elcid89: blog elcid89's blog
lol ...
Published May. 28, 2008The spokesman who defended President Bush's policies through Hurricane Katrina and the early years of the Iraq war is now blasting his former employers, saying the Bush administration became mired in propaganda and political spin and at times played loose with the truth.
In excerpts from a 341-page book to be released Monday, Scott McClellan writes on Iraq that Bush "and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war."
"In this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security," McClellan wrote.
McClellan also sharply criticizes the administration on its handling of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath.
"One of the worst disasters in our nation's history became one of the biggest disasters in Bush's presidency," he wrote. "Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush's second term."
Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino said the White House would not comment Tuesday because they haven't seen the book.
Frances Townsend, former Homeland Security adviser to Bush, said advisers to the president should speak up when they have policy concerns.
"Scott never did that on any of these issues as best I can remember or as best as I know from any of my White House colleagues," said Townsend, now a CNN contributor. "For him to do this now strikes me as self-serving, disingenuous and unprofessional."
Fox News contributor and former White House adviser Karl Rove said on that network Tuesday that the excerpts from the book he's read sound more like they were written by a "left-wing blogger" than his former colleague.
In a brief phone conversation with CNN Tuesday evening, McClellan made clear that he stands behind the accuracy of his book. McClellan said he cannot give on-the-record quotes yet because of an agreement with his publisher.
Early in the book, which CNN obtained late Tuesday, McClellan wrote that he believes he told untruths on Bush's behalf in the case of CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose identity was leaked to the media.
Rove and fellow White House advisers Elliot Abrams and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were accused of leaking the name of Plame -- whose husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson, had gone public with charges the Bush administration had "twisted" facts to justify the war in Iraq.
Libby was convicted last year of lying to a grand jury and federal agents investigating the leak. Bush commuted his 30-month prison term, calling it excessive. At the time, McClellan called the three "good individuals" and said he spoke to them before telling reporters they were not involved.
"I had allowed myself to be deceived into unknowingly passing along a falsehood," he wrote. "It would ultimately prove fatal to my ability to serve the president effectively."
McClellan wrote he didn't realize what he said was untrue until reporters began digging up details of the case almost two years later.
A former spokesman for Bush when he was governor of Texas, McClellan was named White House press secretary in 2003, replacing Ari Fleischer. McClellan had previously been a deputy press secretary and was the traveling spokesman for the Bush campaign during the 2000 election.
He announced he was resigning in April 2006 at a news conference with Bush.
42 Comments
(16 votes) homeowner shoots masked home intruder
(7 votes) cary police seek man in suspicious death
(4 votes) suspect in fatal hit-and-run surrenders
(2 votes) cary investigating woman's death


































Welcome to GOLO, where WRAL.com visitors can comment on stories and create profile pages, blogs and photo galleries.
You must be a registered WRAL.com user to use these tools. Click here to register or log in.
No, Scott doesn't come out smelling like roses on this one, but...but...the whole truth is always the sum of it's parts. And I believe Scott.
The one blaring point that his book makes will be completely ignored over the opportunistic time to argue politics. That our entire government has become a playground of fame and fortune over capability to do the job they're undertaking. Mass confusion exists on all fronts from intelligence taking to intelligence reporting. Chains of command have gotten lax and every Senator or Congressman had rather have their time in front of the media than to show up to work for the people.
GOLO member since August 2, 2007
June 3, 2008 12:16 p.m.
Honestly, I didn't. I just considered it unworthy of a serious response.
and it's "you", not "u". Few people are going to take anything you say seriously if you write everything like a text message.
GOLO member since September 6, 2007
May 28, 2008 10:05 a.m.
May 28, 2008 10:02 a.m.
I guess you missed McCain's proposal to slash the US nuclear weapons arsenal? :-D
GOLO member since September 6, 2007
May 28, 2008 10:00 a.m.
May 28, 2008 9:56 a.m.
May 28, 2008 9:45 a.m.
Were they loyal to him when they pushed him out to save their own backsides?
While he isn't the most credible of sources, what he's doing isn't a bad thing. The American people need MORE insight into how their government actually works, not less. If he makes a buck or two while providing it, more power to him.
GOLO member since September 6, 2007
May 28, 2008 9:43 a.m.
GOLO member since November 23, 2007
May 28, 2008 9:41 a.m.
McClellan wrote he didn't realize what he said was untrue until reporters began digging up details of the case almost two years later.
It's a blinding glimpse of the obvious, and a scathing indictment of the reliability of the "White House Press Secretary" as a media conduit. Flashlight may be on to something... the truth of your statements about the Bush administration is proportional to how quickly Karl Rove throws you under the bus! :-D
GOLO member since March 18, 2008
May 28, 2008 9:35 a.m.
I would imagine that his loyalty went south about the time that they shoved him out the back door.
The point isn't that he's a paragon of virtue. I don't think many would buy into that characterization of him. It's simply that he's willing to reveal things when many of the rest of them won't. Should what he has to say be taken with a grain of salt? Probably ... Doesn't mean it's bad for the American people that he's saying it.
GOLO member since September 6, 2007
May 28, 2008 9:16 a.m.
Please log in to add comment.