I really need to preveiw my thread headings. Crap another one.

So is he really trying to tell us something or just making some extra dough? Maybe both?

McClellan writes: “History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080527/pl_politico/10649

I know it's easier said than done but why didn't McClellan resign sooner rather than knowingly participate in perpetuating the webs of lies surrounding all things Iraq War? I can’t imagine being a party to such an overt series of untruths. Maybe this book is a way for him to clear his conscience.

Tal-If you talk to some people who have been in abusive relationships that's the one question that everyone asks "why didn't you get out sooner?"

What seems to be a clear reason to leave isn't as clear when you're in the middle of the abuse.

At the time, there jingoistic fervor was at a fever pitch. Even the New York Times was on the bandwagon. I guess it would have been hard to see truth from fiction. I mean look at how many people went to jail for their loyalty to Nixon. They were involved in all sorts of criminal activity -- all in the name of good government. Or so they thought. I guess you’re right.

I believe McClellan to be the first in a new wave of tell-all books that will be forthcoming. I've always thought and said ( even though I know I wasn't the first to predict it ) that MUCH information will come out, when Bush leaves office, about just how much lying there actually was going on during Bush.

Each one will be marginalized and discredits will be attempted PURELY out of embarrassment of those who defended Bush's staements and policies. McClellan was a particularly poor liar and he knew it. In fact, once it became SO clear that he was lying, that is why and when he left. He became ineffective BECAUSE he couldn't lie good enough.

He stayed long enough to expose much of it for what it was, but too long for me to just absolve his being compliciant. He's probably had this book written for a while and figured " Oh well, I'd better release it now since everyone knows that Bush had me do a lot of lying for him and before all the others come forward too." It's a good business move. It's a terrible move for those that still try and lie to us.

I'm so happy to be alive that this era of exposing things done in the dark by shining a huge-ass light. It gives me real faith, sometimes.

So who's next to release a book that shines some light? I'd pay for a Colin Powell book that was truthful. His view was singularly special to me.

The Bush Presidential Library is gonna have to be big enough to hold all these existing and forthcoming tell-all books. The old Enron tower in Houston ought to do the trick!

I've a nickname: The Bush/Enron Presidential Tower of Shame.

"The Tower of Abusive Power"!

Let's see now. Man fired from job by Bush. Man needs money. Man is bitter. Man needs book that will sell. Man makes up things or distorts things so lefties will get all excited and buy book. Man thinks "thank God for lefties".

McLellan was not fired...it appears he resigned on his own. I doubt the prospect of rocking chairs and reminiscing over lemonade will happen now.

"I thought he handled his assignment with class, integrity," the president said. "It's going to be hard to replace Scott, but nevertheless he made the decision and I accepted it. One of these days, he and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas and talking about the good old days."

Scott deserves that book. Go and look at some before and after pictures. The stress damn near killed him!

I think you are going to see a LOT of Republicans buy that book. They are wanting the inside scoop on how their party was hijacked, exploited then trashed on the way to power and dollars.

It's going to piss a lot of them off too. This will make getting through the 5 stages easier, so we can see more and better Republicans elected.

(Like the Democrats are currently doing)

It's the changing of the guard happening right now, and it's a good thing.

According to Ken Herman of Cox news service:

"McClellan worked for Bush from 1999, when he signed on as a deputy in the governor's press office, until 2006, when he was forced out as White House press secretary."

From the Washington Post:

"McClellan stops short of saying that Bush purposely lied about his reasons for invading Iraq, writing that he and his subordinates were not "employing out-and-out deception" to make their case for war in 2002."


Not exactly what the lefties want to hear.

Oh, so he couldn't meet their bar for LYING, saw the end and negotiated an exit?

Thought so.

"Oh, so he couldn't meet their bar for LYING, saw the end and negotiated an exit?"


You made that up and posted it as if it were a fact.

Prove it.

Deane I am a bit surprised by your spin job. I thought for sure you would have some actual insight that would hold up some of McClellan's information. I mean he was right there when things happened.

I have no doubts he is striking while the iron is hot and yes he will make some money as have others. Isn't every presidency lined with former insiders and staffers that make extra cash after they quit, resign or are let go?

There were plenty of people writing books after Clinton left office. So why is this different?

I guess I expected some spin from you but not this much.

Chris, Karl Rove has already said McClellen wasn't even at some of the meetings he claims to have been.

I should add that I actually couldn't care less what McClellen says about Bush. That Presidency is over with. Bush's legacy doesn't interest me a hoot. What I don't like are all the lefties at the hog trough eating slop and claiming it's caviar.

By the way, I don't think quoting members of the Washington press corp is putting a spin on things. Sorry it doesn't square with what lefties want to believe.

Deane- How can anyone here believe anything coming from Karl Rove? He is the true spin master.

As much as you are trying to discredit McClellan and any others for that matter, I think this is only the beginning of information the Bush machine is going to be dealing with as his term comes to and end.

And best believe it will get worse once he leaves office. Bad is bad. And when you try to spin that, it looks even worse.

Sorry-Karl Rove holds the least credibility.

"Sorry-Karl Rove holds the least credibility."

Why is that, because you don't agree with him?

Because he was able to get elected the biggest moron our country has seen.

McLellan is probably just getting a head start on what is going to be a LOT of books published by a LOT of people inside the Bush administration that are less than favorable towards their old boss. This also isn't the first book to come out like this; I believe Colin Powell (whom very few, even those to the left in here, will question his integrity) came out with one, and he has been very critical of Bush since leaving in 2004.

Deane, you may be "over" the Bush Presidency and not want to cry over spilled milk, but a lot of you conservative types are so quick to dig up the dirt on past Presidents, especially Clinton. The fact of the matter is, there isn't a shovel on this Earth big enough to dig all the dirt up that has piled on the Bush administration.

Sure, let the discrediting attempts begin. Fully expected. The next step, after the character assasination attemts ( man needs money, was fired, is bitter. etc. ) from Deane will be to get hung up on some miniscule detail and twist it into a thing about semantics or something else insiginificant. All the while avoiding the fact that this guy knew of what he wrote. He may be all those things Deane accused him of being. But is his book wrong? Deane only knows what he is told and will never read the book because anything that gives credibility to the left or Democrats or whatever America Hating label we get from him today, is not worthy of his attention. Other points of view are frowned upon.

Deane: The simple fact is, you can't handle the truth. Bush could murder someone on live TV with 200 million Americans watching, and people like you would still attempt to discredit what everyone saw. You're pathetic.

And this is Bush Legacy.

He has buried the Republican party for a long time. The list of scandals and corruption is the biggest there has ever been in our history, and the Rubber stamp Republicans supported him throughout the whole thing.

Now we get to hear about the downstream costs for a long time.

So Bush did some hard and crazy partying back in the days but honestly doesn't remember if he ever used cocaine?

I have done more than my fair share of hard partying ie drinking but I have never forgotten what "other" substances I have used while hard drinking.

And how is it not a lie or deception if you don't recall or are evasive and vague in your answers.

Goddammit why does Dubya always remind me of my father?

Washington is all about power. Everyone wants it. McClellen had no power, he was nobody after he got booted out of the White House. Now he's getting another 15 minutes of fame. He'll get invited to all the tragedy channels. He's somebody for a little while. The spotlight is on him. Sure feels good.

What is there in the book that is new? Anybody know, or is the usual liberal tripe. Perhaps all the threads should simply be labeled Bush Bashing Thread #4306 and so on.

Maybe you can start one labeled "Bush Defending #499500040040040"?

"The former press secretary — the second of four so far in Bush's presidency — explained his dramatic shift from loyal defender to fierce critic as a difficult act of personal contrition, a way, he wrote, to learn from his mistakes, be true to his Christian faith and become a better person.

"I fell far short of living up to the kind of public servant I wanted to be," McClellan writes. He also blames the media whose questions he fielded, calling them "complicit enablers" in the White House campaign to manipulate public opinion toward the need for war.

McClellan said Bush loyalists will no doubt continue to think the administration's decisions have been correct and its unpopularity undeserved. "I've become genuinely convinced otherwise," he said."

Scott McClellen has now seen the light and is now trying to be a better American. Maybe you should remove your blinders and attempt to see for once as well.

"Scott McClellen has now seen the light and is now trying to be a better American."

Oh, I get it now. He found Jesus. Hallelujah.

I think he's always had Jesus, he just forgot about him for awhile while he was in an abusive relationship.

Deane, you are certainly going to find yourself in a bind trying to deny the writings of all the authors of all the books revealing the true idiocy of the Bush administration. Are you aware how many books have already been published on the subject? Are you prepared to discredit every one of these authors as money-hungry lefties? You're welcome to try, but I think you need to take a step back and look at your own stratergy.

Here is just a sample of what's been written about the failures, lies and deceitful tactics of the Bush administration. Most of these guys don't need the money nor did they have a personal axe to grind (i.e. Bush didn't "fire" them).


The Bush Tragedy by Jacob Weisberg.

State Of Denial by Bob Woodward

Dead Certain by Robert Draper

Crimes Against Nature by Robert Kennedy, Jr.

I suspect that validation is a primary motivating factor. This book seems like it's going to be the kind of book that says " You know all those times you thought I was lying? I was. And here is why."

So when Deane asks, " Is there anything new? "

Yes. Yes is the answer to that. It is new to have the person who actually did the lying to come out and say " I lied. Here is when and here is why."

I take no additional pleasure that it comes from a Republican administration. That is the truth. The fact that you, Deane, don't care about legacy, truth vs. lying, a lesson learned, caviar or liberalism is of no consequence to me. But you should care about those things because they are important on any level you can think of. What is NOT important is your pride. Heck, I don't blame you personally for Bush's mistakes. I just want to know as much of the truth as I can get. You, it seems, only want the appearance of truth. Then, of course, once your ideals get exposed as flawed, THEN you claim not to care.

But you are lying. You DO care and if any policies you supported actually worked, you'd use that as support for your point of view. It's fully right to do so, in my opinion. But you can't expect anyone to just go " Oh - you got proven wrong and NOW you don't care? OK. That's fine. It's not important." with a straight face.

This is where you say " No new attacks since 9/11." as if that applies to what we are talking about.

"Are you aware how many books have already been published on the subject?"

So, what then is new in this one?


"It is new to have the person who actually did the lying to come out and say " I lied. Here is when and here is why."


Which page is that on?


"Robert Kennedy, Jr."

Now there's a real inside source!

Flippancy is only degrading the value of your own opinion.

You don't want a real discourse, Deane, rather you think you are successful in being capable of getting under the skin of most of the more clear minded in the audience, but I got news for you, you aren't, you can't and the Republican dream is already descending into a nightmare.

"You don't want a real discourse"

There's nothing to discourse. There's nothing new in what McClellen says in his book. There's no smoking gun. Bush has been repeatedly accused of far more on a regular basis on this forum. It's like the beating of a drum.

People beat drums when they are pissed. The real point is making really sure that everybody understands what this election is about.

Are we going to sanction what was done, by allowing the Republican party to continue to hold office, or are we going to say, "Ok, that sucked, let's try something new!"

It's that simple. Everybody needs to know what happens when we vote for Republicans.

"let's try something new!"

Like what?

Deane, you consistently shift the focus. In your first post you wrote:
"Man makes up things or distorts things so lefties will get all excited and buy book." Now you claim there is nothing to discuss?
You can't just claim it's distortion and fabrication when it is backed up by so many others. Actually you can, and you will and that is why we will continue to point out the errors. You righties sure don't have a clue.

---

quote:

It's that simple. Everybody needs to know what happens when we vote for Republicans.

---

" There's nothing new in what McClellen says in his book."

Why don't we all read it to find that out instead of relying on your view, eh? That seems fair.

You first.

Oh I will, honey.

Get a room, dammit!

(Hey, it's legal in Cali and Mass now, so that makes it trendy too!)

Darktemper, I totally agree!

That's why I frequently mention the movement in the Democratic party toward electing more and better Democrats.

This is a good thing in that we can primary challenge established players, back the challengers with people money, not corporate money, and get some change.

When the Republicans grok this (and I think many of them have), we will see fewer idiots and more Statesmen like elected.

It's all good, from my perspective.

McClellan said Bush loyalists will no doubt continue to think the administration's decisions have been correct and its unpopularity undeserved. "I've become genuinely convinced otherwise," he said."

I am wondering exactly how many Bush loyalists are left?

Now we all know that many in this country no longer read but how long realisticly before this book hits #1 on Amazon, and #1 on New York Times. I am guessing that its already hit #1 on Amazon and will hit #1 on NYT's in about 2 weeks.

I think about 20 percent of us represent the remaining Bush loyalists.

Some of the 23 percenters came to Jesus on this whole thing and are willing to try something new.

The rest?

Staunch. Not going anywhere.

Like I said, those remaining could see Bush murder someone on TV and somehow find a way to disredit the information.

I bet you are right, Shyguy, it will sell like hotcakes.

Vitalogy, those remaining could actually read a bit of history, and knowing that he has killed with pleasure, still pretend that he is a decent human being.

George W. Bush during his six years as governor of Texas presided over 152 executions, more than any other governor in the recent history of the United States...

"Please," Bush whimpered, his lips pursed in mock desperation, "please, don't kill me."

From Death in Texas, a thoughtful, provacative and thorough article by Sister Helen Prejean in the New York Review of Books.

So, is your thinking he should give those convicted of heinous crimes a cheap suit and send them down the road. Or, should he carry out the wishes of the judge, jury and directives of the law? I become confused as to what you're thinking should be done.

Deane-

You come across to me as a guy who curses Bush under your breath. Then you play the "he's a lame duck" card so you really don't have to answer the hard questions.

I find it disappointing because I think you would add some real value to this thread if you didn't constantly defend a president who keeps proving he is in way over his head.

I know you have to almost obligatorily try and discredit McClellan calling him disgruntled. But as mentioned this will not be the last book, last interview, last staffer that is going to come forth and make their point.

McClellan has been in politics along time and my feeling is he was excited about being apart of this administration. A chance to really try and make a difference. I think his book is part of his disappointment in what he has seen.

Deane, you're not confused, but you are hypocritical. Here's a quote from you in a 2007 thread, regarding the Scooter Libby pardon:

"This is all politics and it isn't right for someone to spend 2 1/2 years in prison as a political prisoner."

So you are all for carrying "out the wishes of the judge, jury and directives of the law" if it involves a state-sponsored execution, but you get squeamish when a white-collar criminal is sentenced to a couple years in a cushy federal prison? The power of the pardon is reserved for the friends of the pardoner, eh? Deane, you now personify elitism.

(BTW, the Karla Faye Tucker pardon would have been for a stay of execution only, commuting her to life inprisonment. No 'get out of jail free card' like Scooter got.)

Also, McClellan's book pretty much proves the guilt of Rove and Cheney in regards to the Plame issue.

I have no idea what you people are arguing about but ill say this, why would anyone buy a book from this guy when he was part of the problem to begin with.

Reminds me of the OJ book.

Because this administration has blocked nearly all efforts to actually understand what really happened, reading the books is one good way to get at that information.

Being part of the problem, means very likely having something of value to say about it.

Of course, there could be lies in the book. Maybe, maybe not.

Won't know until we read it, then compare / contrast to the other information that is out there.

If there are some holes, well, we learned something. Actually learned a few things, some of which we would not have known before.

Deane_johnson:
Why is that, because you don't agree with him?

No, because Rove is full of shit. Rove's his name, propaganda's his game.

"Also, McClellan's book pretty much proves the guilt of Rove and Cheney in regards to the Plame issue."


This book doesn't prove anything. Some disgruntled ex-employee who was forced out decides to "get even" and make a few bucks at the same time. No new information. He's lucky the affiliations are not reversed. If it were the Clinton's he was writing about, he could end up in the river with cement boots.

Chris, I actually have no interest in defending Bush. He's a boob and the sooner he's out of the White House, the better off we'll be. What I'm responding to are the wild eyed radical liberals on the forum who will leap on any piece of shit like a starving Berkshire hog, touting it like it had some form of legitimacy. And, guess what! That's why they post what they do.

"This book doesn't prove anything."

Wrong

"No new information."

Wrong. Unless you've read it, STFU.

"He's lucky the affiliations are not reversed. If it were the Clinton's he was writing about, he could end up in the river with cement boots. "

Dream on, big boy. You speak like you some omnipotent jack-ass. You should take pause and read your own posts before hitting the submit button.

"What I'm responding to are the wild eyed radical liberals on the forum who will leap on any piece of shit like a starving Berkshire hog, touting it like it had some form of legitimacy."

No, that's not the case at all. You are self flatulating for your own enjoyment. You just can't deal with the doom of the Republican's future, and the fact that all the blame rests with the group you supported.

When did you finish reading it Andy?

People on here have made some very good points. These revelations couldn’t have come at a better time. And to watch these neo-conservatives roaches scatter as the light of truth is shined upon their den of ill repute speaks volumes. It confirms what most of us have all known all along; George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove and convicted felon I. Lewis Libby are proven liars.

To attempt to mitigate the truth with such overwhelming evidence to the contrary points to an unbelievable degree of denial. This administration, which touted itself as more moral than their predecessors, has engaged in a war of deception -- designed to mislead the American people from the very beginning in terms of the Iraq question. And to try and paint it in any other way shows a true lack of ignorance to the truth, period. This war was never about WMD’s, but rather perpetuating a discredited political philosophy. Rather than strengthen our position globally, George W. Bush has created a situation which undermines our ability to engage the rest of the world in reasoned tones.

Hopefully, General Colin Powell will write a book telling the true story behind his concerns about the whole Iraq question. I wonder if he were to write such a book, would this decorated four star general be accused of being nothing more than a former disgruntled employee?

"These revelations couldn’t have come at a better time."

Actually, October 2004 would have been a far better time.

You're right Amus, I stand corrected.

All Deane is doing is repeating the Bush Administration talking points. Word by word. It's almost like he's on that group email that gets sent out to all the minions.

Let's see now. Man fired from job by Bush. Man needs money. Man is bitter. Man needs book that will sell. Man makes up things or distorts things so lefties will get all excited and buy book. Man thinks "thank God for lefties".

Thank God in HEAVEN that we have EXTREME RIGHTIES like yourself DA. YOU want to re-write HISTORY just like Herb so that it fits YOUR liking.
YOUR talking points are right in line with the RNC website, Plush Bimbo, Insannity and the EXTREME RIGHT wing neo-nazi Bible thumpers out there in America.
WOW! It must suck to live in YOUR head.

I get a fair number of those. The crap they send is absolutely hilarious at times. I've got to laugh, or get really pissed. Laughing is better.

Actually was considering joining the McCain comment troll action club. Figured I would spout off a few good ones, with a throw away online identity, impress them, then just start doing the research, and countering the items on the list, right on schedule.

Then I realized just how bad he is and that it's very likely not warranted.

Actually was considering joining the McCain comment troll action club.

I ALREADY have!!!!!

Ill pass on the book. Seems like a disgruntled ex employee that was part of the problem now trying to make a quick buck.

Besides, what could he tell us that we dont already know?

Why DUHbya is/was such a screw up....
Why he can't talk in front of crowds....
Why his IQ is that of a 5th grader in TAG class.....

"Seems like a disgruntled ex employee that was part of the problem now trying to make a quick buck."

So you agree he's disgruntled, right? About what, do you think? Maybe all the crap he had to deal with in the Bush administration. Notice the Bush slime machine never really attacks the message, just the messenger.

I can tell you right now, when the Republicans lose the White House in November, Bush will say it's "simply a disgruntled electorate, trying to make some money for themselves by stopping runaway government spending and corporate giveaways." And who can trust voters with THOSE kind of motives?

You are a fool if you think that you should believe what he writes in this book. You didnt believe him before when he lied to your face about Katrina and how the war is being handled,

Why believe him now?

I know why, cause now he is saying bad things about Bush and suddenly you want to give him his own show on Air America.

He lied before, he will do it again.

And, as has been said before, we can read the book, look at the information, then see where it leads.

Trying really hard to marginalize his book looks a lot like trying to cover up the horror of the Republican party.

Nothing to lose by reading the book is there? Say it's actually full of lies. So, that's easy right? Point them out, one by one, and be done with it.

Where the heck can you get this book? I just drove down to Borders for nothing!

Even Republicans can see the error of their ways. Redemption is possible.

All I'm saying is calling someone disgruntled doesn't mean they are lying, doesn't mean they are 'truthing', doesn't mean anything. But that's they GOP way...they can't disprove his assertions, so they sow doubt.

It's the WH's extreme backlash to guys like McClellan, Clarke, etc. that make me tend to think they are probably telling the truth. When Bush hits back hard and low, focusing on the messenger rather than the message, you're getting pretty close to the truth.

" Why believe him now? "

Because he's not written a book perpetuating the lies he says he told - that, as it turned out in more than a few cases WERE LIES. He was put in a particularly unique position during a time in which truth was at a scarcity.

Like I said before, I'm not ready to absolve him - but to hear him admit he was told to lie COUNTS to me.

You don't have to and can speculate on various quotes that you read or that O Reilly pays attention to and tells you what is important for you to think. If that's enough for you, fine, MC. I'll make you a deal though. I'll read " What Happened " and I'll let you pick a book that tells me what REALLY happened and make my decision. Got one? Seriously. I'll do it. I'll even let you include currently updated congressional reports. Not that those SEEM like they would help your cause. But I'm open to seeing the truth wherever it happens to be. Just tell me where it is. Not where it's not. It's only fair. And I won't even ask you to meet me halfway and do the same.

I am going to try a different approach and judge the book after actually reading it. I finally finished " The 9 " ( Boy, that was a hard read for me. I like Toobin on camera where he can ask and answer questions. Listening to him read his book was difficult for me ).

hmmm. So then by that logic all Bush has to do is write a book after he leaves office and blame Chenney or something and suddenly he is credible.

Which logic are you critiquing?

Yes. If that was the truth, yes.

You are a poor bluffer. I'll take that challenge. I'll give it an inordinate amount of weight in his favor and if what he pens checks out on any kind of level; Yes. I will give him credibility for telling the truth. What's so hard to swallow about that?

He can write all the books he wishes. But the only book I’m sure that will resonate with the vast majority of Americans is an apology for his dereliction of leadership. A mea culpa is in order from George W. Bush – and from many of his current and former subordinates. This administration has failed at nearly every measurable level – and George W. Bush’s extreme lack of popularity bears this out.

He could publish a lot of Red Meat for the 23 percenters, make a quick buck. Then, his legacy will be copies to be found forever in the thrifties, right next to the racks and racks full of self-help and romance novels.

George W. Bush is already talking about wanting to make big money on the lecture circuit; he’s made statements to this effect. If Bill Clinton can rake in $100,000,000 in speaking fees and book advances/royalties, I’m sure George W. Bush will do roughly the same.

Fees or lessons?

Easy joke. But like Clinton giving marital advice, McGreevy going to become a Priest ( true ) and Ted Haggard going to massage school, I can't see it being a good thing for anyone.

"Where the heck can you get this book? I just drove down to Borders for nothing!"

It isn't out yet. Won't be until next week.

I've watched countless Republican talking heads speak about this book. Not ONE has denied what McLellan states is true. All they do is bash him for writing the book and for "not speaking up" when he was press secretary.

In other words, they are pissed that he broke the code.

Totally.

It's gonna be a good read.

"I've watched countless Republican talking heads speak about this book. Not ONE has denied what McLellan states is true. All they do is bash him for writing the book and for "not speaking up" when he was press secretary. "

Precisely.

I think they'd like to read it first. How can you deny something when you don't know what it says, or in what context.

Even better, from their perspective, marginalize it so that question does not even come up.

This is Republican Nut-Bag 101.

The fact that it's even a point of discussion means there is absolutely some really good and stinky dirt in that book that will impact some people that a lot of other people want impacted.

Hell, it might even be true.

He's gonna make a nice bunch of money, which he can then use to relax a bit and see if he can roll back some of the very hard miles the administration put on him.

Wonder if he does not seriously regret that choice he made back then? Wonder if he doesn't regret a lot of the stuff he did, or was a part of as a result of it too?

Bet he does, and that's why there are so many Nut-Bags crying foul right now.

That doesn't make it right, but it does make it better, and that counts for something.

We've even got Chris Matthews doing some fairly deep introspection right now. There is hope after all!

"I think they'd like to read it first. How can you deny something when you don't know what it says, or in what context."

Well then Deane, I guess they shouldn't have gone on TV and spoke about it at all until they did read it.

Trust me, they know what's in there. They were part of it. Ari Fliescher is posturing for a position in the McSame administration.

Unfortunately for him, there won't be a McSame administration.

" I think they'd like to read it first. How can you deny something when you don't know what it says, or in what context."

You don't mind if I keep that one handy for future conversations with you, do you? Because, you know, you do seem to avoid actually reading things because of some reputation that you've been told to think and feel about ( Obama's books, Rolling Stone, etc. ).

"Ari Fliescher is posturing for a position in the McSame administration."

Your evidence?

Has it occurred to anyone that since all Democrats already believe the things that are in this book, and they've been said before, over and over again, that it's not going to effect much of anything?

Let's see now, Bush lied about WMDs (book apparently doesn't say that), Bush ignored some intelligence reports, Rove did this, Rove did that. What's going to change other than Scott McClellen rendering himself unemployable in the future? Smooth move Ex-Lax.

"since all Democrats already believe the things that are in this book, "

Care to show the evidence on that claim?

Let me know when you get done talking to ALL Democrats. By that time Obama will be in his second term.

"Care to show the evidence on that claim?"

You're looking at it. Just read the pdxradio.com forum for a few weeks.

Ah...so ALL Democrats now read pdxradio.com.

Understand how the right wing behaviors fit a pattern:

1: Faulty reasoning — RWAs are more likely to:
Make many incorrect inferences from evidence.
Hold contradictory ideas that result from a cognitive attribute known as compartmentalized thinking.
Uncritically accept that many problems are ‘our most serious problem.’
Uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs.
Uncritically trust people who tell them what they want to hear.
Use many double standards in their thinking and judgments.
2: Hostility Toward Outgroups — RWAs are more likely to:
Weaken constitutional guarantees of liberty such as a Bill of Rights.
Severely punish ‘common’ criminals in a role-playing situation.
Admit they obtain personal pleasure from punishing such people.
Be prejudiced and hostile against racial, ethnic, nationalistic, sexual, and linguistic minorities.
Volunteer to help the government persecute almost anyone.
Be mean-spirited toward those who have made mistakes and suffered.
3: Profound Character Attributes — RWAs are more likely to:
Be dogmatic.
Be zealots.
Be hypocrites.
Be absolutists
Be bullies when they have power over others.
Help cause and inflame intergroup conflict.
Seek dominance over others by being competitive and destructive in situations requiring cooperation.
4: Blindness To One’s Own Failings And To The Failings Of Authority Figures Whom They Respect— RWAs are more likely to:
Believe they have no personal failings.
Avoid learning about their personal failings.
Be highly self-righteous.
Use religion to erase guilt over their acts and to maintain their self-righteousness.
RWA is also correlated with political conservatism — not so much at the level of ordinary voters, but with increasing strength as one moves from voters to activists to office holders, and then from lower- to higher-level officeholders. (The Authoritarian Specter). Scores on the RWA Scale predict many attitudes and behaviors related to conservatism as defined in the general culture at the time. For instance, the scale has correlated reliably with political party affiliation; reactions to Watergate; pro-capitalist attitudes; severity of jury sentencing decisions; punishment of deviants; racial prejudice; homophobia; religious orthodoxy; victim blaming; and acceptance of covert governmental activities such as illegal bugging, political harassment, denial of the right to assemble, and illegal drug raids (Altemeyer, 1981, 1988, 1996, 1998).
In one part of his summation, Altemeyer wrote that RWAs are more likely to be: "Conservative/Reform party (Canada) or Republican Party (United States) lawmakers who (1) have a conservative economic philosophy; (2) believe in social dominance; (3) are ethnocentric; (4) are highly nationalistic; (5) oppose abortion; (6) support capital punishment; (7) oppose gun-control legislation; (8) say they value freedom but actually want to undermine the Bill of Rights; (9) do not value equality very highly and oppose measures to increase it; (10) are not likely to rise in the Democratic party, but do so among Republicans." (The Authoritarian Specter)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Wing_Authoritarianism

Sounds like Herb to a T!

" What's going to change other than Scott McClellen rendering himself unemployable in the future? "

You will be proven wrong to have supported false claims and lies and your credibility will be affected. All the while others who said that you were wrong and that Bush was lying will be validated and shown to be right in their assertion that we were being lied to. Those that continue to deny it will lose power to a degree that will be satisfying to me.

Clear enough for you now, Deane?

Your team has blown it to such a degree that it will be remembered and acted upon for a while. Eventually, Democrats will do something to give your side another shot. And will be for stuff just like this that matters and effects policy and morale and lives and the economy and and and...

So quit pretending that this is of no consequence. You know that it is. You, personally, fucked things up. Now it's our turn to try and fix it since nothing is ever important enough for you to actually DO anything. Suck it.

You're looking at it. Just read the pdxradio.com forum for a few weeks.

So if we read YOUR posts plus Herb's and Co. you believe what Hitler said in Mien Kampf?
I'm just sayin'.....

Scott McClellen will be interviewed on Friday's PBS News Hour.

It doesn’t take a book to recognize just how awful George W. Bush has been at handling the situation in Iraq. Using the neo-conservative benchmarks outlines in late 2002 and early 2003, the war should have last a year, resulted in few casualties and cost a maybe $100,000,000. Nothing has worked out quite like the neo-conservatives planned. In fact, McClellan does us all a favor by making clear that the actual reason behind the invasion was about spreading democracy into the Middle East – a key con-conservative objective. So the whole WMD claim was a ruse.

What George Bush is doing about this.