Is Woodward's "Bush's War" Pro-Bush or Anti-Bush?

[coloradodem2005]

I thought it was pro-Bush when I read the back cover and if it was, it would just go to show how far the administration has fallen when someone who was pro Bush writes a book two years later condemning him. However, it might have been anti-Bush but even so.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

1. It's what the intelligence community calls a "limited hangout"...

...tell some of the truth mixed with more lies and hope the public swallows it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Here are my working theories on this

Some of the quotse inside the book cannot be construed as pro bush, and even came up in the hearings.

The other major point that must be made is that Woodward may have behaved nicely, as it were, while gathering his material for this book.

I would say that I will have to get both books and judge them, for what they are. I am afraid that we are seeing the unraveling of a Second PResident where Woodward has a role, an inmportant role.

We may have to even say that he loves his country far more than many others do... as he has taken risks, serious risks indeed in coming out with the second book. You do not toy with the bushies and expect to come out of it without a major bruise or two.

I'd also advise him against flyng anything but commercial for the rest of his life.

[coloradodem2005]

3. What was the first unravelling of a President by Woodward?

If Bush II is the second.

[placton]

5. Nixon

[Another Bill C.]

4. I would reserve

making a judgement on the book until I've read it. It's almost 30 years since I read "All the President's Men" but, until I see differently, I would consider Woodward to be an old-school journalist who attempts objectivity in his writing.