Empty

2:11 pm EST March 3rd, 2008 | News | 7 Comments

Official Clinton campaign calls referring, “mistakenly” of course, to Sen. Obama as Osama Bin Laden.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

7 Responses to “Empty”

  1. jerry says:
    March 3, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    So do we actually know if:

    a) this event actually occurred
    b) it was an official clinton campaign call
    c) it was an unofficial clinton campaign call
    d) it was an Obama campaign call
    e) it was a McCain campaign calll
    f) it was someone else out playing tricks

    Beats the hell out of me.

    I’ve never heard of James Oliphant before, so I could see any one of the four Oliphant, Clinton, Obama, McCain, being responsible for this.

    I would have been more likely to believe it was HRC’s campaign in some role if the report was slipping “Osama” for “Obama” but slipping OBL for BHO? That raises a redflag for me.

    (I could still believe it is HRC’s campaign, I just don’t see any reason to based on this one report.)

  2. jerry says:
    March 3, 2008 at 3:04 pm

    At first I thought your advertisement here was for “MediaFast”, a way to get off my addiction to bad media or something….

  3. duros62 says:
    March 3, 2008 at 6:38 pm

    I’ve never heard of James Oliphant before,

    Didn’t he play the sheriff in Deadwood?

  4. Robster says:
    March 3, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    James Oliphant is an author. You must not get out to bookstores that often.

  5. Wellstone says:
    March 3, 2008 at 10:11 pm

    This is outright irresponsible slime, from both Oliphant and you, Oliver.

    First of all, it is not “CALLS”.

    It is ONE anecdotal hearsay report to ONE person on “the Swamp”, the Tribune Blog.

    Second, there’s no corroboration, no actual investigative reporting, no confirmation, no attribution. No nothing. Not even an “alleged”.

    Yet because it furthers an Obama-as-victim frame and confirms a negative Clinton frame, you jumped on it and posted it.

    I’m embarrassed for you, and surprised at you, Ollie.

    I think a retraction is in order.

  6. Nimrod Gently says:
    March 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm

    A retraction isn’t in order until it’s proven that this didn’t happen.

  7. somejackass says:
    March 4, 2008 at 9:18 pm

    How many words do you know that start with O- and end with -ama? (Oh, mama doesn’t count). I seem to remember mistakenly referring to al Jazeera (whos work I am actually quite fond of, being a far left bomb thrower) as “al Qaeda”, and you were there. So, slip of the tongues do happen

    I might actually argue that the similar names actually work in Obama’s favor (at least until the Democratic nomination is over) because anytime anyone slips up, everyone will jump all over them (for good reason).

    But it’s important to remember alot of times people are doing this subconsciously. This particular incident is purely speculation.