McClellan savages Bush and the Bush admin

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by YOhio

ChinoCoug, FrankRyan, and DetroitDad are all dems.

FrankRyan--barely an opinion. None memorable.

ChinoCoug is all over the place. I don't understand half of what he says (by choice, because it is too tiring).

DetroitDad, well, I have stopped paying any attention to him, and vice versa, as he is either careless or no good.

If that's all there is, well, that is sad.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by YOhio

I agree.

Ironically, I do as well. There's no easy way for McClellan to come out of this looking good.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

there is a reason you are tangled in embrace with Tex.

He that can hear, let him hear.

You are one strange cat.

Can't we get a real democrat on this site? Just one??? If you in 2008 agree with the decision to invade Iraq you are no democrat. That with the intelligence we had, it was worth invading, killing, occupying. But I take it you are against avoiding any other "threatening" countries.

I mean, the most liberal guys here might be Lebowski and MudPhud, and I don't really count them as democrats.

We don't have one frickin democrat on this entire site. Sad. We have a Persian and an Israeli Zionist, but no democrat.

Where do you get that I agree with the invasion of Iraq? And what are you mad at me for? Because without me we "don't have one frickin' democrat on this entire site?" That doesn't really seem like something I am responsible for. If I am not "Democrat enough" for you, join the party yourself. Are you having a bad day?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Ironically, I do as well. There's no easy way for McClellan to come out of this looking good.

Sadly for Bush, there aren't many ways for him to come out looking good either. This continues to look like the sham we have thought it was for years now.

[MikeWaters]

Um, he should have said something to the press?

Where were all the leaks coming from that had Bush so upset?

What would it mean, if he had resigned? Oh wait, he did resign. What if he had resigned earlier? What if he had been the only high-up guy in the Bush admin to criticize Bush after resignation. Oh wait, there were others.

etc, etc. The truth was frickin obvious the entire time, that we had a bunch of clowns in there. It's no shock to find out that they were incompetent. The shock is that Bush's friend is telling the truth.

McClellan could have at least had the decency to bow out with malignant cancer and keep his mouth shut.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Um, he should have said something to the press?

Where were all the leaks coming from that had Bush so upset?

What would it mean, if he had resigned? Oh wait, he did resign. What if he had resigned earlier? What if he had been the only high-up guy in the Bush admin to criticize Bush after resignation. Oh wait, there were others.

etc, etc. The truth was frickin obvious the entire time, that we had a bunch of clowns in there. It's no shock to find out that they were incompetent. The shock is that Bush's friend is telling the truth.

McClellan could have at least had the decency to bow out with malignant cancer and keep his mouth shut.

I suppose the leaks could have come from McClellan, but I would be really surprised. He was quite antagonistic with much of the media when he was press secretary. He did resign, but if you recall, it was widely thought at the time that he had actually been told to step down by Bolton soon after Bolton took over and began reorganizing the West Wing staff.

I did find this gem of a quote from Bush when McClellan resigned:

Mr. Bush, during his remarks, at one point put a hand on Mr. McClellan's shoulder. "One of these day he and I are going to be rocking on chairs in Texas, talking about the good old days and his time as press secretary," the president said. "And I can assure you I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, job well done."

Bush needs to stop looking into people's eyes to see their soul. He never seems to get it right. Either that or he needs to take this guy's advice:

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Sadly for Bush, there aren't many ways for him to come out looking good either. This continues to look like the sham we have thought it was for years now.

Oh come on. Guy leaves the administration with a sour taste in his mouth, writes and publishes a book while Bush is still in office, and you expected what, posies? Some of what McClellan says is likely true, but let's not pretend the man's a picture of objectivity.

As for Bush, the jury will be out on him for a while, regardless of what the leftist nuts think. My guess is, he'll join the list of forgettable presidents, but I don't believe history will be as hard on him as his harshest contemporary critics. It rarely is.

And he doesn't hold a candle to Carter's incompetency.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Oh come on. Guy leaves the administration with a sour taste in his mouth, writes and publishes a book while Bush is still in office, and you expected what, posies? Some of what McClellan says is likely true, but let's not pretend the man's a picture of objectivity.

As for Bush, the jury will be out on him for a while, regardless of what the leftist nuts think. My guess is, he'll join the list of forgettable presidents, but I don't believe history will be as hard on him as his harshest contemporary critics. It rarely is.

And he doesn't hold a candle to Carter's incompetency.

Who associated with the administration is a measure of objectivity? The people in the West Wing are either strongly biased for Bush or against him, and yet you would have us all give tremendous credence to the statements of those who are for Bush and who work with him closely.

McClellan's motives are likely not pure, but that doesn't mean his statements aren't factual either. His statements are worth carefully scrutinizing. If they appear true after that analysis, Bush is in deep trouble.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

McClellan's book bothers me on multiple levels. If he disagreed with Bush at the time on the war, he should have said something to Bush. If he learned he had been lied to about war intelligence, he should have said something to the press or to Congress. If he learned Bush was manipulating intelligence, he should have said something to the press or Congress. He didn't.

Either he is a lousy human being just now doing the right thing for the wrong reason, or he is a lousy human being doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason. In either event, I don't think McClellan will do so well in history.

Come on. He was the press secretary for crying out loud. His job was to be an advocate for the White House. I imagine he pushed back his doubts and carried on as a good soldier. Shame on Bush for conducting a presidency resulting in this kind of soul-searching from his former inner circle.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Come on. He was the press secretary for crying out loud. His job was to be an advocate for the White House. I imagine he pushed back his doubts and carried on as a good soldier. Shame on Bush for conducting a presidency resulting in this kind of soul-searching from his former inner circle.

Shame on Bush, but shame on his enablers. McClellan had a chance to stand against perceived wrongdoing, though it would have been unprofitable to do so. After being shoved out the door and with dollar signs flashing, he writes a tell-all.