Scott McClellan on "Meet the Press"

[WaylonJennings]

Basically a 101 course on why I could never go into PR. Standing up there and defending with all your heart and soul decisions and policy you absolutely do not believe in - to the point of, at times, lying to the American people on behalf of the administration.

I at least respect that he's coming clean now. I know it's tough to do, because you know he's making some money on this. But I'm in favor of anything that adds to and clarifies the historical record, particularly from primary sources.

He did say that he plans to donate a portion of the proceeds from "What Happened" to families of soldiers killed in Iraq, as a kind of restitution for helping sell the war.

 

[bagelchick]

Actually I think it's more a course on why I could never be a lawyer...."standing up there and defending with all your heart and soul"....regardless of whether or not your client is guilty or innocent.

Interesting that with all the press he's doing, we hear today that's donating some money to a charity....

I haven't read the book, but plan to get it this week and read it for myself.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

"In my nearly 36 years of public service I've known of a few like you," Dole writes, recounting his years representing Kansas in the House and Senate. "No doubt you will 'clean up' as the liberal anti-Bush press will promote your belated concerns with wild enthusiasm. When the money starts rolling in you should donate it to a worthy cause, something like, 'Biting The Hand That Fed Me.' Another thought is to weasel your way back into the White House if a Democrat is elected. That would provide a good set up for a second book deal in a few years"

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0508/Bob_Dole_unloads_on_McClellan.html

 

[WaylonJennings]

Actually I think it's more a course on why I could never be a lawyer criminal defense attorney ...."standing up there and defending with all your heart and soul"....regardless of whether or not your client is guilty or innocent.

Interesting that with all the press he's doing, we hear today that's donating some money to a charity....

I haven't read the book, but plan to get it this week and read it for myself.

Went ahead and fixed that for you. Because putting all lawyers under one umbrella is a little like saying that Gary Smith and Ann Coulter have the same job.

As far as the charity question, Russert basically put him on the spot and asked him directly if he's going to do that, and McClellan said, "Yes," and mumbled something about how he and his wife send the troops "care packages."

 

[D-Backs Hack]

http://pol.moveon.org/mcclellan/?rc=homepage

Coming clean is great--but profiting from lying to the public isn't. McClellan was a critical part of the effort to sell us the war and now he's poised to make millions of dollars for it. That's wrong.

 

[Birdscribe]

"In my nearly 36 years of public service I've known of a few like you," Dole writes, recounting his years representing Kansas in the House and Senate. "No doubt you will 'clean up' as the liberal anti-Bush press will promote your belated concerns with wild enthusiasm. When the money starts rolling in you should donate it to a worthy cause, something like, 'Biting The Hand That Fed Me.' Another thought is to weasel your way back into the White House if a Democrat is elected. That would provide a good set up for a second book deal in a few years"

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0508/Bob_Dole_unloads_on_McClellan.html

You mean, kind of like lobbyists for both parties -- who were once members of the House or Senate but are now cashing in, Chris?

I'm sure Bob Dole never cashed in on that access. ::)

http://harpers.org/archive/2008/05/hbc-90003019

The hypocrisy is blinding.

 

[PCLoadLetter]

What a slimeball.

He's happy to take a paycheck from his country while lying to it, and I'm supposed to give a **** what he has to say now?

If he had any problem with what he was doing before he should have quit. He didn't. Screw Scott McClellan.

 

[alleyallen]

"In my nearly 36 years of public service I've known of a few like you," Dole writes, recounting his years representing Kansas in the House and Senate. "No doubt you will 'clean up' as the liberal anti-Bush press will promote your belated concerns with wild enthusiasm. When the money starts rolling in you should donate it to a worthy cause, something like, 'Biting The Hand That Fed Me.' Another thought is to weasel your way back into the White House if a Democrat is elected. That would provide a good set up for a second book deal in a few years"

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0508/Bob_Dole_unloads_on_McClellan.html

You mean, kind of like lobbyists for both parties -- who were once members of the House or Senate but are now cashing in, Chris?

I'm sure Bob Dole never cashed in on that access. ::)

http://harpers.org/archive/2008/05/hbc-90003019

The hypocrisy is blinding.

Game.
Set.
Match.

 

[Killick]

 

[DemoChristian]

Of course I'm someone glad McClellan is speaking now, though I wish he'd done it much sooner. Slate has a good video here.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1243727174/bctid1578008544

 

[Flying Headbutt]

Bob Novak and Trent Duffy raise some interesting questions in columns that are in the Washington Post today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101915.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101922.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

 

[Alma]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

 

[cranberry]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

But if he's pulling **** out of his ass and his editor is "reworking" the book, we aren't really learning anything.

 

[Fudgie the Whale]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

But if he's pulling **** out of his ass and his editor is "reworking" the book, we aren't really learning anything.

That's true. There's absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, though.

 

[micropolitan guy]

"Nice job, Scott. Two thumbs up." - Robert McNamara.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

But if he's pulling **** out of his ass and his editor is "reworking" the book, we aren't really learning anything.

That's true. There's absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, though.

Well, other than what people who were in the White House at the time are saying. They're no less believable than McClellan is at this point.

 

[alleyallen]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

But if he's pulling **** out of his ass and his editor is "reworking" the book, we aren't really learning anything.

That's true. There's absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, though.

Well, other than what people who were in the White House at the time are saying. They're no less believable than McClellan is at this point.

Equally as possible, those same people could be lying and McClellan could be telling the truth.

 

[Monroe Stahr]

Someone should do a story on the Stockholm Syndrome that often afflicts underlings, who -- held hostage by their own political beliefs (or perhaps by their blind ambition) -- end up doing regrettable things. McClellan certainly fits the mold. As does Anita Hill, who continued to work for Clarence Thomas -- and even had him write a letter of rec for her, if memory serves -- even after he behaved, in her telling, inappropriately.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I guess it comes down to this:

Was McClellan a coward when he never spoke up in the White House? Or is he a liar now?

As for me, I couldn't care less about McClellan's personal integrity. That's his business. Good luck to him there. Nor do I care how offended Karl Rove and Bob Dole are. Party loyalty is for the party, not me.

My job, as a voter and a watchful citizen, is to figure out the truth, and make decisions accordingly.

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

But if he's pulling **** out of his ass and his editor is "reworking" the book, we aren't really learning anything.

That's true. There's absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, though.

Well, other than what people who were in the White House at the time are saying. They're no less believable than McClellan is at this point.

Equally as possible, those same people could be lying and McClellan could be telling the truth.

Agreed. But they aren't pimping a book.