Read The Monster of Florence?

So you haven't read Preston and Spezi's big bestseller?

Do so. It's quite a story. Probably not the best prose, but it sure beats those Dan Brown-style thrillers-and this one is a true story: an American novelist and an Italian journalist investigating the murders committed by the "Monster of Florence," but they attract the attention of the local police, who decide that the two men might just be involved in the murders (for a synopsis of the book's events, see this Boston Globe article from 2006, or this piece from The Atlantic).

Anyway, it's an easy, fast read, and it's certainly an intriguing tale.

Aside: You might recall the moniker "Monster of Florence" from the novel Hannibal; the monster was in action while the good doctor was hanging out in Firenze.

Sinclair Loses Blog No. Two

Larry Sinclair's most recent site has been removed completely, and, according to his site host, there will be no return. Again, there's no coming back to Hostmonster for Larry Sinclair. See the details and communications with Hostmonster at The Mitch and Nan Show.

It should come as no surprise; he's consistently violated their terms of service by publishing personal information of those he claims are attacking him (including home addresses and residential and business phone numbers), he encourages his posters to investigate anonymous bloggers who post at sites that oppose or debunk Sinclair's activities and accusations, and he posts recordings of telephone calls that he makes to retaliate against his harassers (any hypocrisy there?). Anyway, he went all out on one woman, she complained, and Hostmonster said "enough is enough. Bye." Once again, Mr. Sinclair confirms that he is his own worst enemy. He deliberately ignores the host's terms of service, so naturally they'll disable or remove his blog. He cannot place this at the feet of any public authority or private blogger: this is his own doing.

Will he resurface? Of course he will. At the very least, he'll appear by proxy on sites by supporters Citizen Wells and Cao. The notoriety, the donations, and the winks of approval from groups such as PUMA and Clintons4McCain are probably too satisfying to surrender. Moreover, at this point, Sinclair has nothing left to lose. He's due in New Castle County superior court (DE) in a week or two, and after that, who knows?

UPDATE: He's back, and this time with StartLogic. Terms of service here. I wonder how long it will take before he (or is supporters) violate the company's terms of service, for certainly it was for this reason that Sinclair was asked to leave Wordpress and Hostmonster. If he could leave the overtly racist and the publishing of people's private information aside, he might have a permanent online home. While he might argue that others "out" various netizens, I'd suggest that "when others do it" he or the outed parties contact authorities and avoid retaliation.

Special thanks to "Anonymous" for the heads up...I was at work and unaware that Sinclair's blog had gone dark.

Avoiding Politics Tonight

A post that has absolutely nothing to do with politics or scandal.

Yesterevening I settled down to watch Dziga Vertov's Man With a Movie Camera, but my heart wasn't in it. I switched over to the cable and began watching Ratatouille instead. Okay, it's a bit of a contrast--from silent Soviet-era avant-garde to splashy Pixar animation--but let me tell you--Ratatouille was a treat. Absolutely delightful, charming, and fresh. I had my doubts--seriously, an hour or so gazing on animated rat hordes? (shudder). The film won me over completely--especially Peter O'Toole's voicing of the gothic and Vincent Price-y restaurant critic Atom Ego (I swear this is a reference to filmmaker Atom Egoyan).

Then another shift. I plugged in a dvd of what promised to be a cheesy Italian giallo titled My Dear Killer (I know--it sounds awful). To my pleased surprise, it was terrific enough to keep me awake past my bedtime. It avoided the giallo cliches, for the most part anyway, and focused on plot rather than death--blackmail, kidnapping, questionable affections for children, and a pretty decent Agatha Christie-type ending that I won't go into. And for once, George Hilton really impressed me.

So last night was a solid gold movie night.

On another note: The other night I tried watching Paul Naschy's turn in Rojo Sangre. Didn't finish it. What an awful film--the director tried to go all out in terms of style and flash, but the plot, although promising (formerly successful actor gets his vengeance out, a la Vincent Price), was terrible--it descended into sheer nastiness. Totally unappealing in every way.


One hundred (100) days until the election!

Is PUMA Supporting Larry Sinclair?

Curious.
In his latest call for cash, Sinclair offers some goodies along the lines of a PBS telethon: he'll send you a bumper sticker for $15.00 and a dvd of his NPC event for $35.00, but the big prize? According to Mr. Sinclair's site,

Each person contributing $100 or more, you will receive one PUMA08 T-Shirt

Either Larry Sinclair is counterfeiting PUMA wear or else PUMA has donated t-shirts to his cause.

Which is it?

If the PUMA group, whether as PumaPac or Puma08, is not associated with Sinclair, they better move fast before their efforts, and their name, get muddied up with his unverified allegations of drugs, gay sex, and murder.

If they have donated gear to Sinclair to help his legal battles, well, what can you say about a group that willingly associates with someone with a 27 year criminal history and who has links to Hal Turner and the Vanguard News Network?

UPDATE: A reader has corresponded with Will Bower this morning, and, apparently, he was quite shocked to learn that Sinclair was issuing PUMA08 shirts (she posted text to one of the emails the comments section below).

Mr. Bower contacted Mr. Sinclair and Montgomery Blair Sibley and had them adjust the wording of Sinclair's offer. The number "'08" has been removed from the t-shirt design, and Sinclair has rephrased his donation plea. However, Mr. Bower won't request that Sinclair desist from using "PUMA":

Alas, PUMA and "Party Unity My Ass" is now a movement that no one really owns.
If it were, then the sportswear company would have more at stake than we would.
I do appreciate your concern, but this one isn't really in anyone's hands at this point.

As an aside: Bower cc'd his email to three women; evidently, my pal wasn't alone in voicing concern about the PUMA-Sinclair "connection."

Note: Apparently, one of Sinclair's major supporters (and one who has admin rights on his blog) is a North Carolina-based real estate broker who has a sideline in Sasquatch research and UFO watching. Why does this not surprise me?

Who is Clintons4McCain's Target Audience?

Although I’m having fits about the John Edwards allegations myself, I find this article about media bias at Clintons4McCain rather interesting. Although an author isn’t cited at Clintons4McCain, the original article was posted by Rob Port at Say Anything and reposted at Agoravox. Mr. Port is “[a] conservative political blogger from North Dakota.”

Clintons4McCain is the co-creation of Cristi Adkins and Peter Boykin. The group, and its site, is allegedly by and for Democrats and Independents who are voting for John McCain because their preferred candidate is not the presumptive Democratic nominee. If this is true, I find the choice of article curious as it’s not exactly intended to appeal to Democrats; rather, it plays on Conservative complaints about Democrats and a perceived "liberal media bias":

Why Is The Media Ignoring John Edwards’ Sex Scandal?

Especially in light of continued rumors about Edwards being a choice for either VP or perhaps AG in the Obama administration?

If you thought the media’s adulation of Obama was bad, the double standard they’re clinging to on Edwards’ love child problem is perhaps even worse.

[I’ve snipped a lengthy cite from Slate]

C’mon. If this were happening to a Republican every citizen in America would know all the gory details. As it stands now if you were to ask one of your non-political junkie friends what was going on with Edwards’ love affair they’d probably give you a blank stare.

Edwards gets a pass because Edwards is a liberal and that’s just the way it is. At some point Americans are going to have to wake up and realize that the journalists they’ve trusted to bring them sound, thorough and objective reporting aren’t doing it any more.

The article focuses on media bias at work; this is not my focus at the moment (admittedly, I am tempted to agree with this if reports that the LA Times is squashing blog commentary at their site are true).

That Clintons4McCain chose to repost this article suggests that the group is not so much pro-Clinton as it is pro-GOP. For example, it repeats the oft-heard complaint, "if this was about Republicans. . ." (and yes, Democrats rely on this complaint as well. In fact, I used it the other day), and it utilizes the now-perjorative term "liberal" to define Edwards. Yet these are minor items. More striking is that the author claims that the “media adulation of Obama” is bad, but the cover up of the Edwards story is possibly worse. This is a surprising redirection of attention for a site ostensibly supportive of Clinton, and McCain by default: Edwards isn’t running for president anymore, and rumors that he's on Obama's VP list are just that--rumors. Why use a pro-Clinton forum to attack Democrats who are no longer in the race?

I'm just asking.

Update: My mistake. It seems they are discussing the Edwards mess at the LA Times.

More on the Edwards Rumor

Apparently, Fox News has just confirmed the National Enquirer's report of catching Edwards at a Beverly Hills with Rielle Hunter. Damn.

In my last post, I stated that last year's rumors that political a sex scandal was about to burst into the open were not about Larry Sinclair. Here is why:

Last summer, this blind item from the New York Post’s Page Six appeared all over the Internets:

August 27, 2007 -- WHICH political candidate enjoys visiting New York because he has a girlfriend who lives downtown? The pol tells her he'll marry her when his current wife is out of the picture.

Pretty cold, no? The gossip sites guessed the pol to be Edwards, Thomspon, or Guiliani, by the way.

In October, the Enquirer reported on the same rumors. The tabloid named Edwards, but they withheld explicit information on Hunter. Shortly thereafter, New York Magazine published a fairly detailed examination of how the little blind item grew into the full-on rumor that the Enquirer published. Granted, the story's goal was to dismiss the rumors, and it succeeded, but it also included updates linking to the Los Angeles Times, which had reported, albeit briefly, on the Edwards story. The LA Times article quickly vanished:

Update: The LA Times saw fit to mention the rumors last night on their website when Edwards again denied any affair. Meanwhile, Kausfiles picks up on a denial from Rielle Hunter herself, and questions why the Drudge Report has steered clear of this particular storyline.

Update 2: The Los Angeles Times link has mysteriously disappeared, but John Edwards tells the AP the Enquirer story is "completely untrue, ridiculous...I've been in love with the same women for 30-plus years and as anybody who's been around us knows, she's an extraordinary human being, warm, loving, beautiful, sexy and as good a person as I have ever known,'' he said. ''So the story's just false."

These updates appear to have been added on the 17th or 18th of October. On October 31st, this item popped up at The Moderate Voice:

Is the Los Angeles Times sitting on a sex scandal story about a certain presidential candidate that could blow the campaign wide open?

Rumors about the story- “ which apparently does not involve a certain guy who gets $300 haircuts — have been circulating in Washington for some time. The story apparently is ready, which means that it has been checked, double-checked and lawyered, but the Times apparently doesn't know when or whether to let it rip.

Although the story suggests Edwards isn't the pol in question, this seems a case of the Times playing it safe. And it might have worked--except that in December 2007 the Enquirer reported that Hunter was preparing to give birth to Edwards's child. All involved denied the story. Most people forgot about it--that is, until a day or two ago.

And why am I making a point of discussing the Sinclair thing? Because his supporters have been using the bit from The Moderate Voice as "evidence" that Washington knew all about Larry Sinclair and people (read: the GOP) were just holding onto it until just before the 2008 elections.

The question of whether the Hunter and Sinclair rumors are equivalent--well, not exactly. Again, there seems to be some true evidence in support of the Enquirer's claims. Sinclair's "evidence," on the other hand, has yet to see the light of day.

Aside: Jonah Goldberg, a man with whom I tend to disagree, put something out that I find worth citing here:

Whatever the merits of the whole Edwards love child story, are we really supposed to believe that one of America's most famous trial lawyers wouldn't sue a publication that printed defamatory and slanderous lies about him?

Although common sense dictates that someone accused of deplorable activities should ignore those accusations rather than give them air time, which effectively legitimizes the claims, it may well be time for Edwards to address the allegations of his relationship with Hunter.

Of Cancer and Adultery.

I'm off to accompany my beloved to a local Relay for Life event, but I want to post these two bits:

1) Randy Pausch, author of The Last Lecture, died today of cancer. He was 46 when he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer last year.

2) The husband of the amazing and admirable Elizabeth Edwards just might be a true ratbag—and we're talking ratbag of the first degree--if The National Enquirer is correct.

Rumors of an affair between John Edwards and a woman named Rielle Hunter have been floating around the tabloids and the Internet for nearly a year now, and the Enquirer has just published a story claiming that the magazine caught him at a late night rendevouz with Hunter. Read Slate's article here. I also recommend MondoReb's interview with David Perel, the Enquirer's editor-in-chief, here (note: DBKP has followed the Edwards story for some time now).

If true, this is disheartening to say the least. To think of John Edwards, once the Dem's golden boy, sidling up to Newt Gingrich and John McCain in the messing-around-while- married-to-a-very-ill-woman sweeps, especially considering that the sick woman is Elizabeth Edwards—well, it makes the stomach churn.

Aside: The difference between the Edwards rumor and the Sinclair rumor is that seems to be some actual evidence in support of the Edwards rumor. Sorry Sinclair supporters: this is the rumor that all those pundits were alluding to last autumn.

** Yes, I'm a few days behind as far as "breaking news" goes. Busy...

Ich Bin Ein Obama (ok--enough of the JFK puns)

I'd forgotten about Obama's appearance in Berlin today, but my beloved 'phoned to tell
me that 200,000 people had gathered in the streets
of Berlin to hear the candidate's speech.*
Wow.

Full text of today's Obamatory here.
The UK Times account here.
The Guardian's story here.
Der Spiegel's article here.

I am so pleased, so proud, that an American--after these past five years of catastrophic foreign policies and willful antagonism towards our traditional allies--has inspired so many, many people throughout the globe.

I tell you what, if this man does not win the presidency, McCain would be well wise to appoint Obama to some kind of "global" ambassadorship. Obama can travel the world and remind allies and foes alike of the goodness and idealism that lies at the U.S.A.'s heart (in spite of the Current Occupant's disastrous eight year misrule).

Added: I've just seen that the Current Occupant has forbidden State Department employees from attending Obama's Berlin speech. Doesn't this interfere with freedom of speech rights? Ah well. Allegedly, this order was an attempt to maintain political neutrality. Okay, I'll buy that. But if it was McCain in Berlin, would the State Department issue a similar order?

* So how long before people begin concocting reasons to explain away Obama's crowds? If you recall, when 75,000 people attended his rally in Portland, pundits claimed that the crowd only showed up because a band, was playing the event.

Update and answer to question above: Not long at all! Apparently, Berliners were compelled to attend the speech because they wanted to see a reggae performer, Patrice, and a band called Reamonn, and not Obama after all! See here. Come on--you knew it was only a matter of time before someone would find a way to dismiss the Berlin crowd.

On another note: They finally got Radovan Karadzic. It's about f***ing time. Now sling him up and go all ling chi on his war criminal ass.

Fresh Astroturf for the Presidential Campaign

To think that this all began with an a minister of the church of Metallica.

Once we began to look into America's Hope Foundation, we were lead to look into other anti-Obama organizations--most disguised as pro-Hillary sites--and we've learned that there's some serious astroturf being laid out. Curiously, much of it originates from beyond the USA's borders, including Canada and Madeira.

We'll be relating our findings soon (admittedly, there's so much material that it takes some time to sort through it all), but rest assured--the GOP is involved. The RNC's hand isn't always in this jar, but it surely seems as though some dedicated Republicans and social conservatives (not at all the same thing) have gone out of their way to blanket the Internet with blogs and pacs to give the impression that all of the 18 million people who voted for Hillary Clinton in the primaries, plus a million or so more, are telling the wicked DNC (insert devil laugh) to nominate Hillary OR ELSE.

Caveat: This does not imply that the majority of Hillary Clinton's supporters are GOP operatives; rather, many are "true" Democrats whose anger or frustration has been channeled and manipulated by groups organized along the lines of Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos.

Sinclair: Blog No. Two Goes *poof*

While messing around on the Internet this a.m., I wandered over to Larry Sinclair's new site (he was booted off of Wordpress last week). To my surprise, the following message appeared:

This Account Has Been Suspended Please contact the support department as soon as possible, and please have your site name ready.

Admittedly, I haven't been checking in to see what Sinclair's been up to this week, at least not regularly, so I can't say why he's been shut down. My guess? Threats, posting someone's private information, revealing confidential information (e.g., the attorney Richard Wier; Sinclair placed his phone message online), inciting his regular posters to investigate and disrupt people's private lives, etc. Take your pick. Naturally, I'll offer a caveat: this could well be something inconsequential, like a software goof.

It's doubtless that we'll soon hear why the site went down; Sinclair will resurface somewhere, somehow. And after complaining that his site was sabotaged by bloggers, or that the DNC was trying to silence him, he'll confess, sooner or later, that Hostmonster suspended the site due to some error in Sinclair's own judgment or abilities.

UPDATE: Sinclair's site now displays the announcement:

This Domain (larrysinclair0926.com) Has Been Disabled

As the banner also includes instructions for restoring the the site, I'm assuming that Hostmonster has not terminated Sinclair's account, so we can expect him to amend his site and return any time now.

FYI: Hostmonster's terms of service.

UPDATE2: It's back! And this is a good thing because DBKP has been preparing a three part, detailed debunking of Sinclair's story, and they'll be needing his site for research purposes. If you haven't reviewed their library of Sinclair-related articles, I recommend that you head on over there and take a look at what Little Baby Ginn and MondoReb have cooked up for you.

Dominant Inconsistencies and Anti-Obamites

The Internet has grown heavy with the proliferation of anti-Obama groups. Some of these coalitions are, at least ostensibly, pro-Hillary Clinton. Some are bluntly anti-Obama while others play at concerned neutrality.

You might think that these groups, organized to make a splash in the ’08 election, would aim to make their online presence as transparent as possible so as to avoid any accusations of "dirty tricks," of being GOP front groups (a la the Cristi Adkins / Clintons4McCain story), or of "faking" their numbers (e.g., astroturfing) and thereby being dismissed by the media and/or the electorate.

I've noticed lately that many--indeed, the majority--of the anti-Obama but pro-Dem/Hillary groups share similar GoDaddy and Earthlink registrations. For now, I'd like to discuss the latter as it ties into something I've been rambling on about for the past month: that's right. We're back to America's Hope Foundation and Obama Hate Speech, which have recently joined the Just Say No Deal coalition.

The person who registered both sites has several other similar domains going, some of which have folded, some haven't gone live, and some are withering. The following material intrigues me as it forces the question, "why?" Why register so many websites, and under rather shady circumstances? Here are some of Jonathan Davis's/Jdawg's anti-Obama/pro-Hillary websites listed by their date of registration, domain name, and current status:

5/26 Votergate08.com (last updated 5/24)

5/26 Countallvotes.org (last updated 5/27)

6/05 Drafthillary2008.com (welcome message)

6/09 Americahopefoundation.com (welcome message)

6/09 Americashopefoundation.com (live)

6/09 Operationnobama.com (welcome message)

6/09 Usahopefoundation.com (welcome message)

6/18 Ohiofightsback.com (welcome message)

7/03 Obamahatespeech.com (live)

Each of these websites share the following registration information:

Organisation Name.... Jonathan Davis

Organisation Address. 166 blue mountain rd

Organisation Address. front royal

Organisation Address. 22630

Organisation Address. VA

Organisation Address. UNITED STATES

Admin Name........... Jonathan Davis

Admin Address........ 166 blue mountain rd

Admin Address........ front royal

Admin Address........ 22630

Admin Address........ VA

Admin Address........ UNITED STATES

Admin Email.......... jdawg2008@earthlink.net

Admin Phone.......... +1.540[redacted]

Points:

1. The organization address, “166 Blue Mountain Road, Front Royal, VA,” does not exist.

2. The phone number for the registrant (504-xxx-xxxx) does not match the registrant’s name. Instead, the number belongs to a woman, V. I. Givens, who does live in Front Royal.

3. The email address is invalid.

The above, along with AHF's employment of a questionable (at best) "Reverend" prompts me to consider their motivation: why all the dissimulation if they're only concerned about Hillary's success? What other reasons might underlie their deception? And did they intentionally select the name of a KORN member for the registrant? Of course, this assumes that the registrant's name was fake, but there hasn't been much to cast doubts on that possibility.

Finally, as a source pointed out to me, the telephone contact information offered on Count All Votes does not belong to the name listed on the site: “Count All Votes” lists “Aaron McCauley” as their contact along with a Seattle-area telephone number. No Aaron McCauley exists at the telephone number. It belongs, instead, to a person named McCathern, who is, according to comments left on various blogs, a Clinton supporter. But to mismatch a name and number, well...perhaps they weren't really expecting anyone to call.

As I'm still pursuing some points, I've resisted drawing conclusions for the moment. I'm just sharing information for now and looking forward to building on this material. But I'd like to note: a zillion websites devoted to a cause does not equate with a zillion people being devoted to that cause. It doesn't even give the appearance of a zillion people being devoted to a cause. And people know you can "fake" a website, just as you can "fake" signatures on an online petition. So, again, why do it if you run the risk of discrediting your movement?


On another note: As I browse the anti-Obama sites, I keep coming across a line reasoning that equates with the thesis that "because 18 million voted for Hillary, none of them will vote for Obama." Either/or fallacy, folks. Look it up.

I'll return to the "GOP front group" issue soon.

Special thanks to questing horse--the anti-Rocinante.

Obama's Most Recent Conservative Convert

If you haven't had a chance to review this article, here's your chance:
"I'm a Lifelong Conservative Activist and I'm Backing Barack Obama," by Larry Hunter. Excerpt:

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.

Ouch. Someone hand Senator McCain a Band Aid--he's bleeding economists.

Anyways, read and enjoy the article.

A Virtual Sticky Note

I've been putting together a longish piece on the sites America's Hope Foundation and Obama Hate Speech; I'm fairly sure that I have conclusive evidence that a GOP front group, featuring some familiar names, is behind the two Virginia-based efforts. I say "fairly sure" because I'm awaiting final confirmation on a few items.

I also have some evidence that the people behind these groups include themselves among Larry Sinclair's supporters. However, although they might back his efforts, whether they actually believe him or not is another question entirely. They're more interested in bringing Obama down than vindicating Sinclair, which explains what happened earlier this week. America's Hope Foundation withdrew its Sinclair ads (just about the same time as the Ricki Lieberman noise was kicking off. Hmmmm). Of the cutting of ties, well, let's simply say that America's Hope Foundation incurred Sinclair's displeasure.

Anyways, check back tomorrow and things ought to be laid out nice and precisely for you.

Aside: It's a Friday night in July. I wonder if Reverend Tim L. Donovan has a gig?

And Featuring Rev. Tim L. Donovan, Lead Guitar for America's Hope Foundation

Review these photos.
The one at the left is of "Reverend" Tim L. Donovan, spokesman for "America's Hope Foundation."
The photograph at the right is from the MySpace site of "Irondragonz," a heavy metal band based in Shenandoah, Virginia (update: Irondragonz's MySpace now lists the band's location as Washington DC; they're still based in Virginia). Anyway, take a gander at the fella just under the wall clock. Pretty striking resemblance, wouldn't you say?

Among its members, Irondragonz features gentlemen by the names of Tim W. Donovan, songwriter and vocalist, and Tim L. Donovan, lead guitarist and, occasionally, drummer and vocalist. Tim W. and Tim L. appear to be father and son (respectively), and daddy's MySpace provides some interesting details about his home life:

Status: Married
Here for: Friends
Orientation: Straight
Hometown: obamaville next to crack town
Ethnicity: Latino / Hispanic
Religion: Other
Zodiac sign: Virgo
Children: Proud parent
Education: High school
Occupation: slave trader

Charming, eh?

Oddly enough, two "Tim Donovans" appear on a "Count All Votes" e-peitition. From Google’s cache of that petition as retrieved on Jul 2, 2008 (I've redacted names not related to America's Hope Foundation, and I've left Ms. Adkins's just "because"):

Name	Comments
7 Aaron McCauley	Shame on the DNC. They should know better. [McCauley is Count All Vote's media contact]
10 Tim Donovan	count these votes!
11 Tim L Donovan
13 Cristi Adkins	All voices have a right to be heard and all votes matter. It is odd that a child of civil rights activist would 'hush' the voters of Florida and Michigan; regardless of the rationale. Incongruent of a 'Not Politics as Usual' mantra as well. Cristi Adkins

There's another name or two that I'm curious about, but I've removed them for the moment.

After America's Hope Foundation chose to discard their Sinclair ads, I thought to ignore them. Then I took a look at their YouTube page. Several of their anti-Obama videos ' titles use the word "white," as in, "hate of whites," "white greed,"and "just how white folks will do ya." This focus on how whites will be harmed by Obama certainly brings their motivation into question.

Of course, this whole thing could be publicity stirring shenanigans for their bar band. If so, it's a strange way to be garnering media attention.

Added: I forgot to include that a Timothy Donovan does reside in Front Royal, VA, but his address doesn't match that of the AHF/OHS registrant (actually, the registrant's phone number; the registrant's given address is not a residence). This Tim Donovan might not be affiliated with this group in any way. I know that seems unlikely, but I don't want to post unconfirmed material. There's enough of that going on at the moment. Oh, but I can add that it appears the entire Donovan clan supports Hillary Clinton. Four of them appear on the petition--they were so eager they even beat Cristi Adkins in signing their names.

Update: Since this post, Donovan the Elder has edited his MySpace page. Rather than revise his responses to the categories of "hometown" ("obamaville next to crack town") and "occupation" ("slave trader"), he's simply removed those categories from his "details" section.

August 16th: Please see this update.

Note: Many thanks are due Anti-Rocinante for aiding this post

Not One Shred of Dignity

Tonight, Larry Sinclair appeared on Hal Turner's show to repeat the same tired claims.

Turner mocked Sinclair by playing "songs" about gay men and freeloaders; he played "jokes" about homosexuals. He told Sinclair that he hates him "on principle."

Mr. Sinclair, you worry about bloggers, and you define them as enemies out to destroy you and your credibility. Look in any available mirror. There's your enemy.

Maybe you should have listened to your supporters who actually preferred that you maintain dignity by skipping Turner's program. The rest of them? I'm sure you did them proud.

Addition: Sure enough

[ZZZZ] Says:
Larry, great interview — I am really proud of you —

Added two days later: a Sinclair supporter, JoAnn Bjorkman, reconfirms the nexus of Sinclair's believers and unbridled racism when she sends her thoughts to The Mitch and Nan Show:

Obama is a nigger, a fag, a shame to our country and to that hag of a wife. Take that and stuff it in your mouth cause it seems that is all you can do….run that mouth.

I'm sure that Ms. Bjorkman was pleased as punch with Sinclair's Hal Turner interview. She probably had a good laugh at his expense (all those gay jokes) while simultaneously thrilling to the idea that Hal Turner can somehow help put that uppity candidate back in his place.

Are you really, truly, sincerely just fine about this, Mr. Sinclair?

Sinclair and Racism: It's Confirmed.

Hal Turner. Hal freaking Turner.

Call me gullible. Call me a soft touch, but I am dumbfounded by Larry Sinclair's most recent actions, which seem to confirm the underlying motivation in his six month assailing of Senator Obama.

Larry Sinclair has announced that he will appear on Hal Turner's radio show on Wednesday, 16 July.

Hal Turner: The white nationalist and anti-Semite. The Holocaust denier. The supporter of National Vanguard and other supremacist groups. The man whose website, "Whitelandia," features posts on the "dismantling of white culture" and "breaking news for white folks." the man who advocates shooting immigrants. The man who called for murdering judges.
A man who has offered up these pearls of wisdom, compassion, and concern for the public welfare, as cited by the SPL:

[Turner] rants about a "Portable Nigger Lyncher" machine, "faggots," "savage Negro beasts," "bull-dyke lesbians" and "lazy-ass Latinos ... slithering across the border."

He's been honored with his very own page at the ADL. Enjoy.

Mr. Sinclair, if you'd ever truly hoped for mainstream media's attention, you've certainly gone about it in a strange way. If MSM journalists covered your tale now, it would only follow along the lines of "Larry Sinclair, a frequent guest of such fringe broadcasters as Jeff Rense, has also associated with Hal Turner, the noted anti-Semite and Aryan nationalist." You took such pains to distance yourself from Hillary Clinton's supporters' groups and being portrayed as politically motivated, so I admit, I cannot comprehend your reasoning. You say you just want to get the "truth" out there. Look at who you're offering that "truth" to.

The man is rabidly anti-gay, yet you--a self-proclaimed gay man--are willing to commune with him. Now your motivation will be framed as pure and simple racism. I've resisted the rages that "he's just out to bring down the first black presidential nominee." Now, I'm not so sure. This seems to be precisely your goal.

You can forget dreams of anything more than widespread public disgust.

In the words of Mr. Welch,

You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

Aside: Yes, the Goya's ugly; it's appropriate.

Added: oh, the American Nazi Party is loving the Turner interview, according to the website Ivory Power (get it? Ivory power, That's pretty clever!). No links provided, but if you Google it, I'm sure it will pop up.

"America's Hope Foundation" Pulls Sinclair Ad

An update on a post from 01 July.

The anti-Obama organization, "America's Hope Foundation" (also see here) has decided against running the ads featuring Larry Sinclair's allegations.

In a post on the AHF sister site, "ObamaHateSpeech" (which features a charming little photoshopped picture of the candidate with horns, smeared/sneering lips, and a swastika lapel pin), the group's spokesman, "Reverend Tim Donovan," announced:

We initially felt that the SInclair matter was important for the American people to hear and investigate. We produced a radio ad and distributed it (in a very limited period of time and number of spots). We had planned to air a television ad related to the issue as well, and in preparation for that we launched a due diligence inquiry into the allegations. This is important for any organization that is going to produce or distribute material of a controversial nature. During this inquiry we found several issues that made us more uncomfortable with the material. At question, specifically, was whether Mr. Sinclair was consistent in answers to questions he has been asked in interviews and in public.

In response, Sinclair has attacked "America's Hope Foundation for its decision; he's gone so far as to call them a hoax created by the Obama/Axelrod/Biden trinity). To which Reverend Donovan replied that the group would not engage in an online battle, noting:

We simply no longer believe that the information in your allegations is in fact true, and therefore we cannot support it. Should we become convinced at a later time that your allegations are true, we may reconsider our decision. I will hold you in my prayers, as I know you must be going through a great deal. I would simply offer you one bit of advice, it seems you have a tendency to make enemies. While I am certain that there are Obama people focused on attacking you, I am also becoming convinced that more often than not these are folks you have needlessly attacked, slammed, or smeared. This is all prompting me to question your mental health — and believe me this is not an attack — but I think you need to be more careful in who you associate with, who you bring close to you, and when you choose to attack those who ask questions.

Admittedly, this came as quite a surprise to me. I'd anticipated that, sooner or later, bloggers or the MSM would discover that "American's Hope Foundation" was founded and supported by Sinclair and/or his associates. Instead, the group actually explored Sinclair's claims and, having found them lacking in credibility or evidence, suggested that he might be experiencing "mental health" issues. I'm sure that many bloggers had already concluded the latter point.

For the record, I'm not one of them.

UPDATE: As of 17 July, "America's Hope Foundation"/ "Obama Hate Speech" has joined forces with "Just Say No Deal," an umbrella organization consisting of PUMA types. Apparently, they haven't had much success at raising money. Or so they say.

The New Yorker Cover

Color me ambivalent.
I understand it's satire aimed at all of those anti-Obama smears, and I agree with others that the cartoon is alarming--but isn't that a good thing?

Surely the public reaction indicates that The New Yorker's caricature of the Obamas--Barack as a Muslim and Michelle as a revolutionary--has done its job. The media and electorate are discussing it--and the ideas motivating it--openly.

Once again, we have an opportunity to both explore and debunk allegations associating the Obamas with everything from treason to being Muslim and cavorting with terrorists.

I doubt that the cover gives anyone "ammunition" to use against Obama, as one commentor at The Petition Site claims. Who in their right mind will see this cartoon as confirmation that smears, such as those cited by Snopes.com, are true? The people who were fighting tooth and nail against Obama in the first place, that's who: the racists, the white nationalists, the do-or-die social conservatives, and other fringe groups.

In a side note: the cover arrives on the heels of a investigative article that tracks the generation and transmission of the "Obama is a Muslim" smear that criss-crossed the country via email. Apparently, those allegations originated with a failed Chicago politician who has had a burr in his butt about Obama for several years now.

Tony Snow, RIP

It's been announced that Tony Snow has lost his battle against C-R cancer.
I didn't agree with his political views or the reasoning he set forth within his work, but that means nothing.

Snow was a good man. From what I understand, he was a loving family man. I do know that his associates in the press loved him. As an observer, I found him a pleasure to watch during the White House press briefings.

Good bye, Tony. And thanks. You will be missed.

Sinclair to Lose Blog?

Wordpress might well yank Sinclair's blog if recent rumors (from trusted sources) bear out. It seems he has consistently violated the company's terms of service by requesting that his posters research information on private individuals and then posting that information on his site.

Sinclair often responds that his actions are only fair; after all, don't people post his information online? This is true. However, Sinclair himself posts documents and personal details online; he's done so since January 2008. In other words, he has placed that information in the public eye.

I'm not so worried about whether or not Sinclair posts information on convicted felons, but I do think he steps over the line by posting unfounded accusations against certain private citizens and then revealing that person's identity, home address, place of work, and telephone numbers. This is an incitement to harassment.

Apparently, Wordpress has had enough. Will Sinclair resurface with a new site? Possibly. Until then, if you follow this story, you'll know where to find him in the downtime.

UPDATE: When I initially posted this item, I was under the impression that Wordpress had actually pulled Sinclair’s blog. My reasons for believing this:

1. Earlier today, Sinclair began posting back-and-forth emails between himself and Alex at Wordpress. Alex asked Sinclair to either confirm his sources for individuals’ personal information Sinclair had posted, and Sinclair responded that Wordpress had ignored his own complaints about others posting information about him.

2. Sinclair announced he was leaving Wordpress as of Monday, 7/14/08, but that his Wordpress blog would remain up and running (albeit with no new posts) until that time.

3. At approximately 6:00 pm EDT, the site went inactive.

4. At approximately 6:45 EDT, the blog reappeared, and Sinclair posted the following:

Larry Sinclair Says:
Friday, July 11, 2008 at 5:47 pm
WordPress was asked to reactivate the blog long enough for me to retrieve my files and images. We will still be moving to LarrySinclair0926.com

I will not publish any further articles on this site.

As the blog had actually gone dark, and Sinclair later asserted that he'd asked Wordpress to reactive the site for archival retrieval, we might assume that Wordpress did, indeed, pull the site--I rather doubt that Sinclair pulled the site, and his "moving announcement," voluntarily before setting up elsewhere.

By the way, there's a slight update on the Delaware situation; see DelawareOnline for the details.

Added 7/12: I'm thinking that this will be my final commentary on the whole Sinclair situation. It's gone from being shockingly silly to absolutely ludicrous, and there are far better stories to waste my time on. No matter its value as an example of Internet-driven conspiracies, there's simply no need to discuss each foolish new addition to the story. Of course, I might just change my mind if something truly silly hits the 'nets.

It's Too Hot for Whining Nuts

I really wanted to write a post on Phil Gramm’s ridiculous, condescending commentary about the American public’s gullibility and "whining" about the economy, as well as John McCain’s hysterically funny response. I also wanted to lay out some questions about Jesse Jackson's stake in maintaining the baby boomer culture wars, as exemplified in his comments about Barack Obama. Alas, today's a rush, and it's too hot to sit at the computer in my stuffy office. So for now:

“Heat” by H. D. (Hilda Doolittle)

O wind, rend open the heat,
cut apart the heat,
rend it to tatters.

Fruit cannot drop
through this thick air--
fruit cannot fall into heat
that presses up and blunts
the points of pears
and rounds the grapes.

Cut the heat--
plough through it,
turning it on either side
of your path.

A Romantic Diversion

Now that sounds potentially naughty, doesn't it?

For some reason, the Romantics (not the new wave band) were well represented on the radio yesterday. I listened to an early-morning program that discussed Lyrical Ballads' emergence from a cultural shift. Then I heard Garrison Keillor reciting some Wordsworth later in the day. I admit, Wordsworth is my least favorite Romantic, and he is one of my least favorite poets--I find his glorification of nature and man a bit cloying at times. Even so, listening to the discussion and to the recitation, put me in mind of this:

from "Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood" (l. 58-76)

Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:

The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star,

Hath had elsewhere its setting,

And cometh from afar:

Not in entire forgetfulness,

And not in utter nakedness,

But trailing clouds of glory do we come

From God, who is our home:

Heaven lies about us in our infancy!

Shades of the prison-house begin to close

Upon the growing Boy,

But he beholds the light, and whence it flows,

He sees it in his joy;

The Youth, who daily farther from the east

Must travel, still is Nature's Priest,

And by the vision splendid

Is on his way attended;

At length the Man perceives it die away,

And fade into the light of common day.

(1807)

"But trailing clouds of glory do we come"--such a beautiful, evocative line.

A curious aside: The excellent film about Ian Curtis, the lead singer of Joy Division, titled Control, featured Curtis's character reciting Wordsworth's "My Heart Leaps Up." Is there something in the zeitgeist?

Disclaiming Once the Damage is Done, then Reversing the Message

Two points to make today, and for once I've included links to Sinclair's blog (for citation purposes only). (links removed. Please Google)

1. For posterity's sake, I'd like to note that Sinclair added an official caveat to his Wordpress site today:

DISCLAIMER
"I do not necessarily subscribe to any of the opinions of the posters on my blog -- the posters are uniquely responsible for their own messages." I am the only person with Administrative Privileges on this Blog except in emergency situations.

Sinclair also claims that all "articles, original photos, comments, and other material on [the] site is [sic] the sole property of Larry Sinclair." In fact, he repeats that "all comments submitted to this blog become the sole property of Larry Sinclair" (of course, thanks to that pesky fair use doctrine, I can cite such material for critical purposes). But the point is that he's claiming and disclaiming the material simultaneously; I suppose I simply don't understand why he'd want to claim "ownership" of certain comments (see below)

My guess as to the disclaimer's appearance? Someone finally told him that the racist, overly sexual, and plain old whacky comments were not only getting out of hand, but that they did more damage to Sinclair than anything he might say. This includes the comments I noted here. Rather than moderate his blog for inflammatory content (except, of course, the less-than-positive commentary directed at him), he dissociates himself from the commentary it contains. Well enough. The problem in, for the past several months, his silence over such commentary implies endorsement of messages left.


In recent weeks, Sinclair seems to have made an effort to "soften" the tone of his blog; no surprise (you might review Politico's briefly-described reaction to the site). I assume that he's finally realized that people who have the power to make real decisions--decisions beyond determining how great a donation a loaf of nut bread deserves--might also take a look at his blog and associate him with its content. You'd assume that, seeking publicity from the MSM and all, he'd have paid attention to this slight point earlier.

2. For once he doesn't bother to use qualifiers such as "alleged," "purported" or "possible association" in tying Obama to murder:

1. Larry Sinclair Says:
   Sunday, July 6, 2008 at 8:51 pm

   [snip]

   The issues here are Barack Obama being a crack smoker, having being killed to protect his political dreams and his use of internet warriors and US Attorneys and Senators connections to silenced anyone who attempts to expose the truth about him.

First he adds a disclaimer as evidence of his good sense, then he reverses that inclination towards sensibility by repeating his accusations in purely confrontational language.

You have to admit--that latter post makes him look just a mite kooky. Between the drugs, the murder, and the vast cabal of politicians and lawyers out to cover everything up--well, not even Clancy could invent a plot this inane. But that fits Sinclair's tale precisely. Consider: from its genesis in a motel room, where Sinclair filmed his first YouTube video, to his press conference and subsequent arrest on valid warrants out of Delaware, to today's complaints aimed at the Obama campaign, which continues to ignore him (justifiably so), and a secret society of elites that has dedicated itself to masking Sinclair's story.

No. Not even Clancy could pull that off--successfully, at any rate.


UPDATE: An Anonymous comment posted at 1:30:

No one has told me to do anything. I have always stated the only comments that I will be responsible for are the ones that I actually make.

It is interesting that you claim all these types of comments but fail to mention how you and your sister bloggers have made far worse than anything I have found on my blog.

Not to mention the admissions of out right illegal activity that you and your sister bloggers have acknowledge you have and continue to engage in.

Have a nice day.

To Anonymous: You suggest that m, p, & g s is responsible for the actions of people unaffiliated with this blog. Please provide details to support your claims; more importantly, please cite evidence of illegal activity on this site. Unless you can supply supporting material, your allegations are baseless. I encourage you to cease and desist in asserting such claims.
Thank you.

Obama Maintains Lead Over McCain & Looking Ahead

Obama remains up, albeit by a slim margin:

Gallup has him at a 5% advantage over McCain nationally: 47% to 42%.

Real Clear Politics has Obama leading with an average of 5.7%.

Rasmussen reports that Libertarians back Obama over McCain 53% to 38%, and in a national poll, Obama leads McCain 47% to 40%.

While it's a slender lead, Obama has remained consistently ahead of McCain since he was declared the presumptive nominee. In fact, Gallup notes that McCain "has not held a statistically significant lead since early May." No wonder McCain has, once again, shaken up his staff.

My guess is that polls will remain thisclose up until November 4th. There will be bumps and dips as we move through the Democratic and Republican conventions, and as 527 ads begin to overtake our television screens and radio broadcasts, but it does look as though the country will maintain the near 50/50 ideological split that we've had in recent years. (Hey--Charlie Cook agrees! )

Aside: I missed blogging on Wesley Clark's commentary that suggested John McCain's military service, and his experience as a POW, didn't qualify him to be president. Not only was this ludicrously inappropriate, but it was just an asshole thing to say. I'm mighty pleased that Obama chucked him. I won't say "threw him under the bus" for this reason.

Reading the Declaration of Independence

I hope all celebrants enjoyed a safe and happy 4th of July.

Our local paper has a tradition of including the Declaration of Independence every 4th (I'm sure most papers in the nation do so), and I had the pleasure of reading it out loud to a friend who has never read it before. It's striking how many US citizens are aware of the document but have never taken five or ten minutes to actually read it (I'm regularly shocked by students who say they've only heard of, and never looked at, this masterful expression of US ideology and idealism). So if you haven't done so before, here you go:

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should

commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the

Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Larry Sinclair's Complete* Criminal History

*Perhaps only partially complete. There may well be more to come.

Please visit this site for a series of allegations detailing Sinclair's criminal history, which includes, apparently, incidents that occurred not only when Sinclair was out of prison, but while he was incarcerated (and he's been incarcerated a lot). The bloggers supply specific evidence--dates, locations, case numbers, and more.

About the current charges in Delaware, Delaware Online claims that Sinclair attempted to pay for a hotel room with bad money orders. If you're at all curious about this fellow, please see Mitch and Nan's site for full details on other law-oriented items.

(UPDATE: From Delaware Online 12 July.)

To tell you the truth, I was shocked at the consistency of Sinclair's crimes--fraud. Deceit. Initially, I thought his record only centered on a few states--Colorado, Florida, and, most recently, Delaware--and a few incidents. But it seems more extensive than these. Remember Ben Smith's piece at Politico on Sinclair's criminal history? It seems that Smith only scraped the surface.


Note: Sinclair is due before the judge for an arraignment on criminal charges on Thursday, 03 July. His lawyer, a well-respected figure who thought he was being hired for a criminal matter, apparently viewed Sinclair's website, then promptly picked up the phone to call Sinclair. The attorney told Sinclair to "forget it." It's no shock, or it shouldn't be, anyways. The poor man thought he was being retained on a criminal matter. Then he discovered that Sinclair was telling his supporters the attorney's job was to help implicate Obama--it would help "get to the truth" of the matter and bring down Obama. The attorney saw this, along with Sinclair's accusations against Beau Biden, the Delaware Attorney General, and Senator Joe Biden (that they'd invented charges against him). The attorney realized he'd been played, and this is why the attorney backed out. He apparently didn't want to be associated with something as tawdry and questionable as Sinclair's story.

Wyndham Lewis Gets His Exhibition

The long-neglected* Wyndham Lewis finally gets a showing at a celebrated London gallery. The National Portrait Gallery's special exhibition of Lewis's portraits has officially begun. You can view the NPG's Lewis collection here.

As high modernism's centenary approaches (I'm calling it at 2022), we'll soon encounter a barrage of major exhibitions and conferences, etc. dedicated to the folks involved. Ya think?

* Some argue that neglecting Lewis is appropriate considering his often shockingly offensive views. See my comments here on that matter.

(Perhaps hard to believe, but my interests do extend beyond American politics and yellow journalism. Occasionally, at any rate).

In For a Whole New Kind of Ugly: America's Hope Foundation

Hold on to your hats, folks. A press release has just appeared online. Read:

America’s Hope Foundation, which plans to run TV and Radio ads in swing states throughout the United States from July to November, announces two new radio ads that will begin airing on July 2, 2008 in markets across the country. The ads may be heard on the Foundation’s website (see below).
The ad descriptions follow:

• Obama – Iran ad – This ad focuses on the discrepancies in Obama’s statements related to the nuclear situation in Iran. In his own words, Obama downplays Iran’s threat level, only to dramatically reverse himself two days after. This ad calls into question whether Obama, who seems to have such an elementary grasp of foreign policy issues, will be able to keep the American people safe in this time of war. This ad is airing in Virginia, Nevada, Colorado, Indiana, and Alaska.

• Obama – Sinclair ad – This ad focuses on the allegations from Larry Sinclair, former Obama associate, who alleges that he and the Senator engaged in drug use and sexual activity together in 1999. The mainstream media has largely ignored Sinclair, but his statements must be brought to light so that they may be properly investigated. This ad is airing in Virginia, Florida, Colorado, and Nevada.
The ads will air over the next two weeks before a new round of TV and Radio ads are announced.

The Reverend Tim L Donovan, Executive Director of the America’s Hope Foundation, is available for comment and for interviews. Please use the contact below to inquire further.

"America's Hope Foundation" will run an ad about Larry Sinclair. What the heck? And they call him a "former Obama associate" According to who? Not even Sinclair has referred to himself as a "former Obama associate." And "properly brought to light"? It's been all over the internet for the past six months--it's not like the story has been suppressed. If Sinclair would produce some evidence, then the mainstream media--from Williams to Couric to Olbermann to Cooper--would be all over it.

But more on America's Hope Foundation:

Contact information from the group's website:

3445 Seminole Trail

Charlottesville, VA� 22911-7593

(800) 530-5106

cjensen@americashopefoundation.com

Note: I don't endorse contacting these people for freakouts. Hate mail will only spur their bleating about persecution (see below); exposing the group would be more productive in the long run.

A whois search includes the following:

Domain Name………. americashopefoundation.com
Creation Date…….. 2008-06-09
Registration Date…. 2008-06-09
Expiry Date………. 2010-06-09
Organisation Name…. Jonathan Davis
Organisation Address. 166 blue mountain rd
Organisation Address.
Organisation Address. front royal
Organisation Address. 22630
Organisation Address. VA
Organisation Address. UNITED STATES

A little more investigation might be due here. It's possible that both names will be unveiled as either former "Hillary is 44" maniacs or as another set of GOPers fronting a site for those mythic disillusioned Democrats, you know--a site like "PUMA" or "Clintons4McCain/ClintonsFor McCain." Incidentally, I wrote on these last night. (For more on Reverend Tim L. Donovan see here).

Curiously, a search for "Tim L Donovan" results in a listing at a "Count All the Votes" e-petition--just two spaces above Cristi Adkins. Of course, there's no way of knowing if either "Tim L Donovan" is the one referenced in the news release, but I do find it interesting that a Tim Donovan seems so close to...Cristi Adkins (even if it is a matter of spaces on a generic e-petition).

Mostly though? I'm thinking that this "America's Hope Foundation" is yet another eruption from Sinclair's followers--a way of "sneaking" their ugly series of accusations (drugs, gay sex, murder, and so on) in the mainstream-and making themselves look even more foolish (if possible).

Okay, now despite all that I've written above, I 'm actually fine with this. Let me rephrase that. I'm not happy that people are going to give Sinclair's story more publicity as it's already been shot through with holes, and I'm not happy that they're going to use it intentionally to slime Obama--there's certainly no pretense at an ethical appeal here. It's intended to smudge him up so badly that, when the story is again discredited, people will yet wonder if there "might" be any truth to it (and of course there isn't).

The reason I am fine with it is because I'm sick and tired of people pretending that this story isn't "out there" and that journalists have ignored it (they haven't ignored it--they've reviewed it and found it devoid of credibility). It might well be worth taking a risk, and losing the few gullible voters (well, probably not a loss. Such people are likely the same ones who continue to insist that Obama is Muslim) just to make Obama's non-involvement perfectly clear and to stop the allegations once and for all. Besides, there's that whole first amendment thing. America's Hope Foundation has every right to say what they will. And Obama has every right to slap them, and Sinclair, with a lawsuit for slander.

Crikey. You'd think theses anti-Obama scamps would have learned their lesson when the "whitey" tape blew up in their faces. And the birth certificate thing. And the "Brother says Obama was a Muslim" thing. And the "Obama went to Rezko drug parties" thing. And the "long legged mack daddy pimp" thing. And the "Kenyan connection thing." I'm sure there are other examples of matter-thrown-but-unstickable, but it's getting towards logging off time.

My guess about this America's Hope Foundation thing: egg will be on some abashed faces soon.

Added 7/02/08: They've updated their website:

America's Hope Foundation will run both new Obama radio commercials, in spite of an attempt to harass and intimidate our organization�by Barack Obama supporters.

Conveniently, they've not included any examples or evidence of such harassment and intimidation. And how do they know if people who object to this nonsense are Obama supporters or not (plenty of people who refuse to vote Obama don't approve of this kind of tactic). But they have chosen to include a rather poor compilation of GOP-style anti-Obama talking points, most of which merely reiterate attacks that others have used to no avail (e.g., the "hate spewing pastor," the "clinging" comments, the Ayers thing, etc.). Such attacks might be more effective if they were applied more creatively or at least--dare I say it?--more intelligently.

Yawn.

UPDATE: America's Hope Foundation claims that its ads began airing today (Sunday, 06 July). We'll see.

One thing I'd like to add: whoever writes the prose on that site desperately requires an editor/proofreader.

UPDATE 2: After exploring Larry Sinclair's claims, America's Hope Foundation has withdrawn its ads featuring Sinclair. See this post.