What is Digg?122 Comments
- savingadvice, on 05/12/2008, -2/+94It's even worse: above the newspaper article in the top left video of Clinton in the back - it says "Simply raise prices and pocket the difference - Newsweek - Clinton aids admit it won't do much for you but it will help her politically" - someone is going to get fired.
- egoherodotus, on 05/12/2008, -4/+49She needs to go away.
- Homerr, on 05/12/2008, -3/+43Just imagine all the gems that would slip past in bills that she would sign if she was President!
- alex77, on 05/12/2008, -4/+42It states in the video (in the small print at the bottom) that the ad was "Approved by Hilary Clinton". Did she even watch this? What else would she approve of without even looking at? I'm not American, but it still scares me that a possible future US president doesn't bother checking important details.
Clearly there are problems when her own staff are sabotaging her election propaganda. - NoDrama, on 05/12/2008, -4/+37There could hardly be a more fundamental difference between the two candidates for the Democratic nomination: The Clintons are campaigning with the Rove tactical toolset, targeting fears of specific groups to shave a few points off their opponent in carefully selected spots, while the Obama vision of "strength through unity" dictates reliance on an appeal to selflessness and a reliance on the intelligence of the voters to consider the issues we must confront, like it or not.
http://obamesque.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/united-w ... - karmicwizard, on 05/12/2008, -1/+28It's up on Kos now too: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/11/22738/6747 ...
One response notes:
"I'm a video editor, and there is no question the video editors, for whatever purpose, tried to sabotage the ad. But that's not the main problem.
These ads, upon completion, are viewed and Oked by numerous most senior of her staff, and likely including Hillary herself. It's incomprehensible these 2 huge materialistic errors would slip their eye. We're not talking a ***** youtube preview here. The ad was previewed and watched at HD resolution on a big widescreen monitor....
Unbelievable" - Laminarcissus, on 05/12/2008, -2/+26From http://tinyurl.com/4coc4g
Marc Andreesen, the guy who started Netscape, recounts a 90 minute meeting he had with Obama shortly before he started running for President:
"We asked him directly, how concerned should we be that you haven't had meaningful experience as an executive -- as a manager and leader of people?"
"He said, watch how I run my campaign -- you'll see my leadership skills in action."
I think we're really seeing that difference in every area of the campaign. It's like Babe Ruth calling his home run. - 666dorado, on 05/12/2008, -0/+25"Did she even watch this? What else would she approve of without even looking at?"
umm, how about authorizing the iraq war without reading the full NIE report?? - jlee2081, on 05/12/2008, -1/+27This was the first I've heard of "Troopergate" and I'm having a hard time believing it. What self respecting man would arrange a hookup with Paula Jones? refresher pic - http://tinyurl.com/5u2m58
- trogdorBURN, on 05/12/2008, -10/+35Why the hell is it called "Troopergate"? Retarded trend adding "-gate" onto the end of any scandal. Watergate was called that because THE NAME OF THE HOTEL WAS THE WATERGATE.
- hayzeus, on 05/12/2008, -2/+23Amusingly, the original video is still up. Sloppy, sloppy.
- argaen21, on 05/12/2008, -3/+24This is just classic. Props to the guy working in video editing who is pissed off and wants change.
- GangsterCompute, on 05/12/2008, -0/+13God. Need a unicorn chaser after that one.
http://boingboing.net/images/Unicorn-and-Foal-Prin ... - wild, on 05/12/2008, -0/+11Agreed. There had to be an intentional decision to put those in there.
That Hillary would allow it to pass speaks volumes about her (or her representatives) attention to detail. - wynja, on 05/12/2008, -3/+13Does it really surprise anyone that she's completely making this ***** up anymore?
- sipofsoma, on 05/12/2008, -1/+12The article in this ad was written about a different "troopergate":
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2007/12/1 ...
still funny though - CicurateGroup, on 05/12/2008, -2/+13That is awesome!!! Someone has to pick this up in the Media.
- aliengoods, on 05/12/2008, -0/+9Right now I think the Clinton campaign is too busy looking for book deals or new jobs to be concerned with the minor details.
- MadMax3000, on 05/12/2008, -3/+11HAHAHAH HILLARYous!
- unmarked, on 05/12/2008, -0/+8Actually, if you read it a little more, you'll see it refers to Troopergate II, Spitzer Strikes Back. :) In the last column, it references Mr. Nocenti, who appears to be tied to NY's former Governor Spitzer. Still funny that they managed to remind everyone of their own Troopergate by bringing up someone else's Troopergate!
- Laminarcissus, on 05/12/2008, -0/+8And especially funny that the ad is titled "What's Happened"
- reynolds3g, on 05/13/2008, -0/+7this is pure gold. its tough to make me laugh loudly, but this did it. The Clintons will go to any length. But it makes sense, her "base" is white men who didn't finish college so they probably can't read anyway.
- sathias, on 05/13/2008, -0/+7Indeed, by the naming standard that arose from Watergate, it should have actually been called Watergategate.
- makenshin, on 05/12/2008, -0/+8Verified on both counts and wow. I mean the ad itself is totally misleading, but to have the background images say that Hillary is wrong. I cant believe they let this through. Did they really have no better stock images or video to use? Have been anti-Hillary (though not bill until recently) for many years, but this just makes me like it more. Can someone save/link to before they take it down. I have to save this in my scrapbook or something.
- queotic, on 05/13/2008, -0/+6I was 12 years old. Now that I'm old enough to understand the intricacies and nuances of politics, I'm rejecting the Clinton's style of politics.
- abelg99, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6I tried commenting on her YouTube Video with the link mentioned above and also this excerpt from Time:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1 ...
"The gas-tax holiday was a scam. It had been tried at various times — Barack Obama had voted for a local version in the Illinois legislature — and prices never came down. The oil companies and gas-station owners simply pocketed the difference. Clinton's "responsible" version of the plan was also a scam. She wanted to pay for it with a "windfall profits" tax on the oil companies, but she had earlier, and more responsibly, called for the elimination of tax breaks for those same companies. If you eliminate the tax breaks, you effectively eliminate the windfall profits. There would be nothing to tax. In any case, the "holiday" had next to no chance of passing Congress. Her sell was, well, shameless pandering."
Don't think they'll post it. Last text response on that video was 6 days ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF48jPeZDsQ - 47f0, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6True, but there's more than signing bills in that office - such as skimming over intelligence reports, skipping over briefing papers... The possibilities for fun are endless.
- frankingeneral, on 05/13/2008, -0/+6Umm how about the PATRIOT ACT, which, once it came under fire, suddenly every democrat had "didn't have the chance to read it." Yeah, Hillary was a part of that.
- queotic, on 05/13/2008, -0/+7I very much doubt if someone as calculating & intelligent as Clinton wouldn't read the NIE report. Saying that she wasn't aware of the report's contents was a convenient political excuse. She's a weathervane of the political winds and goes with whatever is popular.
- makenshin, on 05/13/2008, -0/+5I agree with you on it adding context, but putting that particular scene from Obama's ad with those words in the background of her own video was probably a poor choice (at the least for not denying it within the ad).
- AmnioticEntity, on 05/12/2008, -1/+7guilt by association tactic.
- makenshin, on 05/13/2008, -0/+5 A little late, but noticed the High Resolution download link on Hillary's site, saving now. Going to show this to all my friends, especially the former Hillary supporters, so they know what they got themselves out of.
- aliengoods, on 05/13/2008, -1/+6Dugg up for objective use of facts.
- MisterChirish, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6Um - at what point does this cross the line of legality? I'm not a lawyer, but isn't fabricating headlines and displaying them in this fashion a form of libel?
Oh - no wait. Forget I mentioned that. If I am to understand things correctly, evidence has a way of "disappearing" whenever Hillary and Bill get involved in a legal battle.
I'm waiting until they manage to hide the DNC documents she signed in September that agreed not to count the Michigan and Florida primaries. - alexanderdietz, on 05/13/2008, -0/+7Two things:
1. The blogger's comment that "They couldn't actually find a newspaper clipping that was titled what they wanted ("Obama Attacks Clinton gas tax plan"), so they made one up" is wrong. There's an AP article with that headline: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080503/ap_on_el_pr/de ...
2. Including the video that says "Simply raise prices and pocket the difference - Newsweek - Clinton aids admit it won't do much for you but it will help her politically" isn't an oversight or a sabotage. This is a response ad to this Obama spot that includes those quotes: http://youtube.com/watch?v=bBWKYgHuWh4
The ad wouldn't make sense without it.
That said, the Troopergate thing is a valid point. - anubis2night, on 05/12/2008, -2/+6You could tell right away that this was a quick hack photoshop job done by the clinton camp. The article is fuzzy but the title is sharp and clear? Good catch. And yes I went back and froze the ad on the clinton site then read the article a bit. Definitely shows how her camp works: dysfunctionally, and also illegally
- karmicwizard, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5Ben Smith at politico has also picked up this story (incorrectly giving credit to the Kos entry here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/11/22738/6747 ... ). Ben's article is here: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Sublim ...
- Plantagenet, on 05/12/2008, -2/+7What stupid thing will Hillary do next??
How about an ad showing her being endorsed by Monica Lewinsky? - jefuchs, on 05/12/2008, -1/+6The YouTube comments are all written by Hillary cheerleaders. They moderate comments and only allow the ones that make them look good.
- greenbowles, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4awesome, and good catch!!!
- blackinthmiddle, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4After seeing this, my wife thought the same thing you did. Her people seem to actually be sabotaging her. Of all the random ads to grab, they grab Troopergate? Way to much of a coincidence!
- RohanXI, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4They should have just used Lorem Ipsum....
- dubspyracer, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4After reading this headline, the first thing I decided to do was digg up the first person who mentioned the idiocy of this new naming trend
- johnsiepierski, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4Even the ad firm that Hillary hired is filled Obama supporters.
- queotic, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3Olbermann is the only one I can see talking about this.
- quetzzz, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4Yes, and the interesting thing is they took the time to change Spitzer's name to something that looks like 'Withzer.'
- Lionhart, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3She doesn't pay for nor pump her own gas, the secret service does.
- bjornski, on 05/13/2008, -1/+5Don't leave out LGF or FreeRepublic. They're even more rabid about it.
- ChunkyGork, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate
I don't understand your comment - twiztidsinz, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3rofl
-
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 