Home » Groups » Rockingham/Strafford DFA » Blog » SPOOF? I'd call it FRAUD...
Democracy for America group blog for Rockingham/Strafford DFA
SPOOF? I'd call it FRAUD!
Linked to groups: Blog For America, Rockingham/Strafford DFA
Linked to campaigns: Obama for America
There's a fraudulent email going around which at least one poster on the Barack Obama Community blog refers to as a spoof. Not hardly. When a communication misrepresents the source, as this one does, that's a fraud. I don't know whom Ms. Dowd is going to sue, but there's got to be some recourse against this:
‘It’s Over, Lady!’
Unity was spared the banality of unanimity.
Carmella Lewis, with her Hillary T-shirt and Hillary placard, came all the way from Denver to make sure there would be plenty of ambiguity, duality and ferocity in Unity.
Just as Hillary was testing out the unfamiliar familiarity “Barack and me” Friday and talking about “his grace and his grit,” Carmella began loudly booing and waving her sign.
“We want Hillary!” screamed the 57-year-old retired ad saleswoman and Clinton delegate.
“It’s over, lady!” yelled some Obama supporters a few yards away.
.....
being turned into THIS:
This poses as serious question about where campaign money for U.S. candidates should come from. I found it interesting.
This from the NY Times
>
>By MAUREEN DOWD
>
>Published: June 29, 2008
>
>OBAMA'S TROUBLING INTERNET FUND RAISING
>
>Certainly the most interesting and potentially devastating phone call
>I have received during this election cycle came this week from one of
>the Obama's campaign internet geeks. These are the staffers who
>devised Obama's internet fund raising campaign which raised in the
>neighborhood of $200 million so far. That is more then twice the
>total funds raised by any candidate in history - and this was all from
> the internet campaign.
>
>What I learned from this insider was shocking but I guess we shouldn't
>be surprised that when it comes to fund raising there simply are no
>rules that can't be broken and no ethics that prevail.
>
>Obama's internet campaign started out innocently enough with basic
>e-mail networking , lists saved from previous party campaigns and from
>supporters who visited any of the Obama campaign web sites.
>
>
>Small contributions came in from these sources and the internet
>campaign staff were more than pleased by the results.
>
>
>Then, about two months into the campaign the daily contribution intake
>multiplied. Where was it coming from? One of the web site security
>monitors began to notice the bulk of the contributions were clearly
>coming in from overseas internet service providers and at the rate and
>frequency of transmission it was clear these donations were
>"programmed" by a very sophisticated user.
>
>While the security people were not able to track most of the sources
>due to firewalls and other blocking devices put on these contributions
>they were able to collate the number of contributions that were coming
>in seemingly from individuals but the funds were from only a few
>credit card accounts and bank electronic funds transfers. The
>internet service providers (ISP) they were able to trace were from
>Saudi Arabia , Iran , and other Middle Eastern countries. One of the
>banks used for fund transfers was also located in Saudi Arabia .
>
>Another concentrated group of donations was traced to a Chinese ISP
>with a similar pattern of limited credit card charges.
>
>It became clear that these donations were very likely coming from
>sources other than American voters. This was discussed at length
>within the campaign and the decision was made that none of these
>donations violated campaign financing laws.
>
>It was also decided that it was not the responsibility of the campaign
>to audit these millions of contributions as to the actual source
>(specific credit card number or bank transfer account numbers) to
>insure that none of these internet contributors exceeded the legal
>maximum donation on a cumulative basis of many small donations. They
>also found the record keeping was not complete enough to do it anyway.
>
>This is a shocking revelation.
>
>We have been concerned about the legality of "bundling" contributions
>after the recent exposure of illegal bundlers but now it appears we
>may have an even greater problem.
>
>I guess we should have been somewhat suspicious when the numbers
>started to come out. We were told (no proof offered) that the Obama
>internet contributions were from $10.00 to $25.00 or so.
>
>If the $200,000,000 is right, and the average contribution was $15.00,
>that would mean over 13 million individuals made contributions? That
>would also be 13 million contributions would need to be processed.
>How did all that happen?
>
>I believe the Obama campaign's internet fund raising needs a serious,
>in depth investigation and audit. It also appears the whole question
>of internet fund raising needs investigation by the legislature and
>perhaps new laws to insure it complies not only with the letter of
>these laws but the spirit as well.
There are any number of crimes alleged here. Not to mention a slander against the users of the internet. What I find surprising is that there don't seem to be any typos or misspellings in the fraudulent email and rather sophisticated formatting. Doesn't look like an amateur job.
One of the central issues in this election has to be the extent to which fraud has been and continues to be perpetrated against the American people. The New Yorker cover needs to be just the start of a national conversation about the strategy of personal destruction with which the political process has become infected--and it needs to be done in the context of how, under the guise of "protection," the American people were lied into a war and an economic agenda that is driving the nation to the brink of collapse.
a) it wasn't even written by Dowd
b) it's totally and blatantly all lies
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/donations.asp
- If you notice, when Howard says "we're gonna win Florida" he points right at Charlie Grapski, who is sometimes hidden by the podium.
By Denise in San Mateo County on Jul 17, 2008 8:36 PM EDTHe's right in front though
Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco
www.presidentialmemorial.org
415.762.5120
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
INITIATIVE TO RENAME SEWAGE PLANT IN HONOR OF PRES. BUSH QUALIFIED FOR NOV 4TH BALLOT
San Francisco (July 17th) - Officials at the Department of Elections announced today that the citizens' initiative to rename the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant the George W. Bush Sewage Plant has qualified for the November 4th San Francisco ballot. Voters will decide on the measure in the general election alongside the presidential election, numerous statewide initiatives, and an expected 20 to 30 local measures.
"We want to thank the dozens of people who volunteered to campaign throughout the city, and the thousands of San Franciscans who lined up to sign this petition to pay tribute to our President," said initiative co-author Brian McConnell. "With over 100 volunteers, we were able to run a citywide campaign with no donations, no paid signature gatherers - it was a 100% grassroots voter movement."
The Presidential Memorial Commission is planning a creative, art-driven general election campaign, and is putting out a general call for support from artists who want to design flyers, billboards and other attention-getting devices. "We're hoping for an election campaign like no other," said Mr. McConnell.
While the measure is only being presented to San Francisco voters, voters worldwide can contribute to the general election campaign by donating artwork and funds at www.presidentialmemorial.org
- Wastewater treatment does not deserve to be so villified.
By Monica Smith on Jul 17, 2008 6:26 PM EDT
- The locals are against it - they just want to forget about him
By Denise in San Mateo County on Jul 17, 2008 6:54 PM EDTAt least that is what the buzz is on talk radio
- The way I see it is... this one is a win-win either way.
By Susan Rowe on Jul 18, 2008 1:33 PM EDTcontributions made over the internet. I am sure they will purge this method of contribution, just like the millions of voters that have registered.
"believe." That's the hallmark of the faith-based clan. Never mind facts. Rumor and inuendo and gossip will do just fine.
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=699&Itemid=1
How many years has Barack Obama been sucking up to rich, powerful people? It is clear that the Cinderella story of the neophyte who suddenly struck political pay dirt is just one of many well marketed lies. While it is accurate to say that few Americans had heard of Obama before the 2004 Democratic convention, it is not true that his political ambitions began that year when he ran for the United States Senate.
Obama first secured buy-in from wealthy, politically connected white people when he was still a state senator in Illinois, and then he began his not so surprising rise to power. He has worked very hard over a long period of time to position himself as an ambitious but "safe" black man who had no intention of rocking the political boat or letting anyone else do so either.
Obama's words in 2001 explain a great deal about his actions in 2008. We have been told that he has to move to the right in order to win this November. He has to tell lies and claim he was against warrantless surveillance and then vote in favor of it. He has to smear Moveon, a group that cooked its own books in order to endorse him. He has to turn his back on public campaign financing. He has to slander all black men. He has to threaten war with Iran. He can't end the occupation of Iraq.
The wishful thinkers assure us that he will be different and begin to undo the Bush regime apparatus. Only after he puts his hand on the bible will he be able to speak up for the millions of people who voted for him in hopes of seeing true political change.
Anyone who believes that tale deserves to be fooled because his pattern is so clear. He will govern just as he has campaigned ever since he first held public office. The former law professor will find reasons not to defend our constitutionally protected civil liberties. The new president will find more reasons to single out black men for criticism. He will always have a reason to continue the Iraq occupation, the time to leave will never be right. His nominees will not enforce civil rights laws, but they will do so with soft words and smiling faces.
The hand writing has been on the wall for a long time. Barack Obama cares about his own ambition, and nothing more. His campaign is a well oiled marketing machine that convinces gullible people to believe he is who they want him to be. Those of us who aren't fooled have an obligation to speak up and point out the sleights of hand that go back many years. We should not be surprised when it continues to show itself after January 2009.
Obama will be no more or less progressive than the Legislature we elect with him. Eliminate as many Blue Dogs as possible in this cycle and the next, and we should do well.
The fact that he put Dean on the bus while he travels abroad, I see as a positive sign.
Also. lets face reality here. We can't disengage from Afghanistan as long as we believe that Obama did 9/11 as anything other than a black ops asset. As long as folks believe that a 757 hit the Pentagon and that 10,000 gallons of jet fuel brought down the Towers. The war in Afghanispakistan will continue until UNICAL gets its pipeline.
When the opposition secures a nominee in this country, he is taken to the "Situation Room." This is where the people who actually run things sit the nominee down and tell him, "Here's the situation." The powers that be really don't care about the minor left-right shifts that occur in politics, but the nominee is informed of his limitations as to what he can and cannot do.
This is why it is vital that we elect the most progressive Legislature possible in both houses.
On the bright side I think Howard has the inside track for VP
I certainly hope you don't think McCain hasn't already sold out.
- Larry Hunter: I'm a lifelong conservative activist and I'm backing Barack Obama
By Susan Rowe on Jul 17, 2008 6:59 PM EDT<!-- ARTICLE CONTENT START -->I'm a lifelong conservative activist and I'm backing Barack Obama
BY LARRY HUNTER
Wednesday, July 16th 2008, 7:39 PM
I'm a lifelong Republican - a supply-side conservative. I worked in the Reagan White House. I was the chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for five years. In 1994, I helped write the Republican Contract with America. I served on Bob Dole's presidential campaign team and was chief economist for Jack Kemp's Empower America.
This November, I'm voting for Barack Obama. ....
...full article HERE.
Hunter is the former staff director of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee and president of the Social Security Institute.
In addition, what the R's accuse the D's of is often that which they are doing. Then, when they are found out it doesn't sound like anything new.
- HECK OF A JOB: The Blue Dogs and Conservatives of California's Central Valley...
By Susan Rowe on Jul 17, 2008 7:09 PM EDTWorse than Appalachia
Valley congressional district ranks last nationwide on study's scorecard of well-being.
By Michael Doyle / Bee Washington Bureau
07/16/08 23:09:54
Front page headlineGRAPHIC: Measure of the Valley
WASHINGTON -- Poverty, poor health and low graduation rates have put the San Joaquin Valley's 20th Congressional District dead last in a new national scorecard that ranks the well-being of residents.
Even notoriously grim Appalachia fares better than the congressional district that sweeps in Fresno, Kings and Kern counties, the study made public Wednesday shows.
The assessment of health, education and income ranks the district 436th out of 436 districts nationwide.
"We have significant issues in the Valley that reflect rural inequality," said Adela de la Torre, a University of California at Davis professor and adviser for the study. "The Valley has always been an area that's underserved."
The study, "The Measure of America," applies to the United States -- for the first time -- a so-called "human development" standard previously used to evaluate developing countries from Afghanistan to Zambia. The domestic results are sobering. ...
...full article: http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/735060.html
Valley districts' dropout rates climb under new calculation
By Pablo Lopez / The Fresno Bee (Front Page)
07/16/08 23:09:52
California Department of Education: http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
A new counting method has dramatically increased high school dropout rates for Fresno Unified and other large school districts in the central San Joaquin Valley, the state Department of Education announced Wednesday.
The new system, which uses identification numbers to track students, suggests that 35.1% of Fresno Unified students dropped out during a four-year period ending in the 2006-07 school year. The district had reported that only 24.9% dropped out.
Madera Unified School District's rate rose from 27.4% to 28.2% under the new method.
Visalia Unified's dropout numbers went from 12.2% to 19.1%, and Central Unified's rose from 19% to 23.7%.
In Clovis Unified, the new system more than doubled the dropout rate -- from 4% to 9.6%.
The statewide average under the new tracking system is 24.2%. It was 17.3% under the old system.
Local school officials, however, said the new method is flawed -- in part because schools sometimes give transfer students new identification numbers, making it appear that the student dropped out of his or her previous school.
...full article: http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/735059.html
- See? I hope that lady in the coffee shop reads this. The one whose husband could not find work which forced her to go back.
By Denise in San Mateo County on Jul 17, 2008 8:24 PM EDTPoor baby
- Modesto Bee - Almost a quarter of Stanislaus high schoolers dropped out, state data show
By Susan Rowe on Jul 18, 2008 3:54 PM EDTAlmost a quarter of Stanislaus high schoolers dropped out, state data show<script type="text/javascript" src="http://media.modbee.com/static/scripts/thickbox.js"></script> <!-- story media --><!-- /story media --><!-- story body -->By MICHELLE HATFIELD
last updated: July 16, 2008
<!-- side pane --><!-- /pubsys/production/story/story_sidebar.comp --><!-- High Five/More Related stories -->Nearly one in four Stanislaus County high schoolers dropped out in 2006-07, according to data released by the California Department of Education this afternoon.In the county, 23.6 percent of high school students dropped out. The state number comes in a little higher, 24.2 percent.
The drop-out percentages are calculated from an estimate of the percent of students who would drop out in a four-year period based on data collected for the single school-year 2006-07.
Other drop-out trends: ...
full article:http://www.modbee.com/breakingnews/story/362035.html
- Over a week ago, I posted this about the fallacious Maureen Dowd article.
By Pat in Colorado on Jul 17, 2008 7:12 PM EDTA friend sent it to me, then when she found out it was phony, she wrote an apology.
Huron John, I amazes me that you find so much derogatory information about Barack Obama. There are so many real culprits, thugs, dishonest people out there, that one of the good people you continue to denigrate flummoxes me. Why? Have your read Obama's books?
There's a great article in Newsweek this week about him, about his experience with a variety of religions, cultures, and his own choices. For whatever suppositions that demean him, he is genuine. He was never an ideologue, and I can't imagine with his intelligence and background he would be.
Why? What dos this serve?
If you want to be really cynical, read the August issue of Harpers, "The Wrecking Crew: How a Gang of Right-Wing Con Men Destroyed Washington and Made a Killing" by Tomas Frank. The writer who wrote "What's the Matter with Kansas?" This goes back to the Reagan era with Abramoff and Norquist. It shows how difficult any change will be because we have sold our democracy, and there are lobbyists, institutions, consultant groups, staffers, and elected officials who are in the busy of selling this democracy.
I have to shake my head (there's that old teacherly righteousness I am so afflicted with!) Why are we diminishing the possible good with the impossible perfect, to paraphrase Howard Dean?
- I didn't think anyone in the world could be as critical as my mother
By Fred from Oregon on Jul 17, 2008 7:35 PM EDTThen I found Huron John on the blog :)
we were subject to rdorgans Obama polyanna (riding jibjab's unicorn)for quite a few months so the universe says payback time with Huron John lol
since it is pretty predictable you can always scroll if you don't want to hear it
I wasn't criticizing Fred. I was merely citing a respected African American journalist who has a different view of Obama from most of us, based on following his career from its earliest days.
right. You 'merely' cite each and every article under the sun that bashes and paints the bleakest picture. A different view from few, if any here - no one here thinks he's perfect or the most progressive, or superman. It's old and boring, IMO, to see the same 'ol same 'ol articles posted incessently. Not to mention the length you post exceeds copyright rules.
Thanks for reassuring me my mind is still a bit intact :)
I think you were off blog when HuJo admitted to being a grumpy old man. Hey it takes a village. (ducking)
I should be it amazes me, who are in the business of selling democracy.
- It's no surprize there are people around the world who would support a Bush opponent
By Fred from Oregon on Jul 17, 2008 7:33 PM EDTWhy do you think the price of oil is going through the roof. They want regime change in America. When Obama is elected, the barrel price will collapse, guaranteed. Never as low as it once was, but it could hit $200 before the election.
The troubling thing about Dowd's insinuation is that we have no numbers, and the opposition can easily exploit that unknown figure (probably a fraction of a percent) with hyperbole that would make the innuendo that Obama's been backed by terrorist.
Good thing Maureen is bringing it to our attention early.
a) it wasn't even written by Dowd
b) it's totally and blatantly all lies
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/donations.asp
The troubling thing is that Swift Boating spam email blasts such as this are taken the least bit seriously by anyone.
it's a fake
Think our health care system is looking bleak? Dive into the controversy— and explore the solutions.
- the fake is devastating swift boating if not countered though
By Phil Specht on Jul 17, 2008 7:45 PM EDTthe FEC will track everything down anyway
Obama people just need to divert any Chinese donations to Clinton's debt, the Clintons have experience lol
http://www.flickr.com/groups/766145@N25/
Holly
- if you don't have the toolbar in your comment box, hit reply to someone's comment to get one.
- paste the link in the comment box, then highlight it
- click the 'link' button on the toolbar (next to ABC)
- paste link and click insert
- if it's a long link, it's nice to hit return so the end of the link doesn't overlap the Reply button in your post
:-)
http://www.flickr.com/groups/766145@N25/
~ ~ ~
Phil - hope you got my email before the Night School session.
~ ~ ~
We can help counter this libel by reading the Snopes article and sharing the info w/ those who would believe the lies
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/donations.asp
- Hi Denise. We've had lots of visitors. Makes me want to curl up with a book and shut out the world.
By Pat in Colorado on Jul 17, 2008 9:22 PM EDTThere are going to be some vicious smears and very clever lies told about Obama. Reading the Harpers' article, it gave me a sense of how totally the system has been hacked with corruption, collusion, influence selling, and greed. I think if we can ever repair the system, it will take decades and it will have to come from all of us.
Abramoff and Norquist were in college when they set out to destroy the government and make it into a marketing, capitalistic tool. They have succeeded to a terrible extent. Even people we have respect for are involved in the subjugation of rights in this country to profit globally. For instance, Scowcraft under George Bush the First and a man called Bader, not to exclude Henry Kissinger and others.
If you are interested, this Harpers issue examines the system much more deeply. It's way beyond the blaming of a few people. It's endemic.
Off now for a nap.
American Physical Society Disputes Climate Change “Myth of Consensus”
Michael Asher
Daily Tech
July 17, 2008
The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”
check it out at www.aps.org
APS Climate Change Statement
APS Position Remains Unchanged
The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:
"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."
An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.
Read:
Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth
The decision by the government to distribute Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth has been the subject of a legal action by New Party member Stewart Dimmock. The Court found that the film was misleading in nine respects and that the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisors served only to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.
In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.
The inaccuracies are:
* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
* The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.
Not all of the inaccuracies in the film were fully considered by the court as the judge requested a sample on which to consider the case. Professor Carter’s witness statement (reproduced below) lists 20 inaccuracies in the film.
there are links at the bottom of the page to Professor Carter’s testimony… very interesting reading.
An Inconvenient Truth…..
Let’s apply chuck Baldwins’ Law…[ read: the opposite]
A Convenient Lie. Huh!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimmock_v_Secretary_of_State_for_Education_and_Skills
a most interesting read and worth doing so.
The court ruled that the film was substantially founded upon scientific research and fact and could continue to be shown, but it had a degree of political bias such that teachers would be required to explain the context via guidance notes issued to schools along with the film. The court also identified nine 'errors' in the film, and ruled that the guidance notes must address these errors specifically.
and it's not even a Dowd piece. Her article that day was about the Clinton campaign.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/donations.asp
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
- DNC Chair, Gov. Howard Dean, M.D. is first!
By Susan Rowe on Jul 17, 2008 6:11 PM EDT