In Defense of Scott McClellan

Right now Scott McClellan has no friends, and that's a shame. His former friends on the Republican side are trying to bury him. The rest of us are still skeptical of him and what he did when he was still in the Bush White House. And the press is trying to be tough on him specifically because he called them out for not being tough enough when he was press secretary.

So, we have this ironic situation that in a time when McClellan is finally being honest, he has no defenders. I'm afraid this is going to lead the public to the false impression that the world is united in thinking he is a calculating opportunist who is trying to make a buck by turning on his friends. When, in fact, the reality is that the man finally grew a conscience.

Throughout the book and his interviews, McClellan talks about how he grew uneasy throughout his time with Bush and finally his conscience got the better of him. I believe him. Why?

Would it have been better if he dramatically stepped to the podium one day while he was still White House press secretary and said, "We have been doing an organized propaganda campaign to deceive the American people and I resign!"? Yes, that would have been better. But 99 out of a 100 times that's not the way the real world works. You get caught up in whatever subculture you're in and it's hard to untangle yourself.

Have you ever been in a situation where you wound up doing something you were uncomfortable with because of societal pressure and then later wondered - what the hell was I doing? I don't know about you, but I certainly have.

Now, this was no little thing. This was a gigantic mistake that eventually costs thousands of lives. And yes, I would have loved if he admitted his mistakes and pointed out the lies of the Bush administration without the publicity surrounding a book. Yes, I wish he had the courage to recognize this earlier (as some like Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill did - but remember, they too were pilloried anyway).

But right now, the bottom line is that McClellan is clearly telling the truth. Everything he says matches with what has been reported and suspected before. It is an amazing insider look at the deception that went on in the Bush White House. Even his explanation of how Bush convinces himself of his own lies rings so true. His details on how Cheney and Rumsfeld ran the White House while Condoleezza Rice bowed her head matches every report we have from within the administration.

And remember, he didn't have to be this harsh to sell books. A couple of juicy details would have done the job. This was personal. Not as in a personal attack against Bush and the others in the administration. More like an attempt at personal redemption.

As McClellan says throughout the book, he liked Bush and looked up to him, so he wanted to believe what he was saying. And in the end, after so much evidence piled up - with the final coup de grace being Bush's own admission that he personally authorized the CIA leak - he couldn't do it anymore. Once outside of the Washington bubble, he began to reflect on all of the transgressions, his and those of his cohorts, and realized he had to write a truly honest account of what happened. That should be commended, no matter what came before.

One final note. People should not overlook what McClellan said about the press. That's the real lesson to take away from this book. While the Bush administration was complaining loudly about the liberal media, they were internally snickering about how much they had intimidated them. That lesson should never be forgotten. The way the Bush administration cowed the press should be an everlasting shame on the media. I wonder if instead of reacting angrily to this, whether the press corps will take away anything from this when they step out of their bubble and come to terms with their own conscience.

Young Turks on You Tube

< How many more reasons to Impeach the Bushites? | STOP threating the Republicans as if they were decent people >
 Display:

I see your point, Cenk, but you know what? I don't really care if the son of a bitch has any friends left or not. I would hope that anyone involved in the Bush administration be isolated and alone for the rest of their miserable lives.

I take it for granted that what he has written is true. Why wouldn't I? Everything he says is stuff I and thousands of others have been saying happened all along. So what? What the hell is different today from last week?

McClellan left his position two years ago.

"When, in fact, the reality is that the man finally grew a conscience."

We had the galley rushes being leaked last year. Figure it took him a year to write it. He says there was a 'final straw' which made the lying and obfuscation too much to endure and he could no longer stay in his job. Was that the birth of his "conscience?" Yet he restrained all these new found pangs of guilt until they could be marketed for maximum gain. Fuck him.

I don't give a damn if he makes money off the book; may his sales be brisk, that's not my point. My assertion is that his book profits would not have been diminished one iota if he had acted on his pangs of "conscience" when he left his position or at ANY time over the last two years. How many have died in Iraq during the time he sat on the sidelines waiting for his turn to get into the book game? 

"More like an attempt at personal redemption."

How many thousands of people are going to be going through physical redemption because of injuries sustained since his "conscience" kicked in and he felt the need to speak out against the injustice...in two years or so.

If he had had the balls to speak out while at or shortly after leaving, I would feel much more sympathy. THAT was the time to be redeemed - not now. At this point, it's between him and his spiritual guide. All I have is contempt for him and his ex-boss.

Fuck Scott McClellan AND the high horse he rode out on.

by MedfordTim on 05/29/2008 03:53:00 PM EST

I don't care about friends or no friends. What I *do* care about is people not taking his claims seriously because they are too busy bashing him (either because they're republicans angered over a truth-teller or dems pissed that he didn't come out sooner).

Yes, obviously he should've come out sooner, for many reasons including the critical ones you've outlined. But the bottom line is that him coming out, even this late in the game, is incredibly damning to this administration. And that *does* count for something and it *is* a good thing.

It ain't perfect, but it sure as hell beats him never coming out to tell the truth.

by Tom Hanc on 05/29/2008 04:08:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]

When you're right, you're right.

by MedfordTim on 05/29/2008 05:49:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
There is an interesting video on Charlie Rose's archive from a few weeks ago right after Bill Moyer's interviewed Rev. Wright. For those who don't know Bill Moyer's was LBJ's press secretary. I think he would probably express a lot of empathy if he were questioned about McClellan, or at least be torn. On the one hand, he was once the face of the Viet Nam war, but on the other hand is furious we haven't learned from his mistakes.

Never-the-less think about all the good Moyers has done in the past forty years since leaving his post. Yes, he didn't stand up when he should have, he went along with the crowd and admits it, but on the other hand that doesn't make responsible for the Viet Nam war, he was merely the talking head. No one is blaming McClellan for the Iraq war, but let's just remember whom our ire should really be directed at, and applaud the stand he is taking now, albeit too late to do any good.

Whatever you do, don't click this link (studies show you're more likely if you shouldn't)

by tiggerporn on 05/29/2008 06:55:13 PM EST

Imagine you're at a party and you get really really worked up about something, and you confront the host, in front of everybody, and he's all like, Omigod I'm so sorry to hear that, seriously, no way but then he turns right around and goes in the back room with his boys and cracks the fuck up, ha, having a beer and smoking a stogie, just laughing at you.

Come on, this is the cherry on the cake, right? Not only to Cheney/Bush get away with it, they get to tell you about it. I'm not saying that McClellan is willfully complicit at this point, it is the ultimate irony though, in admitting he was played for the fool and willfully complicit before (OK he's saying it wasn't willful or only partially so, can we really believe that) he is actually being played for the fool one more time.

For guys like Cheney/Bush it isn't just good enough to get away with it, they have to get you angry, really pissed, they have to let you know they got away with it and there ain't a damn thing ya can do about it kid so keep walking or stfu, that is essentially what they are saying to us.

I'm not saying that they had anything to do with publishing this, but that you have to wonder they weren't aware of him prepping it, aware of it and vetted about it. It has become such an MO for people leaving you do have to start to wonder. Sure sure when you're in you're in and when you're out you're out and then it is OK to cross the line and you get a nice royalty check from the publishing house, everybody from Clarke and O'Neill on down the line.

It just seems like Bush/Cheney are saying, ya what the hell, sure go ahead do it, you'll just implicate yourself on some level and then you become untrustworthy and there is always the profit motive we can throw at you (really just a reworking of the gold digger ex-wife argument) but at the end of the day man, we're above the law, so go tattle do whomever ya want.

In that sense he is still their bitch.

Whatever you do, don't click this link (studies show you're more likely if you shouldn't)

by tiggerporn on 05/29/2008 07:26:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
As for McClellan I'm wondering, what the hell, where is Special Prosecutor Patty Fitz during all this? I mean I know it would probably be distasteful and might be illegal in some fashion for him to comment, from a I-don't-know national security perspective, who knows? But shouldn't he have an interesting take on it, obviously Scooter could not face double jeopardy and that had to do with Dick Army which I don't think applies to this. I mean just shootin' fish in a barrel but Dick Cheney didn't face prosecution (regardless of what he says about executive privilege and not being part of the executive branch whatever that means) so he couldn't face double jeopardy, right? I mean ignoring the shot-in-the-face moment which wasn't prosecuted, I think, anyway, right. It is neither here nor there at this point, no one is going to waste the energy going after them and even if they did I don't believe it is in Paddy's jurisdiction? Right, but still ya think he'd have an interesting viewpoint and he could always bring a case as a civilian citizen, but I'm not sure how you could prosecute Cheney in civil court? A citizen can't just bring a criminal case against someone can they?

I'm still wondering what Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has to say about all this. Find his blog here:
 
From the desk of Paddy Fitz.

Whatever you do, don't click this link (studies show you're more likely if you shouldn't)

by tiggerporn on 05/29/2008 07:34:52 PM EST

They could wait until someone will actually prosecute them and no one will pardon them.

That's what really worries right-wingers, isn't it?  That the impeachment and pardon that they all thought was worse case scenario if they were caught committing war crimes, wasn't the worse case scenario after all.  That they might REALLY be punished.  That precident might be set that might make power hungry corporate puppets think twice about hijacking our country and trying to turn it to a neo-facism.  That despite trying to turn the Justice Department and Supreme Court into a partisan tool to ensure an effective one party system, a permanent majority, no because of that, they have lost all control that they had.

Ken, enjoy the rest of this year.  It may be the last time you get to witness your party in control of this country.  The people are tired of their corporate-government hybrid masters.

by richardshort2001 on 05/30/2008 12:39:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]

We will get about three decades or so of liberal control (more or less) then a decade of conflict then we'll be right back at 1980.

The people will forget this.  They always do.  Just yesterday or the day before bobo threw out that the Great Depression and WWII were partially FDR's fault and WWI was caused by Wilson and most people on here were ready to concede that.

We progressives will patch the country up and build it back to prosperity and the cons will come in with their bullshit made up issues (God, gays, guns, race, abortion, etc.), convince the forgetful bastards of the future they need to change course and it starts anew. 

by ProfRich on 05/30/2008 01:41:20 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I intended to suggest within his lifetime.  Not wishing ill on Ken, but I don't think any of us can guarantee we'll be around in 30-40 years.

by richardshort2001 on 05/30/2008 02:27:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Many of us may never see the country turn to the right again. 

The rest of us may get to die watching it descend into conservative madness yet again.

by ProfRich on 05/30/2008 09:33:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I believe Scott is coming forth with the truth.  He appears to be sincere in his change of heart after reflecting on his experiences during his tenure at the White House.  However, I also believe he has another motivation for "coming clean".  That is, CYA.  He is knowledgeable enough to entertain the possibility of people being held accountable for their actions down the road.  Hence, his bordering on eagerness to testify before congress (under oath) regarding the transgressions of the Bush regime.  I agree with Cenk in that the information he has provided has added additional verification to what we have known for years.  Now watch the poor dude get pummled by the right wing and other Bush operatives.

by psyche2 on 05/31/2008 06:11:18 PM EST

 Display: