White House Backstabbing for Fun and Profit
Scott McClellan's book isn't even on bookshelves yet and is already causing controversy. Just what do presidential aides owe to the men who gave them everything and changed their lives forever?
Scott McClellan was plucked from obscurity by then-Governor George W. Bush in 1999 to become deputy communications director (he was chief of staff for a Texas state senator). He was given the job of traveling press secretary for Bush-Cheney in 2000 and rewarded with the top communications post in the White House — press secretary — in 2003, succeeding the burned-out Ari Fleisher. McClellan is not a very popular fellow at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue today.
It’s a safe assumption to make that without George Bush, Scott McClellan would still be in Texas, glad handing other state senators, eating greasy barbecue on the campaign trail, watching endless baton twirling routines by cute little 8-year-old girls in hideously revealing outfits (and being forced to clap), and giving interviews to the Turnbull Weekly Shopper. Instead, he became the second most visible person in the White House, calling star reporters by their first name and able to get Ben Bradlee on the phone anytime he wished.
Now I’m a sort of old fashioned curmudgeon. Not a Victorian, mind you, but no doubt born in the wrong time. To my sensibilities, if someone were to do me a life altering favor such as tapping me on the shoulder and asking me to represent the president of these United States before the news media when just a few years previously I was jawboning ranchers to help pass a school lunch bill, I just might carry around feelings of loyalty and respect for pretty much the rest of my life.
But I’m not Scott McClellan and no one dangled a 7-figure advance in front of my face to write a book that would kick my old boss in the groin when he’s already down for the count and bleeding profusely.
McClellan is not the only Bushie to cash in on the times, the drama, and the peculiar satisfaction people get when reading about the president’s failures and blunders. Fired Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill wrote The Price of Loyalty in 2002,a kiss and tell book which claimed that Bush was “detached” from events that were going on and his economic policies were “irresponsible.” He also stated that the war in Iraq had been planned since the first national security council meeting.
But O’Neil’s book didn’t have much impact because most of official Washington realized it was an exercise in payback. The treasury secretary got the ax and was publicly castrated when the administration let on he didn’t have the “gravitas” with Wall Street to give the investors any confidence in the Bush economic plan. O’Neill couldn’t let that challenge to his manhood go by without a riposte so he wrote his poison pen letter of a book, getting in as many shots as he could.
Something similar happened when counterterrorism pro Richard Clarke was shouldered aside in a power grab by then National Security Council Chief Condoleezza Rice. Clarke went from having every day access to the president and being in charge of the nation’s counter terror efforts to filing reports with Rice for the president’s perusal just like any other normal White House staffer. Whether it was because he was passed over or some other more partisan reason, Clarke’s book Against all Enemies laid the blame for 9/11 at Bush’s door and ended up absolving himself of most of the failures that led to that awful day.
Why would aides and cabinet secretaries do something that at the very least is perceived as being a betrayal of the man who gave them a front row seat at the making of history? The phenomenon has not been limited to the Bush administration. The late historian Arthur Schlesinger notes in this PBS Newshour transcript that William Duane, Andrew Jackson’s treasury secretary, wrote a book attacking the president after Jackson fired him. And Newsweek reported that one of FDR’s major advisors, Raymond Moley, wrote a book in 1939 charging that Roosevelt had been captured by the far left.
Presidential historian Michael Beschloss points out that, even with those examples, what McClellan did is very unusual by historical standards. He explains why such behavior was seen as traitorous:
Basically there was a feeling about government — before the last 30 or 40 years — that if you leave in protest, you go quietly. For instance, in Roosevelt’s case, his assistant secretary of the Treasury was Dean Acheson. After the first year [Acheson] was very unhappy about one of Roosevelt’s monetary policies and he quit–and he did it quietly. He was disenchanted with Roosevelt, but publicly people didn’t know the reason why–he just said that it was time to leave. And Roosevelt later said to someone, I really disagreed with Acheson, I was upset when he left. But look at Dean Acheson: that’s an example of the way a gentleman resigns.
What about a more recent example?
Probably the most spectacular example would be [Richard Nixon's White House counsel] John Dean, who did not resign in protest. He left in the spring of ‘73 after he concluded that Nixon was setting him up to be the scapegoat for Watergate … But only a couple months later, in June of ‘73, only a couple of months after he’s left the White House, he goes before Congress and accuses Nixon of impeachable offenses and begins his testimony by saying, “I hope the president will be forgiven.” And then goes on to say a lot of things [that Nixon did] that are pretty unforgivable.
The historian then talks about a speechwriter for Eisenhower who was going to write a mildly critical book after the president had already been out of office:
There’s no rule. There used to be that there was an unwritten rule that you never write while the president is in office and even for some time after that. Eisenhower had a speechwriter called Emmet John Hughes … [His] book was called “The Ordeal of Power,” and it was pretty mild criticism. It basically said, Eisenhower was a great man, he was so popular, why didn’t he use his popularity for greater things than he did?” This is not an expose, this is not the kind of thing that we’re talking about later on. Eisenhower heard about it while the book was still in manuscript. He was irate. The book was supposed to be published by Doubleday, which was Eisenhower’s publisher. Eisenhower went to Doubleday and told them to cancel the contract–which they did.
John F. Kennedy was somewhat obsessed about staffers who would end up writing books about him. Bobby told John that they really had to give Arthur Schlesinger a job because he was going to write a book about the administration anyway and he may as well get it from the inside rather than outside where they couldn’t control him.
Ronald Reagan dealt with a trio of employees who ended up contributing to the erroneous image of him as genial dunce. Of the three, former Chief of Staff Donald Regan’s book was the nastiest — a bile-filled reminisce that took particular aim at Nancy Reagan who came off as a cross between Leona Helmsley and the Wicked Witch of the West.
But if there was one thing that all these previous books had in common it is that they were written by fairly substantial men who built solid reputations outside of government. They may have been obscure prior to coming to Washington, but because they were hardly without life achievements their service in government was something like the culmination of a long career. Loyalty was a secondary consideration to playing politics or rescuing a reputation as was the case with both Regan and Alexander Haig, who felt slighted by the Reagan White House when they didn’t think he should act as something of a co-president with the Gipper.
George Stephanopoulos came in for similar criticism as McClellan when he published All Too Human almost two full years before Bill Clinton left office. The book angered Clinton partisans for its frank discussion of the president’s failings and raised many of the same questions being asked about McClellan’s book. But Stephanopoulos was an administration insider and the book was enormously valuable for the insight it gave into how the Clinton White House really operated.
Not so Mr. McClellan. He was far from being an administration big shot. He had no reputation to rescue nor did he necessarily have a political axe to grind. He wrote his vicious little pamphlet and nailed it to the wall because his publisher recognized a market for his scribblings, nothing more. There is doubtless some historical value in what we are told is a book all of 321 pages, although I doubt whether it would be anything much beyond footnote worthy. In essence, Mr. McClellan sold his memories — faulty or otherwise — for no other reason than he could.
Nothing wrong with making a lot of money, I’ll grant that to him. But in McClellan’s case, one wonders if the idea of loyalty to a man who changed his life forever by taking him in when he was little more than a Texas political jobber ever crossed his mind.
Sleep well, Scotty.
Rick Moran is PJM Chicago editor; his own blog is Right Wing Nut House.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
46 Comments
1. David Thomson:I cannot recall anyone who thought Scott McClellan did a good job. At the very best, he was an object of pity. Most thought McClellan was way over his head, a minor leaguer who somehow snuck into the majors. A book by such an individual should normally find no more than a mere handful of readers. Sadly, his gross distortions will be amply rewarded. The odds are indeed that McClellan is now a millionaire.
I might also add that Scott is similar to his mother, Carole Keeton Strayhorn. She tried to do enormous damage to the Texas GOP by running as an independent candidate versus Rick Perry in 2006. There was a decent chance that her efforts could have placed a Democrat in the governor’s office. I personally considered her to be a stark raving crazy person who consistently indulged in exaggerations, if not outright slander. Ms. Strayhorn was also a a betrayer of trust. Like mother, like son?
May 29, 2008 - 3:56 am 2. Ciscokid:Scotty best invest his book money wisely. Doubt he’ll be trusted by anyone ever again. Character of a person (Obama) obviously doesn’t count much to the Democrats. They’ll use Scotty to beat the Bush hater drum a few more times and kick him to the curb. We’ll hear Obama jump on this, trying to tie McCain in somehow with Bush, blah, blah, blah. Tens years after a presidents term, usually is when a true history of their leadership and truthfulness come into focus. Scotty’s little Judas moment in history will help fill in the liberal propaganda chapter, which has caused Bush to have such low ratings during his term.
May 29, 2008 - 4:25 am 3. David Thomson:“Doubt he’ll be trusted by anyone ever again.”
Scott McClellan has indeed proven himself to be a person not to be trusted. The odds are that George Soros will somehow provide him with a nice salary for the next few years—and then he will disappear forevermore from public view. This is also what happened to his mother. I doubt very much if she could be elected dog catcher anywhere in Texas. Both mother and son have burned their bridges behind them.
May 29, 2008 - 5:34 am 4. tanstaafl:Scott McClellan’s stumbling non-answers to questions during press conferences were always embarrassing.
His intellectual skills are such that writing some sensational exposé (with a healthy advance that will zoom to the top of Amazon in one day) is likely the best way he has to make some fast & quick money.
Now equally inept and self-serving Congresscritters (e.g. Robert Wexler, D-Fla.) are calling for McClellan to be examined under oath by the House Judiciary Committee.
Plamegate redux. Don’t Congresscritters have any real work to do ?
Undoubtedly, but the grandstanding and witch hunting are so much more fun.
May 29, 2008 - 5:34 am 5. dan:I’ve just heard this morning’s NPR interview with McClellan twice - this man is a worm. The morning’s top headline is, briefly, “Bush insider exposes The Lie,” but then McClellan himself answers “so it was propoganda, just like we’ve been saying” with “well he was sincere, he didn’t do it intentionally, the White House is this bubble.” And “you say you still have respect and affection for those who lied us into war, but how can that be?” Well, “the White House is a bubble, and my views have evolved…”
It’s just like the music industry: you write one goddamn song to get you onto the charts, the rest is self-evident crap, the media gives you a fanfare previously reserved for actual superstardom earned by distinctive and truly seductive talent, and then you blow away - but we have to hear about your goddamn talentless prostitute ass for weeks because the media is a whorehouse of idiots.
Anyway, McClellan is scum.
May 29, 2008 - 5:36 am 6. AJ:“I cannot recall anyone who thought Scott McClellan did a good job. At the very best, he was an object of pity.”
Exactly. Comparing him to stalwarts such as Tony Snow and Ari Fleischer is like comparing Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan.
Of course, the liberal drive-by media, who ignores real stories of military heroism or anything relevant is drooling over this, as part of their agenda is to destroy Pres. Bush, even though that’s a meaningless endeavor here in June of 2008. But they have no use for facts or morals.
I received nearly a dozen emails from leftists yesterday about this. The others were from my Jewish liberal friends who believe Rev. Hagee, who supports Israel with million dollar fundraisers each year, is more dangerous and worse than Rev. Wright.
Some (Orwellian) World.
May 29, 2008 - 6:11 am 7. Truth:I have to respect the writers op-ed. But what I wonder is why? Scotty’s book is a big story and by most counts will be looked at in curiosity regarding his motives. I wouldn’t hire Scott after seeing him throw his former co-workers under the bus. But you have objectively ask did he have good reason? With that said. All I have heard from the right is how Scott has changed, must be troubled, he’s a traitor, and comparisons to people who have been disgruntled in the past. Where is the outrage of the accusations. There is no doubt there are some who profit from the administrations decision making in all fields of commerce and they are numerous. Where are the people who just have conservative values on national security, faith, economics, schooling,? Can you continue to blindly follow like sheep? The evidence has always been there. Or not there in some cases. The last 8 years has weekend us as a nation, caused a enormous rift between the 2 major political parties, spread the military 2 thin, weekend the dollar,stripped us of our liberties(patriot acts 1 and 2-wiretapping), increased the deficit, lost jobs overseas while allowing more imports, sparked the growth of India and China by giving them access to our markets-helping increase fuel prices for us. And of course Iraq over 4000 dead Americans thousands of wounded and thousands of dead Iraqis. Iraqs enemy’s were Syria and Iran. Take a look at the globe that was perfect. So a book like this comes out and reasserts previous suspicions. From a former staffer(non-policy maker)at the white house. So what we have been through as Americans as well as our allies is for nothing, for Impereralism. Screw Scott! Where is the outrage for what matters? The country.
May 29, 2008 - 6:47 am 8. Extreme Mortman » Dread Scott - Just When You Thought it Was Safe to Take Politics Seriously Again:[...] Rick Moran writes a great column in Pajamas Media today. A favorite excerpt: It’s a safe assumption to make that without George Bush, Scott [...]
May 29, 2008 - 6:51 am 9. Mike:Loyalty,He was plucked from obscurity,etc etc etc ya right.What about loyalty to the American people and our country?I voted for this guy twice so call me a fool I deserve it.But dont talk loyalty when he refuses to secure our borders,gts us where we dont belong, and tries His best to destroy this country from within, ya loyalty!!
May 29, 2008 - 7:34 am 10. asdfs:Didnt Negroponte admit to being the leaker? Yet they still insist it was Rove and Libby… total tards. Scotts a dick as well.
May 29, 2008 - 7:39 am 11. politicalreacharound:Maybe McClellan wasn’t sleeping well because of his conscious. I am sure he is sleeping better today. The author’s point that you should stay loyal to your employer no matter what is pretty weak. Its too bad Bush never stayed loyal to his employers the American people. He used this country as his sandbox to build a legacy that was washed away with the tide a long time ago. I also doubt the money was the number 1 issue in this case seeing how being close to this administration will make you rich anyways. In the end McClellan comes off as a simple man asked to lie for people he respected and finally coming to terms with his and the administrations many mistakes and lies after proper reflection.
May 29, 2008 - 7:58 am 12. Rockford:This piece is itself puzzling. If you are going to deny McClellan’s assertions, give it a shot. You seem to be tacitly admitting he’s right, while calling him disloyal.
Maybe McClellan decided his loyalty to his country and to history was stonger than his loyalty to a failed president.
May 29, 2008 - 8:45 am 13. kgj:“And Newsweek reported that one of FDR’s major advisors, Raymond Moley, wrote a book in 1939 charging that Roosevelt had been captured by the far left.”
And why, was that not true?
I suppose FDR was more of a fascist than a leftist, though.
Legitimate criticism from former aides in their memoirs is not something they should all refrain from out of loyalty.
The point is to keep it legitimate and classy.
It’s obvious Scotty was just after the money.
May 29, 2008 - 9:12 am 14. J.G.:The conservative right-wingers have always denied the truth and ignored the facts. McClellan’s book is just another example.
May 29, 2008 - 9:53 am 15. dee98:I Have a dream
Obama blasts McCain
Hillary Blogs
Obamas resume
Want to know the difference between Clinton and Obama supporters
And Find out What has been bothering me
This and more on…
http://sensico.wordpress.com/
May 29, 2008 - 10:07 am 16. Kurt:asdfs: The leaker (at least to Novak) was Richard Armitrage of the State Department. That it was he was a source of speculation for some time until his identity was eventually revealed.
May 29, 2008 - 11:29 am 17. schnargley:Well. This will finally put the nail in the coffin! What we and the world press have all thought and said for eight years without relenting is finally confirmed by this profound, substantial and disturbing expose on possibly the owrst person ever to have existed since the human race crawled out of the mud.
I hope this kills his chances of getting reelected.
May 29, 2008 - 12:25 pm 18. Mabel:No one put it better than O’Reilly. McClellan does not add anything new. He’s an opportunist, making money while biting the hand that fed him. If he had any NEW insider information (details, actual facts not just his opinion), then I would say his disloyalty is excused. He told Fleisher last year that the book would be pro-Bush and recently admitted that his editor wanted to make changes to it. Why? Cause a pro-Bush book won’t sell!!!
May 29, 2008 - 12:36 pm 19. Aaron:And what is it that he has said that it’s true??? His own impressions that Bush seemed “detached” but was sincere??? Unless he could read Bush’s mind, his commentary is worthless…more so when considering that as press secretary, he had no involvement in discussions or participation in big decision making…he was just the messenger who’s now trying to save some face with an unpopular administration and to make some dough. The only loyalty he shows is to his wallet.
For a president that really values loyalty, this is a low, low blow. Left-wingers rejoice. I agree. He’s scum.
“He wrote his vicious little pamphlet and nailed it to the wall because his publisher recognized a market for his scribblings, nothing more.”
That is conjecture, nothing more. He could also have hit a point where his loyalty to his country outweighed his loyalty to Bush. That’s just as impossible to prove or disprove. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle of those two extremes.
May 29, 2008 - 1:11 pm 20. Rockford:Kurt and asdfs:
Yes, Armitage leaked to Novak.
He was NOT the ONLY leaker, and he was not even first.
Rove leaked to Matt Cooper, and Libby leaked to Judy Miller. He also, yuh know, purgered himself and committed Obsturction of Justice covering it all up. No big deal, though.
May 29, 2008 - 1:19 pm 21. Eugene:Whatever, whatever. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Where I come from, when someone gives you a hand up, you don’t turn on them. Whatever Mr. McClellan thought or felt, he should have talked to the President himself. Heaven knows he could have if he REALLY wanted to. He took the coward’s road. Too Bad.
May 29, 2008 - 1:49 pm 22. WR Jonas:David Thomsons first post is dead on. This is Texas politics by none other than Molly Ivins “lite” or as she is lovingly referred to in Austin political circles,”Carol Keeton McClellan Strayhorn Rylander Crosby Stills Nash and Young.”
May 29, 2008 - 1:52 pm 23. Javelin:Scotts “momma”
So now it’s time for all the right wing Bushbotic ghouls to crawl out of their holes and slash and attack another of Bush’s critic. Sorry Moran, I think you are just a cheap little hack writing for a crummy little blog for little jerkoffs who live in a talk radio universe.
May 29, 2008 - 2:03 pm 24. Rick Moran:Basically, Moran’s main point is that you must bury the truth when it concerns you patron, how immoral! So we should serve no one higher than our boss? All I see here is the usual brainless bullies tossing insults around because that is their sandbox level of reasoning.
I beg to differ. There is nothing cheap about me. I am a gold plated, diamond encrusted, titanium shielded, platinum dripping 100% Bushbotic ghoul who also happens to be a gigantic hack of writer working for one the leading online rags in the conservative attack machine.
Top that, Mr. Green With Envy Liberal Talking Point.
May 29, 2008 - 2:22 pm 25. WR Jonas:Javelin: You are missing the point buddy ,you don’t have to bury the truth.You can sell it, like a guy named Judas did many years ago.
May 29, 2008 - 2:26 pm 26. Nathan:He was bought by based on who published the book. Who really wrote the book? Give it a little time and the left/Bush haters will appear.
“….A globe that was perfect”? What a strange comment in the middle of a rant.
May 29, 2008 - 2:32 pm 27. Aaron:Javelin — Rick is actually a critical and objective thinker who is, to his credit, reviled by many on the extreme right. Read his blog. Don’t be a impolite.
The fact is that McClellan’s book (ahem, the media’s analysis of McClellan’s book) just doesn’t contain enough substance to make those who are sympathetic to Bush seriously rethink their positions.
To me, it reinforces the tragic story of a president who started a war to bring forth a level of greatness in himself that he does not, in fact, possess.
I’ll stop talking out of my rear just as soon as I read the thing…
May 29, 2008 - 3:18 pm 28. Candide:…it reinforces the tragic story of a president who started a war to bring forth a level of greatness in himself that he does not, in fact, possess.
I think Bush started the war to remove Saddam.
May 29, 2008 - 4:53 pm 29. Sissy Willis:“No reputation to rescue”? Couldn’t his motivation have been a desperate, existential need to regain lost honor?
To bring himself back into the scheme of history
May 29, 2008 - 5:20 pm 30. Eugene:Hey, Hey, Hey, guys (& girls).
Just remember an old proverb”:
“When they say it’s about the principle, and not about the $$, it’s really about the $$”
If Mr. McClellan really is not interested or motivated by $$, let’s see him donate the proceeds to charity.
I’ll watch, but, I somehow kinda doubt it.
It’s about the $$. Are we to blindly follow bad leadership? A thousand times no! But, there is this word that’s lost in politics these days. It’ an old word. It’s called HONOR.
Semper fi.
May 29, 2008 - 6:48 pm 31. Mabel:“…it reinforces the tragic story of a president who started a war to bring forth a level of greatness in himself that he does not, in fact, possess.”
Yeah right, that’s why he did it…
But NOT because:
-Saddam was a genocidal murderous maniac
- He violated a ton of UN resolutions and mocked the weapons inspectors
- He boasted of having WMDs
- Tony Blair, Bill and Hillary, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy all agreed he was a threat
- This move might lead to democracy in the middle east to counter the jihadist epidemic and give those people a better chance at life.
No, it was his own twisted sense of grandeur, right? Please, stop psychoanalizing people you don’t know…quit watching Dr. Phil!
May 29, 2008 - 7:43 pm 32. Javelin:Rick Moran:
I could care less about your creds, all I know is that this piece is just an attack piece that is all venom but little else. You vilify him and little else. It seems that every time someone falls out with Bush, thousands of hacks like you foam at their mouths and attack the person ad hominem instead of actually refuting the charges and arguing their position cogently.
By the way, what is the great principle that McClellan is abrogating? Someone that close to the President could have easily enriched himself by writing a defense of Bush too. How did every here acquire the ability to read his soul? Of course, it is so much easier to attack and label people then pretend you possess some great principles (which seem invisible to me) than actually search for the truth.
May 29, 2008 - 8:56 pm 33. FredFlintstone:If it walks and talks like a hitpiece, it probably is one.
May 29, 2008 - 9:45 pm 34. Steve:What a shock the usual lefty trolls come out. I would like to bring up a point that has been said elsewhere, if this guy knew that this was wrong then why did he wait until he got paid to do it to say this? What does it say about him? Kind of takes away his arguement about setting things straight. Would he have done it if no one had paid him? Of course all the lefties defend him as a seeker for truth. So does this mean all those books written about Clinton were quests for the truth?
So now it’s time for all the right wing Bushbotic ghouls to crawl out of their holes and slash and attack another of Bush’s critic. Sorry Moran, I think you are just a cheap little hack writing for a crummy little blog for little jerkoffs who live in a talk radio universe.
So your just here as an observer right? Seems you got nothing better to do then troll. Sorry Javelin your just another lefty cbyer tough guy who talks big behind a keyboard who thinks running his mouth in a free country is brave.
May 29, 2008 - 11:56 pm 35. john:I get tired of talking about WMD’s as if that was the only reason to attack. The truth is this wasn’t George Bush’s war; it was Bill Clinton’s war, only Bush had the guts to fight it. We beat Saddam Hussein in the first “Gulf War”, he surrendered and we let him stay in power if he fallowed OUR rules and he agreed. That made him our B**CH. When he shot at our planes he broke the deal. As it said in Mad Max Thunder dome “Break the deal, face the wheel” and that wheel went right over Hussein’s neck. GOOD RIDDENCE. So when talking about Iraq it’s good to talk about that slightly important fact too. While were talking about WMD’s, don’t some of you think that jerk Hussein, thanks to the inept UN, might of had a chance or two of hidding them in Syria?
May 30, 2008 - 6:56 am 36. Misanthropicus:Iago/Scott McClellan/Bill Richardson Political Ethics Consultants
Misanthropicus is glad that he can inform the PJM readers about the opening of this new political consulting firm in Washington, DC. Cmbining solid administrative and PR exposure, historical experience, character and loyalty, Iago/McCllelan/Richardson will unfailingly, without hidden agendae, work for furthering their clients’ objectives. You can trust Iago/McClellan/Richardson - their integrity is legendary.
May 30, 2008 - 7:12 am 37. Chuck Tucson:For references call:
William Shakespeare, scrivener,
Othello, potentate,
George W. Bush, US president,
William J. Clinton, former US president,
Hillary R. Clinton, current US presidential candidate,
Others: _____________________________
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
etc.
Way to attack the messenger. Standard procedure for you, since you don’t have the intellect to challenge the assertions in the book.
Tell us, Rick, why on earth should he have any loyalty to a man who flat out lied to him on many occasions causing him to then come spew those lies to the people.
Loyalty. What a load of crap. Where was the loyalty to McClellan? Oh, maybe that doesn’t count. You’re a talking point spewing tool. Maybe you should try being loyal to conservatism for a change.
May 30, 2008 - 9:30 am 38. NormL:McClellan was the first “insider” to draw back the curtain on the White House self-created bubble and their version of reality. Mark this- he won’t be the last to reveal how this lying, corrupt, deceptive and traitorous behavior of this gang of thugs subverted America for their own selfish ends.
You rant about loyalty? What about being loyal to the Constitution, the American people, and the thousands of US soldiers sacrificed for Bush/Cheney’s imperial fantasies? Oh and the truth.
HIstory’s indictment of this administration is coming around way to fast for your Bush loyalists and you can’t handle it.
May 30, 2008 - 10:32 am 39. Misanthropicus:“I am shocked, shocked! It took a while to learn about this conspiracy happening around me, but now I am shocked, deeply, sincerely shocked! I just talked with Barry Obama about it and he said that this is exactly what happened to him, being around rev. Wright for twenty years and learning only in 2008 January that he every weekend yells ‘God damn’ America! It can happen to anyone” (Scott McCllellan with Chris Matthews this morning).
TO: Politicalreacharound, JG, Rockford, Javelin, Sissy Willy, Chuck Tucson, NormL & assoc.
May 30, 2008 - 11:12 am 40. Just say no to FOX:Yo - you are mixin’ two things here fellas. One, the debate over the Iraq war (or rather about the “casus belli” in that matter is one thing, which is open to discussion, I agree).
Second item is, how someone who’s been around for so long in the White House claim that he hadn’t an inkling about this hideous situation he’s unveiling now?
While some say that it was Betty Currie and Obama who told McCllellan about this conspiracy, I stay with my view:
Scotty - a) you’re either a dolt, or b) pretty seven figures.
I’d go for (b) and I congratulate you for setting up shop together with mr. Iago and mr. Richardson as ethics consultants.
Scott INFINITY!! There said it all. Now what about the allegations? From what I read here it seems as if the majority of you raise your children to turn a blind eye to the misdeeds of there friends.
Scott was smart. He made some money and stamped his get outta jail free card. I am willing to bet you will see criminal action soon. How far up it will go is the question.
You guys give conspiracy theorist their material by demonizing McClellan and doing your best to ignore and minimize the information from him. Yeah we all know the current administration was not the most open and there were rumors, but now a source this close. I think some of you should join the isolationist party.
May 30, 2008 - 11:51 am 41. Steve:It’s funny how all the lefty trolls who scream about proof for the Iraq War now will accept the word of someone with no proof that these things happened. So far from what I’ve seen he’s saying these things without any proof. But like all conspiracy theorists you believe it because you want to. Scream all you want but someone who doesn’t say anything and then only finds his moral compass when someone hands him a check is highly questionable.
May 30, 2008 - 3:19 pm 42. Javelin:Steve
May 30, 2008 - 4:44 pm 43. Steve:What the heck do you know about my politics? You use labels cause you are an ugly fanatic who can’t hold an intelligent argument. I wish that Saddam had the capability to strike back so warmongers like you could get a taste of your own medicine. You supported the war cause you like war
What the heck do you know about my politics? You use labels cause you are an ugly fanatic who can’t hold an intelligent argument. I wish that Saddam had the capability to strike back so warmongers like you could get a taste of your own medicine. You supported the war cause you like war
What do I know about you politics is what you’ve said, here’s that example again.
So now it’s time for all the right wing Bushbotic ghouls to crawl out of their holes and slash and attack another of Bush’s critic. Sorry Moran, I think you are just a cheap little hack writing for a crummy little blog for little jerkoffs who live in a talk radio universe.
Basically, Moran’s main point is that you must bury the truth when it concerns you patron, how immoral! So we should serve no one higher than our boss? All I see here is the usual brainless bullies tossing insults around because that is their sandbox level of reasoning.
Did I misquote you? What’s really funny is that after you rant about me knowing nothing about you and calling names. You have no problem accusing me of things you don’t know about me and calling me names. Again just going by what you say here you’ve done nothing but confirm my view of you being the normal anti-war loud mouth who thinks it’s fine for you to run your mouth from behind a keyboard but no else can dare question them.
May 30, 2008 - 6:35 pm 44. lgkick:Who says your loyalty should be with your employer? A politician’s loyalty should be with his country and his people. When you see the truth, you should defend it and stand for it. It is not honest to support a cause that you know is not legitimate and to the best interest of your country, even if that means you have to cut the hands that fed you and spit on the face of your ex-comrades. After all, there are still men on the right who can see their mistakes and are ready to go through the worst suffering imaginable in order to correct a wrong.
May 31, 2008 - 12:50 am 45. Your Stupid DVD:How dare you make those assumptions and implications. Indeed Obama has inspired many Black Americans. He has the support because they feel he is a more than capable at leading this country at the same time understand the subtle challenges of being black in this country and the world. That is not racist at all they identify with him and his ideals.Is it sexist for women to vote for Hillary? No. Is it racist for whites to vote for McCain? No. Blacks want the same things every people wants.It would only be responsible to say the same percentage of people who vote racist is equal in all races. Blacks respect their votes just as much as anyone if not more. In fact in less educated and blacks who do not follow politics when polled in urban areas say if they vote it will be for Hillary. And those people polled knew Obama was black. Taken by black pollsters. I know you don’t read any black information besides headlines.( its natural for blacks to stay informed on all publications related to all American life)
And don’t you dare assert that most blacks don’t know what socialism is. I know what it is everyone black i know understands what it is. Every ignorant thought you have just apply your numbers to the rest of the population and the percentage is basically the same. Do you know what racist is?
racist=1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
People like yourself push blacks to the left. Not because they are liberal but because they are more tolerant when it comes to the natural diversity of people. And tend not to fill entitled as the right.
May 31, 2008 - 3:03 pm 46. edkling:If Obama wins we will at least get one thing out of it, a break in the constant ranting and crying the liberals have put us through for eight years.
Jun 5, 2008 - 8:04 pm