I guess what we all need to do is buy the book and read it when it comes out. My comments are derived from the fact that when Scotty was questioned about some of these key comment, he had nothing to say. In some cases he seemed quite surprised that the comments were in a book "he wrote"??? What I am indicating is that it is entirely possible that this book, like many before was authored by someone else and may not accurately depict the author for whom it was written, intentions. It surely would not be the first time. I find it kinda strange that in one sentence in the book he exclaims great praise of Bush, and in the next intimates he, is a liar. I also find it strange how the book talks about these "lies" as having been architected by two people in a private conversation (Libby/Rove) that Scotty was not involved in. At the end of the day, controversies like this sell books. I doubt anyone will argue that this leaked info about the book will no doubt equal a substantial rise in book sales and a rise to the NYC best sellers list in no time at all!
Oh geez, this is getting good.... http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/05/mcclellan-on-bu.html What's worse? A President who gets a BJ from a fat sorority chick, or a guy who might have done some angel dust at a wild party? Bush beats Slick Willy hands down. Plus his wife is hotter.
The problem, Jeremy, is that you're posting opinions as if they were fact, alng the lines of: Grim is right, in my opinion. It's gospel, if it comes from the WH and it is in praise of this administration's ways and means. But if it comes out critical, it's "he's on the take," or any other from a host of smears. In other words, it's religious, in my opinion - blinders in place.
My bad, that's what I meant. Slick Willy was lamer. Cigar and fat chick BJ, so weak. Add in the saxophone and "did not inhale".... UGH At least Bush was a party animal. You get the feeling that Clinton had some weird kinds of trailer-park yuppie fetishes.
he is not the only one that has said this type of things. as earlpearl have said before there are a lot of people that have said the same things give or take a bit.
I look forward to this book. To date this administration has had its interior workings very well masked from the public. One of the extraordinary views of the administration from the inside was that written about Paul O'Neill's period as Treasury Secretary. Its perspective on the President and on the administration was at such enormous odds with what is published and made public by the administration including: 1. The Bush administration was focused on changing things within Iraq back in January 2001. 2. While focusing on Iraq Bush became unfocused on Israel/other middle eastern concerns 3. Bush was remarkably disengaged and unreactive on critical information unlike the qualities and concerns of previous Presidents with which O'Neill had worked and with whom he had interacted. 4. The White House policies seemed to be totally dictated by political concerns with little or no regard to actual real life occurances. Some of the introductary information about this book suggests similar observations. I wonder if some of the criticisms about the administration stemmed from the O'Neill book, which was one of the first documented pieces that both gave commentary from the inside and was at dramatic odds with the image the administration presented to the public. In this time and age it is silly to paint the picture of the book based on monetary gains. Reagon, Bush's father, and Clinton all made a lot of money after leaving office. If that has been the case, why shouldn't the employees there have the same right. Meanwhile, the public deserves a look within an administration that has hidden all access to any of its records and information at a level that has probably broken laws with regard to access to this information. Last I heard this was a democracy and there was a rule of law.
One interesting immediate response to this is how current and former White House employees are instantly on the attack at McClellan. Already more than one White House loyalist has addressed that McClellan didn't voice the concerns articulated in this book while he was at the White House. In the O'Neill book, it listed numerous examples where opportunities for discussion and dissent were simply never available and squashed. The entire environment, per the O'Neill book, discouraged debate and dissent. It would be fascinating to juxtapose perspectives of these two books with historical newspaper records of the events the books describe, and see comments from White House loyalists....issue by issue.
[ot] She has got to be the hottest press secretary ever. She looks like she should be on the west wing playing someone with access to the white house instead of being there in real life. [/ot]
Wow! I can't wait to see Donahue's movie! Donahue was booted after 9-11 for speaking the truth on his show.
The war has been over for some time now... It pretty much ended with the removal of Saddam. What is going on now is the rebuilding and creation of a new government/country. One that is emerging at a fast pace by comparison to the US's own independence, some 230+ years ago.