Bush Admin Lying Machine coming apart, Be careful whose bed you choose to lie in McCain Options

[Hellfighter]

So here we go;
Straight from the source like never before;
One of Bush's own about to reveal the whole Bush Admin/neocon lying machine scheme-
No surprise really -but now its about to be officially 'explored'.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10649.html

some doubters may venture to say he's just selling a book - but he seems to be like Colin Powell and the Generals who criticized the Iraq war from its outset, a virtuous person who was slapped around by the neocon villains in the admin revealing the formerly deliberately obscured facts for themselves for everyone to judge-finally.


This post has been edited by Hellfighter: 05/28/08 9:16am

[Robert]

When I said McClellan wrote in his opinion Bush never knowingly mislead America, I was specifically referring to Iraq, which is what I think most people consider as defining Bush.

The "I was mislead" comes from the Plame affair which actually isn't something I could or would argue with except for the fact in his interview with Olberman
McClellan also said about the Plame affair
"The president has the legal authority to declassify the NIE report"
Which inadvertently latter lead the to leaking of Plame's identity
More importantly, McClellan also said
"I do not believe the president was in any way involved with the leaking of her identity"
Which I think changes the whole issue in a very different light when it comes to the NIE and Plame.

Now that you've read the book I have two questions for you.
1) After reading the book would you agree with me that media incorrectly portrayed this book as an anti-bush book when it's main point was actually the overall failed politic system in Washington.

2) This one is going to be much less discernible.
Could you pick up on a different witting style from the Bush part's of the book and the rest.
I'm not trying to imply different people wrote the Bush and the Non-bush parts of the book.
I'm sure the basis for the whole book comes directly from McClellan, possibly penned by a ghost writer which would be fairly normal considering he's not a writer by nature or profession.
To give you an idea what I mean. The writing just seemed better when Bush was the focus/subject.
To me it came across as more witty and flowed better.
Not trying to imply it was wrong or anything else.
Simply, maybe the editor focused most of their effort in cleaning up and improving the Bush related areas of the book.
Done probably knowing the Bush parts is what would decide how well the book sold.
Not saying that's the case, just the impression I had an was wondering if you noticed.
Something you may not have noticed while reading but maybe get a sense of it after looking back.
What do you think, am I nuts?




As for the why McClellan wrote it when he did and why.
I doubt both side will agree on that.
My Opinion was summed up very well by my former senator Mr Dole who said today.

"There are miserable creatures like you in every administration who don't have the guts to speak up or quit if there are disagreements with the boss or colleagues. No, your type soaks up the benefits of power, revels in the limelight for years, then quits and, spurred on by greed, cashes in with a scathing critique. In my nearly 36 years of public service I've known of a few like you. No doubt you will 'clean up' as the liberal anti-Bush press will promote your belated concerns with wild enthusiasm. When the money starts rolling in you should donate it to a worthy cause, something like, 'Biting The Hand That Fed Me.' Another thought is to weasel your way back into the White House if a Democrat is elected. That would provide a good set up for a second book deal in a few years. If all these awful things were happening, and perhaps some may have been, you should have spoken up publicly like a man, or quit your cushy, high-profile job. That would have taken integrity and courage but then you would have had credibility and your complaints could have been aired objectively. You're a hot ticket now, but don't you, deep down, feel like a total ingrate?"

[Hellfighter]

...........
My Opinion was summed up very well by my former senator Mr Dole who said today.

".......You're a hot ticket now, but don't you, deep down, feel like a total ingrate?"

Actually I've been watching McClellan in a few interviews lately. I think the 'toal ingrate' remark is a spiteful outlashing term with no basis.
Clearly McClellan is NOT intending to assasinate Bush. He shows no motivation to do so. His demeanour is always very humble and forthright and he says 'he doesn't know' when he doesn't - he stands on what he believes and asserts nothing outlandish, nor misleading to play up selling his book.
He portrays Bush as a flawed character - and indeed, reading about Bush's life in general he does have a tragic flaw pervading his life - he goes along by instinct rather than sage wisdom. It might be good for playing poker, but for playing with the destinies of other people through instinct based policies/job appointments -not good.

McClellan is not looking at himself as a 'hot ticket' neither. It seems to me he's out to squash the true leeches in the Bush admin- the architects of soul-less schemes; Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Libby, Rice..... clearly he wants to make it known for history to see -from his time on the 'inside'- what was really going on and that there were two sides raging against each other in the admin- those that sincerely meant well and were loyal and wanted to believe the policies issued were best for America , and those that were cunniving misfits who lied WITH a smile to the public about their true intentions and would say 'So?!' when asked why they were messing things up for the public they were supposed to serve with the public's interests as priority.

McClellan if anything sees Bush had his tragic flaw manipulated by the neocons who succeeded in vaulting Bush to believe he was the Grand PooBar of saving the world once and for all....


This post has been edited by Hellfighter: 06/04/08 6:29am