The McClellan Book

No worries, Bush's defenders will always be able to furnish excuses and explain why what appears to be so is not actually so. Why despite what your eyes and your brain tells you he actually is a great president. It'll probably be the historians fault, perhaps the liberal media's fault, or maybe even the French again.

 

While I don't think that anything new will come out of McClelland's book (hello, I think we knew we were being lied to several years ago), I do applaud and think that it is important for anyone and everyone to be outraged by the current administration, to the point that future leaders think of Bush's failures everytime that they try to pull one over on Americans. More than anything, it is the apathy (in addition to blind conservative faith and reactionary defensive tactics) of Americans in the face of Bush's oppression that disappoints me. Worst administration ever? Yes - but only if future ones aren't worse.

 

I don't know if I want to applaud McClelland or punch him in the mouth upon sight.

Now that these aides see the ship sinking, they're coming out with the "truth," but what irks me to no end is where was this nobility while our Constitution was being shat upon? I'm waiting for C. Powell - a man I thought could be president - to comment (and if he has already, can I get links?).

Also, this is just another link in the treason chain...notice NOBODY at the White House has denied the information, simply spun it off as "sad" and "confusing."

 

What a Lib parrot load of crap, Don. You are hugely astute on just about anything to do with sports or the human psychological syndrome... but when it comes to politics it's like you turn it off.... I have no freakin idea how you segment your brain.

It is exactly what it looks like. Recycled talking points with only political talking points and no depth, no explanation how McClellan was 'evil', incompetent, and a deer in the headlights, and alla sudden he's a hero?

Look for the money. Look who's giving him the money. Look at his options, OTHERWISE.

I say again... what do you think of Doug Feith's book... there WAS an insider.

Hell, look at the opening of the NYT editorial:

The latter? seems to me, that anyone would have to admit, it's all three!
A perfect storm.

Oh, the NYT writer goes on to assume everything McClellan says is proabbly true... but then they wont talk about Doug Feith's book which has all the same tropes available, but explains the decision process a LOT more factually and has documentation to boot.

SM has none of these... he claims to be an 'insider' but then complains of being 'shut out' from the beginning? Which is it?

I suggest you think back on episodes of 'West Wing'. I always thought they covered decision processes pretty much the way it would have to be done.

 

Most likely, McCledude could of earned far greater wealth working within some lobbying / think-tank for the rest of his years than with his book. That said, his motivations have to be called into question b/c of the timing of his book. Also, Feith's book isn't even relevant to this issue unless it is being used to support calling McClellan a liar b/c it did not address any allegations of criminal behavior.

Somebody is not telling the truth in this situation, and it is highly suspect that nobody within the current administration is calling McClellan a liar. Further, I watched Ari "you better watch what you say and do" Fleischer refuse to call him a liar upon a direct question by L. King last night.

The declassification of info, an alleged leak, the executive directive to lie to the people, the criminal trial, the conviction and then...the pardon. But, there cannot be an improper connection in the aforementioned events, right?

 

You GOT to be kidding! McClellan was as inside as Feith?!!!

Feith sat in on policy brainstorming and presented papers on intelligence and policy. McClellan didnt do that. He was a PR flack, and let in on the decision and how it might be handled, once it was made.

And McClellan wasnt very good at his job, anyway... you want to dispute THAT?
As to why Ari or others wont call him a liar on his points, who knows. But I bet it will come out within a year from now.

If it's an evil conspiracy, then I'll own up. Youdambetcha!

But here's somethingn that I dont understand... when they mention Plame in this book.... what difference does it make who did what when? It's established that the SUPPOSED Covert Agent, was outed by a career wonk, not a member of the administration.

 

Gee... guess I'll just have to fall back on the fact she WASNT a COVERT agent,