God help us if the Democrats find out.

October 26, 2004 1:22 PM

God help us if the Democrats find out.After Cheney's .com/.org mixup, Republican domain name confusion continues as Bush campaign staffers accidentally send email--including lists of voters that may be used to challenge voters--to addresses at georgewbush.org instead of georgewbush.com
posted by kirkaracha (26 comments total)

D'oh! This would probably be better as a comment in this thread since georgewbush.org is the source of the emails mentioned by Greg Palast.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:32 PM on October 26, 2004

republicans: rich, successful, dishonest & ignorant.
posted by quonsar at 1:32 PM on October 26, 2004

Yeah, how did these guys get so rich anyway?
posted by trbrts at 1:36 PM on October 26, 2004

"All I have is music... "

Sweet, sweet music.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:36 PM on October 26, 2004

so this (found at the bottom of one of the emails quoted):

"THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying it, and notify the sender by reply e-mail or by calling 505.848.1800, so that our address record can be corrected. Thank you."

doesn't work, huh? Probably better in the green.
posted by grimley at 2:00 PM on October 26, 2004

"can't we say something intelligent?"

Hahahahaha.
posted by skallas at 2:01 PM on October 26, 2004

Oh.... crap.... I needed this. And to think, if they'd configured their mailserver according to "best practices" for spam avoidance (i.e., not having a catchall), they wouldn't have been able to provide us with this wonderful little diversion.

My fave part is the staffer fantasizing about a thing with Barbara Bush. Scroll all the way down for the picture of W. and Bar The Younger, where a sender muses: "She and I would look good together."

Response: "Just stay away from Jenna or things could get ugly."

I wonder if one of the addressees or senders could flex to get this pulled... it's exquisite, though. I may have to Magpie it when I get home.
posted by lodurr at 2:02 PM on October 26, 2004

Don Povia wants to bang the twins! Hehe, wait till daddy find outs!
posted by skallas at 2:06 PM on October 26, 2004

Meyers, Ryan P. [mailto:[e-mail]] wrote:

"THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited...


Up yours, Ryan
posted by Reverend Mykeru at 2:24 PM on October 26, 2004

Don Povia "...holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and History from Monmouth University, with a minor in Policy Studies. He is a member of the Pi Sigma Alpha Political Science Honor Society and the Phi Alpha Theta International History Honor Society."

But he's not a Yale man -- not even Ivy, ferchrissakes! And certainly not a Deke. Though he does appear to be a pro-wrestling fan -- that should count for something with a Bush Girl....just probably with the wrong one...
posted by lodurr at 2:27 PM on October 26, 2004

Um, on behalf of the entire Bush inner circle, DOH!.

Thanks for the grin!
posted by fenriq at 2:28 PM on October 26, 2004

" - Also: Congratulations to President Bush on his debate last night."

HAHAHA. I gotta stop reading this. Its too funny.
posted by skallas at 2:38 PM on October 26, 2004

What the hell is this?

Jean M at CNN is filing on the aids protesters at the youth convention today.

She's trying to get someone on camera to respond and turn it into a larger security story.

I said no; I'd talk to her on the phone.

CNN will be looking to get someone on tape; please refer them to me.

Thanks. Mark.

Sounds like CNN (the media whores they are) are trying to take a protesting story and play it up to some kind of "be scared, if protestors can get through so can terrorists" bullshit pro-Bush scare tactic. Wow. Event in question here.
posted by skallas at 2:43 PM on October 26, 2004

Thank you, Jon Seaton, for getting your email address screwed up in everybody's address books somewhere along the line.
posted by DrJohnEvans at 3:15 PM on October 26, 2004

Oh, man. First the georgewbush.org thing and now this. You'd think Mr Seaton was actually working for the Democrats...
posted by DrJohnEvans at 3:16 PM on October 26, 2004

Yeah, how did these guys get so rich anyway?

They know some Saudis...
posted by clevershark at 4:06 PM on October 26, 2004

If there were only one internet, this wouldn't have happened. More than one, and it can get a little confusing.
posted by emelenjr at 4:24 PM on October 26, 2004

from one of the alternate internets ; >
posted by amberglow at 5:43 PM on October 26, 2004

It is little glitches like this that make me want to hug the internet. Strange how much real news is coming from comedy sources this year.
posted by whatnot at 5:59 PM on October 26, 2004

Can't connect to georgewbush.org right now. Anyone have a mirror?
posted by hattifattener at 6:08 PM on October 26, 2004

This is like Watergate, only because of someone's fuck-up instead of criminal activity.

If I were the Democrats, I'd get the people on that list to do early voting.
posted by eustacescrubb at 6:32 PM on October 26, 2004

I saw a bunch of .gov addresses on there, is it legal to use gov't equipment for partisan political activities?
posted by m@ at 7:36 PM on October 26, 2004

m@, for the record, I believe that it is allowed -- obviously, the President is allowed to use government stationary to write notes for his political adivisor, for example.

More broadly, though -- don't take that path. These people are not public figures. That sort attack-dog shit is loathsome on either side.
posted by Ptrin at 9:02 PM on October 26, 2004

m@, for the record, I believe that it is allowed -- obviously, the President is allowed to use government stationary to write notes for his political adivisor, for example.

The Hatch Act is pretty specific about which federal employees may or may not participate in partisan political campaigns. The Office of Special Counsel also has guidelines regarding when and how federal employees may use their government-funded email to engage in partisan politics. I know I saw employees of the Council on Environmental Quality of the Executive Office of the President and NOAA in more than a few of the "from" headers, which leads me to wonder why they are electioneering instead of, say, doing the jobs we're paying them to do on company time . . . There's no reason these people couldn't get personal, non-federally-funded email accounts to do their electioneering; after all, they have several internets from which to choose.

More broadly, though -- don't take that path. These people are not public figures. That sort attack-dog shit is loathsome on either side.

Bullshit. I am not a Republican, and I am not a Democrat, so I feel free to say that ANY federal employee electioneering using the time and resources I'M PAYING FOR is more than open to public scrutiny. The people using private email who sent these messages to the wrong domain are stupid, but I agree they probably do not warrant investigation (unless the Hatch Act prohibits them from partisan involvement). However, those sending email from their .gov addresses are almost certainly violating the Hatch Act, and are certainly wasting my money, and, therefore, most certainly do deserve public scrutiny.
posted by wdpeck at 10:52 PM on October 26, 2004

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED etc..

Well, to my eyes, it seems to be addressed to someone at georgewbush.org. Perfectly legal in my book for someone at that site to use (i.e. post) it.
posted by bashos_frog at 2:01 AM on October 27, 2004

people should be calling some of those phone #s -- especially on election day...
posted by Shike at 11:18 AM on October 27, 2004