Washington Examiner
Slate: The refined cynicism of the president. "How do I get you to pay attention to this story? I could type out a balanced tale about an incremental change in White House spin and message control, relying on they probably wouldn't stay on the page very long. The second would excite the emotions. Conservatives would approve. Liberals would denounce it and point out the exaggerations. My editor would smile because the controversy would attract more readers."
your discernment, patience, and kindness toward all the creatures of the Earth. Or, I could say that Barack Obama is a cynical and manipulative liar. The first approach would get a modest number of thoughtful readers, but they probably wouldn't stay on the page very long. The second would excite the emotions. Conservatives would approve. Liberals would denounce it and point out the exaggerations. My editor would smile because the controversy would attract more readers.
"This is trolling. I've decided against it, but the White House has not."
"Prominent Washington correspondents are accusing President Obama and his aides of knowingly stretching the truth on issues like the so-called women's pay gap just to create controversy and keep issues -- and the president -- relevant."
...
"Basically, it’s an effort of creating a controversy for the sake of having a controversy to put an issue before the public and make the president’s position prominent. He wrote that the administration’s made-up claim that women earn 77-cents for every man was “stray voltage in action” because it created a food fight over the 77-cent figure, allowing the White House to strike at GOP foes."
Slate: The refined cynicism of the president. "How do I get you to pay attention to this story? I could type out a balanced tale about an incremental change in White House spin and message control, relying on they probably wouldn't stay on the page very long. The second would excite the emotions. Conservatives would approve. Liberals would denounce it and point out the exaggerations. My editor would smile because the controversy would attract more readers."your discernment, patience, and kindness toward all the creatures of the Earth. Or, I could say that Barack Obama is a cynical and manipulative liar. The first approach would get a modest number of thoughtful readers, but they probably wouldn't stay on the page very long. The second would excite the emotions. Conservatives would approve. Liberals would denounce it and point out the exaggerations. My editor would smile because the controversy would attract more readers.
"This is trolling. I've decided against it, but the White House has not."
No comments:
Post a Comment