| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Home Front: Politix | ||
| Woodward book details Obama battles with advisers over exit plan for Afghan war | ||
| 2010-09-22 | ||
| ||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #9 Limp as a windsock ... [Bush] was asked to summarize the contribution made by his secretary of state, Colin Powell, to the war in Afghanistan. "Powell is a diplomat," Bush said mildly, "and you've got to have a diplomat. . . . He is a diplomatic person who has got war experience." The praise was notable for how faint it was; dismissive, almost, and revealing in the inadvertent way that Woodward's books always are. Bush is a self-confident man--self-confident enough to denigrate, slyly and publicly, the veteran public servant who sits as his secretary of state. 43 is a good judge of character. |
| Posted by: KBK 2010-09-22 23:52 |
| #8 The Weekly Standard's blog has a pre-review (scroll down to 11:21 a.m. Sept.22), based not on the book itself, but on Mr. Woodward's pattern of behaviour. The key word detumescence is utterly delicious in this context. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-09-22 15:08 |
| #7 ABC News: Bob Woodward: Obama Determined To Find Afghanistan Exit Strategy I'm sure Obama would find his strategy in Juarez, but only if he visited the place alone, unarmed & after dark. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-09-22 14:07 |
| #6 Imaam Hussien has released or delayed the trial of every terrorist and now we find out he is battling America's Generals regarding to stop the war against them. PERIOD. |
| Posted by: wr 2010-09-22 13:25 |
| #5 Frank -- "We can absorb another terrorist attack" ought to make a great campaign slogan for 2012, no? I want to see that plastered on every billboard in America. Signed, President Prissypants |
| Posted by: Infidel 2010-09-22 10:31 |
| #4 Woodward who became a bottom feeder during the George W. Bush years. Man, Woodward went bottom feeder in the George H.W. Bush years. If not earlier. |
| Posted by: Mitch H. 2010-09-22 10:14 |
| #3 what is most disconcerting is their fatalistic advance acceptance of another terror atack on US soil. I mean, it'll prolly be just the little people ('proles') that get killed, right? And in teh meantime he can continue on his apology tours, bowing and scraping to our enemies. *spit* |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-09-22 10:05 |
| #2 ...in most cases the other side can't even comment back because they are still "inside" the government. Unless you're the CIA and it's called leaking. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-09-22 10:03 |
| #1 In any Presidency you will have infighting as people try to get their views followed on very important matters. This leads to disgruntled folks talking to Woodward who became a bottom feeder during the George W. Bush years. I may agree with the disgruntled this time (seems a lot of military in there), I may be happy that Woodward is sticking the shiv into both parties, but I still think this kind of journalism is pathetic because in most cases the other side can't even comment back because they are still "inside" the government. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2010-09-22 09:32 |