Umm, why is it relevant to this thread about your perception that the President had a thin skin because he refused to go on Hannity? Where did the President go "after" Woodward? Why is sending a cordial email by an aide to a reporter apologizing a "threat" when Woodward even said that no apology was necessary and it was not that big a thing?
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
frogger wrote: There is a Chicago style intimidation process that exists within this administration that is just plain wrong. They use varying tactics to discredit or demonize ANYONE who does not walk in step with their belief system. They are attempting to control the press and as a result the message leaving Washington. Truth does not seem to be a part of this message.
If one disagrees with the platform, they are discredit through character assignation, much like what is complained about here.
Tone is set at the top and the tone from the top of the democrats is ugly and offensive a good deal of the time.
Woodward is but one example of the strong arming going on with this administration.
It is just a blatant example when a loyal liberal reporter is thrown to the wolves.
What I don't understand is why stories like these below aren't offensive to you as a liberal.
Does the end really justify the means?
I learned a long time ago with my grown children that the more I explain what is wrong....the less they understand. Better to let them figure it out on their own.
The lesson hits home better.
