Posted on 06/09/2008 4:18:30 PM PDT by Winged Hussar
it says at the bottom of the page “paid for by Barack Obama”.
That ought to go over big with the Hillry crew
Already pulled from the gutless puke’s website.
Does that distortion of the presidential symbol still appear on Obama’s web site during the download. That was really weird.
“when is the msm going to admit to this incredible scandal.”
When hell freezes over.
Have you seen the symbol on the web page, before it downloads? It’s still there, but it doesn’t last long enough to verify that it is the same one that was posted before. It goes by so fast that you can’t really tell if that is an eagle taking flight, or a turkey vulture. The original symbol had a vulture in place of the eagle, about to take flight, on a shield with the Obama symbol and a flag with arrows going through it at the bottom. Take a look. You have to start at barackobama.com, though. Don’t go to any variations of the page.
If the web site loads too quickly, you won’t see it. You have to slow it down by reloading.
Get a life. FR also has it’s share of sicko posts that get pulled as soon as the mods are alerted to them. Doesn’t mean that the sicko posts are some sort of hidden truth about what most FReepers and JimRob believe. Some of it is actually posted by lefty trolls trying to embarrass FR, and of course they like to save their handiwork and circulate it.
It’s the stuff that STAYS up, or that was clearly put on a site controlled by the Obama campaign with the approval of senior campaign staff, that we should focus on.
“It’s the stuff that STAYS up...”
Tony Wicher’s “Jewish Lobby” stuff was up for more than a year, and it was taken down only after Free Republic and other blogs began to talk about it.
I am well aware that trolls may post stuff to make Obama look bad, but a lot of this stuff is from well-established Obamamaniacs. Tony Wicher’s point score at my.barackobama.com put him in the top 5 percent if not higher.
troll
They probably never noticed it until before it started being the subject of internet chatter. Most forums aren’t closely moderated, and the Obama campaign, like any Presidential campaign, has a million things going on all the time and can’t monitor them all. Now that they’ve got the nomination sewed up, they’ll probably shift to closer monitoring of postings on websites they control. Just because some nutcases support Obama, doesn’t mean their beliefs reflect his. I’m sure McCain, and some of the unsuccessful Republican candidates each have some nutcase supporters too. It’s taking a risk to allow public postings on a campaign-controlled website, but the purpose isn’t to encourage an avalanche of people posting that they believe exactly what the candidate believes. That would be pretty pointless. If they go very light on moderation and let it be a free speech zone, then the postings should be read in that context.
“Hold your water, sweetie. I’ll get around to your petty concerns after I’ve liberated the White House from the white man. Fix me a waffle would ya?” - Obamassiah
You’ve been on FR less than a month and you’re calling someone who’s been here over 7 years a troll? The management apparently disagrees with you.
The B word is one of the kinder words I have for Hillary.
Repeat: the B word is one of the kinder words I have for Hillary.
For a minute, I couldn’t believe what I was reading either. Then I caught this at the bottom of the page:
“Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.”
...and I realized that some nasty supporter (or opponent) posted this.
I know how contentious it is to disagree here, but I think this really is situation where a rabid anti-hillary blogger is spouting his (or her) own beliefs. It wouldn’t be right if some of the more loathesome comments on conservative blogs (it’s disingenuous to say that it never happens) were attributed to McCain. Even if they end up on his own page, I’d imagine they wouldn’t stay there for long.
Wouldn’t it be better to attack on the real issues rather to use “gotcha” politics and false claims that he supports this kind of rhetoric? How could it possibly help him in November? You better believe that if Obama or an actual representative says these kinds of things, it’ll be fair game.
And when should either side give a whit about their opponenents supporters? When they have something of consequence to say. This is not one of those times.
Such is the nature of the internet.
I know how contentious it is to disagree here, but I think this really is situation where a rabid anti-hillary blogger is spouting his (or her) own beliefs. It wouldn’t be right if some of the more loathesome comments on conservative blogs (it’s disingenuous to say that it never happens) were attributed to McCain. Even if they end up on his own page, I’d imagine they wouldn’t stay there for long. Wouldn’t it be better to attack on the real issues rather to use “gotcha” politics and false claims that he supports this kind of rhetoric? How could it possibly help him in November? You better believe that if Obama or an actual representative says these kinds of things, it’ll be fair game.(1) Let's quote the hate speech all over the Internet and let Obama defend himself. His moderators HAVE deleted stuff about which people have complained, and I have a record of that. That, my friend, is called "exercise of editorial control." (2) Michael Savage just talked about this stuff. (3) Obama's people are so terrified that they are apparently watching Free Republic. I posted another link to some hate speech ("Judeofascist Semites" was the term used) and, within less than 12 hours, the page at my.barackobama.com was gone. Too bad for them that I downloaded the whole thing first, so it will be back to haunt them. (4) I am 100 percent aware of what is called an agent provacateur (the excuse MoveOn.org tried when it welcomed hate speech at its Action Forum). Some of the hatemongers at my.barackobama.com were there for more than a year, and their point counts were in the top five percent. They were not fly by night operatives who dropped in to smear Obama, and I have screen shots and downloaded pages with which to prove that. (5) Inappropriate comments about Ted Kennedy's serious illness were removed by this site's moderators, and threads were locked when it continued. Should we really believe that Obama's PAID moderators can't keep their site equally civil? I have considerable experience with this, having been one of the people who forced MoveOn.org to take its Action Forum down for good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.