Posted on 09/21/2008 5:56:53 PM PDT by tsmith130
From Ace's site:
Probably at about midnight or just before.
It's Rusty's story. It'll be posted later. Midnight ET or maybe a bit after.
The basics? Axelrod's astroturfing. An attempt to get a blatantly dishonest anti-Palin ad to go "viral" on YouTube. Gross deception in pumping out fake "amateur grassroots" ads which are really cooked up by a big PR firm strongly connected to David Axelrod and Obama's officially-acknowledged ads. And likely bright-line violations of electioneering laws, which require those putting out "electioneering communications" to disclose the true creator and sponsor of such ads.
Oh, Yeah: I forgot to say:
IMPACTING...
That was posted in #12...but thanks for screaming!
He’s the blogger at mypetjawa who is working on the story.
If the MSM doesn’t report it, is it still a big scoop?
What are we supposed to see here?
From what I can see, there’s “Big News” coming, but no allusion to what it is, other than some sort of video.
I read it. Is this supposed to HURT the democrats?
Axelrod, Obama’s Campaign Manager, is colluding with an advertising firm to smear Sarah Palin via Youtube and and attempting to make it look some “average joe” out in America is doing it.
Expect the lies about book banning and no outlawing Abortions to be featured, such ads will no doubt be picked up by M(essiah)NBC and the other usual suspects.
Why are we so slow on the uptake on these things? Why must we always play catch up?
me either...if you get a translation please alert me...TIA...
It is a “heads up” on these things, there is a collusion going on with the Dems and some smear merchants.
I thought we were the smart ones?
Maybe I am looking too much into this but wouldn’t it have been better to break the story AFTER they released the ads??
That way it would get media play from the MSM and THEN the story would break.
If you break the story now, they can just not run the ads.
Here’s another update: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/273930.php
Correction: The latest is that the law does not seem to require disclaimers naming the producers/sponsors of an internet ad if it was placed for free and not for fee. As it seems to have just been placed on YouTube in the normal course of things (that is, people from the firm just uploading it without paying YouTube), it doesn’t look like this is outright illegal.
As far as that part goes, at least.
Thanks Roscoe. There still might be some ‘there’ there, just not as bad as originally thought.
I must be a stone cold idiot. (See post 6.)
Eh, I don’t get it. The secret’s out now I guess.
Thanks.
The DemocRATS seem to have complete immunity to all wrong doing. I doubt this will hurt them.
I love Ace Of Spades!
Love ya man!
I’ve never seen the media soo desperate, they will throw anything and the kitchen sink at Governor Palin.
I daren’t put on CNN or M(essiah)NBC right now, my head would explode, you just know that they will pick up those videos ASAP.
FWIW ping.
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.