It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => General Board => Topic started by: Pandora on February 28, 2013, 06:19:49 AM
-
White House Threatens Reporter Woodward: You’ll “Regret Doing This” (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/white-house-threatens-reporter-woodward-youll-regret-doing-this/)
Bob Woodward said this evening on CNN that a “very senior person” at the White House warned him in an email that he would “regret doing this,” the same day he has continued to slam President Barack Obama over the looming forced cuts known as the sequester.
Woodward said (http://www.businessinsider.com/bob-woodward-obama-sequester-white-house-reporting-price-politics-2013-2#ixzz2MCBYP4xv) Obama was showing a "kind of madness I haven't seen in a long time" for a decision not to deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf because of budget concerns.
-
I think this belongs in the Media Bias section as the coverup by fellow "journalists" will be more newsworthy than Gene Sperling (the e-mailer) going Full Nixon on Woodward.
Leading off, for benefit of the low information New York Times readership...
Jonathan Chait, who takes offense at the thought of old fashioned journalism being performed. (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/weird-philosophy-of-bob-woodward.html)
-
Woodward could possibly count coup on at least one scalp if he'd reveal the name of the senior official, and box Hussein Obama into a corner of either supporting the person or firing them.
I want to know the name Bob.
ETA: Ah, Gene Sperling. Don't even know who the hell that is.
-
Woodward could possibly count coup on at least one scalp if he'd reveal the name of the senior official, and box Hussein Obama into a corner of either supporting the person or firing them.
I want to know the name Bob.
Bingo! Enough of this! Woodward is not above fluffing his feathers for his own purposes and this Regime is not beyond manipulation and threats, so lets have the name or just call this a lovers quarrel!
-
Missed it by 6 seconds. ;D
(http://images.zap2it.com/images/tv-EP00001826/get-smart-don-adams-1.jpg)
-
Gene Sperling is budget director I think, and a beta male pussy, I know.
A plutocrat threatening a journalist. How rotten is your profession, fellow journalists? Are any of you going to come to the defense of what used to be the bread and butter of your profession, against some little Nixon wannabe?
-
Heh, but no, cannot give the Nixon treatment to a "D" no matter how despicable the "D" is.
Move along, lovers need to just hug it out and get over it already, nothing to see here!
-
Doesn't look like it right now; they're circling the wagons around Obongo instead.
Makes ya wonder, dunnit, exactly what it's gonna take to wake these people up.
I agree, too, that Woodward ought to spill the name -- goes to credibility. Oh, too, do you remember when Bill Clinton last year publicly criticized Duh Wun that the Presstitutes started wondering aloud about his mental faculties slipping?
-
“Never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel.”
I wonder if this sperling drone thought that woodward was just another geezer to push around? I mean, Bob is an old geezer, but he isn't toothless by any stretch. And just because he is a committed leftist doesn't mean that you can casually disrespect or threaten the guy.
I don't GAS about woodward - his lack of objectivity lost me a long time ago but I do love a good cat fight.
Toss 'em in a bag and let 'er rip!
-
Soup, the thing about Woodward is that he's not just a WaPo reporter. He's also an assistant managing editor. So the White House clown, Sperling, is not taking on just Woodward. Woodward is management at the WaPo, so Sperling is waging war on that paper as well. Fox, WaPo, like there's any difference. /
My bet is that Sperling never heard of Bob Woodward and probably thought of him as some old newspaper reporter guy, of little relevence. No one can accuse anyone in the O'Bammy Adminstration, from top to bottom, of knowing the least little bit of History.
-
Soup, the thing about Woodward is that he's not just a WaPo reporter. He's also an assistant managing editor. So the White House clown, Sperling, is not taking on just Woodward. Woodward is management at the WaPo, so Sperling is waging war on that paper as well. Fox, WaPo, like there's any difference. /
My bet is that Sperling never heard of Bob Woodward and probably thought of him as some old newspaper reporter guy, of little relevence. No one can accuse anyone in the O'Bammy Adminstration, from top to bottom, of knowing the least little bit of History.
My basic point - but you said it better than me ;)
-
I think this belongs in the Media Bias section as the coverup by fellow "journalists" will be more newsworthy than Gene Sperling (the e-mailer) going Full Nixon on Woodward.
Leading off, for benefit of the low information New York Times readership...
Jonathan Chait, who takes offense at the thought of old fashioned journalism being performed. (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/weird-philosophy-of-bob-woodward.html)
Who named Gene Sperling as the emailer?
-
Well, the White House, now, who's pretty quick to release relevant information when they think it helps their cause.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html)
I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim.
I might see how there could be two honest interpretations to that. The White House says Sperling is concern trolling. Woodward sees a read between the lines threat.
BUT
Lanny Davis reports the same kind of threat (http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27s+Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threat&id=8924&is_corp=0)
::deercorn::
-
They can word it anyway they like but a threat is a threat and the walking the verbal tightrope gets old after a while.
-
Well, the White House, now, who's pretty quick to release relevant information when they think it helps their cause.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html)
I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim.
I might see how there could be two honest interpretations to that. The White House says Sperling is concern trolling. Woodward sees a read between the lines threat.
BUT
Lanny Davis reports the same kind of threat (http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27s+Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threat&id=8924&is_corp=0)
::deercorn::
I can't get the wmal page to load (damn firefox!).....can you excerpt or paraphrase?
-
Well, the White House, now, who's pretty quick to release relevant information when they think it helps their cause.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html)
I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim.
I might see how there could be two honest interpretations to that. The White House says Sperling is concern trolling. Woodward sees a read between the lines threat.
BUT
Lanny Davis reports the same kind of threat (http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27s+Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threat&id=8924&is_corp=0)
::deercorn::
Ah. Would have been nice to know that earlier.
The last email that Politico shows from Woodward is dated 2/23, where he tells Sperling 'no need to apologize', yet he revealed on 2/26 what had happened previously. I suspect subsequent events and another shoe.
And the pussyfooting continues with the above Politico piece because all the authors reveal about the source of the "exclusive" emails is "White House pushback". Again, the "who" is missing.
Mushrooms, I tellz ya.
-
I have to turn off ad muncher to get the wmal page to load, myself. Must be something in the page that's funny.
Davis told WMAL that his editor, John Solomon, "received a phone call from a senior Obama White House official who didn't like some of my columns, even though I'm a supporter of Obama. I couldn't imagine why this call was made." Davis says the Obama aide told Solomon, "that if he continued to run my columns, he would lose, or his reporters would lose their White House credentials."
Davis says he does not know if the White House official involved in his case is the same one who is alleged to have threatened Woodward, but he says the language used in both cases is very similar. In any case, Davis says his editor, Solomon, was not worried by the threat.
-
Oh, silly, me. Did I also forget to link USA Today?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/02/28/obama-woodward-white-house/1953105/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/02/28/obama-woodward-white-house/1953105/)
All we can say is: We know more than a few reporters have received similar e-mails from White House officials. Yelling has also been known to happen.
::popcorn::
-
More on the yelling, at the right this time:
http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2013/02/27/all-the-presidents-thugs/?singlepage=true (http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2013/02/27/all-the-presidents-thugs/?singlepage=true)
-
Aaaand, right on schedule, questioning Woodward's competency due to age:
http://pjmedia.com/blog/wh-attacks-bob-woodward-with-ageism-are-these-dems-too-old-for-obama-too/ (http://pjmedia.com/blog/wh-attacks-bob-woodward-with-ageism-are-these-dems-too-old-for-obama-too/)
-
Yeah, catfights between libiots are fun to pass the time, but really, they fight like most libiots - like weakling girls! Look at Woodward's wussy response.
Lover's spat, verbal jerkoff, call it what you will. . .
-
drip...drip...drip... (http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/why-bob-woodward-s-fight-with-the-white-house-matters-to-you-20130228)
My tweet was not intended to compare Nixon to Obama (there is no reason to doubt Obama’s integrity -- period) but rather to compare the attack to the press strategies of all the presidents’ men.
He's gotta get his bona fides as a JournoTard in good standing in. Other than that there's some real animosity building. Now what are you going to do with it, Ron Fournier? Are you to keep polishing your boy's pole, as you've been doing to this day?
-
drip...drip...drip... (http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/why-bob-woodward-s-fight-with-the-white-house-matters-to-you-20130228)
My tweet was not intended to compare Nixon to Obama (there is no reason to doubt Obama’s integrity -- period) but rather to compare the attack to the press strategies of all the presidents’ men.
He's gotta get his bona fides as a JournoTard in good standing in. Other than that there's some real animosity building. Now what are you going to do with it, Ron Fournier? Are you to keep polishing your boy's pole, as you've been doing to this day?
There's no reason to doubt Obama's integrity?! What the HELL has this guy been smoking?
This can’t be what Obama wants. He must not know how thin-skinned and close-minded his staff can be to criticism. “I have the greatest respect and admiration for what you do,” Obama told reporters a year ago. “I know sometimes you like to give me a hard time, and I certainly like to return the favor, but I never forget that our country depends on you.”
Ookay, the Stalin-doesn't-know tactic. Fail. And speaking of thin-skinned and close-minded, he's describing Obongo hisse'f.
-
Lanny ::clintonista:: Davis has commented that he has
received virtually same language and thinks it's inappropriate. Two heavy hitters adversarially lining
up like that could embolden other reporters to pursue
truth. ... ... . Naw
-
The egos of these perfumed princes may not enjoy having to endure affronts, but every single one of them is fully prepared and willing to ceremoniously disembowel themselves with a samurai sword if that is what will be required to protect the cause of Leftism.
-
I can't help but think this is an orchestrated distraction, WTF is the other hand (the Left hand of the damned) doing?
::saywhat::
::foilhathelicopter::
-
Lanny ::clintonista:: Davis has commented that he has
received virtually same language and thinks it's inappropriate. Two heavy hitters adversarially lining
up like that could embolden other reporters to pursue
truth. ... ... . Naw
You had me going till you said NAW I thought you had lost it. ::oldman::
-
I've had the same thought Libertas. What is being accomplished for the greater cause of Leftism by the Father of adversarial journalism proclaiming a head-butt with the regime at the very moment when it is becoming obvious that the media leviathan is its overt propaganda arm?
Obama proclaims himself "not a dictator" in the same way Nixon proclaimed himself "not a crook", with Bob Woodward at the fore.
-
And yet, Woodward has to consider his legacy. He could have professionally retired on Watergate (Bernstein appears to have done so) and he has instead continued to be relevant over the years.
Consider Dan Rather. He had a well established (although largely undeserved and mostly BS) reputation and then tossed the entire thing out the window over his "fake but accurate" GWB National Guard story. His legacy is that he is a nut. Now, Rather did that to himself so he had no way to undo his ruined reputation but with Woodward it is a different story.
Say what you will about Woodward...he is most definitely a left leaning journalist like most in the industry...but he does seem to call things the way he sees them and does seem to deal in facts (however selectively to fit his worldview). And he has, in this case, too, reported the truth about Barry and his thugs. His career seems to have come full circle. He achieved fame and fortune for reporting on a thuggish Nixon White House and here is again in the same sort of situation reporting on a thuggish Obongo White House. So what will he do? Will he end his professional career cowering in fear and having his reputation trashed by those who are vastly inferior to him? Or will he fight back?
I am hoping that he fights back and I think he might. Woodward is very keen on looking at things from a historical standpoint and I do not think he wants to be remembered this way. There are media people who are even now saying that Woodward's efforts regarding the Watergate story were overblown...that he doesn't deserve the reputation that he has acquired. Woodward cannot allow that narrative to become part of the popular historical culture.
What would be very nice is if Woodward goes on a full frontal assault on the administration to prove his point and to also thwart the thug attempts to silence him and ruin his reputation. The admin certainly is a veritable orchard of low hanging fruit in just about any area you care to glance at. The only thing that has been missing up until now is someone in the MFM to actually go after any of it. To me it seems like Woodward is in the catbird seat and can pick and choose whatever and whomever he likes to go after. To use another metaphor, it would be like shooting fish in a barrel...astonishingly easy for an old pro like Woodward. Just as the tools in the MFM try to write him off as a has been he starts cranking out truthful and damaging material, showing them how journalism is really done.
Will it happen? I have no idea. But I hope it does. Woodward may be a left leaning journalist but he is head and shoulders above the propagandists who populate the most of the MFM these days. If he has any fight in him at all it would be (metaphorically) kind of like Bruce Willis in RED kicking Agent Cooper's ass in his own office...yeah, with Aerosmith's "Back in the Saddle" playing in the background.
-
The only thing that could spur Woodward on is if the rest of the MFM keeps tweaking him, but in the end I expect this will fade and people won't even remember it, I'm certain Jack & Julia Libtard and the rest of the low-info looter army are clueless now, so the MFM & Obama can say whatever they want. This spat served its purpose, now its back to more lies.
-
The only thing that could spur Woodward on is if the rest of the MFM keeps tweaking him, but in the end I expect this will fade and people won't even remember it, I'm certain Jack & Julia Libtard and the rest of the low-info looter army are clueless now, so the MFM & Obama can say whatever they want. This spat served its purpose, now its back to more lies.
You're right of course - it won't last. But far be it for me pass on the rare opportunity to enjoy the schadenfreude
::beertoast::
-
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/beat_the_press_96lFrUNync5zuBZTiZ6aUL (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/beat_the_press_96lFrUNync5zuBZTiZ6aUL)
...last week’s flare-up between Bob Woodward and the White House - ...the larger point was roundly missed: the increasing pressure that White House correspondents feel when dealing with the Obama administration — to follow their narrative, to be properly deferential (!), to react to push-back by politely sitting down and shutting up. [...]
...
“I had a young reporter asking tough, important questions of an Obama Cabinet secretary,” says one DC veteran. “She was doing her job, and they were trying to bully her. In an e-mail, they called her the vilest names — bitch, c–t, a–hole.” He complained and was told the matter would be investigated: “They were hemming and hawing, saying, ‘We’ll look into it.’ Nothing happened.”
-
Shocked? Hardly. And in the mid-terms the slighted libiots will be among the first to drop to their knees in obedience and dutifully demonize anybody without a little "D" after their name.
They are like battered spouses, they take a beating and then profess love for the bastard. He's their bastard after all, perhaps someday he won't smack them anymore and it will be all hugs and kisses again.
-
In the end they will still cover up for the King of the USA.
-
I'm sorta waiting for Woodward to now launch a salvo against the next convenient Republican in order to regain cred among his peeps.
-
I'm sorta waiting for Woodward to now launch a salvo against the next convenient Republican in order to regain cred among his peeps.
Zackly
-
First, he's inviting Obama over for a confab, er beer summit, whatever. . . ::)
::mooning::
-
First, he's inviting Obama over for a confab, er beer summit, whatever. . . ::)
::mooning::
I would love Woodward to suggest a beer summitt.
-
First, he's inviting Obama over for a confab, er beer summit, whatever. . . ::)
::mooning::
I would love Woodward to suggest a beer summitt.
He did, he invited them to his house.
I posted a link to it but somehow it disappeared.
-
So far Stymie hasn't accepted. Shocked, I know. :P
-
First, he's inviting Obama over for a confab, er beer summit, whatever. . . ::)
::mooning::
I would love Woodward to suggest a beer summitt.
So far Stymie hasn't accepted. Shocked, I know. :P
This (the invitation) is the biggest hit a media personality has given Obama, too bad it didn't
receive more air play.
-
First, he's inviting Obama over for a confab, er beer summit, whatever. . . ::)
::mooning::
I would love Woodward to suggest a beer summitt.
So far Stymie hasn't accepted. Shocked, I know. :P
This (the invitation) is the biggest hit a media personality has given Obama, too bad it didn't
receive more air play.
No matter how sh*tty Stymie treats the MFM and calls them bitch and c*** and whore, they'll still cover his worthless ass!