Skip to main content

View Diary: Bob Woodward rewrites the history of the sequester (34 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Cool for you, you read the book. (0+ / 0-)

    The context, though, is bigger than just the book. You ignore the Fox News sunday talk show Woodward appeared on last week where he waffled and wandered and finally said "everyone has their fingerprints on this", and you ignore his WaPo piece.

    Besides that, in the largest context, you ignore how the rightwing crazy media has embraced Woodward's waffling to make a completely erroneous case against the Obama White House. Just google it: "woodward sequestration" and see which cites pop up.

    Context matters.  And Woodward, in context, comes off as a bought-n-paid-for FoxNews right wing shill.

    •  His WaPo piece was a prompted by misstatements (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      goodpractice, ffour

      by the President and Jack Lew:

      “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed.  It is something that Congress has proposed.”
      His WaPo piece was calling out a President, and one of his top advisers, on a misstatement of fact.  The President proposed the sequester, and his proposal was not "balanced," but was all spending cuts.  

      People who are focusing on this one short piece as if that is ALL that Woodward had ever written on the subject are being disingenuous, it seems to me.

      When  journalist points out a clear misstatement of fact about his own record by a President of the United States, that reporter is not obligated to go through the pages of details, in the very same piece, of the instances where the other side was a bad actor.  He references those.  But this piece was about a misstatement of his own record by a President of the United States.  And this piece was factually accurate.  

      He does not have to reproduce half of his book in addition to pointing out that the President, and Jack Lew, made misstatements of fact.  

      •  Context (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ORDem, ItsSimpleSimon, Eric Nelson

        Context of the Budget Control Act:

        1. House of Goop refuses to raise debt ceiling. Full faith and credit yada yada.
        2. Sequestration proposed to Reid by White House staffers Lew and Nabors. Agreed to by PBO under duress to persuade Congress to raise debt ceiling.
        3. Budget control act passed by Senate and House of Goop
        4. Signed into law by PBO
        5. Sequestration was supposed to be so onerous that the super committee would find a work-around
        6. Super committee did not find a work-around
        7. Current: blame game starts; no action by GOOP congress; Woodward, selling books, waffles on Fox News Sunday (it's got everyones' fingerprints on it, really???)
        8. Sequestration hasn't gone into effect yet, the GOOP congress could still fix it and this thread topic would be irrelevant.
        9. Instead GOOP congress goes on vacation and blames Obama from afar.
        10. You (and Woodward, see 7 above) split hares (ouch).

        Who owns sequestration?

        Congress, congressional super committee members, and PBO (imo for giving in to domestic terrorists). Also imo (apparently shared with the majority of American Voters) blame rests with goop congress.  

      •  Two different questions in play (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coffeetalk

        Thank you for your patient, scrupulous attention to the details which are a matter of public record.

        I agree with you--this diary did not establish that Woodward "rewrote history", as the title suggests.  Instead, it admits that what Woodward said was true:
        * the sequester was proposed by the White House and approved by the president, and
        * it was "cuts-only".

        The rest of the article is--in the name of context--, giving the reasons (if you are a Dem) or the excuses (if you're GOP) that the administration has for doing what it did.  And yes, those reasons/excuses/contexts are also facts, but they don't make Woodward's comments any less factual.  "I didn't do it", and "the other guy made me do it" are two different claims. And "who owns it", is another topic for another day.

        The folks who are arguing with you are having trouble admitting that Obama, Lew, and Carney are, frankly, wrong about whose idea it (i.e., the sequester) was and whether tax hikes were included.  By the way, http://en.wikipedia.org/... is pretty fair to both sides, IMHO.

        Not that anybody asked me, but this problem is hard enough to solve without the constant misrepresentations on both sides.  If I were King I would lock them up without food until they made a deal.

        Vote in haste, repent in leisure.

        by wrecktafire on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 02:25:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Silly fool you read the book! (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coffeetalk, Whatithink, ffour

        You can't be bringing  facts into an argument around here when people have made up there mind and it doesn't fit the narrative.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site