« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
McClellan's Story. Who's Buying it?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10649.htm
So according to the Politico.com article, McClellan's memoir is "surprisingly scathing" perhaps more than expected.
Big surprise! If it wasn't, no one would buy a copy.
I've always been skeptical of the memoirs of outed administration insiders. Think about it: it's your job to mislead the public. Obviously, you can can use the same methods to mislead the public about your role in it.
And he does it well; with chapter titles like “The Permanent Campaign,” “Deniability,” “Triumph and Illusion,” “Revelation and Humiliation” and “Out of Touch,” how can you not win the hearts and minds of the press corps?
Even Brownie accumulated some street press cred when he started criticizing the Bush administration.
The least candid line in the book:
“As press secretary, I spent countless hours defending the
administration from the podium in the White House briefing room.
Although the things I said then were sincere, I have since come to
realize that some of them were badly misguided.”
Then he goes on to blame the Press for failing to question the propaganda in the lead up to the Iraq War. Considering that McClellan decided to become Press Secretary AFTER the war started, I suppose it's a much more noble to "unknowingly" pass on that information.
Comments (11)
So true. I find it hard to imagine McClellan has a single original thought in his book let alone any insight worth checking it out for free from my public library. Actually, I think my next visit I will ask our librarians not to spend the tiny fraction it would cost in my taxes to add it to the collection.
May 28, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see. It's your job to mislead the public, and you can use those same methods to mislead them about your role. Ergo what? Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain? I don't think so. Let's not forget that McClellan's is not the only book like this. Besides, this isn't just about Bush anymore. It's about McCain, who unreservedly supports a war that everyone knows has been based on deception and exaggeration. It's fodder for the Democrats, as if they needed more.
May 28, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
McClellan is a capitalist running dog lackey, a professional liar, a gutless lap-dog to sociopaths. Any time he opens his mouth, get your wheelbarrow ready for a free load of fertilizer.
May 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't bother me that he was once a professional liar, and now choses to tell the truth. Here's his interview from the DAILY SHOW (posted on 1/25/07)... Seems like a decent fella:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=81281
I hope Dana Perino - the lipstick on the pig of the administration - chooses to start telling the truth one day too.
May 28, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Dick Clark hits the nail on the head:
"I think the difference with McClellan's book [and mine] is he's now telling us something we all know -- that the war with Iraq was a disastrous war [and] was sold with deception. It's a little different when you say something as I did and a few other people did four or five years ago, when the war was popular and when we were unpopular for saying what we said."
And despite the fact that this memoir is pure egoism disguised by McClellan's assumed "minor role" in the drama, at least there is one thing worthy of interest in it:
• Steve Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, said about the erroneous assertion about Saddam Hussein seeking uranium, included in the State of the Union address of 2003: “Signing off on these facts is my responsibility. … And in this case, I blew it. I think the only solution is for me to resign.” The offer “was rejected almost out of hand by others present,” McClellan writes.
May 28, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, don't shoot a gift horse in the foot!
Anyone who is willing to help uncover the Cheney/Bush lies, no matter how belated, should not be scolded or dissed. It surprises me there is so much "concern" about McClellan's belated battle with the truth, the truthiness outweighs the tardiness any day, as far as I'm "concerned."
Thanks, Scottie, we appreciate one more nail in the Cheney/Bush neocon political coffin.
May it be the final one, in terms of the public realizing us tin-foil mad-hatters who cried foul at every lie weren't crazy after all.
May 28, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
JEP07: Here, here! (At the very least, Rove should be in jail. Anything that adds to the case against his freedom is good and welcome news.)
May 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heck, I think EVERY "liberal" outlet should have him as a guest so the word DOES get out. Are there those who won;t believe him? Sure. But there are those who WILL belive him, and that counts for more.
Did we know this stuff was true? Yes. So if he says it's true, then he's lying? I don't think so.
Is he a slime? Sure. Is he telling some truths that need to be told, even if again and again and again? Yes!
Let's give him a full hearing, over and over and over again. After all, he can't actually be labeled a "Liberal," unles "Liberal" means "The only political view that prefers fact over all the alternatives."
Last but not least: I like the tantalizing bit about Rove meeting with Libby during the Fitgerald investigation of the Plame leak. I hope Fitzgerald is paying attention.
May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heck, I think EVERY "liberal" outlet should have him as a guest so the word DOES get out. Are there those who won;t believe him? Sure. But there are those who WILL belive him, and that counts for more.
Did we know this stuff was true? Yes. So if he says it's true, then he's lying? I don't think so.
Is he a slime? Sure. Is he telling some truths that need to be told, even if again and again and again? Yes!
Let's give him a full hearing, over and over and over again. After all, he can't actually be labeled a "Liberal," unles "Liberal" means "The only political view that prefers fact over all the alternatives."
Last but not least: I like the tantalizing bit about Rove meeting with Libby during the Fitgerald investigation of the Plame leak. I hope Fitzgerald is paying attention.
May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't understand the argument of not believing him. Its a catch-22. If he is lying about the administration lying, then they never lied, and therefore he isn't lying at all.
Plus, it just feels better to believe him.
May 28, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"McClellan's Story. Who's Buying it?"
No problem on buying it, nothing new but it confirms already what we all knew. Why shoot the messenger who has given us something and who was on the inside of this deceiving, untruthful crowd who gave us a war of their choice, not a war of necessity. Scotty's book just confirms what we all already knew. The WH says disgruntled, yes as most of America is disgruntled.
May 29, 2008 1:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment