Posted on 03/16/2006 9:34:09 AM PST by pabianice
Actually, I think they keep him there becasue he rope a dopes them into doing exactly this kind of thing.
Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves like Dean did
I used to care about who the Press Secretary is and how he came across.
Now I don't give much of a rip.
Sure, I would like to see the media all hammered and put in their place and called on all their "stuff" (a polite word for bs). But that is just me wanting the satisfaction and joy of watching it happen.
What I now care about is what is the reason Bush and Rove do what they do, and I have no doubt they have their reasons. The fact that these people are fully exposed and being egged on to get meaner and meaner and crazier and crazier, like animal house instead of a press briefing, could just be their way of allowing the press to totally marginalize themselves.
I fully understand why so many here don't agree with this.
But I just let Bush/Rove do their thing.
My guess is they plan at some point to beat these people about the head and grind them into the ground, but that they are going to do it some other way, not through Scott McClellan or any replacement for Scott McClellan.
SO put a baffoon who cant defend anything to be the PR spokesman as a rope-a-dope? I dont buy it...
McClellan will draw no attention to himself and Bush will not allow him to.
This would allow the MSM to get higher ratings as they would report day after day on the latest ins and outs of the latest secretary's comments and how the media would analyze, criticize, twist and hype the latest to get ratings.
Do we really want the media to turn around their ratings slump? Don't think so. McClellan is low-key. Good for him. (and Pres. Bush)
ROFL!!!
The Vultures posing as members of the White House Press Corp have lost any respect they may have had.
This bs plays great with the shrinking number of lunatic lefties. It does not play well with the rest of America.
IMHO, I say that it is female trouble, if he is married, then it is a divorce...if he is single then the girl friend is moving out....
Great idea. You be in charge of that, okay? :)
So, Monkeyman is out of his tree again. Going bananas.
Time for a new cage?
Too bad McClellan didn't get his mama's aggressiveness. He must have taken after his hen-pecked father.
Rants are my specialty!
Excellent point. Remember how after the State of the Union speech in January how CNN did some flash polling that showed the speech was well received? Did you notice Wolf Blitzer falling all over himself to try to mitigate those positive numbers by saying "These are probably because Republican voters are more likely to watch the State of the Union than are Democratic voters." He said it over and over again to try to say "Don't really put too much stock in these numbers. It's mostly Republicans." Funny how Wolf and the rest of the media rat pack don't feel any such need to point out that their crapola polls over-represent Democrats and thus should not be taken seriously.
Apology accepted David Gregory!
Helen Thomas you have been rude to me for the last time!
Choke hold! gasping for breath. Dead
or
I find your lack of faith in this administration disturbing!
Well, here's a copy and paste of the Helen Thomas segment of the briefing. Y'all can fill in how you would respond to the hag. Do the same with Gregory's segment if ya wish. Let's have fun with this.
I'll do mine later.
___________________________________________________________________
Q Does the President know that he's in violation of international law when he advocates preemptive war? The U.N. Charter, Geneva, Nuremberg. We violate international law when we advocate attacking a country that did not attack us.
MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, I would just disagree with your assessment. First of all, preemption is a longstanding principle of American foreign --
Q It's not a long-standing principle with us. It's your principle.
MR. McCLELLAN: Have you asked your question?
Q It's a violation of international law.
MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, let me back up, preemption is a longstanding principle of American foreign policy. It is also part --
Q It's never been.
MR. McCLELLAN: It is also part of an inherent right to self-defense. But what we seek to do is to address issues diplomatically by working with our friends and allies, and working with regional partners. That's what we're doing when it comes to the threat posed by Iran pursuing nuclear weapons. That's what we're doing when it comes to resolving the nuclear issue with North Korea. So we seek diplomatic solutions to confront threats.
And it's important what September 11th taught us --
Q The heavy emphasis of your paper today is war and preemptive war.
MR. McCLELLAN: Can I finish responding to your question, because I think it's important to answer your question. It's a good question and it's a fair question. But first of all, are we supposed to wait until a threat fully materializes and then respond? September 11th --
Q Under international law you have to be attacked first.
MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, you're not letting me respond to your question. You have the opportunity to ask your question, and I would like to be able to provide a response so that the American people can hear what our view is. This is not new in terms of our foreign policy. This has been a longstanding principle, the question that you bring up. But again, I'll put the question back to you. Are we supposed to wait until a threat fully materializes before we respond --
Q You had no threat from Iraq.
MR. McCLELLAN: September 11th taught us --
Q That was not a threat from Iraq.
MR. McCLELLAN: -- some important lessons. One important lesson it taught us was that we must confront threats before they fully materialize. That's why we are working to address the threats when it comes to nuclear issues involving Iran and North Korea. That's why we're pursuing diplomatic solutions to those efforts, by working with our friends and allies, by working with regional partners who understand the stakes involved and understand the consequences of failing to confront those threats early, before it's too late.
Q What are the consequences?
MR. McCLELLAN: The consequences of a nuclear armed Iran, they are very serious in terms of stability --
Q Are you warning Iran that it has consequences as you did Iraq?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what has happened with Iran right now is that the matter has been reported to the United Nations Security Council because the regime in Iran has failed to come into compliance with its safeguard obligations, and they continue to engage in enrichment related activity. And we have supported the efforts of the Europeans to resolve this matter diplomatically, but the regime in Iran continues to pursue the wrong course.
They need to change their behavior. They continue to defy the international community. That's why the matter has been reported to the Security Council. We have now entered a new phase of diplomacy. And there are a lot of discussions going on about how to prevent the regime from developing a nuclear weapon capability, or developing nuclear weapons. And that's why those discussions are ongoing.
This is an important issue. It outlines in our national security strategy that this is one of the most serious challenges that we face.
Q Are we threatening Iran with preemptive war?
MR. McCLELLAN: We're trying to resolve this in a diplomatic manner by working with our friends and allies.
Ping to #235.
Have fun with it, fellow villain.
Ping! "If Helen Thomas tore off her mask..." roflmfo
Besides, I've seen a pattern... whenever the "ugly duo" beat up on Scotty in the press room, the legislative Dems think they've scored. They then launch another Keystone Kops agenda item.
It's a hilarious show, at times.
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.