Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Libs Eat Their Own

Posted 6 years ago on Feb. 28, 2013, 2:16 a.m. EST by justiceforzim (-17)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

R.I.P Bob Woodward

And to think I used to marvel at how well Dems of all stations stay on message!



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by justiceforzim (-17) 6 years ago

Sadly, with all the flap over whether Woodie was threatend or not, no one has pointed out yet another Obama lie.....

From the 3rd presidential debate 10/2012:

The sequester is not something that I proposed," Obama said, of the $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts set to kick in on Jan. 2. "It's something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen. The budget that we're talking about is not reducing our military spending. It's maintaining it."

He outdid himself;...3 lies in one quote

Man, you could start a thread on all of Obama's lies

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago

Exclusive: The Woodward, Sperling emails revealed By: Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei February 28, 2013 08:30 AM EST

POLITICO’s “Behind the Curtain” column last night quoted Bob Woodward as saying that a senior White House official has told him in an email he would “regret” questioning White House statements on the origins of sequestration. The official in question is Gene Sperling, economic adviser to the president. The White House has since pushed back, saying the exchange was far more innocuous than Woodward claims.

We have obtained, exclusively, the exchange. Here it is:

From Gene Sperling to Bob Woodward on Feb. 22, 2013


I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.

But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)

I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is diffferent. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.

My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.


From Woodward to Sperling on Feb. 23, 2013

Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob


I could rail on MSM all day but........this is surely a waste of time.

[-] 0 points by blacksad (-58) 6 years ago

This whole thing really troubles me. You can see these journalists lining up, choosing sides. We 're getting closer and closer to an official govt run press. They won't have to be subtle about it pretty soon.

I don't think Woodward was threatened, but he did nothing to deserve this level of attack. The good thing is that now it's a lot easier to see which journalists have balls and which ones are neutered house pets.

[-] 1 points by justiceforzim (-17) 6 years ago

Yes. The Organizer-in-Chief has definiely taken state run media to new heights(lows). It's sad that someone in the press lobbying for inconvenient truths has become the story, instead of Obama's lies and skill at message management.

Organizing for Action is an abomination, too. Politico ran a story this week laying out how even Common Cause has denounced it. NYT has an op ed piece on this Chicago style pay-to-play, too. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/opinion/sunday/the-white-house-joins-the-cash-grab.html?_r=1&

One can omly hope this affair serves as a wake up call to the Obama state media and they start doing their job.

[-] 1 points by conservatroll (187) 6 years ago

There is hope! David Gregory did a pretty good impression of a journalist Sunday on Meet the Press during his interview of Sperling. He basically got him to admit the sequester's WH paternity. It's a start, anyway if Obama is subjected to fact checking. Maybe all it takes is for a guy like Woodward to lead by example in reminding today's kids behind a mic what journalism is all about.

[-] 0 points by inclusionman (7064) 6 years ago

meaningless useless journalism if his questions were about who 1st recommended the deal both agreed to!!

A real journalist would ask why are we cutting job creating pgms to reduce the deficit when the problems we face is joblessness and low wages.

That would be useful questions for anyone pushing cutting instead of stimulus which is what we need.

[-] 0 points by conservatroll (187) 6 years ago

Exposing the lies of a sitting president is useless? Seeing the media grow a pair and start reporting the Emperor's nakedness is useless? I really do NOT understand your blind devotion to our current POTUS.

[-] 0 points by inclusionman (7064) 6 years ago

What "blind devotion" are you referring to? I'm simply saying our problem is joblessness and low wages!!! Not who originated an agreement both sides agreed to.

The question should be: How the fuck do you cut pgms (& jobs!!) during an unemployment crises.?

no cuts, no austerity! Stimulate the economy, create jobs!!

[-] 0 points by TimetoStop (-55) 6 years ago

Curiouser and curiouser...

Even truth is getting surreal...

[-] 0 points by Nevadaone (-55) 6 years ago

All the President’s Thugs:

Hey, Bob, you can’t say we didn’t warn you. We knew this White House was capable of attacking even the great Bob Woodward for telling the truth.

You could have listened to Michael Barone. He saw it coming even before Barack Obama was elected. In October 2008, he penned “The Coming Obama Thugocracy.”

I experienced it when DOJ press harpy Tracy Schmaler yelled at a half dozen reporters, as the White House official did to you, about my under-oath testimony involving the New Black Panther dismissal. Her victims included Pete Williams, Quin Hillyer, and Sharyl Attkisson. After Schmaler’s thug tendencies were well known, she was nurtured and promoted within the Thugocracy instead of being canned, as any administration before this one would have done to her — Republican or Democrat.

Schmaler has since been appointed a Made Man of sorts, entering the rarefied private sector air of David Axelrod’s shop.

Schmaler’s story is typical of this gang. Her shouting, threats, and rants at reporters would have rendered her unqualified to serve in the press shop of a state department of agriculture.

But there is something unique about the Obama White House. It borrows tactics and standards from the darker figures in history — threats, projection, unrepentant dishonesty, towering columns in stadiums, and even bloody mayhem like Fast and Furious hatched for political purposes.

Richard Nixon seems like a fluffy kitten compared to this crowd.

Which brings us back to you, Mr. Woodward. What’s happened when you, of all people, are the bad guy?

Had you ventured into any cocktail party in Silver Spring or Takoma Park just a few years ago, you would have been treated like a hero — liberal Washington’s very own version of Pittsburgh Pirate Bill Mazeroski, who with one swing of a bat brought down the reviled Nixon. “Maz” never had to pay for a meal in Pittsburgh after that October afternoon in 1960 when he delivered a World Series.

That used to be you, Bob. But now, you’re the problem!

You, of all people, threatened by a Democrat White House.

And where are your defenders? Where are the new hipster reporters of the left to defend you? Where have all the flowers gone, they used to ask.

But this is serious stuff. When the elder statesman of the industry that guards the First Amendment is threatened by the White House, it marks a dangerous turn.When other “reporters” join in, it is even more dangerous.

Perhaps this will be enough for the usual phalanx of fools at places like Mother Jones, TPM Muckraker, and The Nation to at last wonder if we’ve come full circle back to those days of righteous triumphs in August 1974. Outrage toward abuse of power was so in vogue. Where is the righteous indignation that seized a nation beginning in May 1973?

Maybe it was all a show, Bob.

Did the wave you started have more to do with the “R” after Nixon’s name than principle?

With you, I’d say it was principle. But with the rest of the liberal left, it’s starting to look like poor Dick Nixon got a raw deal compared to this mischief of rats.


[-] 0 points by Nevadaone (-55) 6 years ago

You got to love this. Bob sure got himself in one hell of a pickle here and even a threat from a senior WH official "you will regret doing this". Calling out the Dicktator in Chief Obama like that is bound to put him on Barry's kill list for sure.


[-] 0 points by shadows (-39) 6 years ago

Lanny Davis, ( democrat) also attacked by the White House .

[-] 0 points by Nevadaone (-55) 6 years ago

Yes. You can't criticize Lord Obama and get away with it. They cannot stray from the Progressive plantation.

[-] 1 points by shadows (-39) 6 years ago

The mark of a totalitarian govt.

[-] 1 points by Nevadaone (-55) 6 years ago

That's exactly correct. That is what we are dealing with here.

[-] 0 points by justiceforzim (-17) 6 years ago

Oh yeah, the liberal spin machine is focusing on Bob, not the issue, as usual. If this gets any more heated, I am sure Bob's love children, his taxes and the children he has molested over the years will start to come forward.

Robt Gibbs better watch his mouth about the lack of transparency he was allowed to provide the press during his tenure. Poor Jay Carney. Can you imagine being the face of the Dear Leader's spin machine?

I have been wondering for a while if the state run media props Obama up out of devotion or fear. Still wondering.

[-] 0 points by conservatroll (187) 6 years ago

Heh,heh...ole Jay had to run from the pressroom the other day when pay-for-play came up. I figure VQ is hasn't been around here since he's trying to bundle that 1/2 mill so he can sit in the One's brilliance 4 times a year.