Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

`Hicky' actor in GOP ad tries to cash in: I'm available for more work!

The political world is chattering away this morning over Mike Allen's story reporting that national Republicans are airing an ad attacking the Democrat in the West Virginia Senate race that was cast with actors in Philadelphia.

The ad features "regular guys" trashing Obama and Dem candidate Joe Manchin, and according to the casting call, the actors were given a "hicky blue collar look." Dems, and the Manchin campaign, have jumped on the story, hammering it as proof that the GOP candidate, businessman John Raese, doesn't understand working people and isn't who he claims he is.

The ad has given sudden national exposure to one of the actors, Damian Muziani, and now, in a funny twist, he's just posted a statement on his Web site about the mess, trying to cash in on his newfound notoriety, and doing a bit of sucking up in the process:

Damian has NOT provided information to Mike Allen from Politico.com for his article regarding Joe Manchin. He has no idea how Mike identified him, but is impressed with his reporting savvy nonetheless. Damian will have NO COMMENT on the Joe Manchin commercial for those inclined to inquire. Damian is, however, available as a host, reporter, and promoter for groups who have a position to fill. Man on the street? Audience warm-up for your local talk show? Witty co-host to spice up your program? Let's move on now and PRODUCE together, ok?

I guess this means he's available for more GOP ads?

By Greg Sargent  | October 7, 2010; 10:40 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Lou Dobbs's illegal immigrant problem -- and ours

Comments

He needs to marry into the Palin family.

Posted by: hellslittlestangel1 | October 7, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Still NO MENTION by Mr. Sargent of this:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/10/07/2010-10-07_krystal_ball_congressional_candidate_in_virginia_outraged_over_raunchy_photos_le.html?r=news/national

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "l NO MENTION by Mr. Sargent of this"

I'm guessing that's probably because she's a Democrat, so it doesn't represent hypocrisy (because, you know, conservatives are all anti-sex).

As I mentioned in the previous thread, I would see it as a resume enhancement, except there are nearly enough photos, and they aren't nearly racy enough.

I can't imagine trying to turn this into a campaign issue, although I find the accusation that blogging about the photos is actually "sexist". Maybe she could run a join O'Donnell in a "We're both victims" campaign. "We're attractive young women and mean people are beating up on us. Vote for us, Prince Charming!"

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

One of the biggest GOP marketing scams since "Country First".

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Non story but funny self promotion.

"It's not unusual for political ads to use "fake" actors to stand in for real people... The casting language did not come from the NRSC."

Or from Raese!

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43254.html#ixzz11gctPZzv

Posted by: sbj3 | October 7, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Senator Scott Brown(R) Playgirl Nude CenterFold.

It is way too late for the sanctimonious Right Wingers to start expressing outrage about pictures of fully clothed Democratic candidate, goofing off at a Christmas party.

Senator Scott Brown(R) posed complete nude for a Sex Magazine.

I wonder how many Republican spin Doctors met up at some "Gentleman's Club" to coordinate their cries of outrage over pictures of a fully clad, female Democratic candidate?

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Please don't take Joke's troll bait PLers.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis:

It's not "hypocrisy" for Christine O'Donnell either (unless you don't believe in REDEMPTION?).

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

This is what the GOP stands for.

Literally the dumbing down of not only politics, but of regular Americans.

This is IDIOCY for idiocy's sake and should be strongly repudiated by West Viginians and Democrats.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Liar-still:

Cosmopolitan is hardly a "Sex Magazine".

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I'm not a witch. I'm U2, and I still haven't found what I'm grifting for.

Christine O'Donnell

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

From Ben Smith: "MTV screening Obama's audience for views, looks

Oh my gosh!

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1010/MTV_screening_Obamas_audience_for_views_looks.html?showall#

Posted by: sbj3 | October 7, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Raese made his money the old fashioned way.....

And has the brains and skills to show for it.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 7, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "It's not 'hypocrisy' for Christine O'Donnell either (unless you don't believe in REDEMPTION?"

Indeed I do. I consider general hypocrisy charge leveled and Republicans and conservatives, at all levels, to be a linguistic construct for the purpose of politically defeating Republicans and diminishing conservative ideas without actually addressing those ideas. I think O'Donnell is more of a poseur than a serious conservative, but I haven't suggested (and won't) that she's a hypocrite, even though I think her anti-m@sterbation stance (such as it was) is just nuts.

Also, I find the cliched notion of Republicans or conservatives being somehow "anti-sex" as prima facie evidence that liberals (at least, those that make such charges) don't actually know any conservatives (or remaining stubbornly ignorant of who they actually are, if they do).

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Scott Brown(R) Nude Centerfold. The pride of all those Tea Party members who are fully behind Christine O'Donnell's Chastity Belts For All, campaign.

What's a little hypocrisy, at a Tea Party for hypocrites?!

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: You have it entirely backwards. We're outraged that she did not pose completely nude.

Scott Brown has the right idea. Kyrstal Ball, it appears, is a bit too much of a prude, for my tastes, anyway. What, is she ashamed of the human body? I mean, seriously.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

At least we can agree that Christine O'Donnell is not a hypocrite.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

@Liam: "The pride of all those Tea Party members who are fully behind Christine O'Donnell's Chastity Belts For All, campaign"

Have you ever actually seen a hot chick in nothing but a metal chastity belt? Like a gold-plated one?

You wouldn't be so dismissive of that circumstance, if you had. /snark

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Glad to see Old Jake back on here. I missed him yesterday. I view him as Plumline's very own Abe Simpson. I picture Jake attaching an Onion to his belt, each morning before sitting down at the keyboard, to type up a a long and rambling rant, to be mailed to that young hussy, Ann Landers.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

For anyone else wondering about Cosmopolitan (not Playgirl) magazine, it was a tasteful nude, a la Michelango's David -- but not showing any private parts -- and it was not a "centerfold" as in FOLDING out of the magazine.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: "picture Jake attaching an onion to his belt"

As was the style at the time. ;)

Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on them. ‘Give me five bees for a quarter,’ you’d say. Now where were we? Oh yeah, the important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Republicans Joke and Kevin are purposefully changing the subject of the conversation AWAY from the embarrassment of the Republican Party.

They obviously don't want to talk about THIS issue because it makes the GOP look like the disgusting scumbags they actually are.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Have you ever actually seen a hot chick in nothing but a metal chastity belt? Like a gold-plated one?

You wouldn't be so dismissive of that circumstance, if you had. /snark

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:40 AM
...............

Never seen such a display, but I believe Jake just might have, at the victory party, after the battle of Hastings.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Obama: "those who cling to guns and religion" I don't think Obama even bothered to campaign in W.Va. in 2008.

Posted by: ohioan | October 7, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

All, new Adam Serwer post on Lou Dobbs mess:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/lou_dobbs_illegal_immigrant_pr.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 7, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Jake even has to defend Scott Brown's nude shot (he wasn't THAT nude) and centerfold location (it wasn't a FOLD OUT).

What do you call that? Reactive behaviour? Like an amoeba. You poke it and the amoeba reacts automatically.

Bwahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reactivity and sophistry, all in one defensive sentence.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 7, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "it was a tasteful nude, a la Michelango's David -- but not showing any private parts"

Well, not to pick its, but Michelangelo's "David" does indeed show the naughty nibbly bits. Perhaps not as sexualized as pictures of Krystal Ball cavorting with her so-called "husband" and some kind of "costume party", but Mike's on full display (when medieval prudes didn't have a post-facto fig leaf tacked over the offending manhood).

I refer you to the centerfold: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_(Michelangelo)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"Reactivity and sophistry, all in one defensive sentence. "

Anything to change the topic off the ridiculous Republican Party's foibles and fumbles.

Joke is a non-stop Republican Tea Party propaganda machine and given that we know he is a serial liar, he doesn't even attempt being rational anymore.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "Republicans Joke and Kevin are purposefully changing the subject of the conversation AWAY from the embarrassment of the Republican Party."

Ethan, I like you. I really do. And I can't speak for Jake, but I'm not trying to steer the conversation in any direction, except that which I find the most entertaining or enlightening to myself.

Or in which direction I think I might amuse, or inform, some other person.

And you know why, Ethan? Because I know you're out there. I know you are vigilant. And it simply isn't possible--oh, as desirable as it may be--to distract from the tragic greed and evil of the Republican party, with someone like you on the case. There's simply no point to it. I could do my best to spin and distract for my Republican overlords, but you would catch me. It would all be for naught, with you there watching my every move. For naught!

So, I don't bother, and focus on sharing things I think are interesting, entertaining myself. And, of course, I like to listen to myself speak (or read what I write), because I, like most people, think I'm both more intelligent and more interesting than I actually am.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis:

I was saying that SCOTT BROWN's private parts were not exposed.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Jake even has to defend Scott Brown's nude shot (he wasn't THAT nude) and centerfold location (it wasn't a FOLD OUT).

What do you call that? Reactive behaviour? Like an amoeba. You poke it and the amoeba reacts automatically.

Bwahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reactivity and sophistry, all in one defensive sentence.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 7, 2010 11:52 AM

...................

I got a terrible hernia,when I picked up the Cosmo edition, containing the Michelangelo Nude. Marble sure is awfully heavy.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

@Kevin_Willis: "Well, not to pick its"

Not to pick nits. Sigh.

And: "but Mike's on full display"

I meant so say, "Mike's handiwork is on full display". And I do mean handiwork. I often don't correct my typing dyslexia, as I expect my smarter-than-the-average-bear fellow plum-liners will understand my impairment, but in this case it was going to drive me crazy, unless I "redacted" it. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

As for Republicans airing an ad attacking the Democrat in the West Virginia Senate race that was cast with actors in, GOD FORBID, Philadelphia!!!

Who cares? I brought up Ms. Ball because that seems like a more important revelation -- but I'd be more than happy ro defend Mr. Raese -- at the very least, the political world is chattering away this morning more about her ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "I was saying that SCOTT BROWN's private parts were not exposed."

And you likened Scott Brown's nude to Michelangelo's David, whose private parts are very definitely exposed. Thus, I thought, for clarity I might mention the fact. There were clearly some differences between Scott Brown and Michelangelo's David, not the least of which being that David let it all hang out.

Are you suggesting Michelangelo's David is not tasteful? ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Kevin,

Not to worry mate. I understood what you were driving at. Mike did chisel out David's plums and banana, for all the world to see.

I must say that I was shocked to discover his Scott Brown nude, on the ceiling of the Sistine chapel. Very tastefully done mind you. It would not offend Pope or a Tea Party member.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Compare Scott Brown's nude layout to Michelangelo's David.

1. David is standing--Scott is laying.
2. David is nude--Scott is "not THAT nude".
3. David is marble--Scott is Republican.
4. David is white--Scott is...oh well.
5. David is hung--Scott is "not THAT nude".

Anything else?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 7, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis:

They are both tastefully (not literally) done, which is why I likened Scott Brown's nude to Michelangelo's David. Thanks for whatever clarification you thought was needed.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues

How is the Meg Whitman Maidgate scandel playing out these days, out west?

I recently learned that Meg's husband's name is Griff Harsh. No wonder she uses her maiden name, and did not even go the hyphenated route.

Imagine Meg Harsh, or Meg Whitman-Harsh!

Posted by: Liam-still | October 7, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

@liam,

Looks like the polls, post maid-gate and post debate, are showing Brown +5 - +7. Whitman & Brown cancelled out of the third debate. Brown is already ahead 20-30 pts in the Bay Area, so doesn't need a local radio debate. Meg needs to quit talking about maid-gate and hope the story doesn't have legs. Early voting has started so the timing isn't good for Whitman.

Another former household employee has come out and stood up for the maid and verified that Meg is "harsh" and cheap. Since that plays into the prevailing view of Meg, that story continues to play. It's like "I can see Russia from my house" line played into Sarah Palin's image. Neither Whitman nor Palin can shake loose of their images.

Meg the Harsh would have been just TOO much.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 7, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not an actor. I'm you. A hick."

Posted by: bernielatham | October 7, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Kevin_Willis,

Well then, what are your thoughts on the topic at hand, sans spin and distraction?

You think it's cool that the Republican Party explicitly wrote that ad with the "hicky blue collar look" in mind?

Given your penchant for supporting rural communities, do you find that insulting?

Given MY penchant for supporting rural communities, I DO find it insulting towards real, hard-working blue-collar rural Americans.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: "You think it's cool that the Republican Party explicitly wrote that ad with the "hicky blue collar look" in mind?"

er, ethan:

"The casting language did not come from the NRSC."

"An NRSC vendor told the talent agency, in an e-mail provided to POLITICO: "So here’s what we need for casting ... 2 featured characters that will be talking to each other at a diner, conversation back and forth. ... One male- Age about 55.- Looking for someone to represent the middle of the country… Ohio, Pittsburgh, West Virginia area- Middle class ... One male- Age about 45- Middle class- Again, should represent the Ohio, Pittsburgh, West Virginia area of the country."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43254.html#ixzz11hAMSh40

Try as you might there's no story here.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 7, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Meg Whitman is SO "cheap" that she paid her maid $23 per hour!!!!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 7, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

"The GOP group blames the casting call on an outside producer."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/07/AR2010100703009.html

@SBJ: "The casting language did not come from the NRSC."

HAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!

JEEZ!

It's bad enough they OUTSOURCED the ad production, but did they even watch the ad? Did they ever stop to think for a second that producing a fraudulent video would be negatively perceived?!?!

HILARIOUS.

No story SBJ?

If it's no story then why did the RNC PULL THE AD???

The message of the ad is insulting.

But the total mismanagement of the production of the ad is quintessential Republican RNC fumbling. All they needed to do was watch the ad and say, "Ya know, this may be too fake." But they didn't.

Either somebody at the RNC approved the ad and thought that fraudulently deceiving WV voters was a-okay, OR, the RNC never bothered to watch the product they paid for until it was on the air.

Again, either way this is a classic Republican fumble.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: "Producing a fraudulent video."

?????

What are you talking about?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 7, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"What are you talking about?"

Acting dumb again I see. What are YOU talking about? It's obvious what I'm talking about. That video ad was a total fraud.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "You think it's cool that the Republican Party explicitly wrote that ad with the 'hicky blue collar look' in mind?"

I dunno. Was it really insulting? If it was, then I'm insulted. I wouldn't use that term. Certainly wouldn't recommend it in casting a political commercial.

However, Democrats and liberals are in no way in any position to critique Republicans for their condescension towards rural Americans. If they think they are, then, absolutely, they should give that a shot. See how that plays.

And there are plenty of blue bloods who are condescending of rural Americans in the GOP--no doubt about it. Lisa Murkowski occurs to me. Arlen Specter. Karl Rove? The RNC, as I have noted repeatedly, is not exactly made up of good ole boys. More Boss Hoggs than Duke Boys in the RNC, if you get my meaning.

Beyond that, it sounds like making a mountain out of a molehill. I worked in an advertising agency, and this sort of stuff is neither exceptional, nor in any way the responsibility of the client. The client does not do casting calls. They don't word the call or write the call sheets. That's the folks at the agency, many of whom may not be sympathetic with the products or person they are trying to sell (or, I'll let you in on a secret, they may despise the people they are targeting their advertising at). At the agency I worked at, a militant liberal (and dedicated vegan) did a great line of packaging for beef jerky. POP, endcaps, everything. Beautiful.

And it's not "outsourcing"--it's how it freakin' works, it's how everybody not only does it, but has done it, for about as long as there has been ad agencies. The political candidate is not going to be responsible for what's on a call sheet, and it's a weird (and, may I note, kind of desperate-sounding) assertion.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

"The client does not do casting calls"

The client approves the final ad. Always.

If not, then they are FOOLS!!!

If so, in this case, then they are FOOLS!!!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 7, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "The client approves the final ad. Always"

Yes, but this nontroversy is about the language of a casting call, not the final ad. Of course, they are responsible for the final ad. Something about the final ad offends you (I mean, other than endorsing a Republican)?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 7, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company