It sounds pretty fishy to me that Obama doesn't think his campaign people have the ability to create a video like this one. If an ordinary citizen can do this, high dollar, high tech advisors surely can. There's something "fgishy" here.

In twenty years will their be political ads characterizing a particular front-runner as John Hodgman? Yeah - new Apple vs PC ads just aren't as cool as the old ones.

And he did it all with a Mac, how awesome. The game has changed. Hope Phil gets a new gig soon.

I agree...but Obama is probably right, his peeps are most likely too cheap to use Macs. It's easy for someone with his priorities too not really be aware of what technology is available to his team.

He won't be out of work for long. I read in another article that ad agencies would kill for 1.5 million views. The trouble is that it's hard to get a spot for that kind of coverage. It was mentioned that on tv the ad could have been worth $1m or more.

This is one of the most disturbing and effective political ads of all time. Wow! The game has certainly changed, hold onto your hats America, and then the World!!

Gotta give the Democratic party props for taking advantage of the latest trends like viral marketing.

The political machine (Hillary and friends) can't control the message to the masses any more and that is good for our democracy. It started with the printing press and mass production of books and then, God forbid, newspapers with news for all and has jumped to a new height. I hope people will get more involved and ultimately VOTE!

I commend Mr. de Vellis. It's about that citizens start making political ads. All professional one's suck! Rock and Roll!!!!

"Illinois Senator Barack Obama said that his presidential campaign {new} nothing of the video before it appeared on YouTube"

Spell check maybe?

There are going to be countless ads just like it! If I find the time I'll even make my own... There's a lot of material on the internet and plenty of easy to use programs to do it. The upcoming election is going to be real fun

Illinois Senator Barack Obama said that his presidential campaign new nothing of the video before it appeared on YouTube.

"new nothing".

Where's the k?

Over 56% seeing video are Clinton Fans

If he's was willing to go through so much trouble to create this video he should have done a better job. It's dumb and nothing new to Internet crowd. Repugs are getting so desperate, it's almost laughable.

LOL, Guests. You read this story and the only thing you can think to say is pointing out a spelling mistake? I hope you didn't hurt any brain cells.

I just hope this REALLY DOES spark a desire for individual citizens to take control... we all know that TV is run by other powers.. so until You Tube is run by them also, let take advantage and use this for OUR benefit

I have no comments as to Democrat, Republican, Green, etc. The idea that today's consumer-based technology can be used 'By The Voters' to create mass distributed content to be viewed literally to by the whole world, brings freedom to a wonderful new level. Especially, when the effect sends strong ripples through the polical process.
I do wish the best to all Presidential Candidates for all parties.

I believe that Mr. de Vellis is dead on the money with his ad and point of view about Hillary Clinton. God help us if this communist get into office...

Congratulations to all Democrats, once again we were able to show the world that flashy negative ads are always the winner over content in a political campaign. Who cares anymore about War in Iraq, Social Security, Health Care and global warming when we can have a woman throw a sledge hammer into the face of a (democrat) political opponent.

Does the reporter also "now" nothing about spelling?

In case you did not know, 'new' is a correctly spelled word. Spell check would not catch that one.

Dumbass.

Start up the inter-party friction, stir the pot. This is so transparently Republican. Unfortunately we Americans are so prejudice against other cultures we would not be caught dead with a president named "Barack Obama". So let's attack the only other choice for a Democratic leader. I hope this guy rots before he gets another job. Luckily the Republicans have no one that comes even close to either one of these fine candidates.

Spell check won't work, because "new" is a correctly spelled word. As is "dumbass".

I think you did not understand Obama's statement. He said that "He" did not have the technical capability to do this. Obama did not state that others involved with his organization were not capable.

To suggest that this ad, if it can even be called that, is a Obama sponsored action is just pure stupidity. Yes the person may work for a organization connected to Obama, but you know what he got bored, he made his own pro-Obama video. A sixth grader could have done this, the programs to do such things are availble to anyone freely on the net. Clinton is just mad her supporters are not as creative and are jumping ship. Republicans dont have the forethought to make this type of video.

God Bless America!!! We have such Freedom of Expression that we are so use to! Keep the Faith and Keep our Freedom!!! Express Yourself!!!

A computer spell check wouldn't have caught that. Instead, of pointing the error out in a forum, why not just send the editor a nice email? The editor can fix it, and save face. Moreover, I doubt the editor reads all the comments.

Unless, of course you want all your friends here to know you can spell and you want the editor to feel dumb.

Quote

Guest wrote:
"Illinois Senator Barack Obama said that his presidential campaign {new} nothing of the video before it appeared on YouTube"

Spell check maybe?

I tend to agree with this users comments. This is a new level of freedom to many individuals. I am afraid though that you will see even more laws being passed to limit this kind of thing from happening. You can bet those that want to control the masses will do whatever it takes to keep this genie from getting out of the bottle.

I challenge you to observe the news over the next few months and you will see small blips of news about new "laws" that limit this kind of thing. In fact it has alredy begun with the law suit against Google and Youtube. That is a direct effort to shut this kind of company down. Notice that attacks are against the owners and operators of the servers that host the content (look at the P2P network legal actions). No host for content no mass distribution.

But as the guy stated. The GAME has definately changed. BTW this can be done easily with any modern PC not only a MAC.

You gotta admit that people are allowed freedom of speech. I honestly found this whole thing a little entertaining, although I suppose it could make some people mad.

I think it's just people taking things too seriously now-a-days. But that could just be me.

I think people should be allowed to show their opinion (in spoof-tastic ways ). It's politics. You know the old saying about opinions and human anatomy-...

There is no Democrat or Republican party any longer. It's all just a bunch of greedy pigs striving to command the highest dollar ad campaign to fool the largest number of sheep. If you think any of the candidates from either side of the aisle give a hoot about America, about you, or your families.... then flashy little campaigns like this will keep you sputtering about until we're a nation totally divided against itself. And, you know what they say about a house divided against itself. Welcome to Amerexiconada.

The issue I have with it, is that it's not a "spoof" of the 1984 video ad, it's just a plagiarising of it. The ad uses the 1984 ad to prove a different (but similar) point but does not editorialise against the ad itself. If the video was reshot to look similar to the 1984 ad, that would be OK, but the video uses the copyrighted content that another person/group created to push it's own agenda.

It's not like I'm some huge copyright weenie, but this is not some great ad, or some great amazing new concept. It's something I've been doing for years, writing word balloons on the covers of magazines, pasting new headlines over other ads, singing over songs with self serving lyrics. The difference is, I don't post that stuff in a massively public forum.

That being said, I think that citizens created ads are an interesting new twist, something I'll keep my eye out for in the future.

Obama is running for president! He cant control everything everyone says about him or Hilary or anyone else. I dont think Obama personally had anything to do with this.
Personally, I think the democrats should be working together. They are all supposed to represent the same ideologies anyway, right? We want to beat the republicans, right? If Hilary uses this to attack Obama later down the road, she'll loose my support.

spell sheck would have found nothing wrong with new...its is spelled correctly

You can use copyrighted material for political parody - that's why the famous Bush vs. Kerry segment survived legal scrutiny.

just the tip of the iceberg for the swiftboat-esque ads to come. It will only get worse. If people are swayed by this type of stuff then we got big problems. Vote for the candidate that shares your views but the main thing is vote.

The guy said he was a democrat and there's no reason not to believe him. Hillary is bad news, period. Why would a republican make a pro-Obama add? The democrats are going to fold in on themselves just like before, even with their best attempt ever at garnering support (can anyone say eminem - how pathetic was that? I've never voted before but I am now because we have to get the republicans out). It is a fragmented and pathetic party that doesn't even know what it stands for. Both fine candidates, you are in dreamland.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Who cares anymore about War in Iraq, Social Security, Health Care and global warming when we can have a woman throw a sledge hammer into the face of a (democrat) political opponent.

I care.
War in Iraq: Keeping bad guys over there, but more importantly, helping Iraq's middle class challenge extreme religious ideology
Social Security: Set up my retirement plan not to need it. Suggest you do too.
Health Care: Studied hard, got a good job, work hard, pay my own Health Care. Suggest you do too.
Global Warming: 0.5єC in the last century is certainly warming. In 2010 it'll start cooling again, and touch off an energy crisis to heat people's homes. Meanwhile, I'm installing solar panels to augment my pebble bed reactor.

I don't need Hilary or anyone else taking my money to "combat" or "fix" these problems. I have them covered on my end already. You should too.

Do you even know what a communist is? Dont just speak up. Know.

Quote

Terrin wrote:
A computer spell check wouldn't have caught that. Instead, of pointing the error out in a forum, why not just send the editor a nice email? The editor can fix it, and save face. Moreover, I doubt the editor reads all the comments.

Unless, of course you want all your friends here to know you can spell and you want the editor to feel dumb.

I agree. The editor won't feel dumb, they'll just fix it. Pointing out stuff like that publicly shows "guest's" lack of couth. Have a modicum of decorum.

We all know who was really behind this: Al Gore. Despite being VP to Bill Clinton's P, Al does not particularly like the Clintons and he detests Hillary. Is it just a coincidence that Al Gore sits on Apple's BOD and this ad was originally a Mac ad and it was created on a Mac?!? I think not. But the smoking gun is all the global warming subliminal messages. You'll have to go frame by frame, but I swear, after watching that, I couldn't stop thinking about how to reduce my carbon footprint by 90% by the year 2050.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I believe that Mr. de Vellis is dead on the money with his ad and point of view about Hillary Clinton. God help us if this communist get into office...

God didn't help us 6 years ago when Bush came to power.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Do you even know what a communist is? Dont just speak up. Know.

Knew, new, gnu and now a dont

Quote

Guest wrote:
This is one of the most disturbing and effective political ads of all time. Wow! The game has certainly changed, hold onto your hats America, and then the World!!

Yes, maybe you're right. Good and bad things alike, coming from the US, tend to spread on to other parts of the world. But can you imagine that so far here in Norway (and that goes for the other Nordic countries as well), ads do not play a very important role in elections? We have them, of course, but not that much on TV, mostly in newspapers - and they are quite sober.
What we have instead are debates and they are quite open, not staged.

But who knows how long that will last?

Quote

rezonate wrote:

War in Iraq: Keeping bad guys over there, but more importantly, helping Iraq's middle class challenge extreme religious ideology
Social Security: Set up my retirement plan not to need it. Suggest you do too.
Health Care: Studied hard, got a good job, work hard, pay my own Health Care. Suggest you do too.
Global Warming: 0.5єC in the last century is certainly warming. In 2010 it'll start cooling again, and touch off an energy crisis to heat people's homes. Meanwhile, I'm installing solar panels to augment my pebble bed reactor.

I don't need Hilary or anyone else taking my money to "combat" or "fix" these problems. I have them covered on my end already. You should too.

Interesting.

1. Iraq: how does it help the Iraqi middle class if 60,000-500,000+ (different numbers from different sources) of them are killed, hundreds of thousands more injured and several million displaced? How does it help them if their businesses are destroyed, their oil exports cut back, their access to electricity and clean water severely restricted, and their health care system severely damaged while, at the same time, the demand increases due to war-related injuries?

If you say that this is due to sectarian violence, stop and think just why there is sectarian violence. There was little to none before the invasion; now, it's the major factor in everyday life in Iraq.

As for keeping the bad guys over there, first, the "bad guys" didn't come from Iraq. They came from Saudi Arabia, for the most part. They trained and were based in Afghanistan. There was no connection between the Iraqi government of Saddam and Al Qaeda, as President Bush has admitted several times. Of course, there are a lot of terrorists in Iraq now. Bin Laden got all he could possibly have asked for when the US invaded Iraq.

As you want to keep "bad guys" over there, have you volunteered to serve in Iraq? The US Army has raised the maximum age for enlistment to 41. If you're a strong supporter of the war, between 17 & 41 and in good health, why not hustle on down to the recruiting station and sign up? Heck, they may even overlook a few convictions and/or a low score on the qualifying test.

I'll be waiting for your answer as to when you report for duty. If you fit those criteria and don't sign up, why do you expect others to do so?

2. Social Security: First Social Security does a lot more than provide for retirement. There are benefits for the disabled and survivors. Second, the market goes up and down. My father had a lot of money invested in stocks, some in bonds, as well as a company-provided pension (fortunately, it was with an insurance company, not his employer) and Social Security. During the last several years of his life, the value of his stocks decreased, not increased. Third, Enron. Fourth, Enron. Fifth through 1,764th, Enron.

3. Health care: Good for you. I hope that you don't lose your job. Do realize that, as you get older, your employer is more likely to lay you off. Also realize that the 45+ million uninsured Americans are a threat to your health, as well as their own. The US health care system ranked way down among industrialized countries in a recent study by (I think) WHO. The quality of care available was top-notch, IF you could get it. The cost was much higher than any other country and the outcomes (on average) were not as good as most.

4. Global warming: stop listening to Rush and read the peer-reviewed scientific papers or at least the summaries. Much of the "anti-global-warming" rhetoric is coming from and/or sponsored by the oil companies. Guess why? Remember that the cigarette companies denied that smoking had any connection with cancer, not for a year or two, but several decades. Their CEOs even stated such to Congress while under oath, despite the fact that their own research had clearly shown the connection.

Quote

gslusher wrote:
Also realize that the 45+ million uninsured Americans are a threat to your health, as well as their own.

Bullshitake. There are many uninsured and what politicians call "underinsured" who are young and healthy and don't want to shell out the cash for care they never get. On top of that, many states do not allow insurance companies to sell real insurance. For example, I'm a healthy 36 year old. I have been to see a doctor exactly twice in the past 16 years. One was for a jammed middle finger that got a splint, not even an xray. The other was for a flu/cold that required antibiotics. I have a high deductible plan that has minimum services required by the state of California that I will never use. Costs me about $150/month. I would much prefer to have real insurance, perhaps with a $25K deductible but a much lower cost and pay for routine medical expenses out of pocket or with an HSA. Many 20 and 30 somethings who are healthy and able to afford medical insurance just skip it. This was the giant problem that Massachusetts had in setting up it's 100% health insurance program. Without the healthy people paying into the system and getting nothing out, you cannot have it affordable for everyone. In fact, in the MA plan, traditional high deductible low(er) service plans favored by healthy young self employed people don't even meet minimum state guidelines. Think of it as "tax the healthy".

Google "Arnold Kling". Read his book "Crisis of Abundance". Then you'll be qualified to offer opinions on this subject.

Quote

Bosco wrote:
There are many uninsured and what politicians call "underinsured" who are young and healthy and don't want to shell out the cash for care they never get.

This is true. I'm one of those, too. At least I was. But due to years of not having basic insurance, I haven't been able to go in to get regular checkups and have preventative care. And now I'm shelling out money for pre-diabetic symptoms. I should be able to get over it, but hopefully I won't run out of money, or when and if I do get a health insurance plan I won't be denied for a pre-existing condition now.

If this country did enough for just preventative care to stave off the more serious stuff for its poorer citiznes and those citizens who really are rather healthy and don't need something more comprehensive, a lot of the stuff we end up paying for as people grow older won't happen.

So, yeah, why don't YOU do some Google searching so that YOU are qualified to offer opinions on the subject.

(Sheesh. As if you have to be special in this country to offer an opinion and speak up. If that was the case, there wouldn't be so much other bullcrap in this thread. But, that's America! The freedom to spout as much bullcrap, and do so loudly and proudly in order to shout down your neighbor, who is clearly wrong and probably a poopyhead, too. If he isn't a poopyhead, he is certainly unpatriotic. String 'em up!)

By the way, more on topic:

I don't find what this guy did particularly groundbreaking. Someone upthread claims any 6th grader could have done this. Well, maybe. But the guy who did do it worked for a political ad campaign company doing just the thing he did: video editing. He's a skilled person; who was fired or resigned (depending on who you listen to) because he went beyond what the company was hired to do.

There has been plenty of political video work before this. The only reason this is getting noticed is because it took Apple's famous ad, a lot of people hate HIllary Clinton and love to see her get bashed in the face, and a lot of people seem to be afraid of Obama Barack and hope this sticks some ugly to him. Otherwise the mainstream media would have skipped right past it like they do any number of other political videos, political blogs, etc. that scoop them.

Quote

Dean Lewis wrote:
This is true. I'm one of those, too. At least I was. But due to years of not having basic insurance, I haven't been able to go in to get regular checkups and have preventative care. And now I'm shelling out money for pre-diabetic symptoms.

Sorry. This is total horseshitake. Even if you are not insured, you can get into a doctor for a checkup. You just have to pay out of pocket. Say you have a $1000 deductible plan (which is quite common). You might pay $150-$200 month for that plan, and depending on if it's a PPO plan, you might get a negotiated discount rate for having a checkup. Say it costs you $300 out of pocket for said yearly checkup. It's probably still less expensive than the diff between your high deductible plan and an HMO where you can go have your checkup for a $5 copay. And I still say, read Kling's book because you'll see that these annual checkups, mammograms, MRIs, and all these other tests are generally not terribly cost effective for the limited benefits they provide. As to diabetes... I don't need an MD to solve 99% of the cases preventatively. It's called "eat right, eat less, exercise, don't smoke". You're paying for a lifestyle choice, not lack of health insurance. Sorry to be blunt, but your bad experience should not wreck thing for people who balance their health and cost structure more optimally.

You people that equate insurance (or what you think is "high quality" insurance) with access to health care have a terribly expensive insurance fetish that you need to get over.

My my my... what once was a beautiful country....