So the Washington Post is calling the Baingate situation

[mucifer]

nothing more than nasty name calling from both sides:

President Obama’s campaign has spent many months trying to portray Mitt Romney as an unprincipled flip-flopper, a panderer to right-wing extremists and a greedy business executive. Then this week the ante was upped when one Obama aide suggested that Romney may be something worse: a potential felon.

The latest charge, made by deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter in a conference call with reporters, provoked immediate outrage from the Romney campaign, which, in the course of demanding an apology, called the president of the United States a habitual liar.

The intensified hostility and persistent name-calling dominated the campaign news Friday and signaled that the presidential contest was entering a new phase, moving from relentlessly negative to downright nasty. And in a sign that the tactics were taking a toll on both sides, each candidate felt compelled to conduct a series of television interviews to respond to the criticisms from the other camp.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2012-campaign-enters-a-new-phase-as-obama-and-romney-rachet-up-their-attacks-on-each-other/2012/07/13/gJQAofMqiW_story.html?hpid=z1



Looks like Rmoney's tactics are working.

[snappyturtle]

1. You're right...I'll join you....

[progressivebydesign]

2. This is why our "journalists" SUCK in America.

They see everything through the lens of a 20 year old sorority girl. This is NOT a he said - he said, there is ACTUAL things to investigate. Or do newspaper reporters even DO that anymore???

I'm grateful for the TRUE journalists out there, be they few and far between. The pampered, manicured, Hampton-Summering, ass kissers, that pass for journalists nowadays are a disgrace to the profession.

For god's sake WaPo, can you at least TRY to investigate this shit? It's right there in front of your noses. This is NOT name-calling, this is a fucking pulitzer prize in your lap. But you act like it's a sorority election.

[coalition_unwilling]

3. If Romney wasn't CEO from 1999-2002, who was the CEO? It's really that fucking simple. - n/t

[Igel]

9. No, it's not.

Hence the "name calling" allegation.

You can be CEO and not be actively managing. Usually that's considered a bad thing, but sometimes it's by consent of the board and the CEO. Sometimes it's by consent of the board and the CEO only retroactively. On occasion it's a good thing.

You can be on the board of an organization and not be actively managing its day-to-day affairs. As a matter of fact, having the board actively manage the day-to-day affairs of a company is considered a really bad business practice. Unless, of course, the "board" consists of the owner-managers, then it may be inevitable.

The small company I worked for had a stupid set up. Founder/president had 51% of the shares and was prohibited from selling her shares for so many years, and from splitting them into smaller chunks. Sell 51% or 0%, that's the options. VP had 49% of the shares, same limits. Whoever had 51% was president. Whoever had 49% was VP. The president couldn't fire the VP. The president couldn't quit unless she sold all her shares. I'm sure it seemed like a good idea when they drew up the paperwork. It was stupid. Still, either could have delegated all responsibility to a manager.

[coalition_unwilling]

10. I was speaking somewhat metaphorically (about the decline of journalism) and what I really

meant (and probably should have elaborated on) was this:

If Romney wasn't calling the shots at Bain, who was calling the shots at Bain? This should be a very easy question for any thinking journalist to ask and for Romney's people to answer and document. If they cannot or will not answer that simple question, the failure to respond itself becomes a part of the story. Journalism 101 (at least when I practiced it 30 years ago).

[Rosanna Lopez]

5. Journalism died a long time ago

Journalism in America died when members of the media signed onto Operation Mockingbird, and agreed to participate as 'assets' in a deliberate campaign of misinformation and propaganda - something that the mainstream outlets are still doing today.

[XemaSab]

4. OBAMA's calling Romney a flip-flopper?

Romney's own damn record is calling Romney a flip-flopper.

[just1voice]

6. Mutt Robme should be tried for his crimes or else politics is all just a corrupt show

You guess which will happen.

[demgrrrll]

7. This reporter has a big photo of Romney on his facebook page, so.............

there you have it, and there you are..........

[CBHagman]

8. The Post likes to decide on a narrative and stick to it, even if facts contradict it.

While there are various Washington Post cartoonists, critics, columnists, and reporters (e.g., Tom Toles, Ezra Klein, E.J. Dionne, Michael Dirda, the late Mary McGrory, the late Herblock) I admire, over the years the publication itself has indulged too frequently in picking a narrative and running with it, rather than focusing on the facts. For instance, they've painted Ronald Reagan as having left the presidency with unquestioned popularity and Bill Clinton as having departed under a cloud of controversy, when in reality approval ratings went up and down for both men, and Clinton's were healthy when he ended his second term.

The Post's latest shtick is "But both sides do it, of course," a mantra recited dutifully every time someone mentions GOP filibuster overuse, intransigence, and outright boorishness. They've also showed a marked tendency to begrudge Democrats positive press. A recent headline was something on the order of "Obama fails to botch response to such-and-such," and it was downright painful to read the top half of page A1 the day Al Gore's Nobel Prize was announced.

The Post also has displayed a massive contempt for its subscribers, omitting coverage of a great many stories but for a grudging "For more, look online." But hey, they always got room for Rielle Hunter and the Salahis.