Indy Conservative on June 2, 2008 at 9:25 AM

So was THAT post written for everyone on the thread? Or should we ignore that one too? Just let us know what you want, dude; we’re flexible. :)

inviolet on June 2, 2008 at 9:53 AM

Dude? Me?

May God forgive you.

Indy Conservative on June 2, 2008 at 9:25 AM

Cracking me up Indy…

Keemo on June 2, 2008 at 10:12 AM

Sorry, it was not my intention to make fun of the “m” guy. I was so nervous, it took me an hour to clean the spilled coffee from my keyboard and the spit from my monitor.

Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez recounts in his recent book, “Wiser in Battle: A Soldier’s Story”. How President Bush gave a “confused pep talk” during a videoconference with his security and general staff.

“Kick ass!” he quotes the president as saying. “If somebody tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them! We must be tougher than hell! This Vietnam stuff, [How would the Bush know, he didn’t serve and doesn’t bother to study history] this is not even close. It is a mind-set. We can’t send that message. It’s an excuse to prepare us for withdrawal.”
“There is a series of moments and this is one of them. Our will is being tested, but we are resolute. We have a better way. Stay strong! Stay the course! Kill them! Be confident! Prevail! We are going to wipe them out! We are not blinking!”

Does that sound like a frat boy before a flag tag football game or a CIC?

There is something very wrong with this whole bunch. Bush Derangement Syndrome on the left is a symptom of this Rorschach administration. The left senses something and gets it wrong as usual. At least the right can catalog the betrayals, both of themselves and of the nation. My prayers are for the country and the soldiers.

If one of those three ever harbored any qualms about Little Mac being grotesquely unqualified for the job of WHPS, they never did anything about it.

It is the responsibility of the President himself to make sure that all the people he or his advisors want in high places are of good character & professionally qualified to do the job.

Little Mac posssesed neither the character nor the qualifications to fill such an important post, and should never have been appointed in the first place. Even a casually observant GOP loyalist could see that from the minute he stepped into the Blue Room for his first solo briefing.

I’d sooner have Techno-Viking as WHPS than Little Mac.

Lake finishes with a good point about McClellan and his role in the Bush administration. Instead of opting for talent and intelligence, this administration has tended to value loyalty.

Gee, where have HA readers read that days ago?

Congress stimied into strict gridlock under Bill Clinton. During those years, Statesman and Texas Democrat Bob Bullock facilitated some great work accomplished through the Texas legislature, work that George Bush took credit for accomplishing in his first POTUS campaign. Bullock was gracious, and lived his life loving and protecting his Texas with great leadership, providing the home that GW will return to. Carolyn Keeton, on the other hand, was just a user and abuser. Her claim to fame was as State Auditor, as she was a good comptroller of financial records. THAT is where she would have remained to serve Texas well IF she loved Texas more than she loves herself. Scotty is just illicit spawn, given a chance to be a real MENSCH, and proving himself NOT. Scott McClellan dreamt to be our contemporary Richard Rich; but he hasn’t the balls to even rise to the occasion of being a true villain. He is just diddlysquat, sh*t off the ol’ block.

This too has passed.

maverick muse on June 2, 2008 at 10:49 AM

Anyone wondering how McClellan could do this without thinking through the consequences has got to look at what both his mother and father have done in Texas, with dad writing a book implicating LBJ in JFK’s death 40 years after the fact, while mom managed to stab both political parties in the back, switching from Democrat to Republican when she realized that was the only way by the mid-1990s to win statewide office, and then siding with Democrats in the Texas Legislature against Rick Perry, before leaving the GOP for independent status when her 2006 primary challenge failed.

So in Scott’s world, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with switching sides or stabbing your former friends in the back, if it can either earn you a few more $$$ or a higher political position. What he didn’t realize is when you get to the presidential level, doing things like that puts you and your claims in a much brighter spotlight than those sort of stunts do in Austin, Texas.

As a career plumber, you’re talking my kinda language mav. Good stuff!

Novak’s on the right track. After the publisher rejected his 2007 draft, McClellan agreed to have it juiced, just to sell it.

petefrt on June 2, 2008 at 9:54 AM

Wouldn’t be the first time…nor the last.

Had the same discussion at the dinner table a few nights back. What happens to people when they spend too much time in DC?

This too has passed.

This clown’s 15 minutes are just about up. Once the Soros connection was exposed, most of the media interest dried up….

My first reaction when hearing about McClellan’s book was what a backstabber, a turncoat, a Judas Iscariot! McClellan was happy to enjoy all the privileges and advantages of his White House gig. Bush had even invited McClellan to his Texas ranch…

1. Plame was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a superspy.
2. Plame’s husband was (and is) a shameless political opportunist who lied about facts which were inconvenient to him.
3. Armitage was responsible for any “leak,” and his disclosures predated any and all other disclosures from anyone in the white house.

All of this is well-documented. So Scott McClelland exposes himself as someone who can’t observe facts and get the story straight: the very reason he was fired.

McClellan and his publisher didn’t want any negative buzz about the book leaking out before publication.–Ed

Their attempt to sway the ‘08 election is in vain. McClellan didn’t even get a tad of sympathy at DailyKos where he’s referenced as either rat pie or rat quiche. No one liked McClellan outside of Bush’s circle ever liked McClellan, and no one likes him now. He’s a born loser, and the world hates a loser. McClellan’s Affekt is his own demise. He is UNIVERSALLY persona non grata.

As for over-reliance upon the trust factor based upon “loyalty”, doesn’t McCain fall into a worse category than Bush? The McCain campaign is being (ill) advised by those who have NO LOYALTY either to McCain or the GOP, but strictly to their own independent profit.

jp on June 2, 2008 at 10:18 AM

thought the same thing. ah well, every dog has his/her day.

Lake finishes with a good point about McClellan and his role in the Bush administration. Instead of opting for talent and intelligence, this administration has tended to value loyalty.

The Bush really is a moron. He kept most of the Clinton operatives in power because he valued “loyalty”? /boggle

Cracking me up Indy…