Skip to comments.Bob Woodward: Decision Iraq (Kerry Dodges Interview About Iraq)
Posted on 10/24/2004 12:19:13 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
The role of commander in chief is clearly one of the president's most important jobs. But a presidential campaign provides voters little opportunity to evaluate how a candidate would handle that role, particularly if the candidate isn't an incumbent.
At the end of last year, during 3 1/2 hours of interviews over two days, I asked President Bush hundreds of detailed questions about his actions and decisions during the 16-month run-up to the war in Iraq. His answers were published in my book "Plan of Attack." Beginning on June 16, I had discussions and meetings with Sen. John Kerry's senior foreign policy, communications and political advisers about interviewing the senator to find out how he might have acted on Iraq -- to ask him what he would have done at certain key points. Senior Kerry advisers initially seemed positive about such an interview. One aide told me, "The short answer is yes, it's going to happen."
In August, I was talking with Kerry's scheduler about possible dates. On Sept. 1, Kerry began his intense criticism of Bush's decisions in the Iraq war, saying "I would've done almost everything differently." A few days later, I provided the Kerry campaign with a list of 22 possible questions based entirely on Bush's actions leading up to the war and how Kerry might have responded in the same situations. The senator and his campaign have since decided not to do the interview, though his advisers say Kerry would have strong and compelling answers.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Indecision on Iraq. Indecision on the terrorists. That is what Kerry has to offer. The Americans are in danger of letting the American Zapatero deceive them like they were deceived by the wobbly Jimmy Carter in 1976.
Will this article lead to the endorsement of President Bush by the Washington Post?
Real CinC material there all right. NOT.
just like he said he would be glad to come on the O'Reilly Factor..and never has...
nope..they have already endorsed Kerry...
Golly, Bob really nails Kerry for avoiding the interview...
Cowardly is as Cowardly does.
Wapo already endorsed effin.
>>Will this article lead to the endorsement of President Bush by the Washington Post?<<
Haven't they endorsed anyone (sKerry) yet?
This should be a lesson learned for the Republicans. Even if you answer the Washington Post's questions on the most important issue of the election and your Democratic opponent doesn't, the Washington Post will still endorse the Democrat.
He would have started answering Woodward's 22 questions stating he was against the war and by question 22 he would have flipped flopped back to support for the war. There is no way he can remain consistent.
In your dreams.
Yep! Kerry does as cowards do!
But it still won't stop him or his fellow travellers in the MSM from voting for Kerry, or from doing everything possible to bring down George Bush in this final week of the campaign.
It would have taken Kerry years to answer those questions. Woodward needed to start asking and getting answers sometime in early 2002.
Hey Bob - you're supposed to be an investigative journalist, so ask Kerry about his plan to win friends & influence at the UN - by throwing Israel to the wolves.
True but the WaPo still presents Woodward's stinging report on Kerry's evasion and stands it in contrast to the openess with which the President responded to Woodward and granted him extensive access. The WaPo is a paper people actualy read, rather than line cages or litter boxes. This article is a harmful to Kerry as WaPo's endorsement is helpful. Maybe even more so since it's up on Drudge right now.
Since Bob Woodward is the darling of the MSM, I wonder how much play this little tidbit will receive on CNNCBSABCNBC... any?