If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Threatening email to Bob Woodward from the White House turns out to be the nicest apology letter ever   (politico.com) divider line 433
    More: Followup, Bob Woodward, White House, Gene Sperling  
•       •       •

6582 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Feb 2013 at 10:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



433 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-28 02:21:07 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: FlashHarry: A) not even mitt romney's top advisor thinks the media was "in the tank" for obama

To be fair, having been Romney's top adviser does give cause to question his judgement.


fair point.

however:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/business/media/challenging-the-cla im s-of-media-bias-the-media-equation.html?_r=2&;
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/23/media-favored-romne y- over-obama-during-gop-primaries-study.html
http://www.journalism.org/node/26958

actual studies show that the media has been in fact rather anti-obama.

the only reason the right screams "BIAS" is that they're so frequently in the wrong, the media can't help but call them out on it sometimes.
 
2013-02-28 02:23:09 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Soup4Bonnie: What a disaster of a thread.


Did you see the one where Corvus tried to explain derivatives to MattStafford?  That one was pretty good.  I've never seen two people so intent on misunderstanding one another in my life.  It was like watching Arrested Development, only real.
 
2013-02-28 02:25:16 PM

jjorsett: The good thing about this flap about whether Woodward was threatened or not is that it lets the Democrats avoid having to discuss his main point, which is that the White House is lying about being the architects of the sequester and reneging on its deal with the Republicans.


ahem:THERE WOULD BE NO SEQUESTER IF REPUBLICANS HADN'T TAKEN AMERICA'S CREDIT HOSTAGE IN THE SUMMER OF 2011.
 
2013-02-28 02:25:46 PM

Dog Welder: unexplained bacon: Wasteland: It'll take awhile. No sense being content with one Big Story when they can wait and have two.

and that's probably what it really boils down to.

can't they see that smaller outlets are running circles around them? How is that good for business?
I guess they're counting on people who have trouble using the internet to prop them up.

Maybe they shouldn't have laid off all of their investigative reporters.


Interestingly, they are relying on the internet to prop them up since they laid off all their investigative reporters.

Investigation?  That's what blogs do.  Can I double click this?  I think it's one of those "Hyper-Links" my granddaughter sends me in electronic mail.
 
2013-02-28 02:26:04 PM
 
2013-02-28 02:26:06 PM

theknuckler_33: Brubold: cameroncrazy1984: max_pooper:

So the two of you have somehow managed to ignore our eroding civil liberties during Obama's presidency? His continuation of the Bush era policies that are quickly growing our country into a police state? Random DHS road blocks? TSA molestations? Expansion of warrantless surveillance of US citizens?

I'll just leave these here -

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/16/us/politics/16obama.html?_r=1&hp

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/01/theres-no-room-f or -civil-liberties-in-obamas-inauguration-view-of-america/267422/

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/03/obama_signs_ndaa_again/

And of course there are many many more to be found.

I won't try to speak for them, but I know that I am not the least bit happy about the continuation of some of the Bush era policies, but I also look at the entire picture and being upset at one policy does not preclude me from praising another. In general, Obama aligns more with my own views than anyone on the right, so I support him. Calling that "giving him a pass" on the things I don't like is just partisan hackery.


I'll call it supporting the lesser of two evils - your individual views mean nothing to them, in their mind you support every view they have.
 
2013-02-28 02:27:00 PM

FlashHarry: Philip Francis Queeg: FlashHarry: A) not even mitt romney's top advisor thinks the media was "in the tank" for obama

To be fair, having been Romney's top adviser does give cause to question his judgement.

fair point.

however:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/business/media/challenging-the-cla im s-of-media-bias-the-media-equation.html?_r=2&;
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/23/media-favored-romne y- over-obama-during-gop-primaries-study.html
http://www.journalism.org/node/26958

actual studies show that the media has been in fact rather anti-obama.

the only reason the right screams "BIAS" is that they're so frequently in the wrong, the media can't help but call them out on it sometimes.


I agree. I just couldn't resist the urge to mock the Romney campaign team.
 
2013-02-28 02:27:03 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com image.circletrack.com
 
2013-02-28 02:27:46 PM
I like how he wrote a nice response back, saying that he understood how things can get heated. I talk nice to people who make ME feel "threatened" all of the time.
 
2013-02-28 02:31:39 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Except now another one of their own is talking about the intimidation coming from the White House.


Difficulty: Woodward wasn't threatened
 
2013-02-28 02:32:18 PM

FlashHarry: jjorsett: The good thing about this flap about whether Woodward was threatened or not is that it lets the Democrats avoid having to discuss his main point, which is that the White House is lying about being the architects of the sequester and reneging on its deal with the Republicans.

ahem:THERE WOULD BE NO SEQUESTER IF REPUBLICANS HADN'T TAKEN AMERICA'S CREDIT HOSTAGE IN THE SUMMER OF 2011.


There wouldn't be any sequester NOW if the house would just do it's job.  They have zero plans approved and zero upcoming votes on any plan.  They are intentionally letting the sequester happen and making no effort to avoid it.
 
2013-02-28 02:35:51 PM
Woodie should've gone all Cornholio on this guy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoPVC4YxDlI
 
2013-02-28 02:36:55 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Except now another one of their own is talking about the intimidation coming from the White House.


another one? you mean in addition to Woodward? who wasn't actually threatened at all?

you fellas might want to hold up and wait for something verifiable before crying wolf....again.
 
2013-02-28 02:37:16 PM

FlashHarry: so to sum up this thread:

• bob woodward, the sudden darling of the right wing, is caught in a lie.
• farkers pounce on this, making endless fun of him
• butthurt wingnuts leap to his defense by trying to imply that the non-wingnut community thinks he's racist for opposing obama, despite zero evidence to support that claim

is that about it?


There was also the brief but hilarious "The left never criticizes Obama and to prove it here are some opinion pieces criticizing Obama from the left! Harumph!"
 
2013-02-28 02:38:27 PM

Lost Thought 00: Woodward should be disgraced and banished from the journalist community


Lol a true thought from a true liberal.
 
2013-02-28 02:41:48 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Except now another one of their own is talking about the intimidation coming from the White House.


c481901.r1.cf2.rackcdn.com

oh ah, one more thing, from the article you linked to (not the first time this crap made the rounds on fark today btw) please direct your attention to the part that I've bolded:

WASHINGTON -- Bob Woodward isn't the only person who's received threats for airing the Obama administration's dirty laundry.

Bob Woodward did not receive any threats...

/helluva scoop you got there
 
2013-02-28 02:46:37 PM

BeesNuts: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Soup4Bonnie: What a disaster of a thread.

Did you see the one where Corvus tried to explain derivatives to MattStafford?  That one was pretty good.  I've never seen two people so intent on misunderstanding one another in my life.  It was like watching Arrested Development, only real.


Was that the one with the whole "build a bridge between two uninhabited islands" routine? That was funnier than "Who's on First"

Listening to gold loons "explain" economics is always entertaining
 
2013-02-28 02:47:17 PM
Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.
 
2013-02-28 02:48:38 PM
 
2013-02-28 02:49:27 PM
For the record, this is how you threaten someone:

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. Because if you don't, I will have the president f*cking murder you. (That's in bold so you understand we're serious.)

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

P.S. Seriously I will have it look like it did when we murdered David Carradine, choking yourself to death while masturbating to erotic Smurf cartoons. You don't mess with the POTUS, brah.
 
2013-02-28 02:50:10 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.


did you read Woodward's email back to him? you really should if not.

sorta destroys the line you're going with here.

/talk about a knee-jerker
 
2013-02-28 02:50:57 PM
This thread reminds of this clip from Billy Madison, with the GOP mouth breathers playing the part of the bus driver and everyone else playing the part of Billy Madison.
 
2013-02-28 02:51:10 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.


Woodward said there was no need for an apology, so he didn't.
 
2013-02-28 02:52:50 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.


So the email that he claimed contained a threat didn't actually contain anything even remotely resembling a threat, so therefore some prior conversation that he never claimed was threatening must have been?

i210.photobucket.com
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect
 
2013-02-28 02:53:34 PM

max_pooper: This thread reminds of this clip from Billy Madison, with the GOP mouth breathers playing the part of the bus driver and everyone else playing the part of Billy Madison.


Except that it's the bus driver who just pissed himself.
 
2013-02-28 02:57:50 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Kangaroo_Ralph: Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.

So the email that he claimed contained a threat didn't actually contain anything even remotely resembling a threat, so therefore some prior conversation that he never claimed was threatening must have been?

[i210.photobucket.com image 310x232]
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect


desperation must cause brain rot.
look at the RWers reacting to this, it's ridiculous.

-look! the WH threatened Woodward in an email! Woodward said so.

-oh the email doesn't contain a threat? oh the reply from Woodward was friendly and without mention of feeling threatened at all?

-well there must be something....uh...look another unsubstantiated claim!

-wolf! there's wolves everywhere...IT'S A STRAIGHT UP WOLF ATTACK!!...THE WOLVES KNOW KUNG FOO!!!...LOOK! EVERYONE LOOK!

-nope it's nothing
 
2013-02-28 03:01:51 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Brubold: If you want to interpret it that way, that's fine. Oh you may want to look into this as a sort of pattern of behavior for the Obama WH.

http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27 s+ Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threa t&id=8924&is_corp=0

http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/02/28/obama-woodward-whit e- house/1953105/

"All we can say is: We know more than a few reporters have received similar e-mails from White House officials. Yelling has also been known to happen."

OMG - yelling? How ever do those reporters make it through the day in the face of such egregiously threatening behavior? And I thought crab fishermen had it tough



Its the same bullshiat that I go through in my office. When other people raise their voices at co-workers or say things that are considered stern or direct, they're considered people who don't take shiat. When I do it, is considered "anger".


/Black people problems
 
2013-02-28 03:02:12 PM
I hope everyone likes hearing about this because I'm pretty sure the GOP is gonna try to turn this into a new Benghazi.
 
2013-02-28 03:02:27 PM
Brubold claims the left does not criticize Obama... to only give sources a few post later about left authors criticizing Obama.  Farkers called him out on his statement that the left does not criticize Obama.

We are still waiting for Brubold to defend his contradicting statement.  Well, at least the Right has never contradicted themselves before, since they have never called Obama a Fascist-Communist, Atheist-Muslim, so at least they have that going for themselves.
 
2013-02-28 03:02:53 PM

Brubold: cameroncrazy1984: max_pooper:

So the two of you have somehow managed to ignore our eroding civil liberties during Obama's presidency? His continuation of the Bush era policies that are quickly growing our country into a police state? Random DHS road blocks? TSA molestations? Expansion of warrantless surveillance of US citizens?

...


How about you submit your own thread rather than jacking this one?
 
2013-02-28 03:04:02 PM
I think the RW has been taken so far down into this RW fantasyland that feel absolutely certain that Obama is some sort of monster on the verge of unveiling his evil plot.

At the first whiff of some perceived proof of their preconceived narrative they just go nuts without thinking for even a moment. If that gets shot down they don't stop and think about how they were just pulled into such idiocy, they just cast their eyes to the horizon waiting for that ship to come in.

poor little fellas.
 
2013-02-28 03:06:19 PM

FlashHarry: jjorsett: The good thing about this flap about whether Woodward was threatened or not is that it lets the Democrats avoid having to discuss his main point, which is that the White House is lying about being the architects of the sequester and reneging on its deal with the Republicans.

ahem:THERE WOULD BE NO SEQUESTER IF REPUBLICANS HADN'T TAKEN AMERICA'S CREDIT HOSTAGE IN THE SUMMER OF 2011.


They're all hypocrites, but one stands above the rest.

thinkprogress.org

1. Helped make the sequester happen. Ryan was among the Republicans leading demands for spending cuts to offset a debt ceiling increase in the summer of 2011, and was among the leaders who refused to consider new revenues in those negotiations. Had Republicans not refused to raise the debt ceiling in the first place, the sequester wouldn't exist.

2. Voted for plan to create the sequester, then bragged about it. Ryan took credit for the sequester in August 2011, bragging to Fox News that it guaranteed the massive budget cuts Republicans were seeking. "We got that in law," he boasted. On the House floor, he said the Budget Control Act's spending cuts were "a victory for those committed to controlling government spending."

3. Called the sequester "devastating" during the presidential election. Ryan blasted Obama for wanting the sequester's "devastating defense cuts" to take place during the presidential election, when he was the GOP's vice presidential candidate.

4. Blamed the likelihood of the sequester occurring on Obama. The sequester "will probably occur" because "the president has not a proposal yet on the table," Ryan told CBS News last week. "Don't forget it's the president who first proposed the sequester. It's the president who designed the sequester as it is now designed," he added.

5. Will include sequester cuts in his latest budget.


http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/02/15/1599681/paul-ryan-seques te r-position/
 
2013-02-28 03:09:59 PM
Man Democrats must be imploding..

Woodward and now Lanny Davis. I even heard Obama backing off his "the sky is falling" statements about sequestration .
 
2013-02-28 03:12:16 PM

whcrow: Woodward and now

...


what happened with Woodward?

oh right, nothing at all.
what's that? you've got another completely unsubstantiated claim to add to the one that was completely debunked just this morning?

/proceed
 
2013-02-28 03:13:05 PM
Pseudo-conservatives still believe pro wrestling is real.
 
2013-02-28 03:14:36 PM

whcrow: Man Democrats must be imploding..

Woodward and now Lanny Davis. I even heard Obama backing off his "the sky is falling" statements about sequestration .


Wait, Lanny Davis also received a completely non-threatening email from Gene Sperling? Wow. Tell us more
 
2013-02-28 03:15:30 PM

danvon: The sad thing is that the story about the threat is out there. The R base has that bit of information squirreled away. So, in about a year, they'll bring it up that Woodward was threatened by the administration as evidence that the President is a dictator, bully, etc. and the fact that there was no "threat" will conveniently slip down the memory hole.


They still throw out references to Eric Massa from time to time in the same way: Obama plays hardball like when he ginned up false claims of sexual harassment against a Democrat for opposing Obamacare and drove him to retire. It doesn't matter that Massa always claimed the retirement had nothing to do with ethics charges and that he made a damn fool of himself admitting to feeling up interns without permission but claiming it was merely rough-housing. The initial claim was inflammatory enough to stick.

To BSABVR the comments above, I grit my teeth every time a liberal says "Fox News went to court for the right to lie." No, and it's been cleared up enough times that they should know better. Still, it is a nice glib answer that is inflammatory enough that people continue to say it when pointing out the channel's skew.
 
2013-02-28 03:15:46 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.


where'd you go?

are you reading Woodward's emails, realizing you were duped?
will you adhere to the disproven BS you came in here with and take to a site with less facts where you can be outraged in peace?
 
2013-02-28 03:18:19 PM

hugram: Brubold claims the left does not criticize Obama... to only give sources a few post later about left authors criticizing Obama.  Farkers called him out on his statement that the left does not criticize Obama.

We are still waiting for Brubold to defend his contradicting statement.  Well, at least the Right has never contradicted themselves before, since they have never called Obama a Fascist-Communist, Atheist-Muslim, so at least they have that going for themselves.


The only thing Brubold ever cared about was to derail the thread into another topic to take attention away from Woodword lying and getting caught. He never had a desire for honest debate, just cowardly right wing defending.
 
2013-02-28 03:20:04 PM

skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: Rann Xerox: [READS "THREATENING" E-MAIL]

I hope my wife and daughter threaten me like this the next time I leave the toilet seat up.

Why do they care? Do they walk into the bathroom backwards with their pants down and hope?

My wife claims that it's a problem when she gets up to use the bathroom in the middle of the night and doesn't turn the light on. I mean, having a baby is expensive and all but we can afford to turn the bathroom light on for 30 seconds I think


It's not the power bill, it's the "oh god the light it burns dear god why did I turn the lights on aaargh" problem.  Personally I always put the seat and the lid down because it just seems unkempt and sloppy not to, and considering what a filthy bastard I am, that's saying something.
 
2013-02-28 03:20:17 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Except now another one of their own is talking about the intimidation coming from the White House.


Dick Morris was a Clinton adviser.
 
2013-02-28 03:25:04 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Sperling emailed Woodward to apologize for the tone of his original conversation.

I'm betting most of you knee-jerkers would have construed the original conversation as threatening.


If we did, why would we describe the language from the apology note as the threatening stuff instead?

Why not piss our pants like normal conservatives because some staffer raised his voice at me for saying stupid shiat?
 
2013-02-28 03:25:07 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Kangaroo_Ralph: Except now another one of their own is talking about the intimidation coming from the White House.

Not...exactly.

"When I had my column 'Purple Nation' originally in the Washington Times with the editor John Solomon...he received a phone call from a senior Obama White House official who didn't like some of my columns."


Maybe this means they'll finally stop blathering on about Benghazi.

/too much to hope for?
 
2013-02-28 03:26:50 PM

NeverDrunk23: The only thing Brubold ever cared about was to derail the thread into another topic to take attention away from Woodword lying and getting caught. He never had a desire for honest debate, just cowardly right wing defending.


Yep... and now he's colored bright glowing butt-hurt red on all my fark pages.
 
2013-02-28 03:28:24 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Brubold: If you want to interpret it that way, that's fine. Oh you may want to look into this as a sort of pattern of behavior for the Obama WH.

http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WMAL+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Woodward%27 s+ Not+Alone+-+Fmr.+Clinton+Aide+Davis+Says+He+Received+White+House+Threa t&id=8924&is_corp=0

http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/02/28/obama-woodward-whit e- house/1953105/

"All we can say is: We know more than a few reporters have received similar e-mails from White House officials. Yelling has also been known to happen."

OMG - yelling? How ever do those reporters make it through the day in the face of such egregiously threatening behavior? And I thought crab fishermen had it tough


Its the same bullshiat that I go through in my office. When other people raise their voices at co-workers or say things that are considered stern or direct, they're considered people who don't take shiat. When I do it, is considered "anger".


/Black people problems


it might help if you'd stop calling them "cracker ass crackers"
 
2013-02-28 03:29:06 PM

TheBigJerk: skullkrusher: cameroncrazy1984: Rann Xerox: [READS "THREATENING" E-MAIL]

I hope my wife and daughter threaten me like this the next time I leave the toilet seat up.

Why do they care? Do they walk into the bathroom backwards with their pants down and hope?

My wife claims that it's a problem when she gets up to use the bathroom in the middle of the night and doesn't turn the light on. I mean, having a baby is expensive and all but we can afford to turn the bathroom light on for 30 seconds I think

It's not the power bill, it's the "oh god the light it burns dear god why did I turn the lights on aaargh" problem.  Personally I always put the seat and the lid down because it just seems unkempt and sloppy not to, and considering what a filthy bastard I am, that's saying something.


bright light > wet heine, imo.
 
2013-02-28 03:32:05 PM
My Prediction - tonight Hannity will whip this up into the biggest scandal since Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Black Panthers Watergate

Because it's all they've got. I mean hell, they beat the Benghazi drum for FIVE MONTHS and had nothing to show for it but a handful of feathers.

You go to press with the scandal you have, not the scandal you wish you had
 
2013-02-28 03:36:48 PM

jjorsett: The good thing about this flap about whether Woodward was threatened or not is that it lets the Democrats avoid having to discuss his main point, which is that the White House is lying about being the architects of the sequester and reneging on its deal with the Republicans.


IDGAF who the "architect" was, the GOP used it as a selling point just as much as the Dems, then the "supercomittee" abjectly failed in the task. Regardless of where the blame goes, everyone agrees that it's a bad thing, yet the House wont pass a bill (all spending bills must originate in the house) to stop this idiocy from happening. Let's also not forget that the GOP reneged too, and that they aren't simply seeking the 2:1 cuts to revenue ratio that was offered before. They did a shiatty job negotiating themselves into a corner because they thought they'd be dealing with President Romney right about now, and they're being a bunch of pouty biatches who want to implement all the Romney cuts balancing the budget on the backs of the poor that voters overwhelmingly rejected back in November.
 
2013-02-28 03:36:58 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: My Prediction - tonight Hannity will whip this up into the biggest scandal since Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Black Panthers Watergate

Because it's all they've got. I mean hell, they beat the Benghazi drum for FIVE MONTHS and had nothing to show for it but a handful of feathers.

You go to press with the scandal you have, not the scandal you wish you had


I've pre-shiat my pants in anticipation of this outrageous story.

/keeps the wolves at bay
 
2013-02-28 03:39:43 PM

unexplained bacon: Ctrl-Alt-Del: My Prediction - tonight Hannity will whip this up into the biggest scandal since Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Black Panthers Watergate

Because it's all they've got. I mean hell, they beat the Benghazi drum for FIVE MONTHS and had nothing to show for it but a handful of feathers.

You go to press with the scandal you have, not the scandal you wish you had

I've pre-shiat my pants in anticipation of this outrageous story.

/keeps the wolves at bay


Truth, works as air freshener too.
 
Displayed 50 of 433 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report