So by now you've all probably heard about
Scott McClellan's tell all book about his time in the white house. I gotta say, the firestorm has been pretty funny to watch, but at the same time it seems like there are some really logical follow up questions that should probably be asked.
- Now that it seems like everyone is comfortable with the idea that the Iraq war was based on lies and a PR campaign... shouldn't that mean something? I feel like there's this thing - in that other thing - high crimes and... something? Oh well, moving on.
- Before I saw the interview he did last night on Olbermann, my main question about the whole thing was "why is he doing this?" McClellan wasn't Cheney, Rove or Rice, he was one of the few remaining connections to Bush's era as Texas governor, and I think he might be coming to grips with what he was a part of. Like everyone else, I originally figured this was about making money, but the more I thought about it, I don't really think so. I mean, he's gonna make money from this book and all, but this book cuts off any other chance of making money on the conservative book/speech giving/consulting/think tank circuit, which seems like it would be insanely profitable over the long haul. And it's not like he had a courageous resigning in protest moment that will endear him to the left like Richard Clarke or Paul O'Neill, so there might not be much money on that side either. It's almost impossible to believe that someone who spent that long lying to all of us is trying get the truth out, but after watching his interview last night, thats the impression I got.
- Anybody want to point out that all the attacks are on McClellan as a person, and no one in the administration is denying the truth of his specific claims. Shouldn't that tell us something?
The majority of the outrage of about this story completely misses the point. There isn't really too much new news when it comes what he said. The surprise here is that you're getting this info from as inside of a source as you're going to find. The fact is if you've been a journalist covering the Bush white house (like David Gregory for example), and you are shocked by the claims that he made (like Gregory's outrage about the timid questions before of the iraq war)... THEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN DOING YOUR JOB! If the guy whose job it is to take your questions says that you weren't hard enough on him, then you should probably hand in your notepad and call it a career, because well, you're just not good enough. Call
Jeremy Scahill and give him your press pass on your way out.
No comments:
Post a Comment