Keukasmallies Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 It appears that certain White House staffers may soon suffer from the rather painful "Tit-in-a-Wringer" syndrome. Now Lanny Davis reports that his Editor at the Washington Times was advised by the "White House" to stop running Davis' columns or every WT reporter would lose their WH credentials. Sweet arrogance, thy name is Barack.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 What a douche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) Wow, now a new article out from Ron Fournier of National Journal, a huge Obama supporter. This is getting very embarrassing for the WH. First Woodward, then Davis, now Fournier. http://mobile.nation...to-you-20130228 As editor-in-chief of National Journal, I received several e-mails and telephone calls from this White House official filled with vulgarity, abusive language, and virtually the same phrase that Politico characterized as a veiled threat. “You will regret staking out that claim,” The Washington Post reporter was told. Once I moved back to daily reporting this year, the badgering intensified. I wrote Saturday night, asking the official to stop e-mailing me. The official wrote, challenging Woodward and my tweet. “Get off your high horse and assess the facts, Ron,” the official wrote. I wrote back: “I asked you to stop e-mailing me. All future e-mails from you will be on the record -- publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you. My cell-phone number is … . If you should decide you have anything constructive to share, you can try to reach me by phone. All of our conversations will also be on the record, publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you.” I haven’t heard back from the official. It was a step not taken lightly because the note essentially ended our working relationship. Without the cloak of anonymity, government officials can’t be as open with reporters – they can’t reveal as much information and they can’t explain the nuance and context driving major events. Edited February 28, 2013 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 It doesn't surprise me one bit. Most administrations try to control the coverage as much as they possibly can, but this one takes it to a whole new level. They have an incessant desire to control the narrative, that has been on display for quite some time. Even Plouffe bragged about this aspect of the first Obama campaign, regarding controlling the narrative. These guys are political animals, and they are great at it. They can politick with the best of them, but when it comes to governing, these guys are about as incompetent as they come. It is amateur hour up there at the W.H Also, I see that many liberals are doing everything they can to savage Woodward's reputation. Check it http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/media-others-tweet-on-bob-woodward-88234.html?hp=r2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 The Most Openly and Transparently Thin-Skinned Administration in History. With a little help from its enablers in the Palace Guard Media. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Didn't the Administration try this in their first few months, limiting or revoking (I forget which) Fox New's access because they weren't a real news station. As I recall, everyone in the media (even MSNBC) got together and said "We don't like Fox...but !@#$ you. You're not deciding who 'freedom of the press' does and does not apply to." Apparently, they didn't learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Didn't the Administration try this in their first few months, limiting or revoking (I forget which) Fox New's access because they weren't a real news station. As I recall, everyone in the media (even MSNBC) got together and said "We don't like Fox...but !@#$ you. You're not deciding who 'freedom of the press' does and does not apply to." Apparently, they didn't learn. Only good Administrators learn from mistakes. Organizers know only one way. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 In a couple days Barry will release a statement blaming his underlings and it was a simple misunderstanding beyond his control. He will remain Teflon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) Only good Administrators learn from mistakes. Organizers know only one way. Fortunately, Obama knows the way to make this all end: send Holder to court to argue that Californians had no right to vote against gay marriage. No one will remember Woodward tomorrow. Even the sequester will pass without a whiff criticism. Because it's time for a new hot topic to spin up the masses. SQUIRREL!!!! Edited February 28, 2013 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 From Andrew Sullivan This is what Woodward was claiming was a chilling threat to press freedom! I mean, seriously. What exactly is the threat?... Does this read like a man writing to someone threatening him with anything? He even says: “I for one welcome a little heat.” He describes Sperling’s “threat” as “personal advice” as a friend, which it plainly was. Then he goes whining to CNN and Politico that he is victim of government threats for his reporting. That’s a lie, and Woodward has now been exposed as a liar. Talk about eating their own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 From Andrew Sullivan Talk about eating their own Yeah, the left has absolutely been destroying Woodward. You should read the comments section in the HuffPost article. You'd think he decided to legally change his name to Sarah Palin. They're as rabid as can be, and want blood for even suggesting that the problem with the WH staff is that it's missing a reservoir tip to complete their thin-skinned ensemble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Wait, so Woodward isn't going after GWB anymore? Welcome to the White House, Mr. President. I guess the responsibility for the mess is now finally yours. It's about time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 That's what the W.H does, successfully I might add. They mobilize their base, which it all began with Plouffe and co. when they sent out tweets attacking Woodward, and now all the drones follow suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 This whole thing is unsurprising. This is the same White House who used to send Rahm Emanuel (as Chief of Staff) to confront Congressmen in the showers and demand they do as they're told. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/09/AR2010030903654.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Interesting that everyone is jumping on Woodward, yet no one is asking why Sperling is advising his "friend" that he will regret it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 This whole thing is unsurprising. This is the same White House who used to send Rahm Emanuel (as Chief of Staff) to confront Congressmen in the showers and demand they do as they're told. http://www.washingto...0030903654.html Hey now, in defense of the WH...nobody has to tell Rahm to do stuff like that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 ...yet no one is asking why Sperling is advising his "friend" that he will regret it. Because in context, he did it really nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Because in context, he did it really nicely. Like Christopher Lee in Lord of the Rings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I always wonder what libs think about this kind of ****. Who knows. They get very quiet, ignore it, then never bring it up again. If President (*^*&%^$^#wasn't on their team they'd be soaking tampons over the **** he's doing, but instead they just flip the page to the next Obama puff piece and lube it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Hey now, in defense of the WH...nobody has to tell Rahm to do stuff like that... I just don't want to know what Rahm was poking Massa in the chest with while naked in the shower. I always wonder what libs think about this kind of ****. Who knows. They get very quiet, ignore it, then never bring it up again. If President (*^*&%^$^#wasn't on their team they'd be soaking tampons over the **** he's doing, but instead they just flip the page to the next Obama puff piece and lube it up. Most libs are not interested in what's best for the country, so long as their "team" can claim victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts