Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why doesn't Woodward put 2 and 2 together?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:12 PM
Original message
Why doesn't Woodward put 2 and 2 together?
Edited on Fri Apr-23-04 09:15 PM by tridim
and go for the jugular. He's exposing all these horrible truths that are just devastating to the Bush admin, yet he doesn't ever come out and simply say, "These are bad people". The 700 million dollar issue is a cut and dried impeachable offense and tonight he said Bush gave a simple answer to the question, "Yes (we diverted the funds)", yet he doesn't call them on it. He just reports the facts and moves on. Keep in mind, this is Bob Woodward, one of two people who solved the incredibly complex Watergate puzzle. He's obviously not stupid.

I don't think we can simply say he's a right wing shill either. He's not, as proven by the accusations his book. Something else is going on here... Something big, and I'll be damned if I can figure it out. Maybe he should investigate himself like he did with Watergate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
KissMyAsscroft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. The job of a journalist is simply to report the facts.

I don't buy Woodward's bullshit.

He is with them and Im sure the book is full of plenty of pro-Bush propaganda.

He wouldn't even be allowed at the WHite House otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I recomend you read the book
instead of making such rash judgements, in that sense you remind me of the connies, and yes that book is IN MY READING Stack... right now working on Clarke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'll tell you what it is
as bright (and he is) as karl Rove is, he has not realized what bob is doing. He plays nice in the media (to a point), and gets access for more dirt to be exposed

It is actually very machievellian if you ask me, and he is LETTING YOU make the final decisions... he is indeed reporting, not editorializing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I'd buy that, but this time he wrote a book
He's not working for a newspaper like he was during Watergate. He SHOULD be editorializing, and he should be kicking ass and taking names. That's what I don't get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. He is, and he is a reporter not an editorial writer
he is old school, that is why I'd rather READ the book and come to my own conclusions and that is why his revelations have so much weight in DC.

You think that these revelations would have gone as far as they have if it had been an editorial writer?

For that matter, you think an editorial writer would have been able to get that close to the bushies?

Trust me, his books will be CLASSIC and used by Historians in years to come, if and when we win this battle
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
6. Because he's "Stupid Like a Fox"

According to Timothy Noah, anyway.


========


Woodward: Stupid Like a Fox
He isn't nearly the idiot savant he pretends to be.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Wednesday, April 21, 2004, at 3:40 PM PT


Bob Woodward is always the last person you want to ask about the lessons to be drawn from his books. Woodward is an astonishingly good reporter, and when he's got something hot, he knows it. But when it comes time to arrange all the facts and anecdotes into a coherent whole, he tends to flub it. Every book Woodward publishes should be stamped, "assembly required."

Sometimes Woodward flubs it because he's misread the data. That was the case with The Agenda, his book about the making of Bill Clinton's first budget. Although the book wasn't constructed as an argument, its thrust was that in putting the concerns of bond traders ahead of special-interest pleas for a "stimulus package," Clinton sold out. But the truth is that Clinton's first budget became the keystone to what may have been Clinton's greatest accomplishment—elimination of the monstrous budget deficits created by Ronald Reagan. (Clinton's accomplishment was evident at the time, and it's even more evident now.) Woodward's thesis was dead wrong, but it was presented so unobtrusively that it detracted only slightly from what was otherwise a really good book—still one of the best ever written about Clinton. When Woodward has a great story to tell, there's no reason to care that he doesn't grasp its meaning.

Increasingly, though, Chatterbox gets the feeling that Woodward often flubs the analysis in his books not because he doesn't get it, but because he's deliberately playing dumb. This is especially true of Woodward's two books about George W. Bush, which differ from his previous books about presidents in that they incorporate lengthy interviews—be careful what you wish for!—with the president himself. In both Bush at War and Plan of Attack, the narrative grinds to a halt whenever Woodward quotes Bush mouthing platitudes about the business of governing this great nation. One can't really blame Bush for this. All presidents describe their Oval Office experiences in a particular dialect characterized by tedious and self-serving generality. That explains why readers can never finish their memoirs. They do buy them, though. And Bush is the president. What's more, Bush has taken such a liking to Woodward that he now orders reluctant underlings to grant interviews, too. So, if Bush gives Woodward a lot of useless interview material that would be tossed out if it came from anyone else, no matter. It goes in, along with a lot of power-porn boilerplate about the awesome burdens shouldered by the commander in chief. Gotta keep that man happy.


As Woodward's burden of access grows heavier, the chasm widens between the book Woodward writes and the book Woodward pretends to write. By now, it's reached the point where assembly is required to understand not only the book, but even the marketing of the book. A case in point is Woodward's apparent reluctance to draw attention, in the publicity blitz for Plan of Attack, to his remarkable finding that it was Vice President Dick Cheney—not Bush—who made the final decision to wage war in Iraq.


more......


http://slate.msn.com/id/2099307/






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Thanks for the article
That pretty much answers my question. Let's just hope the fox eventually gets his chicken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 10:35 PM
Original message
Good you got it
Noah is far better with words, but that is my take...

he is crazy as a fox actually, not dumb as a fox, small difference, but that is my take.

Anyhow... read the book and do all the assembly you need to do. As a historian I am used to doing some assembling every so often...

BTW Clarke to a point requires a lot of backgrond to get it... but that is another good and important book
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Good you got it
Noah is far better with words, but that is my take...

he is crazy as a fox actually, not dumb as a fox, small difference, but that is my take.

Anyhow... read the book and do all the assembly you need to do. As a historian I am used to doing some assembling every so often...

BTW Clarke to a point requires a lot of backgrond to get it... but that is another good and important book
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glarius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
7. .He seems to me to be very cunning about keeping everybody happy
He throws in just enough negative comments about the Bushies to make himself sound credible....I think he's disgusting. Watching him on Larry King tonight was sickening....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
8. Woodward seemed to put it all out there
Edited on Fri Apr-23-04 10:00 PM by chimpsrsmarter
during Nixon, it seems without Bernstein only 1/2 the story comes out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
10. He's selling books.
Read and interpret however pleases you. He can sell to B$$$ies and Anti-B$$$ies. Both sides see what they want and he takes it to the bank. His mission is report and sell-you decide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
12. He's plain .......chicken!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porkrind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
13. Jeebus. I just watched him on "Larry King (barely A-) live,
and I finally had to turn it off. I couldn't take any more of his non-conclusions. I really couldn't tell WHAT he thought. Do you think Powell is a liar, or not? Just come out and say it! Please, finally come to the point and call them "Liars!" Is it really that hard?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 03:17 AM
Response to Original message
14. To me, the best spin on Woodward is that by not bashing Bush...
outright he might get listened to by some people who would not otherwise listen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC