From Time this week: [the Obama campaign machine] "doubled down on efforts by the White House to use social media to spread its message." The timing on this quote stuck me as just this morning I was reading a post on the Daily Beast and was instantly on alert. Usually the comments on DB are a mix of left, right and center with a few oddies commenting all day all time all hours. But today, I had a flashback to 2008: the comments were all lefties: a flood of anti-Republican hate had taken over the site in the comments section. Ah...thought I: Obama's paid hacks are out again in force.

They are paid to make it look as though the sentiment is with Obama, the Dear Leader, when in fact, these are paid political operatives who are flooding the virtual waves with Obama mandated messages.

Some enterprising reporter would do a nice story on who is funding this and what messaging tactics are being used. It was so blatant in 2008, when places like Feministing and other web sites, supposedly for women's rights and equality, became bastions for anti-Hillary sentiment. Slate was infused and the publishers were fine with that. Feministing egged on this Obama campaign tactic with their "oh eeek, Hillary" coodiez posts.

But this is a great story and media knows it. Obama is doing what is legal but profoundly unethical for a presidential candidate.

I find this troubling but whacha goona do? How about understanding that during the next year, 7 our to 10 anti-Republican, pro Obama comments are probably put there by folks on Obama's campaign pay roll.
Come on, reporters, dig out the talking points distributed to these trolls and do your job as journalists. Even if you voted or will vote for Obama, do you not want honest reporting about had campaign tactics? We did not have a drill down into Obama donor fraud tactics of 2008 or his slanderous tactics to win senate races. Where art thou o journalists? Kangaroo Court?