Obama Wants You!!; (to rat people out)
 

As a public service for my fellow TOTV'ers who are of the President Obama loving persuasion, I'm performing a public service to let you know that he and his people have a website for you to report attacks against him, to him.

I don't think I ever seen such a scheme in my entire life, but I know his rabid fans who are scared to death of his failing popularity will want to help him by reporting online articles critical of him, directly to him.

Will he use questionable behind the scenes tactics to punish those who perpetrate, write and abet the dissembling of critical articles against his administration?

I don't know, but the fact that he can is troubling enough for me.

I would like to know what everyone thinks of this.

But as promised, here it is................

http://my.barackobama.com/page/signu...port-an-attack

I cannot wait to hear the comments.

:22yikes: Unbelievable!

Watergate!!!!!!!!!

Good grief...what's next?:undecided:

I'm not seeing the problem here. It's nothing new. Oh, sure, the fact that it's a website might be new but there are companies that sell this service (reporting malicious comments, bad press, etc) all the time - some even advertise on XM Radio.

"Rat people out"? Since when it saying "Hey, this person is saying [whatever] about you" "ratting out"? Oh, if you MAKING IT UP, that's a different story but shouldn't people be unafraid to stand behind their words when it comes to a public figure?

If "ratting out" is identifying the extremest lies, then it must be a good thing. Here is the purpose of the site:
"President Obama’s re-election campaign launched a Web site on Tuesday called AttackWatch.com that encourages supporters to help dismiss false accusations made about the president’s record and to report what they believe is misinformation about his policies."

thank you love2travel for setting the record straight. There is nothing sinisterabout this sight. As a matter of fact it was set up to find misinformation just like this and set the record straight. Nice job. Just a thought but this site could keep his folks very busy.

Informing on you neighbors is the bulwark of a totalitarian regime. It doesn't matter if there's a "wall of separation" between the Obama campaign and this organization, it's very unseemly. Especially when the powers that be can retaliate. Whether they do or not, they can and that is the problem.

Remember J. Edgar Hoover tactics, or the alleged uses of the IRS to intimidate political foes in the past? I do, and it can happen again.

Only fools would use that site.Or maybe the foolish

Already Backfired on Obama
 

The Obama campaign team's strategy of the "rat out" site it initiated has already become a laughing stock and a Republican campaign tool.

Is the Washington Post changing it's ways? I'm seeing more and more articles critical of the President published in this usually left leaning paper

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...HDSK_blog.html

Richie: Since when is "dismissing false accusations" the equivalent of "informing on your neighbors" a-la the USSR?

No offense DJ, but I'm thinking it's a little naive to take what Obama operatives say at face value.

Video
 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZPwDRZ6pTM&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

so we can't take Obamas peoples words at face value but that allows some to translate this into "ratting your neighbor out"....unbelievable the stuff that is posted.

Ya got to luv em though....they are so sincere in their misinterpretations.

That must be why this sight has become a laughing stock and an major embarrassment.

Obama and his people have never misrepresented themselves, have they?

Of course they have, just like every other politician past, present and future has or will have.

Of course not. They are the transparent administration. They post the bills on the internet for 5 days before voting, remember?;)

OK, I'll grant you that. So that makes your's and Wayne post about why shouldn't the President's word be taken at face value a moot point. Doesn't it?

Nope

I guess you can live with your own contradictory ideas. Good for you.

Richie--
Your comments and perspectives are so predictable and so boring.
Why do you take silly, obviously partisan krap so seriously?
It's a free country and people -- including you -- are entitled to say and promote all sorts of silliness. How many jobs have you created?

Really Richie-you are getting just a little too snarky. IE: your response above: It is not contradictorary...sometimes is not always. Do you just chuckle to yourself when you think you have "bested" someone?

Good for you Ladydoc. It took me 4 years to figure him out and now, I laugh and go to the next post.

Wow Rich, 3 attacks in a row. But it is OK. I bet they wish they had at least one witty person on their side.
Same old strategy, personal attacks. I thought this stuff was supposed to end?

When I have, I have; what do you want me to say? You're thoughts on politicians and their lies don't jibe with you faith in the President's words, who you agreed, by omission, hasn't kept his word.

Don't hate me 'cause I'm right. It's bound to happen at least twice a day.

I'm used to being attacked when I've proven my point. The attacks are what proves that to me.

What has this tread to do with creating jobs?

But, if you insist, I've created as many jobs as Obama in August.........ZERO.

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/obam...mo_code=CF77-1

Richie-I will try to jog your memory. How many times have I said I do not like Obama and even considered voting for McCain until he picked the kiss of death as a running mate? HOW MANY TIMES??? When did I say I agreed with what Obama says? Don't assume what I believe...by omission or otherwise. And being right twice a day is a stretch some days....:laugh:

I have faith in action and results. Words are pretty meaningless.

OK, great.

But I was only speaking to the issue that Wayne and you raised as to "why shouldn't you take the President at his word" as to the purpose of his "inform on your neighbors" website.

I was speaking to no other issue. Was I reading your post incorrectly where it seemed you were agreeing with Wayne's premise?

Hey Lion, You are either incredibly humble, or you just plain forgot to mention that it didn't cost you one cent of taxpayers money! :bigbow:

That's true, and thank you for pointing that out.

fyi/ouch/pass it on

Your money folks and our elected officials doing their thing.





Subject: First (ever) Federal Reserve Audit


Results of first-ever Federal Reserve Audit

The first ever GAO audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the
past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank
bill, which passed last year. The results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve's nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander's webpage July 21st.




Where has it been on the internet since July?
_http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dc
bb3c3_

(http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/n...3-62060dcbb3c3)

What was revealed in the audit was startling:

$16,000,000,000,000.00 (TRILLION) had been secretly given out to US banks
and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland.

From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had
secretly bailed out many of the world's banks, corporations, and governments.

The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program,
but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest.
Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the
United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious
the American public would have been outraged to find out that the
Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.
To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion.

The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year
history is only $14.5 trillion.

The budget that was being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is
only $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration,
and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000
would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world. In late 2008,
the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to
failing banks and companies.

The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal
Reserve loans can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows:

Citigroup: $2.5 trillion($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion* ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)*

Yes, you read it incorrectly.

Sorry; no wonder I wasn't making any sense to you. I apologize for my miscomprehension (why isn't that a word?) of your postings on this topic.