Turning the corner?
Bob Woodward seems to have had a recent epiphany about Obama.
First there was this. And now this:
The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward ripped into President Barack Obama on “Morning Joe” today, saying he’s exhibiting 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.
“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.
“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 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.
“Under the Constitution, the President is commander-in-chief and employs the force. And so we now have the President going out because of this piece of paper and this agreement. ‘I can’t do what I need to do to protect the country,'” Woodward said.
Woodward no longer is the mover and shaker he once was. So why am I paying any attention to him at all? Well, it doesn’t make much of a story at this point to talk about those MSM figures who think Obama is just great; their Pravda-esque propaganda has been duly noted and is continuing apace as expected. But Woodward seems to (perhaps) be in the throes of some sort of more basic change regarding Obama, and I can only hope that he is not alone in this.
Plus, of course, the whole topic of political change is of interest to me.
Something in the blatancy of Obama’s behavior about the sequester—his lies, combined with his lack of interest in protecting the United States while simultaneously blaming others for decisions he is so clearly in charge of—seems to have reached Woodward and told him who Obama really is, probably for the very first time. And he’s shocked enough to speak out about it.
Are there others seeing the light? And if so, how many? I see no evidence of it, although I’m on the lookout.
Plus, I wonder whether Woodward will go silent again.
[Hat tip: Ace.]
Downright Nixonian behavior, except Nixon never endangered our well being to get his way.
Woodward’s semi-change might be noticed by some of a certain age who consider themselves educated. The younger don’t know who he is; heck, they probably don’t know who Nixon was.
Presidents always seem to get savaged at some point in their second term. In Obama’s case, one can only hope. I’m happy if he gets a raised eyebrow, as here.
Like you said, he’s no longer front and center in the media. Not to mention, today’s media is infinitely broader in reach and form than it was when he was an influential journalist. There will never be another Bob Woodward or H.L. Mencken or Walter Cronkite – or any single dominant media figure.
Nice to hear he’s thinking about this, but he’s just another voice in a very big wind.
I’ve heard on various talk shows that even the prime liberal outlets are becoming frustrated with the lack of access to Obama. Obama and company don’t need them to control the news or get their message out anymore – they’ve implemented and mastered other media forms to get their propaganda out, and like all useful idiots who’ve outlived their usefullness, the print and TV news will figure it out their fate when it’s too late.
This is interesting since Woodward has made a career out of cozying up to members of each of the last few administrations and getting them to discuss the inner-working of major decisions and events. One can only imagine the number of scandalous, behind the scenes stories he’s heard over the years. And to him, it seems, Obama’s behavior is unprecedented.
It will be interesting to see how he is treated by his media colleagues after this. Will he be accused of racism, or maybe senility? Maybe they’ll just put him out to pasture.
Even though it is par for the course with Obama, it’s hard to avoid acknowledging his blatant lies about the sequester cuts.
The sequester was his idea in the first place, but even though no one seems to be aware or care about that, it seems pretty obvious that the sky is not going to fall if these very minimal cuts (2 percent in the growth rate correct?) take place.
He is doing his usual “campaigning” in Newport News and elsewhere warning that children will go without food, students without loans, etc. etc. if the sequester goes through and it’s being met with a collective yawn by citizens on both sides. No one seems to believe disaster will strike after these cuts take place and he looks increasingly like the liar he is for saying so.
Now that Hill’s out from under this administration the MSM may just help blow the house down.
The carrier withdrawal is a d i p l o m a t i c initiative — by the Pink House.
Barry still can’t comprehend that EVERY single player in Tehran regards all DC initiatives as politically toxic — and they are in full campaign mode — with elections in June.
The notion that the Wan is going to ‘make a decision’ (heh) in JUNE, 2013, WRT the mullah’s atomic program… ’tis to laugh.
Bob is s l o w.
=======
And in other news: cutting the DoD makes for almost no net savings for the Federal budget.
Why? Such expenditures are typically (income) taxed back at the highest rates. When the multiplier effect is figured in… peace time military spending — at these modest levels — is almost a wash.
In contrast, the Democratic constituencies are black holes of Federal expenditures. Such outlays typically create very low (income) tax reflows back into the Federal collections maw.
INRE the DoD: it’s biggest nightmare is not the F-35. It’s medical care for veterans — to include the Vietnam generation. It’s ramping hyperbolic. T H A T ‘ S what is causing the generals budgets to blow up.
It’s exploding so fast that before the decade is out, DoD won’t be able to buy any new gear at all. (!)
Ike should’ve warned America about the Medical-Pharma Complex.
On Laura Ingraham today Harry Alford, president and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce said: “Obama wanted the National Black Chamber to dance to his music and have blind allegiance to his crazy programs and agenda, which are totally anti-business. We are a pro-business organization. So we have to stand on the side of business, and the benefit of our members, which are black entrepreneurs.”
Cracks are appearing and lava is beginning to surface. 4 dead in Benghazi. Never give up.
“Ike should’ve warned America about the Medical-Pharma Complex.”
Actually its the Medical-Pharma-DC Complex. Karl over at Market Ticker has been all over this subject.
Oh, look, Woodward has been threatened by someone at the White House for having the audacity to criticize Obama: http://tinyurl.com/cxjkkwk
Full Drudge headline treatment.
“Oh, look, Woodward has been threatened by someone at the White House…”
Relax, its the Chicago way. Pay for play. Donate 500k and get some face time with da mayor. Or end up at the bottom of Lake Michigan.
Threatening Woodward is indeed the Chicago way.
Woodward has not been too frightened to talk about it. Good! Could this be the beginning of Obama’s “Alinsky Gate?”
“And in other news: cutting the DoD makes for almost no net savings for the Federal budget.
Why? Such expenditures are typically (income) taxed back at the highest rates. When the multiplier effect is figured in… peace time military spending – at these modest levels – is almost a wash.” -blert
Come on now. You’re sounding like a leftist with this ridiculousness, and I’d like to see your sources on that claim.
Woodward is from Chi-town himself, isn’t he?
He started to mull things over back in 2001, when he wrote the largely admiring “Bush at War” book about the Bush Administration in the first 100 days after September 11th, and the push for the Afghanistan war.
His calling the BO White House’s tactics “Mickey Mouse” is doing a little saber rattling of his own: the equivalent of patting BO on the head and saying, “Now, now, young man; don’t be impertinent to your elders.” But I think he’s naive — the thugs in the White House, including the Thug in Chief, are seriously bad news, and they Do have executive power over the world’s only superpower.
Politics have been so relatively benign here for so long that I think most Americans forget what a glittering prize we are, and how far certain types of people will go to get power over us: there are, I think, no limits.
I have an expanation why so many people are in denial of treachery and thuggery of the present White House administration. It is Stockholm syndrom. USA citisens simply can not admit that they were so blantanly lied and betrayed by their elected leaders. That would make their present situation so gloomy and desperate that they make every excuse and rationalization possible to avoid full recognition of this terrible reality. Denial is just the first stage of psychological trauma. The next stage is anger and reaction formation.
I read yesterday that Ben Carson is speaking at CPAC and that a black pastor of a 35,00-member church in Brooklyn agrees with Carson’s take on many issues. Maybe more and more tiny cracks will appear.
PBS Front LIne several weeks ago clearly showed Obama broke a budget deal that he had made with Speaker Boehner. This and today’s crap from the White House all get a pass from the MSM. The average stupid Joe will blame the House GOP 100%. What’s your guess thing will be like after the D’s get the House? Or, BO gets two addional seats on SC?
I’m thinking we will look back at Obama’s threatening Bob Woodward and realize that this is when he jumped the shark.
}}} But Woodward seems to (perhaps) be in the throes of some sort of more basic change regarding Obama, and I can only hope that he is not alone in this.
Unfortunately, the time to have this national epiphany was 4 months ago, not now.
Short of the absurd improbability of impeachment, no epiphanies need apply.
Peace time military spending is mainly training and maintenance. Without the funds for training, the munitions, the fuel, the pay for more troops to replace the old experienced ones, there is no military. It will be a hollow one, a real hollow military, unlike the ones people thought was hollow in 2005.
By cutting back, the military won’t have the resources to instantly rebuild itself when a real war starts. Which is perhaps the goal all along. The extra money flowing into the pockets of Dem contractors and politicians, is just a side benefit.
Bernstein and Woodward were always in the pockets of government puppet masters to begin way. Even as far back as Watergate.
Government power masters have been playing with the press for quite a long while in destroying their enemies. The public were just never made aware of that fact.
Woodward (along with sidekick Bernstein) is still synonymous with Watergate in many people’s minds. (Well maybe not Millennials and younger but certainly the rest of us, whether on the right, left or middle).
As such, he is still sitting on his throne at the WaPo at the king of “crusading” modern journalists.
Even though the White House is confident that they have the entire press corps in their pocket, even THEY don’t want those kind of optics.
That is, being trashed by a legendary journalist best known for being the “honest and brave” investigator who exposed White House shenanigans and brought down a president.
What amazes me is that they actually seem to have threatened Woodward…