McClellan - Where's the Beef?

Ah, let's see. Where to start.

Scott McClellan is a shit. How better to describe someone who writes a book blasting the guy he used to work for when that guy is still in office? Memoirs should wait until after the president has left office, thank you very much.

But if Scott had some insights and news into the Bush White House that was so vital and urgent that it couldn't wait another 7 months, then he should have told us about it upon leaving his job, not after holding it all this time while he wrote a book. By writing the book, he reveals he's willing to put America second in order to maximize his sales. Which means he can't be trusted to do the right thing. Which means there's no reason for us to believe that he wouldn't bend the truth to create market excitement over his memoirs. The little shit.

On the specifics, though, there is nothing much in the excerpts to support the mad media frenzy:
In a broad indictment of the culture of Washington and national politics, McClellan said deception "permeates our national political discourse" and has "become an accepted way of winning the partisan wars for public opinion."
A problem that McClellan is looking to exacerbate, it seems.
He wrote that he had placed "great hope" in Bush to change that culture: "He chose not to do so. . . . Instead, his own White House became embroiled in political maneuvering that was equally unsavory, if not worse" than that of the Clinton White House.
It is sad to think of the Bush administration being as ruthless as Clinton's, but it's hardly an earth shattering accusation.
"The president had promised himself that he would accomplish what his father had failed to do by winning a second term. . . . And that meant operating continually in campaign mode: never explaining, never apologizing, never retreating. Unfortunately, that strategy also had less justifiable repercussions: never reflecting, never reconsidering, never compromising. Especially not where Iraq was concerned."
Well, so what? He doesn't like to look back. Scott says he was mislead by Libby and Rove, but so was the president. The administration used propaganda to launch the war - what President hasn't? He says that Bush is a decent man who, knowing what he knows now,
"...would never have made the decision to invade, despite what he might say or feel he has to say publicly today."
Which makes this whole frenzy much ado about nothing.