The White House Goes All Joan Crawford On Bob Woodward
You'll "regret doing this," Woodward claims a "very senior person" at the White House warned him in an email (in the wake of Woodward's criticisms of Obama's behavior in regard to the looming sequester). Brett LoGiurato writes at BredRed.com:
Earlier today on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Woodward ripped into Obama in what has become an ongoing feud between the veteran Washington Post journalist and the White House. Woodward said 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.The Defense Department said in early February that it would not deploy the U.S.S. Harry Truman to the Persian Gulf, citing budget concerns relating to the looming cuts known as the sequester.
"Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, 'Oh, by the way, I can't do this because of some budget document?'" Woodward said on MSNBC.
"Or George W. Bush saying, 'You know, I'm not going to invade Iraq because I can't get the aircraft carriers I need?'" Or even Bill Clinton saying, 'You know, I'm not going to attack Saddam Hussein's intelligence headquarters,' ... because of some budget document?"
The Chicago/Stalinist way...this is why I'm hopeful the dems will implode sooner or later, this style cannot be sustained. The repubs are already gone. It's gonna be a free for all.
Stinky the Clown at February 27, 2013 6:26 PM
I feel mighty naive, but could it be possible that deployment isn't going forth because of other reasons, but blaming it on the sequester to force Congress to act?
NikkiG at February 27, 2013 7:34 PM
I'm not a fan of Faux News but this commentary by Napolitano on Fox Business News regarding Obama's drone murders of Americans overseas is pretty interesting - in the "We have another insane bloodthirsty kinglike President" way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKggU2y5x2Y
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at February 27, 2013 7:58 PM
The problem is that the lamestream media has bought so far into the leftist agenda that they have no way to back away gracefully.
There are so many things that they would have to report on, even semi-honestly, that they would they would lose all credibility.
If the lamestream would have to come clean on Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, the gun control agenda, and many other things they would no longer have credibility.
So until that tie is broken -- we are screwed.
Jim P. at February 27, 2013 8:06 PM
The MSM is going to turn on Bob Woodward, and they think they stand a snowball's chance in hell against him? He's the freakin' Godfather of Investigative Journalism, you know, the real deal stuff that exposes corruption and misdeeds and such on the part of fat cat politicians and government employees.
He's going to eat their lunch, burp in their faces, and ask "Is that all you've got? Where is my desert?"
Kat at February 27, 2013 8:47 PM
The email to Woodward is not actually as threatening as Woodward wants people to think. As quoted in Henry Blodgett's article of Feb. 27th in businessinsider.com, it said: "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." He's saying Woodward would be proven wrong. It's actually a fairly polite comment.
Katherine at February 27, 2013 9:06 PM
> He's the freakin' Godfather of Investigative
> Journalism
Naw, he's just the guy who Redford pretended to be in a movie.
His greatest success came from jury tampering, not from romantic shoe-leather journalism.
A lot of his books suck pretty bad.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 27, 2013 9:48 PM
Congress is ready to act. The president is demanding more tax increases as part of any deal and refusing to consider any deal that does not contain tax increases.
Basically, we have a president who's acting like a five-year-old and threatening to take his ball and go home if he doesn't get his way.
Except the ball he's threatening to take away is our national security and public safety.
When Nixon was deeply enmeshed in the Watergate scandal, there was fear among his closest advisors that he might initiate a foreign crisis as a distraction; but Nixon opted not to jeopardize national security for his own political survival.
Woodward is right - this is madness.
Conan the Grammarian at February 27, 2013 10:03 PM
The email to Woodward is not actually as threatening as Woodward wants people to think. As quoted in Henry Blodgett's article of Feb. 27th in businessinsider.com, it said: "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." He's saying Woodward would be proven wrong. It's actually a fairly polite comment.
Your quote includes in an ellipsis just before the threatening remark. And you claim that this shows the real context?!?!?
Engineer at February 28, 2013 2:18 AM
"Or George W. Bush saying, 'You know, I'm not going to invade Iraq because I can't get the aircraft carriers I need?'"
Hmm, maybe then we wouldn't be in such a mess now...
DrCos at February 28, 2013 3:33 AM
"He's going to eat their lunch, burp in their faces, and ask 'Is that all you've got?'"
I don't think so. The MSM today are fellow travellers. Marxists are notorious for taking down anyone who strays off the reservation even the tiniest bit. And most journalists today weren't born when Watergate happened; all they know about it is what they learning in J-school, which is "Republicans bad, Democrats good". They won't think twice about throwing Woodward off the fiscal cliff.
Cousin Dave at February 28, 2013 6:47 AM
We won't be sending an aircraft carrier to the gulf to threaten the Mideast?
The present administration is incompetent, but less military action is a win.
Wyowanderer at February 28, 2013 8:25 AM
Well apparently we're sending $60 million bucks worth of stuff to the Syrians...
Flynne at February 28, 2013 9:28 AM
"Marxists are notorious for taking down anyone who strays off the reservation even the tiniest bit."
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/gingrich-rove-candidates-GOP/2013/02/20/id/491230
Rove’s Plans to Weed Out GOP Candidates
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at February 28, 2013 10:20 AM
The Onion weighs in:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/anonymous-source-informs-bob-woodward-he-hasnt-bee,31481/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default
Conan the Grammarian at February 28, 2013 11:49 AM
@Engineer: The complete email exchange between Woodward and Gene Sperling of the White House can be read on Politico today. I stand by my original quote because reading both emails affirms the weakness of whatever "threat" Woodward says there was and makes this "controversy" a pretty shallow affair, meaningful only to the ever gleefully paranoid.
Katherine at February 28, 2013 12:25 PM
Rove’s Plans to Weed Out GOP Candidates
The bushman was an awful president. Neither he nor Obi were remotely qualified to even run a government. Bush v. Gore was a bad choice, then Bush v. Kerry, then Mac v. Obi, then Obi v. Rom. The selection was mediocre, at best, so think how low the advisors will stoop for these losers to "win"
Stinky the Clown at February 28, 2013 1:13 PM
Marxists are notorious for taking down anyone who strays off the reservation even the tiniest bit.
Case in point, Malcom X
lujlp at February 28, 2013 3:24 PM
"Rove’s Plans to Weed Out GOP Candidates"
I didn't say that other groups don't do it too. I wouldn't label Rove a Marxist, but he is well tied into the Washington apparatus and has a big stake in things staying like they are. In his own way, he's just as bad.
Cousin Dave at March 1, 2013 7:00 AM
Leave a comment