Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Woodward on MTP Now!

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:47 AM
Original message
Woodward on MTP Now!
exposing bush* lies about Iraq. Showing 'classified' graph that exposes bush* lies.

Says US needs some truth telling. No shit.

Says Cheney called him and says he was upset that Woodward quoted him, called his story (about Kissinger) bullshit and hung up on him.

LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madame defarge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. Just found this at TPM RE: Woodward & Ohio 2004 elections
Let us know if he talks about this!!!

Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)

I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.


Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)
mjrosenberg's picture
By M.J. Rosenberg | bio

I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.

section break

On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."

Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.

The rest is history.

Does something about this story stink to high heaven!



http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. The book indeed
says that Carville told the White House that Kerry was considering contesting Ohio. But there is nothing in the book that indicates that the White House did anything to keep Kerry from doing so. In fact, the book makes it clear that the decision not to use one of three options to contest Ohio was entirely Kerry's.

Everything in the book regarding Ohio supports, in my opinion, the belief that the democratic vote was not counted. Kerry seemed aware of that. He could have contested it, but choose not to for two reasons: he felt it could be damaging to the country to have two contested national elections in a row, and he was convinced that even though he was correct, he would not win the struggle. Neither of these beliefs hinged on what Carville told people in the WH, or what they did in response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
2. He's ripping this admin and countering claims he didn't speak to people
like Kissinger, Scowcroft, etc.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. While I did not
see him on MTP this morning, I've watched him respond to critics in the past week. They aren't going to win the debate by challenging him on sources or the accuracy of his quotes.

While I do not like Woodward, I found this book a very impressive indictment of the administration. It is by far Woodward's best book (I am not including Woodward-Bernstein efforts).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Does he go into PNAC and the massive transfer of wealth the Bushco has
accomplished, or is this just about their incompetence and lies to war?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. The book is
pretty focused on picking up the story about the war, from about where he left off with the second book. That includes some information on the expense of the Bush-Cheney investment in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Hmm, writing about this administration and not going into PNAC seems
incomprehensible to me, but probably the dirt on the Bushes will fill volumes and he's leaving these important little tidbits for his next book. Or another writer.

Of course by then the family may be safely in exile.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. PNAC
was from before the information covered in this book. Some of the information regarding the people involved in PNAC is found in the second book "Plan of Attack."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Thank you for reading them and reporting back, so that I don't have to.
So many good books and excellent writers, Woodward is not my first choice. It is good to know what he covers in depth (and what he notes as an aside), since people do pay attention to his words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. I would guess
that the majority of DUers could read this book from cover to cover, and not encounter anything new. At least not anything of significance. There are some conversations between a few players that may not have been reported on progressive sites, but I honestly think DU gives a fuller analysis of the issues involved in the Iraq mess than Woodward.

If I were to list the top ten things missing from BW's three books, the full PNAC picture would have to be at the top. He makes brief mention of Plame, but ignores things like the neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal entirely. He is not nearly as honest or accurate as, say, James Bamford. However, his works are read by a different audience (with some overlap, of course).

I think people might enjoy reading the book. I'd think going to the library might be the best bet. I also think it's important to have some general discussions of the book -- and certainly the coverage on tv -- so that people appreciate the impact the book appears to be having. One thing I'm not comfortable with is the discussions that say Woodward indicates Carville was responsible for a change in the Kerry campaign's stance on contesting Ohio. I like Carville, but think there is fair reason to think he might say things to his wife. But my feeling is that Woodward recognized that the Kerry people had some very serious concerns about Ohio. He puts it in the context of the election results starting out being dismal for the Bush administration; they were actually quite depressed up until late afternoon or early evening. Then the change came. Woodward notes three areas of concern the Kerry people had, and the Carville piece only seems to lead to some conflict on how to respond within the Bush camp.

Woodward notes a few irregularities that involved denying democrats the same opportunity to actually vote, and his comments seem to indicate he believed this would have given Kerry the strongest case to contest the outcome. It sounds like Woodward though Kerry was trying to do something for the good of the country, and not for personal, possibly selfish reasons; he notes that Kerry attempted to reach out to Bush, and offer to support an effort to try to heal the growing divides in the country. Woodward makes clear that Bush rejected the concept, ignored an opportunity to reach out to others, and began to act in a very selfish, arrogant manner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Very clear and concise You do good work H20 Man.
Edited on Sun Oct-08-06 03:01 PM by glitch
edit: this seems like the kind of book where you could pick up a lot in nuance.
Thanks for distilling it for us!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
3. I heard that...Cheney called him is similar to Putin's taking care of
certain journalist yesterday!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
4. Cheney is so mature...
getting mad and hanging up on Woodward. I'm so glad the "adults" are in charge. :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. It just emphasizes the desperation of this criminal cabal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. The more the
administration and their hannity-ite poodles attack Woodward, the more air time he will be given to respond. His sources and quotes are clearly accurate. The book is a strong indictment of the administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
6. I was coming to DU to find out who said "bullshit" to Woodward
and why, because I got a phone call right then and missed the story. I was laughing about it anyway. Thanks for the clarity! I was hoping it was Dumbya who called him. Cheney saying "bullshit" is no big deal. The Idiot in Chief would have been a different matter to his constituency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. You know if Cheney calls 'bullshit' it HAS to be true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. Here is another thread on the Bull Shit remark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chat_noir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
9. blame game
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
I Have A Dream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Great graphic! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoMama49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Can you watch MTP on line if you missed it?
If so, can someone provide a link?
Thx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. it usually replays tonight on MSNBC or CNBC if you have cable n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
20. Okay, am I forgetting history here?
I've been seeing all of these positive remarks about Woodward for his current book but weren't his last two books Bush suck-ups? Was he perhaps buttering them up for the kill or am I just remembering wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Book #1
was cheer-leading on Bob's part. It's little more an a commercial for the Bush administration.

Book #2 was different. It had a lot of the pro-Bush baloney in it, but it also had evidence of growing fractures within the lower levels of the administration.

Book #3 documents the sins of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. It's a good book. DUers are likely familiar with most of it, and it isn't as good as Hersch or Bamford's works by any means. But it communicates some of the things that DUers have know for years, to a different audience.
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 Sat Apr 19th 2014, 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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