Legendary Journalist Bob Woodward Calls Out Obama For Sequestration … “That’s a kind of madness that I haven’t seen in a long time” (Video)

File this one under the category when someone in the main stream media actually does their job and holds a president accountable no matter what his party affiliation.

Legendary journalist Bob Woodward of “Watergate” fame is calling out President Barack Obama as the deadline for  sequestration nears. As the Obama White House uses scare tactics instead of leadership telling Americans that all things will cease to exist, families will suffer, children will go hungry and the sun will not come up tomorrow … Bob Woodward calls out Obama and likens his actions to madness. Woodward blasted President Obama for playing politics with sequestration and putting the United States at national security rick.

It’s one think for Republicans or conservative media to say that Obama is showing a failure to lead, but then one of the journalistic lions like Bob Woodward says it … everyone takes notice and listens.

 Transcript from Real Clear Politics:

Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying ‘Oh, by the way, I can’t do this because of some budget document?’ Or George W. Bush saying, ‘You know, I’m not going to invade Iraq because I can’t get the aircraft carriers I need’ or even Bill Clinton saying, ‘You know, I’m not going to attack Saddam Hussein’s intelligence headquarters,’ as he did when Clinton was president because of some budget document? Under the Constitution, the president is commander-in-chief and employs the force. And so we now have the president going out because of this piece of paper and this agreement, I can’t do what I need to do to protect the country. That’s a kind of madness that I haven’t seen in a long time.

It certainly is madness. Yes, just imagine how the liberal MSM would be reporting this story if Reagan or either of the Bush presidents has done the same and put party politics over country?

This is going to leave a mark against Obama. Bob Woodward is a respected journalist and it is going to be fool hearty for Obama and his minion to tarnish Woodward’s image. Although they will certainly try.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta Admits on ‘Meet the Press’ that Information from Waterboarding Led US to Death of Bin Laden

Another White House lie debunked …

This morning on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta admitted that information from Waterboarding lead to tracking down and the killing of Al-Qaeda mastermind terrorist Osama Bin Laden. So much for President Obama and his lap dog media’s parroting that waterboarding played no issue in killing Bin Laden.

“The real story was that in order to put the puzzle of intelligence together that led us to Bin Laden, there were a lot of pieces out there that were a part of that puzzle. Yes, some of it came from some of the tactics that were used at that time, interrogation tactics that were used. But the fact is we put together most of that intelligence without having to resort to that.”

The Gateway Pundit reminds us that this was not the first time that Panetta had made such comments.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta Removes Military Ban on Women in Combat

In one of his last acts as Barack Obama’s Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta removes the military ban on woman in combat. The change will open thousands of positions to woman on the front line. The recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule prohibiting women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units.

With all due respect to woman in the military, this is a terrible idea on so many levels. The US military, Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines, should be about having the greatest fighting force on the planet, not an equal opportunity, Title IX experiment. Many woman might even be able to handle the physical, mental and shooting proficiency of a front line combat soldier; there is more to the role than that.

The Pentagon is lifting its ban on women serving in combat, opening hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando jobs after generations of limits on their service, defense officials said Wednesday.

The changes, set to be announced Thursday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, will not happen overnight. The services must now develop plans for allowing women to seek the combat positions, a senior military official said. Some jobs may open as soon as this year, while assessments for others, such as special operations forces, including Navy SEALS and the Army’s Delta Force, may take longer. The services will have until January 2016 to make a case to that some positions should remain closed to women.

The groundbreaking move recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule prohibiting women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units.

What is going to happen when a woman is captured and held captive by America’s enemies and the public brutality and rape that will be broadcast to the public? Will a woman POW have a different reaction from “We the People” than a guy? The answer is yes and the enemy knows that. Will woman who have to pass lesser physical standards then men be allowed in front line military action? Sorry, but men are hard-wired to protect woman. What is going to happen in a time of war when a male soldiers is confronted with that choice? Then there is the bond of soldiers of front line military troops, there is a reason why its called, ‘Band of Brothers’, not Band of Brothers and Sisters. No matter how you slice it, once you introduce both sexes together, the dynamic changes. Many are going to be quick to say that this is the same as when blacks and gays were not allowed in the military. Not even close. If people have not yet figured out that men and women are different, they have not been paying attention. There is a lot more to being a front line military soldier than just physical and mental ability. There is a reason why they are cohesive units and it is not because they are coed. After all, Men are from Mars and Woman are from Venus.

America, in the end some things are more important than gender equality and that is the protection and defense of the United States and its freedom and liberties.

FBI Found Out About Petraeus Affair While Investigating a Complaint Against Mistress Sending Threatening Emails to Another Woman to Stay Away from Petraeus

Petyon Place or is it Petraeus Place or is it Petraeus-gate?

File the following under, you have got to be kidding me. According to accounts, the FBI learned about CIA Director Petraeus’ extramarital affair while they were investigating a complaint from a woman close to Petraeus who had received harassing emails from the general’s alleged mistress.

The FBI traced those emails back to Paula Broadwell, a former military officer and Petraeus’s biographer, according to news reports. When law enforcement officials delved into her email account, it was apparent Broadwell and Petraeus were engaged in an affair.

The identity of the woman who filed the original complaint has not been disclosed.

This morning on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Senator Feinstein (CA-D) stated that Petraeus’ mistress, Paula Broadwell, was threatening another woman to stay away from her boy Petraeus.  Senator Dianne Feinstein also stated that she should have been briefed by the FBI sue to the nature of national security issues and potential security breaches.  In the end Feinstein added, “I can’t believe it. But, that’s what it is.”

VIDEO Hat Tip: The Gateway Pundit 

From The Hill, Senator Feinstein: No link between Petraeus resigning and Benghazi investigation. Says who? We were also told by the Obama administration that there was no terror connection between the Benghazi attacks and terrorism. They told us that the attacks were a result of a reaction to a video tape.  I am far from a tin foil hat conspiracy individual, but the timing of this resignation is far too convenient for Obama and the Congressional Benghazi hearings next week. Was there an affair, yes. Is he resigning because of the Benghazi debacle, probably not. However, why did Petraeus not resign sooner? Once again we are presented with the question that Barack Obama will never answer, what did he know and when did he know it regarding the Petraeus affair? Who really does not believe that Obama knew and was only going to disclose this until after the election? Who does not think that Petraeus was not asked ny the WH to delay his resignation until after the election and some quid pro quo would be provided to Petraeus  in return?

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she does not think there’s any connection between the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus and the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that resulted in four dead.

“On the events in Benghazi and his resignation, absolutely not,” Feinstein said on Fox News Sunday when asked about a possible link. “And I think if you really think this thing out everybody will come to that same conclusion.”

UPDATE I:  Woman who received threatening emails from Petraeus’ mistress identified as Jill Kelley, a local concerned citizen who volunteers to help the military.

MSM Bias … CBS Tries to Defend Withholding Key Part Of Obama Interview Where He Wouldn’t Call Benghazi A Terror Attack (Assassination of Ambassador Stevens)

More MSM bias and how the Corrupt Media Complex is nothing more than the Obama propaganda outlet meant to deceive the American public.

As reported at the Politico, CBS has been caught with their hand in the defend Obama at all cost cookie jar as they try and defend not airing a key portion of their ’60 Minutes’ interview where Obama wouldn’t call the Benghazi terror attack and the assassination of Ambassador Stevens a terror attack. This is the kind of interview that any media outlet dreams of … one with the president and the most important news of the day with an issue like terrorism. A sure fire ratings grabbers. Not for CBS, who inexplicably withheld the President’s comments so to protect their candidate.

Benghazi, the ‘Watergate” of our times and no MSM to hold a president accountable

Pic Hat Tip: Vanderbilt ’12

CBS News is continuing to draw fire for withholding footage of a Sept. 12 interview with President Barack Obama in which he said it was “too early to tell” whether or not the previous day’s attack in Benghazi, Libya, had been an act of terror.

That remark, which was not included in the “60 Minutes” package that first aired on Sept. 23, was also left out of a subsequent package that aired in the days following the second presidential debate, when President Obama said that he had called the attack “an act of terror” in his Rose Garden address on Sept. 12, which took place before the interview. The remark was not released until yesterday, a fact Bret Baier of Fox News called attention to earlier today.

In interviews with POLITICO, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said CBS had been “explicitly misleading” in order “to protect President Obama.” Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said he was “dumbstruck” by the network’s decision not to report on such a newsworthy item. On Fox News, Sen. John McCain said CBS was “not carrying out their responsibilities of informing the American people,” while conservative columnist Byron York wrote on Twitter that the network had “a scandal on their hands.”

Meanwhile, sources at rival television networks, who declined to speak on the record, expressed confusion over CBS’s decision.

“It’s surprising they held on to any of it,” one source said. “If [we had the interview], we would’ve put that stuff out the second it became news — again — after the debate. All of it.”

So what was the part of the interview that was cut from “We the People”? How about what might be the most key part of the interview in asking Obama whether the attack was a terrorist one or not? Shameful, simply shameful. But then again as Weasel Zippers sarcastically notes, it is not as though this was news worthy.

In the interview conducted on Sept. 12, Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” asked the president about his remarks in the Rose Garden: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?,” Kroft asked.

“Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans,” Obama said.

Hmm, I thought that Obama claimed, echoed by CNN’s Candy Crowley as she came to Obama’s aid, that Obama had called it a terror attack in the Rose Garden as he falsely stated during the 2nd Presidential debate?

Barack Obama is only at 48% in the polls because of a lying, deceitful and corrupt bias media that would do anything to make sure he was reelected including withholding important information from We the People.

As stated at Legal Insurrection, some one at CBS will most certainly be fired for this. However, not for withholding the clip, but for publishing it at all. Sadly, this is probably more fact than fiction. Is it any wonder why the MSM has not pressed Barack Obama on Benghazi and the murder of four Americans. We can only imagine how the story would have been pursued if the president was a Republican.

There is no question that the American people deserved answers and to be told by their president what he knew and when he knew it. However, with a bias MSM, those things do not pertain to democrat presidents and especially this one who the media feels the need to protect and coddle at all cost.