True, but the question now is will life long Republicans trust Mcclellan, or will they buy into the usual Faux talking points that are aimed at discrediting him?

The GOP can try all they want to discredit McClellan but it's too late. The cat's out of the bag. The damage to BushCo is already done. No, the nutso 28% won't be swayed by Scotty's book because they worship before the altar of King George, the boy king, and lost in bizarro world.

The Bush presidency just received its final coffin nail. I'd say rest in peace but I'm not that generous.

obama: "mccain drank the kool-aid"
mccain:"nuh uh"
obama:"omgzorz"
mccain:"i never dr.."
obama:"pwned! lol"
mccain:"stop that i never..."
obama:"oh snap dude"
mccain (red in face and clutching chest):"arrrrrrrrrghhh...."

The freight wingers are salivating at the prospect of their hero -Tim Russert -nailing this guy to the floor this Sunday on Press the Meat. BillO is even claiming that Russert's CAREER hinges on how hard he comes down on Scottso !

You can kill the messenger as hard and as often as you want, but if the message has already gotten out, then it's too little too late.

pop @#7

Great point.

pissed off patricia @ 7:

I do not get it. This latest minister doing a comedy act in church is being played on MSNBC in an almost continuous loop, along with Fox doing the same thing. They are all but snuffing out the McClellan story all together. Priorities folks. Priorities.

You're SEEING their priorities, Patricia: the media is not a NEWS organization, it is a CORPORATE PROPAGANDA organization. It's well past time for us to stop pretending to expect journalism or even truth from the mainstream media (Olbermann and some others being the exceptions that prove the rule.)

And if McCain were SMART, he would use the Scott McClellan "revelations" (not that they are to anyone who has been skeptical of this administration) to justify yet another flip-flop, and suddenly turn against the Occupation of Iraq and the Bush Administration. Not, of course, sincerely, but simply because he would see that as a way to win the election.

Hopefully he's not that smart, and will lose even his home state in the autumn fall.

John McSame/McBush voting 91% with Bush since 2001....100% in 2008

Yeah...its a no-brainer...

pissed off patricia @ 7:

I do not get it. This latest minister doing a comedy act in church is being played on MSNBC in an almost continuous loop, along with Fox doing the same thing. They are all but snuffing out the McClellan story all together. Priorities folks. Priorities.

Good luck hearing anything about it for the rest of today either. A crane collapsed in NY and they'll be showing us shots of the wreckage and speculating about it all day long. [snark]It's not like there's anything ELSE for them to talk about. [/snark]

6 sassafra Says: obama: “mccain drank the kool-aid”
mccain:”nuh uh”
obama:”omgzorz”
mccain:”i never dr..”
obama:”pwned! lol”
mccain:”stop that i never…”
obama:”oh snap dude”
mccain (red in face and clutching chest):”arrrrrrrrrghhh….”

You forgot, "I'm coming Elizabeth!"

Scott McClellan is a hero.

Obly @ 18:
Umm, since when did offering the slightest bit of critical commentary become trolling? How interesting would these threads be if 100% of the comments were vacuous bobble-headed agreement with the OP?

Seriously dude, if you really can't handle the slightest poke to your groupthink, maybe you'd be happier on the O'Reilly blog.

Since the moment something advantageous to the Left comes along and you post your hand-wringing Piglet comments about how we all ought to just take a chill pill and be careful not to push things too far. Screw that. It's all we can do to keep the story in the press at all (see MargeAggedon's comments above), and it's about time we stopped pretending timidity is actually taking the high road.

Don't like a political fistfight? You might want to turn off the TV till December. Don't like critique? Put on your asbestos undies before posting, and don't come whining to me.

McClellan comes out of the retard closet and today they announce on drudge that the war on terror is mission accomplished. Apparently Al Qaeda is "almost beaten". Anyone believe that?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Tommorrow the WH plans to announce that NASA has found the gold at the end of the rainbow but if you don't elect McSame, they'll have to put it back.

the THING is that McClelland is doing something about it... NOW.

He got his book out BEFORE the next election... and in time for a national discussion to take place before more of these INSANE Republicans continue in their power positions.

He knows he will be castigated by the right wing talk machine. He seems, now, to be acting out of conscience... not out of personal partisan positioning. I hope this book makes him a million dollars... because like one of the MSNBC talking heads said yesterday:
"He'll never work in THIS TOWN again."

FED-UP in Texas @ 26:

the THING is that McClelland is doing something about it... NOW.

He got his book out BEFORE the next election... and in time for a national discussion to take place before more of these INSANE Republicans continue in their power positions.

When he turns his profits over to the families of soldiers killed and wounded in Iraq, that's when I'll call McClellan a hero. Til then he's just a shill selling a book to fit the national mood.

Obly @ 18:

Albatross @ 12:

Obly @ 10:

Hmmm...this is some good political red meat, but I think Obama should probably be careful with how far he pushes it.

Go back under your bridge, I hear some goats coming.

Umm, since when did offering the slightest bit of critical commentary become trolling? How interesting would these threads be if 100% of the comments were vacuous bobble-headed agreement with the OP?

Seriously dude, if you really can't handle the slightest poke to your groupthink, maybe you'd be happier on the O'Reilly blog.

Clearly you don't understand. This person represents teh 'New Democrat'; kinda like a Republican but still can't win elections. Just keep in mind that no criticism of The Precious is allowed and that the first thing you need to do is STFU! and you will be welcomed with open arms.

Point out that Senator Barkey has a few problems with syntax, history and his positions on the few issues he has a postion on and....

You will be asked to leave, 'For the good of the Party....'

Lenin had nothing on these Kool-Aid drinking losers.

YourMom @ 29:

To me the issue is not whether you believe the lies or not, but how you frame your foreign policy. THIS is where a fundamental change in thinking is desperately needed. There wouldn't be a "need" for the lies if diplomacy rather than war was the first option for dealing with conflict.
The cycle is repeating itself with Iran. Whether or not they have nuclear ambitions, a military strike should not be the first option. Fabricating lies to justify one should be redundant. "Pre-emptive strike" is just a euphemism for "unprovoked attack".

The real problem is corporatism and the need for the rule of law. War is profitable. War profiteering is a Bush family tradition since Prescott Bush helped out the Nazi's during WWII. When Senator Leahy suggested that war profiteers be prosecuted, Senate President and Halliburton boardmember Dick Cheney told him "go fuck yourself." And war used to require a Congressional declaration, now it requires merely the thinnest loophole (vis declaring the Iranian Republican Guard "terrorists" in order to rationalize an attack).

As a populace, we need to insist upon the Rule of Law and call for the enforcement the Constitutional powers of all three branches. If We The People don't stand up and shout for this from our representatives, we will not be able to staunch the corporatist erosion of the rule of law in America.

Our current foreign policy is not driven by a philosophical emphasis on war over diplomacy - you're mistaking cause and effect. Our national policies have been overwhelmed by corporate profit motives, and we're rationalizing our national policies to serve the bottom lines of the military-industrial establishment about which Eisenhower tried to warn us.

Sitting his reasons for writing the book aside for a moment, what he says in his book is what all of us have wanted someone to say for a long time. He has given us the inside story regarding what was going on. We all knew it, or thought we did, but now he has confirmed it. Will he get rich from the book? I really don't know or care. Could he alone, coming out of the press secretary's office and talking, have stopped the war? I doubt it. The people who don't believe him now sure wouldn't have believed him then.

So rather than bicker over his intentions, let's focus on what he said and how it can be applied. Hopefully Americans will be more dubious about claims from the white house in the future, especially when it comes to matters as serious as the invasion of another country.

This book puts a burden on McCain and to a lesser extent on Hillary. McCain's only claim to fame is his knowledge regarding defense. Fine, but how do you separate yourself and your support from an ongoing war that we now know was sold on insincere reasoning? The catch 22 of all this will be interesting to watch.

For all the critics of Scott McClellan, put yourself in his shoes. Would you have done what he did? He knew what was in store for him, that the administration and their journalist friends would chew him up and spit him out. But he apparently thought what he knew needed to be brought to light. He had been a loyal Bushie for years and what he saw going on was too much for him to ignore and keep to himself. Granted the book came at an opportune time but his publishers I am sure had a lot to do with that. Would you, as an insider seeing all the criminal activities taking place, kept your mouth shut forever or spoken up sooner? McClellan admits he believed Bush intended to make changes in Washington, be more bi-partisan and clean up the White House but too late discovered this not to be true. Don't be so hasty to condemn McClellan until you can truthfully say what you would have done in his shoes.

liberAL @ 36:

For all the critics of Scott McClellan, put yourself in his shoes. Would you have done what he did? He knew what was in store for him, that the administration and their journalist friends would chew him up and spit him out.

I'm a small businessman, and one of my important early clients was a company that made medical wiring. Then one day they announced that they had won a bid to work on Landwarrior, and Army effort to produce diagnostic radio-linked vests for soldiers. These vests would radio for help if the soldier were incapacitated, and could even constrict to tourniquet an injured arm.

"Okay," I thought, "I'm not happy about defense contracting, but business is business and this device helps save lives, that's cool."

A couple of years later one of the engineers came to me and held up a widget. "You know what this is?" he asked. I shook my head. "We won another contract last month, it's part of a trigger mechanism for land mines."

I haven't worked an hour for that business since that time. The owners are friends of mine, and I explained to them my problems with their business, and told them while I empathize with their desire to be successful I could not in good conscience facilitate the construction of land mines. We're still friends, but I won't work for them.

This was in 2003, and I and my family suffered for this decision in lost income and lost future opportunities.

That's not heroism, that's called living one's values.

Patricia is right, it's a waste of time to explore Scott McClellan's motives. But I find it galling that a man be called a hero for doing LESS THAN THE MINIMUM required to be a good person.

He should have quit. He should have provided evidence for the Plame investigation. He didn't, fine. Now he has the chance to do the right thing again: rather than exploit his privileged position for personal profit, he should turn the profits from his book over to the families of the soldiers killed and injured by the lies he told on behalf of the administration.

It's not too late. He can still do it. But he hasn't.

So is he a hero?

Albatross @ 22:

Since the moment something advantageous to the Left comes along and you post your hand-wringing Piglet comments about how we all ought to just take a chill pill and be careful not to push things too far. Screw that. It's all we can do to keep the story in the press at all (see MargeAggedon's comments above), and it's about time we stopped pretending timidity is actually taking the high road.

Don't like a political fistfight? You might want to turn off the TV till December. Don't like critique? Put on your asbestos undies before posting, and don't come whining to me.

So, is this like your thing? You go to random blogs searching for posts that give you an excuse to pick a fight and whip out your flame-tested namecalling and cutesy metaphors? Are you trying to prove to the girl who dumped you that you really are witty or something?

Dude, you personally, calm down. Seriously. Calling someone a troll who is making a legitimate observation does not qualify as astute political critique on your part, so get over yourself.

I'm a true-blue liberal, and I stand by my point. Many, many Dems bought into the propaganda (or at least didn't openly speak out against it) and voted for the war. Regardless of their rationale or the political environment at the time, they're complicit in what has happened since. You're going to see many Lieberman-esque newspaper columns pointing that out.

Since Obama's main focus right now needs to be uniting the party, he needs to be careful about how many and whose toes he steps on. The public is already against the war. There's more than enough other stuff to hit McCain over the head with. Obama should be measured in his response. That's what I'm saying.

Here is a little challenge for those out there full of criticism and possessing organizational skills...instead of beating up on Obama or Hillary...let's get us a DEMOCRATIC president and Congress and provide them with a MEDIA that actually responds to issues, investigates the facts and information, presents it in meaningful formats (without celebrity sensationalism), and, FOR GOD'S SAKE is has enough knowledge themselves to use the resources available to them when interviewing people in our government...like, for in stance, when the "talking points" from either side are being spewed...meet them with insightful and intelligent questions and follow-ups that are unbiased and helpful!!!! Let's begin the REVOLUTION with a dumping of the overpaid fools and pundits on TV and radio and print and begin to pay attention to and support those (like Knight Ridder/PBS/C-SPAN/NPR etc)...take your money and run from the major networks and cable outlets...NOW that would be something!!

The President Has Kept Us Safe
--Thane Rosenbaum

With President Bush-bashing still a national pastime, it's notable how much international terrorism has been forgotten, and how little credit the president has received for keeping Americans safe.
This is a difficult issue for me. I didn't vote for President Bush – twice. And as a human-rights law professor, the events at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, along with various elements of the Patriot Act and the National Security Agency's wiretapping of Americans, are all greatly troubling to me. Yet I live in Manhattan and I was present on Sept. 11, 2001 – admittedly 100 blocks from the murder scene, but I was here, trembling along with the rest of America. Remember those days?...

Americans, admittedly, have short time horizons and, perhaps, even shorter attention spans. Our collective memory has historically been poor. But had there been another terrorist attack or, even worse, a dozen more in cities all over America – a fear that would not have been exaggerated on 9/12 – would we have allowed ourselves the luxury of quarreling over legally suspect counterterrorism measures, even though such internal debates are credits to our liberal democracy and constitutional freedoms?

Terrorism is now largely off the table in the minds of most Americans.
But in gearing up to elect a new president, we are left to wonder how, in spite of numerous failed policies and poor judgement, President Bush's greatest achievement was denied to him by people who ungratefully availed themselves of the protection that his administration provided.
----------------------------------------------------

This is the narrative that will dominate the national debate this coming fall, not Scottie's book, which is hardly revelatory nor an indictment of McCain's judgment even using the most vivid of imaginations.

Obama continues to lose the judgment argument on a daily basis. The Rev. Michael Pfleger just pushed whatever higher ground Obama was seeking to capture on Scottie's 'Book of Revelations' off the front pages. It was Yesterday's News yesterday.

To Albatross at 38. You have more integrity than Scot. But let's just suppose for a minute that you had known the company was making some sort of trigger but you didn't know what is was used for at the time. Then let's say a year later you discovered they were triggers for landmines. Would you feel guilty as hell for being involved in such a project? I think from what you have said, you probably would. I think since Scot left the white house and looked back, he realized the enormity of what this administration has done and his conscience got to him.

Robt @ 39:

How does one get this played over and over so the right wingers have to see and hear it several times a day for weeks on end.....?

Hmmm... Make him a Democrat and black?

Actually this election is shaping up to be the beginning of mass revolt against the MSM as much as anything.

Till then we have books to sell, places to go, people to see.

princess @ 44:

The President Has Kept Us Safe
--Thane Rosenbaum

----------------------------------------------------

This is the narrative that will dominate the national debate this coming fall, not Scottie's book, which is hardly revelatory nor an indictment of McCain's judgment even using the most vivid of imaginations.

Obama continues to lose the judgment argument on a daily basis. The Rev. Michael Pfleger just pushed whatever higher ground Obama was seeking to capture on Scottie's 'Book of Revelations' off the front pages. It was Yesterday's News yesterday.

The fact that princess is obtuse enough to even bring up Pfleger as some sort of issue only proves what a useless American and ignorant voter she really is. You really are part of the 28%, faux, kool-aide drinking idiots. Once again, you never fail to amuse, princess. You "people" should just stick to middle names and flag pins....at least you would only look partially retarded. What's the next fake outrage issue....Obama has a cousin, who knew a guy, that went to school with another guy who once said a racist remark? lol. You "people" reek of desperation.

MargeAggedon @ 31:

Albatross @ 25:

Bruce @ 19:

Scott McClellan is a hero.

Scott McClellan is a vindictive little opportunist. A hero would quit sooner, or turned State's evidence during Fitzgerald's investigations. No, I can just see little Scotty twisting with fury for being denied the Wingnut Welfare he likely demanded after leaving his post, and deciding a good tell-all would serve as vengeance...

I have to agree. If he knew all these things at the time and was so 'bothered' by them why didn't he quit and at least make a statement to the relevant agencies??
Because he didn't want to.
He's not upset that his owners at shrub co. used him as part of their propaganda machine. He's upset that he wasn't better rewarded for his contribution.
He's as much a hero as any spineless political hack with a personal axe to grind.

I don't know. Scotty had been drinking the kool-aid for many years before being put in charge of handling the press, a job he was woefully inadequate to handle (much like many bush cronies). It's hard, in the heat of the moment, to realize your heroes are really manipulative scumbags. Maybe, just maybe, he was out of his league and really was used by the evildoers (bushco). I don't know. Call me naive, but maybe the truth finally caught up with poor Scotty's ability to comprehend it. And now he's genuinely pissed and wants to clear his name.

Or then again, maybe the gravy train had run out and he saw the cash registers receipts in the prevailing wind. Is it bad that I always felt a little sorry for the little weasel when he was stumbling over his words during a press conference? I always saw the guy as a patsy, working way out of his abilities.

McBush has been wrong on Iraq and has been wrong on every foreign policy. The myopic Americans that support McBush support him for only one reason: They Hate America.

msm is completely out of credibility. when the whitehouse mouthpiece tells you that everyone in the executive branch was lying and the press did it's part to help, there is no redemption.

the good part is them being undone by one of there own.

the bad part is that this is the continuation of boiling america like a frog.

princess @ 44:

From the first sentence you know this writer is a joke. boosh-bashing is an oh-so clever plagiarization of the term gay-bashing those on the far-right use. Bashing would be directionless, maybe even threatening. Policy differences are not bashing. And with a current approval rate of 28% we could consider that as something of a referendum on him, even a vote of no confidence if we we're a parliamentary system.

We have been safe from terrorism, but saying that was due to any specific policy is specious reasoning. Additionally, we have been attacked since 9-11 with the anthrax scare. That seems to be an attempt at the justification of illegal spying on American citizens, data-base sweeps, telecommunications buggery, and NSL's, as well as the crimes of Abu Ghraib and Guantonomo Bay.

Who the hell names their kid Thane? That's not a name but a title for a noble warrior chief in ancient Celticdom.

Bush in Orange - McClellan in Blue...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&add...

On defeated acts of terrorism are they including those foiled by our allies,

Or blinking toys on bridges

Or low intelligence people being coerced by undercover agents

Or dirty bombs that turned out not to exist

Or plots from prisoners who would say anything to stop the torture, and when nothing happans, because there was no plot, take credit for foiling it?

I prefer to foil a baked potato.

ysbaddaden @ 60:

princess @ 44:

From the first sentence you know this writer is a joke. boosh-bashing is an oh-so clever plagiarization of the term gay-bashing those on the far-right use. Bashing would be directionless, maybe even threatening. Policy differences are not bashing. And with a current approval rate of 28% we could consider that as something of a referendum on him, even a vote of no confidence if we we're a parliamentary system.

We have been safe from terrorism, but saying that was due to any specific policy is specious reasoning. Additionally, we have been attacked since 9-11 with the anthrax scare. That seems to be an attempt at the justification of illegal spying on American citizens, data-base sweeps, telecommunications buggery, and NSL's, as well as the crimes of Abu Ghraib and Guantonomo Bay.

Who the hell names their kid Thane? That's not a name but a title for a noble warrior chief in ancient Celticdom.

One minor correction. The anthrax "scare" was more than a scare. It was a frank and deliberate terrorist attack resulting in the death of more Americans and infection of many others. Much like those responsible for 9/11, herr dubyah has not caught those responsible for both attacks. Yeah, talk about "keeping us safe".

Yellow Elephant Safari @ 63:

Dr. (Bitter Hussein) Matt @ 55:

princess @ 44:

\The President Has Kept Us Safe
--Thane Rosenbaum

With President Bush-bashing still a national pastime, it's notable how much international terrorism has been forgotten, and how little credit the president has received for keeping Americans safe.
This is a difficult issue for me. I didn't vote for President Bush – twice. And as a human-rights law professor, the events at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, along with various elements of the Patriot Act and the National Security Agency's wiretapping of Americans, are all greatly troubling to me. Yet I live in Manhattan and I was present on Sept. 11, 2001 – admittedly 100 blocks from the murder scene, but I was here, trembling along with the rest of America. Remember those days?...
.

Princess, we all know you really are one stupid mf'er, but citing an opinion piece from a reich-wing newspaper just makes you look brain dead, princess. Seriously, it's like you have completely given up, princess, on your trolling duties, princess.

Tsk, tsk Dr. M. Can't resist the urge to tease the livestock eh? Especially now when bleating and following the lead ram toward the abyss is all they have left......

I can get a free pass for teasing a retarded goat on a Friday morning during a short work week.....can't I? :)

VegasRage @ 59:

Scott is just a man who started to wake up to some cold realities he didn't want to believe were true. That is not always an easy shift to make, I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

Never, ever, give anyone from this administration the benefit of a doubt.