Liberated McClellan starts burning bridges

About two years ago, on the South Lawn of the White House, Bush and Scott McClellan appeared together to announce the press secretary’s departure. After thanking him for his service, the president said, “One of these days he and I are going to be rocking on chairs in Texas, talking about the good old days and his time as the Press Secretary. And I can assure you I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, job well done.”

After hearing about McClellan’s new book, Bush might reconsider saving a rocking chair for his ol’ buddy.

Last November, McClellan’s publisher released a six-sentence excerpt from his book, which drew all kinds of attention and raised speculation that the former White House press secretary, liberated from the president, might burn a few bridges with his former colleagues as a civilian. It looks like he’s done just that — and then some.

Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan writes in a surprisingly scathing memoir to be published next week that President Bush “veered terribly off course,” was not “open and forthright on Iraq,” and took a “permanent campaign approach” to governing at the expense of candor and competence.

Among the most explosive revelations in the 341-page book, titled “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception” (Public Affairs, $27.95):

* McClellan charges that Bush relied on “propaganda” to sell the war.

* He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.

* He admits that some of his own assertions from the briefing room podium turned out to be “badly misguided.”

* The longtime Bush loyalist also suggests that two top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them — and McClellan was continuing to defend them despite mounting evidence they had not given him all the facts.

* McClellan asserts that the aides — Karl Rove, the president’s senior adviser, and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the vice president’s chief of staff — “had at best misled” him about their role in the disclosure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.

A couple of years ago, McClellan’s predecessor, Ari Fleischer, wrote a book about how everyone in the Bush White House was great, and the entire team could do no wrong. It was obviously silly and hackish, and as a result, no one bought or cared about Fleisher’s book.

McClellan has obviously chosen a more provocative route.

Indeed, the former press secretary apparently didn’t hold much back.

The eagerly awaited book, while recounting many fond memories of Bush and describing him as “authentic” and “sincere,” is harsher than reporters and White House officials had expected.

McClellan was one of the president’s earliest and most loyal political aides, and most of his friends had expected him to take a few swipes at his former colleague in order to sell books but also to paint a largely affectionate portrait.

Instead, McClellan’s tone is often harsh.

“I still like and admire President Bush,” McClellan writes. “But he and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war…. In this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security.”

We’ve had a few Bush administration officials break with the president and his team in fairly high-profile ways. Paul O’Neill, John DiIulio, David Kuo, Richard Clarke, and Matthew Dowd come to mind.

But this is clearly different. McClellan wasn’t just a White House official, he was part of the president’s inner circle, and part of the team that followed Bush to Washington from Texas. And now he’s trashing his old team in a surprisingly high-profile way. One can’t help but wonder, of course, if this is McClellan’s way of trying to save his own skin — as the Bush gang is condemned by history, McClellan doesn’t want to be associated with failure.

Of course, if he’d thought to speak up when it mattered, instead of after the fact, McClellan’s ability to make a difference might have had an effect. Now, it’ll sell books, but it’s a little late in the game.

Post Script: By the way, one part of McClellan’s book was left out of the WaPo and NYT reports, but bears repeating:

McClellan repeatedly embraces the rhetoric of Bush’s liberal critics and even charges: “If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.

“The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise…. In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.”

Well, this is a pleasant surprise.

Too much – he is still proclaiming that chimpy is a “great man”, denying any responsibility for his own action, and shielding dur chimpfurher from any accountability.

Please, don’t grab this lying liar and now proclaim he is some kind of “good guy”. I want kkkarl to get his just derserves more than anyone.

Point is – snotty had no credibility when he was chimpy’s shill for the press and nothing that has been released about this book indicates he is being forthright and honest now.

He is just cashing in and “catapulting the propaganda” of our “great leader”. He is still trash.

  • The pro-Bush media reaction is priceless, however. He had an obligation to object if he didn’t agree with policy (Fran Townsend). He was a terrible comunicator, who probably didn’t even write his own book (Tucker Carlson). It’s all old news (Mika Bryzinski).

    Does that mean they’ll stop denying the fact that they abetted the president in his propaganda campaign?

  • Curb the vitriol for a second, LB, and smell the roses. The story is number one on CNN this morning, front page on the WaPo, and who knows where else. Until the next celebrity crashes an SLK into a fruit stand, the issues McClellan raises are getting some high-profile attention. The fact that he finally admits what most Americans already know — that the war was sold on propaganda — while McCain is singing “No Surrender” makes Scotty’s book worth the paper it’s printed on. Not that, I’ll buy it…

  • You might ask what it takes to remember
    when you know that you’ve seen it before
    where a government lies to a people
    and a country is drifting to war
    and there’s a shadow on the faces
    of the men who send the guns
    to the wars that are fought in places
    where their business interest runs
    Jackson Browne 1986 Lives in the Balance

  • Back in 1984, I was still kind of half-assed taking classes at Syracuse University, hanging around with what was left of my college crowd (those of us who hadn’t graduated yet, most of whom never would) and living off campus. I had no TV of my own and paid little attention to politics, and of course, these were those long gone years before the Internet existed, when people still got their news from TV, radio, and newspapers.

    I remember wandering over to a friend’s house on Election Day evening, around 9 o’clock. I’d voted earlier at a campus polling place, and then gone down to M Street and gotten something to eat, and hadn’t heard a word about the election results. I knew my buddy Karl listened to the news fanatically and would have the latest. So I knocked, and when he answered the door, I asked, innocently, having no idea of the electoral route that had just taken place — “So, did Mondale win?”

    “Good Lord, no,” Karl advised me, “it’s a massacre, Democrats are burning their uniforms on street corners, the world is doomed.”

    I recollect this now not just to bathe in nostalgia’s pleasant glow, but because, well, honestly, staring down the shotgun barrels of 4 more Reagan years looked awful back then, but we really had no idea just how bad things could get. Reagan was an exemplar of wisdom and restraint compared to Dubya, or, more accurately, Cheney and his crew.

    However, I also find it satisfying to think that these are the days when Republicans and conservatives are getting their own gas cans ready, and come November, they will be the ones out burning their uniforms on street corners. Scott McClellan is just at the point guy, getting the trash barrels cleaned out, wadding up some old newspapers, preparatory to the big bonfire.

    What goes around comes around, I guess. It only took, what, nearly 25 years?

  • Funny, there’s a story out now about how Tim Russert was “shocked” by the assertions in this book.
    Shocked I tell you.

    Well, I knew it wouldn’t be long until we started seeing some tell all memiors from WH insiders, and maybe this will finally force the punditocracy to acknowledge what the majority of informed citizens have known since 2000, that Herr Bu$h, his handler Cheney, and the rest of their minions are nothing but frauds.

  • The pro-Bush media reaction is priceless, however. …. It’s all old news (Mika Bryzinski).

    I don’t think I’d classify Mika Brzyzinski as even remotely “pro-Bush.” She’s pretty clearly meant to be the liberal counterbalance to Scarborough on MSNBC’s morning show. She tries to present an even-handed approach, but she seems to line up on the liberal side of things. Her Dad was Carter’s NSA.

  • The best part of this is a quote from Rove ” He sounds like a liberal blogger” Now thats funny.

  • As if I really didn’t understand
    That I was just another part of their plan
    I went looking for the promise
    believing in the Motherland
    and from the comfort of a dreamer”s bed
    and the safety of my own head
    I went on speaking of the future
    while other people fought and bled

    Jackson Browne 1986 For America

    What part didn’t McCellan get?

  • At first I was delighted to hear about this book. But, the more I hear about it the more lightweight it feels. Does it reveal anything we didn’t already know about the Bush administration? Does it show the real reasons why we’re at war in Iraq, or just rehash that the “reasons” we were given were false and the president knew it? Does it calculate the incredible fortunes being made over there, paid for by American tax dollars?

    Don’t get me wrong. Any time an egg-faced “W” is front page news, I’m happy as heck. But, it sounds more like additional confirmation rather than extraordinary revelations. Granted, I have not read the book.

    “The history of the contemporary free market was written in shocks. Some of the most infamous human rights violations of the past thirty-five years, which have tended to be viewed as sadistic acts carried out by anti-democratic regimes, were in fact either committed with the deliberate intent of terrorizing the public or actively harnessed to prepare the ground for the introduction of radical free-market reforms.” Naomi Klein Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

  • Indeed, the former press secretary apparently didn’t hold much back.

    I don’t think we’ve seen a fraction of what we eventually will. There are too many people who have insider knowledge that, once they are freed of this malignant group of people, will be coming forward with bombshells.

    Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but I have a gut feeling. (Oh, boy…did I just have a Chertoff moment?? UGH! 😉 )

  • TR (8): I don’t think I’d classify Mika Brzyzinski as even remotely “pro-Bush.”

    Not even remotely? I’ll grant that she is left of Willie Geist and Joe Scarborough. I’ll even concede that she’s more pro-Huckabee or McCain. Maybe not so pro-Bush But she also points out that while her father is liberal, she and her brothers are split. But she sure as heck ain’t Rachel Maddow.

  • Ed Henry was also on CNN last night defending his predecessors in the White House press corps, talking about what a great job they had done. One of the most disappointing thing we have learned about the media over the decade plus is that they are incapable of ever admitting mistakes or analyzing their own behavior and learning from it.

  • I actually disagree with the idea that McClellan should have said something when he still worked for the Whitehouse. Because when you’re hired for a job, you’re not speaking for yourself. You’re speaking for your boss. And if you don’t like what that boss has you say and he makes you say it anyway, you only have one choice: Resign. That’s it. But no matter what, you don’t get to use the position they gave you as a podium to state your own personal opinion. When a Press Secretary speaks, he’s only speaking for his boss; not himself.

    And if more people had had this attitude about the Bushies, we would have been better off. Because when people like Colin Powell hyped WMD’s and the need for war, they weren’t doing so from their personal opinions. They did so as part of their jobs. And if the corporate media had understood this, rather than assuming that Powell was personally agreeing with the war, they would have been less likely to agree with doing it. Same goes for Richard Clarke, who told lies to reporters when it was his job, and exposed it all after he quit. That’s how it’s supposed to work. None of this is personal and an employee’s integrity is ultimately only as good as his bosses. And if you don’t like your bosses integrity, there’s always the door.

    In fact, that’s really one of the weird things about the pundit class. For as much as they act as if this is all academic and that you shouldn’t get too passionate about this stuff, for them, politics is all personal. It’s about the reassurances that Whitehouse insiders give them, without realizing that those reassurances were made as part of their job. When “Senior Whitehouse Officials” or Retired Generals tell them something, they do so for business reasons; not personal. If only the media understood that these insiders were simply making a business transaction, rather than imagining that they were getting personal assurances from their friends, we’d be much better off. But unfortunately for us, most folks in the media want little more than to be loved; and Republicans have taken advantage of that for years.

  • Hmm. May be time for multiple suicide notes penned by Scott to be found around the house, along with a surprise out in the tool shed.

  • As for Mika Brzyzinski, her dad was a guest last week and it was pretty clearly embarrassing to her to have to talk about politics with him on the air. What I got from that is that she doesn’t agree with him on most issues and was hoping he wouldn’t say anything. She’s not a liberal as far as I can tell (do we have any evidence other than her father? he obviously didn’t have too much influence on the son who is working for McCain), though she clearly isn’t a Bush sycophant either (nor is Scarborough for that matter).

  • How do you ‘like’ and ‘admire’ someone while admitting he lied to sell an illegal and unnecessary invasion that’s resulted in the deaths of over 4000 US soldiers and countless Iraqi civilians? You were the Press Secretary, Scott; the propaganda front man. Any ideas about how we might avoid these little oopsies in the future?

    The book sounds more pathetic than scathing.

  • Hmm.. fascinating, so the Bush administration is not as perfect as we thought..?

  • Little Scotty’s brother is an MD who had some citizen-screwing job with HHS, if I recall. Is he still in the administration?

    And their mom, who recently ran for governor in Texas, is an old Bush crony from way back. Will the whole family follow Scotty in his “Honest, I was as big a victim as all of you by Bushco’s treachery!” ass-saving routine?

  • Too little, too late. McClellan was a key facilitator of the very policies he now condemns at a time before the entire nation had recognized this administration for the fraud that it is and his criticisms would have mattered. Now he’s telling us what we already know, at a time when it’s too late to reverse any of the damage done and Bush is well into his lame duck phase. McClellan will get rich off of book sales and be hailed as a hero by opponents of the administration, but the timing of this reeks of cynical and calculated self-interest.

  • I think the people being harsh against McClellan for telling us what we already knew are missing the point: While WE already know this stuff, lots of other people don’t. Particularly not the corporate media, which still has some respect for the Bushies. If anything comes from this book, I’m hoping that it’s that the media realizes that what us dirty hippies have been saying for years about the Bushies is absolutely true, and that they got duped by people they imagined were their friends.

    Again, it’s one thing to have put together the pieces or to hear dirty hippies say this stuff. It’s something else to hear it straight from the horse’s mouth. I don’t have high hopes that the media will finally internalize how corrupt the Bushies really are, but this definitely makes it harder for them to ignore it.

  • Now that the Bush administration’s time is winding down, it’s important to pay close attention to who is saying what about their time in it. There’s going to be quite a few people trying to rewrite history.

    I recently cracked open a month-old issue of GQ with Robert Downey, Jr. on the cover and went straight to the interview with Karl Rove. Two things stood out. The first is that he bashed Obama and apparently said something very complimentary–off the record, of course–about Clinton. The latter surprised me, but the former didn’t. I know that in The Audacity of Hope, Obama allegedly misquoted Rove and others about the use of the phrases ‘America is a Christian nation’ and ‘No new taxes.’ Rove goes so far as to say that during one of his frequent trips to the White House, he challenged Obama on this, but that the Illinois senator couldn’t come up with an answer about what happened. Perhaps it’s true, but I am going to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. For one thing, how often did he go to the White House? And second, those two phrases appear to be statements from the Republican Party platform. The quotes from Obama’s book don’t give direct attribution, as far as I can tell, to Rove or to Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich, or Ralph Reed. The second part that struck me was when Rove said that he enjoyed the many substantial policy discussions taking place. This goes directly against what people like John Diullio and Paul O’Neill said several years ago.

    All of this may seem like small potatoes, but this is how this group operates. They push some ridiculous idea in a tiny venue and then watch it spread like a contagious disease. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear a lot of discussion about notions that directly contradict with McClellan said, along with, of course, comments impugning his integrity in the coming months.

  • re: Mika Brzyzinski…

    She may not be pro-Bush, but any woman who puts up with the sexist crap Scarborough and Geist shovel her way ain’t no liberal.

  • In the words of Captain Renault:

    I am shocked to find out there is gambling going on here…

  • All of Bush’s ugliness, ignorance, disrespect of others, greed, selfishness, etc. preexisted his first election as Governor of Texas. So, there is no one who has gained power, money, position or their 15 minutes of fame, through association with him or his administration, who can say that any ill-conceived, or mis- or mal- or evilly-conceived act of Duhyba is or has ever been a surprise.

    Certainly the Press has and still does ignore his malfeasance’s, pathologies, and history of failure and cowardice, and does support his obvious disrespect for the citizens and laws of this nation, his intent to destroy the economic structure of this country and its democratic freedoms and his need to bring bloody turmoil to the world.

    The Repocons raison d’etre are greed, power, and pathological destruction of otheres to gain power and money and control of other’s lives, even to the extent of killing hundreds of thousands of innocents, or unjustly locking innocents along with guilty in cages forever. They glibly get revenge against anyone who disagrees with them.

    With these as their mind set and mental make up, expect a landslide of reveal-all anti-Bush biographies. They are the perfect followup for retired and fired Repocons, – money and pathological destructive power over others is the Repocon ethic. No one deserves to be more publically exposed as a user, a liar and as a mental and emotional black hole as the scion of a Nazi family who cheated his way to the Presidency of a country that was created by the Declaration Independence and the Constitution of the United States.

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

  • Sometimes it just takes one voice to point out that the King is naked. Perhaps McClellan’s book will set the tone for other Bush insiders’ memoirs.

    Will we see something like this from Tony Snow? I doubt it. He will remain loyal to the cause, all the way to the end.

  • Slowly, steadily the truth will emerge, layer by layer until the whole pattern takes shape and form, as in the unburdening of our conscience of some long-dark held secret — the full pattern has yet to emerge, this is just a part!

  • Will we see something like this from Tony Snow?.

    I agree that this is totally unlikely. McClellan was different from the rest of them: He was actually human. And this is one reason he was a HORRIBLE press secretary. While Ari was a cruel robot who could explain in a thousand different ways why he wouldn’t answer any questions and Snow was a mocking anchorman who truly enjoyed duping reporters, McClellan always seemed to actually struggle to answer the questions. And because there were no good answers to give, he came off really shitty. And I think that’s one reason why he’s telling all, because he really wanted to give the right answers and felt betrayed by the Bushies; which makes it acceptable to him for him to betray them.

    I’m quite positive that they picked him because he had been with them for so long and didn’t feel they could trust an outsider, but he was a really poor choice. Of all the press secretaries, he was the only one I felt sorry for, even while I laughed at his poor performance. And so it’s no surprise that he’s the guy who would tell-all in a book. He was much too human for the job, and continues to act like a human. That’s not to say he’s not also a douchebag, as he totally is. But he’s a human douchebag, and that’s made all the difference.

  • ““I still like and admire President Bush,” McClellan writes . . . he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security.”

    So, he’d throw the whole world under the bus before Bush? Bush is not responsible for anything at all? This view seems to reverberate throughout the media and the political world. Whatever blunders and horrors this administration has visited upon planet earth, they can’t possibly be the fault of the president?

    Are history books going to exalt this guy, and claim his presidency failed because he was terribly ill-served by the American people who were nasty to him in the polls in spite of his great accomplishments?

    And what about the Bush/Cheney necon foreign and domestic policies? Are they going to escape any criticism at all? Are we never going to learn that Reagan’s government-is-evil-long-live-unfettered-imperialistic-captitalism doesn’t work?

    This is better than some sickeningly sweet white wash job, but still, it’s basically a self-serving, faux tell all, cashing in piece of work. A throw some aides under the bus, get some headlines and hope to sell a few books kind of thing.

    Come on. It’s time for somebody to step forward and tell the world what this administration really represents, so we don’t do it again – in 2008 with McCain.

  • Everyone seems to be piling on Scott McClellan. People all over the blogophere are saying that he should have come out sooner with his observations. Well, what if he did. Would he have been trashed as everyone else who came out against this administration has been trashed? Of course he would have been. He would have been portrayed as a disloyal know-nothing and would have been forgotten by the corporate media in the next news cycle.

    So, I am not going to trash McClellan because we can’t go back and relive the past. He did what he did and we are where we are.

    I think the current political cycle is what makes the timing of the publication of his book so perfect. Especially after the revelation by the New York Times of the “military analysts” who were propagandizing the Iraq war. His book adds fuel to the fire and confirms the fact that this war was a war of choice which was sold to us by the Bush administration. He is also agreeing with Obama – that the war with Iraq was dumb war and should never has happened.

    It doesn’t do any good saying that McClellan “should of” or “could of” done this or that. With Bush’s ratings down in the dumps, his book will further serve to reinforce the feelings shared by so many people that Bush is the worst president ever.

  • “But he’s a human douchebag, and that’s made all the difference.”

    Why, Doc, I never figured you to be so lyrical!

    McClellan’s problem is the systemic GOPer problem: aversion to accepting personal responsibility for anything. “Karl lied to me. Scooter lied to me. Dick lied to me. Yes, I lied to the press corpse, but they should’ve known better.” Is there any Republican who actually knows what responsibility is, much less can accept some modicum of it?

  • Poster, Brian,#23 is correct. This revelation will be followed by a lot of O’Neiling by the punditry. I’m still waiting for the day when they finally get around to asking Bush why he wanted his staff to “find me a way to get into Iraq”, ten days after he took office – but I’m not holding my breath.

  • Jesus Sheridan. Of course the vile little man should have spoken out sooner. How many thousands have died because he didn’t and Bush wasn’t impeached

  • Wasn;t McClellan involved somehow with the destruction ofg Bush’s National Guard records? Is that in the book?

    McClellan was a cut above Ari Fleischer, but that really isn’t saying much.

    In “Nixonland” Rick Perlstein has Nixon telling a donor in 1966 that he knows the Vietnam War can’t be won militarily. Later that year Perlstein comments that not only did Johnson also know at that time, but Nixon knew that Johnson knew and he understood Johnson’s vulnerabilities perfectly. So he criticized Johnson unmercifully, goading him into escalating the war. Tens of thousands of Americans and probably millions of Vietnamese died in the ensuing years and both countries were torn apart, albeit in different ways. It isn’t new, but it is still horrible and unspeakably immoral. This is our heritage.

  • Dr BioBrain makes an interesting point
    “And if more people had had this attitude about the Bushies, we would have been better off. Because when people like Colin Powell hyped WMD’s and the need for war, they weren’t doing so from their personal opinions. They did so as part of their jobs.”

    I both agree and disagree. Yes PR people have accepted the job of parroting and sometines preparing someone else’s BS. Sometimes that is a positive constructive thing sometimes not, most of the time its just a job.

    However, the President’s staff are American Citizens, and are employed and paid by the people of America. They therefore have both a responsibility to their immediate boss and twice over to the American People.
    If they are honorable people and loyal Americans they would resign rather than knowingly pass along lies to their fellow Americans and to the world. And they have a responsibility to make at least a reasonable effort to know whether the words they speak are the truth or not.

    I am continually astonished at the straight faced manner in which all Presidential official spokespersons can lie blatantly, repeatedly, continually, frequently, day after day, year after year – knowing that virtually everyone who hears or reads their lies knows they are lying – and not see themselves as serial-traitors.
    Much less as good Christians any Repocon would be wracked with guilt if they lied. How can these people live with themselves?

    Any employee taking such a position has the option of stating as a part of accepting the job as spokes person, that they will not knowingly lie for their employer and that they will not quietly accept being lied to by their employer.
    Any honorable person would set those boundaries.

    I work in a hospital lab. Believe me that nurses and lab technicians and others face pressure (usually by the hospital) to short cut hospital policies, department procedures, (JCAHO, CAP, OSHA, state and federal laws and regulations, etc.) (ie, create untruths of various kinds small and large in patient records or departmental records because it is convenient, or to cover errors usually inconsequential, often simply clerical (misspelled names for example) but sometimes of great consequence.
    There are people who won’t lie just because someone in authority tells them to. (Fortunately we have a union that stay’s very busy protecting us, other hospitals can fire nurses or techs if they refuse to backdown from following their hospita’s and department’s policies and procedures).
    Librarians risk their jobs to protect their patron’s privacy.)
    There are honorable people in this country.

    If an ordinary citizen librarians, nurses, or lab techs can have honor then, the likes of Colin Powell and the other Reponazis have not so much as a shredded fig leaf to hide their dishonor.

  • Perhaps McClellan’s book will set the tone for other Bush insiders’ memoirs.

    You mean like what a great leader and man he is?

    Give me a break – there is nothing in this book that will change a thing, snotty accepts no responsibility for his role and chimpy is portayed as this wonderful man that has no culpability.

    Nothing has changed – snotty is still dur chimpfurher’s lying liar.

  • Well, this is a pleasant surprise.

    Not for all of us. Heheh

    9. On April 25th, 2007 at 6:34 pm, williamjacobs said:

    I must object on behalf of Scott McClellan to your impugning his integrity.

    Of all the Bush flunkies, McClellan repeatedly refused to parrot back every line of bull he was fed. He always (to my recollection) couched terms, hedged on absolutes, and rephrased to make each phrase contain a grain of truth. McClellan CLEARLY was uncomfortable lying. It cost him his job.

    The memoir may be a dud. I will not be surprised if “refreshing candor” is EXACTLY what we get. I dare say STARTLING candor is not out of the question.

    Look for careful wording where none of it SOUNDS harsh, but for those used to the subtleties of Washington criticism, it’ll be brutal.

    Any love out there?

    The artist formerly known as williamjacobs

  • hark says
    “Are history books going to exalt this guy, and claim his presidency failed because he was terribly ill-served by the American people who were nasty to him in the polls in spite of his great accomplishments?”

    The Bushies are already trying to drown the true history of this administration in Bushie swill.
    However –
    There may be hope – look at Nixon’s reputation. Even Reagan’s
    Theodore White and others have tried to blame Nixon’s down fall on the staff he chose in his second term. Watergate was all their fault.
    But Nixon surrounded himself with evil men and except for the Repocons pretty much nobody has any sympathy for Nixon, and hasn’t had for 20 years or more.
    He did leave office in disgrace and all the Republican efforts to make his two terms look good have not succeeded. Watergate, the Irwin Hearings, the Saturday Night Massacre, are the Nixon legacy.

    Iraq and possibly Iran are Bush’s.
    The rest of the world isn’t likely to forget Bush’s indifference to the Indian Ocean tsunami for many many generations.

  • Even though I think it’s somewhat beside the point, the good Doctor and others raise valid points about whether McClellan should have resigned. I would only add that anyone in a situation like his — Colin Powell is actually a much better example — faces something of a dilemma: can I positively influence events more by staying or by resigning in protest. It’s a character test that I think he failed, but, again, is beside the point.

  • Doc Nebula-
    I remember wandering over to a friend’s house on Election Day evening, around 9 o’clock. I’d voted earlier at a campus polling place, and then gone down to M Street and gotten something to eat, and hadn’t heard a word about the election results. I knew my buddy Karl listened to the news fanatically and would have the latest. So I knocked, and when he answered the door, I asked, innocently, having no idea of the electoral route that had just taken place — “So, did Mondale win?”

    and I bet they drowned their sorrrows under Kimmel dining hall at a place called the Jab.

    – SU grad as well- ’90.

  • Looking back on McClellen’s pressers now….he comes off a lot like someone who just isn’t a very gifted liar…..

  • McClellan is a far better book peddler than ever he was a press secretary. Too bad he has to do it in such a shameful way as to both throw his old boss under the bus and cozy up to the liberal media. McClellan’s mom taught him how to be a traitor and evidently she did a very good job of it. Etu Brute

  • Comments are closed.