I doubt it's really from Obama.

IANAL but if it was from Obama I think he's legally required to put his name on at the end saying he "approves this message."

He doesn't need to say he approves, but if it's paid for by campaign money and televised then there needs a notice at the end explaining who paid for it. Since this is the internet, they can do whatever they want.

I'd be surprised if this was from Obama, since he hasn't ran much of a smear campaign (from what I've seen) even though he's had lots of chances. If he did a negative ad, this is what it would look like. He tends to snidely suggest Clinton has problems without straight calling her retarded.

>> ^doogle:
I doubt it's really from Obama.


Follow it back to the original Youtube -- it's from Obama's official channel.

I think the law about the "I approved this message" is for TV. I think this is a viral.

"The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act amended the Federal Election Campaign Act (1971) to ban national political party committees (most prominently the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee) from accepting or spending soft money contributions. It also included a "stand by your ad" provision requiring candidates to appear in campaign advertisements and claim responsibility for the ad (most commonly with a phrase similar to "I'm John Smith and I approve this message.""

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_in_the_United_States
see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_approve_this_message

The youtube video says that it is a TV ad, so I wonder why the "I approve" isn't in there.

Lobbying is one of the most ignored issues among voters. The unregulated free market achieves the best possible result because competition drives costs down and quality up. No company is safe from a good competing product and the average man's lot increases indirectly through this kind of market operation. Until... the free market gets socialized as it is today.

Big businesses give politicians pack money for advertising (which people fall for) to help them beat the incumbent. And since both sides engage in it, there's no chance of it not happening. Politicians, once elected, return the favor by passing special privilege legislation: HMO Act, NAFTA managed trade, certain FDA bans (Stevia comes to mind), subsidies, no-bid contracts, special tax breaks, and yes even the Federal Reserve Act (manipulates market interest rates) etc. Happens under both Republican and Democrat administrations.

So government, itself a monopoly, via legalized bribery increasingly socializes the free market by taking money from your paycheck and giving it directly to a company rather than making that company earn it by making a better or equal but cheaper product under the pressure of competition. Under the weight of government largess, many small businesses fail or have no incentive to begin. All the while, Suzie Democrat blames the Republicans and Joe Republican blames the Democrats, despite probably getting screwed by both. Some people even blame the free market. "We need more government regulation" they say, even though they never read the bills and depend entirely on morsels they get from the corporate owned networks to know what's happening.

So how do you prevent this from happening? Basic research on your candidate and his history. Ron Paul, for example, refused lobbying. If your candidate accepts money from special interest groups, his ideals are corruptible and the free market is in danger. Period. Why would you EVER vote for someone like that? Too late. We have a major uphill battle getting rid of those above things before this country collapses under the weight of a government who you people keep thinking is your savior. Stop it. Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop.

shill for Obama, where is he now? AWOL