Posted on 06/02/2005 8:21:22 PM PDT by John Robertson
While many MSM'ers (sorry, most) are lionizing this guy as "a hero," someone who "did what he had to do," something big is being missed.
Our side has pointed out that he authorized/engineered illegal breakins himself...
And that he turned on the Whitehouse because he didn't get the top FBI job. Now think about that....
Felt became a snitch because he didn't get something he wanted! He was an opportunist, plain and simple (and it runs in the family, apparently, as they shamelessly say they urged the old man to do it so they could all get some money). Yeah, a real hero.
But here's what I haven't seen....
If they had made him the head of the FBI, he WOULD NOT have turned on the Whitehouse.
In fact, as head of the FBI....
HE WOULD HAVE HELPED THEM BURY WATERGATE!
Which is exactly why Nixon was sending Gray over there -- to clean it up.
So, you're the other FReeper that watches KO.
Tell that to Bill Casey's family.
Tell that to Hillary Clinton's friend, Ms. Sherburne.
Bottom line is that NO ONE did anything without Hoover's knowledge and approval
I never said anything about not admiring Woodward (I admire his industry, his doggedness, but certainly not his self-importance and unctuousness).
I just said, I dont' think this guy's a Republican.
As for neocon...I doubt that too.
As for you, I'm certain: You just told me.
Oh, yeah. I readily admit it; he IS funny sometimes. And he's been smashing this week. (The Michael Jackson stuff is HILARIOUS.)
If he was really interested in seeing justice done, as he saw it, and if he couldn't go to anyonme in the Bureau or DOJ, then why not go to Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox? Instead, he chose to go to the newspapers.
What I think is that folks are sore that Felt helped bring the criminal conspiracy down and/or he did not tell Nixon to stop where he was going or he was going to sing. It was not Felt's job to be in the business of the care and feeding or treatment of Nixonion acted out neuroses.
That would be my guess .. and I'll bet it didn't go over very well
Woodward is a Republican. He has said so. Whether he still is, I don't know. But he is no liberal. That is silly.
Straight shooter and Woodward simply don't go together. Woodward is like many on the left, they claim to be registered republicans as they run cover for people like Hillary Clinton
How has Woodward run for cover? Please help me with some of this.
I'm gonna need some verification.
I spent 30 years KNOWINT J.Edgar was a crossdresser...but in the last few years, I've seen pieces saying that this is total crap. In other words, one of those stories that somehow gets out there and won't go away.
I can live if it's true.
But it very much seems like something the left would use to vilify a conservative man of power.
You know the left? Oh, we think blatant homosexuality and all its derivations are perfectly normal and wonderful and mainstream...but if we can tar any of our enemies with such charges, well, that's a different story.
I fell off the couch laughing when he set up the gored matador story.
"Instead, he chose to go to the newspapers."
Anonymously. Sheesh, even our tiny, itsy bitsy small town paper won't print an anonymous letter! Hero, my cellulose butt. This guy should be Webster's as the first definition.
And therefore it follows that ..... ?
He was effective, no question. He possessed all of the qualities you mentioned. He was also paranoid, conniving, narcissistic, anti-semitic... I reiterate, Nixon was no hero.
Woodward's a straight shooter? Strange that like so many other straight shooters from the Post & elsewhere he failed to pick up on any of Kerry's inconsistencies, any of Brinkley's numerous factual errors, any of his young contemporaries' (or old ones, for that matter) dead-wrong reports on Vietnam back then or the lies or aproportional stories coming out of Iraq. He was after the RNC before he even had a hint of Watergate--look up a story he did on a certain RNC staffer who happened to take (and then returned) a finder's fee (in his private, nonRNC business) in April of '72 (two months before any break-in). He never managed to correct the return of the fee (or its irrelevance) of which he was notified.
So you're the one who's feeling contrary tonight? (Good, too often, it's me.)
You say of Woodward: "But he is no liberal. That is silly."
Show me, okay?
You don't have to demonstrate that he IS a Republican, I'll let that one go. Show me that he is NOT a liberal. Then explain how it's "silly" to say what many of us have come to know as ineluctable after watching and reading him for 30 years: liberal...the word "progressive" could be applied to him. He may not be a crazy-left flag burner, but Republican?
The guy went for getting to the bottom of the story, justified in my opinion in this case. I am unaware of any of his writings that can be characterized as disingenuous. Perhaps there are, I am just not aware of them. He wrote a very complementary book of the Bush administration in its planning stages for the Iraq war. But then, Woodward does tend to have an establishment bias when it comes to the Executive's exercise of foreign policy initiatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.