01/22/2008
Gay Limo-Riding YouTube Loser Posts Slanderous Obama Smear
Dear Larry Sinclair, if you're going to launch a smear campaign, it's probably best to research your script (Obama was a member of the Illinois State Senate in 1999, not a representative), practice your cue card reading, shave, and brush your teeth, if you have any.
(via gawker, good as you)
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 10:08 AM EST by Andy in Barack Obama, Election 2008, News | Permalink
Comments
Oh dear lord...that is just kind of bizarre.
Posted by: Nick | Jan 22, 2008 10:33:28 AM
Hilarious. I wonder how far this will go. Obama is clearly out of this guy's league. He might as well claim to giving head to Erik Rhodes. Well, then again...
Posted by: gwyneth cornrow | Jan 22, 2008 10:34:16 AM
And take off that stupid cap, while you're at it.
I guess he's hoping to be a Monica Lewinsky for the 21st century. How pathetic.
Posted by: sam | Jan 22, 2008 10:35:07 AM
He better get ready for the attacks. First the personal ones about his being out of Obama's league ( although when smoking crack you don't make good decisions). Anti-gay politician turning out to be a pole smoker but that's only republicans.
The hypocrisy will be astounding by those on the left and right that went after Craig and the others as they bend over backwards defending Obama. I guess because he's not a prostitute or somewhat hot he's not believable.
Posted by: hephaestion | Jan 22, 2008 10:45:09 AM
Oh please Hephaestion; he's not even remotely credible. Stop acting like this is some kind of hypocrisy.
Posted by: Dan E | Jan 22, 2008 11:13:18 AM
hephaestion,
Are you kidding? This is just some weirdo looking for his 15 minutes of fame. This like the woman who claimed to be Michael Jackson's secret wife or the guy who broke into Steven Spielberg's house hoping to rape him, or the woman who went after Colin Farrel on the Tonight Show.
Frankly, it's probably best to just ignore these kinds of people who are desperate for attention.
Given the attention that Obama has been under since his campaign for the U.S. Senate, wouldn't the gay rumors have been out and about like wildfire for a long time (especially with the Donnie McClurkin debacle!)?
Also, it's also hard to believe that Obama could have been functional if he were an addict. Moreover, why would a politician with aspirations write a biography that details teenage drug use still be doing drugs? Somehow, I think the Clintons would be slinging that stuff up left and right instead of going back 30 years for childhood dirt.
Really, why do we have to pay these kinds of people any interest?
Posted by: noah | Jan 22, 2008 11:17:16 AM
I believe him. It will all come out.
Posted by: Mike | Jan 22, 2008 11:34:15 AM
This is why I could never run for office, cause all the random sex ive had, id be screwed!!
Posted by: sammy | Jan 22, 2008 11:41:59 AM
andy, thanks for posting this. this is the pathetic video that "johnny lane" and "chris(?)" were trying to link to yesterday. when i saw it, i practically fell out of my chair laughing. what a loser this guy is.
Posted by: nic | Jan 22, 2008 12:07:11 PM
The comparison to Larry Craig and alleging a hypocritical non-response from left and right (Hephaestion) is really nonsensical.
First, as to the right, why would the right stay quiet about anything that denigrates either of the Democrats' two front runners? And don't claim it's because they'd rather run against Barack than Hillary because that's simply not true; they're desperate to run against Hillary so they'd have every reason to bring Barack down now if they could.
And second, as to the left, there's no way in this media environment that the entire Democratic party and other left-leaning sources could be counted on to stay mum on this story if there were a shred of credibility to it.
There have not been, to my knowledge, ANY suggestions in the past that Obama is gay or that his drug use continued into adulthood. As far as the alleged hypocricy goes, that contrasts significantly with Larry Craig who's been rumored to be gay and a frequent patron of DC's busiest public restrooms since pratically the day he arrived in DC more than 20 years ago.
For all its manifest benefits, this guy is one example of the problematic downside of the internet. Give any knucklehead like this one a video camera and broadband access, and all of a sudden, with no filtering, editorial control or fact checking, he's a *potential* factor in a presidential nominating contest. That said, he so lacks credibility that he'll probably go nowhere, thank God.
It will be interesting to see when and how libel and slander laws make their way to the internet.
Posted by: Hermes in DC | Jan 22, 2008 12:07:53 PM
There's Nothing like starting my day, with a hearty chuckle...it's better than oatmeal.
Thank You, Larry
Posted by: candipearl | Jan 22, 2008 12:09:25 PM
I'm with Sammy; although I haven't done anything I'm ashamed of (that I can think of right this minute), others might not be so non-judgmental.
I can't imagine how one could run for president having done something like this - how could one expect to keep such a thing hidden unless one had eliminated the source? True, politicians are a special breed and often quite full of themselves, but it is just too hard to believe that in an age where every nuance is judged and scrutinized that a crack head could expect to run for president without being found out. It doesn't make sense. I don't say never; I do say it strains credibility more than my ass strained the old trousers I valiantly but vainly attempted to wear the other day.
I saw this yesterday, and was thoroughly disgusted. I'm sorry that this video was posted here, because now it will get even more viewing. I find it sad that this video was posted on Youtube just before MLK day. Just in time for those who still resent his being honored to affirm their hatred for anyone who is not white, straight, and male, as the following comment I cut and pasted from the Youtube comment section for this video will vividly illustrate (and I apologize for the content, but I think it's important to see):
>Sucking a stoned ni**ers dick, thats low even for a f*g.
I hope its true, then America is truly fucked, before they had a choice between a ni**er and a bitch for president, now they have a choice between a crackhead homo ni**er and a bitch, things are certainly not looking up for ya guys :D <
Posted by: JT | Jan 22, 2008 12:17:09 PM
JT,
That's the point of videos like this, they help to inspire hatred and play on stereotypes. Racism, sexism and homophobia are deeply ingrained in American society. People pretend that racism and sexism have very little play in the world.
Overt racism and sexism like that comment from Youtube just put a redneck face on bigotry, deterring realization that it's the covert and subtle racism and sexism that have just as much if not more ability to harm others. It's hard to defend against a knife that comes from behind oneself.
Look at how the Clintons and their proxies have tossed coded or direct racist attacks at Obama. Or, look at the very direct and indirect sexism Hillary Clinton received after her loss in Iowa. Chris Matthews was forced to issue an apology because he said that Clinton got elected to the Senate in New York because people felt sorry for her because Bill Clinton cheated on her. Then there are the relentless attacks on her being cold or gay.
Posted by: noah | Jan 22, 2008 12:42:52 PM
This fool has Obama confused with Leroy Johnson who had a thing for inflicting welcomed pain on pitiful, masohistic rednecks. That "They all look alike" crap will cause mistaken identity shit like this everytime.
Please, as if Obama would even speak to some low-life creature.... But let me tell y'all about the Evangelical sex party I went to with 10" Huckabee, or the House of Guiliani Drag Ball of 2000--it was fierce, Miss Thang.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jan 22, 2008 1:10:12 PM
i know i'm bordering on the picayune, but i believe this horrid creature is committing libel rather than slander.
Posted by: nic | Jan 22, 2008 1:14:26 PM
Here are all of the sordid details of Larry's story:
http://anndavis.blogspot.com/2008/01/exclusive-statement-from-obama-accuser.html
Posted by: Rossie | Jan 22, 2008 1:23:24 PM
i'm with sammy too, the only thing i could run for was maybe president of girth and mirth where believe me sleeping around is an absolute requirement for holding office...
Posted by: the queen | Jan 22, 2008 1:31:29 PM
libel is written...slander can be both written and verbal defamation.
Posted by: CLIFF | Jan 22, 2008 1:34:24 PM
That is just wrong, sad, and outright pitiful, first off Chicago is one of the most segregated cities in the world, and, I doubt if there is much "race mixing" of any kind there, but, if, this nitwit does do oral sex, he must be good at it since he should have put his teeth back in before this insipid story came out.
Youtube, the bane of the Internet, anyone can lie about you and, many of the dimwits will believe it as fact.
Posted by: Sebastian | Jan 22, 2008 1:40:25 PM
"i met senator Obama at a berlin discotheque in 1989, before his life in politics. i was working for exxon-mobil, then just exxon. afterwords, we went behind the discotheque, where he turned into a werewolf. he slashed my chest and stole my cocaine, then fled into the black forest, which is home to many of his kind i am told
if obama is not a werewolf, why hasn't he addressed this issue? why has he not appeared before the senate on any full moons, and why does he refuse to wear or use silver."
Best Youtube comment ever
Posted by: DW | Jan 22, 2008 2:27:12 PM
from HARPER DICTIONARY OF CONTEMPORARY USAGE:
"libel" is technically the defamation of a person... by means of written statements or by pictorial expression. "slander" means similar statements made orally. given the nature of the interwebs, i used the term "picayune" for a reason. my comment was not meant to pick a fight with anyone; rather, it was meant to elicit clarification. any lawyers out there?
Posted by: nic | Jan 22, 2008 2:44:44 PM
DW,
high-larious. thanks for the laugh.
Posted by: nic | Jan 22, 2008 2:49:12 PM
NIC and CLIFF (and anyone else who cares):
To NIC's question, it's actually not clear whether a falsehood communicated over the internet is necessarily a libel or a slander because the laws obviously weren't written witht his medium in mind, and the case law has not caught up with the issue yet.
CLIFF's distinction between libel ("written") and slander ("can be both written and verbal defamation") is inaccurate in two ways for the same reason.
The difference between libel and slander does not in fact relate to the exact form the communication takes but rather the longevity or durability of the means of communication.
The real distinction then is between transitory or fleeting means, the epitome of which is unrecorded speech, which is a slander, and more enduring or permanent means, the epitome of which is the printed word in a publicly-distributed medium like a newspaper, which is a libel.
The significance of the distinction is the question of whether and how dramatically the alleged defamation may be repeated in the future-after the original communication is long past. In practice, libel has come to be associated with formally-distributed public media, e.g., the press, and slander with personal communication.
In all likelihood, a knowingly false internet post on a publicly-trafficked site like YouTube is *probably* a libel, but that's not been ordained as such by any court in the US.
Posted by: Hermes in DC | Jan 22, 2008 2:56:12 PM
The right-wing has yet to figure out how to use the Internets to their advantage. This will circulate within the wingnutosphere only. Let them have their false conspiracies -- they're never going to vote for him in the first place.
Also, since it's spoken and not written, it would be slander, not libel.
That is all!
Posted by: davitydave | Jan 22, 2008 3:00:05 PM
NO FIGHT HERE...JUST REFERRED TO GOOD 'OL NOAH WEBSTER FOR MY REMARK.
Posted by: CLIFF | Jan 22, 2008 3:10:24 PM
i find the responses on this page amusing and hypocrital. i despise both parties and find the choices we have laughable. but i digress. if he was leveling this claim against mike huckabee, mitt romney, john mccain, ie any republican, you all would be calling for that person's head. why shouldn't the claim be investigated? there are plenty of "blind items" out there about the candidates, which are more than likely true but they dont make it onto cnn, fox, msnbc, etc. most of you should stand back from your obvious bias and consider that this accusation could be true.
also i wanted to address the racism and sexism comments. again i find it hypocritcal that blacks and women are allowed to base thier votes on race and gender. it is racist and sexist for people to do that period but legitimizing it for blacks and women is even worst than the "cut and paste" comment from candipearl. if people's basis for whom they are going to vote begins with race and/or gender then they are an idiots to begin with. racism and sexism in any form from blacks/whites and/or male/female is wrong and people should be called on it, esp when it comes from blacks, women, etc.
Posted by: jby | Jan 22, 2008 3:13:08 PM
"esp. when it comes from blacks, women, etc."
Maybe "etc." is who your comment is truly aimed at because blacks and women have been voting for white men ever since we got the vote. May "etc." is white men, hunh?
Hell, unknowingly, we've even been voting for white homo men. Just ask the fine Republican ladies of Idaho.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jan 22, 2008 3:37:43 PM
Derrick, you strike again with the wit before happy hour, thanks for a good chuckle!
Posted by: Sebastian | Jan 22, 2008 3:50:54 PM
thank you, HERMES IN DC. in yo' face CLIFF!!! wanna throw hands?!? cuz i can sure throw hands, buddy. just kidding. lol.
Posted by: nic | Jan 22, 2008 4:17:04 PM
If you want to learn what it's like to be libled on the internet and try and sue for it, read "Unequal Justice: being gay in America," by Archbishop Bruce Simpson...the story is amazing and sad that our justice system is the way it is.
Posted by: angrycitizen | Jan 22, 2008 4:25:11 PM
JBY -
I won't (although I could) get into an argument here about racism and sexism, as it seems that you could stand to lose one (but only if you learned something in the process). And the cut and paste was not from candypearl, it was from me - post authors are below the post.
You are right . It COULD be true. It is just hard to believe. It IS possible. It is just not probable. Stranger things have happened than to have a Senator, in his own state, where he would easily be recognized, engage in several questionable acts around a potentially corroborating witness (the limo driver). If Obama had met "Larry" discretely, and engaged in these alleged acts without witnesses, it would make more sense, yet be even harder to prove. Which is why people in the public eye generally do these things discretely. This does not seem at all discrete. It seems brazen and foolish and the sort of thing someone not very bright might think he could get away with doing. Granted, drugs may addle the brain, but I have to wonder if Obama, as a public figure, was seen as addled or foolish during his tenure as Senator, during 1999, or at any other time someone can show me proof about. Until I have more proof, I will remain skeptical, and suspicious of the motives behind posting such a video.
FYI, I would be more easily swayed if we were talking about some right-wing, Bible-toting, gay rights opponent, because it's part of reaction formation. Distancing self from some part of the self one finds unacceptable. Besides, if you preach against it, most people will be unlikely to suspect you are secretly fighting and occasionally losing out to your own urges and history. Saying the no while doing the yes. It saves face. But I would mostly be skeptical of any claim trotted out during a presidential campaign without sufficient proof. As it stands now, these are unsubstantiated claims by someone with access to a video camera and a questionable agenda.
Posted by: JT | Jan 22, 2008 4:29:37 PM
Posted by: Sebastian | Jan 22, 2008 1:40:25 PM
Sebastian, I assure you there is race-mixing in Chicago.
Good fucking Christ, already. Daley's son runs Bartertown, not Daley Sr. It is 2008.
Posted by: Marco | Jan 22, 2008 4:39:03 PM
Marco,
Sebastian said, "...much race mixing". But Obama wouldn't do anything with that reject from HeeHaw on Youtube. That wouldn't be race mixing, that'd be some form of bestiality. Having sex with George Clooney would be race mixing...good race mixing.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jan 22, 2008 4:56:35 PM
Last time a come to this site!!
Fucking Assholes for posting
such shit.
Posted by: frank | Jan 22, 2008 5:35:30 PM
Since Obama DOESN'T have an anti-gay record, it would not by hypocritical to ignore this boob on YouTube. Craig deserves scorn because of his hypocrisy as a public servant.
As for segregation and Chicago, my experience, having lived there in the 80's and visited many times since, is that it's gotten better, less hostile, but still fairly segregated. But then again, so are most American cities. The segregation gets "softer" (i.e., more about economics and inertia) and hopefully will fade away as people feel more comfortable in different neighborhoods and can afford to live in cities.
Posted by: David R. | Jan 23, 2008 12:18:23 AM
2 thoughts:
1) This could turn into an interesting legal case, regarding slander and youtube. I don't think there has been anything this high profile before, but claims of druge use and or sexual activity are clearly slanderous.
2) On the other hand, wouldn't it be sort of hilarious if it turned out to be true?
Posted by: jacknasty | Jan 23, 2008 12:32:28 AM
Why be so nasty against this guy? Because his comments are against a Democrat? I am a democrat and these negative, racist and classist comments against this man are disturbing, especially coming from Andy!
I am not saying that I believe this guy and I find his using "I gave him head" remarks stupid. The cocaine/crack comments are all he needed to say.
Obama was a member of the Illinois State Senate in 1999, not a representative. Gee Andy, I bet even half of Illinois wouldn't know the difference.
Posted by: Mike | Jan 23, 2008 3:05:27 AM
I'm suppose to believe this guy rides around in his own limo?
Posted by: cosooner | Jan 23, 2008 9:59:17 AM
What goes through the head of someone like Larry? How stupid does a person have to be? The idea that Obama would have sex with this turd is so ridiculous...ugh.
Posted by: Miles | Jan 23, 2008 10:31:21 AM
Mike, you are so clearly NOT a Democrat. Every statement you have made in the past has been a right-wing talking point. Trying to label yourself a Democrat now is insanely laughable.
Posted by: Tread | Jan 23, 2008 12:01:46 PM
OMG, what will the GOP think up next to muddy this election. Its the same thing every 4 years. These people are sick.
Posted by: VATOMCAT | Jan 23, 2008 3:00:00 PM
What a ludicrous video. This guy is delusional at best. Accusations like this don't deserve attention, but if this guy continues to push this, his credibility does...
Posted by: bryan | Jan 26, 2008 10:18:35 PM
Did he have his teeth in or out when he gave head? This guy looks like the product of first cousins.
Posted by: charley | Feb 22, 2008 10:57:23 AM
Sure, I believe this and I believe in Santa.
And I believe that the surge is working.
And that Walter Reed is a great hospital.
And I believe a flat 23% sales tax isn't regressive.
I wouldn't let his mouth touch my dick, how 'bout you?
Posted by: Joe Bua | Feb 22, 2008 12:21:05 PM
I know this for a FACT. Larry Sinclair is a drug addict and alcoholic and has pulled this crap before. This lying asshole has tried to extort money from various people over the last ten years by claiming to have either done drugs with them or had sex with them or both. The guy is nut-job and I can guarantee you that if you check this low-life's story out, you'll know that he IS lying. Of course, you can expect the right-wingnut media to pick this bullshit up and run with it. Which would be ironic since Larry Sinclair was paid by some "interested parties" with connections in the right-wing media to make this video and, like the true drug addict and alcoholic he is, shamelessly took the money to support his many addictions--fully knowing that he was lying. Personally, I would suggest to Larry Sinclair that he shut his lying, cocksucking mouth before somebody shuts it for him--PERMANENTLY.
Posted by: miek | Feb 22, 2008 2:27:40 PM
I know this for a FACT. Larry Sinclair is a drug addict and alcoholic and has pulled this crap before. This lying asshole has tried to extort money from various people over the last ten years by claiming to have either done drugs with them or had sex with them or both. The guy is nut-job and I can guarantee you that if you check this low-life's story out, you'll know that he IS lying. Of course, you can expect the right-wingnut media to pick this bullshit up and run with it. Which would be ironic since Larry Sinclair was paid by some "interested parties" with connections in the right-wing media to make this video and, like the true drug addict and alcoholic he is, shamelessly took the money to support his many addictions--fully knowing that he was lying. Personally, I would suggest to Larry Sinclair that he shut his lying, cocksucking mouth before somebody shuts it for him--PERMANENTLY.
Posted by: miek | Feb 22, 2008 2:28:08 PM
Who cares if hes lying? That nigger is a communist and a muslim out to impose islam law and america! He deserves to be exposed any way possible! Muslims must be put down!
Posted by: 4234234 | Feb 22, 2008 4:44:11 PM
PROOF of Larry Sinclair Delusions about Obama. More can be found simply by going to google!
Larry Sinclair lives at 600 W Superior St. #604 Duluth MN 55802. That is what Larry filed in Court which is public record for anyone to see. This is available via a google search, we are not revealing anything not publicly available. According to H.U.D. records which are also public, that address is a building with 154 units called Gateway Tower and is a complex for the elderly and disabled; a government subsidized home for the mentally ill and disabled.
Larry Sinclair may have been in a mental hospital during the time he says he was in Illinois. He was suffering from sever psychosis due to schizophrenia.(Maybe drug induced? He's a self admitted heavy user or was) This is being confirmed by reporters of the Globe Magazine and others. (It may already be confirmed and why the lies have not made it to mainstream media.
YouTuber Absinthelover reports the above and this: In the Globe Magazine that just came out. It has an article and an interview with Sinclair. It says he has had multiple convictions for fraud in the past. He also has a brain tumor.
From YouTuber MasterJoberry, the article: "On Delusional Misidentification" From the link: Focusing on the neurological bases, these delusions can result from...brain tumor. Delusional misidentification syndrome...used to describe certain delusions of times, places, objects, persons, including the 'self', and even body parts."
Larry claims he was off his meds for a week so as to take the polygraph but if they have not accounted for the role that Larry's brain tumor might have on his beliefs (and also his clearly demonstrated erratic behavior) then they may be measuring nothing more than delusions caused by the brain tumor. We have reason to believe that his condition is fairly advanced given he said he had little more than a year to live (Globe Magazine).
CNN, MSNBC & FOX all know about this, and others. They have researched this story and will not air it because it is libelous, inaccurate, and fraud based on the ranting of a very sick man with a self-admitted mental disorder and self-admitted criminal history where he says, "...I actually revealed some things about myself that could put me away for quite a bit of time..."
In Larry's radio Interview he revealed that he has a past that could have him put behind bars. It's about 2/5 near 1/2 way into the interview, JUST before a break.
"...I actually revealed some things about myself that could put me away for quite a bit of time..."
YouTuber kujayhawklaw says, "I got really worked up about this. I insulted his methods to the point I got him to call me personally at home. He was friendly, but requested that I start sites against him because controversy helps him sell his message. Nice guy, but a fraud."
YouTuber asdffd says, "I just asked this guy on his video if he had ever been convicted of fraud. Soon after he made a post saying he would be busy for a few days and not be able to post for awhile. When I tried to make a follow up comment my comment wasn't posted- I think he blocked me from posting. I think the truth is going to come out about Larry Sinclair and it ain't gonna be pretty. The first video he made- it looks like it was made in a hotel room. I wonder if someone put him up to it."
YouTuber PoliticalJunk says, "LARRY SINCLAIRE BLOCKED MY SCREEN NAME TO COMMENT ON HIS VIDEO: YOU can check out this website to know the Federal LAWSUIT: It shows his Address with is a HUD FACILITY for ELDERLY and DISABLE PEOPLE (Mentally disable people too!) In a radio interview he even said he had mental problems as a child."
Larry has accepted $100,000 to take a lie detector test via a tabloid website. He claims his intentions are selfless to expose Obama...
Even if he passes the polygraph, it only means he believe his delusion, even if it is a lie.
Posted by: TST | Feb 23, 2008 2:05:31 PM
Bwahahahahaha, it seems that people will go at ALL lengths to make sure Obama doesn't get elected. God Bless America, indeed; that's why I left the USA for good!
This video made my day, though.
Vote Obama!
Posted by: PC | Feb 26, 2008 10:01:08 AM
Recent Comments