Help! Obama Treason Smear

[bos1]

Hello DUers,

Is there a place where Obama's campaign is addressing the smears? Apparently the wingnut talking point this week is that Obama tried to delay troops withdrawals from Iraq until after the election.
http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/14410
Factcheck.org has nothing on it. Where is the Obama campaign reaction? Is there a website or something for this?

[creeksneakers2]

1. Debunked, like all the other GOP lies

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=7120827

[Coexist]

18. That's the one!

[Tennessee Gal]

2. Here it is ............

Undermining McCain Campaign Attack, Republicans Back Obama‘s Version of Meeting With Iraqi Leaders

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/undermining-mcc.html

[Kerrytravelers]

3. Go to this link:

www.barackobama.com

On the right hand side, you'll find a "Fight the Smears" link. Follow that.

[bos1]

4. Thanks but this smear is NOT THERE.

Obama is getting slammed and his campaign cannot get it together immediately to reply?

[Tennessee Gal]

5. See post #2

[vaberella]

7. Hey TG, I knew I read it. But it wasn't from abcnews, I remember them

quoting Hagel. I like Hagel a lot.

[vaberella]

6. Excuse me?! As an earlier poster had said. It's a debunked smear.

What are you talking about "his campaign can't get it together".

Your post is not new, that is about 2 weeks old, that's why no one here is talking about, currently. I was even surprised seeing your post.

[bos1]

9. This smear is not debunked on the Obama website, as far as I can see.

Why aren't they on top of it? Why do I have to do a lengthy search to find these articles? That's my point.

[WinkyDink]

16. Why give it credence by addressing it?

[vaberella]

20. Because they want to use anything to bring down Obama...

so they'll even manufacture some indignant complaint which has no reasoning in order to complete that task.

[bos1]

31. You paranoids are fools.

This smear was/is getting play all over the right wing media and talkshows, and talkshows have a lot of influence. I heard it on a show the week I wrote the OP and I was trying to get info to rebut it. It was hard to find the info and that surprised me. It was and is my opinion that Obama should have a truth squad immediately debunking these things with a site that is easy to access.

If Obama wins, he will probably be attacked constantly by the rightwing, the way Clinton was. He'd better be prepared.

[Political Tiger]

36. You can throw all the facts at the right-wingers that you like

But why bother? They don't care! They'll ignore the truth at all costs.

And Obama's campaign can't address every single smear or there'd be no time to run the campaign!

[bos1]

37. I know that is often true

with the real Taliban-like wingnuts. But in this case, with even the White House/Republican Hagel on record that it was all a lie, it would have been easy to have debunked it. I think most Repubican voters, on being informed of the debunking, would have realized they were being overtly and even lamely (it was an old, old smear) and maybe have gotten angry. Instead, the talk show hosts were able to broadcast it with impunity, and that has an effect.

And if part of running a campaign has to be about about neutralizing these attacks.

[Political Tiger]

39. Well, I really don't think Repub voters care about the truth

In fact, they seem to perfer lies to the truth and I guarantee there would be absolutley no outcry from the right finding out they've been lied to. Just look at how they eat up McSame and PaLIEn's lies!

Anyhoo, there's plently of sites debunking the lies, for instance:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fightthesmearshome/
http://factcheck.org/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
http://www.snopes.com/
http://www.truthfightsback.com/site/index
http://mediamatters.org/
http://mediamattersaction.org/

[bos1]

40. I hope that it not always or mostly true

and thanks for the links, if one of them has updated debunking on such things, I will use them. But at least 2 of them (snopes and factcheck) didn't.

And I gotta say it again: the Obama campaign should be on top of it.

[Political Tiger]

41. and here's another:

http://truthorfiction.com/

[vaberella]

19. You don't have to look to Obama's site for it. He doesn't address ALL smears.

Most of them have been debunked by honest reporters and google is an easy thing to use to help you. You're being intentionally difficult and petty to expect him and/or his surrogates to address all of them. Even Obama himself doesn't believe he has to give so many smears credence, that's not to say he shouldn't. But when it's readily available and addressed by MSM, I don't see why everything needs to be handheld.

Why don't YOU take the initiative and send it to him and where it's been debunked so he can take care of it. Most smears that he has on the site are not smears he actually hunted down, they were sent by his supporters and addressed them.

Instead you whinge. It doesn't make sense to me.

[cliffordu]

26. Thanks for all your concern!!! We appreciates the concern!!

No. Really!

[Sodan]

8. Look at post 2 here - his own people are exposing his lies..

[krkaufman]

10. Repeat... there it is, in post #2

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7126822&mesg_id=7126838

[TheKentuckian]

11. Simmah down now

You have to realize that at this point the Republicans are now just flat out pulling accusations out of thin air, making quantum leaps in both logic and possibility, and even resorting to charges of "thought crimes" to counter the reality words and actions. Not to be flip but only a team of omnipotents could keep up with or even read the rebuttal's of the insane nonsense the Republicans come up with.
Stuff like this was probably so auto-rebutted that it didn't get the honor of being a smear. Keep in mind that Republicans, being stupid and/or evil will hammer away at even a widely discredited lie in an attempt to get traction by repetition, or at least cause their opponent to come off message in order to defend their bullshit.

[TheBigotBasher]

12. Excellent Summary TheKentuckian.

I had a look at the nothalfbigoted site yesterday and that lot seem to be going strong on this non story. I am guessing that this may be the "October surprise", stories seem to take a couple of weeks to filter from the pits of that site up to the gutter of the McMansion site.

The Republican Party is after all the one with the gall to suggest the Democrats are linked to big oil as they do not support allowing Exxon owned drills to go up in everyones back garden, and more instability in the Middle East. No W and his followers are not out of the pocket of big oil, they are accidents from the big oil bed sheets.

[demokatgurrl]

13. Are you on the wrong web site?

[bos1]

15. Hello people. I am not asking if DU has covered this subject

I am asking why the Obame website has not. I think it is a real weakness in the Demo's campaign that they don't have an instant response page for these things, and instead I have to Google search and sift thru endless reports for reputable answers.

[cliffordu]

27. Maybe Obama isn't a panic troll.

[bos1]

28. Hopefully he won't take any snide dunce lessons, either

[Warren Stupidity]

14. What agreement to draw down troops?

The Bush Cabal, and Gramps, have been dead set against any timetable or draw down of US troops. At best Bush conceded that some bullshit they call a time horizon for an eventual reduction in forces might be possible. Rather than asking us to disprove total bullshit, how about coming up with anything of any actual substance?

"Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July. "

Again: what agreement? What draw down? WTF? Instead, what actually happened was that Maliki blindsided the Bush administration by publicly calling for a complete withdrawal of US forces within the Obama 16 month timetable. Of course Maliki was quickly compelled to back away from that statement.

(Easy to verify this fact just google maliki withdrawal obama. e.g. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2008/jul/20/timetableclashonwithdrawing)

Typical rightwingtard tactics: do a 180 on the facts and then demand proof it ain't so.

[Coexist]

17. delete wrong spot

[Peacetrain]

21. Even the Bush Adminstration debunked this McCain lie

No love lost there..

[DefenseLawyer]

22. Congrats on getting Obama and Treason in your headline.

Mission Accomplished, as it were.

[Ichingcarpenter]

25. Rush Limberg is a pedophile drug junky

At least I heard that somewhere.

[bos1]

29. Well I guess this site is too big not to include some thought police

& self-defeating paranoid ones at that

[me b zola]

23. Help! I don't know who you are or how you got in here!

:scared:

[bos1]

30. Help, I have no idea what you are talking about

Could your doctor give us a translation?

[Cosmic Charlie]

32. sure you do.

concernomania

[bos1]

34. read post #31

and try to get it

[backscatter712]

24. Can we retaliate by bringing up Hanoi Hilton rumors and calling him Songbird?

No, as a matter of fact, I don't feel like playing fair.

[imax2268]

33. bos1

seriously man...

just look at the headline and then read the article...the author contradicted his own headline with this statement...

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

The author of the NYPost story is a neocon...

here...read this...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/15/125036/940/762/589108

it's nothing to worry about...ok...calm down...

[bos1]

35. I understand. The point (again) is

this smear was/is getting play all over the right wing media and talkshows, and talkshows have a lot of influence. I heard it on a show the week I wrote the OP and I was trying to get info to rebut it. It was hard to find the info and that surprised me. I thought that Obama would have a truth squad immediately debunking these things with a site that is easy to access, to help people like me rebut the smears.

If Obama wins, he will probably be attacked constantly by the rightwing, the way Clinton was. He'd better be prepared.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

38. This whole affair is from an allegation made by Amir Taheri that was printed in the NY Post.

Amir Taheri is a neoon and proven liar, as an be seen on his Wikipedia page. He has the credibility of Rush Limbaugh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amir_Taheri#Nest_of_Spies

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/please-barack-say-its-non_b_126585.html


And we all know how reliable the NY Post is: