Friday, October 31, 2008

"Confession of an Obama blogger"

(NOTE: "Don't miss these: 10/31/08" will go up a bit later, Lord willing. It will be a busy day here; keep checking back.)

I'll say two things up-front:
  1. I wonder if this is legit, and wish it could be verified.
  2. It makes perfect sense, and fits both what I've seen elsewhere, and experienced here.
"Sarah P" (not her real name) writes on Hillbuzz that she works, with less and less joy, on the Obama campaign. And she details what they have paid people to do, in order to suppress support for John McCain, and help Obama deceive his way to greater power.

Among her revelations/claims:
The internal campaign idea is to twist, distort, humiliate and finally dispirit you.

We pay people and organize people to go to all the online sites and “play the part of a clinton or mccain supporter who just switched our support for obama” [Sound familiar?]

We do this to stifle your motivation and to destroy your confidence.

...we infiltrate all the blogs and all the youtube videos and overwhelm the voting, the comments, etc. All to continue this appearance of overwhelming world support.

....[The intention is] make you feel stressed and crazy and feel like the world is ending.

...There is a huge staff of people working around the clock, watching every site, blogs, etc. We flood these sites. We have had a goal to overwhelm.

...Sarah Palin is a huge threat, and our campaign has feared her like you can’t imagine. If it seems unfair how she has been treated, well its because she has had a team working round the clock to make her look like a fool.

this is a big conspiracy and I am so shocked that its not realized. [Me, too]

...I will be quitting my post on nov 5th and my vote will be for John Mccain.
Are you wondering what I'm wondering?


Lieutenant Pratt said...

I'm wondering what kind of right-winger wrote that?

If Mccain doesn't win on election day it will be for three reasons, none of which have anything to do with sneaky tactics by the Obama campaign. All the bloggers and blog readers in the USA probably amount to less than 1/10 of 1% of the population. Why would a campaign devote time and energy to deceive less than half that crowd? Nonsense.

Three reasons McCain lost:

1- The Bush economy. Incumbent parties rarely win in bad economic times. In fact, they never win. If Obama were white or Hillary had won the D nomination this election would have already been history.

2- John McCain has spent too much time distracting Americans and not telling us why we should elect him--until the last two weeks. He has started to make up ground as he has begun to focus on taxes and security issues. The more he talks about Bill Ayers, Khalid whoever, or Rezko, the lower McCain's numbers go--except among the right-wing who eat this up.

3- Sarah Palin. Bad pick to attract moderates like me. We are looking for qualification and experience in the VP. We are looking for good judgment from the presidential nominee. Palin lacks the former and that reflects poorly on McCain. I won't vote for Obama because he lacks the experience I would like.

No- I'm not a shill for the Obama campaign. I'm 99% sure I won't be voting at all on Tuesday. If I do, it will likely be for Mickey Mouse because I heard that ACORN registered him here in Florida.

DJP said...

Wow, what a fast, instant, and reflexive denial.

Interesting, too: it exactly fits the pattern of what you're denying.

candy said...

Lt. You protesteth too much.

Andrew D said...

I'm not a very smart person but I can put 2 and 2 together.
Obama's campaign workers are not as clever as they imagine themselves to be.

Frank Lunz (the FOX News pollster) astutely observed that, while conservatives have long dominated talk radio, Obama supporters have been dominating the internet during this campaign. Wonder of wonders how did that happen?

I should be surprised but for some reason I am not!

Trinian said...

Hmm, I'm not sure. If I were posing as a fake Obama supporter who had changed their vote to McCain, these are the sort of inflammatory things that I would say to drum up support for McCain. If there's one thing Americans hate, it's feeling like they're being told what to do and how to feel. This plays to that very well. It doesn't say anything that we don't already suspect, and attempts to justify those suspicions. I get even more suspicious when somebody tells me what I want to hear.

DJP said...

It is, at least, interesting.

1. Pratt comes to a conservative Christian site where there's no way in Hell he's going to persuade many to go for pro-infanticide extremist Obama (so if you can discourage us to vote for McCain, then Mission Accomplished).

2. Conservatives love the military and hey! He's a lieutenant! As he often reminds us.

3. His criticism exactly imitate DNC talking-points.

4. He meets every response with an ad hominem, or he ignores them (then later claims he hasn't been answered).

5. Even arguments that are decisively refuted are later repeated as if for the first time (i.e. how unqualified and scary the far-more-qualified-than-Obama Sarah Palin is).

6. Most damning at all: Obama's pro-infanticide extremism doesn't even register, though Pratt claims to volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center. Like all Dems, he says "Forget the laws and the courts, and hide in your houses and pray for change, while we run everything."

7. When he even tries to respond, it's a challenge to prove the pro-life position from Scripture. Oopsie!

Really does not pass the smell-test.

I'm pushed to one of two conclusions —

Lieutenant Pratt, you are either:

A shill for Obama; or

A very confused man whose motivations are other than you think they are.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget that Lieutenant Pratt isn't interested in Scripture that supports the pro-life position. (For someone to even question whether or not Scripture is pro-life strains credulity.)

Lt. Pratt's actual request: Could you point me to those "clear" verses in the Bible that says life begins at conception? I'm not talking about the Jeremiah passage or the one where the six month old John jumps in the womb. I want the ones that specifically say life begins when egg and sperm combine.

DJP said...

It's very hard not to see that as a dead giveaway.

Andrew D said...

I cannot get past how his comments here so precisely match the pattern described. How could someone's comments so accurately fit the detailed description to the T by accident?

If I didn't know better I would think that Lt Pratt himself wrote the confession.

Unknown said...

If I may be so blunt, Lt. Pratt: as my father used to say, if you don't vote, you don't get to complain.

Dan, here is another similar article:

DJP said...

Andrew, though, if you read the confession, Pratt's a better speller. Seriously.

Truth Unites... and Divides said...

"If I didn't know better I would think that Lt Pratt himself wrote the confession."

Zing! Stomach hurting from much laughter.

Rachael Starke said...

"If I didn't know better I would think that Lt Pratt himself wrote the confession."

Given that the writer seems to be genuinely wrestling with guilt and remorse over her poor choices in causes.....

I'm thinking not. :)

Ron said...


I definitely read that with skepticism. It sure proves one thing; you can put anything on a blog and people will begin to promote it as truth. What's worse, we as Christians will begin to absorb this as much as the rest of the world. For me, this is a sobering reminder of why it is important for us to recognize that we are citizens of the Kingdom of God first.

Lieutenant Pratt said...

i admit it, I wrote that. Yes i really do work for the Obama campaign and I'm so darn guilty about that i'll be voting for McCain. Well, if the buddhists are right and I get reincarnated 50 or so times.

I checked the responses here and my initial question was not even addressed so I'll ask it again and rephrase it so you can understand:

If I, or anyone else, was a shill for the Obama campaign why would I spend my time and effort trying to change the minds of your 15-20 regular readers and the few others who drop by? Consider that you, and I assume many of your readers, are in a state that Senator Obama will win by 20-25 points next Tuesday. Consider further that the odds of casting even the tiniest bit of doubt in any of your minds is approaching the law of non-zero probability. This would be a hugely futile waste of my time. I have difficulty believing that any rational person would believe a presidential candidate and his staff would waste their time on such trivial matters.

DJP said...

There are several inaccurate premises — itself nothing new.

And I already answered your question.

Lieutenant Pratt said...

No you didn't. You obfuscated and misdirected. That is not an answer.

I think all y'all need to take a big step backwards. Y'all are too wrapped up in this election. You should breathe easier and think it through like John Piper. This world is not your home and when you throw too much energy into politics it overwhelms your ability to see clearly why God put you here, which is, of course to worship him and enjoy him forever.

DJP said...

Yes, I really did answer you. 8:19am. You asked "Why?", that's why.

BTW, I don't allow endless cycles. So deal with it, or move on.

Chris H said...

Lt Pratt,

With respect sir, you are begging the question rather than posing a new one. You assume that Obama will 20-25 points, and so why would someone try to change the minds of those who are voting McCain; a reasonable question, if the assumption was grounded in fact, rather than speculation.

If the polls are correct, Obama has a very slim lead. That is the only fact we have with which to work in terms of likelihood. If the lead is that slim (or less, mind you), then it makes very good sense for those who support Obama to work to make it seem like a futile effort to vote McCain.

Further, you seem to believe that the focus of the Obama shills aree localised to this blog; I would suggest that this blog is one of many (assuming, that is, that DJP's blog even shows up on their radar).

Additionally, you suggest it is futile to try to convince the regulars to change their mind. This is perhaps accurate, but there are many people who read this blog than regulars.

You will no doubt reply that I have not answered your original question; I put it to you that the question is as DJP briefly mentioned and I tried to elaborate on, based on assumptions rather than actuality.

DJP said...

FWIW, at the moment I average 823 visits a day, and 1840 page views a day.

RT said...

The Obama campaign knows that George Bush won the last election in large part because of the Republican "72 hour plan" that got out the vote more efficiently than did the Democrats. Now, whether it is part of a coordinated effort or not, it certainly serves Obama's purpose to convince potential McCain voters to stay home on Nov 4. The Pratt "progression" from "inquiring conservative", to "reluctantly unconvinced moderate", to "non-voter", whether coincidentally or not, fits well into an Obama strategy. Much of what he says resonates, and is meant to resonate, with less-than-enthusiastic McCain supporters and, whether calculated or not, is tailor made to keep them at home and out of the voting booth. The bizarre sub-text of "I'm a Christian/veteran/anti-abortion volunteer who has not been able to eliminate the hate-mongering/anti-military/baby-killer from consideration for my vote" is either just window dressing or otherwise meant to amuse.

Andrew D said...

I have a confession of my own.

I can lurk here for months without commenting. Then SOMETHING written either by Dan or a commenter prompts me to type. Then I may return to lurking for weeks or months.
I can't explain it!

But I know that there are many lurkers out there :)

DJP said...

RT - awfully well-put. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Lt. Pratt,
I'm 99% sure I won't be voting at all on Tuesday.

You claim to be pro-life and now you claim to not (in all likelihood) be voting. Sounds like cowardice to me. Can't even stand up for the babies who will definitely be murdered should Barack the Butcher be elected and sign the Freedom of Choice Act.

Shame on you.

Gilbert said...

1. Anyone who votes for Barack Obama is either not pro-life or horribly ignorant of the murderous policies he will inflict on us all (and not just to the unborn),

2. Anyone who is "pro-choice" *when knowing the facts about it* and claims to be Christian is not a Christian and is headed for hell. "You shall not murder" is NOT a suggestion. The devaluing of human life by this man is almost beyond belief.

CR said...

Lt Pratt: I'm wondering what kind of right-winger wrote that?

For your information, Hillbuzz is a website run by women who want Obama to lose so that HRC will have a chance in 2012. These are not "right-wingers."

Lieutenant Pratt said...

Gilbert- You need to step back and breathe for a few minutes. You also need to realize that our citizenship is not of this world and we are not put here to reform this culture. Watch John Pipers video and breathe deeply. Politics is passing away. I cry over every baby that gets aborted, maybe more than you do. But I also know that not one of them gets aborted apart from God willing it to be so. i don't understand that but I know it is true.

DJP said...

Gilbert, your first point is exactly right. Thanks for breathing just fine - and thinking fine.

Your second point goes too far. But I would say that any professed Christian who says he can put the scalpel in Obama's hand and have a clear conscience is telling us nothing good about Obama. He's telling us something terrible about himself; and he should fear for his own soul.

Nobody believes you anymore, Pratt. That post is blithering nonsense. The more you post, the more you confirm the consensus about you: phony.

RC said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RC said...


I would add one more possibility for your first point: complementarians who believe complementarianism is a more important doctrine than the sinfulness of abortion (of course, I'd think that they got their priorities confused, but such people do exist).

DJP said...

Sad but true. I know that some good people are making the wrong choice, on that basis.

Exposes us to the usually-mistaken cliche that Fundies are all about probing others' private lives. As a matter of fact, usually we aren't.

But here's life, which is a big and clear Bible issue; and what a woman can or cannot do (apart from ruling her husband, or men in the church, or being a pastor), which is hardly crystal-clear in the Bible. Here's Sarah Palin, fixing to be like Deborah and the Proverbs 31:10-31 woman. But we say it's SO wrong we'll beg off standing in the way of the pro-babykiller.

On what basis? On the basis that how Todd and Sarah Palin work out their family lives is our business?