Comments on: Scott McEllan’s Expose on the White House Should Have Been Given Away for Free

By: Janet/Robin

Janet/Robin — Wed, 28 May 2008 23:23:48 +0000

Sooo, all this stuff is only wrong, now, when McClellan can make a buck off talking about it?

What really irks me about this is that if the very people McClellan targets had doggedly exposed the lies when they were spoken, they would have been hit with the “they hate America == they’re not patriotic” crap.

Every time I think we can’t sink any lower, the bottom falls out once again.

By: Jennie

Jennie — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:38:40 +0000

He goes on to write about how the supposed left wing media failed to do its job in reporting.

Isn’t that a bit like a pursesnatcher blaming his victim for not holding onto her purse hard enough?

By: Zee

Zee — Wed, 28 May 2008 20:43:56 +0000

It appalls me too that McClellan should make a dime on this - this administration seems to have more former employees/advisers capitalizing on the mistakes made while they were in the public sector. What’s even more appalling is that, even now, someone is calling him “brave” for writing this book. Gag - brave would have been to have resigned his position - and stopped contributing to the misinformation the liberal media was too stupid to see for what it really was - and gone on record early on and then written his memoir. Or, wait, join the press corps and help uncover the truths…Oh, but that’s not as lucrative, and entails a smaller publishing contract, fewer royalties and smaller speaking fees.

Look, I know this sounds naive, but I work in politics, and, though it’s rare, spines and integrity do exist. This book makes me think McClellan has neither. He can’t have been as “misguided” as he claims and still have filled a book. He was a party to the lies and propaganda he writes about.

Ok, off soapbox now. BP returning to normal…

By: Gwen

Gwen — Wed, 28 May 2008 19:11:25 +0000

Without having read it, I can’t say if your outrage is deserved or not. I tend to think not, but that’s purely my bias.

However, I will say that I think it’s unfortunate that large portions of the public seems so ready to rush to judgement of people who have had to make horrendously difficult decisions with the best information they had at the time - far more information than you or I will ever see. And yet we have the balls to criticize them. I just think that’s a bit narcissistic of a person until they know all sides to the story.

Bandwagons often don’t have a driver you can see - and that’s dangerous.

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Wed, 28 May 2008 18:52:23 +0000

Here’s a short and kind of funny look at tell-alls:

By: ジェーン(Jān)

ジェーン(Jān) — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:47:24 +0000

Eh, I’m with Rebecca. If book deals get them to talk, let ‘em sell the books. All administrations lie, and insiders only tell the truth later if it makes them money because they’re scummy to begin with. It’s just good that the truth eventually comes out.

By: whey

whey — Wed, 28 May 2008 16:44:55 +0000

Can’t agree with you more. Makes that anger simmering below the surface (not just inside me but in the American public) bubble up. Luckily, I can vent a little “YAHHH! Bush Administration YAHHH!” (a la Soulja Boy) whenever I start Righteously Percolating.

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Wed, 28 May 2008 16:38:10 +0000

McClellan publishing a book doesn’t bother me. Actually, all these tell-all books are a good thing - from any administration.

The more people who leave any administration who feel able to share what they were actually thinking while in the midst of doing their job, the better.

Also, I am cynical (and I think realistic) in believing that all administrations lie.