Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Election 2008

McClellan's Memoirs Hurt McCain Just as Much as Bush

By Frank Rich, The New York Times. Posted June 1, 2008.


As the McClellan circus shows, unexpected bombshells about White House Iraq lies will keep McCain pushed back for months to come.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

They thought they were being so slick. When the McCain campaign abruptly moved last Tuesday’s fund-raiser with President Bush from the Phoenix Convention Center to a private home, it was the next best thing to sending the loathed lame duck into the witness protection program. John McCain and Mr. Bush were caught on camera together for a mere 26 seconds, and at 9 p.m. Eastern time, safely after the networks’ evening newscasts. The two men’s furtive encounter on the Phoenix airport tarmac, as captured by a shaky, inaudible long shot on FoxNews.com, could have been culled from a surveillance video.

But for the McCain campaign, any “Mission Accomplished” high-fives had to be put on hold. That same evening Politico.com broke the news of Scott McClellan’s memoir, and it was soon All Bush All the Time in the mediasphere. Or more to the point: All Iraq All the Time, for the deceitful origins of the war in Iraq are the major focus of the former press secretary’s tell-all.

There is no news in his book, hardly the first to charge that the White House used propaganda to sell its war and that the so-called liberal media were “complicit enablers” of the con job. The blowback by the last Bush defenders is also déjà vu. The claims that Mr. McClellan was “disgruntled,” “out of the loop,” two-faced, and a “sad” head case are identical to those leveled by Bush operatives (including Mr. McClellan) at past administration deserters like Paul O’Neill, Richard Clarke, John DiIulio and Matthew Dowd.

So why the fuss? Mr. McClellan isn’t a sizzling TV personality, or, before now, a household name beyond the Beltway. His book secured no major prepublication media send-off on “60 Minutes” or a newsmagazine cover. But if the tale of how the White House ginned up the war is an old story, the big new news is how ferocious a hold this familiar tale still exerts on the public all these years later. We have not moved on.

Americans don’t like being lied to by their leaders, especially if there are casualties involved and especially if there’s no accountability. We view it as a crime story, and we won’t be satisfied until there’s a resolution.

That’s why the original sin of the war’s conception remains a political flash point, however much we tune out Iraq as it grinds on today. Even a figure as puny as Mr. McClellan can ignite it. The Democrats portray Mr. McCain as offering a third Bush term, but it’s a third term of the war that’s his bigger problem. Even if he locks the president away in a private home, the war will keep seeping under the door, like the blood in “Sweeney Todd.”

Mr. McCain and his party are in denial about this. “Elections are about the future” is their mantra. On “Hardball” in April, Mr. McCain pooh-poohed debate about “whether we should have invaded or not” as merely “a good academic argument.” We should focus on the “victory” he magically foresees instead.

But the large American majority that judges the war a mistake remains constant (more than 60 percent). For all the talk of the surge’s “success,” the number of Americans who think the country is making progress in Iraq is down nine percentage points since February (to 37 percent) in the latest Pew survey. The number favoring a “quick withdrawal” is up by seven percentage points (to 56 percent).


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: george bush, john mccain, scott mcclellan

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Election 2008! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Seems to me that Sen. Obama is
Posted by: Quannah on Jun 1, 2008 1:23 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
more than ready to have a full-out debate with McStain about the War on Iraq - a debate that, as Frank Rich points out, will surely be lost by McStain. He, who has cast himself as the War President-ial Candidate, will be hard pressed to convince enough voters that he's right on this issue, and Obama is wrong.

Sen. Obama knows what he's doing. He feels confident that he can take on McStain with little-to-no trouble. Since McStain can't even make a simple statement without telepromters, I can't wait to see the upcoming Presidential Debates! This is gonna be good.

The only real risk Obama faces are the sleaze machines of the Right. They have legions of 527s ready to pounce with lies and innuendo to make the people (voters) question voting for Obama. I certainly hope the people of this country aren't stupid enough to fall for this again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

McCain will be just fine (if he says something like this)
Posted by: democracynowiniraq on Jun 1, 2008 2:01 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since when does a president not want the media and public opinion to their side? When did that become an abstract concept? Especially during times of war???

Since when does a president want his subordinates to be sending the public mixed messages about anything at all??

Since when does a president NOT "sell" or use "propaganda" to forward his agenda?

Since when does a president NOT go before the American people to explain why war is necessary in the first place?

Since when does ANY president, in ANY country, at ANY time, want his council or administration to be disloyal to him??

After having listened to several tapes of Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon, I can tell you that they had TWO eyes on the electoral calendar. And I have no reason to believe that Kennedy, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, or Clinton were one iota different.

Perhaps Mr.McClellan thought he was applying to work at the neighborhood bakery. Any White House press secretary I've ever seen has been a "puppet" of the president who says what the president or his cabinet want him to say.

I don't believe the book will be full of lies, per se, but the entire context is distorted to embellish the worst possible light on Bush to sell a book. As far as this 24-hour a day campaign deal, well??? That's because we are now in the era of 24-hour news networks and 24 hour blogospheres.. You MUST stay up on your toes AND be in campaign mode 24/7..

What I find interesting is that mode actually began during the Clinton years and has only continued during the Bush years. Except when Clinton's team did it, they were hailed for their cleverness and sharpness and quick response. But when Bush does it, it's "propaganda."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're assuming Posted by: hurricane hugo
» RE: You're assuming Posted by: democracynowiniraq
» Plame case was a farce Posted by: democracynowiniraq
» correction Posted by: vox persona
» RE: GOP TROLL (demonaq...democracynowiniraq) Posted by: democracynowiniraq
» RE: GOP TROLL (demonaq...democracynowiniraq) Posted by: democracynowiniraq
McCain
Posted by: RedFoxOne on Jun 1, 2008 6:32 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL, who cares about McCain. Surely there is no one out there taking him seriously anyways. LOL, what a joke. Can you even imagine another four years of Dictator Bush? LOL

JJ
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: McCain Posted by: democracynowiniraq
» RE: McCain Posted by: Fishbone Soldier
» RE: McCain Posted by: democracynowiniraq
» RE: McCain Posted by: Fishbone Soldier
» RE: McCain loves torture Posted by: Lauren
» RE: McCain loves torture Posted by: democracynowiniraq
McCain = OLD...
Posted by: HughScott on Jun 1, 2008 7:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OLD ideas, OLD solutions, OLD Bush friends.

Obama, who is smarter and mentally tougher than Insane McCain, will clean his clock in the TV debates next fall.

-----------------------------------

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam vet, ex-USAF pilot, lifelong registered Republican, ARDENT Obama supporter and the editor of www.PhonyFighterPilot.com -- the only website about George W. Bush that presents irrefutable, smoking-gun proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: McCain = OLD... Posted by: Moore Hognutz
Songbird McCain -- the most HATED veteran of the Vietnam War
Posted by: HughScott on Jun 1, 2008 7:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google "Songbird McCain" and you will find hundreds of nonpartisan websites and blogs that blast him for betraying family members of missing POWs in Southeast Asia.

No other Vietnam vet has been vilified as much as Insane McCain. And that was before he refused to support the new GI Bill.

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam veteran and ARDENT Obama fan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Frank Rich is on point as usual
Posted by: Fishbone Soldier on Jun 1, 2008 9:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of the NYTimes opinion writers are either in love with their own words or a bit too cutesy (or they're William Kristol... let's not get into that one). But Rich has continued to put forth interesting and compelling angles on the news of the day. This article is no exception.

Regardless of what many pundits think, the war will be issue number one in this election. And regardless of his military service and perceived experience, it's going to be a biiiig loser for McCain. The more he talks about it, the worse things will get for him (particularly since he can't seem to keep the facts straight in his head - or at least in his mouth). And since it's supposed to be his only "strength" in this election, he's basically toast. As others have mentioned here, I can't wait for the debates.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Belligerence an inate, inherited attribute - probably not!
Posted by: kiwijohn on Jun 2, 2008 12:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stop - take a breath.

Up until about the end of World War II America was a very reluctant participant in global conflict. Our cultural ethic was firmly entrenched in economic growth and a foreign policy which focussed on constructive global participation rather than belligerent intervention. And then there was the Bomb...
which was used only a few months before the then friendly Soviets also had it! Was that what changed our World?

Since about then US Militarism in a global context has been on the rise. If we can identify the root cause and a truthful rationale for our current single-minded military-supremacy politics, we may be able to catalyze some useful dialog at home and overseas. Why have such a large number of thinking people in the Western World turned against the current Administration? Is it because we have oversimplified human values of what is right or wrong? Have we turned into global thugs? I don't think so. But how do we convince the others now that we have this mess on our hands?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Still Uneasy
Posted by: Urstrly on Jun 2, 2008 4:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rich speaks as though the Clinton campaign is finished, but I'm worried that it isn't, that the longer she keeps collecting tokens, the more it erodes the Democratic case.

On every other point, I agree with him. We've been negligent in failing to hammer how Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld sat out Vietnam. And, as pointed out in last week's Times Magazine, McCain's experience in Vietnam, while brutal, was removed from engagement on the battlefield. Still, the delusions that this war is "winnable" persist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Change or business as usual
Posted by: QCao009 on Jun 2, 2008 5:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only "new" thing we have learnt in Scott McClellan's book is that we Americans can be spun by a complicit, docile and uninquisitive media. This is no more than another Rove Trojan horse presented to keep our eyes on the past, deter any responsibility of the man they call the Prez, even though his actions are completely criminal, and his crimes totally impeachable.

Quoting McClellan basically limits our imagination and pulls us back into a debate about Bush, while Bush is so yesterday. This monster of a human being will continue to sulk and wreck havoc on our nation for the rest of his term, and nothing he does should surprise us any more. On the other hand, he has so impoverished our nation, financially, politically, spiritually that we better start talking about how to rebuild it NOW, rather than wait any longer.

In due time, his legacy is indeed waiting him in the hellhole he deserves, and in January 2009, a lawsuit should be filed on behalf of all citizens to take back what they have looted from us these past eight years, even if we may never recover the name of our country which they have sullied.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

See how they run
Posted by: Moore Hognutz on Jun 2, 2008 1:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Observing this campaign is a little like watching the slow growth of a cancer. Horrifying but still quite absorbing.

Will anyone read Scott McClellan's 'traitorous' book? Lots of Lefty Piranhas will scour it, no doubt, but not too many Lockstep GOP Baseniks, so what Scott says won't change many minds. Just my guess,I probably have it wrong. (I live in benighted North Carolina, where a lot of the hardworking white boys still think Obama's a muslim tatar. I have higher hopes for the accuity of hardworking white girls, who tend to keep their own council. We'll see, won't we.)

Captain McCain should certainly stay away from Sen. Obama. Any way possible. Particularly in debates, where he'll get fileted and pureed.

McCain would do well to follow the example of his Republican predecessor, A. Lincoln, who in 1860, upon winning the nomination, declined to make personal campaign appearances. He hunkered down in Springfield and waited for election day. His Republican friends campaigned for him, but Br'er Fox, he lay low.

That was a winning strategy in 1860, but I don't expect the present crop of Republicans to buy in. The Vision Thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: See how they run Posted by: leemiller38
» RE: See how they run Posted by: Moore Hognutz
Frank Rich, always
Posted by: Floresta on Jun 2, 2008 9:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on point and supports his well wrought prose with intelligence and purpose. I cracked up at the witness protection line. Hope that the Dems read this column as there are some real chewwy talking points therein. Poor John McCain, ha,ha!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not that worried
Posted by: willymack on Jun 2, 2008 11:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That mcnut will get enough actual votes to win the '08 election. I'm REALLY worried that the vote count will be falsified the way it was in 2000 & 2004, and if it is, that nobody will have the guts to call the rethugs on it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

if every juror prosecutor had to be IN LOVE with EVERY WITNESS...
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on Jun 4, 2008 8:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we'd never get a conviction for a LOT of crimes, right? the purpose of an investigation is to find the LOSE THREADS & START PULLING

Politics is the Art of controlling one's environment ~ Hunter S. Thompson

I'm reminded of the Jeff Farias Show interview with H.Candace Gorman who talked of visiting her clients in Guantánamo & her escorting 'guards' who began commenting to her about her personal life & family in Chicago

CONSIDER:
DO YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE Rove wouldn't have **made sure he could control whoever became Press Secretary** before the job was given out?

Think about it: Does KKKarl Rove FAIL TO PLAN?

You wanna know Ol' Scotty Boy was no saint when he applied... but there is no way in HELL that the Bushevik Administration doesn't have INSURANCE to enforce COMPLIANCE against critical functionaries...

Compliance is EVERYTHING that defines this Administration. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if McCain's
- post-incarceration debriefing &
- medical-psychiatric notes
aren't kept IN A MAN-SIZED SAFE along with other 'critically important' confidential files.


get the right goods on people & they're YOURS - consider that McClellan probably took time out to **ensure his protection** from the Administration & that THE LACK a WILL TO PRIVACY could have a LOT to do with what's going on in our societies.

The Thieves of Virtue: legislating morality undermines representative government. really, VICE is contextual:
* gender
* ethnicity
* age
* race

all pay a part in morals. but VICE, should never be *criminalized*, especially in a nation where PRIVACY has been abolished

Who is PERFECT ENOUGH to represent THE PEOPLE or a populist reform when there is neither privacy nor the Will to preserve privacy in society?
Who stands *for the People* when Money & Power exert corrosive controls to extend their oppression & corruption?


Nobody is immune to *vice* as VICE is about how ONE PERSON privately & personally determines *how to enjoy their own body*

Naked Truth: Civil Rights & CNN coverage of "F.B.I. biometric database - 'Server in the Sky'"
...& THAT is how THE MORAL MAJORITY ensured Money & Power will kill representative government for The Peoples who seek JUSTICE, Freedom & Human Rights

"There is no 'we' in corruption":
"Yell Fire!": Bush to freeze peace activist assets? - Executive Order to "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq"

NSA's Domestic Spying Grows As Agency Sweeps Up Data

"shock & awe-ful thing"s: "Taking Liberties" & forced drugging of Non-Americans on US flights

Cops & Former Secret Service Agents Ran Black Ops on Green Groups


┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄
BlueBerry Pick'n
ThisCanadian

"We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid

"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]