The Dean Plan: "In Obama We Trust" ... or else (Updated)

"In Obama We Trust. When a man becomes the Nation, we have Stalin."


This quote is the summation for the June 17, 2008, Newsvine politicalcenter op-ed Obama's Unprecedented Attack on Free Speech - Mechanisms and Results from which comes this disturbingly familiar scenario:

Obama communication and voting control systems designed to eliminate free speech rank at the pinnacle of Obama's attack on free speech. These include the following important free speech elements without which media, voters, and all in the world fail to understand the truth and could ultimately have no more opportunity to voice their differences and views than those in totalitarian regimes.

The first is Obama's successful eradication of Hillary Clinton supporters from the MSM, including especially CNN. We have never heard of such an effort, much less anyone who has successfully achieved such an eradication of opposition in any US political campaign.

The second is the system used to deny all those who were not supporters from any venue in which Obama appeared. In ASU and elsewhere, Obama operatives ensured that only supporters appeared, with opponents being rejected. Even then, the MSM learned that they were not to report anything negative about Obama, and they did not.

The third and most intrusive system of all was the use of race as a way in which to define Obama's opponent and the use of racism claims to ensure that major issues were stifled in the press. Indeed, to this day, the Democrats have continued to use racism wherever they turn. From the Wright controversy, where Dean called the coverage racist, to the war against Geraldine Ferraro claiming that she is a racist, Obama has turned the tables dramatically against free speech and toward some other place that we dare not go or discuss.

More on this systematic plan of control was published May 18, 2008, at RW in the article "The Dean Plan", reposted again below, with updates and a new section at the end on Obama campaign worker training camps and other developments.

---

May 18, 2008 Update: Apparently someone in the Obama camp read the tea leaves or something, because The Politico reported the following earlier today:

Concerned about appearing presumptuous or antagonistic towards Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama will not declare victory in the Democratic nomination fight Tuesday [May 20, 2008] in the event he wins enough pledged delegates to claim a majority. ...the campaign now appears secure enough in its commanding position that it no longer feels compelled to declare victory in an attempt to marginalize Clinton.

How nice.

Previously, RezkoWatch wrote that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.)'s unprecedented intention in U.S. politics to declare himself the Democratic Party's presidential nominee on May 20, 2008—a move reminiscent, it seems, of France's Napoleon Bonaparte who crowned himself Emperor with the Iron Crown of Lombardy—the following article is being reposted. Although it was removed from RezkoWatch on May 11, 2008, the significance of the information it contains demands its resurrection. Let's hope that Sen. Obama is a student of history and manages to avoid the Emperor's fate.

"On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said Obama is taking premature 'victory laps,' and Clinton has come back every time pundits write her off. Said she will actively campaign in Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota." h/t Larry Johnson, No Quarter.

---

An expected outcome from each state's Democratic primary or caucus between candidates is a declared winner. While awaiting the Indiana and North Carolina election returns on May 6, 2008, hands down the most revealing result of the evening came from a heated exchange between CNN Democratic consultants Donna Brazile and Paul Begala, with the money quote coming from Brazile:

... I have worked on a lot of Democratic campaigns, and I respect Paul. But, Paul, you're looking at the old coalition. A new Democratic coalition is younger. It is more urban, as well as suburban, and we don't have to just rely on white blue-collar voters and Hispanics. We need to look at the Democratic Party, expand the party, expand the base and not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Anyone who was not stunned, or as Jerome Armstrong wrote, "flabbergasted", by Brazile's words should be. Speculation will go on for days about what she meant by a "new Democratic coalition". Hold on to that thought while we take a trip in the Wayback Machine, as RezkoWatch is often wont to do.

It's July 27, 2004, when Barack Obama, then Democratic U.S. Senate nominee for Illinois, was chosen to give the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

The event "took on the airs of a coronation," Nicholas Stix wrote August 9, 2004, in EnterStageRight, adding

The worshipful tone of establishment media Obama stories has made it clear that for the lords of the media-political complex, the Senate is but the beginning of the road for Obama, a road that many power brokers would like to see culminate at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Did you get that? Obama's road to the White House was already being paved in July 2004, months before his election to the U.S. Senate was assured. As Stix indicated, the plan for Obama's media "coronation" had, indeed, already been set in motion; it was well-planned, originating with a source well-known to many in the Democratic Party, while, at the same time, it was hidden in plain sight and unsuspected by nearly all except perhaps the Party elites.

It's now February 18, 2004, the day after presidential candidate Howard Dean's third place showing in the Wisconsin primary and he drops out of the race. Back in January 2004, following a third place showing in the Iowa Democratic caucus, Dean had let out what has come to be known as the "Dean Scream," the beginning of the end for his presidential aspirations.

Moving forward, it's now March 16, 2004, and Obama has won the Illinois primary for the Democratic nomination to the U.S. Senate. Even now, the media coverage is described as fawning while the "value" of Obama's "organization" is being admired. (RezkoWatch has gone into great detail outlining some of the sources of that "organization," including funds raised by indicted political fixer Antoin "Tony" Rezko, the Alliance of Business Leaders and Entrepreneurs, and many others on his behalf.)

It's now May 12, 2004. It is announced Barack Obama is selected as one of the "Dean Dozen". Howard Dean writes:

Several months ago I put out a call to the hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists who had worked on my campaign to run for office themselves. Hundreds of volunteers answered this call. Our new organization - Democracy for America - is dedicated to using its resources to support those candidates in their fight to take our country back from the right-wing conservatives who dominate our government. Today, Democracy for America announces the Dean Dozen - twelve diverse candidates that represent the spirit of grassroots democracy.

Need proof that the plan was in play before Dean's formal announcement of the "Dean Dozen"? Listed under Obama's name we find this:

In the race to regain control of the U.S. Senate, Democrats have few better chances to pick up a seat than in Illinois. DFA volunteers all over Illinois helped Obama win his primary [on March 16, 2004], now it's time to help him win the general. Stay tuned: I will be on the trail with Barack soon.

At least one blogger notices that Barack Obama's campaign blog is being run "by some of the same people who were involved with the Howard Dean adventure." The plan is in play.

It's now June 1, 2004, and a blogger comments about the Obama campaign blog's Memorial Day event schedule: "I guess my question is how old time democrats are responding to the influx of 'Dean Heads' (yes I know all Obama supporters are not Dean Heads) at these and other events?"—then asks "What happens if the 'Dean Heads' develop real power in the Democratic Party in Illinois?"

The plan is moving forward, as should be obvious. Don't believe it? Well, here it comes, the Barack Obama campaign plan of today. Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, the Obama campaigns for 2004 and 2008 gained significant momentum following the embarrassment and humiliating loss by a single candidate early in the 2003-2004 primary season—Howard Dean.

The strategy for Obama's current campaign appears to have come straight from Howard Dean's playbook, which was explained in some detail in a study published in April 2004 by a journalism and media studies professor at a prominent U.S. university who conducted extensive research using press releases, emails to supporters and issued by MoveOn.org, political ads, interviews, ground study, media reports, and other data during the 2003-2004 U.S. presidential primary between November 2003 and March 3, 2004, the date of the ten-state Super primary.

It is as clear as day. Howard Dean drops out of the presidential race on February 18, 2004. Super Tuesday is on March 3, 2004. By this time, the plan is in hand and already in motion. Within weeks, Illinois bloggers are aware that Dean bloggers are at the helm of Obama's campaign blog and "Dean Heads" are showing up at Obama campaign events.

Is there more to this story? Absolutely. But for now, the following highlights from an obscure study clearly indicate how the plan for Obama's candidacy evolved from Dean's 2003-2004 primary campaign. It should also be obvious that Dean's stamp is clearly imprinted on Obama's campaign, a fulfillment of Dean's dream towards what Donna Brazile referred to on May 6, 2008, as a "new coalition"—it is grounded in the plan.

Please note that the study says nothing about how to actually win an election, just how to manipulate voters and the mass media.

The Plan

#1: Influentials

The "ten percent of the U.S. population who engage in two-step-flow, or tell their neighbors 'what to buy, what politicians to support, where to vacation'."

Engaged in "making a political contribution to a candidate or political party, reading political email; forwarding it on, visiting a political web log, participating in a political chat room or visiting a news site for political information."

"A far larger percentage of them than the public at large is concerned that interest groups wield too much influence in the political process."

#2: Web influentials

"Democratic outsiders, not sponsored by major political parties, or traditional Democratic interest groups."

Develop "new forms of participatory political advertising, which can influence [and] shape press coverage and voter perceptions of political candidates." Note: Asked in question format, the rest of the "plan" makes it clear this is the goal.

Individuals committed to the whole, with "social capital, or enhanced connections between people and groups."

"[O]nline innovators sought to inform and activate their members, and bring them together in the real world."

#3: Small donor campaign contributions

Build campaign around "contributions given by small donors, whose help you also rely on for grassroots organization."

"All fundraising involves dialogue."

#4: Candidate

"[E]ssentially no national name recognition."

Personality for public office.

Able to "handle the stress of a frontrunner presidential campaign."

Prepared for the "problems" that would be encountered in the "world of traditional presidential level campaigning" and able to "balance" "obligations on the ground, in the air, the real world of campaigning."

#5: Funding

"Financial support from a broad network of small donors would draw press attention that would develop campaign momentum that would mean ever increasing funding."

Replace the "large Democratic contributors" with "small ones."

527 political action committees: "Such groups can raise unlimited amounts of money from domestic donors, as long as they do not specifically advocate the election of a particular candidate." Can recruit activists.

#6: Change the media landscape, create a movement

"[S]et the public policy agenda."

Create a new culture "which will be better because it will contain more variety in unity—it will be a tapestry in which more strands have been woven together. .. not just plain talk, but action ... with greater numbers of young people" participating in politics.

Web "personalization and interactivity" as opposed to DNC "party unity" and "inclusiveness".

"[A]ccelerated primary schedule" to "produce a single strong party candidate for the presidency an unprecedented eight months before the election."

Use "Web networks to create cyberflora fostering information exchange and public debate."

Draw on and disseminate "arguments and positions relating to political change, using serious and frivolous symbolic languages—making the case to their audiences that change can be both creative and patriotic."

Create a "mainstream press echo chamber."

Get "liberal commentators" on board.

Create "talk radio echo chamber" that will lead to opportunities for press coverage.

Create a "web echo chamber."

Combine the "possibilities for experimentation and grassroots participation which arise due to Internet availability with experienced ground organization" with training and "centralized management."

---

Obama political campaign training camps
Camp Obama 2005
Beginning in January 2005, within days of taking his U.S. Senate oath of office, using corporate dollars, Sen. Obama set up both the Hopefund political action committee and Camp Obama, which it funded. SourceWatch informs:

As of June 30, 2005, after six months in operation, Hopefund Inc. "receipts totaled $851,674 with Obama traveling the nation to headline events and collect checks," Lynn Sweet reported October 27, 2005, in the Chicago Sun-Times.

In January 2006, "Obama's Hopefund will bankroll a 'school' to train first-time campaign workers and place them in campaigns across the country," Sweet wrote, with the "recruiting focus of Obama's 'Yes We Can' program [to] be young African Americans and Latinos" and the "aim of the week-long campaign school ... to 'create this whole class of young, talented staffers who can work their way up in the Democratic Party.'"

"Obama's Hopefund is 'not the beginning of some run for higher office. That is not what this is'," Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs told Sweet.

However, the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza wrote November 2, 2005, that Obama was "polishing his credentials for a potential national run down the line."

Hopefund was to "partner with EMILY's List, which has significant experience in staff training, to get the campaign school off the ground," Cillizza wrote. EMILY's List originally endorsed Hillary Clinton's candidacy and not Obama's.

It should also be noted, as detailed in the SourceWatch article, Hopefund cash was used to prime the pump of many subsequent Obama key state Democratic parties and superdelegates.

Camp Obama 2008

One of thousands of Camp Obama events is being held this week in Eureka, California, the local newspaper, the Times-Standard, reported June 23, 2008. More than 100 people had signed up to "learn how to passionately convey why they personally believe in Obama and how best to contribute to the local effort."

Dr. Aaron Schutz wrote June 9, 2008, a the Black Agenda Report about how Camp Obama works:

To design his campaign organizing strategy, Obama seems to have turned to long-time organizer and Harvard lecturer Marshall Ganz, who participated in the civil rights movement and was a key organizer with Ceasar Chavez, among other efforts.

In trainings for key leaders, Zack Exley reports, Ganz exhorts participants to "inspire" voters.

It literally means to breathe life into each other . . . . And we can do that by telling our stories to each other. That's what Barack did for us when he told his story. And that's what we can do for others when we tell them our stories.
A key goal of the training, Exley noted, was to "learn how to tell our own stories," or, as Ganz said, to "put into words why you're called and why we've been called, to change the way the world works."

Participants worked on telling their story about how they came to support Obama in the correct way, using "materials and worksheets" that gave "structure and flow to the story telling process." The aim was to be able to "tell their 'story of self' in less than two minutes." Or 30 seconds if a person is phone canvassing. Or a "couple key ideas" if someone is canvassing.

Throughout their training materials, this idea of telling one's personal reasons for supporting Obama remains central. There is also reference to policy, and to Obama's policy statements, but these take a back seat to the storytelling.

Field Organizer Kim Mack told a group of volunteers in California, for example that "potential voters would no doubt confront them with policy questions. Mack's direction: "Don't go there. Refer them to Obama's Web site, which includes enough material to sate any wonk."

Dr. Schutz explains this an "Evangelical" Approach:

This use of personal stories to try to help others come over to our point of view is a classic tool, as well, of efforts to convert people to a new religion. In evangelical circles, one develops the same kind of "conversion" story, and there are numerous websites giving detailed instructions for how it is supposed to be structured. Interestingly, the recommendation is generally to keep these to a couple of minutes, just as Ganz recommends.

Let me emphasize that I'm not accusing the Obama campaign of being some kind of "cult" as others have. That accusation seems ridiculous to me. Instead, the Obama campaign is trying to do what all campaigns do, one way or another: to get people to believe in a particular person.

Ganz makes this resemblance to religion explicit. "Where does hope come from?" Ganz asked at a training. His answer? "Faith . . . . That's why faith movements and social movements have so much to do with each other."

The goal is to get beyond mere intellectual agreement with a candidate and activate a deeper emotional connection.

At the end of this article section, Dr. Schutz writes

The Obama approach is designed to tell people how to think—here is a story of how to convert—even if they may construct the details of their own story differently, and what to think—Obama is really cool.

The Obama approach is about telling while the organizing approach is about listening.

Read the rest of Dr. Schutz's lengthy aricle. It explains a lot.

Fight the Smears website

And then we have the recent launch of the Obama campaign's "Fight the Smears" website to "debunk" Obama rumors. It's not a smear if it's the truth. Enough said.

Jon Stewart at Comedy Central on the Audacity of Fear

---

Updates

#1: "Brazile & Begala Discuss Democratic Divisions," CNN, May 6, 2008.

#2: Implementation of Section #1-Influentials and #2-Web influentials cited above from the study/plan are underway:

By way of Taegan Goddard's Political Wire comes word May 8, 2008, from Marc Ambinder that Sen. Obama's "Vote For Change" program "will lay the foundation for Obama's general election get-out-the-vote efforts."

... the campaign is constructing an incredibly elaborate online interface to allow its more than a million donors and volunteers to directly persuade their neighbors through a variety of media. Names gathered from the voter registration effort will be merged with names gathered through Obama's primary efforts and the names off of the Democratic Party's integrated voter file as well as lists purchased from outside vendors."

#3: Billdemo (see comments) wrote May 19, 2008:

Yes, I've been spreading the bit about Blue State Digital being part of Howard Dean's campaign. The guys who founded it worked on Dean's campaign and founded Blue State Digital in 2004.

The main guy to look for here is Joe Rospars.

Quote: "Joe Rospars is presently on leave from Blue State Digital, serving as New Media Director for Barack Obama's presidential campaign."

Before his work at Blue State Digital, he worked for Gov. Howard Dean's presidential campaign where he wrote and edited emails that were sent to hundreds of thousands of supporters and provided content for the highly praised Web site and blog. Joe also worked on message development, online brand building, and grassroots organizing for the campaign.

He's in charge of Obama's online presence. They built his website but they also control his myspace, youtube, facebook etc etc etc.

Remember how when Dean was running, there was a big deal made about how much cash he raised from online donations? Cut to today and Obama is the new Dean in terms of fundraising online.

Rospars even stole the MySpace of an Obama fan without permission. (Rospars is another rude, aggressive, bully who works for Obama.)

The MySpace issue to which Billdemo refers surfaced a little over a year ago. Media links can be accessed at SourceWatch.

#4: An anonymous commenter sent the link to Matt Bai's October 1, 2006, article The Inside Agitator—which clearly mirrors the concepts outlined in the study—with this section emphasized:

This philosophical shift is bound to have consequences for the party’s next presidential nominee. Dean argues that the 50-state strategy is actually going to broaden the playing field in 2008. By the time the next nominee is crowned, he says, a field network will already be in place, covering most of the counties and precincts in the United States; flip a switch, and the whole grid will light up with activity, from Baton Rouge to Boise....

#5: Commenter goldengraham wrote: "Well, after reading this page, it all comes together. I made some personal observations without all the info, just hunches. And it is amazing how my own intuition fits nicely with the reality of the Obama phenomena. His campaign was a Madison Avenue marketing blitz that even a political neophyte could interpret and a pharmaceutical company would envy.

"But without the MSM running shotgun, Barack, even with Oprah and Ted pulling his wagon, would have been toast. Sad day for America."

#6: Michael Learmonth, How Obama Won The Internet: Blue State Digital, Silicon Valley Insider, June 27, 2008.