This video first appeared two weeks ago and was shown on NBC Nightly News today with an expert commentator telling everyone how this sort of thing is going to change all campaigns forever. It was NOT done by Obama. Noboody knows who did it. Nobody knows what to do about stuff like this. They even put the real Obama logo on the sledgehammer girl. Good stuff indeed. Welcome to the Internet Age.

As for who did it? My guess: Karl Rove. :) Maybe.

  1. Phloo says:

    Brilliant! I also think it does a good job of hammering Hillary without tarnishing her too much if she does get the nomination. This is how intraparty politics should be done.

  2. Jägermeister says:

    As for who did it? My guess: Karl Rove.

    My money is on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

  3. Misanthropic Scott says:

    This seems a bit harsh to me. Sorry Phloo, I disagree with you that this is not tarnishing Hillary. I think it not only tarnishes Hillary, but tarnishes Obama as well.

    If I were less cynical I might see it your way. However, since I am a cynical misanthrope, I see this as being the next attempt at a Nader-like tactic by the republican party.

    I don’t put anything past the campaign for the Democratic People’s Republic of the Christian States of America. I think they’ll do anything to divide and conquer, or simply rig the machines, or prevent people from getting to the booth in the first place.

    I think we need to ignore this type of thing and stay focused on the real goal, getting something approaching the appearance of a representative government. Barack and Hillary are two candidates I could vote for without feeling the need to wash my hands afterward. Let’s try not to tarnish either so badly that we get another W, or Worse.

  4. Marlow says:

    Sadly this was a dreadful report by Brian: “somebody really sunk some money into this” ??What? copying the Macintosh ’84 video and changing a couple of images? anybody got a mac?
    And the new NBC political analyst Chuck Todd “this is scary” (never heard of him) was totally clueless.

  5. Mr. Fusion says:

    Look for the Congress to enact a law forcing video sites to either publicize their posters or be responsible for content. They shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind anonymity. Remember, freedom of speech does not give on the freedom to slander.

    And I’m with Jag, this looks like something Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would do.

    And I’m pissed at this 15 second crap.

    I’m not a cowboy, this is my 5th try.

    make that 7th

  6. glenn says:


  7. doug says:

    #5. “They shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind anonymity.”

    I think our founding fathers would disagree, since they themselves published under all sorts of pseudonyms.

    Doug “Federalist Farmer” concurrs with the cowboy crap. JCD, WTF?

  8. Jägermeister — you win!!!

    #4 — You are totally right. Sunk money? Is this the level of expertise the networks give us?? What crap.
    #5 Uh, where exactly is the slander here? Do you even know what slander is?? Seems like the answer to that is NO you don’t.

  9. TJGeezer says:

    Agitprop. Classic. Mr. Fusion (5) might be right about congress but I think it would be an overreaction. Then again, NBC making a big deal out of it was an overreaction and these manufactured excitements do tend to spiral.

  10. V says:

    Imagine it: a world where political advertising became overwhelmed by blogs, personally developed ads, talk show podcasts, things made by everyone in such a large quantity that it overwhelmed the traditional media ads…

    That doesn’t sound so bad. It just means the news media has to do a better job with the facts and the issues, and stay out of the horse races and the circus.

  11. doug says:

    Actually, I call right-wing ‘black propaganda’ on this one. Do something inflammatory, attribute it to someone else to make them look bad.

    What’s the tell-tale? the ‘rainbow coalition’ color-scheme to the O at the end. Trying to link Obama to more ‘conventional’ black politicians, i.e. very liberal. Either that or to the ‘fag flag’ as the hillbilly contingent would call it.

    Note the O on the actual Obama site is a patriotic RWB:

    so yeah, that’s where this is coming from. still pretty clever, and just a taste of the Swift-boating that the Democratic nominee (whoever it will be) is going to face.

  12. lens says:

    I don’t see the big deal at all. 100 people a day could do stuff like this. In fact, it was wasn’t even dirty politics, it contained no lies, and the Hillary soundttrack didn’t even sound evil. If that’s the worst sound bite they could find on her, maybe she’d make a pretty good pres? I guess the scary thing is that nearly anyone else who would roll their own political spot would probably not be as polite as this. As this does is try to get you emotionally moved by Obama, or against Clinton. But really states no reason to do so.

  13. Mr. Fusion says:

    #8, Slander is the purposeful speaking of known untruths to tarnish another’s reputation. Libel is the printing of similar matter.

    Swift Boating is the current popular trend in slandering. It may also be called Rovian Politics.

    From past posts and your slant in #8, it would appear that you enjoy the slandering and lies that sleaze politics is all about. I don’t, simply because it obscures the real issues. Similar to Global Warming. Just question any part of the science, shoot you don’t need to add any substance, just question and suggest some of it is wrong.

    So tell us, do you understand the real dangers in allowing unhindered smearing, slandering, libeling, and general lies to continue? That got us into Iraq, what will continued crap get us into.

  14. Tom 2 says:

    This is ridiculous, I can’t believe the kind of crap the republican propaganda machine is popping out, this is obviously a ploy to pit two extremely versatile democratic candidates against each other. Fox News did the same thing with the Obama muslim school thing, and then saying it came out of the Hilary camp.

  15. Floyd says:

    Um–Mr. Obama has political credibility.

    This is a single data point, but my 85 year old father-in-law, who used to be very anti black people, told me the other day that Obama reminds him strongly of John Kennedy, and that he would vote for him if he has the chance.

    Personally, I’m still a backer of Bill Richardson, but Obama is a pretty impressive guy. The Apple Mac ad rehash is mostly just an amateur commercial, and I don’t put much more into it than that.

  16. Geoffrey Knobl says:

    According to, “E. Floyd Kvamme – who helped bring the original “1984” ad to Super Bowl viewers when he was vice president of sales and marketing for Apple Computers” is “now a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, key technology adviser to the Bush administration and a supporter of Republican presidential candidate Rudolph Giuliani.”

    Gee, he now works for Giuliani AND the Bush.

    Is this a bit too obvious? But is anybody really surprised if this ends up tarnishing Obama and Clinton? This is swiftboat-y to me, if I ever saw any swiftboat-y. And I think one of the guys who worked on that campaing is now an advisor for Giuliani too!

  17. TheGlobalWarmer says:

    So Fusion, it’s OK for Gore and James Hansen to exaggerate and outright lie every day, but here it’s not?

    I think this kind of thing is great. I think the ability to do this anonymously is a huge enabler of free speech. We may be immune to legal repercussions due to speech, but in this day and age, there are too many whackjobs that can find you because you said something they didn’t like. Anonymity is a necessity.

  18. Andy says:

    Funny, along with putting Obama’s logo on her shirt, they also gave her an iPod. Check it when she throws the hammer.

  19. TheGlobalWarmer says:

    There’s already a Barack 1984 video using the same commercial but putting Barack on the screen instead of Hillarius I think this is a good trend.

  20. Mr. Fusion says:

    If I believed Gore to be wildly lying every day then call him on it. He, however, is not hiding behind some anonymity so we don’t know who he is or is making his claims. If you note the attacks though, they have been against Gore. The attackers, such as yourself, don’t give any science or evidence to bolster your point, just attacks. From behind anonymous names.

    Can you imagine the next election where this type of electioneering is so common we don’t know what is true, what is exaggeration, or even what the issues are. We will be forced to follow the Republican campaign style and attack people instead of learning the issues. I understand the neo-cons, Libertarians, and right wing nuts advocating this, but not real Americans.


Bad Behavior has blocked 7728 access attempts in the last 7 days.