Jun 13 2008

Obidiot Obama – Part III, Did Chicago Sun Times Know Of “Whitey” Video?

This is Part III in series of posts on why you don’t address rumors that are false, you let them die a lonely death without proof.  

In Part I of this series on how not to run a Presidential campaign (which shows how a candidate is not ready to be President I might add) I noted the plan to openly address some of the more sensational rumors about Obama and his wife only gave these rumors oxygen.  Especially since some, like the “whitey” video rumor concerning Michelle were dying off due to lack of substantiation.  I also noted the first rule of challenging rumors, don’t feed the frenzy by drawing more questions because more details came out.

In Part I we noted a Time story that proved Obama’s campaign knew about the video rumor before it showed up on Hillary supporter Larry Johnson’s site.  Not a good turn of events, because it supported some of the claims being made by Johnson and others that the Obama campaign knew about the video (as opposed to knew about the rumor of a video).

In Part II we noted how the Obama campaign’s denials were actually non sequitur’s having nothing to do with the rumor.  In addition, the Obama site confirmed Michelle Obama’s presence on at a roundtable and plenary at the event – meaning they confirmed another part of the rumor, thus giving it more credibility to all of it.  

Now we have Part III (this post), and it has to do with how using the liberal media (the Obamabots) to announce this risky new tactic of addressing rumors in full war room mode actually provide fuel for the fire. To get publicized in the news media you have to pay a price – the interview.  You have to provide new details, something to draw in the public.  Which is why this tactic is as dumb as a rock – you should be drawing the public’s attention to issues, not rumors.   In Part I we had the Time article which gave the following new details on the “Whitey” video rumors:

According to campaign officials, what finally launched Obama into a full rumor counteroffensive was a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson. [around May 16th to be exact]

When the Obama campaign got wind of the rumor in April, Michelle’s close friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett asked Michelle if there could be anything to it; the candidate’s wife dismissed it out of hand. But by mid-May, it was picking up steam on the Internet, and Michelle’s advisers decided it was time to have a serious talk with her about it. 

So the campaign knew well before Johnson started his whisper campaign the rumor was out there.  But who was the Obama Campaign’s source?  Well, check out this next interview on the matter of this new (dumb) tactic on addressing rumors from the Chicago Sun Times:

When I phoned the Obama press shop a few times in recent weeks to check out rumors about whether there was a videotape with Michelle Obama using the word “whitey,” the campaign declined to issue a denial or to pass along the question to Michelle’s staff to find out what might be fueling the rumors.

But the rumors about Michelle were kicking around the Internet and working their way into some broadcast outlets; Rush Limbaugh, for example, said rivals of presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama were “waiting to use it in October of Michelle going nuts in the church, too, talking about ‘whitey’ this and ‘whitey’ that.”

Talking a week ago, Obama gave a frosty answer to reporter Margaret Talev, who asked about rumors concerning his wife.

As detailed by Time magazine, Obama then told his “top aides it was time for a more aggressive solution to the rumors that have been popping up on the Internet about him and his family for months.”

Well, it seems the author of this article, Lynn  Sweet, was one of those reporters trying to pin the Obama campaign down on the video rumor before Johnson’s site started his whisper campaign.  

There have been other aspects of the rumor which have bothered me no end – and that is some news media outlets have a copy of the video.  Like all aspects of this ugly whisper campaign I am not buying it, but skepticism can only take you so far.  When I read the Obama campaign admit they were getting questions well before Johnson made the rumor public I wonder what evidence did these organizations have to broach the matter?  You just don’t go up and ask “did your wife go racist in 2004”? It is just not professional and get your butt booted to covering the dog pound.

If there is a copy of this tape, my guess is it is in the hands of the Illinois or Chicago based news media. They are Obama’s home town media and most culpable in letting the needed vetting of Obama happen. The reporters need to print news that attracts attention.  In this case Lynn Sweet did just that.  She knew something before Johnson did – now the only question is what did she know and why is she hiding it from the voters?

8 responses so far

8 Responses to “Obidiot Obama – Part III, Did Chicago Sun Times Know Of “Whitey” Video?”

  1. Soothsayer says:

    John Sidney MCCain III (aka Grumpy MccSame)’s campaign manager “acted in direct opposition to American foreign interests, which prompted a warning to McCain’s Senate office from the United States government”.

    Rick Davis has been in particular hot water with Condi Rice’s State Department for his company’s work with pro-Russian Ukranian political candidates, however, it may be even worse than that:

    McCain may have first become aware of Davis’ activities in Ukraine as far back as 2005. At that time, a staff member at the National Security Council called Mr. McCain’s Senate office to complain that Mr. Davis’s lobbying firm was undercutting American foreign policy in Ukraine.

    McCain’s campaign guru works against US interests in the World, and in the Strata-Sphere a non-story lifted from a 2005 novel about a fictional videotape involving a non-existent candidate’s African American wife rates three (count ’em 3!!!) iterations.

    What a compleat joke.

  2. The Macker says:

    So, you have had an awakening, and now support the US foreign policy of GWB and Condi Rice! Keep us posted whenever you detect anyone “in direct opposition” to US interests.

  3. crosspatch says:

    Sooth plays a very predictable adolescent game of publishing all the negative information he can find on people he disagrees with and all the information he can find that validates his view. He isn’t interested in reading information and checking it and cross checking it with other information from which to develop an opinion. He has simply formed an opinion and then seeks information that validates it.

    It is an easy game to play because no matter what your opinion is, someone somewhere shares it and will produce an article that reflects it. Apparently some people believe that seeing someone else share their opinion somehow makes their view “the truth”. They aren’t particularly interested in looking at things from all different angles in order to develop a truth. They are interested in picking out the things that validate their “truth”.

    But things change over time and so should people’s opinions on things as they grow and learn. I have little respect for anyone that simply touts the “party line” without sharing how they came to their conclusions. I can train a parrot to recite a speech or an article or a party platform. That doesn’t make the parrot enlightened or even correct. And you can’t converse with the parrot to gain any new insight. The parrot simply repeats other people’s words.

  4. VinceP1974 says:

    cross: Everyhthing you say is true. That’s why I dont bother engaging with people like that. I just skip his messaes

  5. the good doctor says:

    There are probably many copies of this tape. It’s coming and they know it. It will be released at the right time, like during the convention. Why release it now? Let them sweat.

  6. Dc says:

    Soothie, and I suppose a congress person, or ex-president, going to a foreign nation for the express purpose of undercutting our foreign policy, a sitting president, or administration, or even meeting with terroists orgs is ok? Give me a break.

  7. Neo says:

    Why is it that this “whitey tape” story/rumour has more legs than a centipede ?

    The worst part of this is now that if it ever turns out to be true, even a little true, it gonna hurt a lot more.

    It’s always the coverup that gets ’em.

  8. conman says:


    Your claim that it is unwise for a campaign to directly address false rumors is so contrary to recent elections is laughable. McCain’s demise in the 2000 GOP primary is widely attributed to his failure to aggressively respond to the wide-spread rumors that he had fathered a black child out of wedlock, that his wife was a drug addict and that McCain was mentally unstable due to his Vietnam imprisonment. This rumor campaign began between the New Hampshire (which McCain won) and South Carolina primaries, ultimately contributing to his lose in South Carolina and the end of his campaign. Kerry’s close loss to Bush in 2004 is largely attributed to his failure to aggressively respond to the infamous Swift Boat campaign.

    Conventional political wisdom is that a candidiate has to address false rumors before they gain traction. That is how Clinton and Bush ran their campaigns. That is why Bush responded aggressively to the rumor that he dodge his national guard duties that came up during the 2000 campaign. Did you think that was stupid?

    Obama addressed this rumor because conservative blogs like yourself kept the whisper campaign alive. I find it so ironic that a couple weeks ago you gave new life to the rumor on the grounds that Obama did not deny the rumor strongly enough when asked by a reporter. Now your claiming he should not have addressed it at all? Come on AJ, which one is it? Quite changing your story everytime something happens to disprove an earlier theory. I also thought you were done talking about this rumor until an actual video appears.

    Your claim that Obama doesn’t know how to run a campaign, and therefore is not qualified for president, is equally laughable. Obama just took on and beat the Clinton machine. Clinton was considered the presumptive nominee by almost everyone early on based on her connections within the party and with financial contributors. Obama out-smarted her and won the nomination against huge odds. He put together the most impressive grass-roots campaign and funding mechanism in the history of presidential elections.

    Why is it that all you conservatives can talk about in this campaign are the smears and rumors about Obama? Debate the substantive and policy issues. Explain why Americans should vote for your guy, McCain, not why we should all be afraid of Obama. I rarely, if ever, see posts on this blog about what is so great about McCain. As AJ repeatedly says, Americans are tired of nasty partisanship. They want to vote for someone, not against someone. Republicans inability to understand this dynamic will be their demise in 2008.