White House Disavows Report That It Disdains Gay Critics, Bloggers As “Internet Left Fringe”

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/white-house-disavows-claim-that-gay-critics-bloggers-are-part-of-internet-left-fringe/

White House Disavows Report That It Disdains Gay Critics, Bloggers As “Internet Left Fringe”


The White House is strongly denying a report making the rounds that it views gay critics and bloggers as part of an “Internet left fringe,” with a senior adviser asserting to me that this sentiment “does not reflect White House thinking at all.”

Yesterday, CNBC correspondent John Harwood set off a min-firestorm on the left after he claimed that the White House views gay and blogospheric criticism of the administration’s foot-dragging on gay rights issues as part of the “Internet left fringe.” Harwood claimed that an anonymous adviser said that “those bloggers need to take off the pajamas, get dressed and realize that governing a closely divided country is complicated and difficult.”

Asked for comment, White House senior communications adviser Dan Pfeiffer emailed:



Whatever you think of the White House’s record on gay rights issues or the respect it does or doesn’t have for the blogosphere, paraphrased second-hand claims from a single anonymous adviser don’t really seem like grounds for sweeping conclusions about the White House’s alleged disdain for the online community.

You can debate whether the White House has been solicitious enough towards the issues that matter to the online world. But it seems clear by White House actions — the hiring of Internet outreach staff, the frequent blogger conference calls, the elevation of Huffington Post at press conferences — that the White House sees the blogosphere as playing a valuable role of sorts.

********************************************

Update: I should add that it’s entirely legit to be concerned about the administration’s gay rights record and the disregard some White House advisers (albeit anonymous ones) hold for the “left.” My point is that this quote, given the sourcing and second-hand nature of it, doesn’t seem like enough to get upset about.

letting Unnamed sources LIE about Obama? I thought this was a place to come to where we don't have to read the usual mediawhore crap?

If that was his intention, he did not fulfill it. If he wants to deny that it was said, he did not do that.
"no one from the White House said that" how hard would that be to say, if it were true?

Harwood just said that the "views" of the WH is that they consider some activists to be on the fringe left. Not that anyone gave any names...I even said it in a post in the thread with the video. Secondly the unnamed official he said, said that bloggers need to "take off the pajamas"----however that goes from left to right because both have said some BS statements.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x387190#387329

"one adviser told me today those bloggers need to take off their pajamas"

http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/11/white-house-thinks-demonstrators-internet-left-fringe-who-need-to-take-off-the-pajamas/

The poster I responded too...was talking about what Harwood said in regards to the VIEWS WH has that the LGBT community is part of the left-wing fringe. NOt the Bloggers pajamas which Harwood could be referring for both left wing and right wing bloggers----the media is basically anti bloggers and bloggers known for less than stellar reps at times. <---So posters wouldn't be offended to the bloggers comment. The poster was targeting directly the statement towards the LGBT community.

There are way too fuckin' many unsourced or anonymous shitholes giving their two cents. I'm starting to think, and actually I've been thinking this for a while. All these anonymous idiots are just the newscasters wanting to lie against the President to discredit him and create drama withi the "left", who they believe have become antagonistic against him---and they want to stir that pot. I'm getting fed up with people in the left not getting a clue and listening ONLY to the WH and White House officials on this versus the media hounds who are really just pushing their agenda, and using unnamed or anonymous sources as skins for their own idiotic opinion or faux noise on topics.

Secondly, with all the protests lately towards the WH and the push towards health care and pressure towards Senators as of late from Baucus to Boehner (congressman)---there's enough to say that the WH has done nothing of the sort. Not from what I can tell.

Emmanuel has on several occasions told the left to cool it on healthcare reform.

First you said that the WH has told leftists to hold off. However KO is on the left. Unless you're talking about Congress...and I've never seen specifics on that. IT's always some anon who's making a statement on that. Just to see WhiteHouse getting a promise from Pelosi that they'd vote on a single payer bill says otherwise.

That can lead into othe territories and highjack a thread. Sorry.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/10-1

Hamsher, who wrote an interesting response to the Politico report with a different spin on the above story, concluded:

There's a big problem right now with the traditional liberal interest groups sitting on the sidelines around major issues because they don't want to buck the White House for fear of getting cut out of the dialogue, or having their funding slashed. Someone picks up a phone, calls a big donor, and the next thing you know...the money is gone. It's already happened. Because that's the way Rahm plays.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-scahill/rahm-emanuels-think-tanke_b_185203.html

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/liberals-to-rahm-whos-fking-stupid-now/

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/08/19/obama/index.html

When progressives refuse to toe the White House line, they get threatened. Contrast that with what the White House does with Blue Dogs and "centrists" who are allegedly uncooperative on health care -- they protect them:

The Politico’s Jonathan Martin reported this morning that Rahm Emanuel warned leaders of liberal groups in a private meeting this week that it was time to stop running ads attacking Blue Dog and "centrist" Dems on health care.
I'm told, however, that Emanuel went quite a bit further than this.
Sources at the meeting tell me that Emanuel really teed off on the Dem-versus-Dem attacks, calling them "f–king stupid." This was a direct attack on some of the attendees in the room, who are running ads against Dems right now.

and that's about what went down. Now whether Harwood pulled it out of his own arse or he was cheerfully carrying tales remains to be brought to light. "Somebody" came up with the remarks and "somebody" needs to own them.

The only thing he said an anon said was that "bloggers need to take off their pajamas." Which, if it was said, deserves to be said to those on the right and left. Even some left wing blogs pushed nonsense statements that PUMAs and others were spreading.

there is no proof that either he originated the remark or that he carried water. There's more to the story and I'm waiting for the other sneaker to drop.

It ain't over.

Like some people that really do "care".

that comes out, no matter how farfetched or weak the source is.

with just that?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6756188

Picture this: a young George W. Bush accessorized in his baby-boomer Daniel Boone vest. It had fringe on the sides. You baby boomers gave us the George W. Bush fringe and we have the gay fringe in PJs. It's all gay.

BTW, the quote is from a song in the musical "Oklahoma!"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surrey_with_the_Fringe_on_Top

some of the so-called reporting on anything involving progressive issues is not skewed to drive a wedge between Obama & his supporters. Just look at how questions are phrased or headlines written - all slanted to show divisions within the Democratic party, splits among Obama supporters, etc., etc.

Everyone talks about Obama not acting on equal rights issues. Not true (granted I wish there was more progress on this and many other fronts). He has done quite a bit but cannot unilaterally repeal DADT. It takes CONGRESS, that's why he has kept reminding us to pester our Sens & Reps about this issue. Believe me, the Pentagon wouldn't have done squat without Obama putting pressure through back channels to move this forward.

DOMA must be repealed by CONGRESS. Obama again has reminded us that WE have a RESPONSIBILITY in moving this forward.

Obama is still a community organizer in his approach to issues such as this. He knows that WE are the ones with the power IF we just use it. That's how he was elected and if we were paying attention, that is what he told us was his manner of governing. He expects & needs US to stay involved and engaged in pushing our agenda through Congress so he will have the bills to sign into LAW.

If he acts unilaterally, issuing signing statements or executive orders, they can be tossed aside the next time GOP takes the presidency.



(off my soapbox and hopefully no one takes offense at my rant)

:thumbsup:

anything like that.

to your neverending refusal to face reality.

You do your cause(whatever that is)..no good.

Edit~Spelling.

Bush had buckets of it.

would make a statement on that stupid Mediawhore report? Good for the Obama admin and Bad for the MediaWhores and those who suck up their bad information as a way to take a crap on PO.

I hope this news is in LBN, too, bc that's where I first saw this scum last night.

whitehouse would admit to this? please. :eyes:

a history of doing just that, per digby...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8698241

digby did not say Harwood apparently has a history of stretching the truth. Digby doesn't smear people.

I've heard plenty of criticisms of Harwood, I don't recall anyone accusing him of making things up.

you want. Per digby.

digby does not say Harwood has a history of making things up. Digby doesn't make things up.

it's also entirely possible that Harwood made it up. After all, he has a habit of saying exactly the same thing in his own voice all the time.

Ya know, you think what you want and I'll do likewise, k? I'm surely not here to argue with you. Go find someone else to play your games with.

digby's skeptical about the quote. You could have quoted me instead, because I'm a bit skeptical about the quote and I considered the possibility it's not real. But don't quote either of us as saying Harwood has a history of lying, because, because he does not have such a history and she and I don't lie about people.

get it.

lock stock and barrel. No surprise there. He's the worst of the whiney "me" crowd.

with the worst of them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6545399

centrist democrats (including Obama) have already made it clear that they won't take left-wing groups (such as MoveOn) seriously. What more evidence do we need?

means a chance to diss the President.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-08/obama-vs-moveon/?cid=topic:mainpromo5

Obama "complained that liberal advocacy groups ought to drop their attacks on Democratic lawmakers and devote their energy to promoting passage of comprehensive legislation." Obama, in other words, wants his friends fighting for whatever it is that Congress wants to call "health-care reform" rather than fighting about what health-care reform looks like. <ie including a public option>