Obama-Biden 'AttackWatch' site is Obsessed with 'Swift Boat attacks' !

The official website of the Obama-Biden Campaign is absolutely obsessed with some apparent "Swift Boat" style attacks launched by rival candidate supporters !!

As they keep bringing up 2004 "Swift Boat" attacks made at then candidate John Kerry (guilty btw), the real economic issues seem to be deflected as usual since Obama has a generally failed record on such matters.

They really pour it on with their "articles" and descriptive stories.

Wow.

Three of the most important questions come to mind:

1. So What?

2. Who Cares?

3. What Difference Does It make?

August 19, 2012 -- Attack Watch

A small number of new conservative groups are attempting to use “Swift Boat”-style tactics to smear President Obama’s national security record. The founding members of these groups have long-standing ties to the Republican Party and are dedicated solely to the defeat of President Obama.

Brilliant. I would have thought they were all Liberals

...next

In fact, as Foreign Policy reported, Special Operations Speaks founder Larry Bailey—one of the minds behind the disgraceful “Swift Boat” attacks on Sen. John Kerry in 2004—is a birther who believes that there is “absolutely no question” President Obama is not who he says he i

Leader of new “Swift Boat” attacks is a birther (Ouch!)

August 18, 2012

A group of former U.S. military and intelligence officers are falsely accusing President Obama of leaking classified intelligence about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. Peter Bergen, CNN’s national security analyst, has dismantled their claims point by point

CNN's best source absolutely !
National security expert dismantles false “Swift Boat”-style attacks

August 17, 2012

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry sent this message out about the latest “Swift Boat”-style attacks on President Obama:

It’s easy to look at the attacks, smears, and lies being told about President Obama and his record and say, “Come on, that’s ridiculous. No one could possibly believe that.”

Trust me: You and I learned the hard way eight years ago this August that in the new world we’re living in—one with 24-hour news cycles, the internet, blogs, the echo chamber, and now the new Citizens United-fueled Republican money machine—even completely baseless attacks can stick if people don’t call them out quickly enough. No matter how self-evidently false the attacks are, or how disreputable the people telling them may be, there’s no attack that can’t take hold.

Awwww .. look who's talk'n !
Never assume

August 16, 2012

When President Obama took office, the U.S. was engaged in two wars and and al-Qaeda’s leader Osama bin Laden was still at large. As commander-in-chief, President Obama refocused our priorities on the most significant security threats to the country and on fulfilling our promises to our servicemembers. Under the President, we have eliminated more than two-thirds of al-Qaeda’s core leadership—including bin Laden.

But a new cadre of conservative groups are trying to “Swift Boat” the President by manufacturing false attacks about his national security record. A collection of super PACs and organizations are deploying the same “discredited” and “hardball smear tactics” against President Obama that were used to attack Sen. John Kerry’s military service in 2004. Each group follows the same pattern, identifying themselves as separate, nonpartisan former U.S. military and intelligence operatives who have a “civic duty” to attack the President. But who exactly is behind these attacks?

A closer look at each group reveals an interconnected web of Republican operatives who are launching “Swift Boat”-style smear tactics against President Obama’s national security record.

"interconnected web of Republican operatives" .. Terrible !!
Swift Boat 2.0: Conservative groups behind false attacks on the President’s national security record

Yes Sir-ree Bob, The Best of the Obama Campaign !!

What about the Economy Barack ?

Well, considering Obama was too busy getting stoned to think about serving in this nations Armed Force's, I am certain he has absolutely nothing to worry about in getting Swift Boated. Kerry is slime, but he had to at least sign the line and wear the uniform to earn that much.

He wishes he earned the level of a swift boat attack.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Obama, with hidden past and questionable "credentials," merely has to release all of the requested data as did Romney and much of that fear they have would go away. (This simple solution never seems to be acceptable by Obama's team.)

The demo machine is buillding a defensive wall in advance before the real stuff gets thrown. They know it is coming and they know the charges will stick to a large degree. The main question is, can they deflect enough of the assault?

As many of us on ATS know, there are serious charges against Obama's history that few in the general public know or care about at this stage. That will change shortly.

The demos will have little choice but to make it a racial issue which in many liberal minds will override the troubling data. (Note the use of the word "data" rather than the far less specific word "attacks.") No doubt the MSM will continue to unwavingly support Obama and ignore looking very hard at their man regardless of what is trotted out to his disfavor. It will be interesting.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Bush didn't serve a damn day and you don't even mention it.

Too bad that partisan bias doesn't belong on this site.

reply to post by Aliensun


Obama has released plenty of information and every time he has, the birthers have jumped all over it, condemned it and then demanded MORE information.

These are people who will never be satisfied with any level of information that they get out of Obama. It's a waste of time to even care about what they think or do.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Bush didn't serve a damn day and you don't even mention it.

Too bad that partisan bias doesn't belong on this site.

edit on 20-8-2012 by VaterOrlaag because: (no reason given)

How many presidents are we supposed to go back when we talk about this stuff? The last 10? 25? Bush is no longer in office yet every time someone says something remotely unflattering about Obama they are immediately called out for not calling out prior presidents for doing the same thing. Their time is over. Obama is still in office.

I am not trying to be mean or nasty to you in any way whatsoever, I am just always confused when I see this happen.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


Those who forget the past will not blink when it is repeated.

It's not hard to figure out the bias of some people on here. When talking about corruption, pay attention to the political party that gets mentioned.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

Those who forget the past will not blink when it is repeated.

It's not hard to figure out the bias of some people on here. When talking about corruption, pay attention to the political party that gets mentioned.

I definitely agree with your first statement. We should never forget our history. The good parts and the bad.

I think both parties have issues and dislike the current candidates on both sides to tell you the truth. Some folks do have an agenda, but pointing out another's mistake to make someone else's mistake seem less so...is not going to help.

I do thank you for answering without being nasty though. I understand somewhat why folks do it, I just think it is unnecessary most of the time.

The simple fact that Obama needed a "fight the smears" patrol group in 2008 and now an "attack watch" patrol should speak volumes to everyone!!. Add to that, Obama's former narc/nanny site that was created for those to report "mis information" regarding Obamacare.

Obama needs "truth teams" to fight his battles for him. Please note that he is incapable of defending himself and must rely on his proxy "truth team" That's why Obama has been avoiding the WH press corps for the 8 weeks and counting.

www.barackobama.com...

I love the tab that allows people to report an "attack" Such angry words from a very desperate campaign...

I wonder how many times some of us on ATS have been reported to the "truth team" only to have Obama's attack assassins log in to combat the "truth". Funny...?? Yes.... Reality...???? Definitely!!

You know who you are!!!
Check it out. The official Obama snitch tab
my.barackobama.com...

NO Snitchin'

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, considering Obama was too busy getting stoned to think about serving in this nations Armed Force's,

Hmmm....Pres. Obama was 13 years old when we withdrew from Viet Nam and 43 when we went into Afghanistan.

Romney?

Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records.

They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Bush didn't serve a damn day and you don't even mention it.

Too bad that partisan bias doesn't belong on this site.

edit on 20-8-2012 by VaterOrlaag because: (no reason given)

Okay..... This is something people need to warm up to and accept. George Bush is a former President. Barry Obama is a serving President. What George Bush did is for historians and school children. What Obama does is the concern of every citizen. Why? Bush will never make another decision that directly effects what happens in your life or mine. Obama makes them every day.

If there is a God and he's smiling at all....Obama will be a former President very shortly and then I can ABSOLUTELY NOT CARE what he does, did or is....any more than I care about Bush...

I.E.......... I could't care LESS what Bush did or how he did it. HE IS NOT THE PRESIDENT. Now... that's clear enough isn't it?

reply to post by xuenchen


I think their strategy is -- Anything except the U.S. economy or MediCare --

Paul Ryan has them on defense. -- Grand Slam Home Run in Florida with his mother --

-- Protect and Strengthen MediCare --

Hmmm....Pres. Obama was 13 years old when we withdrew from Viet Nam and 43 when we went into Afghanistan.

Romney?


Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records.

They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Umm... You mentioned Vietnam. I didn't. I did, however, recently finish in a thread with someone about Obama's extensive history in Indonesia. So..I'm well aware that Obama was a child and in that nation during the busy years of the Vietnam War. (1967-1971). Frankly, one doesn't need to serve in a war for serving to mean something.

There have been two Presidents since FDR that DID NOT server in this nation's armed forces. ONLY 2. Obama and Clinton. Now Clinton..By his pure numbers alone, didn't do too bad a job. Personally? Ehh.. He has the morals of a ferret. He wasn't too bad a leader though....

Obama? He shows EXACTLY why this nation could do well with compulsory service for every person turning 18. It's not the military fighting aspect...and Obama isn't missing that. It's discipline and self control. Obama has NONE of it.....and a President NEEDS Judgement and Discipline. Thank GOD this man's term is almost over.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Less than 3 months to go !

I think Obama has already written his concession speech.

Obama is worse than Jimmy Carter.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

Those who forget the past will not blink when it is repeated.

It's not hard to figure out the bias of some people on here. When talking about corruption, pay attention to the political party that gets mentioned.

We obviously have forgotten the past.

We had Carter for 4 years and then elected Obama.

On topic, Obama deserves every attack! He can dish it out but whines like a little ##### when it happens to him.

Can someone call a Whaambulance?

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

Those who forget the past will not blink when it is repeated.

It's not hard to figure out the bias of some people on here. When talking about corruption, pay attention to the political party that gets mentioned.

We obviously have forgotten the past.

We had Carter for 4 years and sthen elected Obama.

On topic, Obama deserves every attack! He can dish it out but whines like a little ##### when it happens to him.

Can someone call a Whaambulance?

Hannity calls Obama - President Cry Baby -.

Obama is a narcissist who blames others for his own failed policies.

------------------
I'm glad he makes mistakes and yells out the truth sometimes.

The genie is out of the bottle. He can't put it back in.

-- If you've got a business, you didn't build that ! --

Those words will haunt Obama for the rest of his life.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Umm... You mentioned Vietnam. I didn't.

And for a reason. It marked the end of the DRAFT.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
There have been two Presidents since FDR that DID NOT server in this nation's armed forces. ONLY 2. Obama and Clinton.

Since FDR?...and 12 in total.

But what is interesting is that looking back on most recent POTUS's, those eligable to serve in Viet Nam...COMBAT

Pres. GW Bush? His dad pulled string to get him assigned to the reserves stateside to avoid combat during the Viet Nam war.
His Dad? Served honorably in WW2.
Clinton?...got a student deferment...ONCE

Romney?...He sought and recieved FOUR Deferments from the draft during Viet Nam. Even fled to France to "minister" in case his deferment was denied. Never served stateside or otherwise.

Pres. Obama?...Never sought or recieved any deferments.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Umm... You mentioned Vietnam. I didn't.

And for a reason. It marked the end of the DRAFT.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
There have been two Presidents since FDR that DID NOT server in this nation's armed forces. ONLY 2. Obama and Clinton.

Since FDR?...and 12 in total.

But what is interesting is that looking back on most recent POTUS's, those eligable to serve in Viet Nam...COMBAT

Pres. GW Bush? His dad pulled string to get him assigned to the reserves stateside to avoid combat during the Viet Nam war.
His Dad? Served honorably in WW2.
Clinton?...got a student deferment...ONCE

Romney?...He sought and recieved FOUR Deferments from the draft during Viet Nam. Even fled to France to "minister" in case his deferment was denied. Never served stateside or otherwise.

Pres. Obama?...Never sought or recieved any deferments.

edit on 20-8-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

It's okay to review military records for now but the #1 and #2 issue on Americans minds

right now are:

1- U.S. economy - High Unemployment - $16 Trillion National Debt - 1.5% GDP and slowing

2- MediCare - Protect & Strengthen or Rob the MediCare Piggy Bank ?

reply to post by Indigo5

“It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam, but nor did I take any actions to remove myself from the pool of young men who were eligible for the draft,” Romney told the newspaper.

But that’s exactly what Romney did, according Selective Service records. He received his first deferment for “activity in study” in October 1965 while at Stanford.

After his first year at Stanford, Romney qualified for 4-D deferment status as “a minister of religion or divinity student.” It was a status he would hold from July 1966 until February 1969, a period he largely spent in France working as a Mormon missionary.

He was granted the deferment even as some young Mormon men elsewhere were denied that same status, which became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s. The Mormon church, a strong supporter of American involvement in Vietnam, ultimately limited the number of church missionaries allowed to defer their military service using the religious exemption.

But as fighting in Vietnam raged, Romney spent 2 1/2 years trying to win Mormon converts in France.

.....

His 31-month religious deferment expired in early 1969. And Romney received an academic studies deferment for much of the next two years.

....

www.nwherald.com...

It should also be noted that not only did Romeny not serve, but he has five sons of age to serve presently, none of which have served. Niether did his father or grandparents. etc.etc.

How again is it an issue that a 12 year old Obama did not serve in Viet Nam at the time? Or that a 43 year Old Obama did not enlist under Pres. GW Bush?

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

It's okay to review military records for now

I could care less. I just thought it amusing that those cheering a draft dodger who ran to france and got FOUR deferments over the length of the war...chose to make it an issue.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
but the #1 and #2 issue on Americans minds

right now are:

1- U.S. economy - High Unemployment - $16 Trillion National Debt - 1.5% GDP and slowing

2- MediCare - Protect & Strengthen or Rob the MediCare Piggy Bank ?

Great...let me know when Romney/Ryan want to actually say something about those issues where Fact-Check.org, Politifact, The Tax Policy Center, the Office of Management and Budget and often other conservatives aren't shouting BULLSH*&.

As Newt Gingrich described Romney on the issues...

“You cannot debate somebody who is dishonest. You just can’t,”

Gingrich said there was “no practical way” to deal with somebody who is willing to say something “totally dishonest.”

abcnews.go.com...

Everyone...even Romney's "supporters" know he has nothing but lies to offer on the issues.