Woodward: White House Warned Me "You Will Regret Doing This"

page: 11
88
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

What happened to economic protectionism....like taxing the crap out of foreign made stuff?? I used to take pleasure in the duty free stores buying stuff for half price, now someone goes to walmart and buys the cheapest pos you can get...and it breaks down in 1 week.

Financial terrorism is much more effective than military and no one dies. Think about it!



That would work nearly as well - do you think you can convince DC to go for it? If not, then I'm ready to the the UN slap a crap load of sanctions on us and keep us from doing any external business at all. Either way would have the same net effect of promoting a self-sufficient country again. I dunno about you, but I can do without crap Chinese products.

An added bonus would be the necessity of accelerating domestic oil production and an acceleration of the quest for alternative energy sources. If we can't import foreign oil any more, then we would HAVE to do something about that domestically. Let the Arabs drink their oil for all I care. Close down the markets for it here, and start churning out our own. I'm sure China would buy it.... so long as they could find another market for their trinkets so they could continue to sell crap to get the money to buy it!

Of course, your scenario of strenuous import tariffs would have advantages, too - the feds could still waste all the money they want to, while simultaneously keeping their paws off mine and yours!




posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 




Ah, the media spin propagana machine at its finest.... Take the peripheral of the issue, and make it the issue. That way, no one is thinking about how the average american has taken a pay cut, so why are these folks still whining? Please..... Remember when Obama supported the Sequester cuts?

Every month we learch from one Pending calamity to another,and it's all made up bull..remember the DEATH CEILING!! and TAXMAGEDDON!! plus the rush to bailout out banks too big to fail with people who are too big to JAIL.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 01:16 AM
link   
What won ww2? wasnt technolgy it was mass producing over wheming fire power to steal technology. USA cant win a war on homeland because wont and will not do that any more. It is a history lesson already learned. USA if ever in a war on the homeland will be next for fire bombing from forgien contries. satallites are in place we arnt nuking anything unless low flying and get thru passive radar.
enough said



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:57 AM
link   
It's un-American to base government initiatives on budgetary considerations. Americans never have bothered about the budget in the past and there is no need for them to bother about the budget now. That's communism.

America invented the credit card, ferchrissakesalmighty!!

We're not giving up American exceptionalism just because some Kenyan commie wants to run government as if it were a household with a budget.

Folks, in all seriousness, the bloom was off the Woodward rose a long time ago. He's been just another hack for a long time now.
edit on 1-3-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mike.Ockizard
It is possible to discuss this without using labels like dictator or throwing around propoganda about tiger woods and golf. People here who use those tactics are just as bad as those they call names. Points made this way sound like spoiled children arguing.

That said, If this is what happened and the whitehouse is threatening people for telling the truth, is that even legal? What a mess our political system is when the leaders keep secrets and play games withthe truth. I say use voting power to throw them all out of office. Hurt their big donators (banks and corporations) by limiting consumption or outright boycotting them. We do have power, we're just too spoiled or weak to wield it.


I've since heard woodward say he never felt threatened. Also read that the washington post is the one who reported that and has since changed their stry to reflect the fact that woodward never felt threatened. Politics a usual while the innocent suffer. We live in a failing society.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Granite
 


Hahahahaha you must be a child to insinuate that. I'll take it as a compliment and I know exactly how old he is, Adding to why Woodward is equally pointless. But you know the right doesn't have enough corpses lobbying for them already, so one more won't hurt.


By the way I won't give you my exact age but I'm between 28-40. Nice one line post try to contribute sometime or challenge my claim that Bob is an obsolete device trying to make another buck and clearly started to lose it in the Bush years if not earlier.
edit on 1-3-2013 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Spider879
 


Agreed. The email exchange has been made public now.


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

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


Read more: www.politico.com...



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 

From your link (politico):


We have obtained, exclusively, the exchange.


I don't see where Politico tells us where they obtained it.
If it was released by Woodward, it would have a lot more credibility. If we aren't sure where it came from, we also can't be sure that everything relating to the exchange was included.
I mean to say that if the White House was the source of this release, it could be possible that it is to cloud the issue more than clear anything up.
Thank you for posting what news we have regarding it anyway. Star.

ETA:
What about this part?

My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved.


I haven't heard anything else about who 'all' were involved in this. Anyone know? Thus far, we have 'Wouldn't Harm a Flea' Sperling shown to us. Apparently there is more to it than that.
edit on 1-3-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 10:57 AM
link   
I am not sure about that... But, is it possible CIA agent to blow up his own car, in order to dramaticaly rise his fee?



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


I would imagine the emails were released from Gene Sperling, so you're right... it does put it in the hands of the White House. However, I feel that not one single person in the White House would be so stupid (and that would be any White House) as to outright threaten an author or journalist. I do believe that since deregulation that allowed corporations to buy up large blocks of media, our media has suffered lack of any integrity and I also believe that since the Patriot Act, journalists have, by perception of threat, towed the dominant party's line... but this I really don't feel qualifies as a threat against a journalist.

It's a matter of public record what the sequester is about and the spin coming from both sides is just typical politics, it just makes no sense for the White House to have threatened Bob Woodward.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
wow.....talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.....and the obama haters on this thread taking this WAY, WAY, WAY, over the top....again. from now on, i'm just going to consider that any post that starts out bashing Obama is a lie, and simply ignore it.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I think that in the end its going to be the Obama administration that will
have regret over picking this fight with Woodward.

Just a few points, Woodward is not the only reporter that has come forth
and said he was yelled at, intimidated, others have said that they were harrassed
with vulgarity. Sure, Woodward is a veteran journalist, which is one of his points,
that if younger journalists are treated this way, that is The Administration
that wants ultimate control in what is reported.


The problem is, there are all kinds of reporters who are much less experienced, who are younger, and if they're going to get roughed up in this way, and I am flooded from emails from people in the press saying this is exactly how the White House works. They're trying to control and they don't want to be challenged or crossed.

www.foxnews.com...


This is a double blow to this Administration, Obama has been exposed as the person who
owns this Sequester, and now he owns this Administration that uses intimidation to
keep journalists from reporting the facts.

So much so that Oama has now gone on the record defending himself -
Obama - I am not a dcitator

Its easy to see who is fudging the truth here, and its not Woodward.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
wow.....talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.....and the obama haters on this thread taking this WAY, WAY, WAY, over the top....again. from now on, i'm just going to consider that any post that starts out bashing Obama is a lie, and simply ignore it.

I would think, if there isn't anything to this, that the blame would lie solidly on Bob Woodward.
Not so much politician haters on this thread (I wanted to include myself).



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 





it just makes no sense for the White House to have threatened Bob Woodward.

Other than for the reason that they want the media to continue to be good lapdogs.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 

Errr no! do you really think that in the past and in private conversations that White House staff members and other opposition politicians and reporters don't tell each other off,John Boehner To Harry Reid: “Go F****k Yourself” is more common in private heated disagreements than you might think,and that was true for Dick Darth Vader Chaney some yrs back,the difference is Woodward tried to spin the whole thing and pretend he is a victim with cross hairs and red dots on his forehead..sheesh!!



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


There's plenty of ways to do that, Woodward didn't just step out of the shadows one fine day and be allowed access to the White House, this guy has a pretty good track record of not playing patsy. I really don't think there's much of a story here and Woodward himself has stated he didn't feel he was threatened, IIRC.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

What happened to economic protectionism....like taxing the crap out of foreign made stuff?? I used to take pleasure in the duty free stores buying stuff for half price, now someone goes to walmart and buys the cheapest pos you can get...and it breaks down in 1 week.

Financial terrorism is much more effective than military and no one dies. Think about it!



That would work nearly as well - do you think you can convince DC to go for it? If not, then I'm ready to the the UN slap a crap load of sanctions on us and keep us from doing any external business at all. Either way would have the same net effect of promoting a self-sufficient country again. I dunno about you, but I can do without crap Chinese products.

An added bonus would be the necessity of accelerating domestic oil production and an acceleration of the quest for alternative energy sources. If we can't import foreign oil any more, then we would HAVE to do something about that domestically. Let the Arabs drink their oil for all I care. Close down the markets for it here, and start churning out our own. I'm sure China would buy it.... so long as they could find another market for their trinkets so they could continue to sell crap to get the money to buy it!

Of course, your scenario of strenuous import tariffs would have advantages, too - the feds could still waste all the money they want to, while simultaneously keeping their paws off mine and yours!


Good post. The problem is too many people are focusing on gun control and the welfare state while neglecting why we are bleeding income and jobs in america. I try to hint people in the right direction but all this left and right crap keeps getting in the way.

Constructive criticism seems to have died after the 9-11-2001 events. Either you are a patriot or an america hater. If you support the official story and love israel then obviously you love america, if you are a 9-11 truther and a bit left then obviously you hate america.

Sometimes you just can't win. The system will not allow it!



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spider879
reply to post by burntheships
 

Errr no! do you really think that in the past and in private conversations that White House staff members and other opposition politicians and reporters don't tell each other off,John Boehner To Harry Reid: “Go F****k Yourself” is more common in private heated disagreements than you might think,and that was true for Dick Darth Vader Chaney some yrs back,the difference is Woodward tried to spin the whole thing and pretend he is a victim with cross hairs and red dots on his forehead..sheesh!!


Yep. I remember dick cheney calling joe biden a blowhard when joe biden won vp to succeed dick cheney. It was on the news everywhere. This whole "you will regret saying that" seems blown out of porportion to sensationalise and win points for the right.

Much like benghazi-gate. 4 people died and all of a sudden its bigger news than 9-11. But the democrats have many loose bolts of their own. I will never vote for either democrat or republican for as long as l live, unless by some holy miracle these two controlled opposition parties get their act together. Constitution party got 300,000 votes maybe next time they get 2 million.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
I think that in the end its going to be the Obama administration that will
have regret over picking this fight with Woodward.

Just a few points, Woodward is not the only reporter that has come forth
and said he was yelled at, intimidated, others have said that they were harrassed
with vulgarity. Sure, Woodward is a veteran journalist, which is one of his points,
that if younger journalists are treated this way, that is The Administration
that wants ultimate control in what is reported.


The problem is, there are all kinds of reporters who are much less experienced, who are younger, and if they're going to get roughed up in this way, and I am flooded from emails from people in the press saying this is exactly how the White House works. They're trying to control and they don't want to be challenged or crossed.

www.foxnews.com...


This is a double blow to this Administration, Obama has been exposed as the person who
owns this Sequester, and now he owns this Administration that uses intimidation to
keep journalists from reporting the facts.

So much so that Oama has now gone on the record defending himself -
Obama - I am not a dcitator

Its easy to see who is fudging the truth here, and its not Woodward.


Good golly burntheships, you act as if this is the first administration to intimidate a reporter....

CJ
edit on 1-3-2013 by ColoradoJens because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   
This may have been posted here already - I didn't take the time to read every post - but Jon Stewart summed this up pretty well...

www.rawstory.com...





top topics
 
88
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join