Bishop Hedd Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 McClellan's book is the hottest topic in politics-well at least for this week-and while it doesn't tell us what those in the know already knew six years ago, it is still always fun to watch the far right republicons eat their own. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nati...92_scott29.html Of course the right wing media attack McClellan but predictably enough avoid criticizing the actual things he said in the book. Scotty always seemed to be the most pained of Bush's press spokespersons. And while he lacked the likable slick charm of Tony Snow, or the photogenic looks of the attractive ditz Dana Perino, you always got the feeling with McClellan that he knew he was spouting Bush Neocon crap and seemed to feel bad about it. McClellan is hardly a hero like a Richard Clarke (I'd lump him in the scrap heap with another neocon retractor Colin "Cancer" Powell) but hey we'll take any act of contrition we can get.
stuckincincy Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 McClellan's book is the hottest topic in politics-well at least for this week-and while it doesn't tell us what those in the know already knew six years ago, it is still always fun to watch the far right republicons eat their own. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nati...92_scott29.html Of course the right wing media attack McClellan but predictably enough avoid criticizing the actual things he said in the book. Scotty always seemed to be the most pained of Bush's press spokespersons. And while he lacked the likable slick charm of Tony Snow, or the photogenic looks of the attractive ditz Dana Perino, you always got the feeling with McClellan that he knew he was spouting Bush Neocon crap and seemed to feel bad about it. McClellan is hardly a hero like a Richard Clarke (I'd lump him in the scrap heap with another neocon retractor Colin "Cancer" Powell) but hey we'll take any act of contrition we can get. Well - you certainly uphold the time-honored liberal tradition of vile hatred, and unctious language...
Adam Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 I don't judge the conservatives or the republicans by what the Bush administration has done. It just wouldn't be fair to judge an entire party/demographic by eight years- its too short a time span.
/dev/null Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Well - you certainly uphold the time-honored liberal tradition of vile hatred, and unctious language... Not to mention their incredible wit with such snappy one liners as RepubliCON and Colin Cancer Powel
blzrul Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Scott McClellan is the son of Carol Keeton Strayhorn or Rylander depending on how you remember her. She is the "granny" who ran for TX gov against Gov. Goodhair. She is a conservative, as is Scott. Her campaign message was basically that the GOP has gotten far astray of party values, substituting social conservatism for fiscal conservatism and building big government as opposed to minimizing governmental intrusion. She was a Bushista when he was Guv - Treasurer or Comptroller, now I don't recall which. Had I still lived in TX I would have voted for the feisty ole granny. I am sure she is proud of her son. As press secretary his job was to perfume the pig, not to contribute to policy decisions. But, it would have been nice if he'd dug in when he thought something was wrong. Four thousand plus US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis might have been spared. Frankly there is nothing in the book that most intelligent people hadn't already surmised. The only difference is it's coming from an insider.
DC Tom Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Man, I'm glad I read your post. I would have hated to miss a gem like "a hero like Richard Clarke".
SilverNRed Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 The only difference is it's coming from an insider. "Insider." Right. The guy was easily the most incompetent press secretary I can remember and only got his job because W. likes Texas people with connections. He was a complete embarassment (who it was fun to forget about) but now he wants to make a little money appealing to the Left since the Right wants nothing to do with him. I find it hard to believe that someone who had more trouble than W. stringing sentences together could ever write a book. Not that it matters. The press will cover this like its a huge story and I wonder how many of the "mainstream media" will bother to wonder why McClellan only had the fortitude to do the right thing and speak out after he got paid to write a book. Nevermind. Let's all pretend this guy was ever competent, let alone important.
Adam Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "Insider." Right. The guy was easily the most incompetent press secretary I can remember and only got his job because W. likes Texas people with connections. He was a complete embarassment (who it was fun to forget about) but now he wants to make a little money appealing to the Left since the Right wants nothing to do with him. I find it hard to believe that someone who had more trouble than W. stringing sentences together could ever write a book. Not that it matters. The press will cover this like its a huge story and I wonder how many of the "mainstream media" will bother to wonder why McClellan only had the fortitude to do the right thing and speak out after he got paid to write a book. Nevermind. Let's all pretend this guy was ever competent, let alone important. And anyways, he didn't tell us anything that we didn't already believe/disbelieve regardless of what side of the fence we were on.
Sketch Soland Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "Insider." Right. The guy was easily the most incompetent press secretary I can remember and only got his job because W. likes Texas people with connections. He was a complete embarassment (who it was fun to forget about) but now he wants to make a little money appealing to the Left since the Right wants nothing to do with him. I find it hard to believe that someone who had more trouble than W. stringing sentences together could ever write a book. Not that it matters. The press will cover this like its a huge story and I wonder how many of the "mainstream media" will bother to wonder why McClellan only had the fortitude to do the right thing and speak out after he got paid to write a book. Nevermind. Let's all pretend this guy was ever competent, let alone important. Who cares if he's competent or not? McClellan is not important. Who cares about McClellan? Why do you feel the need to deflect the issue by ragging on McClellan? You should ask yourself that.
blzrul Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "Insider." Right. The guy was easily the most incompetent press secretary I can remember and only got his job because W. likes Texas people with connections. He was a complete embarassment (who it was fun to forget about) but now he wants to make a little money appealing to the Left since the Right wants nothing to do with him. I find it hard to believe that someone who had more trouble than W. stringing sentences together could ever write a book. Not that it matters. The press will cover this like its a huge story and I wonder how many of the "mainstream media" will bother to wonder why McClellan only had the fortitude to do the right thing and speak out after he got paid to write a book. Nevermind. Let's all pretend this guy was ever competent, let alone important. You crack me up. Most everyone in that administration "got their job because W likes Texas people with connections". A lot of them were recycled Bush I people who eventually had no stomach for W and left. Still, the administration as whole is incompetent so why would this guy be any different? Or is he only NOW incompetent because he's saying things the right doesn't like? He promised before he left that he'd write a tell-all book, and that's just what he did. There were probably tell-all books after Clinton left that of course, to people like you, could only have been gospel truth (assuming they said bad things about Bubba).
Brandon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Perhaps its just me, but isn't it just a little bit hypocritical to only now believe the guy because he tells you what you want to hear? I'm sure that the liberals running around didn't believe a word that came out of his mouth a week ago. IMO, Scott McClellan has absolutely no credibility. He was either lying then, or he's lying now.
Sketch Soland Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Perhaps its just me, but isn't it just a little bit hypocritical to only now believe the guy because he tells you what you want to hear? I'm sure that the liberals running around didn't believe a word that came out of his mouth a week ago. IMO, Scott McClellan has absolutely no credibility. He was either lying then, or he's lying now. McClellan is NOT the main issue here. Democrats and Republicans will focus on McClellan. As usual, PARTISANS MISS THE POINT.
Brandon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 McClellan is NOT the main issue here. Democrats and Republicans will focus on McClellan. As usual, PARTISANS MISS THE POINT. Then what is the main issue?
Bishop Hedd Posted May 29, 2008 Author Posted May 29, 2008 You crack me up. Most everyone in that administration "got their job because W likes Texas people with connections". A lot of them were recycled Bush I people who eventually had no stomach for W and left. Still, the administration as whole is incompetent so why would this guy be any different? Or is he only NOW incompetent because he's saying things the right doesn't like? He promised before he left that he'd write a tell-all book, and that's just what he did. There were probably tell-all books after Clinton left that of course, to people like you, could only have been gospel truth (assuming they said bad things about Bubba). I thought most of the original people in the Bush administration were just recycled old right wing hacks from the tricky Dick and Raygun administrations (Rummy and Cheney among many)? Maybe Rove and McClellan were from Texas but geez can anyone think of anyone else from Texas that had a prominant role in the administration?
Bishop Hedd Posted May 29, 2008 Author Posted May 29, 2008 I am sure she is proud of her son. As press secretary his job was to perfume the pig, not to contribute to policy decisions. But, it would have been nice if he'd dug in when he thought something was wrong. Four thousand plus US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis might have been spared. Frankly there is nothing in the book that most intelligent people hadn't already surmised. The only difference is it's coming from an insider. Yea but serioulsy what could Scotty have done back then? He would have been steamrolled by the Bush propaganda machine and their co-conspirators in the corporate conservative biased mainstream media faster than you can say the "Toronto Bills".
SilverNRed Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 You crack me up. Most everyone in that administration "got their job because W likes Texas people with connections". A lot of them were recycled Bush I people who eventually had no stomach for W and left.What makes you think I like how Bush picks his people? Still, the administration as whole is incompetent so why would this guy be any different? Or is he only NOW incompetent because he's saying things the right doesn't like?Nice try but, no, he isn't only "NOW" incompetent. Here's a link for you to look at from over two years ago: Link He promised before he left that he'd write a tell-all book, and that's just what he did. There were probably tell-all books after Clinton left that of course, to people like you, could only have been gospel truth (assuming they said bad things about Bubba). Yes "people like me" who often quote the anti-Clinton tell-alls. Find evidence that I read any of those books or care about them. SM is taking his last stab at being relevant and making money. That's all.
Brandon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Hypocrisy in action: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/bush.clarke/ You gotta love ol' Scott's comments on that situation.
Sketch Soland Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Then what is the main issue? The main issue: THE GROSS NEGLECT/INCOMPETENCE OF OUR GOVERNMENT AND THE STEADY EROSION OF INDIVIDUAL AUTONOMY BECAUSE OF THIS NEGLECT/INCOMPETENCE
erynthered Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Hypocrisy in action: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/bush.clarke/ You gotta love ol' Scott's comments on that situation. Nice find. McClellan pointed to the timing of Clarke's book. "If Dick Clarke had such grave concerns, why wait so long? Why wait until the election?" Instead, McClellan said, Clarke "conveniently" released a book in the middle of the campaign season.
blzrul Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 I thought most of the original people in the Bush administration were just recycled old right wing hacks from the tricky Dick and Raygun administrations (Rummy and Cheney among many)? Maybe Rove and McClellan were from Texas but geez can anyone think of anyone else from Texas that had a prominant role in the administration? Karen whatserface...Gonzales...Harriett Meier....off the top of my head
Recommended Posts