zappasguitar
Well-known member
You mean the same Lanny Davis who won't even name this supposed "Senior Obama White House Official"?
Yeah, it takes a "real man" to claim an "unnamed source" is out to get you...
You'll regret what you're doing ?
- Thread starter NOVA
- Start date
You mean the same Lanny Davis who won't even name this supposed "Senior Obama White House Official"?
Yeah, it takes a "real man" to claim an "unnamed source" is out to get you...
Are you really claiming that a threat never existed if you apologize for making it ?....again the weird logic of that....
How about abusing someone...does the abuse disappear because you've apologized for it ?
Just like Zippo chooses to ignore Davis's claim because he refuses to name the person that made the thread to his editor.....
Whats to be gained by naming the guy....nothing really....pinheads like Zippy would still manufacture an excuse of some kind and continue to make little of it.
Does it apply to all acts you might do ?
No, I stick by the claims....just because one apologizes for doing or saying something and that apology is accepted doesn't erase the fact of what happened.
Last edited:
Did he or is he coming out with a new book?
apple0154
MEOW
Thank-you.I'm very happy when I see people make up crap and get called on it almost immediately. People like Woodward.
A threat?
"Sorry I raised my voice."
"No problem. I understand completely. You never have to apologize to me."
As I said in msg #14 it sounds more like a lover's quarrel.
apple0154
MEOW
I'll tell you what erases the "fact". Email sent from Woodward: "Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat..." (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...ling-emails-revealed-88226.html#ixzz2MLRHRB3D)
You talk about abuse. If someone suffered abuse and the abuser apologized would the victim say, "You do not ever have to apologize to me......I for one welcome a little
Not only is Woodward a liar but a two-faced SOB. One does not say everything is OK and then go on national news and say they were threatened. Something in his head snapped. That is not the actions of a rational man.
No apology or the acceptance or rejection of said apology will erase the fact of the event happening....and it utterly idiotic to claim otherwise, it doesn't matter if
its a stolen kiss or a brutal murder.....you can't undo whats been done.
Now, Lanny Davis says be was also threatened by this admin. .... that only lends further support to Woodward....
Of course, the emails already CONFIRM the threat was made to Woodward, the rest if irrelevant.
The only snapping going on here is the sound of the electrical storm in your head ......
apple0154
MEOW
His latest book was published in 2011 from what I understand. An overview of his journalistic/investigating prowess is below.
(Excerpt) The real rap on Woodward isn’t that he makes things up. It’s that he takes what powerful people tell him at face value; that his accounts are shaped by who coöperates with him and who doesn’t; and that they lack context, critical awareness, and, ultimately, historic meaning. In a 1996 essay for the New York Review of Books, Joan Didion wrote that “measurable cerebral activity is virtually absent” from Woodward’s post-Watergate books, which are notable mainly for “a scrupulous passivity, an agreement to cover the story not as it is occurring but as it is presented, which is to say as it is manufactured.” (End)
Specifically dealing with the threats we read:
(Excerpt) For whatever reason—anger at the White House’s efforts to spin the sequester dispute; personal animus towards Obama; a genuine misinterpretation of what happened in 2011—Woodward threw an interception. Two, actually. If he’d stuck to pointing out that the sequester was a White House proposal, albeit one that was forced upon it by the G.O.P.’s willingness to force a debt default, he would have been fine; by accusing the President of doing a U-turn on revenues he went too far. And in accusing Sperling of threatening him, he greatly compounded his error and brought the world down upon himself. (End) http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...ard-throws-an-interception.html#ixzz2MLVYohSt
apple0154
MEOW
If that was a threat Woodward has extremely thin skin for a reporter. Actually I'd say it was more like a promise or psychic forecast. I bet he's regretting what's happening now. He was wrong about Obama moving the goal posts and rather than take Sperling's advice he spun the advice into a threat. As Bugs would say,
zappasguitar
Well-known member
What's to be gained by naming Davis' unnamed source?
Why, maybe backing up his claim with some actual proof?
Maybe being able to determine if his claim is legit or just more thin-skinneed Rightie whining like what we got from Woodward?
But who cares if a petty partisan hack like Davis just makes an unsubstantiated claim with no corroborating evidence to back it up?
Why, that's perfectly acceptable to partisan hacks like NOVA looking for a reason to piss and moan about something.
Thin-skinned rightie ?....Lanny Davis ?...you gotta be shittin' me, moron....
I agree Davis is a partisan hack, but the fact of the matter is, hes a left wing, liberal Democrat partisan hack...always has been and always will be....
special counsel to President Bill Clinton, and was a spokesperson for the President....has been on TV for well over a decade making excuses for and
showing support for all things liberal and Democrat....
and you calling him a thin-skinned rightie is laughable in the extreme and just spotlights your ignorance and utter stupidity.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
What's laughable is your sad attempt at diverting the discussion away from the fact you've provided no corroboration to back up Davis' claim...a point you continue to ignore.
Whatever...all that matters is you once again avoided providing any kind of corroboration whatsoever...Davis can't back up his bullshit yet you lap it up like the good little kool-aid drinker we've come to know.
Lanny Davis? Another token FOX whore who craves attention and just so happens to have a book coming out?
Really?
I was told by a high-level White House Official that Lanny is full of shit.