Richard Armitage was the initial leak / source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair#Richard_Armitage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair#Richard_Armitage
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Report: Obama brings chilling effect on Journalism
- Thread starter Espresso
- Start date
- Status
If you think that Obama is a better president than Bush Jr. you haven't been paying attention. Obama is shitting all over the Constitution, seizing unprecedented levels of power, and abusing power to levels not seen since the Civil War and WW2.
I think hes acting like this, because he has no defense force anymore. Bush was a moron and his people did incredible stupid things, but at least he had Fox News and Carl Rove to keeping his back covered.
The real liberal journalists are disappointed with Obama, because he never was a liberal and broke too many promises. The democrats do not know, what to think about him. The liberals within the party as disappointed, because he is no liberal at all. The moderates on the other hand have a problem, because the have to fight in states with a strong Republican base, so for them he is too liberal, so they will not back him either. He has no official defense force like Bush, jumping to his rescue all the time. Stewart, Colbert or Maher make fun of him like they did with Bush, when he screwed up.
To protect, what is the most important to him, his legacy as a president, he makes every leak into a personal battle, to show everybody what it means to give information to a journalist and to betray him. Because in the end that's what it's all about, every leak is a personal insult to Obama, because it diminishes how he wants to be seen by the public or history.
Bush was a simpleton, he did not care, so it was not that important what other people were thinking about him. He already was president. But Obama in his hubris wanted to be one of the greats, like Lincoln or Washington. You know Noble prize winner, negotiator between nations, president who killed Bin Laden. But so many of his plans went wrong, he is very much afraid how history will judge his presidency.
That's why he also has no loyalty towards his people. Remember Shirley Sherrod? She did nothing wrong, but still. She made him look bad, so she was dropped like a hot potato. He is deeply insecure and needs the approval and the love of the people. While W had this "I am the big cheese" attitude, tremble all before my greatness, Obama needs an applauding audience. But because every leak could reduce his fan base, he makes every time an example of the leakers to show everybody, what it means to betray him.
The real liberal journalists are disappointed with Obama, because he never was a liberal and broke too many promises. The democrats do not know, what to think about him. The liberals within the party as disappointed, because he is no liberal at all. The moderates on the other hand have a problem, because the have to fight in states with a strong Republican base, so for them he is too liberal, so they will not back him either. He has no official defense force like Bush, jumping to his rescue all the time. Stewart, Colbert or Maher make fun of him like they did with Bush, when he screwed up.
To protect, what is the most important to him, his legacy as a president, he makes every leak into a personal battle, to show everybody what it means to give information to a journalist and to betray him. Because in the end that's what it's all about, every leak is a personal insult to Obama, because it diminishes how he wants to be seen by the public or history.
Bush was a simpleton, he did not care, so it was not that important what other people were thinking about him. He already was president. But Obama in his hubris wanted to be one of the greats, like Lincoln or Washington. You know Noble prize winner, negotiator between nations, president who killed Bin Laden. But so many of his plans went wrong, he is very much afraid how history will judge his presidency.
That's why he also has no loyalty towards his people. Remember Shirley Sherrod? She did nothing wrong, but still. She made him look bad, so she was dropped like a hot potato. He is deeply insecure and needs the approval and the love of the people. While W had this "I am the big cheese" attitude, tremble all before my greatness, Obama needs an applauding audience. But because every leak could reduce his fan base, he makes every time an example of the leakers to show everybody, what it means to betray him.
[citations really fucking needed now]
lol, I knew this sounded familiar.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=76483983&postcount=27
More intro-level psychological profiles of the President of the United States plz.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Dept. of Homeland Security? TSA? Patriot Act?
Prepare to be disappointed.
[Non-Fox News citations needed]
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
Again, those are shitty things, but Obama has taken the Patriot Act and run with it. Hell, the whole of Congress has. Obama voted No on the 2005 Patriot Act and then reauthorized it as President.
timetokill
Banned
Ain't no transparency like Obama transparency.
Again, Bush did these things.
He also lied to the American people to cause an unneeded war and the economy was destroyed under his watch. Also banned Stem cell research! Also that whole gay marriage thing.
Devolution
Member
This administration has come down super hard on Whistleblowers, I wish more people would wake up to that.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
It was sarcasm. I was saying the Bush administration blew the whistle on a CIA agent, and as such they had a whole different take on whistleblowing, to which Obama could learn a thing or two from. It was entirely tongue in cheek, but I do believe It's ridiculous to suggest that Obama is worse than Bush for a few reasons.
Bush not only manipulated and intimidated media into helping to drum up political cover for a war that they knew didn't require fighting, but the media itself also participated greatly in that endeavor. If it wasn't specific stories that were literally ghost written by administration officials, or stories that presented problems for their narrative disappearing altogether - in some cases even with the intended author being fired with no explanation - it was the Bush administration using various other methods of intimidation to make sure people kept their mouths shut, and didn't say anything other than what they wanted out there. A lot of people wanted to blow a whistle back then, I'm sure. And, make no mistake, there were extraordinary steps taken by the Bush White House to shut those people up, and we know the costs of that degree of intimidation. Considering the many lives lost in the Iraq war, what President Obama is doing makes him an absolute lightweight by comparison.
Or, better yet, why did it take us so long to even hear about half the stuff relating to how incompetent Bush and his administration were in the lead up to 9/11, and how lightly he took many of the warnings being provided to him? There was a New York Times article revealing considerably more than the famous memo about Bin Laden being determined to attack in the U.S. People literally wanted to quit and leave their posts so that in the event that this attack went down, which they believed was a very high probability, they didn't receive any blame for it. I wonder what it took to keep all of that hidden, and to get all of those people to keep their mouth shut? Things like this are why Obama will never be worse than Bush.
And, really, I tend to cringe when the media is acting as if they and some of these whistleblowers are somehow innocent and always doing what's best for the country. I agree with the President taking very seriously the leaking of information that hasn't been approved for release. Does it go too far at times? Sure, it does, and I don't disagree with people who say that. But then there's plenty of borderline dangerous information that a lot reporters happily report about without any concern at all for how it puts people in danger, and I'm not okay with that. But, you know, reporters will be reporters. This is what reporters do. They report the news, and this is certainly their right. However, if you aren't a reporter, and are instead in a position of trust, and violate that trust, then you should face the consequences if caught depending on just what it is you are leaking. Honestly, I'm either a supporter or critic of whistleblowers on a case by case basis. For example, I was glad that info was leaked on torture taking place. I became pissed off when, long after we already knew this was happening, people were trying to get pictures and videos out there in the public that would only have led to even greater violence and hatred against America and Americans in general. They wanted this stuff out knowing that our soldiers who are already in harms way would suffer as a result.
Or, better yet, I was not happy about extra info being leaked than necessary regarding how we went after Bin Laden, or just in general the kinds of leaks that endanger our national security by putting at risk very important negotiations with other countries that are ongoing, or countries that are cooperating with us to help capture and kill dangerous individuals. People even get pissed at Obama for not putting out the picture of Bin Laden having a bullet in his head. We don't need to spike the football. We got the asshole.
The democrats had the chance to undo all of this, they had two years time, but they decided that they rather stick their head up their ass.
The Republicans are terrible, but at least they get something done, while the Democrats are some whiny kids complaining all the time, but as soon as they are in power and could change something, they suddenly sit on their balls.
Of course Obama blames now the Republicans or Congress or Santa Claus for not closing Guantanamo or other things, but they could have done it, if they wanted it. They were just too afraid of Fox News and that they could lose the election, which they did anyway.
blame space
Banned
I'm not gonna just sit here and have the good name of horse experts be dragged through the mud.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Wow, dude. Wow. Republicans are the reason we haven't been able to get shit done in this country for the last three years. Their plan is to literally just block any and all legislation. They have no ideas, no goals, aside from "Fuck the black guy in the White House."
I'm sorry your party has been taken over by extremist nutjobs that have no intention of actually running the country, but get out of here with your bullshit.
XANDER CAGE
Member
and he did a heckuva job
Yes, they are terrible. But it is somehow also very revealing, that the Democrats were not able to do the same thing with all the crazy stuff Bush was doing.
The Democrats are weaklings, whiny little babies. They get nothing done, even if they control everything, because in the end they are too afraid of change. Ironic because Obama promised change.
They have two or three people I would actually vote for, but most Democrats are about as useless as the Republicans. Just slaves of the lobbying groups in Washington.
Dude, I am from Europe and I am in a real left party not some poor excuse like the Democrats.
What is your real left wing party?
airmangataosenai
Member
It's always funny to me seeing people talk about the intel community. For many ,many decades it has been this way: If you leak classified information you will face serious consequences and investigations. It's the nature of working in this line of work. It has nothing to do with Obama. He would've been foolish not to crack down to prevent another Manning too.
Arrowgigantic
Member
Committee whose entire purpose is to complain about how journalists are treated complains about how journalists are treated.
SURPRISE
SURPRISE
Ricko Suave
Member
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He's got a point. Any European leftist party is to the left of Democrats, who are actually center-right.
The German SPD is also pretty close to the democrats now. What they did with Hartz IV and other things, while they were in power, was really against everything the Social Democrats would stand for everywhere else. Willy Brand would have been ashamed. And their candidate Steinbrück, oh dear.
Sirpopopop
Member
Sure if the democrats hated democracy, they could play the game the way Republicans played the game.
Carnby
Member
Check out post 1 in this thread. Good stuff.
Yeah, stopping something as democratic as the Patriot Act by using stalling tactics would have been really undemocratic.
All this things, the Republicans are using now, to stop the Affordable Care Act were installed to stop legislation like Bush was doing. But because the Democrats were so spineless at the time, they didn't use it.
The Republicans and the Tea party are crazy enough to use it for anything, so it's not their fault that the Democrats are such weaklings. If they Democrats would actually have balls, they could have stopped it already some time ago or they had the chance to stop things like Filibusters without the Filibuster, but again they did not.
To play devil's advocate, the whistleblower mentality did come around during Obama's presidency as social media and the like have exploded.
The Internet's evolution since Obama's election has got to have an effect on this as well. Then again, we are also facing some interesting times with privacy and transparency that we've never had before.
I wish more people would talk though, and that's what likely is leading to these leaks because people feel pushed down.
The Internet's evolution since Obama's election has got to have an effect on this as well. Then again, we are also facing some interesting times with privacy and transparency that we've never had before.
I wish more people would talk though, and that's what likely is leading to these leaks because people feel pushed down.
IpsoFacto
Member
Link
The Autumn Wind
Yeah, the solution is for Democrats to be more like the Tea Party. That will certainly solve everything. Maybe you should stick to your own country's political workings.
The Tea Party is crazy, but at least they take a stand to something. They move to Washington, they do demonstrate, the actually act.
While liberals or the Democrats are sitting in their chairs and are whining about the Tea Party, Fox News or bad weather.
Of course the Tea Party is winning, as long as the others are to lazy or to afraid to take a stand for something. If 500'000 people would march to Washington demanding to stop this idiocy, they would act, but of course this will never happen.
I am 37, I was participating in about 50 demonstrations in my life, I got pepper spray and tear gas in my face and I was arrested. When did you demonstrate the last time for something you believed in?
lastplayed
Member
Amateur astronomers all over the world would see that coming long before a month left.
Amateur astronomers all over the world would see that coming long before a month left.
This is actually not true. Granted, I took astronomy a long, long time ago but I'm pretty sure they taught us that for asteroids that we have not already identified, it is pretty scary how little notice we could potentially have. Really depends on the trajectory.
For already identified asteroids, yeah we would have lots of notice.
edit: here is an article on it if you want to learn more - Forbes: We Probably Wouldn't Even See A Doomsday Asteroid Until It Was Too Late
lastplayed
Member
Yeah that's fine, but my point is that if the US government can see it, then other governments can likely see it, meaning other people will more than likely see it too.
What that article doesn't mention is the context of these leak investigations.
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/05...anded-investigation-ap-leaks-explanation.html
More in link
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/05...anded-investigation-ap-leaks-explanation.html
More in link
Oh I get that, I just wanted to be assured that everyone knows well that there is no escaping death by giant asteroid
ridethepiggy
Banned
so because of this he is a terrible president? REALLY?? Perhaps he is terrible when it comes to journalistic freedom but that doesn't make him a terrible President.
The difference between Bush and Obama is that at least Democrats gave a fuck when Bush fucked them. When Obama pulls the same bullshit, there's almost no elected officials willing to call him out from the left. Aside from a few social issues, he's so far right that he drove the far right even farther, forcing them to take up positions that are straight up insane just so they can criticize him from the right. There is no liberal party in the US anymore.
Patriot act, in essence, started putting the governments finger up your bum. You really should check out what bush actually did, it's a pretty depressing presidency and power grab by the executive.
ridethepiggy
Banned
this post is just terrible. my goodness.
airmangataosenai
Member
I said "Wow". You have no clue what you're talking about.
ridethepiggy
Banned
Really, care to explain why rather than drive by posting? Obama has been absolutely awful on issues such as government transparency, violations of public privacy, war powers, and economic regulation oversight. All of these were issues that elected democrats criticized Bush for and now are towing the line for Obama when he pulls much of the same shit.
ridethepiggy
Banned
Really? Have you just totally ignored the Democratic Senators and Congressman who have called out Obama for the spying? Do you just totally ignore democrat voters who condemn him for this? Plenty of democratcs call him out you just prefer to make blanket statements about an entire party because Obama didn't live up to YOUR expectations. If you actually believed he'd be and do everything he said in 2008 then you really don't know anything about politics.
Yeah a few have called him out, the vast majority have done jack shit about it. Excuse me for wanting a president who doesn't shit all over the electorate and a political party that doesn't change it's principles based on which party is in office.
IsntChrisL
Member
Saying that "Bush was bad too" doesn't fix shit. Everybody knows Bush fucked up the country in a lot of ways. The fact that Obama is carrying the torch and making shit worse in many aspects is the issue at hand.
ridethepiggy
Banned
I'm not going to call Obama a bad President because he's been bad in some areas. I'll say he's been bad in those specific areas. He's done a ton of good and calling him a bad President ignores that.
IsntChrisL
Member
Well the same thing could be said of Bush. Any President that lived longer that 30 days in office, probably. I'm not asking anyone to call Obama a bad President. I'm saying that pointing fingers at the last guy doesn't change the shitty things the current POTUS is pulling right now.
- Status