Tweet
In response to the comment about White House disdain for the “liberal fringe” reported by NBC’s John Harwood last night, some are suggesting that the word “adviser” could mean this is coming from someone outside the White House.
Harwood cited “one adviser.” Now, “adviser” can have ambiguous meanings in political reporting. I’ve seen it used to describe top White House aides, but also applied to outsiders who may have the ear of someone in the West Wing. What did Harwood mean? I have no idea.
I asked Harwood to clarify. He confirmed that the quote came from “an Obama adviser.” He did say that the comments weren’t specifically directed at “the LGBT community or the marchers,” but “referred more broadly to those grumbling on the left about an array of issues including the war in Afghanistan and health care and Guantanamo.”
But the White House is now openly challenging the accuracy of Harwood’s reporting. Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer emails Greg Sargent and refutes Harwood’s claims:
That sentiment does not reflect White House thinking at all, we’ve held easily a dozen calls with the progressive online community because we believe the online communities can often keep the focus on how policy will affect the American people rather than just the political back-and-forth.
The White House just called into question the reporting of a senior White House reporter for the New York Times and NBC News, and it is being interpreted as such all over the internet.
This is what happens when journalists allow sources to take cheap shots from behind the cloak of anonymity granted for no good reason. The source doesn’t have to own it if it backfires, and the journalist gets stuck with the reputation for sloppy and erroneous reporting if they decide to dump it on you. Which is exactly what’s happening here.
NBC should release a statement either defending Harwood’s reporting on the matter or retract it. And the White House should identify Harwood’s source, because it doesn’t do much good to claim “we love you, we really really love you” and still protect the person who said it.
100 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Beginning to feel like the Christian right during the Bushco years. Used much?
What does the journalism profession (I know – oxymoron here) say about the use of anonymous sources? I’ve always wondered why they are even allowed.
But I must say it is fun for this straight, 71 year old, 32 year employee of the DoD, fiscally conservative, certified old fart to be cast as a pajama wearing, wild eyed member of the “left of the left”.
Don’t these assholes understand that there are some basics that people in this country believe in and will express their opinion on.
NBC and Harwood do have another option. They can name the source and have the source explain what they meant by their comment.
You are exactly right about the gratuitous anonymity that the press has accorded sources even when those sources continue to prove themselves to be liars. That is not journalism; that is being a tool for deception of one sort or another.
Dear John (snerk)
we’re just not that in to you.
all the best,
anonymous WH sources
Superb analysis. Agree completely.
Karma… calling on line 2 for John Harwood…
Someone in the White House said something and now that Harwood is getting thrown under the bus he should squawk loudly.
Oh, just a *g* at your comment from this former member of Women in Engineering (among other professional associations), former active PTA parent, who has served more years than I care to count on several boards and committees (having been appointed by electeds).
I may go buy myself some cozy new, lovely jammies just to celebrate my new ‘role’ as a pajama wearing blogger type ;-))
I have to say this much for the WH today; they’re making me feel positively ‘hip’.
Don’t tell my children; they might not take it well 8-0
Better still – have Harwood do a couple minutes of interview with the source, just to explain why whomever it was thought they were accurate or whatever in their appraisal of us bloggers.
My money’s on it being Rahm.
And the context the WH put out – that it’s not just the LGBT issues but all the whole spectrum of stuff the blogsare grumbling about – is what tells me it was Rahm.
Until that gets all clarified – I stand by my prior appraisal of “horseshit. You want to keep busting your Repug-lite agenda down my throat, Barry, then you don’t need my support.”
My jammies come with a buttondown oxford shirt, a nice tie, and a law library in which I spend the best years of my life, writing.
I’m going to stick with the gorilla suit.
From original Hamsher piece:
.
So the comment came on the day of the 200K person equality march in DC, but was about left wing “grumblers” in general, on a diverse range of “grumbles”.
Maybe the advisor really was speaking more broadly. But given the context of the comment–the day it was given and in the context of the segment Harwood “reported” on it–it is only reasonable to place it in the context of the equality march.
To be clear, this “damage control” is the bull – the original comment is what they believe (based on actions and past statements).
“Big boys” know its all about stealing, nor governing.
In any case they do not care. Gay Rights, and “liberal bloggers” were used to win the first term, I think they will need this help less next time around (household name, and balancing losing people on the left (by not doing things for them, and I am sure many will say they will not help or vote and really will) with the pickups in the middle (to me there is not a huge middle and a good number of them have other tendencies that move them away from Obama); but pickups in the middle would be some small percentage to offset to some degree and its really just a fake media/spin anyway as an exuse not to govern.
They are getting squat from me until I get results. Hope the non-PJ’s jerks enjoy losing power back to the R’s – who will be about as likely as nil to offer them a seat at the table.
I think their real aim is to try and dull and turn-off people who dig into politics and policy (those that are not part of the official charade).
Anyone who pimps out the “give it time” or related exuses can give it a rest as far as I am concerned (e.g., everyone must love that Obama got the Peace Prize – what’s next he gets the Gay Rights Advocate Award)? The time to watch what is going on and yell about it is every day (unlike the Bush apologists).
All of that being said – I think he is pretty close to doing what he said he would (with some major execptions, and certainly a much slower timetable).
- Iraq (as careful getting out as careless getting in == we are there for a while)
- Afganistan (the good war == lets keep it going)
- Health Care (no single payer == no (or gimped public option; what we did not know was massive deals with the money people).
- Bailouts (we were on the edge == money for rich and power and a big FU to the people)
- Gay Rights (here he promised much more, but I think in this one case he may deliver on a longer timetable).
- Transparecy (here he flat out lied)
-
Blogs, marches, petitions, house parties and protests are useful when the White House can use them to push their own message. When they are controlled by others — Cleve Jones, Jane Hamsher, John Aravosis — who question the White House, they are the left-of-the-left fringe despite values shared by two-thirds to three-quarters of the American people.
When progressives act like Tim “control the message” Russert did for Dick Cheney’s office, our utility is obvious. “We love you guys — we call you alla time!”
When operating independently, progressives are disdained.
hey, it is way past time for journalists to stop quoting anonymous and hardly ID’d sources.
If you cant someone to say it on the record, you just are going to have to find another way to get that idea in your story.
Saying an Obama advisor–is attribution to a world of more than 1000 people.
Put simply, they love the Left when it says nice things about them and hate it when it doesn’t.
Perhaps we can get George Soros to pay for PJ’s.
Could it have been a czar? They are notoriously unacountable.
Remember when Obama promised a transparent administration, no, the most transparent administration? We were thinking he meant transparent but that is such a liberal, far-left and un-serious use of the word.
re: getting ID of advisor–
It simply isn’t necessary to do so, imo. We know it’s someone in the whitehouse.
Just a gut feeling, but likely not Rahm. Rahm would have said
Oh, and…
- Changing the Tone (by governing my consensus with R’s who obstuct you, and be laughing at in private and public – the people (who along with the corps like Goldman) who put him there). They outright laugh in their citizen’s face.
So it’s OK to destroy manufactuing, software, etc – but God forbid we touch people at Corps who add ZERO value (50%+ of banking, and from what I can tell at least 50%+ of Health Insurance industry). So we can do without farms, fish, manufacturing our own bullets, our software and IP – but not without traders who “innovate” and HII’s costly “paper work”.
Save the industries where people can make money without doing anything!
Oh, don’t forget we have enought to spend more on the MIC than ~ the next 5 runner up countries, but we can’t print any fake money to help people (I think they just figure each generation will die off anyway, what’s an extra 10 or 20 years of life..sicko’s)
FWIW, “an Obama adviser” isn’t the same thing as “a White House adviser.” In fact, in the context of being asked to clarify the source, it strongly implies that the “adviser” does NOT work in the White House.
I’d also note that this is working out quite well for Harwood. Far from being humiliated, he’s the center of the day’s conversation for an attention-getting quote — which was probably his fondest hope when he mentioned it on MSNBC.
The only way he comes out looking bad is he tells who the source is, and it’s clearly someone not very close to Obama. If he keeps mum, there are obviously plenty of blogs willing to assume it came personally from Rahm Emanuel. So things are working out quite awesomely for Harwood so far.
heheh. Good one.
The only difference being knowing you are used during the election (some), or at least during the using (some more) – and not remaining blindly ignorant and silent for decades or a lifetime.
He can’t afford to, he needs the cocktail weenies.
been hoping to find some with torches and pitchforks on ‘em.
these are getting pretty threadbare and are a bitch in wash
Maybe someone not in the WH but still close to them is running their own agenda? If so this needs to stop and the person be publicly exposed or else I a Lefty Commentor will have no reason to doubt the Times story as a lack of WH action to disprove it will confirm to me that the WH hates Lefty Bloggers.
And to some (small) degree for bloggers. It’s already clear this is Rham’s feeling, so whack it back at them.
And the fact remains that this did come up in the context of Gay Rights, so whack that back at them as well.
So blogging is no good, large maches are not good, the powers are leaving 4 options:
1. They do something (haha)
2. Million person maches (scary number marches, or better yet a multi-million person boycott of specific corps to turn them into a dead “person” (that is to say no money).
3. YELL VERY LOUD AND BRING GUNS TO MEETINGS (the only thing that has had an impact in the last 9 years).
4. Vote them out, do not vote, etc – or escalate one of the above.
Sorry, I’m not willing to entertain a comparison between the Christian right and liberals. Furthermore, how much has to be done for the Christian right to show up and vote, and how much more of their agenda was left undone that was do able?
The WH must know it looks real dumb having the Times run a story claiming its from the WH and then the official WH has to deny it.
Which story is true who cares Lefties and Righties can agree actions like this win you no points from either side and won’t impress the Middle either.
Oops, I forgot one more option:
A big PAJAMA part! WOO HOO
I am a gay lefty who has been involved in politics for over thirty years….. starting with Stonewall in NYC in the 70′s. While the anonymous source should have spoken more carefully and the President acted more forcefully in the last nine months, I am getting really perturbed with a lot of progressives on the internet who seem to feel their agendas need to come first. The thread of truth from the White House was that everyone should understand the first nine months has been devoted to fixing the economy, health insurance, two inherited wars and defending against a Republican mob devoted to dividing America and destroying the President. Not a good time for some of our agenda. If we keep up the pressure we will get what we want. But shouting like a tea-bagger and cursing the President ain’t gonna get us anywhere. We need to be out there. Not just blogging. Where was the progressive march on Washington to counter the tea-baggers? Where is the pressure on Congress? I do not hear a lot of progressives giving Barney Frank hell for financial regulatory legislation that kisses Wall Street’s butt or Harry Reid for waffling on a Public Option.
Just more rumor mongering from “O”s staff and their pals…they’re getting a handle on how to handle the media and the ‘bloggers” with Harwood’s help….Since we are basically the folks that got these turncoats elected, we can also get them UNELECTED… and with their performances on a number of key issue like health care, GITMO, DADT, mortgages, etc..the list is endless..maybe it’s time they got smacked around a little.
Harwood AND the WH need to come clean on this one cause if they don’t the trust factor will start going down faster than it already is !!!
My PJ’s come with pockets, where I am going to put (and keep) my money.
Sorry, game over – no money for them…I am thinking ever. Given that I am active, donate, study, work hard, vote, and pay taxes – and we shall see what a Super Majority does.
How much of my taxes still goes to Halli-burton? Sorry, I just don’t have any more.
Good point. Slippery issue to pin down.
It is not a matter of what is done or undone – the assumption that we will continue supporting them regardless of their actions, that is the comparison.
And if the reality of what they have to govern is so far from what is presented to the American people – then its time as someone noted earlier – to get rid of the secret presidency.
Belive it or not there are actually some adults in the USA, and voting based on correct information allows Democracy to evolve.
Voting based on no/false information is what gets us in trouble.
Pop the bubble.
I’m not crazy about the idea of the White House tracking down and exposing sources, because once they are set up to do that they’ll use it on the minority of sources that need protection (people who expose misconduct, or expose really bad ideas before they get enacted into law or policy).
The real problem is that stenographers like Harwood agree to pass on these kinds of anonymous attacks.
“Where is the pressure on Congress?”
Are you new here? If so, welcome, and please avail yourself of the resources for contacting Congress throughout this website.
And no one is suggesting that progressives curse or yell or bring guns to meetings, so accusing us of acting like them is wrong.
To Jane and the FDL Gang…
I am a bystander who has a strong interest in issue of social equity, mainly Health Care, but I am quite curious as to why the comment have you all riled up.
Are you guys upset becuase the statement was said or becuase it’s true? My point is if its becuase the statement is said then fine, it’s just an unpolitic cheap shot, it happens accept the apology and move on.
But if the indignation is becuase it’s true. As in being the left of the left without the power to move popular opinion and relegated to misfits in PJ’s bitching then that’s another thing.
If it’s the latter and you believe its an erroneous mischaracterization designed to deligitized the bloggasphere then prove them wrong. MOVE PUBLIC OPINION on issues they are willing to appease their enemies on, while taking the whip to their friends. You guys preaching to each other won’t move public opinion or get you the things you want that’s like having sex with you sister or cousin – it’s just incestuous and deleterious to the gene pool (or the voting pool since its no widending enough to create pressure on the pols)!
If the latter is true, the WH is simply telling you guys that you have no power to affect change … stop bitching and prove them wrong.
Jane likes to castigate the VEAL PEN, but from all her statements they have already been neutered by Rahm, what she and all you folks need to do is strengthen the VEAL PEN so that then can bust loose from under Rahm’s influence. Take Rahm on directly and not just his surrogates. If you want respect then generate fear, otherwise accept the characterization and move on to the next issue on which you guys want to gripe.
“YOU CAN’T WIN AT THE NEGOTIATING TABLE THAT WHICH YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO WIN ON THE BATTLEFIELD”
Looks like we’re heading back to the glory days of FauxSnooze when “some people say” was the mainstay of the day.
It would help the WH if they had credibility, they really do not in this context (from parsing their other statements).
I will go so far as to say I can hear Rhamen in my ear saying things like this and “worse”.
We went to the Town Halls on healthcare after the tea Baggers started bringing guns. We did posts on Healthcare the economy etc why to get voters educated on the issues. We think knowledge leads to a stronger desire to fight than hysterical media induced hate mobs.
Because when the anger fades we will still be right on the facts and the knowledge that we are right on the facts and admit when we are wrong gives us Cred its what changed Bush’s sky high 9/11 poll numbers the fact we said there was no WMD in Iraq and we were right. We warned against the housing bubble. When Bush said Mission accomplished we said we were not winning in Iraq and Afghanistan and we still are not.
We are still converting Bush’s sky high 9/11 poll numbers Left. We are the majority Bush lite policy won’t satisfy.
If I went in that direction, I’d have to look for the tiger suit that I wore when I was my HS mascot.
I understand part of what you are saying, but silence is the enemy.
And we are now starting to get the evidence of what is going on (the only example I need is Health Care, its going to be clear).
- Bank reform….gosh just take Health Care reform and divide it by 100 and that is about as much bank/finance reform we are going to get.
- Transparency: No
- Guantanamo: Going to move it to Baghram or one of our other 800+ bases
I am pretty sure part of the process is petition the government and yell what you need loudly. Has something changed?
Do you think Public Option would be on the table at all if not for the efforts of this blog to get the Progressive Bloc in the House of Representatives to take the Pledge to vote against a health care reform bill that omits Public Option?
Public Option has been marked for death since spring. The only reason it’s alive today is because this blog, this one right here, moved public opinion.
Your prescriptions and advice are excellent, but they are what’s been happening here for months.
It would help if Obama had control of his WH hate us love us fine but first you hate us then you love us that gets Obama less than nothing it just makes him look like he can’t control the WH.
And by control yes I mean Rahm.
Also please listen more, FDL has specifically called out Reid as has Keith Olberman and many here.
Most people know Frank and Dodd are a different head of banks/finance.
Reform of the econ is where we are going to all get crucified if we get a series of half-steps by a half-stepper.
0 for 5.
Did the kitchen staff advise Michelle on what to have for dinner?
i smell tiny dancer
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2008/11/16/amd_ballet_02.jpg
Love that. Body looks like Nureyev?
Digby:
As I said, Harwood’s happy as a clam right now. He’s got Obama and the blogs fighting.
I think it’s a shame that FDL and other blogs took the bait on this so easily.
4 for 5.
Fixed it for you.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/rush-limbaugh-today-show_n_317257.html
Limp-Balls: Biz and ideology are “inseperable”
Darn, that is the most accuarte thing he has ever said (even though I suppose it is possible to “seperate” them. Perhaps this is the issue we are running into – Business has its needs, and policy has to fall in place around it.
Worked really great over the last 10 years.
I was thinking Peter Martins
hahahahahaha
dont tell him
he was swishy
Rhambo wants to be the biggest balled guy in DeeCee
that is photo shopped imo
Yeah, you’re probably right. I didn’t notice the source of NYDailyNews, and Martin was next after Nereyev in stage presence.
Of course it was photo shopped. But if cbl2 is right, and probably is, Martins is a family man and a real alpha male.
Rham prolly insisted! …snort
I know Nureyev, and you sir, are no Nureyev !
I hear your point, but that is how they think.
What was it earlier this year? Scores of people and groups appearing before Congress (granted there is a division of powers, but its the same party) – and not a single one to even touch on single-payer.
The other thing is that other than some fringe items (like oh, Civil Rights – which I guess tend not to be in the majority when people are under the boot) the “lefty bloggers” and the majority of the American people are pretty lined up on many/most issues (though not to the same degree, then it also depends on facts and sources of information as well).
No President wants to be fronting things when the poor (or whoever have aligned interests) decide to work together & have some idea of the truth, and no technology ccould be better than the internet for this (given some money, and not an impossible sum for a few billion people).
It will be interesting to see how places like China (and smaller examples) crack down on the internet, and what other countries follow to what degree.
Did you ever see him perform live? I did, twice. Quite astounding.
uhm no
http://www.sff.net/people/jsfancher/images/photos/People/nureyev.jpg
I do so love it when someone shows up out of the blue and starts talking about “you guys’ or “you people” and then proceeds to lecture us on what we’re doing wrong.
If you are in fact new here – welcome – but please don’t presume to tell Jane that she is not doing enough, or tell the rest of us that we are not contributing, and *acting* in furtherance of our beliefs.
Hang around for a while, and watch our smoke.
paid intruder i believe…watching progressive blogs
If I’ve told you people once I’ve told you a thousand times
NO ANONYMOUS SOURCES EVER!!!!!!!!!!!
Deep throat?
loved him like a Beatle.
‘gramma, why do I feel tingly when he dances ?’
Gdawg, thank you, but we moved public opinion up to and including the last election. Without the progressives who endorsed Obama for the nomination, and who then helped him win the white house, Mr. Un-named-source would probably be ward-heeling in Chicago.
Progressive bloghounds are not puppies. They can’t pat us on the head and make us (or bush’s twin shitmires, which Obama is showing signs of being willing to sustain, indefinitely, go away.) IF they try, we will shit on their nice, shiny, bi-partisan kitchen floor.
I aint a-marchin’ for 4 years of Bush-lite, nor, I expect, will a lot of other good democrats.
Good article. Thanks for the link.
prolly. Sometimes, though, ya just gotta tee one up. *g*
RedX@61 makes a good point. The ‘net is already persona non grata in some places which don’t like the rowdy-assed rough and tumble of “Town Hall Meetings” without the guns, and in which, EVERYONE can yowl. How long will it be before some prez and his administration get in bed with the corporations and start spaying and neutering the internet under some trumped-up bullshit about “efficiency” or “cleaning it up”?
cause,he just took your heart away
audiences used to gasp
Did you ever see him dance live? You’re right about gasping. Never saw anyone with so much stage presence, on top of superb dancing. One of the times I saw him was with Margot Fonteyn in some romantic ballet, like Romeo & Juliet. Still get goose bumps thinking of it.
Yes, of course it was Rahm. It’s always Rahm. Mr. Counterproductive. He needs to put on some pajamas and go take a REALLY, REALLY, REALLY long nap somewhere.
You too? What memories…
Dan Pfeiffer sent out another email to quietly whisper to us that everyone over at the White House really thinks we’re swell? Really?
Harwood goes on the tv and says repeatedly that the White House think that Americans who use the internet as a tool for grassroots efforts are naive, pj-wearing losers.
And the White House has a couple of guys send out an email or two to quietly appease the bloggers? That’s their response?
Do you really think that’s good enough?
Who’s in the veal pen now?
If that’s true, the White House could silence it easily by freeing up Harwood from his anonymity promise. Or asking NBC for a retraction.
They haven’t. Their statement was pure weasel-words. And considering the fact that it’s completely in line with what “anonymous White House sources” have said in the past, I find it kind of remarkable that anyone’s first impulse would be to say “Harwood’s lying”.
DrPuma, you are soooooooo evil ;-))
scribe: yeah, those law libraries can be wonderful places…. quiet and chock full of books; shelves and shelves and shelves…
But? But? But?!
If the WH retracted, or if Harwood came clean, then the WH couldn’t have it both ways.
So Harwood’s under the bus.
Yeah, Rahm has long confused offensiveness with “toughness” or even wit. And are we to assume that he thinks remaining anonymous is synonymous with being all-powerful and above us mere mortals rather than just cowardice?
The comment about the irrelevant fringe could have meant LGBT, or bloggers, or both. Barney Frank could say that and most people would understand it to mean blogger. Maybe I am giving Rahm too much credit, but I think he is smart enough to insult bloggers without helping them. He seems to know the idea is to divide and conquer not unite and conquer.
Why will Harwood not call the source a White House Staff member, a White House source, or a White House advisor? He will only say that the source is an advisor to President Obama. Barney Frank is an advisor to the President on financial consumer protection. Of course, the source was not necessarily Barney Frank, it could have been any advisor to the President. The only reason I mention his name is that his on the record statements are similar, except that it is clear that he is not insulting the bloggers and marchers even part because they are LGBT.
People assume the quote comes from the White House staff. Harman should clear that up one way or the other. He would not have to identify his source.
The truth here is “Progressives” have been carrying water for the MIDDLE CLASS. If Obama’s team chooses to marginalize Progressives to please the blue dogs, I recommend it bask in the sun because it’s sure to lose one house in ’10.
The Obama Administration’s only viable course of action is to follow the progressive lead and enact as much NOW as it can to help the Middle Class. Obama and Congreaa hasn’t done one thing for us yet and it shouldn’t surprise any, we aren’t very forgiving these days!
Jane, is this source trying to take away your credibility by suggesting he’s got your number on speed-dial — and that he uses it?
/snark
Teddy I absolutely agree that you guys have been amazing on the defense of the PO. But you must keep in mind that other more “main stream” liberals have also taken a tough stand such as Howard Dean and his group.
I am sure that the WH was not referring to Howard Dean when they called out the pajama pants wearing lefties. If I was in your position (PJ Lefties) I would bring the fight to Rahm’s door. If there was not a sense of derision in the WH with regard to the PJL then the “advisor” would not have been careless enough to make the statement he/she did.
Until the PJL can evoke fear in people that may support Rahm’s dilutionary policies then it will continue to be derided (I am just saying …).
On the public Option, the deal isn’t closed yet, its off life support, but it needs PJL to go after its real foes in the ranks of the dems and quit focussing on the surrogates.
Please reread my post you are apparently too quick to take offense.
I sure feel relieved knowing the “Obama advisor” isn’t a homophobe — s/he just speaks for the White House which suggests everyone on the left who disagrees with the President on anything should get a life and leave Obama alone. Now, that’s democracy!
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
I am not saying you guys don’t. I am saying Rahm and is talking heads don’t think so, so you need to take it to Rahm himself and make him a believer. Why are you guys talking what I am saying as some criticism of you, instead of pointing out that this would be the belief in the WH if they are willing to have statements as the ones that is upsetting you folks get out.
Incurable cynic that I am about DC politics and the reporters who cover it, I doubt that this will affect Harwood’s bottom line much, if at all. He’s serving the people his masters want him to serve.
If I were Harwood, I’d probably burn this source, given that what he said is just a slam at a particular political group with no official backing whatsoever. The message would be “don’t use me to put your shit in my paper”. Unfortunately, that’s not a concern in DC. In fact, I sometimes think that shit is all the papers are really for these days.
Don’t forget, Harwood had to pass this article by at least one editor. If they hadn’t reviewed it to see if the anonymous source was actually one who could speak for the White House, then they shouldn’t have run the story that way.
We Hillary supporters tried to tell you all he was a fraud. It was in addition to the fact that he was incompetent, had no experience and lied about Hillary and Bill. I am PUMA. Can not forgive him or forget the fraud used to steal the primary. And this just reaffirms what we knew. I am still so filled with rage to have this 0bama inflicted on us.
It was not an article, so it was not edited. He was shooting the breeze on TV.
Right, Alibe50;
Both McCain and Hillary would have made better commanders-in-chief than Obama. We know it’s so, because Hillary said it. :o)
One important point, I do not feel like I am “fringe” because I support a cause or voice my opinion. I represent many who feel the same way but don’t have the means or perhaps the courage to do the same. I find the remarks offensive whether the WH believes it or not. The last time I supported a cause, it was the election of Obama.
Wha? Still no name to the source? Gee, now why is that? The statement yesterday from this unnamed anonymous WH aide wasn’t something that would harm our nation’s security, so why the hell won’t the person come forward? Is it because it’s Harwood’s opinion and he’s covering it up by saying it’s an “Obama adviser”? Could be. Why should we trust him? Or maybe the person who “said it” is Barney Frank, you know, the gay guy who couldn’t shut up yesterday about those gays protesting for some attention! Could be. Or maybe it’s a republican who is on a COMMITTEE who would be an adviser of sorts?
I guess it doesn’t matter because we’re just gonna hate Obama for all of eternity because the wingers are doing it and they’re getting attention!
It’s funny that Dan Pfieffer is the one refuting Harwood’s claims, because Pfieffer himself is the person most likely to have made the comment.
The ONE thing this White House is really good at?
The art of “walking back”… And most of the time, like here, it is Rahmie Boy’s big mouth they have to walk back from.
And oh yeah, Gdawg? Rahmie Boy IS the Real Enemy of the Public Option, because he is the one entity with the most power to kill it. Take him out of the equation, and the DINOs and Blue Dogs wouldn’t have the will to speak up, wimps that they are. They only do so because they have the cover provided by RB.
We have met the enemy, and he is Rahm.
Also.
We need to stop the damn “guilt by association” circular firing squad. It’s ridiculous. And by the way, many, many bloggers are off there rocker, does the name Michelle Malkin mean anything to you? There are many good bloggers out there, but unfortunately there are many more bad ones. Any comments that some anonymous source makes about bloggers in general, could be talking about the flakes out there. And personally, I think many supposedly liberal bloggers like Jane and Aravosis seem destined to hurt the one president they might actually get some results from. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, a liberal who realizes that to swing the pendulum back to the left, we have to stop it from going to the right first. If you all weaken this president, guess what, the pendulum will keep swinging to the right….but I guess you will have something to bitch about, which seems to be what you all like.
It’s kind of funny that “Hillary supporters” feel this way and Hillary herself is serving him as Secretary of State. So you stopped supporting Hillary exactly when? There’s something more to your hatred of Obama, there has to be. You drank the Kool-aid and haven’t found the antidote. Get over it, become a republican, do something……but quit your damn whining, please.
Harwood is a sleazy guy, does anyone remember his spin during the election. He is a republican working the inside, posing as a moderate. He did this on purpose, he knew the angry left blogs would explode….and overshadow the fact that Obama gave a major speech in support of the LGBT community. Bully pulpit….he made a huge gesture and reaffirmed his promises to change things, but the whiny, impatient, childlike folks like Aravosis and Savage screamed, “no, I’m not going to be patient”, waaaa, waaaaa, waaaaa. It’s so shortsighted. It seems like the LGBT community would be cheering him on, helping him, raising his popularity so he can actually do the things that need to be done. But no, I guess taking potshots at him, applying the “guilt by association” game to him, carping at everything he does….that’s helping him a lot. Who needs enemies with friends like that.