Clean Sheets!

I knew a new thread was brewing

So he is a sellout.

He looked O'Reilly in the eye and denied that so I guess it's not true.

some how, that is very sad.

Tool.

If he had wanted to defend the President, no way would he have put his name on that trash. He is just an ass looking to cash in at any cost.

soros should have signed his name to that book

Soros' money is an effective mind changer.

Curiouser and curiouser ...

/Alice down the rabbit hole

So this guy would write a book damning his mother for the right amount of money?

What a swell guy!

Hmm. Money, George Soros, Scotty M whoring himself? What could possibly have gone wrong?

Soros bought him.

Friggin' hump.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Bush is a great person if you've ever had the pleasure of meeting him. This rarely comes across in the media. Big surprise.

Think there's a bias?

What did Soros and his people have on McClellan that he'd do this?

re: #16 Gang of One

What did Soros and his people have on McClellan that he'd do this?

A bigger bank account.

He was for him before he was against him.
(Sounds familiar ... can't quite place it.)

re: #16 Gang of One

What did Soros and his people have on McClellan that he'd do this?

Money.

There is more to this story.

Keep digging.

It was a marketing ploy. My local library is full of liberal crap like this in the political section, conservative stuff is buried deep. With 100,000 libraries ordering multiple copies the book is well on the way to a million seller!

re: #17 Sharmuta

Following the money. Yes. Now it makes sense.

/slaps forehead

soros made the whole thing up.
wonder how many of those other 100's of bush bashing books he "wrote".

Judas sold out his friends and his future for 75 k.. Come on Scott thats chump change for a former white house speaker. What a moron

But don't you think McClellan would have made MORE $$$ on the lecture circuit, et. al. instead of publishing this hit piece? Surely he must have known taht he was igniting a rather large funeral [his] pyre.

re: #21 LoFlyer

It was a marketing ploy. My local library is full of liberal crap like this in the political section, conservative stuff is buried deep. With 100,000 libraries ordering multiple copies the book is well on the way to a million seller!

And yet, like Algore's Earth in the Lurch, ahem, well...Balance...it will end up in the bargain bin of history. I actually BOUGHT Earth in the Balance. At Borders. For $1.00. Because Rush said everyone should read it to see just how dangerous Al is. I still felt dirty.

In 6 months, max, Beam-me-up-Scotty will be on clearance for a buck, too.

re-posted from previous thread:

OT:
H&C on FNC just reported that Sen. Robert Byrd (D WV) has just gone to the hospital for un-specified reasons.

"The money is always right!" -- Mr. Krabs.

re: #26 Grammy Cracker
Probably less than 6 mos. There aren't that many people with BDS, I hope.

I am unable to access my own site.

Can you access it?

And if you can't, is there are way for me to determine why it's inaccessible at the moment?

I've got a report to upload and I can't even log on.

O.T

I saw this at fox news:
Obama’s ex-Church has received 15 million in federal grant money!

The chickens indeed are coming home to roost.

I once worked for a company that screwed me out of a promised bonus. (a good sized one). When I asked about it, after I had completed what I was offered the bonus to accomplish, I was told they did not have the money to keep the promise. After asking several times, they let me go. I had a full client list with all contact info. When I went to a competitor for a job, I was told I could have the job, if I could provide client info/ management info on the other company.(which was very successful). I walked out the door. I was asked for that list and offered money for it at the competitor I did take a job with about 6 months into my new job. I immediately quit.
I dont care if I got screwed, I was not going to give or sell that client list. I have to look at me in the mirror in the morning. Can you, Scott?

re: #27 GeeWiz

re-posted from previous thread:

OT:
H&C on FNC just reported that Sen. Robert Byrd (D WV) has just gone to the hospital for un-specified reasons.

a klan robe exctamy?

Good Lord! Cooter is an obamarama supporter. He must a drank too much of Uncle Jessies shine!

re: #31 zombie

Stuck on Loading...

re: #29 pingjockey

Probably less than 6 mos. There aren't that many people with BDS, I hope.

Me, too!

re: #31 zombie

I am unable to access my own site.

Can you access it?

And if you can't, is there are way for me to determine why it's inaccessible at the moment?

I've got a report to upload and I can't even log on.

It wont load, I get a page error.

As to why, I couldn't tell you, sorry.

re: #31 zombie

No load.

re: #31 zombie

No go.

McClellan was never very bright. Of course, how hard can it be to press secretary? Go out and bloviate on someone else's thougts... No original thinking required ( that's from the jobe description) Like David Brock, the man sold his birthright for a bowl of pottage, and tomorrow all he will have to show for it is what pottage turns into after a day or so...

re: #31 zombie

Zombie- I timed out.

re: #31 zombie

I am unable to access my own site.

Can you access it?

And if you can't, is there are way for me to determine why it's inaccessible at the moment?

I've got a report to upload and I can't even log on.

Nope

re: #35 yochanan

Cheney told a joke about cousins and West Viginia and the Grand Kleagle had a conitption fit.

re: #31 zombie

I am unable to access my own site.

Can you access it?

And if you can't, is there are way for me to determine why it's inaccessible at the moment?

I've got a report to upload and I can't even log on.

Linky no worky...neither does attempted access from a new tab. That sucks.

re: #31 zombie

I keep getting page load error.

He is destined to be a very lonely man.

re: #31 zombie

I get a network timeout message "server is taking too long to respond".

I don't know how to help you with your other question. There could be so many different things wrong that I wouldn't know where to start, aside from contacting the people who host your site.

re: #26 Grammy Cracker

And yet, like Algore's Earth in the Lurch, ahem, well...Balance...it will end up in the bargain bin of history. I actually BOUGHT Earth in the Balance. At Borders. For $1.00. Because Rush said everyone should read it to see just how dangerous Al is. I still felt dirty.

In 6 months, max, Beam-me-up-Scotty will be on clearance for a buck, too.

Try a really hot shower and "Simple green" detergent, that stuff will clean anything. Homeland security has tips on bio and chemical warfare decontamination procedures. I understand watching the video is even worse. And this guy won an Oscar? Good luck!

Thanks for the replies everyone. No I know it's not just me.

A mystery.

Conversation continued next thread.

No I know = NOW I know.

PIMF

re: #31 zombie

Negative

re: #31 zombie

won't load for me

re: #33 CapeCoddah

Presume you sued and won.

I've seen parts of several interviews of Mr. McC. I think he knows he's screwed the pooch.

re: #31 zombie

I am unable to access my own site.

I'm getting the "server is taking too long to respond." screen, Zombie. (9:27 PM Eastern)

re: #55 itellu3times
Nope, not big on suing. They have to live with it, lost a damned good manager, and a friend, too. I always make a point to say Hi when I see them hiding from me behind the fruit in the grocery store.

RE # 31 Zombie
Can you access the FTP server for your site? And/or if you go to your web hosts' site can you access their control panel? It may be a server-side issue, and if it is I hope you made a backup. My site AmericanBumperSticker.com got hosed a few weeks ago and me, like a dummy didn't have a backup I had to reconstruct everything and re upload the whole site.

Bummer it was

Same here Zom, timed out and all that.

Hope it ain't a serious DOS attack launched by some libtards you skewered.

re: #58 CapeCoddah

God Bless you sir,

Ethics is it's own reward.

re: #33 CapeCoddah

I have to look at me in the mirror in the morning. Can you, Scott?

It's difficult for Scott, but after he pasted $100 dollar bills all around the mirror, it got easier.

re: #61 sojerofgod
Thank you, I have always thought so. (Its Ma'am...NO OFFENSE TAKEN!)

re: #32 DownRightMeanAmerican

O.T

I saw this at fox news:
Obama’s ex-Church has received 15 million in federal grant money!

The chickens indeed are coming home to roost.

You are funny. I never heard anyone refer to it as "ex-church".

re: #33 CapeCoddah

I once worked for a company that screwed me out of a promised bonus. (a good sized one). When I asked about it, after I had completed what I was offered the bonus to accomplish, I was told they did not have the money to keep the promise. After asking several times, they let me go. I had a full client list with all contact info. When I went to a competitor for a job, I was told I could have the job, if I could provide client info/ management info on the other company.(which was very successful). I walked out the door. I was asked for that list and offered money for it at the competitor I did take a job with about 6 months into my new job. I immediately quit.
I dont care if I got screwed, I was not going to give or sell that client list. I have to look at me in the mirror in the morning. Can you, Scott?

What a lizard. Good on ya.

re: #56 jamgarr

I've seen parts of several interviews of Mr. McC. I think he knows he's screwed the pooch.

Leave Rover out of this!

re: #11 simonml

So this guy would write a book damning his mother for the right amount of money?

What a swell guy!

Obama did it for nothing.

this book can have no real credibility now. it is supposedly non fiction. so which version is the truth? mcclellan's story or soro's rewrite?

re: #67 Lively

Obama did it for nothing.

Well, there is control of the free world.

re: #62 SteveC

It's difficult for Scott, but after he pasted $100 dollar bills all around the mirror, it got easier.

Good on you, I say! Sometimes it's hard to do the right thing, but you, and only YOU, have to live with the 'man in the mirror'.

I once defended a politician friend against all odds and our party machine. He was a deeply flawed human being, but did not deserve what was being done to him. The media asked if I wasn't concerned about my political 'career' being harmed.... I told them I had to live with myself, and I couldn't if I turned my back on a friend in need.

He lost. So did I. I can still look in the mirror and know I did the right thing. It was worth it.

re: #70 Grammy Cracker

Ooops! I was referring to CapeCoddah's #33....

re: #70 Grammy Cracker
Thats it exactly. 30 pieces of silver is not worth it to anyone with a conscience.

The focus of a book changed during the editorial process and this is somehow dishonest? Newsworthy? Evidence of ill intent, bias, or greed? Have any of the commenters in this thread actually read the book?

re: #73 Indepublicrat
Whats that smell?

re: #74 CapeCoddah

Whats that smell?

I think I might detect a whiff of gamy buttock.....?

re: #75 Grammy Cracker
Thats what im thinking, the dog just woke up sniffing and growling at my feet...usually a skunk...

re: #74 CapeCoddah

Objectivity.

re: #71 Grammy Cracker

Ooops! I was referring to CapeCoddah's #33....

No Problem! :)

re: #77 Indepublicrat

Obvious troll

re: #73 Indepublicrat

The focus of a book changed during the editorial process and this is somehow dishonest? Newsworthy? Evidence of ill intent, bias, or greed? Have any of the commenters in this thread actually read the book?

Seeing I have not commented on this thread till now I will answer no I have not, Have you? and if you did what do you think of it?

One of the main reasons it is taking so long for this book to be Fisked is that everybody is waiting for someone else to buy it, read it and then loan it to them.
I know of No One who has bought this book.

(Don't you wish you knew No One, too?)

Zombie I just accessed your page. No worries.

re: #80 BBev

Seeing I have not commented on this thread till now I will answer no I have not, Have you? and if you did what do you think of it?

I'll admit, I have not. Scotty was a mediocre-at-best Presser, and I cannot image being interested in anything he tried to say by himself (or through his ghost writer). I might read it someday, when really desperate and bored, if it's free....

Plus Amazon.com keeps censoring the reviews of the book. Last night, there were more than 61 reviews on the book and now there is less than 42 reviews. Seems Amazon edits and deletes what they don't really like

A book defending Bush isn't going to make any money right now. McClellan probably realized he could cash in a ton of money if he made it an anti-Bush book. If Obama made $4 million that year when his book went on sale and he wasn't even close to being as famous as he is now, imagine how much Scott is going to make.

I just saw him on O'Reilly. Honetly, the interview sucked really bad. O'Reilly kept asking him the same questions, "don't you feel bad being used by the liberl media to attack Bush." And Scott kept answering the same thing over and over again, "I just want people to know the truth and to help bring change to Washington." What he was really singing is "I'm in the money! I'm in the money!" And it is...all about money for most politicians, and power.

re: #73 Indepublicrat

The focus of a book changed during the editorial process and this is somehow dishonest? Newsworthy? Evidence of ill intent, bias, or greed? Have any of the commenters in this thread actually read the book?

Doesn't the editorial process occur when the book is FINISHED? Oh crap I just fed a troll

re: #80 BBev

Seeing I have not commented on this thread till now I will answer no I have not, Have you? and if you did what do you think of it?

I haven't read it, so I can't claim to know whether it's good, bad, factual, or fanciful. In such cases, I reserve making any rush to judgment.

re: #84 winston06

Plus Amazon.com keeps censoring the reviews of the book. Last night, there were more than 61 reviews on the book and now there is less than 42 reviews. Seems Amazon edits and deletes what they don't really like

That's interesting! I've reviewed dozens of products, including books, for Amazon...and a number of them were negative. They all were both published and left standing. I wonder if people got personal with Scotty, or used profanity, etc.?

re: #87 Indepublicrat

I haven't read it, so I can't claim to know whether it's good, bad, factual, or fanciful. In such cases, I reserve making any rush to judgment.

Well I have seen so many interviews with him lately, I think I have seen enough with out reading the book.

re: #88 Grammy Cracker

I'm sure there were people who commented on the book without having read it. That would be a good reason to take the reviews down.

The McClellan book is a Rovian plot. Just like Dan Rather's throbbing memo; the rest of the story will come out just in time for GWB to cancel the election and declare martial law.
Anyone seen my tinfoil hat?

re: #84 winston06

Plus Amazon.com keeps censoring the reviews of the book. Last night, there were more than 61 reviews on the book and now there is less than 42 reviews. Seems Amazon edits and deletes what they don't really like

Winston Smith, paging Winston Smith. Citizen Smith, please report to the editing room at Amazon.com as soon as possible.

re: #88 Grammy Cracker

That's interesting! I've reviewed dozens of products, including books, for Amazon...and a number of them were negative. They all were both published and left standing. I wonder if people got personal with Scotty, or used profanity, etc.?

I have a feeling rabid moonbats got into the works and started hitting the report button on anything critical of the book.

re: #90 PloniAlmoni

I'm sure there were people who commented on the book without having read it. That would be a good reason to take the reviews down.

True! I have read some reviews there, of books and movies, where the commenter hasn't read or seen the item in question. WTH are they thinking? DUH....thinking doesn't enter into it. Those should be taken down!

re: #86 tedzilla99

Doesn't the editorial process occur when the book is FINISHED? Oh crap I just fed a troll

For a memoir like this, an editor's job is to guide an author to a better realization of his or her own vision. This might entail writing mechanics, organization, and as some have said, marketability--but the author is ultimately responsible for all the content.

re: #73 Indepublicrat

Not gonna get roped into lining this douche-nozzle's pockets with my money. He was a clueless asshole at work as Press Secretary and I assume he was a clueless asshole off duty and now I assume he is a retired and wealthy clueless asshole with a ghost-written book.

"Clueless Joe" Klein was easier to listen to at the podium than McClellan.

I forced myself to read several of the Bush bashing books over the last 6 years including that steaming projectile monkey feces that Maureen "I'll never get decently laid" Dowd produced.

All in the interest of being fair and open-mindeder.

After wasting the time and money and Advil on those, I have decided that I won't read any more liberal books until they are printed on toilet paper where they will have some use.

Not to mention the better realization of the vision of green money courtesy of Soros.

re: #95 Indepublicrat

For a memoir like this, an editor's job is to guide an author to a better realization of his or her own vision. This might entail writing mechanics, organization, and as some have said, marketability--but the author is ultimately responsible for all the content.

Sorry, but the editor's only job for a "memoir" should be to correct spelling and grammar. If the 'editor' 'guides' the 'realization' of the 'vision', it isn't a memoir. It's fiction.

re: #98 Grammy Cracker

A million little pieces of fiction.

re: #95 Indepublicrat

For a memoir like this, an editor's job is to guide an author to a better realization of his or her own vision. This might entail writing mechanics, organization, and as some have said, marketability--but the author is ultimately responsible for all the content.

haha that's funny! An editor's job is to rewrite the book? Hilarious!

Hypothesis for our visitor:

James Carville was just about to write a book praising all the fine things the Clintons did or tried to do. Then, after getting turned down by several publishers, he ends up at a publishing house that is a front company for Karl Rove. Suddenly, the book does a 180 and now says that both Clintons were bad, bad, bad.

Do you see nothing particularly noteworthy here?

re: #98 Grammy Cracker

Sorry, but the editor's only job for a "memoir" should be to correct spelling and grammar. If the 'editor' 'guides' the 'realization' of the 'vision', it isn't a memoir. It's fiction.

You're confusing "editor" with "ghost writer". I don't know whether or not this book had one of those, but even a ghost-written memoir is presented as factual. Every word still needs approval from the person whose name is emblazoned on the cover.

I enjoyed Mark Hemingway's take on the book: the first chapter

"reads like his literary agent forced him at gunpoint to down a bottle of tequila and then summarize the Wikipedia article on the Valerie Plame affair as uncritically as possible."

[Link: article.nationalreview.com...]

re: #102 Indepublicrat

You're confusing "editor" with "ghost writer". I don't know whether or not this book had one of those, but even a ghost-written memoir is presented as factual. Every word still needs approval from the person whose name is emblazoned on the cover.

Exactly so. There seems to be a bizarre effort afoot to clarify what McClellan really meant to say.

Bull. He said what he meant to say. He put his name on it. He's promoting and standing behind it.

re: #101 Silhouette

Hypothesis for our visitor:

James Carville was just about to write a book praising all the fine things the Clintons did or tried to do. Then, after getting turned down by several publishers, he ends up at a publishing house that is a front company for Karl Rove. Suddenly, the book does a 180 and now says that both Clintons were bad, bad, bad.

Do you see nothing particularly noteworthy here?

The benefit of being Independent is that I don't have to come up with a new answer when leftist names are replaced with rightist ones or vice versa. Rove has just as much right to start up a publishing company as anyone else, and Carville has just as much right to change his book right up until the galleys are ready to go out the door--although I have to admit that putting those two on the same side of any issue would be a noteworthy accomplishment.

re: #105 Indepublicrat
Ever heard of the benefits of taking a stand, something you believe in, and fighting for it, instead of sticking your finger into the wind to see who's opinion is popular today? Make up your mind. Independant is a cop out for apathy.

re: #104 Cognito

Exactly so. There seems to be a bizarre effort afoot to clarify what McClellan really meant to say.

Bull. He said what he meant to say. He put his name on it. He's promoting and standing behind it.

I'm not nearly as confused as you 'gentlemen' wish to believe. I also don't give a flying fig what Scotty said or meant to say. Our trolly pal is the one who said the 'editor' should adjust the writing, refresh the memory, and rearrange the story to make it 'marketable'. Marketable trash.

Oh, and the WINGS SCORE! WOOT!

re: #105 Indepublicrat

Fence-sitting gets a person nothing but a sore ass. -Old family proverb.

re: #101 Silhouette

You forgot to mention that James Carville is an evil man-eating snake alien from space, but otherwise a fine point.

re: #107 Grammy Cracker

I'm not nearly as confused as you 'gentlemen' wish to believe. I also don't give a flying fig what Scotty said or meant to say. Our trolly pal is the one who said the 'editor' should adjust the writing, refresh the memory, and rearrange the story to make it 'marketable'. Marketable trash.

Editors do that. Adjust writing, refresh memory, rearrange the story.

What they shouldn't do is change or invent facts.

Is someone making a factual allegation?

re: #108 Sifty

Fence-sitting gets a person nothing but a sore ass. -Old family proverb.

And there's nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos.

re: #111 Grammy Cracker
LOL, Good one Grammy!

WOOT! Wings score AGAIN!

Come on home, Stanley!

Where did the troll go, i'm only hearing crickets from his corner!

re: #114 CapeCoddah

He had to go cash his royalty check.

re: #106 CapeCoddah

Ever heard of the benefits of taking a stand, something you believe in, and fighting for it, instead of sticking your finger into the wind to see who's opinion is popular today? Make up your mind. Independant is a cop out for apathy.

Apathy is when you don't care, while I do happen to care deeply about a wide variety of issues and I fight for them when required. But worse than apathy is closing your ears to valid arguments from "the other side," which is what I see from partisans on the left and right. Not from everyone though--mostly just those who pride themselves on taking a stand and sticking to it even in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong.

re: #110 Cognito

Editors do that. Adjust writing, refresh memory, rearrange the story.

What they shouldn't do is change or invent facts.

Is someone making a factual allegation?

At the risk of encouraging this crap....how exactly is it MY work if the "editor" adjusts my writing, "refreshes my memory" (who the hell was there, after all, me or him?), and rearranges my story? This is just MORE proof that Scotty is a useful tool and nothing more.

re: #115 Sifty
LOL

re: #116 Indepublicrat
I will be sure to let you know the first time I hear a valid argument from the left. I have yet to hear just 1, and I am 41. How long do you think it will take? Why don't you give us an example of a valid left wing argument, then we can put it up as the first exhibit for such things in the yet to be built Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster museum.

re: #117 Grammy Cracker

At the risk of encouraging this crap....how exactly is it MY work if the "editor" adjusts my writing, "refreshes my memory" (who the hell was there, after all, me or him?), and rearranges my story? This is just MORE proof that Scotty is a useful tool and nothing more.

Hi Grammy,
Editors don't edit anymore. They pass text down to low-level copy editors, usually recent English majors. I very much doubt Scotty's editor took the time to rearrange/rewrite his book.

Scotty did it. He chose to do it. He's still a tool, but not stupidly so. He's culpable.

O'Reilly missed it, but McClellan told two stories on the time line of the book's production. Early in the interview Mc said that he had begun writing the book when he appeared on Bill Maher's show (April 2007 I believe he said), and the later he said that he put the first draft in the publisher's hands in December 2006. The date of the Bill Maher show appearance was important in his defense of his changing statements of defending Bush on Maher's show and then blaming him in July 2007. The December 2006 date was his proof that he wasn't manipulated by his publisher to move to a 'blame Bush' posture to accomodate the wishes of that leftist publisher.

Scotty is telling a fib.

re: #117 Grammy Cracker

At the risk of encouraging this crap....how exactly is it MY work if the "editor" adjusts my writing, "refreshes my memory" (who the hell was there, after all, me or him?), and rearranges my story? This is just MORE proof that Scotty is a useful tool and nothing more.

Not everybody's a fantastic writer. Surprise, surprise.

First draft:
I woke up.
Saw the mailman.
He laughed.
I had a funny bandage on my foot.
I had stubbed my toe.

Edited version:
I woke up.
Stubbed my toe.
I wrapped it in a funny bandage.
Saw the mail man.
He laughed.

(Only hypothetical, just an illustration.)

My point is that regardless of the editing, only one person put his name on the front of the book.

It's his, and only his.

re: #119 CapeCoddah

I will be sure to let you know the first time I hear a valid argument from the left. I have yet to hear just 1, and I am 41. How long do you think it will take? Why don't you give us an example of a valid left wing argument, then we can put it up as the first exhibit for such things in the yet to be built Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster museum.

So you're always right and they're always wrong...and yet they believe just as strongly that they're always right and you're always wrong. Meanwhile, in the real world, people are wrong about as often as they're right.

re: #120 hermeneutics

Hi Grammy,
Editors don't edit anymore. They pass text down to low-level copy editors, usually recent English majors. I very much doubt Scotty's editor took the time to rearrange/rewrite his book.

Scotty did it. He chose to do it. He's still a tool, but not stupidly so. He's culpable.

This goes back upthread a bit. I was absolutely NOT defending Scotty. He's a willing tool, looking for cash and the false adulation of the press he failed to impress while in the White House.

I just argued that 'editors' who re-write entire books are not editors....they are authors.

"Scott" McClellan: Apparently that is a mini-shirt and not a kilt. And editor Osnos seems to be playing the part of the nice man with a handful of 20 dollar bills.... The transaction is complete. Services have been rendered for monitary gain. Wipe your mouth, put on your shoes, and ignore the busy-bodies. They always blame the john, anyway.

re: #124 Indepublicrat
Not what I asked you for. I asked, very clearly, for a valid left wing argument. Not an opinion on wether I am right or wrong in my beliefs, since you have no idea what they are, or why I hold them.

re: #31 zombie

I got excess in!

Poo....Penguins tie....overtime ensues...

re: #129 Grammy Cracker
Not a hockey fan, grammy, but I'm pulling for you!

monetary....rats
/pimf

re: #130 CapeCoddah

Not a hockey fan, grammy, but I'm pulling for you!

Funny thing is....I'm not much of a hockey fan, either. But my Pistons lost, the Tigers are a white-hot mess this year, and the Lions....well, why kick 'em when they're down. Again. Like for my LIFETIME they've been down...

Uh...what was I saying? Oh, yeah...Go Wings!

Cant say sorry 'bout the Pistons, as I'm a New Englander. It was the Patriots that broke my heart! As for the Lions, Been there, I'm a lifelong Red Sox fan! Patience...

Having watched McClellan's Meet the Press interview and O'Reilly's I need say McClelllen did 1000% better with O'Reilly. He wasn't ready for Russert. Yet he was ready for O'Reilly. O'Reilly was much much tougher on him. That's interesting how he handles direct attacks better. Must be his training. He spent 80% of Russert's interview staring down at the table in shame and 100% of O'Reilly's shaking his finger back at O'Reilly.

re: #127 CapeCoddah

Your life experiences and priorities color your views on every issue. It's not a personal criticism because it's true of people on the left as well. Unless you're willing to mentally step into somebody else's shoes every once in a while, you're never going to fully appreciate their opinions. So there's no "valid left wing argument" for you and no "valid right wing argument" for them and that's just sad.

I saw him on O'Reilly and he more than held his own. I'm thinking, why couldn't you have been that good when you were the press secretary?

Bummer, Trollboy musta scurried back down his rabbit hole...saw his shadow, meaning another 25 years of stupidity! Why do they always scatter when you ask for just 1, ANY one valid argument from the left?...

re: #135 Indepublicrat
There is no valid left wing argument, period. Every person here has had bad times, and good ones. That should never mean that common sense is abandoned. There is no reason for people to look to the government to bail them out of any situation, or provide anything except a strong defense. I am so sick of the gimmee attitude, I could puke. The left wing is all about entitlement. We are entitled to exactly what we earn. Nothing more, nothing less. Still no left wing argument to present as valid, just more bullshit fed with a shovel. I prefer reality to fantasy in my day to day life. Rule with feelings, and we are dead in the water. Thank god we have had, for the most part, real men in the White House, (excepting Carter/Clinton) during my lifetime,
and men like Truman, Lincoln, and Adams guarding our gates beforehand. I shudder to think of the alternatives...

Being fair and balanced and careful and open-minded and reasonable will keep us all from pissing anyone off at the office cocktail party, but being that wishy-washy all the time means cowardice.

In real life it is preferable to pick a fookin plan and go with it.

There can be no results in the meat world otherwise.

And having to show beneficial results is like kryptonite to liberals.

Liberals, progressives, or "commie bastards" as I like to call them, make rules that harm people in all manner of ways more often than conservatives do.

It's easy to pick the right side of things once you realize that.

But little Scott decided to go for the quick jackpot and sling some red tofu to the moonbats.

What a courageous lion, our man Scott.

re: #27 GeeWiz

re-posted from previous thread:

OT:
H&C on FNC just reported that Sen. Robert Byrd (D WV) has just gone to the hospital for un-specified reasons.

Hope he's OKKK.

re: #139 Sifty

You are SO right! Never forget, people...if you are too open-minded, your brains fall out!

Reasonable minds will differ. It shouldn't be a sign of weakness to be respectful about it.

re: #142 Indepublicrat

Reasonable minds will differ. It shouldn't be a sign of weakness to be respectful about it.

Waiting on ANY valid left wing argument...although none seem to be forthcoming!

re: #143 CapeCoddah

Waiting on ANY valid left wing argument...although none seem to be forthcoming!

Let me get this straight... You're asking a centrist to provide a leftist argument that would appeal to a rightist? Maybe you'd like the sound of one hand clapping while you're at it!

re: #144 Indepublicrat
Hang on, Buddy, YOU are the one who claimed both sides have valid arguments, and that is why you present yourself as a fence sitter, though you are obviously not, but are a liberal. You won't get far here without justifying yourself. YOU made the claim, put up, or shut up.
You wont find an audience here. Put forth one of those liberal arguments you find valid, any one you choose, or shut up. Saying the left has valid points is one thing, producing them is another matter entirely, which you, apparently, cannot do. Cite or screw.

The fact that Soros went after McClellen makes Soros look lame and desperate.

re: #145 CapeCoddah

Pick an issue, any issue--the fact that it's an "issue" at all means that there are at least two sides who each believe they have the right answer. Ergo, the other side has just as many "valid arguments" as your side does. What you call a "fence-sitter" is somebody who actually listens to both sides and considers what they have to say instead of blindly coming down on one side or the other based on whether there's an R or a D after the speaker's name. If I agree with you on issue X and disagree on issue Y, would you agree that both of my opinions are "valid"?

re: #147 Indepublicrat

There were an awful lot of quote marks in that comment, weren't there? Sorry for that.

re: #147 Indepublicrat

You are a lib, not an independant. Several posts back, you asked me to be more respectful. A dead giveaway. Next, I expect to be called a racist. Typical liberal response when anyone disagrees with you. Present a valid liberal argument, as you claim both sides have them.
BTW, how come you are not trying your argument out on the new open thread. Scared?

Proves once again that everybody has a price and apparently Soros and the left met McCellan's price. Hope he enjoys his 30 pieces of silver.

re: #148 Indepublicrat

There were an awful lot of quote marks in that comment, weren't there? Sorry for that.

You've got to earn respect around here by reading the posts, putting in your opinion, and backing it up. Read the post above again and read the previous post on the Soros connection. For more on Soros and his influence, see DTN. I think you'll find that he matches the lib's paradigm of Rove.

The focus of a book changed during the editorial process and this is somehow dishonest? Newsworthy? Evidence of ill intent, bias, or greed? Have any of the commenters in this thread actually read the book?

By the way, comments like the one above come across as condescending. You could have asked people to clarify information without treating them like they are naive. The troll shield will instantly raise when the wide brush starts painting.

re: #150 CapeCoddah

You are a lib, not an independant. Several posts back, you asked me to be more respectful. A dead giveaway. Next, I expect to be called a racist. Typical liberal response when anyone disagrees with you. Present a valid liberal argument, as you claim both sides have them.
BTW, how come you are not trying your argument out on the new open thread. Scared?

You talk without listening. You entrench yourself, engage in name calling, and put words other people's mouths. When all else fails you play the racism card, or the victim card, or that bizarre combination you came up with above. When I walk away from your taunts, you will see it as some kind of victory. And if it sounds like I'm describing one of your worst enemies on the left it's because you are their mirror image down to the finest detail and I could be having this exact argument with one of them on Daily Koz on any night of the week.

re: #73 Indepublicrat

After wasting the time and money and Advil on those, I have decided that I won't read any more liberal books until they are printed on toilet paper where they will have some use.

Amen, those books give a bad name to 'pulp fiction'.

re: #153 Indepublicrat
No valid liberal argument forthcoming. The defense rests.

re: #152 gman

Thanks, gman. I just don't buy the idea of Soros as a boogeyman with planet-spanning influence, hypnotic powers, and diabolical intent (or the leftist version starring Karl Rove, for that matter). He's a guy with an opinion and money, and you either agree with his politics or not. I also don't go in for the whole "conspiracy theory presented as fact" gimmick that pops up on the left and right alike, which is why I initially posted in the first place. It would be nice to see a discussion about the merits of the book and its contents rather than the current speculation on publishing company ownership or editorial oversight.

re: #156 Indepublicrat

Thanks, gman. I just don't buy the idea of Soros as a boogeyman with planet-spanning influence, hypnotic powers, and diabolical intent (or the leftist version starring Karl Rove, for that matter). He's a guy with an opinion and money, and you either agree with his politics or not. I also don't go in for the whole "conspiracy theory presented as fact" gimmick that pops up on the left and right alike, which is why I initially posted in the first place. It would be nice to see a discussion about the merits of the book and its contents rather than the current speculation on publishing company ownership or editorial oversight.

Fine, but we do get passionate around here and swear words are known to start flying. I think you'll find this site to be more centrist than "right" the longer you stick around (which I think is LGF's key strength). We have had some real heated discussions around here (see any of the evolution threads).

re: #157 gman

No worries. I haven't been scared off quite yet. :-)

I don't really see any point in always "seeing the other side". Some points of view are simply wrong, and the kind of thinking that generates them is founded on lies and fraud.

If one person says that 2+2=4 and another says 2+2=4,000,000 , there is no sense in compromising on 2,000,002. Some people are almost always right (an accountant for a major bank had better be). Some people are almost always wrong (and in prison or detox most of the time). Insisting that everyone's position deserves respect is the last ditch of either fools afraid of the truth or fiends trying to destroy the very notion of right and good.

Back to the original topic, why would a press secretary ever have access to anything not meant for general dissemination? His job is to publicize, not to keep secrets- the idea that McClellan had some sort of inside track on secrets is kind of silly. It's like asking the White House chefs about nuclear launch codes- it's not their end of the business.
Show me why I shouldn't regard this book as the increasingly desperate and irrational manuverings of a fading Left facing a royal shellacking in November.

Dave

Hey McClellan Judas, enjoy your 30 pieces of silver. Small pay for being a backstabbing piece of shit, at least in my book.

It's amazing how some people are more then willing to change their creation for the gain of money. I thought O'reilly did an alright job with the interview, though it looks like Scotty is more then capable of looking himself in the mirrior for what he's done. Perhaps it only took some Green and Gold trimming to make it easier? Hope he's able to enjoy the bit of cash he's racking in right now while it lasts........

re: #159 dave fitz

I don't really see any point in always "seeing the other side". Some points of view are simply wrong, and the kind of thinking that generates them is founded on lies and fraud.

If one person says that 2+2=4 and another says 2+2=4,000,000 , there is no sense in compromising on 2,000,002. Some people are almost always right (an accountant for a major bank had better be).

One reason I waste very little time reading leftist/liberal stuff anymore is that I *used* to be one of them, and am so familiar with their arguments that I can often ad-lib the rest of the article after reading the first two sentences.

For me, the question has finally been answered:

The question:

George W. Bush--an evil genius or a fool?

The answer:

Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary, from July 2003 to April 2006.

OTS - Charles, my LGF is loading like a speeding bullet, it sure is different than before. I used to sit and watch it take 45 - 55 seconds. Thanks for giving back those minutes.

re: #159 dave fitz

re: #159 dave fitz

I don't really see any point in always "seeing the other side". Some points of view are simply wrong, and the kind of thinking that generates them is founded on lies and fraud.

If one person says that 2+2=4 and another says 2+2=4,000,000 , there is no sense in compromising on 2,000,002. Some people are almost always right (an accountant for a major bank had better be). Some people are almost always wrong (and in prison or detox most of the time). Insisting that everyone's position deserves respect is the last ditch of either fools afraid of the truth or fiends trying to destroy the very notion of right and good.

I'm not saying that every viewpoint is right or that they're all equal--that would be silly. If your opponent is objectively wrong on the facts or engages in logically fallacies, by all means call them out on it. But there are a whole slew of political issues that aren't like a simple math problem with only one right answer.

Back to the original topic, why would a press secretary ever have access to anything not meant for general dissemination? His job is to publicize, not to keep secrets- the idea that McClellan had some sort of inside track on secrets is kind of silly. It's like asking the White House chefs about nuclear launch codes- it's not their end of the business.

Show me why I shouldn't regard this book as the increasingly desperate and irrational manuverings of a fading Left facing a royal shellacking in November.

The guy worked within the administration for a number of years, attended high-level staff meetings, and got to know the power players on a personal basis, and had access to not only the public talking points but the private notes and strategy sessions that created them. He's an expert on the field in which he's writing and has a unique perspective on important issues of recent history. Whether he's pushing an agenda or not, that book contains factual information unavailable to those of us who don't regularly sit in on cabinet meetings.

A book written by the White House Chef would also be a fascinating read, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that one had been published.