There is a rumor bopping around on the blogs that the GOP is holding a tape of Michelle Obama “railing against whitey” at Jeremiah Wright’s United Church of Christ. The story is that they are holding it for the fall should Obama be the nominee.
Update: This story is being generated by a very pro-Clinton partisan who claims substantiation but has no names. This is a bogus rumor started with two objects in mind.
1) Bring traffic to his blog (I’m not telling you)
2) Get a whisper campaign going that will hurt Obama.
If this tape exists, it will be out soon. But don’t hold your breath.
Update 2 (June 2): More details are emerging from the rumor mill about the alleged “whitey” tape. Apparently, the tape depicts a forum at the Trinity United Church featuring Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan’s wife. There is talk that the man who started the rumor (I’m not telling you) will release the tape tomorrow at 9:00 a.m., and that, in any case, it will be out soon. Again, don’t hold your breath. If there is a tape, it won’t be as incendiary as Republicans want it to be. Michelle Obama did not utter the word whitey, I promise. This is a whisper campaign to scare voters and superdelegates.
Update 3 (June 9): Last update. There is no tape. The blogger, whose name is Larry Johnson, was making a last ditch effort to salvage the Clinton campaign. He’s lost all credibility. This tape does not exist.
Nah, Nope, Not Quite 
This is scary.
However, check out Obama’s close, longtime ties to Chicago and Illinois
crime and corruption. I just posted an article about Obama, Dan Shomon,
Robert Blackwell and associates (long list). This chicanery was barely reported
and definite understated.
This was floated by a Hillary supporter, Larry Johnson. I posted it yesterday and comments from Obama supporters were railing against Republican smear tactics, but it was a Dem. http://patriotroom.com/?p=352
I just laugh out loud every time I read some leftist loon crying in their beer about their candidate being “smeared”. Hey, we all know that if Cindy McCain was caught on videotape railing about how she “can’t stand niggers”, Howard Dean and the Democrats would NEVER stoop so low as to use it for political advantage, right?
Please.
Maybe one day the Democrats will learn to tell the “moonbat” left wing of their party to piss off and will nominate a moderate from the south instead of these elitist northern liberals to which they’re so addicted. (Clinton? LBJ? Carter? Anyone see a pattern here?) Maybe then they might actually win a presidential election.
The Democrats will lose again in the Fall for one simple reason: Americans, on the whole, don’t like whiners and don’t respect wimps. They respect strength. John McCain has it in spades. Barack Obama is an empty suit.
When asked her opinion of Hillary’s hubby, Michelle Obama hissed: “I want to rip Bill Clinton’s eyes out!” as she clawed the air with her fingernails. Michelle seems to be running not only for First Lady but also First Skeezer.
Danram said:”Maybe one day the Democrats will learn to tell the “moonbat” left wing of their party to piss off and will nominate a moderate from the south instead of these elitist northern liberals to which they’re so addicted. (Clinton? LBJ? Carter? Anyone see a pattern here?) Maybe then they might actually win a presidential election.”
======
LBJ, Carter and Clinton are “elitist northern liberals”?
I truly think you need a geography lesson if you think Texas, Georgia and Arkansas are in the North.
Obviously the reference to LBJ, Carter and Clinton was meant to point out the pattern of NON elitist northern liberals who have won. And, yes, that is a distinctive pattern. Of course, there are years in which a certain party would almost assuredly lose, regardless of the kind of candidate put forth. 1984 is a good example for instance – peace and relative prosperity after the four years of Carter – no one was going to beat Reagan. However, I have no doubt that Hart (really a bit more midwest/western than “northern” would have fared better than the ultra-liberal Mondale. 1988 could have been a competitive year, but the Democrats insisted on another northern liberal, and got their clocks cleaned.
I must admist, however, that this year, and this candidate (Obama) are a little different. After eight disastrous years of a shickingly pathetic Bush presidency (and I am a Republican who will be voting for McCain), the democrats should win handily. And, Obama has taken some very principled/statesmanlike stands (no temporary gas tax repeal) over the pandering of Clinton (gas tax repeal). People are hungry for a breath of fresh air. Quite frankly, the whole “Bush/Clinton/Bush” thing is getting old – and younger voters are tired of watching the 60’s generation continue to bicker about Vietnam-era gripes. New voters (whom we kept hearing were going ot show out in droves – Bradley in 2000, and Dean in 2004 – and it never happened) finally ARE showing up. Absent something like the romored Michelle Obama rant on video – which seems highly unlikely, given that Clinton would have paid VERY good money for it – Obama will be tough to beat. So, while I generally agree that the Democrats lose when they go with elitist Northerners, this may well be a 1984-type year, where the race is essentially sewn up for the Democrats, absent a major blunder.
Sorry for my type-o’s – typed that out fast. (-:
aw, you people are all fraidy cats! Drink some acid. LOL!
Dumbasses