Obama Administration launches "Attack Watch"

cjericho · Sep 14, 2011

Piotr Rasputin said:

LongTimeListener said:

If they're trying to snuff out stories before they go mainstream, this sounds like a pretty stupid idea -- Fox and talk radio stories are just going to check the site, figure out what the administration is "debunking" and then tell the pre-debunked version.
Click to expand...

It sounds like something the political blogosphere's more immature denizens (cough, DailyKos, cough) would think of.

"Let's get those jerkyfaces before they post negative stories!!! Whooooo!!!!"

I especially enjoyed the "Join us!! Or just give five bucks . . ." part.
Click to expand...

So how much are you sending?

Smallpotatoes · Sep 14, 2011

This was in 2010:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2010/04/23/snopes_rumors_obama_bush_open2010/index.html

"After eight years in the White House (with Snopes.com around all that time), George W. Bush has been the subject of 47 internet rumors. After less than two years in office, Barack Obama has been the subject of 87, or nearly twice as many.

Even more telling is the relative accuracy of those stories. For Bush, 20 rumors, or 43%, are true. Only 17, or 36%, are false. The remainder are of mixed veracity (4), undetermined (4), or unclassifiable (2).

In contrast, for Obama only 8 of the 87 rumors, or 9%, are true, and a whopping 59, or 68%, are whoppers. There are 17 of mixed veracity and 3 undetermined."

CarltonBanks · Sep 14, 2011

Smallpotatoes said:

This was in 2010:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2010/04/23/snopes_rumors_obama_bush_open2010/index.html

"After eight years in the White House (with Snopes.com around all that time), George W. Bush has been the subject of 47 internet rumors. After less than two years in office, Barack Obama has been the subject of 87, or nearly twice as many.

Even more telling is the relative accuracy of those stories. For Bush, 20 rumors, or 43%, are true. Only 17, or 36%, are false. The remainder are of mixed veracity (4), undetermined (4), or unclassifiable (2).

In contrast, for Obama only 8 of the 87 rumors, or 9%, are true, and a whopping 59, or 68%, are whoppers. There are 17 of mixed veracity and 3 undetermined."
Click to expand...

whaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!! Deys sayin bad tings bout us :-( WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
What a bunch of pussies. I gues www.fightthesmears.com wasn't enough. How many tattletale websites do these little babies need? Amateur hour.

KJIM · Sep 14, 2011

Smallpotatoes said:

This was in 2010:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2010/04/23/snopes_rumors_obama_bush_open2010/index.html

"After eight years in the White House (with Snopes.com around all that time), George W. Bush has been the subject of 47 internet rumors. After less than two years in office, Barack Obama has been the subject of 87, or nearly twice as many.

Even more telling is the relative accuracy of those stories. For Bush, 20 rumors, or 43%, are true. Only 17, or 36%, are false. The remainder are of mixed veracity (4), undetermined (4), or unclassifiable (2).

In contrast, for Obama only 8 of the 87 rumors, or 9%, are true, and a whopping 59, or 68%, are whoppers. There are 17 of mixed veracity and 3 undetermined."
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'd attribute that more to forwarding of messages, Twitter, Facebook, etc. Ten years later, we're far more connected -- it's so much easier to spread rumors than before.

printdust · Dec 15, 2014

Piotr Rasputin said:

Apparently, they're rather cognizant of the political attacks - perhaps TOO cognizant ready to take the political initiative.

Received the following e-mail today (apologies for my lack of hyperlink skills):

(Name Redacted) --

If you're someone who cares about seeing a campaign focused on substance between now and November 2012, I need you to become a part of one of our most important teams.

It's called AttackWatch.com, and it launches today.

Here's the deal: We all remember the birth certificate smear, the GOP's barrage of lies about the Affordable Care Act, and the string of other phony attacks on President Obama that we've seen over the past few years.

There are a lot of folks on the other side who are chomping at the bit to distort the President's record. It's not a question of if the next big lie will come, just when -- and what we're prepared to do about it.

AttackWatch.com is exactly what it sounds like: a resource that allows us to nip these attacks in the bud before they show up on the airwaves and in emails -- and then fight back with the truth.

By signing up, you'll be on the front lines -- you'll hear about false claims as soon as they come up, and we'll count on you to spread the truth to your friends and personal networks and let us know about new smears whenever you hear them.

Will you sign up now to be a part of AttackWatch.com?

Yes, I want to be on the team that fights back. (http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/o2012-join-attack-wire?source=20110913_JM_nd&utm_medium=email&utm_source=obama&utm_campaign=20110913_JM_nd&keycode=)

Not right now, but I'll donate $5 to fund the 2012 campaign and support this work. (https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/o2012-attackwatch-donate-alt?source=20110913_JM_nd&utm_medium=email&utm_source=obama&utm_campaign=20110913_JM_nd&keycode=)

I remember the smears from 2008 well, and I'm sure you do, too.

They didn't just attack Barack Obama and Joe Biden. They went after everything this movement is built on, and everyone who supports it.

This time, they're not just out to personally attack the President -- they're also out to mislead Americans about the record of accomplishments that he's compiled. Just the other day, a Republican financier actually quoted Saddam Hussein in telling a group of millionaire donors that defeating President Obama will be "the mother of all wars."

We're launching AttackWatch.com today to make sure we're ready for the attacks we know are coming -- and armed with the ability to fight back quickly.

Sign up for AttackWatch.com now, and let's get the facts out:

http://my.barackobama.com/Join-Attack-Watch

Thanks,

Messina

Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
Click to expand...

To arms! To arms!

Baron Scicluna · Sep 14, 2011

Seeing the fact that John Kerry lost in 2004 because he was too slow in calling out the Swift Boaters' bullshit, I'm fully in favor of this.

dooley_womack1 · Sep 14, 2011

Most of the rumors about Obama make the propogator look worse than the subject.

deskslave · Sep 14, 2011

KJIM said:

Smallpotatoes said:

This was in 2010:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2010/04/23/snopes_rumors_obama_bush_open2010/index.html

"After eight years in the White House (with Snopes.com around all that time), George W. Bush has been the subject of 47 internet rumors. After less than two years in office, Barack Obama has been the subject of 87, or nearly twice as many.

Even more telling is the relative accuracy of those stories. For Bush, 20 rumors, or 43%, are true. Only 17, or 36%, are false. The remainder are of mixed veracity (4), undetermined (4), or unclassifiable (2).

In contrast, for Obama only 8 of the 87 rumors, or 9%, are true, and a whopping 59, or 68%, are whoppers. There are 17 of mixed veracity and 3 undetermined."
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'd attribute that more to forwarding of messages, Twitter, Facebook, etc. Ten years later, we're far more connected -- it's so much easier to spread rumors than before.
Click to expand...

No, I'm gonna go ahead and attribute it to the fact that Obama's opponents lie.

deskslave · Sep 14, 2011

Also, it's not the Obama administration that launched this. It's the campaign. There's a difference.

(As I noted elsewhere, I expect the "he's using his office to campaign!!!1!!one!" meme to be a focal point of the coming election season, as though no incumbent has ever run for re-election before.)

CarltonBanks · Sep 14, 2011

Baron Scicluna said:

Seeing the fact that John Kerry lost in 2004 because he was too slow in calling out the Swift Boaters' bullshit, I'm fully in favor of this.
Click to expand...

Ignoring, of course, the fact that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were 100 percent correct.

Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L) · Sep 14, 2011

Dear AttackWatch - I just heard that back in 1987 Barack Obama (or someone who looked like him) had sex with Sarah Palin.

Mizzougrad96 · Sep 14, 2011

Yeah, but did he fuck Glen Rice?

Log in or Sign up

Obama Administration launches "Attack Watch"

cjericho Well-Known Member

Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

CarltonBanks New Member

KJIM Well-Known Member

printdust New Member

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

deskslave Active Member

deskslave Active Member

CarltonBanks New Member

Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L) Active Member

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Obama Administration launches "Attack Watch"

cjericho Well-Known Member

Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

CarltonBanks New Member

KJIM Well-Known Member

printdust New Member

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

deskslave Active Member

deskslave Active Member

CarltonBanks New Member

Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L) Active Member

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches