August 8th, 2007
01:46 PM ET
11 years ago

'Romney Girls' slam 'Obama Girl'

Obama Girl is questioned in a new 'ad' from the Romney Girls.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - In the dirty world of politics, even the Obama girl is subject to nasty attack ads.

Just when it seemed the folks at were content with their summer mega-hit online videos "Obama Girl" and "Obama Girl v. Giuliani Girl," the satirical Web site is out with an "attack ad" on Obama's No. 1 fan– this one said to be sponsored by three scantily clad blondes called the "Romney Girls."

The ad asks, "How much can we really trust Obama girl?" as it scrolls through several TV interviews and media reports of the Obama Girl actress, Amber Lee Ettinger, giving varying answers as to how much she supports the Illinois Democrat in real life.

"Why can't Obama Girl just pick a position?" the ad's narrator asks.

The ad ends with a quick a cameo from the three individuals identifying themselves as "The Romney Girls," as the words, "Paid for by the election committee of RomneyGirls For America" scrolls across the screen.

On the Web site, The Romney Girls are identified as "identical triplets, but they are as different as Romney's various viewpoints."

"Frightening Romney Girl likes Romney based on what he stood for in the 1980s. But Athletic-y Romney Girl likes him for completely different reasons – what he stood for in the 1990s. And Infant Romney Girl likes him for what people tell him he should stand for today."

The Web site's previous two online videos, "Obama Girl" and "Obama Girl vs. Giuliani Girl," became instant online hits, and are often cited as examples of how Internet videos are shaping the 2008 election.

Kevin Madden, a Romney spokesman, told CNN the campaign was unaware of the new video but, referencing the candidate's five sons, added, "I’d say that it looks like the five brothers have some serious competition. They better start working on their dance moves."

"Obama Girl" generated over three million views on YouTube, while "Giuliani Girl" clocked in at over one million.

soundoff (32 Responses)
  1. CMS, CA

    Who cares, who cares, who cares?

    We are electing a President right?

    August 9, 2007 01:03 am at 1:03 am |
  2. KD, Dallas, TX

    I am starting to wonder if I should even be reading CNN news anymore-I have already stopped reading FOX. This type of article makes no sense with politics, unless it's meant as one more means of distancing certain presidential hopefuls. And then getting to the response by JC in Mississippi, I can see what kind of people are attracted to this kind of article. I cannot believe that some people are that ignorant. Some people are so afraid of differences that any HINT of Islam creates bias and opinions. Obama is not Islamic, he is Christian. Most likely practicing it better than even JC. Referencing your initials to Jesus Christ, who accepted and loved everyone, and who certainly was the ultimate example with idealism and vision.

    August 9, 2007 08:08 am at 8:08 am |
  3. RuthieM, Millford, PA

    As usual, everyone wants to and does follow Obama! But just like any 'sequel', they're all weak.

    August 9, 2007 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  4. Colin, Milwaukee WI

    Campaigns & political groups actually waste money making stupid web videos like this?

    Oh and "nv", alot of politicians in the US before the 1950's were socialists. Heck, here in Milwaukee, some of our best mayors (Frank Zeilder & Daniel Hoan) were socialists. Don't through the word "socialism" around and equate it to a bad thing. Many parts of America and many European nations progressed very well based on socialism.

    Get a clue before coming on here and littering your mindless posts with bad grammar and blanket statements. You look pretty stupid to the educated amongst us.

    August 9, 2007 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  5. Anon

    Honestly, I cannot wait for every conservative lived through the height of the cold war dies off, so socialist stops being used like an insult

    August 9, 2007 05:21 pm at 5:21 pm |
  6. Noerhady

    is that the only good thing about him? is there anything ulniftipg or redeeming about him? if he were somehow enlightening even while being disturbing i'd still think he at least deserves consideration.however, definitely aesthetically pleasing doesn't necessarily equal good presidential canditate in my mind. I can think of a few physical features that i would classify as not good even though they are meant to be nice to look at .but how does the nation ever come to a consensus on something like this anyway?

    April 27, 2012 04:26 am at 4:26 am |
1 2