Why would Obama supporters "spin" and denounce a "non-existent" tape?

[MNDemNY]

Already claim it as a "miss-pronunciation" of "why'd he"
If this is for real, well, just fuck.

[scheming daemons]

1. The same reason we had to attack the "Obama is a muslim" crap....

When the likes of Faux news starts reporting on something, it makes no difference whether it is true or not.


The bitter hordes of uneducated mouth-breathers will believe it.


This is how you stop a swift-boat. Pre-emption.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Kudos for Obama

stopping swiftboating in its tracks. He's done this before, with some of McCain's allegations. We have to strike right back with the TRUTH.

[MNDemNY]

5. But if it doesn't exsist, why the "spin"?

[scheming daemons]

11. Because a tape of her saying "why'd he" MAY exist - and we can't let that be manipulated to mean

something else.

[MNDemNY]

12. So you just fight it "on spec"?

Seems only to add credence.If a "why'd he" tape exists, why not get out in front of it?This stinks.

[scheming daemons]

14. We saw what happened when Kerry tried to ignore the swiftboat lies....

That doesn't work.


You have to get out AHEAD of it.... yes.... "on spec".

[MNDemNY]

19. Then Obama should release the "why'd he" tape first.

[ellacott]

24. You'd have to assume he has the tape

that doesn't exist.

[MNDemNY]

25. Then why the claim of miss-pronunciation?

[ellacott]

31. You're asking many questions that contradict each other

The questions have been answered. It's not that difficult to understand. There are some who feel there is no tape. There are those that feel it's a tape that been misinterpreted.

In either case there is nothing wrong with getting in front of the story. As has been said, Kerry's mistake was not responding to the Swiftboaters. Ironically he responded quickly to the Drudge story about an affair.

[MNDemNY]

32. The answers are also contradictory.

[ellacott]

34. Actually they aren't

Some feel it exists. Others disagree.

[Changenow]

44. The swiftboat lie shows lies must be addressed

as for the spin, that is likely coming from the Hillary supporters to lend credibility to the possibility that a tape does exist.

[Andy823]

16. Probably because

So many clinton fanatics will jump on this no matter what and use it to their ad advantage to destroy Obama "before" they get the facts! Do you think????

[TahitiNut]

36. Same reason as shoving a mime ... destroy the illusion of a tightrope or glass box.

"Perception is reality" ... the propagandist's creed. Blow the smoke away. :shrug:

[MNDemNY]

3. But, why the claim of miss-pronunciation?

Is there a tape? is the question only what is said?

[Hola]

28. both

you're being a little thick, sorry :)

[casus belli]

30. There is only speculation

both the reports of the tape, and of the intentional misrepresentation of the tape are based upon what people have heard others say about the tape who have supposedly seen it.

The rumor more or less began with Larry Johnson at No Quarter. He has been hinting for weeks at a huge October Surprise that he would be revealing today at 9:00am EST. Today, his revelation turned out to be more heresay with a couple of additional speculations about what is on the tape based on 5 "sources" who have supposedly seen the tape. Among the more interesting claims - that Michelle Obama was in the company of Louis Farrakhan when the alleged statements were made. I won't link to the site but it can be easily found at Google. It's currently experiencing up and downs, I presume because of the backlash of the anti-climactic "revelation" he made today. As an aside, the guy is a real piece of work. make sure you have a good stomach if you decide to peruse the site.

The counter-rumor is attributed to the Booman Tribune, there are numerous threads that detail it on DU. Again, the information is attained from people who have claimed to have seen the tape and involves an intentional misinterpretation of "Why'd he" as "Whitey". You can see the entire breakdown of that particular argument in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6223410&mesg_id=6223410

If I had a guess, I'd say talking about it is exactly what whoever created this drama wanted. If there were any meat to the story, we'd have had it already, and I'm sure it would have been linked to more credible, and more popular sources.

[VotesForWomen]

67. oh it does make a difference if it's true, and denial ain't just a river in egypt.

the train has left the station wrt the 'framing' of Obama, and by nov it will most certainly have reached its destination. he will LOSE, and do serious damage to the democratic party.

[grasswire]

4. are you thinking it's a reverse op? (eom)

[MNDemNY]

6. I, have no clue.

It's just curious that it is being "explained" if it does not exist.

[TeamsterDem]

33. Just like it's curious that it's being touted if it doesn't exist.

As to you having no clue, I concur wholeheartedly.

[MNDemNY]

37. Why so hateful?

Typical kool-aid addled zealot.

[TeamsterDem]

39. Hateful? Really? For saying that you're indeed clueless as to why

campaigns and campaign supporters feel compelled to respond to shit like this after what happened to Kerry in '04? It's not hateful to call a short person short; it's not hateful to say Keith Olbermann appears on MSNBC. Both are facts. You can't wrap your mind around the mystifying concept of getting out ahead of a fallacious story so that it doesn't become a "fact" in the minds of voters, so it's hardly hateful to label you as clueless.

Sorry, you've earned the title.

[MNDemNY]

46. " It never happened, but if it did....." Great way to get "out front"

[TeamsterDem]

50. Logic not your strong suit, eh?

Apparently neither is honesty.

Look, when your candidate is accused of something you don't or shouldn't sit there and allow the thing to snowball into internet legend. If you do you're not helping your candidate. If the tape comes out and is exactly as advertised then it's a bad thing for Obama. That's why it needs to be rebutted because it has the potential of being bad. But we don't believe it's as advertised because it doesn't jibe with what we know about Michelle, and because it seems too good to be true for Obama's opponents.

But apparently you'd have us sit quietly and allow the rumor to be transformed into a "fact" simply because it gets airtime. Sorry, no matter how much you protest to the contrary, we're only dispelling something before it becomes one of those stories that wasn't rebutted quickly and forcefully enough, thus becoming a "fact" like Kerry's supposedly "bad" service record.

[MNDemNY]

56. Logic? If it does not exist, how can it be a "miss-pronunciation"?

[TeamsterDem]

58. If it does not exist, how can it be promoted as existing?

But since it's being promoted it's got to be put down as the dead dog it is.

[mod mom]

7. Because Clinton supporter Larry Johnson has been spreading lies in attempt to hurt our

Democratic nominee and some of us care about the truth.

[Autumn]

18. Larry Johnson is

one fucked up Clinton loyalist. If he is a Clinton supporter why wait until Senator Obama gets the nomination to release it? I think he is a RW pig in disguise. There is no tape and I don't believe Michelle Obama would say anthing like that.

[casus belli]

42. The guy is as expendable as they come

If they had a story with any merit, they'd have released it through a better "source". This guy they can throw away as a lunatic, if and when it's debunked, and they don't have to worry about discrediting one of their star shills.

[mod mom]

45. I believe he put the word out there knowing it could be disproved but wanted it to place

some doubt before the DNC decided how to rule on MI and FL. Didn't he say it would be released this morning? Funny how it never materialized-only the rumors w/o the video.

[wvbygod]

21. Obama is a candidate, not a nominee

A minor detail but still important.

[MNDemNY]

23. Not until Denver, technically.

[LSK]

8. because the sheeple eat up false rumors all the time

aka that whole Iraq and War on Terror BS.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x141369

[TeamsterDem]

9. And the explanations of mispronunciation

are based on the supposed "transcripts" being offered. It's not like they're thought up out of thin air.

Evidently you'd have everyone just ignore a whisper campaign and allow it to get legs, but getting out ahead of smear campaigns like this is one of the central necessities of any political campaign.

[MNDemNY]

10. If they are only "supposed" transcripts, why the need to re-interpret?

[TeamsterDem]

13. "re-interpret?"

WTF are you talking about? It's not "reinterpretation" to point to the supposed transcript as much as others point to the supposed tape. Turnabout is fair play.

[MNDemNY]

17. If the tape does not exist, then, what transcript do you speak of?

[TeamsterDem]

26. If the tape doesn't exist then what tape is anyone speaking of?

Would you have us remain silent while our candidate is disparaged at the hands of a smear campaign? Or shouldn't we be able to defend our candidate from scurrilous charges?

Someone charges someone else with having a video tape of their supposed behavior. The respondent should (a) just fold their arms and remain mum on the subject, thus creating the impression that they can't respond and that the charges might be true owing to their failure to respond; or (b) respond by saying that the tape is either non-existent or that it likely shows something completely innocuous which is being spun as something else. Which one of these sounds more reasonable to you?

[grasswire]

51. uh.....your respondent DID remain mum on the subject

Did you notice that? You wrote: "Someone charges someone else with having a video tape of their supposed behavior. The respondent should (a) just fold their arms and remain mum on the subject..."

That's exactly what Obama has done, as the respondent.

You do realize that his supporters are not the respondents, don't you?

[TeamsterDem]

53. In this case no

the respondents are Obama's supporters because the only ones presented with the claims of the video are his supporters. Until Obama himself is presented with the story he's not the respondent.

[Median Democrat]

15. This Is My Take - The Tape(s) Are Innocuous

Everyone probably has it, and they don't know it. If it was released early on without all this pre-spin, people would give a collective "who cares"?

So, the Hillary/Rush types are creating all this pre-spin and anticipation before releasing the tape, which everyone already has to manufacture a controversy.

Remember John Kerry and the Swiftboat veterans? If the opponent does not have squat, then they just take something innocuous, perhaps even heroric in the case of Kerry, then spin and frame the issue as something bad. The tape is hiding in plain site, because it does not mean squat.

As for the Hillary Clinton types pushing this. Shame on you. Do you really think that Hillary Clinton would be immune to this BS if she were the nominee? Talk about being used as a tool by the RW.

[Warren DeMontague]

20. Because the more we talk about it, the more obvious it is how hollow the attacks on the guy are.

If this is the best y'all can do, really- I hope you've got your outfit picked out for the Obama Inaugural.

[PoliticalAmazon]

22. Swift-boating, left unopposed, works. n/t

[rateyes]

27. Not denouncing a non-existent tape...

Denouncing the shitheads who started the rumor, and the idiots who believe them.

[sfam]

29. That approach worked really well for Kerry during the Swiftboating...

Perhaps we've learned something since then.

[BigDDem]

35. Y'all sure are getting worked up over something that does not exist

[MNDemNY]

38. We hope.

[Median Democrat]

43. This Reminds Me Of The Obama Cheek Scratch...

John Stewart had a field day with this. A reporter showed a tape of Obama scatching his cheek during a campaign, and questioned whether he was giving a subliminal bird to his opponents. John Stewart showed the cheeck scratch, and the commentator who was in full Fox mode about whether this was a subtle obscene gesture, at which point Jon Stewart flipped off the camera yelling, "THIS IS THE BIRD!"

My point is that anything and everything can be spun. Give me a tape of Michelle Obama picking her nose, and I will hype it into Michelle calling for the recycling of snot as an environmental initiative, then put it on Youtube.

[frickaline]

40. because the spin forces these people to show proof

If you don't cast real doubt on the contents, it never needs to be shown. Now people will demand to verify the contents for themselves so they can make up their own minds. Check and mate.

[polmaven]

41. I'm sure glad there is nothing

that any of the Obama supporters have SWORN was said that was misunderstood!

Oh....wait.....

"These people are sh**s"....."White ni**ers"......

Never mind!

[leftofcool]

48. They were on this for what, a week?

[polmaven]

49. At least...

Even after the person who did the taping confirmed what was said, they continued to claim otherwise!

[RainDog]

47. maybe b/c letting shit sit was blamed for Kerry's defeat?

dunno. but to say nothing would get spun as something bad as well.

damned if you do, damned if you don't.

gotta love ratfucking politics.

[Sulawesi]

52. Why not, since you have no issue denouncing those denouncing the spin of a non-existent tape.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

54. Look, we all pretty much know what y'all heard on the conference call by now.

You can stop wasting threads pushing this talking point now. I mean, what with all the various "Popular Vote" creative math scenarios you have to keep going you'll want to conserve your GD-P threads.

Just saying. :shrug:

[iconicgnom]

55. Why is a character assassination topic front and center in your mind at this moment in time

when it's clear that the primary is winding down? It's way past time to focus on creaming McCain on substantial topics and this kind of post is futile beyond distraction.

[greguganus]

57. Your girl lost. Get over it, mmkay? n/t

[MNDemNY]

59. But what of the GE? If this exists, will it hurt?

[greguganus]

60. No. Spin from people that aren't going to vote for Obama anyway. It won't sway his supporters. n/t

[MNDemNY]

62. His supporters, maybe, but what of "swing voters"? with out them we lose.

[VotesForWomen]

68. you're wasting your time. they think the world loves the Saint. nt

[TeamsterDem]

70. That's "what we think," is it?

Here I thought we preferred him in a Democratic primary and voted accordingly. But now I'm learning that we not only prefer him, but that we think the world prefers - nay LOVES - him. That's quite a revelation. Thanks for psychoanalyzing millions of people. Freud would be ever-so proud.

[TeamsterDem]

61. If it's real, yes. Then again if there is a tape of Hillary using the "n" word that

would hurt too. There's as "much" proof of the latter as there is the former. So what's the point in suggesting it would be bad? Neither are provably extant.

[MNDemNY]

63. Yet.

[TeamsterDem]

64. Are you familiar with the phrase "transparent jackass" at all?

You define it rather well with your attempts to seed in the minds of DUers that the tape might or probably exists despite your absolute lack of any evidence. You're essentially promoting the idea that God exists because no one can prove it/he/she/whatever doesn't. It's transparent as hell and hopelessly absurd. Have you no shame?

[Median Democrat]

69. This Is Why I Turned Against Hillary After Supporting Her

Her surrogates continue to engage in these types of attacks. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[DarienComp]

65. A miss-pronunciation, huh?

<facepalm>

[iconicgnom]

66. enough of the race-baiting crap