The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.

Friday, March 1, 2013

Bob Woodard Gambles Legacy on Political Paradigm and A Lie


Bob Woodward
Getty Images 
Bob Woodward must have illusions of his days unearthing the goods on Richard Nixon's C.R.E.E.P. Team (Committee to Re-Elect The President) and the Watergate Building break-in.  He must have slept through  a period of REM (Rapid Eye Movement) and its associated dream state with images of "Deep Throat."


WIKI NOTE: (for the young readers, the current event uninformed, Fox News viewers and  to maintain civility in my comments section) 
Mark Felt
Deep Throat is the pseudonym given to the secret informant who provided information to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post in 1972 about the involvement of United States President Richard Nixon's administration in what came to be known as the Watergate scandal. 
 No, Bob Woodward  there is no "Deepthroat" chain-smoking and whispering hints pointing to the White House. Your time in the lime-limelight and what you have done this week is comparable to a tired and worn-out Ted Nugent. Woodward's contempt of the president and all things Obama is obvious in his choice of words (of which he is a master of wordsmith) and manifest in his actions.  Woodward's days of the following image are days far gone without prospect of return. 


Watergate personnel diagram created by Woodward and Bernstein's research assistant Al Kamen
Watergate personnel diagram created by Woodward and Bernstein's research assistant Al Kamen, 1974. (Image, http://www.utexas.edu)
Bob Woodward has literary and language acumen well beyond most people and he is linguistically capable well beyond most misinterpretation.  His motives were clear.  He was clearly practicing subterfuge, he was surreptitious and self-serving.  Let's not forget Woodward's sudden insertion on every imaginable televised news show since he spoke his lie. During one appearance he actually pulled an Andrew Breitbart and read of parts of the email STRING, that best fit his ploy.




His motive? Woodward's motive is clearly about money and exposure.  If he was able to pull it off he would have cause to pin yet another book.  He would literally have a Dinesh D'Souza like opportunity to make money.  The man is obviously a conservative and he is using his celebrity and his paradigm just as does other conservative money-grabbers.


The Atlantic Wire published a piece and a video of Woodward just before his ploy. The shell of a once credible and award winning journalist actually mentions Ronald Reagan the day after a Reagan appointee to the SCOTUS said "....the Voting Rights Act is a form of perpetuation of racial entitlements".   He mentioned George w. Bush; proof of a recent life spent in a dream state of unimaginable false reality.  He mentioned Clinton with utter ineffectiveness.


Watch the short video...


Read more after the break



Since Woodward has not been on a 10 year mission on the Russian Space Station,   I can only assume he is suffering from overactive dream states. Take a look at this once more.
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,.......".
Yes, Bob Woodward actually used Bush's fabricated crusade against Saddam to support a flawed premise that manifest as an intentional lie.   He would have to have been locked into some far away zone or waiting years for Scotty to "beam him up", to not realize the wrongs of Bush's crusade.     Media reaction to Woodward's ploy... Morning Joe here.... CNN (early morning segment with President Obama's name right-up front in the segment) here. Whatever happen to giving it a bit of time, have researchers make a few calls, and report.   Joe Scarborugh really should know better. Here is the full text of the email from Serling to Woodward and Woodward's response.
US News Dot Com
Here's the full Sperling E-mail
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. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding—from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios—but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.) I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is different.  Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize  Gene
That's 297 words of apology and advice with the "threat" tucked in as friendly advice. As bullying goes it achieves a special level of ephemeral subtlety. 
Woodward's reply, again from Politico:

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; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob That Woodward replied cordially can be written off to his being disingenuous with someone he wants to keep as a source (it's not personal, it's business, as they say). But given the full context of the exchange it seems he's being disingenuous with more people than Gene Sperling.
One noted republican response. 
   Huffington Post
"We Got Played": Conservatives Abandon Dubious Woodward Intimidation Story
Conservative media figures are abandoning Washington Post writer Bob Woodward's over-hyped claim that he was threatened by a White House official. 
In a CNN appearance and an interview with Politico, Woodward claimed that a White House representative (later revealed to be economic adviser Gene Sperling) had threatened him over his reporting on the history of the sequester cuts. Woodward's assertion that the White House was trying to intimidate him was quickly promoted by major conservative media figures.
 Huff Post Later today
Bob Woodward Emails Show White House 'Threat' Was Not So Threatening
Bob Woodward may have thought that top White House economic adviser Gene Sperling was threatening him in an email exchange, but that's certainly not how Woodward responded to the email, Politico revealed Thursday.
Woodward made waves on Wednesday night when he took to CNN and Politico to accuse the White House of deploying heavy-handed tactics with him after he questioned the Obama administration's account of the negotiations over the looming budget sequester. Sperling -- who he did not name at the time -- had told him he'd "regret" moving forward with his narrative, Woodward said, making it clear that he saw this as a threat.
Read more   We will close with a shortened segment from The Ed Show. The original video is available here   
Bob Woodward has again proven the shallowness and unethical side of American far-right conservatism. He exemplifies all that is wrong from people who simply have an aversion to the Obama Administration.  He no more thought he was threatened than he once felt Richard Nixon 'was not a crook". He knew better, but could not resist the 'money-grab" and an opportunity to wound an ethical, professional and effective Executive Branch of US Government.

Worse, yet some who once lived through a period when Woodward and Bernstein were unequaled in their influence on the nation.  Influence over ridding the nation of a corrupt administration, influential in shaping career ambitions of millions (Including this journalism undergraduate) and influential in showing how "right" is "right" and, despite overwhelming pressure to forsake "right", it wins out every time.

Woodward accomplished something that considering his obvious political inclinations bodes well for some who prefer Fox News.  I am hearing the lies is getting full press, many minutes of coverage, and providing additional close-up shots for Fox on-air entertainers.

The empty shell of a former American hero and
fomenter of international journalism through coverage of US  History.

The old adage comes off the mantel once again.  

"When you wallow with pigs, the pig loves it. You have lowered yourself to his pig pen....and you now Stink"

No comments :

Post a Comment