Wednesday, June 04, 2008
The Obama-buster video (Updates 1, 2, 3 & 4)
Looks like it's real. The video comes from a women's luncheon held on June 26, 2004 at Trinity United. (Note: This location is incorrect; see below.) This was part of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Conference.
John Kerry aroused some controversy when he spoke at the same conference, crossing a picket line to do so -- the picketers being a small-ish group of local blacks who were angry at Jesse Jackson, of all people.
Bill Clinton also spoke at this conference. Apparently, he aroused Michelle's deepest antipathy. Wouldn't it be fitting if the Obama Hopey-Changey crusade ends the way it began -- in a CDS snitfit?
The video was once offered by Trinity, only to be purged from their list of items for sale. (I've been to their website, and as near as I can tell, they aren't offering any videos right now.) So who might have let the thing loose?
I'd like to suggest one possible source: Jeremiah Wright.
You will recall that Obi tossed his long-time spiritual mentor under the proverbial bus. Gee -- do you think that Wright might, just possibly might, have a vindictive streak? Mmmmm....could be...
After all, who invited Jeremiah Wright to speak at the National Press Club? Clinton supporter Barbara Reynolds. That fact tells me that the Clinton forces have opened up a channel to the good Reverend Emeritus of Trinity United. The enemy of your enemy, as they say. Perhaps, in the future, people will say that "Hell hath no fury like a spiritual mentor scorned."
I'll have all latest. Keep checking...
BY THE WAY: Hillary's popular vote total: 17,785,009. Barry's: 17,479,990. This pdf report tells you how Obama gamed the caucuses and stole the election. Will "Thor" Friedman discuss the issue? Nahhh....
UPDATE: The Women's conference was held at the Sheraton Hotel. The event was co-chaired by a local ABC News anchor. I've put in a call. We may soon have confirmation one way or the other. Keep checking back.
UPDATE 2: Susan at Random Thoughts calls the scandal "Whiteygate." She also notes that the most controversial speaker (at the time, within the black community) was Bill Cosby. Why? This is why:
The Telegraph in the UK seems to take the Whiteygate story seriously. They're owned by Murdoch, who now favors Obama.
UPDATE 4: A commenter at My DD, which has become an Obot site, sneers at the possibility that Michelle could have said anything incendiary. They point to this story, covering the entire Rainbow/PUSH conference. The story does not mention Michelle Obama. However, the piece simply does not deal with the Women's luncheon at all; the writer seems not to have attended that event. At the time, the controversy du jour centered on Bill Cosby's remarks.
Many of you keep repeating the mantra: Show the video! If you think that only a showing of the video will suffice, then you have missed an important point: The conference was attended by others. Do you need a video to prove that Lincoln said "Four score and seven years ago"?
I've left a polite message with a newswoman in attendance, pleading with her to clear the matter up. If she denies that Michelle said such a thing, I will of course publish what she says, even if doing so means a crow-and-hat dinner for yours truly. So far, no response. That fact alone may be telling.
Think about it: If Michelle did not use an incendiary term, then those in attendance (including war hero Shoshana Johnson) would be very quick to clear her name. Right?
But...they have said nothing. The silence is mysterious. Remember the lesson of the Swiftboat debacle: Always respond quickly.
My mind keeps flashing back to the Obama rep with whom I spoke. Before he would comment, he spent a minute talking to his boss, asking for direction on what to say to me. Then I was told that the campaign refuses to address the issue until a video surfaces.
Why?
Why can't Michelle simply state "I have never used the word 'Whitey' to denigrate white people"? After all, this story is being covered around the world. Why the silence?
By the way -- don't presume (as many do) that "lots of people" would have purchased the tape if it was once offered for sale. I can easily see how a video of that sort might have had very few takers -- except, perhaps, for those featured in the video. For most people, even those intensely interested in the African American community, online news coverage would have sufficed. The big news at that confrence was made by Jesse Jackson and Bill Cosby -- who would have been on another tape.
Others have tried to debunk the story by pointing out that Michelle was not a "panelist" but a "featured speaker." Cah-MON. Does that distinction strike you as terribly important?
John Kerry aroused some controversy when he spoke at the same conference, crossing a picket line to do so -- the picketers being a small-ish group of local blacks who were angry at Jesse Jackson, of all people.
Bill Clinton also spoke at this conference. Apparently, he aroused Michelle's deepest antipathy. Wouldn't it be fitting if the Obama Hopey-Changey crusade ends the way it began -- in a CDS snitfit?
The video was once offered by Trinity, only to be purged from their list of items for sale. (I've been to their website, and as near as I can tell, they aren't offering any videos right now.) So who might have let the thing loose?
I'd like to suggest one possible source: Jeremiah Wright.
You will recall that Obi tossed his long-time spiritual mentor under the proverbial bus. Gee -- do you think that Wright might, just possibly might, have a vindictive streak? Mmmmm....could be...
After all, who invited Jeremiah Wright to speak at the National Press Club? Clinton supporter Barbara Reynolds. That fact tells me that the Clinton forces have opened up a channel to the good Reverend Emeritus of Trinity United. The enemy of your enemy, as they say. Perhaps, in the future, people will say that "Hell hath no fury like a spiritual mentor scorned."
I'll have all latest. Keep checking...
BY THE WAY: Hillary's popular vote total: 17,785,009. Barry's: 17,479,990. This pdf report tells you how Obama gamed the caucuses and stole the election. Will "Thor" Friedman discuss the issue? Nahhh....
UPDATE: The Women's conference was held at the Sheraton Hotel. The event was co-chaired by a local ABC News anchor. I've put in a call. We may soon have confirmation one way or the other. Keep checking back.
UPDATE 2: Susan at Random Thoughts calls the scandal "Whiteygate." She also notes that the most controversial speaker (at the time, within the black community) was Bill Cosby. Why? This is why:
Bill Cosby pleaded with blacks to stop blaming the "white man" for their problems on Thursday, and he reiterated his harsh critique of the current state of African-American culture.UPDATE 3: National Review relays a rumor (just a rumor) that people close to Rudy Giuliani acquired the tape, presumably at some point before Giuliani dropped out.
"It is almost analgesic to talk about what the white man is doing against us, and it keeps a person frozen in their seat. It keeps you frozen in your hole that you are sitting in to point up and say, 'That's the reason why I am here.' We need to stop this," Cosby said in an address before Jesse Jackson's 33rd Annual Rainbow/PUSH Coalition conference in Chicago.
The Telegraph in the UK seems to take the Whiteygate story seriously. They're owned by Murdoch, who now favors Obama.
UPDATE 4: A commenter at My DD, which has become an Obot site, sneers at the possibility that Michelle could have said anything incendiary. They point to this story, covering the entire Rainbow/PUSH conference. The story does not mention Michelle Obama. However, the piece simply does not deal with the Women's luncheon at all; the writer seems not to have attended that event. At the time, the controversy du jour centered on Bill Cosby's remarks.
Many of you keep repeating the mantra: Show the video! If you think that only a showing of the video will suffice, then you have missed an important point: The conference was attended by others. Do you need a video to prove that Lincoln said "Four score and seven years ago"?
I've left a polite message with a newswoman in attendance, pleading with her to clear the matter up. If she denies that Michelle said such a thing, I will of course publish what she says, even if doing so means a crow-and-hat dinner for yours truly. So far, no response. That fact alone may be telling.
Think about it: If Michelle did not use an incendiary term, then those in attendance (including war hero Shoshana Johnson) would be very quick to clear her name. Right?
But...they have said nothing. The silence is mysterious. Remember the lesson of the Swiftboat debacle: Always respond quickly.
My mind keeps flashing back to the Obama rep with whom I spoke. Before he would comment, he spent a minute talking to his boss, asking for direction on what to say to me. Then I was told that the campaign refuses to address the issue until a video surfaces.
Why?
Why can't Michelle simply state "I have never used the word 'Whitey' to denigrate white people"? After all, this story is being covered around the world. Why the silence?
By the way -- don't presume (as many do) that "lots of people" would have purchased the tape if it was once offered for sale. I can easily see how a video of that sort might have had very few takers -- except, perhaps, for those featured in the video. For most people, even those intensely interested in the African American community, online news coverage would have sufficed. The big news at that confrence was made by Jesse Jackson and Bill Cosby -- who would have been on another tape.
Others have tried to debunk the story by pointing out that Michelle was not a "panelist" but a "featured speaker." Cah-MON. Does that distinction strike you as terribly important?
The only way this is an Obama-buster video is if the DVD shows Michelle ranting about "whitey." Which I am inclined to doubt. According to your post, Kerry and Bill Clinton were at the conference, and it just doesn't fit that Michelle would go off on a racist rant like that at such a high profile event. But bring on the tape.
Give it up, gary. Your guy is doomed. We're talking about a sea of red across the map of the USA if he runs.
If you had bothered to click on the link, you would have seen what I'm tlaking about. The women's conference was held separately, in typically sexist NOI fashion. The ladies were infuriated by the fact that Clinton has spoken, and Michelle -- taken up by the spirit of inchoate Clinton-hate -- blamed him for all of Africa's ills. The audience fed her some love, and she kept going on and on.
You Obots are pathetic. PATHETIC. Your irrational hatred of all things Clintonian has led you -- and the Democratic party -- into ruin.
What did I say? The day will come when all will agree that Barack Obama was the worst thing ever to hit the Democratic Party. He will not win in November, and he will lose his seat -- FOREVER -- in 2010.
If you had bothered to click on the link, you would have seen what I'm tlaking about. The women's conference was held separately, in typically sexist NOI fashion. The ladies were infuriated by the fact that Clinton has spoken, and Michelle -- taken up by the spirit of inchoate Clinton-hate -- blamed him for all of Africa's ills. The audience fed her some love, and she kept going on and on.
You Obots are pathetic. PATHETIC. Your irrational hatred of all things Clintonian has led you -- and the Democratic party -- into ruin.
What did I say? The day will come when all will agree that Barack Obama was the worst thing ever to hit the Democratic Party. He will not win in November, and he will lose his seat -- FOREVER -- in 2010.
There has got to be quite a few DVD copies in circulation, and doesn't Fox News have a bunch of DVDs from the church as well? It would appear that the Obamas are busted; it is just a matter of when, not if.
Hey Joe, whaddya know - you were right about the non-concession.
That said, I am a cautious bitterender about this video – I’ll believe it when I see it.
Meanwhile, the sexism of the MSM never ceases to amaze. One has the right to criticize Hill’s non-concession speech – but check out this bit of love from The Guardian:
“it's all about Hillary Clinton, who delivered the most abrasive, self-absorbed, selfish, delusional, emasculating and extortionate political speech I've heard in a long time. And I've left out some adjectives, just to be polite.”
Abrasive? Emasculating? What’s all that about? He’s left out some adjectives? You betcher ass he has – it’s the ones he added that I call sexist and misogynist.
Hill has lost a bitter defeat to a lesser foe, who got a pass due to the romantic delusions of the press. She’s entitled to lick her wounds and concede at her own time. If she’s lost, she’s lost.
No one would ever say this about a man and get away with it, much less be considered a progressive leftist.
Tomasky consciously used those words.
That said, I am a cautious bitterender about this video – I’ll believe it when I see it.
Meanwhile, the sexism of the MSM never ceases to amaze. One has the right to criticize Hill’s non-concession speech – but check out this bit of love from The Guardian:
“it's all about Hillary Clinton, who delivered the most abrasive, self-absorbed, selfish, delusional, emasculating and extortionate political speech I've heard in a long time. And I've left out some adjectives, just to be polite.”
Abrasive? Emasculating? What’s all that about? He’s left out some adjectives? You betcher ass he has – it’s the ones he added that I call sexist and misogynist.
Hill has lost a bitter defeat to a lesser foe, who got a pass due to the romantic delusions of the press. She’s entitled to lick her wounds and concede at her own time. If she’s lost, she’s lost.
No one would ever say this about a man and get away with it, much less be considered a progressive leftist.
Tomasky consciously used those words.
I now think more than one camera might have been running that day. The event was co-chaired by an ABC Newswoman. I've put in a call. We will soon see.
Incidentally, for those of you wondering how HillBuzz could have a description without actually seeing the video -- well, the comment above suggests one possibility.
It looks like it's real?
"In his latest, Johnson gives a visual description:
It features Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan."
Bzzzzzt. Wrong answer Larry.
So the 1 solid gold fact you know for certain is that Larry's sources haven't talked to someone who has seen it, or if they have, they're lying about it.
This is a copy/paste from your front page BTW.
-- Morty
"In his latest, Johnson gives a visual description:
It features Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan."
Bzzzzzt. Wrong answer Larry.
So the 1 solid gold fact you know for certain is that Larry's sources haven't talked to someone who has seen it, or if they have, they're lying about it.
This is a copy/paste from your front page BTW.
-- Morty
If the Obama campaign responds publically then it's a story. Right now the lead news story is Obama sews up the nomination. Obama has not responded to the Larry Sinclair story either.
Since the claim is that there is a tape of Michelle ranting about "whitey" the best evidence would be the tape. Sure an eyewitness account would be evidence but you don't have that either. Supposedly this tape was offered for sale, and could be downloaded from the website, yet only the RNC has a copy. Two local ABC reporters were there at this luncheon, yet there is no account of Michelle even speaking.
Not that I object to your passing on unsubstantiated rumors. Been there, done that.
Since the claim is that there is a tape of Michelle ranting about "whitey" the best evidence would be the tape. Sure an eyewitness account would be evidence but you don't have that either. Supposedly this tape was offered for sale, and could be downloaded from the website, yet only the RNC has a copy. Two local ABC reporters were there at this luncheon, yet there is no account of Michelle even speaking.
Not that I object to your passing on unsubstantiated rumors. Been there, done that.
One of your sources now says the published schedule does not show that Michelle was a speaker at that event.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTE2ODlmYmEyNmE1NDQ0YTViMGY1ZTMxY2U0YmM3ZTM=
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTE2ODlmYmEyNmE1NDQ0YTViMGY1ZTMxY2U0YmM3ZTM=
Morty, seems to me that Johnson gains credibility from recent revelations. I can easily see how he might have been told that Michelle shared the tape with "Farrakhan," missing the important qualifier that this was MRS. Farrakhan. The fact that Michelle did speak at such an event with Farrakhan's wife was something I could not have predicted.
But if you doubt -- why don't you call the eyewitness listed above? I would love to have the matter resolved one way or the other.
But if you doubt -- why don't you call the eyewitness listed above? I would love to have the matter resolved one way or the other.
Scotty, you're crazy. She is listed as a "special guest." Do you honestly think this is an important distinction?
Most of the other ladies present were either "of a certain age" (which means they talk slowly; old people usually do) or were unprofessional speakers, such as Shoshanna Johnson. I'm sure they were happy to let Michelle fire up the crowd.
Most of the other ladies present were either "of a certain age" (which means they talk slowly; old people usually do) or were unprofessional speakers, such as Shoshanna Johnson. I'm sure they were happy to let Michelle fire up the crowd.
By the way, gary -- why don't YOU call Karen Jordan? If she denies the report, I will be overjoyed to have the matter settled, even if I must eat my hat.
If she refuses to return ALL calls -- if she refuses to comment on the matter --
That, in itself, is it. Game, set, match.
If she refuses to return ALL calls -- if she refuses to comment on the matter --
That, in itself, is it. Game, set, match.
Joey,
How does reporting to you a statement from one of your sources make me "crazy"? It's simple. Your source says the published schedule does not show that Michelle spoke. Maybe she did but it is not indicated. You are always accusing people of not reading correctly. How about you?
"One of your sources now says the published schedule does not show that Michelle was a speaker at that event."
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTE2ODlmYmEyNmE1NDQ0YTViMGY1ZTMxY2U0YmM3ZTM=
How does reporting to you a statement from one of your sources make me "crazy"? It's simple. Your source says the published schedule does not show that Michelle spoke. Maybe she did but it is not indicated. You are always accusing people of not reading correctly. How about you?
"One of your sources now says the published schedule does not show that Michelle was a speaker at that event."
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTE2ODlmYmEyNmE1NDQ0YTViMGY1ZTMxY2U0YmM3ZTM=
Scott, listen to yourself. I've heard of hair splitting before, but I never before have encountered so deesperate an example of it.
What possible motive could Karen Jordan and all others present have for refusal to comment? The only one I can think of: They don't want to scuttle Barack Obama's chances.
Michelle Obama is a very "angry" black woman. It comes out of her pores...the more tense she gets the more her jaws juts (bad case of TMJ, I'd say!).
And her writings (her thesis) indicate what she believes. Watch her in NC and SC viedos and see how she panders while slipping into a role using words like "folks" and "people are just mean". To whom, Michelle? You've done pretty good for yourself!
More importantly, the report indicates that she is ranting at Bill Clinton (better if it had been Bush!) and she picks up speed when egged on by the audience...do you think for one minute the audience she was speaking on front of wouldn't be on their feet, yelling and encouraging her to "bring it on". Hey...my bet is she did...and now she, like Bush, must pay that price.
Post a Comment
<< Home
And her writings (her thesis) indicate what she believes. Watch her in NC and SC viedos and see how she panders while slipping into a role using words like "folks" and "people are just mean". To whom, Michelle? You've done pretty good for yourself!
More importantly, the report indicates that she is ranting at Bill Clinton (better if it had been Bush!) and she picks up speed when egged on by the audience...do you think for one minute the audience she was speaking on front of wouldn't be on their feet, yelling and encouraging her to "bring it on". Hey...my bet is she did...and now she, like Bush, must pay that price.
