The truth about Michelle Obama's "whitey" tape Rec this post so the TRUTH gets OUT!!!

[Heather MC]

DON'T LET THEM SPREAD LIES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I got this from one of the blogs at barackobama.com: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/gregm

This really does sound like the most logical explanation for this supposed "whitey" tape. Apparently Michelle Obama is saying '"why'd he"? and not "whitey" while talking about george bush's lack of response to hurricane katrina. Gosh i swear these anti-obama people really don't have anything legit that they can use, do they?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trouble Brewing


There's been a flurry of activity in the blogosphere. One last push by Clinton supporters to attack Obama on personal and racial terms rather than substance.
A long time Clinton supporter, Larry Johnson, claims to have a tape of Michelle Obama speaking at Trinity United Church.
The 'bombshell' is a supposed rant against "Whitey".
The reality is Michelle speaking against George W Bush. "Why'd he let those people die in New Orleans?" "Why'd he drop so many off of Medicare?" etc...
It boils down to slang. "Why'd he" versus "Whitey".
But this video is supposed to hit in a few hours: 9am EST on June 2.

Here's what we need to be clear on.
This is a race baiting story based on a doctored video. We are supposed to hear "Whitey" instead of what was really said
The origin of this attack is important.
If it is the GOP, they will not release it at this stage and would wait to drop the video in late October. Such an act would leave little time to debunk and calm people down, and would surely improve their shortterm odds at winning the presidency

If it is in fact released in a few hours, cuo bono? Who Benefits?
The Clinton's are the only beneficiaries of such a video. Many of their supporters are rumored to have sought a copy of the video (http://clintondems.com/2008/05/1m-bounty-offered-for-michelle-obama-tape/)
The tape is supposed to be released by long time Clinton support Larry Johnson (site).
The tape has been an open secret at Fox News for several weeks. Sean Hannity laughs about those 'nut jobs' who think he has such a tape, but then brags about having it and waiting for the right time to release it.

It is way too early for the Republicans to benefit. In fact, it would backfire on the Republicans to play this hand so early... to much time to suffer the backlash and be cast as a party of bigots.
This cannot escalate to the point of Rev Wright. The goal of the peddler is to inject more Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt into this nominating process and force the issue to the convention. This is either to benefit the Clintons at this stage by trying to force Obama to resign, or to make the Dems lose completely.

If you hear this on the morning news or blogs, respond quickly and politely. This is dirty politics at its worst; and let's fight fire with water.

Update: the link in the text didn't work this one should!
http://clintondems.com/2008/05/1m-bounty-offered-for-michelle-obama-tape/

[Name removed]

1. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LTR]

2. This appears to be the truth about it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6223410&mesg_id=6223410

She said "Why did he" (referring to Bush) and Larry wants you to think she said "Whitey."

Pure bullshit.

[MercutioATC]

3. It was so dark, he couldn't find his car.

I just said "darkie"!!!!!

[Cha]

60. But you're

bad:evilgrin:

[WeDidIt]

4. And what did Larry drop on his site?

"I have not seen it but I have heard from five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape. It features Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan. They are sitting on a panel at Jeremiah Wright’s Church when Michelle makes her intemperate remarks. Whoops!!"

More bullshit teasing without even a first hand account of the tape. Friends of friends saw the tape.

It doesn't get more bullshit rumor mongering than that!

[ErinBerin84]

7. plus, all of the sudden Louis Farrakhan was there?

If that doesn't give it away as utter bullshit, I don't know what does.

[WeDidIt]

16. Yep, complete and utter nonsense

It's a whisper campaign and it accomplished what they wanted it to accomplish.

Faux talked about it.

That was the whole point.

[casus belli]

19. And Ayers, and Rezco, and Ahmedenijad. Must be some tape. n/t

[Heather MC]

23. Don't forget Osama, he was in the back

[Why Syzygy]

72. And according to Bill Clinton, Obama was saying, "ah..ah..ah..well". Quote.

[Why Syzygy]

70. Five people who know five people. Pure hearsay. Facts don't need rumors.

Obama is right. This is to deflect from the issues, and the sooner Clinton gets her big ass out of the way we can get a clear shot of McSheep. Until then, we aren't even sure who the enemy is!!!

VP my sweet gravy never..

[Barack_America]

5. The verb tense would give it away.

"Whitey drop so many off Medicare?" would make no sense.

however, "Why'd he drop so many off Medicare?" is in agreement.

Now I know that Americans are not know for their excellent grammar, but hopefully they'll realize this.

[Maribelle]

10. Verb tense vs. broken English?

Sounds like a paradox to me.

[Maribelle]

6. So you're saying Michelle Obama said 'Why'd he let Katrina happen...' referring to Bush????

Sounds like severely broken English to me - - from a Princton graduate that aspires to be first lady - - that wrote her thesis at Princeton which showed a young woman grappling with race and her role in society?

[olkaz]

11. self-delete

misunderstood

[Maribelle]

12. Wrong. I'm not reframing anything. It's broken English, period.

[DevonRex]

13. Using a contraction is broken English? Get some help. nt

[olkaz]

14. So then you're agreeing with the OP that this isn't some sort of nefarious anti-white macaca moment

I mean, broken english and "whitey" comments are two totally different ballparks.

[Maribelle]

26. I agree, it appears to me that it is not an anti-white moment.

[Maribelle]

27. Yes, I am agreeing

It appears to me that it is probably not an anti-white moment.

[Heather MC]

17. SO WHAT!!! WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THEY ARE LYING???????

[Name removed]

28. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hola]

22. lol

"Why did he leave the tap on" is broken english? In what language? :)

[WeDidIt]

25. Actually, "Why'd" is a perfectly legitimate contraction. n/t

The usage is broken, but under the rules of contractioins, it's legitimate.

[Maribelle]

30. Did I say anything about the rules of contractions?

[WeDidIt]

33. You were unclear

and you are also trying to make some bullshit point about it.

[Maribelle]

35. No, I was not unclear. It is you now that are severely obfuscating ...

making it unnecessarily complicated when all the while it was truly quite simple.

[anigbrowl]

58. Then what does your 'broken english' comment refer to?

[NorthernSpy]

34. Whereas we non-retards will recognize "why'd" as a contraction...

People like you make me ecstatic that Hillary will never be President.

[Maribelle]

36. People like me?

[NorthernSpy]

49. I was talking about the ~non~retards...

(Just to clarify.)

[calmblueocean]

39. How is it broken English?

I don't understand.

[Heather MC]

15. Desparate much?

There are millions of Highly educated people who don't speak the Queen's english

So how do you explain this?

The verb tense would give it away.
"Whitey drop so many off Medicare?" would make no sense.

however, "Why'd he drop so many off Medicare?" is in agreement.

Now I know that Americans are not know for their excellent grammar, but hopefully they'll realize this.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

18. And yet you're willing to believe she's a big racist

who gets up in her church and rails against "whitey". Nice. :eyes:

[Maribelle]

32. ??? Why am I not surprised that what I posted has been totally twisted???

[DarienComp]

37. I'm sorry,

but the notion that "why'd he..." amounts to "severely broken English" is unbelievably asinine.

[Maribelle]

46. OK then, let's try this ...

The wide internet has volumes of correct English posted. Please give me even one link where correct English is used and it contains "why'd".


I am sure you will be able to find it used as broken English - - - just like the use of the term "ain't". I am sure you will be able to find it when there is a quote of someone using broken English. I doubt you will find it used as correct English.


My English teacher would give me and my classmates an "F" for using "why'd" or "ain't".

[DarienComp]

48. You might have a point, if we're talking about written English rather than spoken English

The fact of the matter is that people use "why'd" colloquially all the time, and nobody considers their English to be "broken". And you know this.

[Maribelle]

51. And the difference between 'colloquially' and 'broken English' to you is?

[DarienComp]

56. Wikipedia:

Broken English is a term used to describe hesitant or badly structured English, specifically as used by non-native speakers of the language. It is sometimes called fractured English.

...

[tblue37]

65. Colloquial English is not "wrong." It is just less formal than

Standard Written English, which, by the way, is not spoken natively by anyone.

Language has different levels of formality, and colloquial speech is the appropriate level of language for relatively informal conversation.

Colloquial English is not the same as ungrammatical English at all. For example, in colloquial English, we commonly refer to children as "kids," but that is considered inappropriate for formal writing. On my parenting website (Who's Minding the Children?) I use the word "kids" often to refer to children, because I am writing conversationally to appeal to my target audience. I would never write "kids" in a formal academic paper, though, and I don't let my students use "kids" that way in most of their papers. In some of their papers, however, "kids" would be appropriate, because the assignment creates a context that is decidedly less formal.

Another example: When writing posts here on DU or emails to friends, and even to my students, with whom I use conversational speech and writing patterns for normal interactions, I often use BTW, but I would never do so in a formal writing situation. Context is everything, as current compositional theory will tell you. (Google “genre theory" + "composition.")

BTW, you might be amused to know that I have decided to write and post an article on my site this week about this issue.

[LanternWaste]

54. There is a notable (and academic) difference between...

There are notable (and academic) differences between speaking/writing formally and speaking/writing informally. While most English classes will grade on the valid vs. invalid usage of formal grammar in the classroom, that same standard is rarely applied (if ever) to informal public speeches.

[tblue37]

64. What is posted on the Net is written. "Why'd he" is a natural contraction of

"Why did he" in conversational speech. Sure, it isn't formal enough to be accepted in, say, academic writing, but it is quite common in academic speech. In fact, you will hear that contraction often in meetings and at parties where professors of English converse with each other.

[hokies4ever]

42. She's twice as smart as you

and your accomplishments helping people in life probably pale in comparison to her.

What, you expected people to let you get a free pass trashing the next First Lady?

[tblue37]

62. I am widely recognized as an authority on grammar and usage.

I assure you that there is nothing wrong with contracting "Why did he" into "Why'd he" in conversational speech.

BTW, just so you don't discount my claim to expertise by saying that anyone can claim to be anything on the Net, this is one of my sites:
Grammar and Usage for the Non-Expert
http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/index.html

[mrreowwr_kittty]

63. But I'll bet you think Bill Clinton's Arkansas drawl is cute.

I mean, duh, he's white so it's okay.

[Peacetrain]

8. I put this in another thread along the same line..this is the stupidest

smear attempt I think I have ever heard of.. especially this pulpit buisness.. Tritiy UCC is in a African American neighborhood. so most of the congregates would be African Americans.. duh.. but many people of other races including Anglo Americans go to that church.. think about that for a second...get your brain in gear..she is going to be saying "whitey" in the church to white congregates sitting in the pews.. HELLO!..

[Heather MC]

20. But she never said Whitey, the only person who says whitey is George Jefferson

and he ain't trying to get to the White House

[Heather MC]

21. But she never said Whitey, the only person who says whitey is George Jefferson

and he ain't trying to get to the White House

[Peacetrain]

47. Now that was funny :)

[gateley]

9. Where is this video? nt

[Tinksrival]

24. Larry's last gasp......

Saw this post on another blog

Larry Johnson just posted at No Quarter his clarification on the tape. According to his post, "five sources", who have talked to people who have seen the tape, it shows Michelle Obama sitting at a meeting with Louis Farrahkan at TUC, and it is there where she makes her comments. Too many layers, but the image is not good. There are references in his post about this being put on ice until the general election. There is no mention of Cavuto at Fox actually having the tapes.

Larry is a lying asshole. There is no such tape.

[meow mix]

29. doctored tape

they really have nothing to attack with

[Heather MC]

31. That's why Obama should be president!

They have nothing!

[BooScout]

38. No one here has even seen the tape yet .....

.......and already you're explaining what she really said??? :rofl: That's just too funny.:rofl:

[thewiseguy]

43. So you believe Larry Johnson's explanation on the tape?

:rofl:

[frickaline]

40. .

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DaPBhxXhprg

[hiaasenrocks]

41. If she is saying "Why'd he let those people die in New Orleans?"

what is there to doctor?

Your c/p says there's a good explanation for the words on the tape but then says the tape is doctored. :shrug:

[jeffrey_X]

44. LMAO! They really think she said "whitey" ??????????

hilarious

[file83]

71. No, they know what she really said, but they don't care about the truth.

They just want to smear Obama, so they tasked people to listen for phrases that could be deliberately misinterpreted as racist.

[Cass]

45. How does "Greg from Visalia, CA" know what is on the tape?

He is the person who wrote the post at your first link, btw.

Has "Greg from Visalia, CA" actually seen the tape, or is he talking out his ass? Who is "Greg from Visalia, CA" and how would HE know what was on the tape? He gives no information about why we should give his post any credence whatsoever.

[vaberella]

50. darn it ...I was all excited about this tape and ready to help out and then...

There's no tape. How is there only one tape of her saying this...explain to me this. And meeting with Farakhan. I don't get it.

Farrakhan is way to ego-centric and crazed not to have SEVERAL tapes of him with the Chicago Senators wife. How does one person have a video?

[Coexist]

52. knr! thanks - did the tape ever come out today??

[Heather MC]

53. Not that I know of, but maybe they are waiting for Hannity and Colmes

[StateSecrets]

55. NSWBC will remove Mr. Johnson's membership

few months ago Mr. Johnson engaged in similar agenda-driven trashing of my case, and the great work by the investigative journalist, Luke Ryland. We were not able to pinpoint his 'bosses,' whom he serves very loyally. At the time his claim was: He was doing it on behalf of 'Raw Story' and one of their journos.

On behalf of my organization, and our whistleblowers, I will remove Mr. Johnson from our website; we will end his membership. I will not tolerate agenda-driven & racist attitude; it's a disgrace. He shall not use the title 'national security whistleblower' among many honorable members of our organization.


Sincerely,
Sibel Edmonds

[Bake]

57. Has anyone here actually SEEN the alleged tape?

Personally, I think everyone looks rather foolish arguing about what she did or did not say, whether it was "whitey" or "why'd he" or what the hell ever, UNLESS YOU'VE ACTUALLY SEEN THE TAPE!

So rather than jump to conclusions, either offensive or defensive, I think I'll just wait for the video itself to surface. If it exists.

Bake

[woo me with science]

68. Thank you.

These posts are disgusting. Arguing over the contents of the tape only legitimizes the filthy rumor.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

59. Rec!

This makes sense.

[DeeDeeNY]

61. K & R

[papapi]

66. Nasty despicable lies. I wish we could expose them for the filthy scumbags...

they really are. Larry Johnson has rocks in his head if he thinks he'll get a free pass on this one.

[Why Syzygy]

67. It's disgusting. Get Clinton out of the way so we have a clear shot at McSheep . k'r

[woo me with science]

69. Stop legitimizing this filthy rumor. nt

[Vinnie From Indy]

73. Why'd he say it was so dark he couldn't honk easily?

Quite a few insults there huh?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

74. ouchie....... the wretched sound of cheap violins