|Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Is this proper proper procedure|
Is this proper proper procedure
Posted - 2/27/2013 8:09:14 PM | show profile | flag this post
for a president and/or his senior staff???
A "senior official" has apparently sent Bob Woodward an email saying, "You're going to regret doing this" referring to Woodward's reporting on the administration's sequester narrative...which is attempting to scare the American public into putting pressure on congress to approve what Obama wants.
He apparently ignores the fact that he is NOT a dictator and that our government is made up of three co-equal branches.
Do you believe what's coming out of the White House these last four+ years??? The phrase hasn't been mentioned here recently but this is a consummate example of Chicago-style thug politics. "My way or the highway."
Posted - 2/27/2013 11:50:21 PM | show profile | flag this post
Get your stories straight
"Dictator"?? " consummate example of Chicago-style thug politics. "My way or the highway." Holy Gee. When did Dick Cheney move back to the White House??
In reality--"If a very senior White House official had, in fact, "threatened" Woodward--if the official had promised that a gang of thugs would drop by Woodward's house later, for example, or even if the official had said no one in the White House would ever speak to Woodward again--then, fine, this might be worth talking about.
But according to Ben Smith of BuzzFeed, here's what the senior White House official actually said to Bob Woodward (in an email):
"You're focusing on a few specific trees that give a very wrong impression of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here. … I think you will regret staking out that claim."
That's it? That's the "threat"? Sperling wasn't even saying that Woodward would "regret" publishing whatever he planned to publish because Sperling would get him back for it later. He was saying Woodward would regret it because Woodward would be proven wrong"
So...this thread is much ado about nothing...but I'm sure somehow this positively proves that the MSM (Like the WaPa and Woodward) are soooooooo totally in bed with the Obama Admin.
Read "Now almost the entire "mainstream" media is openly and unashamedly in the tank for Obama and his far left...what some describe as borderline communistic...policies. (cruise)" and "these points are like dissent. something that is only done when republican is president. with dear leader, dissent, asking questions, intellectual curiosity, and seeking truth is racist. "(con)
Wish you guys would pick a paranoid narrative and stick to it.
Posted - 2/28/2013 1:57:58 AM | show profile | flag this post
I reported...verbatim...what Woodward tweeted
I don't know where you got the other bullsh*t...nor do I care.
Posted - 2/28/2013 8:44:33 AM | show profile | flag this post
democrat administrations are so use to the media regurgitating their lies and talking points. they don't know how to act when a woodward or fox news chooses facts.
fdr, truman, kennedy, carter, clinton, and obama.
censorship, threats, blackmail, bullying those who dare speak the truth is nothing new.
Posted - 2/28/2013 11:56:32 AM | show profile | flag this post
you did NOT accurately quote the exchange.
You creatively edited it to take it out of context and give it a whole new meaning.
When mp showed the entire quote, it blew you weak, paranoid conspiracy theory of "Chicago thuggery/dictatorship" completely out of the water.
Why have conservatives turned into such snivelling cowards lately. They're afraid of the powerful, strong liberals these days.
Posted - 2/28/2013 2:42:27 PM | show profile | flag this post
seems more in the media are coming forward saying they were threaten by the obama administration for printing/speaking the truth.
you would think most in the media would stand with those the obama administration is threatening for speaking the truth.
you would be wrong.
most in the media are rallying around dear leader.
which begs the question-
what liberal media?
Posted - 2/28/2013 3:25:59 PM | show profile | flag this post
You want verbatim?
The veritable that proves cruiser and con's fabrications, and spin .. full emails of "senior official" and Woodward, courtesy POLITICO:
"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"
Posted - 2/28/2013 3:30:25 PM | show profile | flag this post
The premise/theory/talking point for years has been 'The mainstream librul media in the tank for Obama' Everyone from Hannity to O'Reilley to con to cruise to Fox to radio to my conservative friends repeat the same mantra. This is where it's not only confusing, but it's downright contradictory to the extreme.
So now we have (so we're told) the ultra in the tank MSM Woodward and WaPo defending themselves against (so we're told) WH "threats". Which, in context, didn't happen. But the 'Conservative Media'--which is HUGE we are told (Look at Fox and Rush ratings)--but they don't really exist--because all the media's in the tank--which is why Obama haters get huge ratings--and circle circle do-si-do. If all this sounds like a word salad Sarah palin speech you're not alone.
One of my favorite sites is Mediaite; because even if they have a Liberal 'intro', what they do is play back the 'Media'. Imagine my surprise when I find a supposed librual site playing back some tape of arch-conservatives attacking the WH against Woodward; and others defending the WH against Woodward.
Fox&Friends, Morning Joe, Tucker Carlson...hell at one point we had non-mainstream media but still media giant O'Reilley praising obviously in the tank for Obama giant star Jon Stewart for a scathing attack of Obama. W.T.F.
The point being; The MSM/Librul myth--from Teflon St Reagan to Today and Obama--is just that--a myth, but a great talking point.
Posted - 2/28/2013 7:55:26 PM | show profile | flag this post
"nor do I care."
Good call by hero cruiser.
Seeing the quote in context robs him of his "Chicago-style thug politics" premise. And a hero like cruiser is not going to let "facts" or the "truth" or "accuracy" stop him on his anti-Obama crusade!!!
So true a patriot, he upholds the bullsh!t to sustain his post.
Posted - 2/28/2013 10:35:32 PM | show profile | flag this post
I wasn't quoting Sperling
I had no idea when I made my post that it was he who threatened Woodward. I DID, however, ACCURATELY quote what...from SEVERAL sources...purported to be Woodward's tweet.
Sit on it and spin.
Or don't. I don't give a sh**.
Posted - 3/1/2013 12:16:02 AM | show profile | flag this post
thank you wingnut...for living up to all of our very low expectations.
"I had no idea when I made my post that it was he who threatened Woodward" Oh. So when you blamed "president and/or his senior staff???" you had no idea who the source was. That was just out of habit.
And "I DID, however, ACCURATELY quote" No, you did not accurately quote anyone. You even mis-quoted out of context, and that's a talent.
"...from SEVERAL sources..." And you listed none of them.
"purported to be Woodward's tweet." Purported is an accusation, and it wasn't even Woodwards tweet, it was the other guys.
So you you got everything ass-backwards, and in oh-so-typical fashion decided to get the last word in anyway.
And you still wonder we mock you.
Posted - 3/1/2013 12:36:33 AM | show profile | flag this post
f yourself, you lying sack of sh**. Jesus, you're tedious.
But then, you're just like many of your radical left wing brethren on here...full of phony self-righteous indignation but can't get ANYTHING right...even with ALL THOSE "PROFESSIONAL" MEDIA RESOURCES AND FRIENDS.
And you've got a lot of nerve making accusations about my ability to quote. You haven't quoted me accurately...or in context...EVER. And that's got to be deliberate. Anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature could do infinitely better than you.
Posted - 3/1/2013 1:16:03 AM | show profile | flag this post
cruiztwit's main problem..though not his only one..
is that he's just a really, really bad liar..
and when he's caught at it, as he always is, he descensds into his attacks and ad hominem..
he can dish it out, but he can't take it..
and he has the nerve to call others "tedious"..
just your plain, garden variety a**hole..
Posted - 3/1/2013 10:31:09 AM | show profile | flag this post
Cruzo's pulling a Brietbart...
his claim that Woodward was threatened has been debunked by the full Sperling statement, putting the tweet into it's real context.
But cruzo's on here still claiming his debunked post is the truth.
Cruzo never lets the truth get in the way of his rants!
Posted - 3/1/2013 9:37:55 PM | show profile | flag this post
Eh, just give him his own high-IQ quote:
f yourself, you lying sack of sh**. Jesus, you're tedious."
Posted - 3/2/2013 8:55:01 AM | show profile | flag this post
For the record...
Woodward never said he was threatened.
Not a single time. He even told his colleagues at the Post he specifically was NOT threatened.
It was POLITICO that claimed in their story that Woodward was threatened. The rest of the right wing media ran with the POLITICO story as if the story itself were some kind of quote.
But in ALL his appearances, Hannity, Morning Joe, where ever else, Woodward has never once uttered the word "threatened."
Posted - 3/2/2013 9:27:32 AM | show profile | flag this post
Woodward brought the whole thing up...
He didn't use the word "threatened" but he basically implied the WH was threatening him about what he wrote. He is the one who made a big deal about it, and when the actual e-mail was printed he has been backpedalling like crazy to act like everyone else is blowing it out of proportion. Woodward has been taken to task by many other Washington journalists who are shocked at his reaction to what happened. Apparently he hasn't been given the attention he feels he deserves.
Posted - 3/2/2013 6:44:51 PM | show profile | flag this post
" f yourself, you lying sack of sh**."
Huzzah and hooray for hero cruiser, sticking to his guns even though he has clearly been proven wrong!
This man is a hero. A patriot who lives by the creed; stupidity, vulgarity, childishness and pointless insults in the defense of my perception of liberty are not vices.
He even finds Jesus tedious!
Shape up savior. Brave cruiser has set his sights on your liberal ways.
Posted - 3/2/2013 9:22:37 PM | show profile | flag this post
You people are so f-ing stupid
I wasn't quoting Sperling, I wasn't quoting Woodward, I was quoting several sources which purported to be quoting Woodward's tweet. I made that VERY clear.
How in the hell do you "media" types keep your jobs if you can't get anything right???
Oh, that's right! You need a perceived advantage even if you have to lie.
Posted - 3/3/2013 12:23:15 AM | show profile | flag this post
Gee you're dumb.
Step away from the shovel....you're killing yourself.
So now your defense is even though you started a thread called "Is this proper proper procedure" [sic]...
And you clearly say "for a president and/or his senior staff" " and (quote) "email saying, "You're going to regret doing this" EVERYTHING that whole post was WRONG.
Now??... it's "I was quoting several sources which purported to be quoting Woodward's tweet." NO. You didn't quote several sources did you?? And now apparently you were wrong with it being an email, and it wasn't even from Woodward in the first place, and even Woodward admits he wasn't threatened anyway, and where did you come up with the "President" part anyway??
"I made that VERY clear" The only thing you made clear is that you jumped on some bullshit wingnut website and ran with it. You had absolutely no facts or quotes straight at all.
But still, for some psycho reason you felt it necessary to post again defending evreything you got wrong--And what the heck, I'm in this deep, let's go for it, let's call "media types" "so f-ing stupid" (quote) because that shows I'm civil and never use ad hominem.
Posted - 3/3/2013 3:37:30 PM | show profile | flag this post
"hell do you "media" types keep your jobs"
Exactly brave cruiser. How do they? When you were in the media, which you've said many times that you were, and if I recall, wildly successful and high praised, you sure kept you job.
Or didn't. I don't recall.
Maybe you left because you found Jesus so tedious.
Posted - 3/4/2013 8:25:12 AM | show profile | flag this post
Co NOW cruzo claims...
he wasn't quoting Sperling (who sent the email) nor Woodward, who tweeted the partial quote.
Then why, cruzo, did you earlier claim to be quoting Woodward -- "verbatim?"
Posted - 2/28/2013 1:57:58 AM
"I reported...verbatim...what Woodward tweeted..."
Posted - 3/4/2013 8:51:40 AM | show profile | flag this post
"why... did you earlier claim to be quoting Woodward(?)"
Because I saw several independent sources that had exactly the same quote...which purported to be Woodward's tweet. That's MUCH more corroboration than you "media types" think is necessary. Therefore I believed the quote to be accurate.
But this is old news. The only reason you're making a big deal of it is because the sequester has become a stone loser for Obama...his scare tactics have fallen on deaf ears...and you need something to take the focus off of that fact.
Your partisan ego has been badly bruised and you have an uncontrollable urge to shelter it. You think bashing me will do that for you. You have my sympathy.
Posted - 3/4/2013 9:22:37 AM | show profile | flag this post
that last post has me ROTFL.
Posted - 3/4/2013 9:45:16 AM | show profile | flag this post
fixed it for you ...
Cruiser saw several wing nut sources that had exactly the same quote...which purported to be Woodward's tweet. That's MUCH more corroboration than most "conservative types" think is necessary. Therefore he believed the quote to be accurate.
But this is old news. The only reason he's making a big deal of it is because the sequester has become a stone loser for the GOP... their partisan tactics have fallen on deaf ears...and they need something to take the focus off of that fact.
Your partisan ego has been badly bruised and you have an uncontrollable urge to shelter it. You think bashing me will do that for you. You have my sympathy.