Posted on 02/27/2013 9:59:38 AM PST by chessplayer
The Washington Post's Bob Woodward continues to break ranks with his Obama-loving colleagues by holding the President's feet to the fire concerning the looming budget sequester.
Just days after he wrote a piece in the Post exposing the inconvenient truth that it was indeed the White House that initially proposed sequestration during the 2011 debt ceiling debate, Woodward appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe Wednesday saying that Obama's decision to not send the USS Truman to the Persian Gulf as a result of these deliberations was "a kind of madness that I haven't seen in a long time" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
BOB WOODWARD, WASHINGTON POST: I'm not sure the White House understands exactly what happened in all of these negotiations at the end of 2011 with the sequester and the super committee and God knows what because they were really on the sidelines. But I think it's possible to take one example here where President Obama came out and acknowledged that we are not sending the aircraft carrier Truman to the Persian Gulf because of this budget agreement.
JOE SCARBOROUGH, CO-HOST: Right.
WOODWARD: Joe, I mean, this will resonate with you, I think. Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, “Oh, by the way, I can't do this because of some budget document,” 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” as he did when Clinton was president “because of some budget document?” 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.” That's a kind of madness that I haven't seen in a long time.
Woah! With Woodward calling Obama “nuts” I sense a little bit of break in the ranks of the media lap dogs.
The madness of King Obama?
One can only hope.
This is not funny. Obama is revealing a dangerous passive-aggressive disorder. In my opinion, a personality trait, if coupled with the inability to use logic and control, makes Obama a very president.
I sense Woodward is on his death bed and ts is his way of confessing his sins.
Ooops!
He’s off the “A” list - effective immediately
Woodward uses the term “madness” when referring to the POTUS’ actions. Is the worm turning on Bam? Certainly madness can lead to impeachment.
That’s a strange threat - firing thousands of Border Patrol agents - when our area paper had a recent ad for BP...now hiring.
He had better stay away from Fort Marcy Park for a while.
Well, Woodward is talking out both sides of his mouth.
This statement is idiotic.
How the rest of these libs have put up with this insanity is beyond me.
The constant lying, actual direct payments to cronies and fundraisers, the obvious thin skinned juvenile petulance, the hypocritical pretense to hate the rich, the insane vote fraud and vote buying, the absolute criminal mindset of the Chicago thugs, the constant pandering to a base that has lost its mind (and quite frankly has no soul); having to defend all this and come to the aid of a clearly inept and destructive regime every day must get old.
Even a partisan hack like Woodward has a limit.
He’s already gotten a call about not doing that again, I’d bet.
The older media lap dogs.
All liberals eventually have a “come to Jesus” moment. Not all of them have the guts to admit it. The other thing is, could this be Woodward’s attempt to break from the pack to become as relevent as he was during watergate? I sense that this will open the floodgates for journalists in an attempt to compete with Woodward. I can imagine that entire semesters were devoted to Woodward and Bernstein and watergate, they are liberal icons.
I have thought all along that no matter what your politics are - no one likes an a$$hole.
Everywhere O goes - he rubs people the wrong way.
I think Woodward simply has gotten a chance to observe him up close and has arrived at the same conclusion as many others.
Bob Woodward is seeing that this whole mess is going down big time bad and is trying to cover his ass.
I think it's a bit worse than that. Woodward is starting up Hillary's talking points. After all, she has an agenda identical to Obama's, so what can she run on? Easy: "he did it wrong, I'll do it right."
I laugh when people think Obama is the worst that can happen. Oh no, he's not even in the same game with the worst that can happen:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
