Michelle Obama's Whitey Video--Does It Exist?

Dr Adequate said:
Look, I like you personally, and you often put up almost rational arguments for the conservative cause, but at this point YOU HAVE GONE OFF YOUR FRICKIN' HEAD.

Obama describes this story as "dirt and lies", and you won't admit that he's denied the story?

C'mon.
Click to expand...

You apparently don't have any concept of what a non-denial denial is.

A denial would be pretty easy: "My wife never said what is attributed to her." Or even stronger might be "I have never heard my wife refer to white people as "Whitey". Or "I deny the story entirely."

A non-denial denial, on the other hand is where you manage to imply mightily that you deny the story without quite getting yourself on the hook if it later turns out that there is irrefutable evidence that the story is true. "That question is not even worth answering," is a common one, and effectively what Barack said. Let me ask you this; if it turns out that there is such a tape, would you then say that Obama was lying? Or would you suddenly discover his escape hatch?

Of course.:D
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:
Alright, I am going to go on the record right up front that I doubt the existence of the video myself, but it is a major topic of conversation on the blogs and so I thought it would be good to get the thoughts of the folks here.

Here's the latest version of what the tape/DVD supposedly contains from a Hillary supporter:



The story has been pushed by Hillary fans in the blogosphere, but there's one obvious problem. None of the Hillary fans have access to the tape itself. Larry Johnson takes it to a ridiculous level, claiming to have talked to five sources who themselves claim to have talked to people who say they saw it. That's not even hearsay, it's hearhearsay.

Still the story has stayed alive and got added impetus today as a picture was found in Jet Magazine of the panel, showing Mrs Obama, Mrs Meeks and Mrs Farrakhan in a group photo.

http://img390.imageshack.us/my.php?image=obamafarrakhanetalmm9.jpg

As I said up top, I'm going against my own confirmation bias on this one. I don't buy it. If it was out there, Hillary's people would have found it.
Click to expand...

Maybe they have found it. Maybe they are afraid to use it.

So, you think the above description of the events on the tape you provided was all scripted since you do not believe the tape exist?

Is Ms. Obama the type of person to go on a rant against White America?
 
Brainster said:
The witness has plainly failed to answer the question. Again, I think that the underlying story is bogus, but he did not deny it, while managing to convince those with particularly weak sentence parsing skills that he did. "There is dirt and lies" is not specific; he's making the general case. If he'd said "This is dirt and lies", then I'd grant you the point. It is a non-denial denial.
Click to expand...


He answered it quite effectively. He answered it quite directly ...


“We have seen this before. There is dirt and lies that are circulated in e-mails and they pump them out long enough until finally you, a mainstream reporter, asks me about it,” Obama said to the McClatchy reporter during a press conference aboard his campaign plane. “That gives legs to the story. If somebody has evidence that myself or Michelle or anybody has said something inappropriate, let them do it.”
Click to expand...


I don't typically answer ludicrous questions directly. I don't typically like to dignify them in any way. Here, Obama clearly calls it "dirt and lies" after preceding it with “We have seen this before". It is clearly a denial and stating it's dirt and lies. Your description of it as a "non-denial denial" shows a real obtuseness that is becoming rather prevalent around here lately.
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:
... Let me ask you this; if it turns out that there is such a tape, would you then say that Obama was lying? Or would you suddenly discover his escape hatch?

Of course.:D
Click to expand...


I'd call him a liar since he's already called it dirt and lies. Any reasonable person would. There is no escape hatch here.
 
He did not come outright and say "THE TAPE DOES NOT EXIST", but he implied such through his answer. If that is what a non-denial denial is, then so be it. Welcome to the answer you will get from 99% of politicians.

He is probably doing it this way, in light of things that have surfaced, even in this election, that were FABRICATED, such as the Stephanopolis/Carville tape that turned out to be a phony.

TAM:)
 
If Brainster has anything, it's a "non-no denial". To claim he didn't deny it by calling it "dirt and lies" is just silliness that he should intellectually be above. He seems like a bright and intelligent guy. That's what makes this kind of stuff seem so "WTF?" to me.
 
Pookster said:
If Brainster has anything, it's a "non-no denial". To claim he didn't deny it by calling it "dirt and lies" is just silliness that he should intellectually be above. He seems like a bright and intelligent guy. That's what makes this kind of stuff seem so "WTF?" to me.
Click to expand...

I think Brainster simply likes to play politics.

He is a smart guy...otherwise. ;)

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
I think Brainster simply likes to play politics.

He is a smart guy...otherwise. ;)

TAM:)
Click to expand...


I simply can't respect that. By jumping on this silly "gotcha" stuff and ignoring the big issues, a person is intentionally muddying the waters and intentionally making the world just a little bit worse.

I have no idea why a person would do it, unless they rationalize it by saying that ultimately the country will be fine and politics is basically just another kind of reality entertainment.
 
I've read many a non-denial denial in my life, and that response of Obama's reads like one.

Examples of out-and-out denials:

Michelle never said that.

Michelle has never said anything like that.

This rumor has no basis in fact.
Click to expand...

What Obama said:

We have seen this before. There is dirt and lies that are circulated in e-mails and they pump them out long enough until finally you, a mainstream reporter, asks me about it. That gives legs to the story. If somebody has evidence that myself or Michelle or anybody has said something inappropriate, let them do it.
Click to expand...

Dirt is a description of information that can be both true and false. Barack is not denying the truth of the "Whitey" tape in any way. He's describing the process by which rumors like this (rumors can also be true or false) get legs in the media, and he's trying to shame a reporter out of perpetuating this process. He ends with a dare (clumsily worded - he meant something like, "let them produce it") to get the tape out in the open.

A non-denial denial this is. And a non-denial denial used when a denial would serve quite well suggests truth behind the rumor.

But it isn't evidence of truth behind the rumor. There are attacks so outrageous that they engender sympathy for the victim. Michelle is the victim of this attack until any actual evidence can make her the attacker. It may be that Barack is willing to let this one enjoy some daylight while decrying it all the same. People who grab the story and get burned will think twice about grabbing similar stories in the future.
 
An out and out denial requires an out an out charge. If Obama is asked "did on date X Michelle say Y at the location Z" Obama can say "no". If, on the other hand, he is asked "is there any truth to the rumors that there is a video in which Michelle made racist comments?" what is he supposed to say? I suspect he has not been present at most of Michelle's speaking engagements. Is he supposed to guarantee that there has never been at any time any statement by her that someone might construe as racist. That she has never used the term "whitey" in any context, even in jest?

Sorry, this has all the characteristics of a McCarthyist , or perhaps I should say Rovian, witch hunt. Throw out some allegations with nothing to back them up, hope something sticks, put your opponent on the defensive, and when nothing is found drop the issue without apology and throw out a new libel or innuendo.

For a perfect example of this behavior, check out Jerome the troll. Excuse me, Gnome. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114953

In the thread you will find 8 pages and counting of charges against Obama, debunked in turn, but never an apology or admission of error on Jerome's part.
 
boloboffin said:
I've read many a non-denial denial in my life, and that response of Obama's reads like one.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Bolo! It is very likely that Barack just slipped into "lawyer speak". I realized after I posted that "dirt and lies" gave him yet another out, as you noted.
 
BenBurch said:
If Malkin has this, I welcome her to put it out there. This exists as surely as the video one blogger averred to about her making ping-pong balls pop out of her :rule10:.
Click to expand...

Wait...I know someone who claims to have read an email from someone who saw the ping-pong video, and Barack HUSSEIN Obama has never denied its existence, so :id:

sorry, my brain just exploded
 
Last edited:
boloboffin said:
... A non-denial denial this is. And a non-denial denial used when a denial would serve quite well suggests truth behind the rumor....
Click to expand...


Maybe it's just me, but when I categorize something as "dirt and lies", it's anything but a ... umm ... "non-denial denial". But maybe I'm just weird like that.

Dirt is a description of information that can be both true and false. ..
Click to expand...


He said "dirt and lies". Why didn't you address the "lies" part of the statement?
 
Reminds me of a call I got about a chest x-ray I read:

Reason for exam: + PPD, rule out tuberculosis

My reading: normal chest x-ray

Caller: Is there any evidence of Tuberculosis?

My (desired) response: what part of "normal' did you not understand? Is it possible to be "normal" and have evidence of tuberculosis? No? Evidence of tuberculosis is by definition abnormal, is it not? Thus "normal" and "evidence of tuberculosis" are mutually exclusive? Agreed? Therefore, when you receive a reading of normal, you can rightly conclude that there is no evidence of tuberculosis. And no evidence of lung cancer. And no evidence of emphysema. In fact, no evidence of anything "abnormal".

Obama called these allegations "dirt and lies". "dirt and lies" are incompatible with "truth". Does anyone deny this? Is there some ambiguity I am missing?
 
Brainster said:
Thank you, Bolo! It is very likely that Barack just slipped into "lawyer speak". I realized after I posted that "dirt and lies" gave him yet another out, as you noted.
Click to expand...


Well, Bolo didn't note the "and lies" part of it. But he did an admirable job on the "dirt" part.
 
Last edited:
gdnp said:
Obama called these allegations "dirt and lies". "dirt and lies" are incompatible with "truth". Does anyone deny this? Is there some ambiguity I am missing?
Click to expand...

Dirt:

7. Private or personal information which if made public would create a scandal or ruin the reputation of a person, company, etc.
Click to expand...

There is no implication in that definition that "dirt" is untrue private or personal information, etc. In fact, the only good dirt (politically) is dirt that is true.

Now, if we take dirt as true and lies as lies, we can see that we still face a problem; how do you reconcile calling one particular allegation "truth and lies". Answer: You can't. Oh, you could argue that he meant it was a mixture of the two (probably not a good thing for Obama), or you could again look at what he actually said:

"There is dirt and lies that are circulated in e-mails...."
Click to expand...

He's making a generalization, stepping back from the particular accusation and saying that this fits a larger pattern.

It's lawyerly, and as I keep trying to say, probably not (in this case) an indication that he's hiding something. Lawyers never commit to anything if they can avoid it; it's the nature of the beast.
 
Brainster said:
You apparently don't have any concept of what a non-denial denial is.
Click to expand...
I do, however, know that describing a claim as "dirt and lies" is a strong and unequivocal denial of that claim.

You have actually gone off your frickin' head, haven't you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom