Bob Woodwards new book

[Si modo]

I don't identify with the US Military or its "War on Terror" blunder. We were attacked on September 11th. You responded by launching this campaign of destruction.

In my hierarchy of loyalties, America falls below God, humanity as a whole, and my family and friends. I don't see that changing any time soon.

Aren't we blessed? Why yes we are. Who wants vile shitheads like you on our side. Not me!

Looks like Si Modo isn't the only one who's feeling a little upset today!

You can't help being dishonest.

But you are a good little Muslim - lying and being a willful victim.

 

[Trajan]

There are several things to consider when critiquing Woodwards recent birth and new book. This is a liberal administration, Limbaugh does not dictate the rules and regulations. Tough situations require thought and debate, look only at JFK's administration and the debates over Racism, the Bay of Pigs, and the Thirteen days. Or even Eisenhower over Korea and the Red Menace. Does anyone want the failures due to ideological restrictions that brought us illegal invasions and the near collapse of the entire economy under Booosh? Had Woodward read or understand a bit of history he may have approached his new world differently. But they are born too often these soothsayers of the obvious.

Your Kennedy blurb is self gratuitous, its missing , well a great deal, especially taking Obama and some of his positions into account, Kennedy made as many if not more costly decisions that turned into ( or not) mistakes than the 3 you ascribed.

How would a study of history helped him, how is that germane? he apparently called it as he saw it.

and that last sentience is gibberish, at least to me...explain please.

 

[JiggsCasey]

ROFLMAO!!!!

Woodward book during Bush years of dysfunction = Liberal pablum, not to be trusted...
Woodward book during Obama years of dysfunction = Gospel...

 

[DiveCon]

ROFLMAO!!!!

Woodward book during Bush years of dysfunction = Liberal pablum, not to be trusted...
Woodward book during Obama years of dysfunction = Gospel...

the difference being Woodward is a liberal

of course a fucking moron like YOU wouldnt get that

 

[Trajan]

pwned, double word score, yahtzee etc...

 

[Kalam]

why the hating on dogs....i can understand the pig thing.....back in the day eating pig could be dangerous...but not now...what else cant you eat?

We just aren't supposed to keep dogs unless they're for hunting or security. Oh, and we aren't supposed to hunt for sport, which I guess is another Southern thing.

We can't consume pork, blood, alcohol, or carrion, or any food that contains one of those things in noticeable amounts. We also can't eat something if it was killed in the name of another god or if it was killed in an especially painful way. There's a certain way your supposed to slaughter animals, too, but it can be hard to find meat like that over here so that doesn't matter as much.

 

[Kalam]

there is an hbo special "my trip to al quaida" where the guy talks about muslims and dogs and how bitterness stems from one prison that would tie the men up and allow wide dogs to fuck them

how it radized the current leaders etc

Yeah, I've heard about them doing stuff like that to prisoners. Basically using their culture or religion against them.

 

[Kalam]

Aren't we blessed? Why yes we are. Who wants vile shitheads like you on our side. Not me!

Looks like Si Modo isn't the only one who's feeling a little upset today!

You can't help being dishonest.

But you are a good little Muslim - lying and being a willful victim.

Whatever you say. I hope tomorrow's a happier day for you.

 

[JiggsCasey]

ROFLMAO!!!!

Woodward book during Bush years of dysfunction = Liberal pablum, not to be trusted...
Woodward book during Obama years of dysfunction = Gospel...

the difference being Woodward is a liberal

of course a fucking moron like YOU wouldnt get that

LOL.... riiiiiiiiiiight.... whatever you need to keep telling yourself, 'o great champion of situational ethics and compromised values.

So, because he's "liberal" he's lying when he writes about your hero. But telling the God's honest truth when he's writing about the "fellow" "liberal" president. Of course.

Why don't you step up to the plate, tough guy, and show the forum how/why Woodward is considered "liberal," exactly. Because he took down your demigod, Dick Nixon?

Surely the Boy King would agree to spend all that time with Woodward - more than any other journalist - even though "everyone" knew he was a known "liberal." Surely a liberal journalist like Woodward would keep quiet about his Plame notes, and buy, hook-line-and-sinker, the vast array of WMD fraud like Woodward did.

Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard called Woodward "the best pure reporter of his generation, perhaps ever." .... Yeah, not exactly a "liberal" journal, in fact, it's pretty much the bible for neo-fascists.

Anyhow, good try, rage-fueled crazy man.

 

[DiveCon]

why the hating on dogs....i can understand the pig thing.....back in the day eating pig could be dangerous...but not now...what else cant you eat?

We just aren't supposed to keep dogs unless they're for hunting or security. Oh, and we aren't supposed to hunt for sport, which I guess is another Southern thing.

We can't consume pork, blood, alcohol, or carrion, or any food that contains one of those things in noticeable amounts. We also can't eat something if it was killed in the name of another god or if it was killed in an especially painful way. There's a certain way your supposed to slaughter animals, too, but it can be hard to find meat like that over here so that doesn't matter as much.

um, kosher meats

 

[DiveCon]

ROFLMAO!!!!

Woodward book during Bush years of dysfunction = Liberal pablum, not to be trusted...
Woodward book during Obama years of dysfunction = Gospel...

the difference being Woodward is a liberal

of course a fucking moron like YOU wouldnt get that

LOL.... riiiiiiiiiiight.... whatever you need to keep telling yourself, 'o great champion of situational ethics and compromised values.

So, because he's "liberal" he's lying when he writes about your hero. But telling the God's honest truth when he's writing about the "fellow" "liberal" president. Of course.

Why don't you step up to the plate, tough guy, and show the forum how/why Woodward is considered "liberal," exactly. Because he took down your demigod, Dick Nixon?

Surely the Boy King would agree to spend all that time with Woodward - more than any other journalist - even though "everyone" knew he was a known "liberal." Surely a liberal journalist like Woodward would keep quiet about his Plame notes, and buy, hook-line-and-sinker, the vast array of WMD fraud like Woodward did.

Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard called Woodward "the best pure reporter of his generation, perhaps ever." .... Yeah, not exactly a "liberal" journal, in fact, it's pretty much the bible for neo-fascists.

Anyhow, good try, rage-fueled crazy man.

of course you dont get it again

a liberal writing negative things about bush would be expected
a conservative writing bad things about Bush would be eye opening
a conservative writing bad thing about Obama, again, expected
a liberal writing bad things about Obama, once again, eye opening

 

[DiveCon]

jiigs once again proving me correct to call him a fucking moron

 

[Sheldon]

Obama Says U.S. Can ‘Absorb Terror Attacks’
Posted by Guest Contributor on Tuesday, September 21, 2010, 9:55 PM
-By Warner Todd Huston

Eh, don’t worry, America. If there is another 9/11-like terror attack, The One says that we can “absorb it” and just become “stronger” because of it. It’s as if he wants it to happen, or something!
In his latest book, Bob Woodward encountered a President Obama that seemed to casually blow off worry of another terror attack. The Washington Post gave us a sneak preview of Woodward’s newest tome where Obama acted so flippantly toward another 9/11. (my bold)

Woodward’s book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, “We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever… we absorbed it and we are stronger.”
​

Linky....

I'm not seeing what the issue is.

I don't think Obama is wrong on this. The opposite of Obama's comment would be something like "America would collapse with another 9/11". I think we're stronger than that. At least I hope we are.

Maybe the objection is coming from the word "absorb", implying that we were unaffected. I think a better word would have been "survive".

 

[Kalam]

why the hating on dogs....i can understand the pig thing.....back in the day eating pig could be dangerous...but not now...what else cant you eat?

We just aren't supposed to keep dogs unless they're for hunting or security. Oh, and we aren't supposed to hunt for sport, which I guess is another Southern thing.

We can't consume pork, blood, alcohol, or carrion, or any food that contains one of those things in noticeable amounts. We also can't eat something if it was killed in the name of another god or if it was killed in an especially painful way. There's a certain way your supposed to slaughter animals, too, but it can be hard to find meat like that over here so that doesn't matter as much.

um, kosher meats

It's a little bit different. When we do it, the animal is made to face Makkah and I believe we cut slightly different parts of the throat. But yeah, it's similar enough that most people accept kosher meat, including me.

 

[Ravi]

I think a great platform for the GOP/Tea Party to run on would be: If we are attacked again we will fail as a nation and the terrorists will win.

 

[JiggsCasey]

a liberal writing negative things about bush would be expected
a conservative writing bad things about Bush would be eye opening
a conservative writing bad thing about Obama, again, expected
a liberal writing bad things about Obama, once again, eye opening

LOL.... So, when challenged to do so, you can't point to anything that supports your claim that Woodward is liberal. Just keep squawking it, and hope no one challenges you on it.

Once again, hung out with Bush more than any journalist. Covered for Plamegate. Supported WMD fraud with zero critical analysis.

But you keep right on making up shit. It's what you clowns do.

 

[California Girl]

jiigs once again proving me correct to call him a fucking moron

I feel for ya, Dive, I really do. It's frustrating to constantly have to explain the fucking obvious to the terminally stupid.

 

[JiggsCasey]

jiigs once again proving me correct to call him a fucking moron

I feel for ya, Dive, I really do. It's frustrating to constantly have to explain the fucking obvious to the terminally stupid.

Oh, hey there. It's the pundit who insisted Glen Back was "factually accurate," then disappeared from the thread when challenged on the notion.

Clearly, you haven't learned when to stop running your mouth at the expense of your floundering reputation around here.

"Terminally stupid".... now there's some rich irony.

Like I've always said... Hear a dubious con man claim? Worry not... just lift the rock, shine some light, and watch the bugs scurry for cover.

 

[California Girl]

jiigs once again proving me correct to call him a fucking moron

I feel for ya, Dive, I really do. It's frustrating to constantly have to explain the fucking obvious to the terminally stupid.

Oh, hey there. It's the pundit who insisted Glen Back was "factually accurate," then disappeared from the thread when challenged on the notion.

Clearly, you haven't learned when to stop running your mouth at the expense of your floundering reputation around here.

"Terminally stupid".... now there's some rich irony.

I 'disappeared' because I was back in the US, having fun. Annoying, I know, but my life does not revolve around your whining. I'm tired of cleaning up your drool.

 

[saveliberty]

a liberal writing negative things about bush would be expected
a conservative writing bad things about Bush would be eye opening
a conservative writing bad thing about Obama, again, expected
a liberal writing bad things about Obama, once again, eye opening

LOL.... So, when challenged to do so, you can't point to anything that supports your claim that Woodward is liberal. Just keep squawking it, and hope no one challenges you on it.

Once again, hung out with Bush more than any journalist. Covered for Plamegate. Supported WMD fraud with zero critical analysis.

But you keep right on making up shit. It's what you clowns do.

In the time period Woodard started at the Washingotn Post, I'd say the burden of proving him a conservative would fall unto Jiggs.