What is Digg?379 Comments
- Maddoktor2, on 03/01/2009, -28/+130Of course it was coordinated:
Domain Name: CHICAGOTEAPARTY.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS47.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS48.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 03-aug-2008
Creation Date: 03-aug-2008
Expiration Date: 03-aug-2009
This is the official site.
Note the creation date of 3 months prior to the election.
This is known as a "contingency plan".
Levying formal charges of sedition against all involved would not be inappropriate in this case. - novenator, on 03/01/2009, -47/+133There is zero doubt the 'rant' was well scripted and rehearsed, down to the fake spontaneity by people around him (who sccording to him represent 'a pretty good cross section of america, the silent majority'). As if America is comprised of uptight ultra-conservative greed mongers with no social life. Santelli the revolutionary for senator? Don't make me laugh, this guy is a joke and what is claimed to be the tea party movement is nothing more than fake grassroots movement funded by the right wing (ie. astroturfing). I feel sorry for anyone who has been duped by this whole piece of theater.
- freedomjoe, on 03/01/2009, -24/+80borrowed research from DU poster drm604
"It was about a website called angryrenter.com which is basically astroturf claiming to represent a grassroots renters' movement against any kind of government mortgage bailout. If you look at the site now, it mentions Obama, but of course it didn't when I wrote about it back in May. I'm not sure exactly when angryrenter.com went online but the domain was registered back in early March '08. If angryrenter is connected in some way with Chicagoteaparty.com and Santelli then this thing goes back even earlier the GinaMaria suggested.
And I think I can show that it is definitely connected. http://http://whois.domaintools.com/angryrenter.co ... shows that the IP address for angryrenter is 67.192.105.50. http://whois.domaintools.com/67.192.105.50 shows the following for 67.192.105.50.
OrgName: Rackspace.com, Ltd.
OrgID: RSPC
Address: 9725 Datapoint Drive
Address: Suite 100
City: San Antonio
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 78229
Country: US
http://whois.domaintools.com/chicagoteaparty.com shows that chicagoteaparty.com is located at 72.32.231.8. http://whois.domaintools.com/72.32.231.8 shows the following info for 72.32.231.8.
OrgName: Rackspace.com, Ltd.
OrgID: RSPC
Address: 9725 Datapoint Drive
Address: Suite 100
City: San Antonio
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 78229
Country: US
Now this by itself could be written off as a coincidence - they both just happened to use the same hosting service for their websites. But it's just one piece of the puzzle. Here's another piece - at the bottom of the front page of angryrenter.com there is a link to freedomworks.org, and the whois info for angryrenter.com shows this:
Registrant:
FreedomWorks
601 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Suite 700 North Bldg
Washington, District of Columbia 20004
United States
Now, if you go to http://freedomWorks.org, what do you see? A picture of an angry Rick Santelli superimposed over an old drawing of the original Boston Tea Party, and the words "Are you with Rick? We are." and the lead article is about Friday's DC Tea Party.
So, Freedom Works started a website protesting Mortgage bailouts sometime between March 2 (the date angryrenter.com was registered) and May 10 (the date I wrote about it) and now they're jumping on the Rick Santelli Chicago tea party bandwagon.
But here's the kicker, if you check out the IP address for freedomworks.org you'll find that it is 98.129.129.184. And if you check out the whois info for that IP you will once again see:
OrgName: Rackspace.com, Ltd.
OrgID: RSPC
Address: 9725 Datapoint Drive
Address: Suite 100
City: San Antonio
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 78229
Country: US
Now read the sourcewatch page for Freedom Works - http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=FreedomWork ... - and then check out their predecessor, Citizens for a Sound Economy - http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citizens_fo ... .
CSE is often described as a "consumer group," but according to internal documents leaked to the Washington Post, 85 percent of its 1998 funding came from major corporations. "The 'citizens' in question companies like Amoco, Bell Atlantic, Citibank, General Electric and General Motors", Washington Babylon explains (p. 15). "During recent years, the CSE, headed by C. Boyden Gray, who acted as counsel to the president under George W. Bush, has opposed health care reform and a rise in the minimum wage, while championing corporate tax cuts, deregulation and a balanced budget."
Funding
The CSE - which is a 501(c)4 tax-exempt organisation - has a related funding arm, the Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation (CSEF) which is a 501(c)3 tax-exempt organisation. (See The U.S. tax code and non profits for further details). In its 2002 Internal Revenue Service return, the CSEF listed its total revenue as being $3.9 million. <15> CSEF budget details
According to the annual report filed by the Foundations the board members to the two entities are shared. (The 2002 return also notes three other organisations - the Taxpayer Action League, the Tax Foundation and Citizens for the Environment - are other related entities with the same board members. The Tax Foundation and Citizens for the Environment were, according to CSEF's IRS return, created during 1998).
According to internal documents leaked to the Washington Post, 85 percent of CSE’s 1998 revenues of CSE's $16.2 million came not from its 250,000 members, but from contributions of $250,000 and up from large corporations.
The then CSE President, Paul N. Beckner, rejected the notion that the organisation was a corporate megaphone. "We aren't a group for hire ... There's a bright line that defines our independence. There is only one position we can take on most issues: the one that means less government and lower taxes. We choose the issues we work on, and we decide how that money is expended." <16>
According to Media Transparency, between 1985 and 2002, CSEF received $16,928,712 in 108 separate grants from only twelve foundations:
* Castle Rock Foundation
* Earhart Foundation
* JM Foundation
* Koch Family Foundations (David H. Koch Foundation, Charles G. Koch Foundation, Claude R. Lambe Foundation)
* John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.
* Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
* Philip M. McKenna Foundation, Inc.
* Scaife Foundations (Scaife Family, Sarah Mellon Scaife, Carthage) <17>
In 2002, CSEF gained $920,000 in grants from three of these foundations, accounting for a little under one-quarter of the organisation's revenue. The Claude R. Lambe Foundation was the most generous contributing $700,000 for general operating costs while the Scaife Foundation donated $175,000 and the John M. Olin Foundation $45,000.
Other CSE funders (not included in above funding total) have included:
* Archer Daniels Midland
* DaimlerChrysler ($25,000)
* Enron
* General Electric
* Koch Industries
* F.M. Kirby Foundation
* Philip Morris (>$1 million)
* U.S. West ($1 million)
* ExxonMobil ($75,000)
* Exxon ($175,000)
* Hertz ($25,000)
* Microsoft ($380,000)
* U.S. Sugar Corp. ($280,000)" - GrandmaSheila, on 03/01/2009, -42/+89FTA
"The right wing moneychangers tried once again to control the message and lie to the American people to push their agenda that only hurts America. The right wing elite hated FDR because he turned on his own class of people and put the average American worker ahead of them. They were shocked that he would care about the state of our nation over the vested interests in a very small few. I did write that Rick's behavior was indicative of most talking heads that appear on the Wall Street shows because they are slaves to the very wealthy. These same people are terrified that Barack Obama may indeed reach America in the same way that FDR reached into the hearts of a depressed and hopeless American population that was beat down by the the depression back in 1929."
They're terrified we might make progress toward mopping up the economic destruction they created. - paintgrl, on 03/01/2009, -30/+71This really is class warfare, the 3% against the 97%. I would not get to comfortable in your thoughts that the rich 3% are to lame to succeed. Vote in local and state elections. Write letters to your local media and Cable news stations letting them know they are full of it. Boycott advertisers who are involved in trying to screw the 97%. It all adds up. Talk to people and let them know the truth of these charades put on by Koch and other GOP money machines.
- novenator, on 03/01/2009, -8/+49Maddoktor, wow, excellent research! I had no idea they registered the domain name in August 2008! Your post needs to be underlined.
- FlaG8r, on 03/01/2009, -9/+50I think I'll take the trade-off of dealing with liars like Santelli in order to maintain an independent press and media in general.
Put it this way, would you have been happy with the Bush Administration controlling all media? - Alheithinn, on 03/01/2009, -15/+45Again, same with Joe the Plumber, who was put where he was, to walk up to Obama and confront him while the media repeated the lie that Obama had approached Joe. This idiot was hand-picked by the Republicans to be a media darling, to be the "common man" they claim to represent.
- joeditto, on 03/01/2009, -23/+50Obama's plan: anyone who creates JOBS will receive TAX BREAKS
Surely we can all agree that the downward trend of the economy can largely be blamed on the policies of the Bush Administration and Limbaugh's wingnut ideology (TAX CUTS for the FILTHY RICH)(who don't create JOBS) and yet the Republicans continue to promote those ideologies..
Limbaugh & his filthy Rich friends,who have no motivation to create JOBS, will be paying more taxes (estimates are 4% increase)
For the record...Over the last 8 years....10% of the population,the Rich, received 800 BILLION dollars, which is roughly 90% of the WEALTH...in the mean time. 90% of the population, the WORKING Middle Class, received 41 BILLION....this is what Fox News calls FAIR & BALANCED.
Common sense will reveal WHY Limbaugh opposes Obama
Hmmmmm, lets see....Rush earns 30 MILLION p/y
Does anyone think Rush will be forced to make SACRIFICES, because of the increase?
Many working class have been struggling to make ends meet...it's doubtful Rush will have any problems to make ends meet.
Now if you add 2 + 2 together, it becomes clear as to why RUSH HOPES OBAMA FAILS
BTW, if any Americans earn LESS than $200,000 p/y for individuals or $250,000 jointly...you'll likely receive and enjoy TAXCUTS the FILTHY RICH have been enjoying under the Bush Admistration.
For those who were protesting at the TEA PARTY and shouted out.
"I'm mad as Hell & I'm not going to take it anymore"
What the Hell are you talking about? - jericho4119, on 03/01/2009, -33/+58Call me crazy, but I relish the inanity and the insanity that was expressed in the rant.
If these are our opponents, how hard can it be for us to achieve victory? - Batfishy, on 03/01/2009, -11/+36That they chose Joe only proves how out of touch they are.
- prodigitalson, on 03/01/2009, -9/+33Just because something is state sponsored doesnt necessarily mean it will be in line with administration. I mean the BBC, even if you beleive it has a pro liberal/Labor slant, is pretty critical of both sides when it comes down to it. Or look at PBS or NPR. These networks have some of the best in depth news reporting out of any of our tv or radio entities.
- kingofinternet, on 03/01/2009, -25/+48if this is true, santelli should be looking for a job.
- inactive, on 03/01/2009, -4/+27If only this could spend a week on the MSM, people really need to know how it is they're being manipulated.
- pintomp3, on 03/01/2009, -18/+37It was so bogus when it was all over the news anyway. Somehow a bunch of stock traders were supposed to represent the average American? Where were the calls of elitism when he called people who lost their homes "losers"? The number one reason for bankruptcy in America is because of medical expenses. I guess those stupid losers who got cancer should apologize to the real Americans who profited for years on the stock market.
- JaseFace, on 03/01/2009, -1/+20The issue of media in America (well, "media" isn't really fair, I'm mostly just referring to cable news I suppose; there are plenty of newspapers and magazines out there that really are fair to both sides, and the nightly newscasts are pretty non-alarmist) is a difficult one. The idea of an American BBC is both intriguing and off-putting. I instinctively don't like the idea of government-controlled media; however, it's obvious that regular cable news simply is not doing its job. It routinely and deliberately misinforms and unduly scares the public to drive up ratings. It's not really news at all, it's just unqualified blowhards rambling about their personal opinions. The only cable news channel that comes close to tolerability is CNN, but even that is quite biased and alarmist.
- inactive, on 03/01/2009, -19/+37I bet the Koch family would really hate the national spotlight being turned on them and their activities, I really hope this gets picked up. Everyone needs to know about this, because I have no doubt that Santelli managed to fool at least a few dittoheads.
- CaptOblivious, on 03/01/2009, -2/+20papajohn5656,
You didn't have the thought to do it.... - ousthouse, on 03/01/2009, -4/+20... because government run media would never broadcast propaganda?
- joeditto, on 03/01/2009, -6/+21EXCELLENT IDEA
- inactive, on 03/01/2009, -33/+48lol you people are tools, this is funnier than reading conspiracy theories. get your tinfoil hats out!
the sheer amount of CLASS JEALOUSY in this thread is enough to dismiss every bit of 'research'. know why that domain ChicagoTeaParty.com was registered in august? because it was going to be a Ron Paul rally! get your facts straight. - novenator, on 03/01/2009, -3/+18If there is one thing the republican party is good at, it is propagating false stories until they get commonly known, then quietly back away after the stories get debunked. By that time, everyone remembers it as truth, despite it being a lie.
Remember the whole story about the Obama inauguration costing 4x what Bush's did? That turned out to be BS
The mccain supporter who was mugged and sexually assaulted by a big, black Obama supporter? False.
etc. etc. etc. The tea bag movement is the same thing. - elpresidente408, on 03/01/2009, -7/+22Right, because a giant conspiracy would leave such a basic detail overlooked.
Found another conspiracy brewing below. Note the creation date is 3 days after Obama announces he's forming an exploratory committee.
It's very easy to manipulate past information to fit an argument as people often leave out any information that contradicts their original claim.
Domain Name: NEWYORKTEAPARTY.COM
Registrar: MONIKER ONLINE SERVICES, INC.
Whois Server: whois.moniker.com
Referral URL: http://www.moniker.com/whois.html
Name Server: NS1.400A.COM
Name Server: NS2.400A.COM
Name Server: NS3.400A.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 21-jan-2009
Creation Date: 20-jan-2008
Expiration Date: 20-jan-2010 - inactive, on 03/01/2009, -10/+24If all of this information was put into a slightly more user friendly format, with all of the pertinent information and links included, and sent to all of the major news networks, there is a small chance that it will make it on air.
Short of that, I would suggest doing the same but sending it to a more narrow group of people. Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, Bill Mahr, and Chris Matthews would be a good start. There would be more of a chance of them either presenting this, or researching it further in order to present it.
This is great work guys, it really exposes how the public can be so thoroughly manipulated at times.
In fact, why not send it to every single newspaper, magazine, website, or any other kind of news outlet and see who has the moxie to run with it. - jbhannah, on 03/02/2009, -3/+16The ignorance of people is astounding. "Joe" (that isn't even his name) was in the crowd and approached Obama to ask a question. The premises of the question were completely falsified—his plans to buy the company, the company's income, HIS income—yet he was instantly seized upon and catapulted into the limelight by the McCain campaign. Whether or not it can be proven that he was planted there by the campaign, it certainly was suspicious, and it doesn't change the fact that he lied about everything right down to his name to try to weasel a bad answer out of Obama. (Needless to say, he still failed.)
And then he goes on to say things like, "the media has no place covering wars," "the Army should be able to tell the media what it wants them to hear about war," "it used to be that Congressmen who spoke bad about the troops could be shot and nobody would mind." He's gone from "just put him away, McCain, you aren't helping yourself by forcing this down our throats" to my list of people I would like to greet with a steel-toed boot to the crotch. - Alheithinn, on 03/01/2009, -20/+32It's tough. I mean, the media is already slanted to the right and the Right has convinced half of America that there is really a liberal media elite. Plus they own their own network (FOX) and their own paper (Washington Post). Bush pretty much DID control the media during his presidency.
Personally, I'd like to see a network added, one controlled by the White House so they can put across their message however they want. We don't have to watch it, don't have to listen to it, but at least the President would be able to speak without being undermined by a media that is almost completely hostile to his message. - treehugger87, on 03/01/2009, -4/+16Pool boy, maid, personal chef, personal trainer, masseuse and driver aren't really the types of jobs we're thinking about.
- inactive, on 03/01/2009, -25/+37Brillant research, everyone!
I'm torn between amusement and pity at the digg-nuts who are falling for this and patting themselves on the back for their "free-thinking" and "independence". - fluxion, on 03/01/2009, -3/+153%, plus their unquestioning 37% working-class supporters who the 3% have somehow managed to convince that Obama is out to get them
- deserteagle2525, on 03/01/2009, -3/+15Two Words: Free speech.
- ThsGuyRightHere, on 03/01/2009, -2/+14Excellent rebuttal. Sure you could make a possibly valid point like suggesting that it could have been an opportunistic domain squatter. Much better to just be a smartass instead.
- graphictruth, on 03/02/2009, -1/+12Wealth - and feel free to check with Ron Paul on this matter - comes from the creation of real goods. Go to any production line in the world - you won't find any of the "top three percent" in any of those plants. Not on the line, not in the office, hell, probably not even in the same state.
But that is where the wealth comes from. And the last time that elemental economic fact was conveniently forgotten - well, the last time we got lucky and got FDR instead of Huey Long. But the Russians got the Bolshevicks and then Stalin.
And that's what happens when your entire way of life is based on ***** over as many people as hard as possible for as long as possible. They tend to resent it. It's bad management. And it tends to undermine the means of production, because, of course, it discounts the humanity and utility of the people that are essential to creating that wealth. So you get offshoring and slave labor seen as viable options for "enhancing shareholder value."
What also occurs is a widespread perception that the top three precent have a lot of stuff they did not earn honorably by participating honestly and fairly in the culture as a whole. The vast majority see no earthly reason why these peopel should be valued as productive members, since the contempt is obviously mutual.
So the only question remaining is how to go about establishing a more satisfactory state of affairs.
Considering how that usually works out - I think it would be extraordinarily prudent for everyone to examine the concept of "social conciousness." Or at least a little situational awareness. - TheSwashbuckler, on 03/01/2009, -1/+12I agree. This talk of charging him with sedition merely because he goes against Obama policy is nonsense.
However, that domain registration is absolute GOLD. - inactive, on 03/01/2009, -5/+16I've actually watched cnbc a couple days a week for the past couple years and pstroll is right. This is pretty much classic santelli.
- joand315, on 03/02/2009, -0/+10It's the same names over and over again. Scaife, Koch, US Sugar, Exxon.
These are people who would love to control the Republican party and will finally have their chance, as there are no repubs left to stand up to them. - Target91, on 03/01/2009, -3/+13NO NO NO!! Government run media is a bad idea. It would be too tempting to use it for propaganda purposes, it would whip conservatives into a fury and ready to shout communism, and even if it wasn't used for propaganda a large number of Americans think government = bad. So no one would trust it. Also running a large news organization isn't cheap.
- novenator, on 03/02/2009, -2/+12Moobs, not that it's any of your business, but full time blue collar. I'm very financially responsible to boot with zero debts. Thanks for the personal slander though, it really strengthens your arguments.
- graphictruth, on 03/02/2009, -2/+11Before you go with that talking point, you might want to look into the intellectual foundation of the NeoConservative Movement. It's a lot closer to Stalin than Obama is.
- AngelaQ, on 03/01/2009, -3/+12"Media manipulations" would be Rick Santellli pretending to be a reporter while putting on a series of media stunts, then claiming they were "news".
- novenator, on 03/02/2009, -0/+8FreedomJoe, I dugg you down so I could digg you up twice.
- inactive, on 03/02/2009, -1/+9Well people do actually agree with him. There is a lot of support for the stuff he said it just isn't as vocal as the anti-capitalist liberals. Plus all the liberals got pissy so the news keeps talking about it to work them up into a raging mob of tv-news watchers.
You are mistaken if you think santelli's opinion is just shared by a few rich people. Check out the rating and comments for his vid on youtube, undeniably positive. These aren't newspaper editors and talk show hosts though so their opinion is swept under the rug by those who disagree. - novenator, on 03/02/2009, -2/+10wow, where do I even start with you moobs? You honestly think 40% of Americans 'don't do *****'? You've never been poor have you? It's a full time job trying to make ends meet, clipping coupons, taking the bus, perpetually looking for a (better) job, etc. To stereotype poor people as lazy is simply ludicrous.
- nihilville, on 03/02/2009, -1/+9Bush's tax cuts went primarily to the rich, yet less jobs were created during his term than under any president since Eisnenhower. Time to get some new talking points.
- Mothrog, on 03/01/2009, -34/+42"Rick Santelli is a traitor to this country and he should be fired immediately along with all those that participated in this fraud."
I love how quickly "liberals" turn in to jack booted thugs when someone has an opinion that doesn't fall precisely in line with what they think. - WasabiBomb, on 03/02/2009, -1/+9Yes, papajohn. Typing in a whois search IS research. Is the fact that you could've easily done it, too, mean that it's not valid research?
- JenniferInMO, on 03/02/2009, -3/+11You two didn't read the article, did you? Santelli's a shill and this whole thing was not a grass roots movement in response to his rant it was preplanned. The people who believed it and showed up at one of the protests were being duped and used by the wealthy power brokers they thought they were fighting against!
This was a fraud on the people apparently organized by a group of billionaires in an attempt to undermine the government. - inactive, on 03/01/2009, -2/+10"The pit" of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange is not composed of rich elitist ultra-conservites or whatever, you're out of order... Check out the book "Out of the Pits" -- a lot of those folks on the floor are actually losing their jobs en masse because of automation and computers. If you look at the Wall Street trading floor you can see that it's already happened, it's basically just a room where reporters walk around now.
- novenator, on 03/01/2009, -1/+8classy response. Let me guess, you vote republican.
- jcrew77, on 03/02/2009, -4/+1140% of the people that don't pay anything? Are you including the 24.5% under the age of 18 and the 12.6% over 65?
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
Are you saying that less then 3% of the population are free loaders or are you only talking about the working age population?
Me, I had a conversation with an individual who said he thought it would be funny if all the rich people closed their factory doors (I was thinking he meant the few that hadn't already done so) and take a 6 month vacation. He felt that everyone would be begging for jobs when they got back. I disagree, if the market is really free and open and large corporations are no longer around to offer the products, I will step in with the space to do so. I will compete in a more balanced space and have improved chances of success. I owe the 7% nothing except maybe a boot to the head. Surely nothing more then a slave owed his "master". - Zomgondo, on 03/01/2009, -3/+10I also highly recommend challenging anyone who calls you a "statist", "libtard", whatever IRL to a fight. Seriously - these guys are the adult versions of the schoolyard bully, and they deserve a good punch in the mouth just as much. It's not "freedom of thought" or "a difference of opinion", it's some beta male (or beta female) brazenly trying to dominate and insult you and then trying to act like he's innocent and just "exercising my freedom" when you tell him to shut the ***** up.
There are valid differences of opinion, of course, and if someone is being reasonably and just enjoying a spirited debate, that's OK. But if they start hurling insults, ask them to step outside.
They won't... I've tried :) -
Show 51 - 100 of 389 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is