napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:13 PM
Original message |
Woodward is on the Daily Show! n/t |
Must_B_Free
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:18 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Woodward and Stewart whoring for Bush |
Skittles
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. I find it hard to believe Jon would "whore" for Bush |
Fenris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Are we watching the same interview? |
Must_B_Free
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
It was a little joke - because I find Woodward to be unsupportive of Bush, but everyone accuses him of whoring for Bush.
|
Fenris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
I think Woodward is a journalist. And as a journalist he reports what he sees. He's not a partisan. He's just a reporter. And a damn good one at that.
|
htuttle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:25 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I gotta question about that 'slam dunk' quote from Tenet |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-29-04 10:26 PM by htuttle
Isn't Tenet answering the question:
Bush: 'This will never convince Joe Public..." Tenet: "It's a slam dunk"
Now, I keep hearing talking heads characterize this exchange as Bush being suspicious of the intelligence data, and then Tenet's statement is taken to mean he's backing up the veracity of the data.
But it seems to me, that in context, he's merely suspicious of it's persuasive capability on the public -- NOT whether it is true or false, but whether it would convince 'Joe Public'. Tenet seems to be saying it will fool the public, not that it's true.
That seems like an important contextual distinction.
|
Must_B_Free
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-29-04 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
they were making the case based on whether it would sell.
This question being asked was "weill we get away with it"? Not - is this something we need to do?
They clearly were bent on going to war and finding a way to get away with it.
So this is an example of where I find Woodward to be incredibly damaging to Bush, yet people accuse him of "whoring".
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:02 AM
Response to Original message |