Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (702451)	3/4/2013 7:07:39 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572970

>> Yet here is the Obama administration saying something to that effect regarding Woodward's analysis of Obama's political tactics. Even if the tone was non-threatening, the implication is clear. They think Woodward is going to pay one way or another for making these criticisms. Ten, it is worth keeping in mind that after this happened (same day, next day) Plouffe and Cutter came out with twitter messages that denigrated him -- Plouffe comparing him to a washed up baseball player, Cutter referring to it as "stupid". Soon after, you have left leaning media calling him a "a crazy man" and MSNBC referring to it as "reckless". All part of the game plan.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (702451)	3/4/2013 8:24:36 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572970

>Yet here is the Obama administration saying something to that effect regarding Woodward's analysis of Obama's political tactics. Even if the tone was non-threatening, the implication is clear. They think Woodward is going to pay one way or another for making these criticisms. Read. Please. Sperling: "I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. 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." His implication was that Woodward was wrong and that he'd regret it when he wrote what he was planning to write, only to find out afterward that he was wrong. How on earth can you see it differently? I mean, Rahm Emanuel threatening a reporter? Sure. Probably happened a zillion times in Obama's last term. But Sperling? Come on. -Z

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (702451)	3/5/2013 5:47:57 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572970

Yet here is the Obama administration saying something to that effect regarding Woodward's analysis of Obama's political tactics. Did you see anyone in the Bush administration suggesting that Woodward may "regret" criticizing Bush that way? Of course not. Gene Sperling, who apologized to woodward, is now "the Obama administration"....cheney's office is responsible for outing a CIA officer, never admitted nor apologized for destroying her career, and for what? her husband telling the truth about the administration's distortions about iraq seeking nuclear materials for a fictitious program they used to help justify their war goals...that's the difference between an emotional outburst and criminal intent... Think about that... Al