ad (no matter how remote) that the many operatives for BIG SISTER would uncover that threat to her dominion

her minions are everywhere

the Orwellian shoe does fit !!!!!!

As usual, the Obama nit-pick story of the week. At least it is entertaining, especially most the comments above -- I can just visualize their shorts crawling up to their ears. Sort of helps take my mind off of all the killing and maiming of our soldiers going on in Iraq.

Obama is green behind the ears, has vertualy no experiance which would qualify him to be president...it obviously shows in his campaign.

Posted by: Drew | Mar 22, 2007 9:56:42 AM

Maybe you're a little green to make that judgement? Using spell check tends to give your comments a little more credibility.

Why is everyone getting all in an uproar over this ad?? Did anyone see the one following the Clinton one? It does the same type of spoofing to Mr. Obama. As for being "sick....sick....sick..." Paulo, with all due respect, not much sicker than some of the ads I saw not too long in the most recent elections. If anything, I tip my hat to whoever did this video for creativity and imagination without having to resort to mud-slinging or crude, lewd, and degrading ads that are shown at all times of the day, incredibly during times when children are watching. Now THAT is sick.

Truth is, we sit around waiting for someone with the perfect past, the perfect voting record,the perfect business affiliates (consultants, campaign workers, etc.), and the perfect, well, just about every person they have dealt with in your entire life and guess what, we will be disqualifying a ton of people that have the potential to make great leaders and a positive change in this country- in any political party.
Go ahead...keep nit-picking...

I just hate that the media is slinging all this stuff around, no matter whether it has a shred of truth to it! Isnt that defamation? Anyhow, it also saddens me to read that some hold onto the negative press and use that as a springboard for debate instead of doing their research. If they did, they would find that a lot of the negative media was in fact retracted. Everyone knows when something bad is undeniably true, the media will drag it out and the candidate will drop out...but Obama is still in the race and going strong. Get a clue about media postings before you put all your trust for decision making into them...youll be better off for it!

Hey Paulo-

Are you really such an ignorant person that you would base your vote on someone because of their name? If you don't like someone's stance or policy, fine- but making such a statement about someone's name goes against the main principles that America stands for.

You have shown your opinion to be worthless.

I thought it was funny, but wonder if Apple will sue over it? Obama still has that "Apple mystique" of being cool and much better than the status quo, virus-filled, crummy, mediocre establishment, so this connects in many ways (chic vs. geek, Mac vs. PC, new vs. old, innovative vs. copycat, Barack vs. Hillary, etc.).

On the other hand, I keep waiting for a "Deaniac moment" for Obama, when one slip and spur of the moment bad decision will kill his campaign (like the Dean shreek a few years ago).

For now, this looks like a big plus for Obama (look at the free press he is getting, and we are all looking at the video now). We will come away with the idea that Barack is cool, new, works, and is virus free, while Hillary is old school, crumbling, mediocre corporate, boring, unexciting, and stuck in the mud of bureaucracy.

Osama is too green...

Posted by: Jeff | Mar 22, 2007 10:32:45 AM

C'mon, Jeff. I thought you were above things like that.

Pam:

The only pattern forming is the unheard of heretofore scrutinizing of a presidential candidate. Doing full blown stories on his grade school experiences in Indonesia. Interviewing people who sat next to him in kindergarden. Because of his gravitas, there are rag rats that will scrounge up anything to capture eyeballs.
This latest flap is more flatulence in the wind. Even a retarded person wouldn't collude with a person who worked for the web firm that developed his campaign's website; less more a cum laude Harvard grad. When he discovered that he held stock--barely enough to talk about--in companies owned by supporters, he sold them--one at a loss, to remove any possible conflict of interest issues. Ok , he got a sweet deal on a parcel of land--who wouldn't? He did nothing illegal or immoral, though it did lack political astuteness.

His smoking habit WAS a more profound issue for me, but he's successfully addressing this...So, keep digging, maybe in time you Obama-haters can scrounge up some "bones" that actually have some meat on them.

Hilary missed a great opportunity to make some witty dismissive joke about the whole thing, which would have given her some warmth and endearment points. Doesn't her campaign get that she could really, really, really use a sense of humor?

Umm, who cares? There's going to be a lot of this kind of stuff out there in the next year, and this one's pretty tame.

No $#!+!

Does this surprise anybody?

www.ReyFloresAmerica.com

It's a great ad.I bet there are a bunch of people wishing they would have thought of it . Why should it be pulled ? I've seen worst on television at election time . Much to do about nothing.

Renounce what? Willy Horton? Are you on drugs, where is the moral equivalence between this video and the extremely despicable and underhanded WH ad?

Admittedly I am a Republican and can't stand HRC, but that said, I don't understand what everyone is so up in arms about. I thought the video was funny and creative.
Posted by: Dan | Mar 22, 2007 9:46:38 AM

Dan,

Suggesting that electing HC would result in America becoming an oppressive police state seems despicable to me... but maybe I'm just overly sensitive.

Or maybe you should read Orwell's novel "1984" (or see the movie) and then you'll understand.

More to the point, Obama has presented himself as a different kind of candidate who rejects the usual negativity. If he expects us to believe that, then he should denounce the ad as sleazy and defamatory.

And "creative"? C'mon, all the guy did was paste Hillary's face into an existing ad... what's so creative about it?

Look at the bottom of the page on Obama's site, and you will see a cc in a circle. This is a creative commons license, which means the material on the site can be used by others.

C'mon, Jeff. I thought you were above things like that.
Posted by: Jeff C. | Mar 22, 2007 10:57:30 AM

I think this is a different "Jeff". That's not the original Jeff's style at all.

Edwards is nuts and Osama is too green...
Maybe Owl Gore can jump in and shake things up.

Posted by: Jeff | Mar 22, 2007 10:32:45 AM

Come on Paulo...stop posting under other peoples names. Jeff would never stoop this low.......
would he?

Hilary missed a great opportunity to make some witty dismissive joke about the whole thing, which would have given her some warmth and endearment points. Doesn't her campaign get that she could really, really, really use a sense of humor?

Posted by: Karen | Mar 22, 2007 11:06:53 AM

She could hire the Daily Show's joke writers to come up with the best stuff we've ever heard, but if she can't pull through with a perfect delivery, well, we've all heard the Dean Shriek and the photo of Kerry handling an incoming football like a hand grenade.

All you Hillary lovers are just itching to keep the new Democratic voices out, allowing the Republicans to hold the White House for 4 more years.

HIllary is the figurehead of the tired old elitist liberalism that has turned middle America off from the party. And right into the hands of Karl Rove. So, instead of social security reform, we get gay marriage, instead of troop reductions, we get Terry Schiavo. If you can't handle Obama, vote for Edwards, but please, let's get away from this politics of hate that she can't seem to let go of.

I would take Obama OR Gore OR Lieberman OR Mccain OR even Condaleeza Rice over Hillary

the reason is character

Osama may be Green (or not) but he could not possibly be as two-faced as Hillary ("everything I do is the result of a poll - even what baseball team I like")

BIG SISTER IS 100 % PHONY -- not 98% , not 99% - one hundred

if she wins, style will have won over substance in the biggest way in the history of the world

I would call her BI*** SISTER but I might get edited

tom - little t - the independent

Jeff C., et al, the Jeff posting at 10:22 and 10:32 is not me. That's some other Jeff. It's a common name.

Just another right wing conspiracy. . .

Since there's a second Jeff out there posting on this thread, I'll heretofore be "Jeffrey" on this thread so as to eliminate confusion.

Pam your post was right on:

"Truth is, we sit around waiting for someone with the perfect past, the perfect voting record,the perfect business affiliates . . .
. . . we will be disqualifying a ton of people that have the potential to make great leaders and a positive change in this country- in any political party. Go ahead...keep nit-picking... "

That's why some potentially great leaders won't even bother to get in the race. They know what lies ahead. The you-tube phenomenon is here and it's reaching millions- we'll have that to deal with now as well as the official negative campaign ads. Can't wait.

This is an excellent example that dems will turn on themselves...not all mud comes from across the asile.

Veronica411

Amen to you sister!

I forgot to include the Democratic National Commitee as a client of Blue State Digital. That said, if insanity prevails and Obama is forced to sever ties and renounce this company, so does the entire Party! Hopefully, sanity will win the day and reasonable minded people will see that that the only offending party is Vellis who has been terminated. Move on!

All I can say is "duck Bubba!!!"...watch out for flying lamps!!!! Hillary is really PO'd right now, but now for the reasons you think! Blaming it on a "vast right-wing conspiracy" would have been so much more fun for her. and Obama? Welcome to Bhillaryland! Hillary plans on having you for breakfast before spitting you out! Run for the hills! This is just too much fun, Dems attacking Dems! They couldn't have scripted this better in Hollywood if they tried!

Thanks for the clarification, Jeff. I didn't really think it was you, I just wanted to be sure. Maybe you should pick up an initial after Jeff, since it is so common.

Okay, I'll be Jeff Y. from now on.

"Suggesting that electing HC would result in America becoming an oppressive police state seems despicable to me... but maybe I'm just overly sensitive."

I'm not sure that was the intent, Leo. My take on the ad was that it was more a reference to the 1984 Apple ad than to the book. The implication being that Obama was going to shake up the primaries like Apple was saying they were going to shake up the computer business.

I don't think Apple's original ad meant that they thought that IBM was bringing about a police state.

Tony, if you don't think Steve Jobs actually believed that IBM was all about conformity and oppression, and that Apple's products were the sole savior of everyone that uses a computer, than I suggest you read "The Pirates of the Silicon Valley" or watch the movie. Back in the day Stevie was quite fanatical and it showed in Apple's corporate culture. That's why Steve Wozniak left and Jobs got fired (then rehired after he calmed down a bit).

If Obama is intent on "shaking up" the campaign by garnering 5% of the vote (the way Apple garners 5% of the personal computing market) then judging by the double digit lead Hillary's got, I'd say he's well on his way.

Am I the only one who sees a pattern developing? Not

Posted by: Pamela | Mar 22, 2007 10:22:45 AM

No Pamela I've been refering to this fellow as Pinocchio for weeks' now. This guy has more excuses than a pregnant nun. By the time this whole thing shakes out, he's going to make John Queery look
like Mother Teresa. He also couldn't remember the fellow who is a
friend of Tony Rezko, who donated money to his campaign, or for that matter the son of the man who he got a job for in D.C. You can bet they will be checking everything from here on in, no more free passes' for PINOCCHIO!!! The wheels are starting to come off the "Obama Express"

Next, we will see a take-off on the new Apple ads (nerdy Windows guy and cool Mac guy ads), except Hillary will be the bungling, out of touch, freeze-up Windows nerd, and Barack the confident, smooth Mac guy that makes her look like a dinosaur.

"If you don't think Steve Jobs actually believed that IBM was all about conformity and oppression, and that Apple's products were the sole savior of everyone that uses a computer, than I suggest you read "The Pirates of the Silicon Valley" or watch the movie. "

I understand that Jeff, but it's a long way from there to saying that the ad was saying that HRC would create an actual police state.

Conformity, in that people are sying that HRC has the nomination lined up is what I happen to think the creator was getting at.

It's a metaphor. A crude, ham handed one, but a metaphor.

Jeff Y.- your comment and comparison is unfortunatley true. If Hillary is Microsoft and Obama is Apple, she will win by a landslide. Then, we will all be stuck with a crummy, mediocre (at best), virus-filled, choking, bloated, stalling oppressive President HR Clinton (who needs tech support constantly), instead of a president who works almost flawlessly, is more stable, works faster, is more modern, more fun, works better, and (hate to say it) looks better.

Analogies are fun, but I hope this is not one that is true, After all, Hillary, I mean Windows, has had over 6,000 viruses last year, and Obama, I mean Mac, has had none. Why do we put up with mediocrity, either in computers or candidates? There is a better solution for both!

I guess my point is, Tony, that even if he's not referring to Hillary actually running a police state it's still a smear. He's suggesting that Hillary is at the very least out of touch and Obama always claims to be above such politics-as-usual dirty campaigning. If he really is he should renounce the ad and ask that it at least not link to his site. But since he has plausible deniability he won't.

p.s. Leo's right, it's not very "creative" at all. This outfit is every bit as bad as the full-time campaign shops full of advertising hitmen that Rove works with. I know, when Democrats do it it's "innovative" and "creative" even if it is meant to tarnish someone's reputation.

but it's a long way from there to saying that the ad was saying that HRC would create an actual police state.

Posted by: Tony | Mar 22, 2007 3:05:23 PM

Tony: Speaking of Hillary and a police state, it was just a short two weeks ago when i watched her on stage proclaim in the truest form of a Bolshevik," I want their money" speaking to the profits made by Exxon- Mobil. I shook my head in disbelief, not believing what i just heard. Then it dawned on me this IS the party line of the new Looney Left. The party i left years ago, and never looked back.

According to a new Zogby Poll, the "1984 Ad" favors HRC. People found this offensive, and it cast a negative impression of Obama. HRC has a big lead in the polls right now.

Looks like we might be hearing her voice and looking at her face everyday for 4 or 8 more years. The good news for Billy is that she will be so busy she cannot keep an eye on Bubba.

Why don't you true-blue Obama haters stop serving up red herrings and admit the unvarnished truth: Minus all these "scandalous" deeds, you still wouldn't vote for Obama. Even if you agreed with all of his political positions--such as calling the Iraq Invasion a "dumb war" when it wasn't politically expedient--you'd still conjure up some "reason", like he's too inexperienced, to not vote for him. Conversely, if he had 20+ years of successful governing experience--let's call a spade, a spade--you'd chomp into his legislative decisions. In other words, you're not cozy with that much melanin in the white house...That may be politically "uncorrect", but you'd garner more respect; at least from this blogophile.

Now, it's understandable, and instructive to have philosophical differences with any candidate's political strategy/decisions. But to completely overlook or deny the man's considerable positives; while using irrelevant, picayune, tempest in a thimble, pre-election dust-ups to make your case, well, lacks both balance and backbone.

Why don't you true-blue Obama haters stop serving up red herrings and admit the unvarnished truth: Minus all these "scandalous" deeds, you still wouldn't vote for Obama. Even if you agreed with all of his political positions--such as calling the Iraq Invasion a "dumb war" when it wasn't politically expedient--you'd still conjure up some "reason", like he's too inexperienced, to not vote for him. Conversely, if he had 20+ years of successful governing experience--let's call a spade, a spade--you'd chomp into his legislative decisions. In other words, you're not cozy with that much melanin in the white house...That may be politically "uncorrect", but you'd garner more respect; at least from this blogophile.

Now, it's understandable, and instructive to have philosophical differences with any candidate's political strategy/decisions. But to completely overlook or deny the man's considerable positives; while using irrelevant, picayune, tempest in a thimble, pre-election dust-ups to make your case, well, lacks both balance and backbone.

Well, Jeff, I hope that we can both agree that if we go through this on every amateur political ad that appears on YouTube, it's going to be a long long 20 months until November 2008.

P.S. My favorite "Mac and PC" ad is the one with the security guy "Mac has issued a greeting, allow or refuse?" That is SO annoying when your computer asks you to allow access, usually to the site of the virus protection it came with already installed.

That's my exact point, Tony, it wasn't an amateur. It was from a guy who works every day on issue ads and other smear campaigns and whose company the "breath of fresh air" has hired as a consultant. Probably an attack ad consultant. Amateur, my rear.

Rus, I've already asked you to name the "positives." You declined. I deny your premise, too. If Obama had 35+ years of experience in the military and Washington (like McCain) I'd DEFINITELY feel a lot better about his ability to deliver a democracy in Iraq and lead this nation. I've had six+ years of a novice politician at the helm and have had enough. Not interested in another at this time.

Anyway, keep spouting race-baiting postings like your last one. It's truly the last refuge of a desperate man.

" it wasn't an amateur. It was from a guy who works every day on issue ads and other smear campaigns and whose company the "breath of fresh air" has hired as a consultant."

Jeff, do some research just once.

Blue State Digital is not in the business of creating ads, smear or otherwise. (Although I'm beginning to think you define a "smear campaign" as any Non-Republican Campaign)

They are a web services consulting firm.

http://www.bluestatedigital.com/technology.html

With a name like "blue state digital" you don't think they're a political firm? You are truly the naivest of the bunch, Tony. A hint, these companies usually don't put what they do out there for everyone to see.

In other words, you're not cozy with that much melanin in the white house..
Posted by:Rus Styles | Mar 22, 2007 3:44:56 PM

I knew it was just a matter of time before this B.S. would start coming out. Did you ever stop to think Russ, his voting record may
be to liberal for some people ? After all he has the most liberal voting record out of the bunch. There has been, putting it mildly
some inconsistencies in his statements, and some embellishments.
You might say the jury is still out on this guy, so until then I'm afraid i will have to refer to him as Pinocchio. Now for that big word "melanin" Rus, is that some type of fruit ?

Of course they're a political firm. Whoever denied that? I said they don't make ADS.

Jeff you've now slipped into the range of speculation. You have no proof of anything, yet you make statements of fact. It's becoming a habit with you Jeff. Or was one of the secret services that Digital Blue offers erasing all records of McCain receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor?

Tony,

The original ad, when it ran back in '84, was not just a bland suggestion that Apple was going to "shake things up". Otherwise why, WHY the heavy Orwellian imagery? The message was clear: Either buy a MAC and be a thinking, free human being or buy a PC and be gray, souless drone.

That was blatantly obvious 23 years ago. As Jeff Y points out, what we have subsequently learned about Steve Jobs and the corporate culture at Apple at the time confirms this (as if that were necessary.)

The Orwellian nightmare imagery is inescapable. No objective person is going to look at this and say, How cute, Barack is a MAC and Hillary's a PC.

In fact, many people of voting age were not even born or were babies when the original ad was initially shown. It ran just once, I believe. They won't even be aware of the computer connection!

So for Obama to fail to make a simple statement to the effect of -- This really sucks and it shouldn't have been done, now lets move on -- is disgusting and disappointing.

And on the subject of disappointment:

I have always liked Rus Styles' contributions in the past. Yes, he's an unapologetic rah-rah political campaigner, but he was always witty, well read and good natured.

Rus, your last post was an enormous let down. Too much melanin in the white house? PLEASE! FYI, it is possible to find fault with Obama and not be a racist.

You have fallen far in the eyes of this blogophile, sir.

Leo, just out of curiosity, is there anyone who lives up to your standards? Or are you just completely negative on everybody?

Leo T.

How about the original TV smear ad - LBJ's "daisy" conmmercial.

Jeff,

Boy Wonder and Shrillary - a real cat fight.

As a few of us conservatives said a couple of days ago, this has Obama's (or his campaign's) finger prints all over it - not those rascally republicans.

Jeff:

If you can't see Obama's obvious +s, it won't matter how many I list, you'll trivialize them..

But here are a few off the top...:

1- Concensus-builder. He can work with both sides of the fence to get things done.

2- Smarts. His resume speaks for itself.

3- Judgement. Particularly on major issues. Read his immigration position. Or his resolution to descalate our troops from the Bush Occupation. If yo think these are examples of poor judgement, well...No comment.

4- Leadership. Leaders inspire. This man has literally come out of nowhere to generate unprecedented SRO crowds/supporters all over America. I suppose all these people are under the Obama spell...And his uncanny fund-raising ability has overshadowed all other seasoned politicians, except Hillary. His following amongst college students (my gen), far exceeds the other POTUS wannabees.

5- He listens. Unlike The Decider...Meaning he's likely to welcome, and heed sound advice. One of the problems with "experienced" politicians is that too often they think they know it all, and are reticent to embrace differing views.

6- Compassion. As a top student, he was recruited by elite firms like Cruise's character in The Firm...Yet, he decided to work at a law firm that represented indigent clients. And earn indigent money. What other candidate rolled up their sleeves to help downtrodden communities fight city hall? This guy has been in the trenches and was a catalyst for change. The scale or magnitude doesn't matter that much (If you can prepare and cook a great meal for 100, you can do it for a 1,000); it's the heart, will, and common-sense.

7- International experience/exposure. More than ever we need someone that can relate, understand and appreciate different cultures/religions. Read Mondo, Pravda and other foreign pubs, and they all speak in glowing terms of Obama's ability to bridge...I guess they have also succumbed to the O-spell...Do you really think our troops would be dying and coming home crippled if Obama was calling the shots?

8- Diverse appeal. I have no empirical data, but judging by the video clips of the crowds at his rallies, he must have the most ecletic following...He message resonates with a very wide audience. The only demographic he doesn't appeal to are middle-aged, conservative white males. What a surprise! Which means he has a real shot of closing the racial divide(s) that still festers...and retards our human evolution.

9- Constitutional Pro. This man taught constitutional law for 8 years. He understands and respects the way things are suppose to work. There's no one else in the mix that matches/exceeds his scope and breath of the framer's governing document.

10- He's straight-up about his flaws and past faux pas. No "It depends on what you mean by is"...And, thus far, I haven't heard make one negative comment about his competition, nor do I expect...Basically, the junior senator has set the tone for maintaining a civil campaign. Hillary has lost her cool, and forced his hand once, but I doubt if she steps out like that again.

These are attributes I and many others seek in a leader. There are more, but I've got a paper to complete. So, go ahead, chop this up and pick out all of his flaws, and show how McCain's "experience" makes him imminently more qualified... BTW, if the melaninophobia shoes fit, wear 'em pride. If not, then you shouldn't be concerned.

Leo,

Do you have a guilt complex? Like I said to Jeff, if the melaphobia shoes fit, wear'em...Look, I said it's cool to have philosophical differences; that it was, in fact, "instructive"--DID YOU OVERLOOK THIS PART OF MY POST?

But, are you suggesting that there are no bloggers here that would need psychological counseling if Obama actually won? You can't possibly be that naive. He even said on Larry King that he realizes there will be people who won't vote for him because of his color, but that the majority of people/Americans have progressed to the point that they'll judge him on how well he communicates his strategy, and how closely it coincides with their own. I concur. I would just love to hear the "true-blue" haters admit it, and stop with the hokey-doke excuses. Now do get my drift?

Leo,

Do you have a guilt complex? Like I said to Jeff, if the melaphobia shoes fit, wear'em...Look, I said it's cool to have philosophical differences; that it was, in fact, "instructive"--DID YOU OVERLOOK THIS PART OF MY POST?

But, are you suggesting that there are no bloggers here that would need psychological counseling if Obama actually won? You can't possibly be that naive. He even said on Larry King that he realizes there will be people who won't vote for him because of his color, but that the majority of people/Americans have progressed to the point that they'll judge him on how well he communicates his strategy, and how closely it coincides with their own. I concur. I would just love to hear the "true-blue" haters admit it, and stop with the hokey-doke excuses. Now do get my drift?

No, Tony, this isn't speculation. This firm is the same as those run by Richard Viguerie and James Carville. It's a CAMPAIGN organization, why would they possibly cut off half their market with a name like that if they weren't a rabidly partisan one?

I've worked as a volunteer in political campaigns before, here's a little clue there's NO partisan campaign organization that just comes out and says "we do attack ads," but almost all of them do. It's the same as the plausible deniability that allows you to look the other way every time Obama's exposed as just another Chicago machine politician.

You have to know how to look for the code words. When some group mentions they do "political fundraisers," "mass communications" and "grassroots event management," what exactly do you think is in those mass communications and shown at those events? Let me tell you what, somebody's making these online campaign materials and they're usually inhouse. Otherwise why would campaigns spend the money to hire them? Do you actually believe it's to collect the e-mail addresses that they could have some volunteer collect for free? C'mon.

What do you think an "online messaging and marketing strategy" is other than a campaign of political (attack and non-attack) ads?

But, I'll just demur. You're right. Obama's paying them to set up a web site for him and send out a few e-letters. Sure.

Hey Liz, this one's for you and Parkridge47. I hope you guys have a sense of humor: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant

P.S. Tony, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I made a mistake. It was the silver star. Or the bronze star. Or the distinguished flying cross. It doesn't change a thing about the point I was making and it doesn't change a thing about the LONG history of Bluestatedigital doing campaign ads for Ted Kennedy and Ned LaMont.

As if that weren't enough. Mr. De Vellis has now been fired by Bluestatedigital.

Here's the statement

Our Statement On The 1984 Video

Statement from Thomas Gensemer, Managing Director, Blue State Digital

On Wednesday afternoon, March the 21st, an employee at our firm, Phillip de Vellis, received a call from Arianna Huffington of "The Huffington Post" regarding the "1984" video currently circulating online. Initially, de Vellis refused to respond to her requests. He has since acknowledged to Blue State Digital that he was the creator of the video.

Pursuant to company policy regarding outside political work or commentary on behalf of our clients or otherwise, Mr. de Vellis has been terminated from Blue State Digital effective immediately.

Blue State Digital is under contract with the Obama Campaign for technology pursuits including software development and hosting. Additionally, one of our founding partners is on leave from the company to work directly for the campaign at headquarters.

However, Blue State Digital is not currently engaged in any relationship with the Obama Campaign for creative or non-technical services.

Mr. de Vellis created this video on his own time. It was done without the knowledge of management, and was in no way tied to his work at the firm or our formal engagement [on technology pursuits] with the Obama campaign.

I have spoken with David Plouffe, Sen. Obama's campaign manager, to inform him of this action and am appreciative of his understanding and ongoing support of our work.

We wish Mr. de Vellis well in his future endeavors.

"However, Blue State Digital is not currently engaged in any relationship with the Obama Campaign for creative or non-technical services."

Oh, so they DO offer creative services (ads)! Want to change your BS story, Tony?

Remember, fellow readers, bluestatedigital does not create ads so these Ned Lamont ads just appeared out of thin air. Thanks for clearing all this up, Tony.
Notice the name of the company that DID NOT make them in the URL:

http://storage.bluestatedigital.com/wm.blue-state-digital/lamont/5311c6b26286947de9_l8m6ilpap.wmv

More after the jump.

http://nedlamont.com/news/663/connecticut-voters-ask-wheres-joe

One last hole to punch in Tony's story before the whole house of cards falls down. Looks like someone made a "1984" campaign ad attacking Joe Lieberman for the Ned LaMont purchase of a Senate seat campaign, too. Guess which firm that doesn't make ads worked for LaMont's campaign?

http://thebellwetherdaily.blogspot.com/

Tony,

I don't even live up to my own standards, so of course nobody else does.

Rus,

Maybe I misread... maybe you, writing in haste, didn't make yourself quite clear... maybe a bit of both. In any case I don't think that shoe fits either me or Jeff Y. But yes, it does fit some folks here.

Others are looking at de Vellis and his past campaign work (for Dem Sherrod Brown in Ohio in 2006) and doubting his story:

"Did Phil de Vellis just cop to a "crime" he didn't commit, or had only a minor part in committing, to advance his career (it's working) or cover for the real perps?

Buckeye State Blog, a lefty Ohio outfit, is doubtful that de Vellis is the auteur of "Vote Different." They have clashed in the past so there clearly is no love lost between the two:

"Also, where was De Vellis' "Big Sister" ad of the Brown campaign. Where's that one piece that hinted at Phil's creativity? Where is something - anything - that shows a high level of technical skill with video editing/manipulation. If you're still looking, stop. I couldn't find anything either. In fact, there's nothing, I repeat NOTHING, from Phil's work on that campaign (or any other work he's done elsewhere that I've tracked down) that even leaves one to hope that he is capable of the pure genius that is "Big Sister". I remain skeptical."

David All pays close attention and doesn't buy it either:

"I took a closer examination of the video today, and there’s one scene which really jumps out at me which leads me to believe that there could, in fact, be more to the story.

Watch the video again and look for this scene. Look how perfectly edited the series of videos are in the video. Now look at the admittedly amateur video which the Lamont folks made using this same idea. No one noticed those scenes.

This is precision editing. Not some kid, in his apartment, on a Sunday, with some editing equipment."

He's referring to an early scene in the spot, where the drones are marching to Hillary video placed perfectly in a series of TV screens above. That shows a remarkable attention to detail in the production.

It also conflicts with ParkRidge47's email to Micah Sifry, which clumsily claimed that the ad was a response to the David Geffen spat. Which happened on February 21st. And if so, that's revealing, because it suggests "Vote Different" was in the works for two weeks or more. Chances are there's more to de Vellis' claim that it was done on his apartment on a Sunday afternoon."

I'm not a video editor. I don't own a Mac or Final Cut Pro. But I've worked with video editors. And my strong sense is, like David's, that there is no way this ad was thrown together in six hours. Maybe the cheap responses were, or the Lamont-Lieberman version was, but not this."

from Patrick Ruffini at hughhewitt.com

More Obama fingerprints on the ad he never knew of:

" But the unmasking of the filmmaker as an employee of a company on the payroll of Clinton's Democratic presidential rival, Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), raises questions about whether the more old-fashioned art of political chicanery was at play.

Phil de Vellis, who worked for the firm that designed Obama's Web site, Blue State Digital, says no one at the company or in Obama's camp knew he had made the video depicting Clinton as the droning voice of a totalitarian establishment. Obama and his aides say they had no idea who was behind the 74-second ad, which has been viewed online more than 2 million times, and which closes by flashing Obama's Web address.

Blue State yesterday provided a Feb. 10 e-mail in which de Vellis boasted of his role in the Obama effort: "Check out Barack's new website. . . . One shameless look at me plug, I designed the MyBarackObama toolbox that is on the front page and all the sidebar pages."

Thomas Gensemer, managing director of Blue State, a District-based online strategy firm, said he fired de Vellis Wednesday night. "This is an unfortunate situation all around," he said. Gensemer said his firm has provided only technical assistance, not creative services, to the senator's campaign. Joe Rospars, Obama's new media director, is on leave from Blue State."

De Vellis designed part of Obama's website... And Obama's media director is on leave from the same company... Doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes to connect the dots here.

The above was broken not by the Tribune but by an out of town newspaper, the Washington Post. Funny how the Tribune gets scooped on its local candidate, again and again....

Jeff-

You LIED about McCain's CMOH. I think those who hold the CMOH would see crediting the honor to a politician who did not earn it, as a big deal, don't you?

AS to Blue State digital, again you are speculating and making allegations with no actual evidence.

""However, Blue State Digital is not currently engaged in any relationship with the Obama Campaign for creative or non-technical services.""

Oh, so they DO offer creative services (ads)! Want to change your BS story, Tony? "

Nope not what that says at all. I am currently not engaged in any relationship with the Obama campaign for creative or non-techincal services either Jeff. Does making that statement mean I make ads?

Believe what you want Jeff, but state it as opinion, guessing and speculation, not fact.

Does truth and facts matter to you at all? Are you willing to say anything to make a political point? Is there no low you will stoop to?

I think the Edwards thread shows that, in fact, there is not.

bottom line is the BIG SISTER Orwellian depiction of Hillary is the absolute truth

she would be every bit as bad a president as would Dick Cheney (who I equally loathe)

abuse your power // SELL your influence to the highest bidders and then .............. pretend you didn't - same story for Cheney and Hillary

This would be a far better country TODAY if Bill had governed without Hillary in the background and if GWB had governed without Cheney in the background

the fact that anyone could support her is beyond repugnant

but she will SPEND ONE BILLION on this campaign and then do nothing but SPIN AND SPIN AND SPIN

little t - tom - the independent

Tony:

It's a hopeless, dog-chase-tail exercise in futility...and, we haven't even witnessed the tip of the off-the-discourse iceberg. Our young men/women losing their lives, limbs and comrades DAILY; and coming home to a roach and rat-infested hospital; struggling to reclaim their lives, after only sacrificing their own...Now juxtapose THE SERIOUSNESS of this vexing issue, with these bloglodytes sitting on their soft butts rummaging through every "news" cite in cyperville to construct some Obama ad conspiracy--it borders somewhere between obsession and fanatacism, you take your pick.

You would hope that people (our fellow Americans)would be more interested in debating who has the lesser-of-all-evils Iraq exit strategy. Or, who has the best consensus-building skills; because--to get this GW cesspoll cleaned up--whoever is bestowed the honor of Head Cleaner in Charge, it will mandate the donkeys and elephants working together. So, my fellow blogophile--if I may humbly suggest--you may not want to waste your passion...

Tony, I did not lie. I actually thought he did win it and the only one who knows what's going on in my head is me, so I'm still sorry about making the mistake, but now who's stating opinions as if they were facts? Or are you psychic? Is that it, Tony, you can read my mind?

And if you'd read my posts on the Edwards thread (which you obviously didn't) you'd realize I expressed nothing but support for Elizabeth Edwards and I even stated that we should stop looking at John Edwards as a politician but rather as a husband and father fighting the struggle against his wife's cancer. That, of course, was before John E. starting trying to exploit the situation to make him look like Robin Hood.

Blue state digital has created online ads for Ted Kennedy, Sherrod Brown and Ned Lamont what more proof do we need that that's what this outfit does?

It was pure coincidence that your use the false claim that McCain won the CMOH, in an attempt to shield him from public criticism, was wholly innocent?

Well, even if that's true, that only changes you from a liar, to someone who posts out of gross ignorance of the actual facts.

And now I'm supposed to believe your statements on this matter?