Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumFlashback - Review of Bob Woodard's Book on Obama (2012) - Notes Lack of New Info and Bias
The New Republic will never be confused with Mother Jones, yet here is a review from Bob Woodard's last book, The Price of Politics, in October 2012, which notes (1) that Bob Woodard's book offers no new information and (2) that is reveals more about Bob Woodard's bias than President Obama:
http://www.newrepublic.com/book/review/bob-woodward-price-of-politics#
So it goes with The Price of Politics. Critics have complained about the tediousness of this latest Woodward volume, which focuses mostly on the debt-ceiling negotiations between the White House and Republicans during the summer of 2011. The reviews in The New York Times and The Washington Post point out that the ground has been tilled by a succession of other writers, most exhaustively by Matt Bai of The New York Times. But I didnt find Woodwards book unusually tedious. In fact, I learned a lot from it. What I found it to be was remarkably slanted.
This was all the more jarring because Woodward is famous for his distinct lack of slant. His books are scrupulously reported but annoyingly literal. At their worst, they read more like stenography than fully hatched stories. The only hint of a worldview he injects is the worldview of the establishment. He reflexively flatters the powerful.
So in one sense the book is a departure: it is relentlessly biased against the president. Woodward argues that the White House and Congress failed to reach a major deficit-reduction deal last summer because Obama didnt provide the necessary leadership, even though this thesis is untethered from Woodwards own reporting, to say nothing of reality.
But, in another sense, the book is perfectly in sync with Woodwards oeuvre. There is a body of respectable Washington opinion that considers Obama unworthy of the presidency: he hadnt put in his time before running, didnt grasp the majesty of the office, evinced no respect for the way things were done. He not only won without courting the citys elders, he had the bad manners to keep his distance even after winning. This is the view Woodward distills.
This was all the more jarring because Woodward is famous for his distinct lack of slant. His books are scrupulously reported but annoyingly literal. At their worst, they read more like stenography than fully hatched stories. The only hint of a worldview he injects is the worldview of the establishment. He reflexively flatters the powerful.
So in one sense the book is a departure: it is relentlessly biased against the president. Woodward argues that the White House and Congress failed to reach a major deficit-reduction deal last summer because Obama didnt provide the necessary leadership, even though this thesis is untethered from Woodwards own reporting, to say nothing of reality.
But, in another sense, the book is perfectly in sync with Woodwards oeuvre. There is a body of respectable Washington opinion that considers Obama unworthy of the presidency: he hadnt put in his time before running, didnt grasp the majesty of the office, evinced no respect for the way things were done. He not only won without courting the citys elders, he had the bad manners to keep his distance even after winning. This is the view Woodward distills.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1351 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)
Flashback - Review of Bob Woodard's Book on Obama (2012) - Notes Lack of New Info and Bias (Original Post)
TomCADem
Mar 2013
OP
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)1. In other words, Obama did not kiss ass...Typical...n/t
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)2. Woodward is looking sadder and sadder...instead of going out with glory by doing some hard
work in his twilight years, he's going on talk shows and making lazy points that are stupid and incorrect and show intellectual incoherence. Does he think we do not notice? I'm sure he's right proud of his Georgetown residence, but does he think the rest of us give a rat's ass about his comfortable life now?
He is irrelevant and has been for some time...