Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » For Sal, dreams, FT and every other liberal obama supporter on this forum: A message for you from the Exec Editor of The New York Times

For Sal, dreams, FT and every other liberal obama supporter on this forum: A message for you from the Exec Editor of The New York Times

+2
2seaoat
Hospital Bob
6 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Jill Abramson: 'This is the most secretive White House I have ever dealt with'

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/01/jill-abramson-this-is-the-most-secretive-white-house-181742.html

Guest


Guest

Leftists are now against transparency, accountability, and media access.

If we need to know something... there will be a white house press release.

Guest


Guest

LOL remember when Obama said he would have the most transparent admin ever...

He continues that lie here too..


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/283335-obama-this-is-the-most-transparent-administration-in-history

Then why don't you know anything about Benghazi? IRS hounding of conservative groups? NSA spying? Fast and Furious Gun Running? Al Qaeda and why if it is on the run, does it seemingly have more stuff going on now than when "W" was POTUS?


Can we find out who is in charge and get some answers?

2seaoat



So it makes it more difficult for The New York Times to do its job.

Absolutely.

boo hoo

Guest


Guest

I wouldn't let them know a damn thing either. All they do is distort stuff and make a spectacle out of everything

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I agree with seaoat and dreamsglore. Obama should do just like Nixon did and not answer to the press or be transparent about anything. And if they do talk to the press they need to just lie to those bozos.
Those founding father pansies were fulla shit when they put that "freedom of the press" nonsense into the Constitution and that needs to be removed.
Presidents are very important dignitaries and they should not be questioned by the peons in the press and when they are they should just ignore it. And they don't need to answer to any of us peons out here. It's just insulting to their importance for them to have to do it.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

And by the way, when the press wanted Bush to tell them about all those WMD's in Iraq the press was fulla shit then too. If Bush said there were WMD's in Iraq then that should be good enough for all of us so fuck the press.

Sal

Sal

Yes, the media has proven itself to be such a noble institution in recent years.

While I have serious reservations regarding the veracity of Ms. Abramson's statement, to the extent to which it's true, I will point you to this as the beginning of an explanation ...

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Then why don't you know anything about Benghazi? IRS hounding of conservative groups? NSA spying? Fast and Furious Gun Running? Al Qaeda and why if it is on the run, does it seemingly have more stuff going on now than when "W" was POTUS?
Can we find out who is in charge and get some answers?

Argle bargle, derp derp ...

Guest


Guest

Yep, thought so

Guest


Guest

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/01/obama-admits-trying-to-control-media-in-new-yorker-profile/

Bob Woodward, also of the Post’s Watergate fame, claimed to have been threatened by an Obama official.

Fox News Channel host ’ Greta Van Susteren wrote at Gretawire this week that the Obama administration tried to block the network’s reporting on the September 11, 2012 terror attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans.

While the Obama-protecting media accused Woodward of exaggerating, it is worth noting that the White House official, Gene Sperling, used similar language as to that reported by Van Susteren in a similar threat.

Sperling: ”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…”

Van Susteren:

“I remembered a disturbing phone call from a good friend in the Obama Administration. I have known this friend for years. The call was a short time after 9/11 (maybe Oct. 2012?) In the call, my friend told me that my colleague Jennifer Griffin, who was aggressively reporting on Benghazi, was wrong and that, as a favor to me, my friend in the Administration was telling me so that I could tell Jennifer so that she did not ruin her career. My friend was telling me to tell Jennifer to stop her reporting. Ruin her career?”

Obama’s ‘everybody does it’ claim is belied by Van Susteren: “In 20 plus years, I have never received a call to try and shut down a colleague – not that I even could – this was a first. “

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

That's not the interview...that's POLITICO's coverage of the interview. In that same interview, she gives herself and the other TIMES reporters a half-baked apology on creating an "echo chamber" for the Bush White House. She doesn't come right out and say, "I felt like a mushroom", but the inference is there that the TIMES went along with the narrative they were spoon-fed...such as the case of Judith Miller, who was then with the TIMES Washington Bureau.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/press_box/2003/07/the_times_scoops_that_melted.html

JULY 25 2003 6:49 PM

The Times Scoops That Melted
Cataloging the wretched reporting of Judith Miller.

By Jack Shafer

"If reporters who live by their sources were obliged to die by their sources, New York Times reporter Judith Miller would be stinking up her family tomb right now. In the 18-month run-up to the war on Iraq, Miller grew incredibly close to numerous Iraqi sources, both named and anonymous, who gave her detailed interviews about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Yet 100 days after the fall of Baghdad, none of the sensational allegations about chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons given to Miller have panned out, despite the furious crisscrossing of Iraq by U.S. weapons hunters.

In a Page One Times piece this week ("A Chronicle of Confusion in the Hunt for Hussein's Weapons," July 20), Miller acknowledges that "whether Saddam possessed such weapons when the war began remains unknown." But from there, she serially blames the failure of U.S. forces to uncover weapons of mass destruction on "chaos," "disorganization," "interagency feuds," "flawed intelligence," "looting," and "shortages of everything from gasoline to soap." Alternatively, she writes, maybe the wrong people were in charge of the search; perhaps a greater emphasis should have been placed on acquiring human sources rather than searching sites; and it could be that the military botched the op by not investing the WMD searchers with the power to reward cooperating Iraqi scientists financially or grant them amnesty.

Judith Miller finds everybody associated with the failed search theoretically culpable except Judith Miller. This rings peculiar because Miller, more than any other reporter, showcased the WMD speculations and intelligence findings by the Bush administration and the Iraqi defector/dissidents. Our WMD expectations, such as they were, grew largely out of Miller's stories.

To be sure, Miller never asserted that Iraq had an illegal WMD program or a stockpile of banned weapons. Far from it: Every time she writes about WMDs, she always constructs a semantic trapdoor allowing her to pop out the other side and proclaim, It's the sources talking, not me! But thanks to the reporting of the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz, we now know Miller was a true believer who grew fat on WMD tips from her sources inside Ahmad Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress organization, and that once in-country she threw a bit and saddle on the WMD detectives and rode them like Julie Krone from one end of Iraq to the other to investigate those tips.

That none of the official tips or the ones provided by Miller revealed WMDs indicates that 1) the Iraqis perfectly expunged every site Miller ever mentioned in her reporting prior to the U.S. invasion; or 2) her sources were full of bunk. Either way, if Miller got taken by her coveted sources, so did the reading public, and the Times owes its readers a review of Miller's many credulous pieces. Thanks to the power of the Nexis Wayback Machine, we can give the Times a few tips on which Miller stories need revision, redaction, or retraction..."

----------------------------

And who was Miller's source? Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff...Scooter Libby...including the outing of Valerie Plame.

---------------------------



Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

My god, most of you people (both you fucking democrats and you fucking republicans) are so fucking partisan and so full of double standards that it just makes me sick to my stomach.
That's the biggest thing wrong with everything about our government, our politics and our public dialogue and it's getting worse and worse as time goes on.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


Who believes Greta? She's a typical FOX hack. And who here has read anything by Woodward? It's like being hit over the head repeatedly by a wet noodle.

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Floridatexan wrote:
Who believes Greta?  She's a typical FOX hack.  And who here has read anything by Woodward?  It's like being hit over the head repeatedly by a wet noodle.

Who believes Obama?


Bob you are correct. Completely partisan nothing more.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Bob wrote:My god,  most of you people (both you fucking democrats and you fucking republicans) are so fucking partisan and so full of double standards that it just makes me sick to my stomach.  
That's the biggest thing wrong with everything about our government,  our politics and our public dialogue and it's getting worse and worse as time goes on.  

Facts are facts. Judith Miller went to jail and left the TIMES in disgrace. Scooter Libby went to jail. There were no WMD's in Iraq. I'll take secrecy over outright lies any day of the week, especially when those lies lead to wars of aggression for profit and political power.

Guest


Guest

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Floridatexan wrote:Facts are facts.  

Not any more.  That's all over with.  Now there are democrat facts and republican facts.  Just like there's democrat science and republican science.
And democrat journalism and republican journalism.  

Here's the very first blog comment on that politico story...

For Sal, dreams, FT and every other liberal obama supporter on this forum: A message for you from the Exec Editor of The New York Times Blog12

He and his ilk think this NYT editor is too pro-obama.

You and others posting to this thread think she's too anti-obama.

That group has it's facts and your group has your facts.  All based on partisanship.  And it ALL derives from the partisan media and the partisan politians themselves.  None of you get these mindsets on your own.  You get it all from them.  You're being manipulated and none of you are even aware of it.  
It's nothing but a big pro wrestling match except the real pro-wrestling is just entertainment and not fucking up the country for all the rest of us.  I can go to the wrastlin or not go.  But I have to live in this fucked up country this mindless partisanship is making for all of us.

Guest


Guest

I want govt to be transparent no matter the party. The tell here is that flatex goes back over ten years to point out an object of abuse... but ignores and excuses completely what is going on RIGHT NOW. Wouldn't condemnation include both?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

PkrBum wrote:I want govt to be transparent no matter the party. The tell here is that flatex goes back over ten years to point out an object of abuse... but ignores  and excuses completely what is going on RIGHT NOW. Wouldn't condemnation include both?

Of course it should. But it doesn't just apply to her and other democrats.
It applies equally to republicans.
They are both guilty of doing the same damn thing.
And it's getting worse.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:So it makes it more difficult for The New York Times to do its job.

Absolutely.

boo hoo

Who would be surprised that you would support President Barack Hussein Obama's administration lying to the public.



Was this a lie?

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:Facts are facts.  

Not any more.  That's all over with.  Now there are democrat facts and republican facts.  Just like there's democrat science and republican science.
And democrat journalism and republican journalism.  

Here's the very first blog comment on that politico story...

For Sal, dreams, FT and every other liberal obama supporter on this forum: A message for you from the Exec Editor of The New York Times Blog12

He and his ilk think this NYT editor is too pro-obama.

You and others posting to this thread think she's too anti-obama.

That group has it's facts and your group has your facts.  All based on partisanship.  And it ALL derives from the partisan media and the partisan politians themselves.  None of you get these mindsets on your own.  You get it all from them.  You're being manipulated and none of you are even aware of it.  
It's nothing but a big pro wrestling match except the real pro-wrestling is just entertainment and not fucking up the country for all the rest of us.  I can go to the wrastlin or not go.  But I have to live in this fucked up country this mindless partisanship is making for all of us.

It's cute when toasters strive to condescend.

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:Facts are facts.  

Not any more.  That's all over with.  Now there are democrat facts and republican facts.  Just like there's democrat science and republican science.
And democrat journalism and republican journalism.  

Here's the very first blog comment on that politico story...

For Sal, dreams, FT and every other liberal obama supporter on this forum: A message for you from the Exec Editor of The New York Times Blog12

He and his ilk think this NYT editor is too pro-obama.

You and others posting to this thread think she's too anti-obama.

That group has it's facts and your group has your facts.  All based on partisanship.  And it ALL derives from the partisan media and the partisan politians themselves.  None of you get these mindsets on your own.  You get it all from them.  You're being manipulated and none of you are even aware of it.  
It's nothing but a big pro wrestling match except the real pro-wrestling is just entertainment and not fucking up the country for all the rest of us.  I can go to the wrastlin or not go.  But I have to live in this fucked up country this mindless partisanship is making for all of us.

If you can't agree that the New York Times and the vast majority of the MSM are pro-President Barack Hussein Obama then you are living in denial. Grow up and face facts.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

What we have now is a country divided primarily into two main groups.

1.  Government/politicians/media haters when the government/politicans/media is democrat AND government/politicians/media lovers when the government/politicians/media is republican.

2.  Government/politicians/media haters when the government/politicians/media is republican AND government/politicians/media lovers when the government/politicians/media is democrat.

Yes there are so-called moderate this and so-called moderate that and  tea party and libertarian and other subsets.  But most of the politics and the politicians and the media and the population are divided into those two main groups.

And as I already said,  groups 1 and 2 have their own separate idea of what the facts are.   And they also have their own separate idea of what history is.

But the thing which is most bizarre,  is how group 1 fully believes that nobody in group 2 has ever had a valid or worthwhile idea about anything.  And group 2 fully believes that group 1 has never had a valid or worthwhile idea about anything.

Why do you think I keep using the pro wrestling metaphor?  It's because ALL of that also applies to pro wrestling.  There is no better metaphor to describe it.

Hulk Hogan and everybody on his tag team spew out exactly the same shit about Rick Flair's tag team.  And Rick Flair and everybody on his tag team spew out exactly the same shit about Hulk Hogan's tag team.

The only difference is Hulk Hogan and Rick Flair don't actually believe the shit they're spewing out.  It's all a fucking act.

But this metaphorical wrastlin that has the whole country held hostage to it actually does believe it's own bullshit.
One group believes half the country are retarded morons who are wrong about literally everything.  And the other group believes the other half of the country is wrong about literally everything.  
And because of that neither group can learn a goddamn thing from the other.  Neither group can find anything worthwhile in the other.  

At least the brainwashed masses believe that.  Some of those politician and media assholes are just exploiting that insanity for their own benefit.  But the masses of peons do believe it.

And the wrastlin match is getting louder and louder.  And reason is getting harder and harder to find.  Facts are getting harder and harder to find.
Open-mindedness is getting harder and harder to find.  
It's all being replaced with bullshit that is bringing this country down.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Sal wrote:

It's cute when toasters strive to condescend.

To everybody reading this,  I am so damn glad Sal decided to puke that out.
Why?  Because I almost talked about the "toaster" in that same post but the post had gotten so long already my fingers got tired of typing.

Yes I absolutely am the "toaster".  And for those who don't understand the reference,  it's not because I'm making a toast to anybody.  You can all get your own fucking booze or get it from obama or bush.

Sal is now incorporating the ideas of Ann Coulter into his arguments.
Ann Coulter is the commentator (and book peddling whore) who we attribute that brilliant quote to.  Ann Coulter proudly proclaims"You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster"

Such utter pablum mindless bullshit which inadvertently just says it all about the state of our government,  our politics,  our dialogue,  our media and pretty much our whole fucking country.  And now Sal has become a Coulterite too.  It just doesn't get any more fucking insane than that.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:
Sal wrote:

It's cute when toasters strive to condescend.

To everybody reading this,  I am so damn glad Sal decided to puke that out.
Why?  Because I almost talked about the "toaster" in that same post but the post had gotten so long already my fingers got tired of typing.

Yes I absolutely am the "toaster".  And for those who don't understand the reference,  it's not because I'm making a toast to anybody.  You can all get your own fucking booze.

Sal is now incorporating the ideas of Ann Coulter into his arguments.
Ann Coulter is the commentator (and book peddling whore) who we attribute that brilliant quote to.  Ann Coulter proudly proclaims"You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster"

Such utter pablum mindless bullshit which inadvertently just says it all about the state of our government,  our politics,  our dialogue,  our media and pretty much our whole fucking country.  And now Sal has become a Coulterite too.  It just doesn't get any more fucking insane than that.



Everything I know about Coulter and toasterology I learned from you, Bob.

lol

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » For Sal, dreams, FT and every other liberal obama supporter on this forum: A message for you from the Exec Editor of The New York Times

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum