Scott McClellan's new book

[Chip]

So I guess the big deal with this Scott McClellan book is that it dishes on some of the stuff going on in the Bush White House while he was there.

What I find interesting is that the Bush lackeys are saying things like they're perplexed that Scott would do this, "this is not the Scott we knew." Or they think it's rude and bad form, or unprofessional or self-serving.

But none of them have said that he's lying.

Sometimes it's what they don't say.


-Chip

[JRC]

I admit I'm going all Godwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) here, but...

What if Goebbels wrote a book called "What Happened" and it was all about the Nazi party? Does his recanting confession absolve him of guilt?

I have a problem with people doing something and then quite quickly turning around and saying Oh that WAS wrong. Instead of having the balls and saying, "What we're DOING is Wrong."

What if McClellan had quit mid-job and said that he could no longer support the policies of the Bush Administration? Wouldn't that have been something? An old Bush loyalist, a trusted adviser, the Press Secretary(!) suddenly putting the personal brakes on the whitewash? That would have been something.

I'm very eager to read this book. I will not buy it until I find it in an used bookstore because I don't want to give any money to McClellan. He should have stood up. Instead, he waited, sat down and cashed in.

This book, no matter what it reveals, does not absolve his guilt.

[hixx]

I don't know, I'm no Bush-lover, and I know next to nothing about this guy, but um....I think he sounds like a total whimp.

How easy is it to come out NOW and say how horrible Bush was? Does this happen at every election year? That people start streaming out of the house that is white, trying to distance themselves and uncovering all the truths?

I honestly don't give a damn what this guy has to say. It makes no difference coming out now to tell me all the horrible things, you should have come out 4 years ago you big ninny.

Hixx

[kremidas]

Apparently Mr. Scott's argument is that HE was also misled by his superiors in the White House, and was ostensibly telling likes that he did not know to be lies. Thus, if true, I think absolves him of guilt. But...is more than a little hard to believe.

[Edison]

At the very least it corroborates what most of the country has already known for years; that the Bush White House is comprised of obfuscation, duplicity and deception, that the Iraq war was a HUGE mistake, and post hurricane Katrina was handled terribly.

Frankly, I never liked McClellan when I saw him on TV.
Whether he was dodging questions about the CIA leak, or hurricane Katrina, he just came off as a self-serving weasel, ..regardless of party affiliation.

So yeah, while I think the book may have a genuine apologetic candor, it's also a "hot, tell-all" intended to garner McClellan some huge dollars for himself. Whatever. People need to make a living. As long as he's very vocal about the larger problem his book points to, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

As an aside; It was interesting to read the FOX 'Exclusive interview' with (FOX's very own) Karl Rove and his response to some of the book's allegations. It was very typical Rove.
I also find it both hilarious and pathetic that FOX has Rove on their payroll as a political analyst.

I know it's a dead horse, but shouldn't FOX be legally restricted from using the words; 'Fair & Balanced'?
I just find it ironic that FOX is the only news network that actually goes out of its way to make that claim, yet it's patently false.

[Telfer]

Bad Republican press is bad Republican press.

I don't have a problem with him taking a beating in the press as long as Bush does too. Anything that helps me believe there will be fewer racists, homophobes, and warlords in office when my kid grows up helps me sleep better at night.