Since the "Obama dressed" photo was circulated to 2,760,000 readers on February 4th

How exactly is Clinton responsible?

Here is a link to a conservative blog that contains a photo of the page from the February 4th 2008 National Enquirer smear story about Barack Obama that contained the picture of him in traditional African garb:

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-wore-muslim-gear-during-kenya-trip

The story was titled:

"Obama's Shocking Al Qaeda Link"

Here are the circulation figures that the National Enquirer releases about their rag:

"Place a classified ad in the National Enquirer. This weekly tabloid has excellent circulation at 2,760,000. Ad is placed in the classified area of the magazine under the appropriate category. Certain restrictions apply, and ads must meet the approval requirements of the National Enquirer. Circulation: 2,760,000."

http://www.nationwideadvertising.com/naten.html

Do you think an internal Clinton staff email discussing the photo just broke this news to American voters?

and it would suggest they are trolling freeper sites to find attack material.

Sun Feb 24, 9:10 PM | Permalink
Mark Penn's lobbying shop is headed by John McCain's top adviser
Let's say that the Democratic nomination battle had been winnowed down to two candidates, and that one of those two candidates (let's call him Barack Obama) was a huge favorite to win. Meanwhile, the GOP nominee has been all but decided. (We'll call him John McCain.)

Now let's imagine that Obama's opponent (we'll call her Hillary Clinton) was desperately slinging every piece of mud she could at him without regard to whether or not her attacks would help John McCain.

Finally, imagine that you found out that Clinton's chief strategist was not only her campaign's leading advocate for these attacks -- but was also the CEO of a public affairs firm whose DC-based lobbying subsidiary was headed up by John McCain's top adviser.

Would you say this posed at least the appearance of a conflict of interest for the strategist in question?

What would you think if you found out that it's all true?

Continue reading "Mark Penn's lobbying shop is headed by John McCain's top adviser" »

http://www.obamaiswinning.com/2008/02/mark-penns-lobb.html

:rofl:

This is starting to speak to a much bigger problem here.

Why are the DUbamas ashamed of it? :shrug:

YMMV

it doesn't stop these people from acting like idiots en masse.

...all they'll see is a turban...on a man with "Hussein" as his middle name.

There's nothing wrong with the picture itself, it's the way it's being used.

bringing down america.

The Obama campaing is once again trying to blame Hillary Clinton for any problems they might have on their own that they can get away with.

This photo was already WAY out there in the public record and a few Clinton staffers, in emails to each other, were discussing it and the implications of it. Go back and read the original Drudge story.That is what the Drudge story says. Probably someone had a relative who reads the Enquirer.

Did Barack Obama blast the National Enquirer for publishing a full page story of him wearing ceremonial African clothing under a headline about him having Al Qaeda links? No not a peep. All his fury is directed at Hillary because some of her aids were talking about it in an email.

They do not deny what Drudge published. They do not claim that Drudge fabricated that email sent between some Clinton staff members.

And no matter how you slice it, the whole nature of this so called "scandal" changes once you recognize that THAT PICTURE HAS BEEN IN PRINT FOR WEEKS already with millions of copies printed. Big frigging secret. Terrible damage done to Obama - because some Clinton staffers talk to each other about it?!?!?

And that is to their credit. They were blind sided by this but they didn't make matters worse by lying without proof that the emails quoted were not genuine. Then they would have been accused with a botched cover up.

I have no doubt that they are not yet done "responding".

They screwed up big time in their response.

You think that the Republicans have done nothing against BO, it's all Hillary, well you better wake up, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Like the attempted 'radical' smear last week. So it's not the same thing as some far-out, weird accusation.

Or maybe they just ooze, full stop.

So they can hit two Dem candidates with one stone.

If it was in the Enquirer, all of DU's ObamaBots have no doubt already seen it.

You can't ask a question about the general without some obamaite attacking her as their answer FOR HIM.

The truth won't deter these people at all.

What can I do for ya?

:rofl:

without any kind of NON-RACIST, NON-RELIGIOUS HATEFUL FRAMING then...

They are engaging in fear-mongering, racism and hatred fueling.

It is disgusting.

If you have any doubts, take this into account. Your defense is "so what if Hillary did it. The National Enquirer did it first."

Disgusting, disgusting, repulsive.

:shrug: Seriously?

The story explains that THEY claim if HRC was in this photo, it would be ALL over the place? WHY?

WHY did they say it?

Fact: The Ohio, Texas & Pennsylvania primaries are coming up.

Fact: All three states have had strong history of racist streaks.

WHY would Hillary's campaign send this out now?

She's trying to bring out her RACIST, UNEDUCATED group of voters. Disgusting.

:shrug:

I know the National Enquirer published that photo. I know that photo has been up at Free Republic. I know that we are talking about that photo among ourselves here and I know that some Clinton staff talked about that photo among themselves via email.

Where is the anger at Free Republic? Where is the anger at the National Enquirer? Where is the anger at the Drudge Report? People here who will use any excuse to tear down Hillary Clinton regardless of how far stretched and unsupported by evidence their accusations are are the ones I find repulsive.

As usual around here. Give the Right a free ride, attack a fellow Democrat.

:kick:

Those kids crack me up! :rofl:

...his sources only read "Mother Jones". Yep, it's a little know secret :)

Director of marketing? Director of RW website dissemination? Is this a defense?

Smoe Clinton staff talked about the photo, just like we are.

Where is the anger at the Right on this Board?

"If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed." - Maggie Williams. (NOT connected at all with the National Enquirer story from 2/7)

It's against anyone acknowledging that racism and fear-mongering exist.

It is SO intellectually dishonest and repugnant that I have a hard time believing people are defending it.

It's simple. For months, we've been warned that the worst of the worst of the Republican party would race-bait and fearmonger.

Hillary's campaign is taking cues right from the worst of the worst.

Disgusting.

Weeks ago? sheeesh...

Your argument is shot down with this headline from Druge site - The photo may have originally been on other sites BUT it was sent to Drudge from the Clinton Staff!!!!!!!!

CLINTON STAFFERS CIRCULATE 'DRESSED' OBAMA
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashoa.htm
Mon Feb 25 2008 06:51:00 ET

With a week to go until the Texas and Ohio primaries, stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo over the weekend of a "dressed" Barack Obama.

The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat frontrunner fitted as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya.

The senator was on a five-country tour of Africa questioned one campaign staffer, in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

In December, the campaign asked one of its volunteer county coordinators in Iowa to step down after the person forwarded an e-mail falsely stating that Barack Obama is a Muslim.

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe quickly accused the Clinton campaign Monday of 'shameful offensive fear-mongering' for circulating the snap.

Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams responds: "If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed."

You DUbamas crack me up!

Obtained. They don't even claim that a Clinton staffer sent it to them, so why should you?

Lots of things get "obtained" from campaigns without the permission of those campaigns, especially when that information can be used to hurt that campaign, which is what Obama is attempting to do to Clinton right now. Drudge got a twofer; he helped get the Obama photo out further and he gave Obama supporters a chance to beat up on Clinton - deepening animosity inside the Democratic party heading into the General Election.

Does circulated mean that a member of the Clinton campaign staff sent Drudge the picture, with the suggestion, implied or direct, that he run with it, or does it mean that Drudge has learned that two or more members of the Clinton campaign staff have included that picture in e-mails (or whatever) to each other?

Williams. This is the problem with the Clinton campaign. This clearly plays to the people we don't want to vote. This is for the racist, scare tactic influenced one-issue voters, the anti-same sex marriage crowd that help dubya get re-elected. You don't buy into "hope", me neither, but you better realize that it is going to get more votes than the same old trying to be like Karl slash & burn politics. Educated voters don't fall for the bait & switch fucking bullshit of folks like Hillary & her surrogate Williams. I'm at times ashamed to be a democrat because of Hillary & her supporters & surrogates. & you know who you are, talk about kool-aid, to think that this wasn't an HRC hit to circulate the photo. Of course there is nothing wrong with it (the photo), but it wasn't us they were putting it out there for, it was the knuckle-draggers (her campaign going for the hate crowd?). It is politics (rovian/everything that is wrong with politics) as usual for the Clinton camp. I feel sorry for her that selling her soul isn't bringing in the voters like she has hoped.

The core message the Drudge Report tries to get cross is "stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo". Do we know among whom this photo is circulating? If it circulates among Clinton's staffs, it would not be an issue, would it? If among large scale of broadcast, then many people can come out to provide the evidence. So far, we only know "drudge says". Is any obvious problem here? Do some homework first please. This is a kind of bad taste politics.

Happy now?

and her as well. Feeling chipper?

why mess up a sure thing?

crap like this.

it's so nefarious and evil

:rofl:

we Dems are gonna allow the Repugs to smear both our candidates with this photo.

Hillary for "circulating" it. Whatever that means.

and Obama for being in it.

Good thinking!

Surely there's a difference between it being on the National Enquirer and making it into mainstream media. That's why the Clinton campaign was pushing it, in order to get it into the mainstream media. Whether the photo was out there before is really irrelevant and in no way absolves them of any responsibility.

And it's all Hillary's fault. :rofl:


So is Obama ashamed of himself :shrug: that he dressed in traditional Somali clothing? Or :shrug: are just his supporters ashamed?

This "why" is obama outraged argument is terrible.

1. Why did camp hillary push out two people who were spreading the Obama is a muslim email from her Iowa head quarters?
2. Pictures of hillary in Muslim garb isn't the same as pictures of fanning "obama is a Muslim" fears by distributing the photo. He has had to fight wingnut propaganda on this point... this is just another attempt to force him to defend the fact that he isn't a Muslim and then they accuse him of being overly sensitive about being depicted as a Muslim (spread by camp clinton)...

It's a overtly evil double bind... if he doesn't answer it then he is a Muslim (which i have no problem with but a country full of Christians won't vote for a Muslim which is exactly why camp clinton is spreading this ish)... if he does then why is he being to sensitive about this whole Muslim thing.

I have voted for a democrat in every election in the last 15 years... they are crossing the line. They ought to think about stepping back...

it's like caffeine to them.

I acknowledge that you do feature the December 10, 2007 date at the top of your post.

There has been long and exhaustive debate on DU already about how and when good volunteers go wrong, or bad volunteers get caught. It raged here for at least a month . And people lost both paid and unpaid positions for that kind of behavior.

I give you a hard time in my post header because you make no attempt to discuss in any way what the Clinton campaign is alleged to be doing to Obama now. All I see is what the Obama campaign is definately trying to do to Clinton now.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And you can continue cheerlead any and all kinds of behavior every damn day apparently.

Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.

In an attempt to avoid accusations of racism, they had resorted to referring to him as "Candidate X." But then they were accused of linking him with Malcolm X.

They then switched to the moniker "Candidate B," but complaints arose that Clinton was trying to put blacks in their place.

They changed to "Candidate A" but when Hillary bitch-slapped every staffer she heard use the term, they resorted to using sockpuppets to silently mime campaign strategies.

No word yet on the color of the socks.

K&R.

Or am I not allowed to poke fun at a primary season in which both candidates have pulled stunts and supporters on both sides have displayed idiocy?

If it really offends you to see a Clinton supporter laugh at all this, then :shrug: oh well

:hug:

I only wish it had made you laugh. We can all use one.

:hi:

They have learned well.

Did anyone notice even a squeek out of them when the Enquirer published that hit against Obama? Nope. They let right wing attacks on him go wild and free. They are letting the Right get away with it and that is poisoning a lot of attitudes toward Obama. I don not believe for a nano second that no one told anyone on Obama's staff about the Enquirer article about him with that photo. They all knew about it at the time.

Where is the outrage about false outrage now?

Church and State? Why is this man's religion of lack of religion have to do with anything? This echos of the fear of Catholics when JFK ran. BTW. I am a Hillary Girl, but these posts are just a bit too much.

by an Obama supporter who is criticizing an unfair attack against Clinton.

He is also suggesting that Obama, despite his very strong campaign to date still can take his campaign to a higher level.


Did I get the facts correct?


My response is:

Despite all of the cheap hits on Obama supporters in being kool aid drinking cultists I consistently see Obama supporters trying to engage the issue in a philosophically honest way. Yesterday there were two leads trying to lambast Hillary as a lawyer representing a rapist. There were a number of Obama supporters aggressively defending her. I could be wrong but I do not see the same type of defenses by Clinton supporter who seem to be much more constrained by a need to stay on script.

I am a Clinton support, though I make efforts not to be a rabid one and I generally have positive things to say about Obama. I got only my second post in four years deleted yesterday blasting a poster on a thread accusing Obama of being an anti-Semitic among other things.

supported Obama. lol. Ah well it is the kind of OP I would like to think Obama supporters would write

Clearly its an attempt of a rightwing group to attack Obama. I doubt that Hillary was involved in this because the issue is just plain stupid. So what, Obama was dressed up in traditional African garb ... who cares?

In a story titled 'Obama's shocking al-qaeda link' (unsurprisingly, there isn't one).




The average circulation of the National Examiner is 439,199 - see
http://www.magazine.org/Circulation/circulation_trends_and_magazine_handbook/1362.cfm

They are sso 'with it' that the magazine, astonishingly, doesn't even have a website.

At the speed at which I was trying to read and absorb information tis morning when this incident broke - my eyes played a mental trick on me - the format seemed so similar and the name - well you know.

I really appreciate the fact check correction.

Both are true and known, but Hillary is exploiting the terrorist aspect.

Hillary Clinton woos man who nearly ruined her husband



Mark Penn is in bed with Drudge.

Obama's campaign would not connect Hillary to the latest attack story without validation.

It has happened before and Axelrod denounced the attempts to link Hillary's campaign to an attack:



This latest incident is different in that it comes on the heels of Hillary's campaign and her surrogates promoting Obama's ties to "former members of a radical domestic terrorist group."

Hillary is manipulative and calculating. She is going after anyone ignorant of the facts. Did I say desperate.

If not you should apply!







They are right up your alley!!!

And every Democrat should be able to discern what is acceptable and what is not. Hillary has stepped into a realm of cheese and it is suffocating her own campaign. Just as it should be.

Thanks, mate.

a note attached that read "You wouldn't let Hillary get away with this."

No denial all day. Plenty of attacks. And then a weak-assed, um, well, you know we have over 700 people, so, um, like, we can't say for sure.

Bullshit.

I wanted to make the same point as post #94 above.

Do they still publish the National Enquirer? :eyes: