McClellan savages Bush and the Bush admin

[MikeWaters]

I believe in loyalty to country over loyalty to man.

The country comes first and McClellan apparently says he hopes his book will help prevent mistakes like the ones made by Bush et al.

I doubt this is for the money. If he wanted the money, he would have kept his mouth shut and had his pockets lined by the fat cats.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I believe in loyalty to country over loyalty to man.

The country comes first and McClellan apparently says he hopes his book will help prevent mistakes like the ones made by Bush et al.

I doubt this is for the money. If he wanted the money, he would have kept his mouth shut and had his pockets lined by the fat cats.

Please explain how McClellan "put the country first."

Re: "fat cats": http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=sv_b_3

[MikeWaters]

He provided a valuable insiders' critique of the administration. that's valuable for the country.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

He provided a valuable insiders' critique of the administration. that's valuable for the country.

Funny how the country's needs and his financial needs coincided so easily. I guess the county didn't value that critique while he was serving.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Tex

My guess is, he'll join the list of forgettable presidents, but I don't believe history will be as hard on him as his harshest contemporary critics.

History may turn Bush into any number of things, but I really don't think people will struggle to remember his 2 terms.

I doubt anyone forgets 9/11/2001
I doubt anyone forgets the current war on terror
I doubt anyone forgets the current massive federal deficit that will weigh on our country for decades to come.

These are just the top 3 things that I doubt anyone will forget about Bush. I am sure people will remember him for other events that occured in his presidency...like FEMA's response to Katrina etc etc.

My point is that he may not be viewed as harshly in 20, 30 or even 100 years from now, but there have been too many life altering events take place during his presidency that we can be pretty damn sure that he won't be forgotten.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

History may turn Bush into any number of things, but I really don't think people will struggle to remember his 2 terms.

I doubt anyone forgets 9/11/2001
I doubt anyone forgets the current war on terror
I doubt anyone forgets the current massive federal deficit that will weigh on our country for decades to come.

These are just the top 3 things that I doubt anyone will forget about Bush. I am sure people will remember him for other events that occured in his presidency...like FEMA's response to Katrina etc etc.

My point is that he may not be viewed as harshly in 20, 30 or even 100 years from now, but there have been too many life altering events take place during his presidency that we can be pretty damn sure that he won't be forgotten.

9/11 and Iraq will unquestionably be the hallmarks of the Bush administration. All I meant by "forgettable" is that he will not rank with the Reagans, the JFKs, the FDRs, etc. He'll just be another average President who did some stuff, and kids will learn about it in a day or two during high school history class, and move on.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he'll be remembered as the GOP's Carter. Or maybe Iraq will stabilize and usher in a century of Mid-East peace.

I doubt it.

[Tex]

Another amusing take. ABC's "The Note" examines McClellan's comments about other former Bush admin officials who wrote "tell all" books:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...ttie-sowe.html

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I believe in loyalty to country over loyalty to man.

The country comes first and McClellan apparently says he hopes his book will help prevent mistakes like the ones made by Bush et al.

I doubt this is for the money. If he wanted the money, he would have kept his mouth shut and had his pockets lined by the fat cats.

If his loyalty was to the country, why didn't he confront Bush when he was Bush's spokesman?

No, this was his attempt to cash in on the Bush (deserved) bashing. Based on his greed in this particular case, I would feel safe in assuming that he would write a tell-all book about his own mother for a fast buck.

[SoonerCoug]

Here is my dilemma. I never believed a damn thing McClellan said when he was press secretary. Why should I believe him now? I really want to believe him now, but I can't bring myself to give him instant credibility.

I suppose you could argue that he was more likely to lie when he was press secretary, since telling lies is the #1 job requirement for a white house press secretary in the Bush administration. Now that he's a free man, maybe he feels like he can open up.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MudphudCoug

Here is my dilemma. I never believed a damn thing McClellan said when he was press secretary. Why should I believe him now? I really want to believe him now, but I can't bring myself to give him instant credibility.

I suppose you could argue that he was more likely to lie when he was press secretary, since telling lies is the #1 job requirement for a white house press secretary in the Bush administration. Now that he's a free man, maybe he feels like he can open up.

Isn't it the job of any press secretary to tell the country his boss' lies?

Not defending Bush, but pointing out what a spokesman does.