McClellan on Letterman: We're Screwed
By Nicole Belle Wednesday Jun 11, 2008 4:50pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t David)
Former Press Secretary Scott McClellan appeared on The Late Show with David Letterman to hawk his book, What Happened. Once again, Letterman proved that late night comedians have more testicular fortitude than any of the pundit class or corporate media for voicing what is overwhelmingly the public pulse on the Bush administration.
LETTERMAN: My feeling about Cheney--and also Bush, but especially Cheney—is he just couldn't care less about Americans. And that the same is true of George Bush. And all they really want to do is somehow kiss up to the oil people so they can get some great annuity when they're out of office. "There you go, Dick, nice job. There’s a couple of billion for your troubles." ( applause ) I mean, he pretty much put Halliburton in business, and the outsourcing of the military resources to private mercenary groups, and so forth. Is there any humanity in either of these guys?
McCLELLAN: Look, I still have personal affection for the President. I can't speak to the Vice President's thinking that well because he's someone that keeps things to himself and he believes in doing it his way, and he doesn't care what anybody else thinks. He is going to do the way he feels is best—and that’s not always in the best interest of this country, as we’ve seen.
LETTERMAN: You told me backstage you thought he was a goon.
Full transcripts below the fold:
LETTERMAN: You were supposed to be here last week and there was lightning and bad weather, you couldn't get out of Washington DC, you got here late and I'm happy you came back.
McCLELLAN: I'm glad to be here.
LETTERMAN: Are you tired--I mean, the book is number one on the bestseller list--are you tired of going on shows like this to try and talk up the book?
McCLELLAN: Some of the other shows, not your show. I'm glad to be here tonight.
LETTERMAN: That raises an interesting question: do people, now knowing about the book, do they have the correct impression of the book, or do they have an impression of a small part of the book?
McCLELLAN: I think they're starting to get impression, the larger message in the book, which is really about changing the way Washington governs for the better and making sure we don't repeat some of the mistakes that we did over the last few years. That's really the larger message. The initial reaction was what you would expect, to some extent. It got a little more vitriolic and personal than I expected from some of my former colleagues.
LETTERMAN: Now looking back on the reaction, was this something you're sorry you included, or you had planned to include or happy you included it, that part of the book?
McCLELLAN: Which part of the book?
LETTERMAN: The part where you sort of assailing your former bosses, the administration.
McCLELLAN: No, I feel very good about what I wrote. It's me speaking for myself now candidly, talking about what happened, how things got off course and what we can learn from that, so that I feel good about, and I hope it encourages more people to do the same because we need that for history's sake.
LETTERMAN: See, I look around, and everything you just said there, and what coalesces in my mind is we're just screwed. Are we just screwed? Honestly, I get the feeling that we're screwed. Do you have that feeling?
McCLELLAN: I'm an optimistic guy. I think things are going to change. It's just a matter of time. I really feel that way.
LETTERMAN: Do you...I know you had a relationship with the President before he was the President. What can you tell us about the guy? How does he feel? I mean, it looks to me...If I was doing the job he's doing or the job he I think he's doing, I wouldn't go to work.
McCLELLAN: I felt that way at some times. Look at that Mark Wahlberg script you showed...give me a second, give me a second.
LETTERMAN: Does he have a sense of ‘oh man, I'm in trouble' or things are fine? What is his position on the way things are now?
McCLELLAN: It's amazing. He doesn't spend a lot of time reflecting. I think he should spend more time reflecting, but he really believes history is going to vindicate him. He really, sincerely believes that 30, 40, 50 years from now things are going to be viewed a lot differently.
LETTERMAN: That everything that he has been responsible for will somehow turn-and if it does happen that there is peace and there's a government that's a representative democracy, well, then, he will have been a genius, for God's sake. Now, what are the odds of that?
McCLELLAN: Well, we'll see, history-- ( applause ) ( laughter ) history--.
LETTERMAN: I'm sorry but--
McCLELLAN: History does tend to reward success more so than candor. We'll have to see. I don't think any of us know how it will turn out 50 years from now. But it doesn't change what I wrote in the book. We made some serious mistakes and need to learn from that and not repeat those.
LETTERMAN:...And misled, actually. Misled to get us into the war in Iraq. Going into Afghanistan, that seemed like the thing to do at the time, right?
McCLELLAN: Absolutely. We were attacked by al Qaeda, and they were being harbored by the Taliban there. It was the right thing to do. The foreign policy team was highly regarded after that. And I think people got caught up in that post-9/11 environment and gave the administration the benefit of the doubt. I did. I was wondering why we were rushing into this war in Iraq. But as the same time, like a lot of Americans, I gave the administration and this foreign policy team the benefit of the doubt.
LETTERMAN: Obviously, we know something had to be done, so I think people would rather have action than no action. Cheney had a role in presenting the Iraq proposition, didn't he? Wasn't he always sort of pro-invasion? Even before Afghanistan...
McCLELLAN: That's true...
LETTERMAN: He wanted to go into Iraq first?
McCLELLAN: The Vice President, the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and some other what you would call neoconservative thinkers, thinking we can go in and transform Iraq and that will transform the rest of the Middle East into a thriving democracy...
LETTERMAN: Has anything that has happened, do you believe, anything that has happened in Iraq-- and these numbers are staggering, 5,000 American men and women killed in combat-- and untold hundreds of thousands, perhaps, of Iraqis killed-- has any of that, any of that that has happened, helped make this country safer, do you believe?
McCLELLAN: I don't think you can say that today. Maybe ultimately it will, but at this point, I think that verdict is still out. You talk about the irrevocable consequences and I was often with the President at his side when he would be visiting the troops or the families of the fallen and our troops have done everything they have been called on to do and more...
LETTERMAN: Absolutely.
McCLELLAN: And they have been there longer than they should have had to be. Maybe after this administration, we can come to a consensus and find a way to bring this to a responsible and successful end.
LETTERMAN: Were you able to voice any of these concerns while the strategy was unfolding, and while the kind of-- the campaign to get people behind the idea of invading Iraq, were you able to tell anybody?
McCLELLAN: Well, no, once the policy is decided by the president-I was Deputy Press Secretary at the time so my role was a little bit limited in the buildup to the war. I took over after we had invaded Iraq as Press Secretary. But this is not an administration that wanted-- once a policy is decided, the President expects everyone to march in lockstep and follow and help implement that policy and not question it. He welcomes the questioning before the policy is decided but this policy was decided just a couple of months after we went into Afghanistan, after 9/11.
LETTERMAN: Cheney, is he-- is he a goon? ( laughter ) I don't mean that to be like a smart-ass. He seems like he might be a goon.
McCLELLAN: He is quite an interesting guy. He has a very dark view of the world and he certainly believes that some of the means justify the ends. And this president showed him too much deference, I think, in terms of carrying out policy, whether detainee policy or energy policies or policies relating to the war itself.
LETTERMAN: In deferring to Cheney, was it because he's intellectually lazy? Is that why he would defer to Cheney?
McCLELLAN: Well, there certainly is a little bit of a lack of intellectual curiosity on the part of the President. He is a gut instinct player. He doesn't like to sit around and discuss policy. He likes to govern from the gut and make decisions and go from there. That's something I talk about in the book as well.
LETTERMAN: Was it on your watch that Cheney shot his hunting buddy?
McCLELLAN: It was, and it sprayed me, too.
LETTERMAN: What is that like? I don't think you have to go back to Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, the last time a vice president shot somebody.
McCLELLAN: It was something I never could have predicted when I became Press Secretary. You go down a list of things and that was not one of them on it.
LETTERMAN: Was he forthcoming with you?
McCLELLAN: No, he wasn't. The Vice President prefers that in terms of the press, well, just "no comment." He doesn't have much regard for the press corps. I was actually advocating, ‘we have to get the information out now to the national press corps', do a phone call -- he was down in Corpus Christi and he took my advice and then called Corpus Christi Caller-Times and gave it to them on their website and said the national press corps could find it there. And for three days, I had to go out there and take my own bullets from that before he went on TV and clarified it.
LETTERMAN: Did the people in the press that you talked to everyday, do they like you? Do they have respect for you?
McCLELLAN: Actually, when I went through the very difficult period when it was... turned out in the Valerie Plame leak episode that something I had said was false-unknowingly so, I had been misled by two advisers to the President-- some of the press corps were my strongest defenders during that time. The White House Counsel had said you cannot comment, it's an ongoing investigation, and the press corps actually stood up on TV and said, ‘He's a straight shooter. His credibility is unquestioned.' And so I appreciated that. It shows the relationship that we had.
LETTERMAN: My feeling about Cheney--and also Bush, but especially Cheney-is he just couldn't care less about Americans. And that the same is true of George Bush. And all they really want to do is somehow kiss up to the oil people so they can get some great annuity when they're out of office. "There you go, Dick, nice job. There's a couple of billion for your troubles." ( applause ) I mean, he pretty much put Halliburton in business, and the outsourcing of the military resources to private mercenary groups, and so forth. Is there any humanity in either of these guys?
McCLELLAN: Look, I still have personal affection for the President. I can't speak to the Vice President's thinking that well because he's someone that keeps things to himself and he believes in doing it his way, and he doesn't care what anybody else thinks. He is going to do the way he feels is best-and that's not always in the best interest of this country, as we've seen.
LETTERMAN: You told me backstage you thought he was a goon. We'll be right back with Scott McClellan.
Login or Register to post comments.
Calling Cheney a goon is being too nice.
Where are all the backstage cameras when you need them. Too funny.
Listen to Paul Schaffer's walk-in music for McClellan. Perfect!
NYT Best Sellers.
1. WHAT HAPPENED, by Scott McClellan. (PublicAffairs, $27.95.) A former White House press secretary regrets that “I allowed myself to be deceived” by top officials.
Wow! I wonder if Dave is being straight up here!
McClellan is getting too much mileage out of this book. He really should have been truthful a long time ago. Like Stephen Colbert says: ". . . these are not revelations . . ."
Yup, that sweaty little turd is quite the hero. Much too little....way too late.
And the fact that he still has "great personal affection" for Chimpy tells me all I need to know.
McClennan is a spineless fuck who exhibits zero judgement. If he can be around Chimpy for more than 30 seconds and not want to vomit, shows he simply has no clue.
"Testicular fortitude" is a rather sexist way to put it.
"Once again, Letterman proved that late night comedians have more testicular fortitude than any of the pundit class or corporate media for voicing what is overwhelmingly the public pulse on the Bush administration."
I wonder if Jay Leno would've said the same things when interviewing McClellan.
[ Deleted. Off topic. We have a thread going on this topic. Site Monitor]
Forget "goon". How about evil bastard?
It's been apparent for some time that David Letterman is disgusted with the Bush administration. When you have a child you think about the future. He called out Bill O'Reilly, he's speaking out on global warming, and he is anything but shy about Bush.
Personally, I'm not concerned about what McClellan says on television or in his book. I want to hear what he has to say on the stand and under oath.
scott's a punk. no other way to look at it. he should have just kept his mouth shut or spoken up about 5 years ago. he hasn't said anything that i already didn't know anyway.
punk weasel prick, that one.
How about demonic frog spawn? With apologies to frogs everywhere.
I admit to having a certain degree of unpopular sympathy for McClellan, and the content of both the posts and some of the comments here reflect why.
Was Scott calling Chaney or bush a goon? (same difference as far as I'm concerned)
I strongly believe that if a person changes for the better he or she should not be deridded but applauded. He didn't leave the White House and get a job at Fox making millions a year to lie to Americans he went out and wrote a book about his personal friends and associates that at the very least embarrasses them and he is taking hits from the right and the left. I hated his guts when he was Press Secretary. I have changed my mind.
Goon? More like Zombie Overlord.
j @ 8:
just means he's nuts
Obamamite @ 14:
But he may be saying things that many OTHERS didn't already know. It's always best to hear it coming from within
xoites defends Constitution @ 18:
Well said. I'm no fan of Scotty, but I do have to give him credit for sticking his neck out like he has.
Howdy Crooks & Liars!
Don Quixote de la Northridge, here. A few weeks ago, I snapped over the corrupt US government's non-handling of the gasoline issue and went on a one-man protest of gas stations in my 'hood. Then somebody said I should take my revolt to the internet, so I made a music video/protest anthem for our times.
Below is the link and info
BOYCOTT GASOLINE
http://youtube.com/watch?v=03thuWjWf9M
Star Spangled Satire presents, "Boycott Gasoline!", a satirical protest anthem for our time. A US Everyman picks up his guitar and sings about a world in change, releasing itself from the shackles of oil and the greedy pigs who price gouge it's docile victims. This video is about changing the way we live, and saying we're not gonna take it anymore!
It has something for everyone: patriotic fervor, environmentalism, satire, all-american kids, amusing oil greedy pigs, Dubya, soccer moms, guitars, and rubber chickens.
Keep on fighting!
I resent Scotti being made into the media darling that he's become. He's a self admitted liar. He has zero credibility. He's written a book to make money. And he's getting paid to appear on all these shows.
Unbelievable.
Joe O. @ 13:
Regardless of that, what will be done after he and hundreds of others point out the obvious.
The same that is happening now, nothing.
The US is far beyond screwed now.
At least the audience were clapping when Letterman pointed out the truth, I wonder if there was a clap board !
xoites defends Constitution @ 18:
He's a republican x. He sold his story for millions of dollars. I'm sure when they discuss McClellan at the WH, they understand.
pete @ 19:
What does that make the people who allowed them to get there though ?
After the anger and the blame ...... must come the taking of responsibility.
LarryE @ 16:
that's how i viewed him coming forward no judgement but it's red meat for both sides pundits challenge and make their own interpretation and the b.s. begins if it wasn't dramatized it wouldn't be fun
The Truth Hurts @ 7:
It is important that he came out and supported the popular view because he was an insider. He has paid a price for speaking up, and therefore he is not gutless. He may make an amount of money for his book, but he probably would have made much more for staying quiet.
Comments like the one above only serve to keep whistle blowers silent, and therefore serve no purpose at all. Instead of spewing vitriol, try to understand the issues and then convert a republican by helping them see through the propaganda. Getting angry and using hate propaganda to get the Democratic party elected, would lead to the formation of a government that is no better than what is already there.
Don from Canada @ 29:
well said.....i hope down deep people understand that and they are jus having otherwise were in big trouble
You noticed how pissed offf the Repugs were? But none of them, including Fran Townsend, denied anything. They just kept saying,"This isn't the Scott we knew." Or "He was disgruntled" what a bunch of tools!
I saw this last night...and I my husband and I both laughed...and sat in stunned silence. Letterman really put all his cards on the table last night with that, although a lot of people who've been watching him for years kind of knew he was left leaning. I thought that Letterman struck a good balance between not trashing Scotty, letting him speak, and interjecting what a lot of "US" have thought about Cheney for a long time. He wasn't the clown, he didn't mince words. He set Scotty up well, and filled in the gaps for him, without speaking for him.
This is why I love Letterman, and can't tolerate Leno. I don't recall, nor do I expect to see, Leno lay out his personal feelings on all of this mess these goons have made of this country. Letterman did, and good for him. He is not a journalist or a pundit. It is not his job to talk politics, it is his job to be the clown, and to ask vapid people questions to make them seem interesting. Last night, he shone in a way that few talk show hosts ever do.
Trash Scotty. Yes, he's a turd. He's out to make money. Screw him.
Let's try this: It's 1964. A Jack Ruby dancer who's done some hooking says she saw Ruby talking with Oswald a number of times.
Do we dismiss her? Sure. She's a stripper. And a part-time hooker.
Yeah. Screw these scumbags. They'd never get into our country clubs.
Thanks Dave for a interesting and entertaining interview. Yes, Bush & Cheney have no regard for the American people (or the Constitution) and yes, they have no decency. It will take a lot of hard work to restore our country once the goons are gone.
23 jbl24
Good video!
Come back after 11:30 pm Eastern time (8:30 pm Pacific time) and post it on the Open Thread. Not just tonight, but every night and you will get a lot of attention. :)
mudshark @ 26:
He is a Republican.
I was a Republican once. People don't change over night. He is moving in the right direction.
All the more reason me to want to see Cheney tried and executed. Public service does not entitle you to great personal gain. That's why we have laws against these kinds of abuses of power.
that's it, screw leno. He waffles too much and caters a little too much for my taste. He had laura and one of the daughters on the other night and he could not do enough ass kissing. No hardball there. he had a chance to really question and he dropped the ball. Jenna seems reasonable and were she not the president's daughter, i think she would be on the other side of the fence. could be wrong on that though.
I'm watching letterman from now on. We all need to support those who have the courage to speak out. i bought the Dixie Chicks album for just that reason. turns out, it was fairly decent. So if letterman had this exchange with scott mcclelland then i will be supporting him as well.
as far as the statement regarding cheney and bush, don't they both know they're old, cheney more so, and they will be meeting their maker soon. How will they answer the questions that are put to them at that time. What was it with these sorry excuses, what was the impetus to have them do what they did??money, power or prestige? Was it Money: you can't take it with you, you can only leave it to those left behind. How much do they really need? Power: Bush is a lame duck and his capital is all spent. Prestige: it's certain he will go down as the worst if not the most criminal to ever hold that office. That's his rock solid legacy that he seems to cherish so much. So what have they gained??? too bad retribution will come in the afterlife and not here. we have nancy to thank for that.
xoites defends Constitution @ 36:
he may be a republican but i don't think he agrees with extreme right neocon philosophy....i can talk to reasonable republican but a neocon thinking person forget it........i believe had the same difficulty this administration is secretive and dismisses the other branches of government..it's been less than a republic
xoites defends Constitution @ 36:
yeah, well, lets wait till after he gets off of the stand in Congress.
Another point to be made...about Scott McClellan....When he was lying in front of the press, as Press Secretary in this administration, he was doing his job. The Press Secretary is not a public servant to the people, he is a toady for the administration, no matter who is in office. The best that a Press Secretary can hope for is a boss who is reasonably honest and straightforward with the American People, so that he won't have to lie very often. Mc Clellan knew Bush from before. He was a true believer, at some point. He doesn't believe any longer.
Like John Dean and David Brock, we need to give Scott Mc Clellan room for his conscience to heal, and for him to feel comfortable telling the truth. It doesn't matter where it comes from, with all of the document shredding,(which you KNOW has gone on.) and the e-mail deleting, we need to have someone who can tell the story of what went on in the White House. We, The People...present and future, need this information, whether he is getting paid for it or not.
Also remember, people who have crossed this administration have been destroyed, and some have died. It takes a brave man to put himself through the character assasination that he knows will be coming for his disloyalty. How many people here...if put in the same position...can honestly say that they would choose to tell the horrible secrets of their friends, whether money was involved or not? Peer pressure is hard for adults too, and Scott could have just as well gone off into the sunset and taken a job with some Republican run company, and kept the secrets.
Having said that....he does need to take a breather from all of this for a while. He's getting to be annoyingly omnipresent.
If McClellan had spoken up five years ago, Bush would removed from his position.
karl @ 39:
I was not actually trying to say that being a Republican is bad or evil. I strongly disagree with most, but an honest Republican came by his opinion honestly and does not make up "facts" to support his arguments. When i was a Repupublican (and an extreem right wing one at that during Vietnam) i found that the people around me were doing just that and as you can see things have not changed all that much. Thankfully i have.
PassedPawn @ 9:
In a word, NO! Leno doesn't have the intellectual ability or the backbone to ask the same questions Letterman asks. They're on completely different levels. Leno is all fun and games, but no brain.
I wonder what the going rate for a person's soul is? Ask Cheney, I bet he knows. He's bought enough of them. Fran Townsend sold her soul for face time on TV.
If Mc Clellan spoke up five years ago, he'd be dead, or living under an assumed name.
Timing is what it is. We've suffered a lot because he didn't speak up, but we have no idea what it took to get him to where he is today, except for what he writes in his book, (which, I'd be willing to bet, not many of us have read yet...I know I haven't gotten to it.)
moniker @ 42:
No, he would have been marginalized and the press would have ignored him. I doubt he would have gotten his book published either.
So...when Cheney comes forward in a year with a book saying he's been an evil son of a bitch and is sorry, we should let him heal his conscience, and excuse him for only doing his job?
mudshark @ 40:
Yeah, and if Scottie "cannot remember" or "cannot recall", then he is in really, really
deep doo-doo because then Wexler/Waxman/Conyers will send him and his attorney
a stern, harsh, strongly worded, threatening letter "requesting" clarification and/or more information, and if Scottie's answer remains the same...then they'll send a second follow-up letter. Needless to say, I find this just another "dog and pony"
show out of which NOTHING will result as those evil/dishonest people in the W/H.
abarts @ 48:
No, nor would we with Charles Manson. A fellow cult member who lied about Manson and killed noone? Yes.
abarts @ 48:
no offense but take it easy cheney will probably get his scott was just a worker bee trying to belong to the club and he found he didn't like the club
karl @ 51:
Proably true, but WHY did it take him sooooo long to reach that conclusion?
I have to laugh:
Like all of you critics of Scott would have been the first to jump up and shout "I protest!" And I'm sure you would have been more than willing to put yourself and your family through the probable wringer with nary a thought about your future for the sake of the country.
You all seem to want fucking heroes, but all we are pathetic humans. Unless you have a clue of what its like, get a grip. We are all fallible, unless, of course, you want to sound like those hypocritical right-wingers with the whole IOKIYAR syndrome.
He did what he did, wrote what he wrote when he wrote it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be in his shoes, either then or now.
Doggiebobo @ 49:
I just want to be clear on this. I am under no illusions here. This will be a non issue here in the very near future. Why? Because nothing will come of it, that's why. I just want to see how he conducts himself on the stand. Will he be forthright? or will he just succumb to the admin 's will?
moniker @ 42:
There are over 359 listed scandals on one website.
35 articles of impeachment read to the house.
Untold lies told. Does "We don't torture" ring any bells?
The Senate report phase II reveals bush lied about Iraq war intelligence
Rendition/Black sites
Floating secret prisons.
Abu Ghraib
The list goes on and on and he hasn't been removed.
In my opinion he feels remorse and in this clip he says more people need to speak up. It's a start.
xoites defends Constitution @ 50:
Are you fricken kiddin me?
bad comparison there x.
Want to try another one?
Doggiebobo @ 52:
it's big time stuff he had his timeline for whatever reason may have had some fear who knows it could e bull shXt also he came and said many things we all knew/know hey it can't hurt trust me bush doesn't like it i suspect anyways then again he might not care.he thought he was in something good make a difference stuff it turned out to be neocon agenda he was a pawn take it for what it is
mudshark @ 56:
No, i think that one is the one i am sticking with. Sorry you don't like it.
mudshark @ 26:
i did see or hear it somewhere (great sourcing, eh? ;) that puffy did promise to donate some of the profits from his book to veterans services. anyone else know more than i?
that said, i agree with both sides (of my mouth): nothing new here, but certainly late; but on the other hand, it is a whole lot better than some former bushies have done...
mudshark @ 54:
We concur. I have seen/heard Scottie on at least 10(if not more) occasions being
interviewed(even including O'Liely), and I observed that Scottie held up very, very
well, consequently, I think that he will conduct himself quite well when questioned
by the Congressional Committee members...but "they" may try to ask questions or
pursue issues of which Scottie had no participation in order to trash bush/cheney/et.al further(which they deserve). It is under those circumstances
when Scottie may be somewhat uncomfortable because of his lack of "insider"
info. I witnessed many of the previous Committee hearings on CSPAN and I mus
say that many of the questions posed to witnesses were ridiculous; but that's
politics and many of those clowns on the hill are just postering/panding for their
constitutents and hoping to be re-elected.
xoites defends Constitution @ 58:
I suggest you do some research on the Manson family x.
taochiapet @ 59:
yeah he said he will donate some money toward that cause good for him....the guy told us what we knew/know let's use it to our advantage i don't think there is much there a lot more is going to come out next few years
Doggiebobo @ 60:
I think he will be candid. If he does not know he will say so. If he knows he will tell all he does know. If you look at the way he conducts himself in the above interview he pulls no punches while at the same time being defferential to both Bush and Cheney. He has a lot of credibility despite the right's attempt at spin. They can't deny what he says credibly because he does not come off like a raving lunatic or a pissed off ex employee. He comes off as someone concerned about our country and how it is governed. In that respect i call him my brother.
Joe O. @ 13:
McClellan has agreed to testify before Congress under oath.
thinkprogress.org/2008/06/09/conyers-invites-scott-mcclellan-to-testify/
xoites defends Constitution @ 63:
Uhuh. I can see it now. "What Happened, part two. What REALLY Happened!"
mudshark @ 65:
Why all the antagonism?
xoites defends Constitution @ 66:
I'm just not going to jump on the Scott McClellan is a hero train. He's in it for the money. I'll bet he saw all this coming years ago. And hung on just to make the money x. This guy was vetted and chosen by this admin. He ain't no saint. That's for damn sure.
ok , I'm gonna take 5.
Scott M told Olbermann the President OK'd the leak of Plame. Let's hear that tale under oath. If it's true, Bush's got some 'splainin to do. That weasel would fold up like a house of cards under a prosecutor's questioning. Then "The Zombie Overlord"/Satan's Creature, Dick Cheney should get slapped into the chair for questioning on the same subject. Both of these human hangnails need to be tried for treason and seditionist acts, and sent to prison.
mudshark @ 67:
Probably should not be making comparisons as to Press Secretaries, but from my
admittedly biased view point, Scottie was indeed a saint compared to Tony Snowjob.
"I want him paraded in handcuffs outside a police house as a common criminal because I don't know if there's a greater crime than taking the world to war based on a lie for your corporate sponsors." ~ Michael Moore
http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=1017
I like how the star guest was Zooey Deschannel promoting the movie "The Happening" and then have Scottie promote the book "what happened"
It was a very nice unplanned tie-in for that segment. As Scottie was suppose to be on last week but was tied up in traffic.
karl @ 62:
i agree. nothing has changed, but it should be welcomed as useful for effecting the minds of those less "enlightened" and more gullible than ourselves...
New superstar McMouthpiece said "...We were attacked by al Qaeda, and they were being harbored by the Taliban there..."
I know they all say that repeatedly so it must be true, but maybe once every thousand repetitions, someone can also show to me, Where's your proof? please?
Doggiebobo @ 70:
Call me jaded.
moniker @ 42:
That's completely delusional, no one would of done a thing, there were lots of people calling out against Bush. McClellan would of been buried by the 90% of the US population at that time who were screaming for innocent Iraqi blood.
taochiapet @ 73:
If only !! That is, the Hearings will be most likely televised in their entirety ONLY
on CSPAN channel, whereas the MSM will cover Britney/Paris H./car chases/hot weather in the S.E./flooding in the Midwest/etc...And, unfortunately, most people
do not take the time to tune in to CSPAN, so I suspect there will not only be a limited
viiewing audience, but that the MSM will(with political pundits) give "their take" and
opinions as to what what Scottie said under oath. We should DEMAND that ABC/CBS/
NBC along with the 24 hour cable news(?) channels, cover the hearings totally.
The world hates you, George W Bushie. And no, history will NOT vindicate you, if there is ever peace in Iraq, it will not be because of your policies.
With Viacom owning Dave's show and the Stuart/Colbert hour of power, I'm surprised the wingnuts attack NBC and MSNBC as the most "liberal" network.
It seems to me CBS and comedy central have the loudest and most effective voices in matters of dissent.
PassedPawn @ 9:
Whenever I have watched Leno, I have always felt he was a little soft on Bush, not an attacker like Letterman. I was impressed with Letterman in that video.
xoites defends Constitution, I'll say that your comparison might be better understood if you say:
No, nor would we forgive Charles Manson, however, a member his cult who was not aware of the killings ordered by manson, but did repeat the lies he was told, could be worthy of our forgiveness.
Boy my typing is poor when I'm stoned! "member OF his cult"
Time for KO and a new Special Comment tonight.
impeach imprison bush and cheney
get them to the hague for trial NOW.
[ edited, Site Monitor]
Why the 'kill the messenger' routine, Scotty proves even a blind pig can find an acorn.
{FIFY Site Monitor}
xoites defends Constitution @ 18:
Me too!
xoites defends Constitution @ 43:
I was a young BLACK republican once. I was conned into joining the young republicans, but I was glad I got to see what the morally bankrupt bastards were.
I got to meet politicians first hand (including a young Georgie the Chimp) and I was left so disgusted by the experience that I left that party forever.
There is something really, really, wrong with a lot of republicans in this country. They're sick, self-interested, sociopaths. Not all of them... just a WHOLE LOT of them.
They were also some of the most delusional, and rather nastily racist people I've met in some time.
I was shocked that people like that could exist, and horrified that they were organized.
During short time I was among their ranks, I kept being reminded of the Brown Shirts.
I have not read Scotties book and this may be in it, but this admission from an inside guy is huge (about the Irak invasion):
"....this policy was decided just a couple of months after we went into Afghanistan"
So, the decision to invade Irak was made around 16 months in advance and after it was made, no discussions were allowed.
Does anyone remember what happened these 16 months? The endless "we americans only want peace" sharade? The "war is a last resort!" followup.
this...is.. too...aggrivating...cant write...
grrrr...
Though pleased that McClelland wrote the book I have been avoiding any and all of his appearances. It just brought back all those painful memories of him behind the podium, nervous, lying, and spouting the party line. But I did want to see Letterman so I watched this clip. I cannot tell you how relieved I was to see McClelland in this instance. His posture was open and relaxed. He spoke quickly, but precisely. I feared that his book was just CYA/Payback, but this one clip convinced me that his motives are honest and his words are true. I hope he can bring that same demeanor to his testimony.
edselehr @ 3:
Can't quite place it... wanna give me a hint?
Dave did the best interviews of candidates Bush and Gore in '00. He's fearless and smart.
LibertyLover @ 89:
The Byrds "For Every Season (Turn, Turn, Turn). Yeah, I liked that choice.
moniker @ 42:
If Scottie had spoken up five years ago, it's nearly hard to imagine how different the world could be....but....what can ya do?
moniker @ 42:
I think not. Scotty sure would have been though.
I love Letterman because one can tell he hates the GOP.
Bobo Brooks and Kristol Meth are laughing stocks. They have brought down the already sullied image of the New York "Judith Miller" Times.
Very well spoken, Mr. Letterman.
Letterman is too smart to play the fool for politics.
Bless him.
It's amazing. This is my first and last time on this site, but, I can't leave without at least making some small comments.
In your self-serving and congratulatory attempts at analysis of the Letterman interview of the unfortunate little McClellan, you have spoken about everything but the enemy. Remember the enemy? Well, they remember you.
I truly believe that this thread gives us a perfect demonstration of the liberals single biggest flaw: your inability, or outright refusal to recognize the existence of the enemy. I think that you truly believe that the enemy is a creature of the Bush/Cheney Administration. All of the problems to which you (or your hero, the vacuous Letterman) refer are problems with the Republicans -- the enemy never comes up in your conversations. Bush/Cheney are the real problems, not the Islamists, not the terrorists who are determined to destroy us.
The terrorist threat is nothing but an exaggerated Republican ploy, a way for Bush/Cheney to make some more money, to usurp some more of your civil rights and liberties.
We are the real problem. If we can just get rid of the Bush/Cheney criminals then everything will be all right. Right?
Do you have any idea what is going on around you? Do you have any sense at all of the peril this nation is in? that you yourselves are in?
Unfortunately, I think the answer to both of those questions is No.
I know I have wasted my energy typing these comments, but I just had to do it.
Good night and sweet dreams,
Roger G.
Thanks Roger; don't let the keyboard hit your ass on the way out.
As for 'enemies' well, I do know that most of the hi-jackers on 9/11 were Saudii's. I also know that the supposed mastermind (Osama Bin laden; remember him Roger?), whose family sits on the board of Carlyle Inc along with the Bushes, is still at large. I also know it wasn't any of them who forced America to invade Iraq, a country with NO connection to 9/11, or blackened America's name and slowly taken away my rights to speak out about what I see, to organize and protest when MY leaders visit or to easily and conveniently fly or travel to other countries. No, all that was done by my government.
So tell me again who are the enemies and why? Cause I sure ain't met ANY Iraqi hellbent on trying to change my way of life or to kill me; wish I could say the same for Bush Co.
I was going to leave before that last nasty little remark -- which was just about what I expected from here.
How about this? How about reading our enemy's evaluation of the importance of Iraq? Would that be beyond your intellectual capacities? Once again, I repeat, you pay no attention to what our enemies have to say. You only listen to each other, an incestuous relationship that automatically precludes learning anything new. And you put our lives in increasing jeopardy and you feel good about yourselves.
Incredible.
How about reading what they plan for the ME if we pull out?
And don't make me laugh -- for someone whose rights to speak out and say what they really think, you seem to be doing a pretty good job of it here.
What liberties have you been deprived of?
Attacking me with your childish obscenities doesn't change the fact that your persistent ideological obstructionism have made us all increasingly more vulnerable to harm.
I am leaving this delusional thread now before I get any further involved in your lunacies.
It's been fun.
Goon sounds too intimidating, on a personal level. We all know Cheney did everything he could to avoid going into the military--when they could have used him. Why does Cheney hate America?
If Cheney is a "Goon," does that mean Bush is the Sea Hag?
"We’ll be right back with Scott McClellan."
Where is the rest of this transcript?
If by "goon" is meant clinically definable psychopath, yes, Cheney is a goon.
We’re Screwed
We Wish.
This is one of the reasons why I've loved Dave since the late 50s.
Roger W. Gardner @ 100:
Lord you are such a clown. As a german i give you some of your logic!!
Its like A.Hitler decides after killing 10million russians he has to kill the other 60 million too, because they threaden germans now after these huge crimes!!!
Indulge in your paranoia,ii guess the only arabs who ever treathen you where some bad singers on American idol.
Read there plan for the Middle East.... thats such bull!! all you could say is "you and wich army??", i guess the ppl in the middle east will take care off that for themself and dont need your help on it since you obvious cant seperate Al Quaida from brown looking ppl!!
in case you dont know, the USA has slowly become the bad guy since vietnam and just reached the pinnacle with bush, but go on believing you are exclusiv bleesed by god...
and at last : is that a arab behind you??? buh...
j @ 8:
It's not like McClellan can be credited with ovarian fortitude.
edgarallenpoe @ 108:
Do women in a woman's prison have penal envy?
Letterman really cut through the bullshit here. Cheney is a "goon". Bush and Cheney do not give a rats ass about the American people or any other people including the Iraqi people.
The one thing I found disgusting about this conversation as well as others is how President Bush and his band of criminals may be looked at in 50 years. As if by "allegedly" spreading Democracy via the deaths of 5000 American soldiers, 50,ooo seriously injured over a million Iraqi people dead (who knows how many have been injured) and 4 million Iraqi refugees, along with the over a million dead due to the sanctions during the Clinton administration and the uncounted dead during Desert storm. That in the future that this genocide will be looked at as a good and honorable thing. How fucking racist how arrogant how criminal. Can you imagine someone saying that the deaths of 6 million Jews, three million Poles over a million gypsies and others was somehow a good thing. These are clearly racist statements and it is no wonder that over a billion Muslims fear our country and it's racist attitudes.
An honest history view will look back on this period and define Bush and his cronies as fascist murderers just like the world looks at the Hitler regime. The one thing that Letterman hit the nail on is that all these criminals seem to care about is oil companies and defense companies making billions and our and Israel's future control of Iraqi resources and Israel and the U.S.'s expansion of control over this region.
The world will look at Americans as they did the people who did nothing while millions were slaughtered by the Hitler regime.
And then they cut to commercial? Jeez, that goon comment should have been the lead-off question.
ysbaddaden @ 109:
More like McClellan has $$$$$ fortitude.
Come on unless this guy is really willing to help bring down the Bush administration and stop covering their asses by saying that "they" (those in the Bush administration) were caught up in the campaign culture (anything goes) like McClellan says thet he was. This is about McClellan making money unless he is willing to really help bring this lying sack of psychopathic warmongers that he helped support. McClellan has blood on his hands and he knows it. But at this point it looks like it is about the $$$$$$$.
edgarallenpoe @ 108:
Or any fortitude. Can a person have post-emptive "testicular fortitude"
j @ 8:
IT'S A EUPHIMISM FOR BALLS, YOU NUT.
Wow. David Letterman asked some questions that were pretty critical of Bush and Cheney. One of the best Letterman interview clips I've ever seen.
You gotta be kidding. Scotty over Cheney? Scotty had little to no influence over Bush compared to Cheney. As Scotty said, Bush is a guy who goes by his gut. He and Cheney have been working together so long, Bush would never have gotten rid of him. At one time Cheney's approval was under 20%, and neither of them batted an eye.
I cut Scott some slack. If he hadsaid any of this stuff while in his position he would have been ostricized. Having this book sooner would have been that much nicer.
Watch his face as day starts to talk about the lack of humanity in Cheney and Bush. It looks as though he is thrilled he is going there. kind of like, this is excatly what I think but i cannot say it.
Once again the "attack the messenger" knee-jerk response battles the actual message. It seems if Scotty has affections for Bush it may have taken him a while to come to terms with his realizations. He may have had to go through the stages of grief even,,,,and he had to write the book, which obviously took time. Perhaps it is only Bush supporters attacking him for realizing his obligation to the Constitution over his affections to Bush. And the notion there is no new information is trumped by the fact we need confirmation from the inside to figure out for sure, without conjecture, what happened. Give the guy a break! It does not matter if a person likes or dislikes him...that does not change the content of what he is saying. And besides, he was only the press secretary. He did his job. His realization came later but like they say 'let he without sin cast the first stone'.
xoites defends Constitution @ 18:
I couldn't agree with you more. When mcclennen was press secretary, I literally couldn't stand watching him; I wasn't sure if he was an evading shill or just plain stupid--but he was unwatchable just the same.
I now think that all his stuttering and seeming stupidity on the job were the result of his having a conscience. It's easy for the opposition to slam bush, but when you've grown up surrounded by serious republican-think and your family has been friends with the 'president' for years, it takes incredible courage to actually fess up to the truth--and then report on it. I too have changed my mind about mcclellan.
I wonder if everyone here would have prefered if he had kept his mouth shut and remained a presumbed supporter of the policies that have harmed America over the past eight years. This belief that everyone's irredeemable if they arrived at a conclusion a little late is completely absurd.
Login or Register to post comments.