Bush: Too coked out to recall

[TitanTiger 20,499]

As for the book....

IF McClellan isn't in it for the money, why didn't he just come out and spread his take on things through the VARIOUS media outlets across this land? Answer that one?

Whether it's Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc., people like this (McClellan) are ALWAYS looking for a way to fund their accounts. Cases like this are rampant in our society these days. It's what SELLS!

Because perhaps he felt he had more to say than could be accurately and fully explained in a 5-15 minute segment on a news program? I know if I felt like there were some important things from my experiences to convey, but they needed more full context explanations to show how I came to those views, I wouldn't depend on snippets and short conversations on media outlets where they are often taped and edited down even further. I'd probably write a book. Or start a website with my articles spread over time. And if you think that even if he had just decided to "spread his take" through the various media outlets that he wouldn't encounter similar criticism (just substitute "fame" for "money" in the boilerplate), you're not being honest.

Answer given.

[CCTAU 3,335]

It sounds like the dims may just have a chance at beating Bush this coming election. I guess it's about time. It only took them 2 elections and 8 years to come up with a plan to beat Bush........

[lukeduke 8]

It sounds like the dims may just have a chance at beating Bush this coming election. I guess it's about time. It only took them 2 elections and 8 years to come up with a plan to beat Bush........

Run someone who also did cocaine?

[arnaldoabru 11]

As for the book....

IF McClellan isn't in it for the money, why didn't he just come out and spread his take on things through the VARIOUS media outlets across this land? Answer that one?

Whether it's Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc., people like this (McClellan) are ALWAYS looking for a way to fund their accounts. Cases like this are rampant in our society these days. It's what SELLS!

I love the quote"people like this (McClellan)". People like this McClellan was one of Shrub's boys.He had been Bushie in Texas.He was brought to Washington because of his loyalty(i.e. don't question the bone heads) to the cause and the administration.Now that he has time to look back on his time there, he comes to the realization,by what he say and heard, that this was really f*&ked up.

[tiger88 934]

Why is it that just because a guy publishes a book about something, he must not be credible? If he thinks these things are important for people to know, what's he supposed to do, jot it down on legal pads or keep it in his diary?

Who said that? Nobody on this thread or any other that I've read on this board on the subject.

The level of supposition is what is disgusting to me here. The guy is biting the hand that fed him for many years with a book which anyone should be able to agree is a stab in the back, that is full of supposition. He is claiming to know what bush was thinking in some of the excerpts I've read. He could have spoken out earlier through provided avenues and didn't. You can say he was frightened of speaking up against the ptb at the time, and thats a weak excuse. Plenty of people would have spoken up in the same shoes. Now we find out his dad wrote a similar tell all book. I just question the guys character. Everyone is shocked (or so they say) in the admin. because he never uttered a chord of discontent while there. A real "team player".

You can rubber stamp him as a good Christian if you want. I question his character and his motives. I have always believed GWB is a good guy who is doing the best he can. I also believe that it is possible that even though he is now villified by many he may gain much more acceptance for some of the things he did (similar to reagan) after he leaves office. Regardless of the outcome I won't throw him under the bus like many have. I think he is giving the best he has for his country.

[Tiger Al 0]

Why is it that just because a guy publishes a book about something, he must not be credible? If he thinks these things are important for people to know, what's he supposed to do, jot it down on legal pads or keep it in his diary?

Who said that? Nobody on this thread or any other that I've read on this board on the subject.

The level of supposition is what is disgusting to me here. The guy is biting the hand that fed him for many years with a book which anyone should be able to agree is a stab in the back, that is full of supposition. He is claiming to know what bush was thinking in some of the excerpts I've read. He could have spoken out earlier through provided avenues and didn't. You can say he was frightened of speaking up against the ptb at the time, and thats a weak excuse. Plenty of people would have spoken up in the same shoes. Now we find out his dad wrote a similar tell all book. I just question the guys character. Everyone is shocked (or so they say) in the admin. because he never uttered a chord of discontent while there. A real "team player".

You can rubber stamp him as a good Christian if you want. I question his character and his motives. I have always believed GWB is a good guy who is doing the best he can. I also believe that it is possible that even though he is now villified by many he may gain much more acceptance for some of the things he did (similar to reagan) after he leaves office. Regardless of the outcome I won't throw him under the bus like many have. I think he is giving the best he has for his country.

With all due respect, the 'hand that fed' McClellen was that of the citizens of the United States.

[CCTAU 3,335]

Why is it that just because a guy publishes a book about something, he must not be credible? If he thinks these things are important for people to know, what's he supposed to do, jot it down on legal pads or keep it in his diary?

Who said that? Nobody on this thread or any other that I've read on this board on the subject.

The level of supposition is what is disgusting to me here. The guy is biting the hand that fed him for many years with a book which anyone should be able to agree is a stab in the back, that is full of supposition. He is claiming to know what bush was thinking in some of the excerpts I've read. He could have spoken out earlier through provided avenues and didn't. You can say he was frightened of speaking up against the ptb at the time, and thats a weak excuse. Plenty of people would have spoken up in the same shoes. Now we find out his dad wrote a similar tell all book. I just question the guys character. Everyone is shocked (or so they say) in the admin. because he never uttered a chord of discontent while there. A real "team player".

You can rubber stamp him as a good Christian if you want. I question his character and his motives. I have always believed GWB is a good guy who is doing the best he can. I also believe that it is possible that even though he is now villified by many he may gain much more acceptance for some of the things he did (similar to reagan) after he leaves office. Regardless of the outcome I won't throw him under the bus like many have. I think he is giving the best he has for his country.

With all due respect, the 'hand that fed' McClellen was that of the citizens of the United States.

Not true. He was not in an elected position. He was there by invite of the POTUS.

[autigeremt 6,652]

As for the book....

IF McClellan isn't in it for the money, why didn't he just come out and spread his take on things through the VARIOUS media outlets across this land? Answer that one?

Whether it's Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc., people like this (McClellan) are ALWAYS looking for a way to fund their accounts. Cases like this are rampant in our society these days. It's what SELLS!

Because perhaps he felt he had more to say than could be accurately and fully explained in a 5-15 minute segment on a news program? I know if I felt like there were some important things from my experiences to convey, but they needed more full context explanations to show how I came to those views, I wouldn't depend on snippets and short conversations on media outlets where they are often taped and edited down even further. I'd probably write a book. Or start a website with my articles spread over time. And if you think that even if he had just decided to "spread his take" through the various media outlets that he wouldn't encounter similar criticism (just substitute "fame" for "money" in the boilerplate), you're not being honest.

Answer given.

Funny thing about all of this....

Dick Morris comes out with information about the under handed Clintons and he's get's railed for it by the Liberals. He's called a back stabber, a liar, and an idiot.

DOUBLE STANDARD!!!!!!

[tiger88 934]

Why is it that just because a guy publishes a book about something, he must not be credible? If he thinks these things are important for people to know, what's he supposed to do, jot it down on legal pads or keep it in his diary?

Who said that? Nobody on this thread or any other that I've read on this board on the subject.

The level of supposition is what is disgusting to me here. The guy is biting the hand that fed him for many years with a book which anyone should be able to agree is a stab in the back, that is full of supposition. He is claiming to know what bush was thinking in some of the excerpts I've read. He could have spoken out earlier through provided avenues and didn't. You can say he was frightened of speaking up against the ptb at the time, and thats a weak excuse. Plenty of people would have spoken up in the same shoes. Now we find out his dad wrote a similar tell all book. I just question the guys character. Everyone is shocked (or so they say) in the admin. because he never uttered a chord of discontent while there. A real "team player".

You can rubber stamp him as a good Christian if you want. I question his character and his motives. I have always believed GWB is a good guy who is doing the best he can. I also believe that it is possible that even though he is now villified by many he may gain much more acceptance for some of the things he did (similar to reagan) after he leaves office. Regardless of the outcome I won't throw him under the bus like many have. I think he is giving the best he has for his country.

With all due respect, the 'hand that fed' McClellen was that of the citizens of the United States.

Oh please. GWB could have hired someone else and he hired the guy and was basically the hand that provided his employment for a long time. First in texas then in d.c. Yes, ultimately the citizens of texas and the us paid the taxes that paid the salaries. GWB's favoritism still provided him with many years of very gainful employment.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

As for the book....

IF McClellan isn't in it for the money, why didn't he just come out and spread his take on things through the VARIOUS media outlets across this land? Answer that one?

Whether it's Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc., people like this (McClellan) are ALWAYS looking for a way to fund their accounts. Cases like this are rampant in our society these days. It's what SELLS!

Because perhaps he felt he had more to say than could be accurately and fully explained in a 5-15 minute segment on a news program? I know if I felt like there were some important things from my experiences to convey, but they needed more full context explanations to show how I came to those views, I wouldn't depend on snippets and short conversations on media outlets where they are often taped and edited down even further. I'd probably write a book. Or start a website with my articles spread over time. And if you think that even if he had just decided to "spread his take" through the various media outlets that he wouldn't encounter similar criticism (just substitute "fame" for "money" in the boilerplate), you're not being honest.

Answer given.

Funny thing about all of this....

Dick Morris comes out with information about the under handed Clintons and he's get's railed for it by the Liberals. He's called a back stabber, a liar, and an idiot.

DOUBLE STANDARD!!!!!!

And unlike their reaction toward McClellan's revelations, conservatives lauded Morris and others who outed the Clintons for the things they did and lapped up the books as if they were the missing fifth Gospel.

DOUBLE STANDARD!!!!!!

All it shows is that most people don't evaluate things on their own merits, they evaluate them as to whether it helps or hurts their side.

[AURaptor 1,125]

Raptor, you're an intelligent person...except when you go into knee-jerk reaction mode when someone criticizes the President or the administration on anything other than spending. Then it's like a whole other person is talking.

Titan and Tiger Al, this clown hasn't revealed anything new, has he ? Nope. And funny, but isn't pretty much his entire argument the EXACT template the Far extreme Left has been blathering on about for the past 7 years ? Sorry, I can smell a dung heap like this from a mile away, and don't need to read his so called 'memoirs'.

[AURaptor 1,125]

If the identical types of information came out about Hillary, what would the discussion be on this topic? Can we just rearrange the poster's names and leave the posts unchanged, or would it be materially different?

If that's really how you see things in your little world, where everything is exactly equal, and one needs to only change the names or political parties, then please, do us a favor and don't vote.

EVER.

[AURaptor 1,125]

Maybe this would've cleared up Titan's post for AU alum:

False headline typical of the lying , extreme far Left. He never said he was " too coked out to recall " . But one thing IS clear, if we're to believe SM, that Bush never used coke habitually, as did Bubba. Of course, if it was Bill Clinton, no one would bat an eye, his past being a private, personal matter.

BTW, Why has Bill Clinton never released his full medical records ?

RED HERRING ALERT!!!

We'll all take that as a " no " . Thanks for your input.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I'll see your "no" and raise you a "it's irrelevant to this discussion."

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Raptor, you're an intelligent person...except when you go into knee-jerk reaction mode when someone criticizes the President or the administration on anything other than spending. Then it's like a whole other person is talking.

Titan and Tiger Al, this clown hasn't revealed anything new, has he ? Nope. And funny, but isn't pretty much his entire argument the EXACT template the Far extreme Left has been blathering on about for the past 7 years ? Sorry, I can smell a dung heap like this from a mile away, and don't need to read his so called 'memoirs'.

I on the other hand will read what he actually says, apart from just the selected soundbites the media focuses on, and make up my own mind.

I mean, isn't this the very kind of close-minded, blind loyalty we lambast lefties that excuse the behavior of the Clintons? Total unwillingness to engage and listen to contrary voices, even though it was the exact kind of stuff hard core conservatives had been saying?

[AURaptor 1,125]

I on the other hand will read what he actually says, apart from just the selected soundbites the media focuses on, and make up my own mind.

I mean, isn't this the very kind of close-minded, blind loyalty we lambast lefties that excuse the behavior of the Clintons? Total unwillingness to engage and listen to contrary voices, even though it was the exact kind of stuff hard core conservatives had been saying?

Close mindedness? Sorry, those are shallow words when we know for a fact, already, that S.M. has simply recycled the Left's talking points and put them into his book, which he's peddling ONLY to Left wing t.v. and radio programs. Wonder why that is ? I've already heard the 'contrary' voices, and they're not saying anything I've not heard before.

Nice try.

[TexasTiger 12,964]

To my knowledge, no one here has read the book yet, so it's hard to make such firm, informed conclusions about what is wrong in it. Most of the criticism I've seen from the Bushbots on talk shows, and here, has been pretty substance-free.

I've seen two interviews with Scott today and he seemed more comfortable and confident than I've ever seen him. I don't think he was ever comfortable in the spin role, which all press secretaries have to do. The challenges this administration has placed on it's press secretaries has been particularly difficult.

This guy latched on to Bush early on, and was a true believer in Bush personally. I sense he still has a fondness for Bush, even though he has become very disillusioned. His mom has a long history in Republican circles in Texas. His grandfather was a legendary Dean of UT-Law School who was highly regarded for his integrity. McClellan has had a reputation for basic decency even amongst the press corps he often frustrated.

From what I understand, his publisher doesn't pay more than 100K in advances. He could have done far better if money was his primary goal.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I on the other hand will read what he actually says, apart from just the selected soundbites the media focuses on, and make up my own mind.

I mean, isn't this the very kind of close-minded, blind loyalty we lambast lefties that excuse the behavior of the Clintons? Total unwillingness to engage and listen to contrary voices, even though it was the exact kind of stuff hard core conservatives had been saying?

Close mindedness?

Yes. When you form opinions simply because you don't like the message, that's exactly what it is. It's what the blind Dems did with the Clintons and it's what blind Republicans are doing now.

Sorry, those are shallow words when we know for a fact, already, that S.M. has simply recycled the Left's talking points and put them into his book,

Actually, you know such thing for a "fact." You've just chosen to characterize it that way in your close-mindedness.

which he's peddling ONLY to Left wing t.v. and radio programs. Wonder why that is ?

That's funny. The Today Show is left wing. That's rich. You'd think he was on Air America and Keith Olbermann.

[Tiger Al 0]

He actually was on Countdown with Keith Olberman.

[tiger88 934]

To my knowledge, no one here has read the book yet, so it's hard to make such firm, informed conclusions about what is wrong in it. Most of the criticism I've seen from the Bushbots on talk shows, and here, has been pretty substance-free.

I've seen two interviews with Scott today and he seemed more comfortable and confident than I've ever seen him. I don't think he was ever comfortable in the spin role, which all press secretaries have to do. The challenges this administration has placed on it's press secretaries has been particularly difficult.

This guy latched on to Bush early on, and was a true believer in Bush personally. I sense he still has a fondness for Bush, even though he has become very disillusioned. His mom has a long history in Republican circles in Texas. His grandfather was a legendary Dean of UT-Law School who was highly regarded for his integrity. McClellan has had a reputation for basic decency even amongst the press corps he often frustrated.

From what I understand, his publisher doesn't pay more than 100K in advances. He could have done far better if money was his primary goal.

Couldn't help but notice you left out his father. I don't blame you. Do you know him personally? I see you are on a first name basis with him now.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I'm not surprised he was on Olbermann. But to hear him talk, that's the only kinds of places he was on. He's been on The Today Show, Good Morning America and at least a couple of other news outlets. Tomorrow he'll be on CNN and I'm sure he'll be on more after that. Wouldn't be shocked if Russert gets a crack at him too.

[TexasTiger 12,964]

To my knowledge, no one here has read the book yet, so it's hard to make such firm, informed conclusions about what is wrong in it. Most of the criticism I've seen from the Bushbots on talk shows, and here, has been pretty substance-free.

I've seen two interviews with Scott today and he seemed more comfortable and confident than I've ever seen him. I don't think he was ever comfortable in the spin role, which all press secretaries have to do. The challenges this administration has placed on it's press secretaries has been particularly difficult.

This guy latched on to Bush early on, and was a true believer in Bush personally. I sense he still has a fondness for Bush, even though he has become very disillusioned. His mom has a long history in Republican circles in Texas. His grandfather was a legendary Dean of UT-Law School who was highly regarded for his integrity. McClellan has had a reputation for basic decency even amongst the press corps he often frustrated.

From what I understand, his publisher doesn't pay more than 100K in advances. He could have done far better if money was his primary goal.

Couldn't help but notice you left out his father. I don't blame you. Do you know him personally? I see you are on a first name basis with him now.

Don't know much about his dad. Scott's easier to spell.

[CCTAU 3,335]

I'm not surprised he was on Olbermann. But to hear him talk, that's the only kinds of places he was on. He's been on The Today Show, Good Morning America and at least a couple of other news outlets. Tomorrow he'll be on CNN and I'm sure he'll be on more after that. Wouldn't be shocked if Russert gets a crack at him too.

You call the Today Show and Good Morning America "news" outlets?

Even so, it seems that anyone who has worked in politics is writing a book as soon as they can. Used to be that when someone disagreed with something, they resigned in protest. Now they hang on like leaches until the blood dries up, then they write a book. We seemed to have had this same discussion about the retired generals a while back.

Whether what's in the book is totally true or not, we'll probably not know for many years. I imagine much of it is fact based. But then I imagine that a book written in praise of Bush would not sell nearly as many copies as one denigrating him.

So while everyone focuses on Bush, the rest of us will support McCain (not the Bush).

[TexasTiger 12,964]

I'm not surprised he was on Olbermann. But to hear him talk, that's the only kinds of places he was on. He's been on The Today Show, Good Morning America and at least a couple of other news outlets. Tomorrow he'll be on CNN and I'm sure he'll be on more after that. Wouldn't be shocked if Russert gets a crack at him too.

You call the Today Show and Good Morning America "news" outlets?

If it ain't on Hannity, CCTAU ain't havin' it!

[CCTAU 3,335]

I'm not surprised he was on Olbermann. But to hear him talk, that's the only kinds of places he was on. He's been on The Today Show, Good Morning America and at least a couple of other news outlets. Tomorrow he'll be on CNN and I'm sure he'll be on more after that. Wouldn't be shocked if Russert gets a crack at him too.

You call the Today Show and Good Morning America "news" outlets?

If it ain't on Hannity, CCTAU ain't havin' it!

I haven't watched Hannity in a while. Did watch a little Glen Beck.

I usually get my views from my own white racist, redneck, gun-loving demented mind.

We like it in here. <insert spinning head emoticon here>