Bob Woodward's State of Credibility

[Opponion]

Bob Woodward is releasing a new book "State of Denial" which accuses the Bush administration of hiding information from the public about how bad it is in Iraq.Â*Â*He claims that the administration knows that the insurgents are out of control, attacking the US troops once every 4 hours on average.

Setting aside his accusations, my question is: do this guy have any credibility left?

He knew the CIA leak case from the start, but didn't tell anyone.Â*Â*He and his whitewater buddy misled the public about the "Deep Throat" identity for decades and let the whole nation onto a big guessing game.Â*Â*He wrote many books, each of which has been biased for marketing purpose.Â*Â*The most of all, insiders have said that in his first version "All President's Men", there was no such a character as "Deep Throat".Â*Â*That version was rejected by the publisher for not sexy or sleazy enough.Â*Â*So, he and his buddy came back with the second version that created the infamous "Deep Throat".Â*Â*No wonder when who the "Deep Throat" was revealed, he and Berstein had to get together for an extended period of time to set their story in sync.

Bob Woodward is wearing the mask of a journalist.Â*Â*But he has been profiting left and right from books that tell biased stories.Â*Â*Here he comes again.Â*Â*Should real journalists have such agendas like selling sleazy books?Â*Â*

He really should be writing "Selling Sleazy Books for Dumbasses" (http://www.opponion.com/about99.html)

[lily]

Welcome Opponion!


Setting aside his accusations, my question is: do this guy have any credibility left?

You must have been reading my mind as I read the first paragraph. Him, Novak and Miller sold their credibility right out the window....right along with their souls they sold to the devil.

[piratemonkey]

Setting aside his accusations, my question is: do this guy have any credibility left?

This says it all.

Set aside the facts, the reports, the evidence and discredit the messenger.

Very typical, very predictable ad hominem attack made when people don't like the facts they're being told.

[BoogyMan]

This says it all.

Set aside the facts, the reports, the evidence and discredit the messenger.

Very typical, very predictable ad hominem attack made when people don't like the facts they're being told.


I don't know that any 'facts' have been presented.Â*Â*This book is an opinion piece just like most other books released either for or against the war and many other topics.

I don't know that he has any more credibility than any other source out there, however, I don't call any anti-Bush commentary 'fact' as piratemonkey does either.

[Rider]

IMO Woodward lost whatever credibility he once had when he tried to push the "deathbed" confession of William Casey. That was a sad day for journalism.

[ECW]

This says it all.

Set aside the facts, the reports, the evidence and discredit the messenger.

Very typical, very predictable ad hominem attack made when people don't like the facts they're being told.


I don't know that any 'facts' have been presented.Â*Â*This book is an opinion piece just like most other books released either for or against the war and many other topics.

I don't know that he has any more credibility than any other source out there, however, I don't call any anti-Bush commentary 'fact' as piratemonkey does either.


And I got a nickel that says you haven't read the book so you don't know if any "facts" have been presented or not. If you want to read an opinion book without any facts stick with Ann Stickfigure Coulter. As for Woodward, I'll reserve judgement on whether his book is credible or not until I read it for myself.

[piratemonkey]

I don't know that any 'facts' have been presented.Â*Â*

I do.

The White House ignored an urgent warning in September 2003 from a top Iraq adviser who said that thousands of additional American troops were desperately needed to quell the insurgency there..

The fact that this advisor warned Bush in Sept 2003 can surely be documented, as can the fact that no more troops were sent after the warning.

On July 10, 2001, the book says, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, met with Ms. Rice at the White House to impress upon her the seriousness of the intelligence the agency was collecting about an impending attack. But both men came away from the meeting feeling that Ms. Rice had not taken the warnings seriously.

So these are the opinions of George Tenet and Cofer Black.Â*Â*You remember Tenet, right?

He's the one Bush gave the Congressional Medal of Freedom to.Â*Â*
(Course he's just a lying liberal trying to undercut the President and help terrorists.)

And this is just the start...

[BoogyMan]

This says it all.

Set aside the facts, the reports, the evidence and discredit the messenger.

Very typical, very predictable ad hominem attack made when people don't like the facts they're being told.


I don't know that any 'facts' have been presented.Â*Â*This book is an opinion piece just like most other books released either for or against the war and many other topics.

I don't know that he has any more credibility than any other source out there, however, I don't call any anti-Bush commentary 'fact' as piratemonkey does either.


And I got a nickel that says you haven't read the book so you don't know if any "facts" have been presented or not. If you want to read an opinion book without any facts stick with Ann Stickfigure Coulter. As for Woodward, I'll reserve judgement on whether his book is credible or not until I read it for myself.


That was pretty much what I was trying to get across only without the invective. You angry liberals are so entertaining.

[BoogyMan]

I don't know that any 'facts' have been presented.Â*Â*

I do.

The White House ignored an urgent warning in September 2003 from a top Iraq adviser who said that thousands of additional American troops were desperately needed to quell the insurgency there..

The fact that this advisor warned Bush in Sept 2003 can surely be documented, as can the fact that no more troops were sent after the warning.

On July 10, 2001, the book says, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, met with Ms. Rice at the White House to impress upon her the seriousness of the intelligence the agency was collecting about an impending attack. But both men came away from the meeting feeling that Ms. Rice had not taken the warnings seriously.

So these are the opinions of George Tenet and Cofer Black.Â*Â*You remember Tenet, right?

He's the one Bush gave the Congressional Medal of Freedom to.Â*Â*
(Course he's just a lying liberal trying to undercut the President and help terrorists.)

And this is just the start...


Unless you have a man on the inside of this administration your 'facts' are just your hatred for the administration fueled by a journalist who agrees with you.

[Labrocca]

haha...so funny...nothing in this book as far as I can tell is new information. Yeah some people advised Bush to add more troops and others didn't think it necessary. There is no FACT that more troops would have been better. It's conjecture at most.

This is just a guy cashing in on his name by slandering another name that people love to hate...BUSH. Nothing to see here people...at least nothing new.

[piratemonkey]

It's conjecture at most.

...at least nothing new.

Fact: Bush has said ad nauseum that he would send more troops if the advisors on the ground in Iraq said they needed 'em.

Fact: In 2003, they did.

Fact: He didn't send more troops.


What about the above is in any way conjecture?
Did you know this before today?