I can hear Henry Whacko Waxman now, ‘ It`s the seriousness
of the charges! We will convene hearings on the illegal Bush war.’
Don’t forget that his 25-time divorced fake Republican mother was running against the GOP in Texas for governor at this time as an independent.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if he lied in the book and the plan was to get him in front of Congress to nail the RATS?
scott who? Hey, what ever became of Ari Fleischer?
Guy’s toast. He burnt his bridges, and the left will dump him as soon as Bush is out of office. Unless he makes enough off the book sales, he’ll be working at a MacDonald’s drive through.
The ONLY reason we needed to go back to Iraq, Is that they broke the cease-fire agreement.
Mc Clellan was pathethetic as Bush’s press secretary. Bush probably put him in that job because he, like his father, was a sucker for “reaching out” to the Democrats. Ari Fleischer, his predecessor, and Tony Snow, his successor, were very sharp and well informed. This made Mc Clellan seem particularly clueless in retrospect. So now he write’s a tell-all” book and all of a sudden the same press that kicked this clueless putz around like a soccer ball is hailing him as a credible “insider”
To call McClellan a turncoat is to malign turncoats.
Guess WHO is going to be interviewed- for the first time since the book publicity- tomorrow night, by KEITH OLBERMANN??
Scott McClellan.
Tonight at dinner, the lovely Mrs. Tick asked me “So what do you think of Scott McClellan”?
I gave her the honest answer: I would strangle him with my bare hands, were it legal and within my power to do so.
What filthy, stinking scum. I hope he rots.
The rest is my favorite, and going on Olbermann just takes the cake!
McClellan writes: “History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided — that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder.”
In fact, “history” is poised to do no such thing. Al-Qaida is on the run, and the U.S. is on the cusp of victory in Iraq (for another view of our success in the War on Terror, see “Verbatim,” page A11). Years from now we think Americans will see this as a turning point in history, a time when an American leader stood up to protect Western Civilization following the barbarous attacks of 9/11.
We don’t have space here to refute everything. But one charge in McClellan’s 341-page tome stands out, so we’ll focus on that: The Bush White House conducted a dishonest “political propaganda campaign” to sell the war to the American people.
Start with the obvious: Wasn’t it McClellan’s job to resign in protest if he thought the American people were being misled? If so, this was his own failing, not Bush’s.
Moreover, contrary to the common wisdom, Bush’s rationale for taking out Saddam Hussein was about many things — not just one.
Yes, he expressed concern Saddam would get a nuclear weapon with which to blackmail both his neighbors and the West.
But Bush also wanted to halt the spread of terror, deny a possible haven for al-Qaida, and promote democracy in the Mideast, among other things. As ex-Pentagon official Doug Feith recently noted, Bush delivered 24 major speeches on Iraq from Sept. 2002 to Sept. 2004. In them, he made a wide-ranging, nuanced case for getting rid of Saddam. It wasn’t only about WMD.
Yet, McClellan claims Bush was “shading the truth.” Well, what truth did he shade? WMD? In fact, the CIA assessment of Iraq that Bush used was made during President Clinton’s final year in office. It said that Saddam had a WMD program and, quite possibly, a nuclear weapon. Every major intelligence agency — Britain’s, France’s, Russia’s, Germany’s, Israel’s, even the U.N.’s — agreed.
Yes, as it turns out, some of that intelligence was wrong. Even so, reasons for getting rid of Saddam were too numerous to ignore. In October of 2002, Congress cited no fewer than 23 reasons when it overwhelmingly gave Bush the right to remove Saddam.
Bush was clear from the start, and dead honest: This was about defending our nation from the insane jihadists who had declared war on us from their safe-havens in the Mideast. McClellan, blinded by his anger, can’t see this. The American people someday will.
bump
Wexler is a rung smarter than Maxine Waters!! BRING IT ON!!! Hey Scotty......you will be under oath, but it won’t matter what you say as long as it’s ANTI-BUSH!! Lie with IMPUNITY if you want!
McClellan always seemed to me like a not quite on board, piss poor spokesman for the administration from the get go.
I sit here so frustrated.
Wouldn’t all this hysteria, this big deal piece of nothing story that is only the Perils of Pauline to those living on a cloud in Washington DC, be simply put to rest if Bush would just use the bully pulpit and end it in its tracks?
Why doesn’t Bush just put out a statement that reads, to the effect...”I regret that this administration’s former Press Secretary has published what we can only consider untruths in a recent book...but I would remind the American public that it was CONGRESS, yes our House or Reps and our Senate, who voted to takes this country to war in Iraq. If it is Scott McClellan’s contention that this was a bad decision, he has no right to change history. “
In other words, it’s always about this supposed “illegal war” and lies about this war and the libs are determined that Bush’s legacy, including I would remind, every precious member of our military, reflect Iraq as his own private decision and a failure. When it was CONGRESS that approved that war.
I’m tired of seeing life so simply but damn any fool can see the Dems are working from presenting a hysterical, constantly repeated until it becomes true rant....and the administration should, using simple common sense but what the hell would be wrong with just saying that bit about congress over and over and hey, the ladies at the beauty parlor will hear it too?
Or maybe that would just take all the fun out of it. Those political elites live on some lala cloud that in no way approximates our own lives, us fools who carry this country on our backs.
Bah humbug.
This reminds me of the 180 degree turn by Scott Ritter when it was later discovered that a Saddam middleman had given him $400,000 to change his story. Similar deal. His publisher publishes lots of left wing trash including books by Soros. On H&C tonight someone reported that Ari Fleischer said McClelland told him that after he had finished his part he allowed his editor to change a number of things, including the title.