Bob Woodward: Yes, the sequester was totally the White House's idea

[Hauldren Collider]

How could a factual statement about a historical event ever be shown to be false? Someone is indeed nutty here, but it ain't Bob Woodward...

Also worth noting, this White House has a habit of trying to directly attack its critics, instead of responding to criticism. Hence Obama's frequent jabs at figures like Rush Limbaugh or complaining about Fox News. They may soon add Bob Woodward to that list. I honestly hope they do. It's going to be amusing watching them try to discredit him.

[Felch]

Oh, boo ****ing hoo, we're going to kill al Qaeda operatives. Cry me a ****ing river.

Considering that the list is secret, I wonder how you know that it's nothing but Al Qaeda operatives. I wonder if the President even knows if they're all Al Qaeda operatives. According to this report, the government's standard for imprisoning people in Gitmo included possession of rifles, using guest houses, and wearing Casio watches. It's not much of a surprise that Gitmo was half full of innocent men, who'd been kidnapped by crooked bounty hunters. Secret government kill lists are as stupid as they are illegal.

[MichaeltheGreat]

If the list is "secret" then how is it a news item? The specific identities are secret, the process isn't. Or do you want the kill/no-kill determination made by whatever E8 to O3 or CIA contractor is "flying" a particular drone? Which is where it would be otherwise.

If you think killing enemy combatants is a problem, maybe you've been felching Moby.

Yeah, and Gitmo was full up of random arabs in the 'stan who were just walking around with rifles. And "innocent" my ass with the exception of some of the Afghan natives. You think the foreign Islamists there were on the Haj and happened to make a wrong turn?

[DinoDoc]

If the list is "secret" then how is it a news item?

The Administration leaked its existence?

[Dr Strangelove]

I've got an idea that will guarantee that this sequester would be the shortest sequester ever.

While the legislators are sequestered Obama and "Wild Bill" Clinton should take a list of the wives of GOP legislators wives, split the list and go visit the lonely women at their homes.

[kentonio]

Oh gee, guess it's not just me..

Bob Woodward, Obama Aide Spar, Causing Confusion Over Definition Of 'Regret'

The hilarious sideline story to this week's coming season finale of "Sequestration: The Musical" continues to be the whole Bob Woodwardämmerung B-plot, which began with his Jack-Lew-invented-the-sequester scooplet and has since spiraled into nonsense.

Earlier today, Woodward decided to go on cable television and insist that President Barack Obama could easily thwart the coming sequestration devastation by simply overriding the commonly held principles of constitutional governance and just flat-out ignore a law that Congress passed and which he signed. Tonight, that little bit of derangement is followed up by a "Behind The Curtain" scooplet from Politico, revealing that an "Obama aide" totally yelled at him that one time, subsequently re-contacted Woodward to apologize, whereupon Woodward miscontrued that apology into some sort of weird Gangland fantasia.

Yes, we can only imagine that the "Obama aide" might raise his voice at Woodward once he'd heard Woodward's underlying claim about Obama "moving the goalposts," which was embarrassingly mis-premised and which Brian Beutler, among others, shredded into confetti. "They're all going to laugh at you!" we imagine this Obama aide might have yelled.

Reached for comment, a White House official told The Huffington Post: "Of course no threat was intended. As Mr. Woodward noted, the email from the aide was sent to apologize for voices being raised in their previous conversation. The note suggested that Mr. Woodward would regret the observation he made regarding the sequester because that observation was inaccurate, nothing more. And Mr. Woodward responded to this aide's email in a friendly manner."

Still, this all raises a question: when Bob Woodward reads emails from the White House, do the words in his head sound like they're being spoken aloud by Edward G. Robinson in the Bugs Bunny cartoons?

[UPDATE: Ben Smith and Josh Marshall say the "Obama aide" in question is Gene Sperling. Sperling is the 54-year old lawyer and economic adviser, who is currently serving as the Director of the National Economic Council, and has hitherto never been known as anyone a normal human adult would have any reason to feel physically threatened by.]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...p_ref=politics

[Hauldren Collider]

It's pretty obvious that the White House feels very threatened by Woodward, and their latest outbursts towards him only serve to reinforce the notion that Woodward is correct:

Watching Woodward last 2 days is like imagining my idol Mike Schmidt facing live pitching again. Perfection gained once is rarely repeated.

— David Plouffe (@davidplouffe) February 28, 2013

[kentonio]

No-one feels threatened by Woodward for goodness sake, the overall sentiment is just that it's sad that a once great journalist is embarrassing himself with this petty bull****. It is funny though watching the Republicans rushing to defend a man they've hated for decades.

[Hauldren Collider]

No, they absolutely feel threatened.

Also, I never hated him. I read his book Bush at War, and thought it was excellent.

[PLATO]

Woodward started his career off with a bang at the Post. While he has generally been a good reporter, he has spent a career trying to live up to his accomplishments of the early 1970's. Now at 70 years old, he wants nothing more than to end his career in the limelight.

[Felch]

Or do you want the kill/no-kill determination made by whatever E8 to O3 or CIA contractor is "flying" a particular drone? Which is where it would be otherwise.

Or we could just not bomb people with our drones. Are you so paranoid that you think our national security is threatened by religious lunatics in Pakistan? Why are you so afraid of a bunch of inbreeds? Were you molested by Taliban as a child?

[PLATO]

More "My way or the Highway" from the White House:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House is threatening a presidential veto of a Senate Republican measure that would give President Barack Obama more authority and flexibility to find $85 billion in spending cuts this year. The measure is intended to replace the automatic across-the-board cuts scheduled to kick in Friday.

The White House says it instead backs a Democratic measure to replace the cuts with tax hikes on millionaires and spending reductions over 10 years.

Neither bill is likely to survive Senate procedural obstacles Thursday.

The White House says there is no way to cut $85 billion over the remaining seven months of the fiscal year without "drastically affecting national security and economic policies." A statement by the White House budget office says Obama's advisers would strongly recommend he veto the Republican proposal.

http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-issues-veto-threat-180509078.html

So the White House and the Congress can't get along...that we know.

Why on Earth would the President veto a measure that would allow him to make the cuts easier on Americans?

It's not like the veto would make the cuts go away. Is there more in this measure that the article isn't telling us?

[DinoDoc]

Why on Earth would the President veto a measure that would allow him to make the cuts easier on Americans?

The answer to this question writes itself.

[Elok]

Or we could just not bomb people with our drones. Are you so paranoid that you think our national security is threatened by religious lunatics in Pakistan? Why are you so afraid of a bunch of inbreeds? Were you molested by Taliban as a child?

Well, if you view the health of the economy as a national security issue, and consider WoT spending a subsidy to the MI Complex...

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

No-one feels threatened by Woodward for goodness sake, the overall sentiment is just that it's sad that a once great journalist is embarrassing himself with this petty bull****. It is funny though watching the Republicans rushing to defend a man they've hated for decades.

Hmmm who should I believe a once great journalist or a never great poster.