Scott McClellan’s revelations about his time as White House press secretary for George W. Bush are causing an international uproar. For John McCain, this means to keep as much distance as possible between himself and the president.
Scott McClellan claims that the invasion of Iraq was a “serious strategic blunder” and a “grave mistake”. In his book “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception”, which was published last Wednesday, Scott describes the contrived “political propaganda campaign” prior to the latest Iraq war that was intended to “manipulate the sources of the pubic opinion”. Apparently, the government had already decided on the war more than a year in advance.
According to McClellan, this “conspiracy” had been initiated by a small number of people tightly connected to President Bush, in particular Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defense Minister Donald Rumsfeld, and former advisor Karl Rove. “I still like and admire President Bush”, McClellan writes in an affectionate tone, but simultaneously criticizes the “lack of intellectual curiosity and his detrimental resistance to reflection.”
Washington is shocked. Not so much about the revelations themselves – since they were already known in one form or the other – but about the author who published them. After all, Scott McClellan was known as one of Bush’s most loyal supporters. He was devoted to the point where he quickly became the target of much ridicule during his almost three years in office.
Scott McClellan made history as one of the worst U.S. press secretaries. Since his assumption of office in July of 2003, he was regarded as a “popular punching bag” (Huffington Post), as someone who always took in with a “cherubic smile” (Time), but never dished out. Because of the dark circles around his eyes, journalists internally called him “Panda”.
The famous beads of sweat on his forehead existed for a reason: Although McClellan had already worked for Bush when he was still Governor of Texas, he stayed an outsider with little influence in Washington. The strategy for the media was developed by the Counselor to the President Dan Bartlett – and the press secretary had no other choice than to meekly announce what he had been handed to. Rich Galen, Republican strategist and consultant, states that “reporters were frustrated because they knew McClellan never knew more than what he was saying.”
Therefore, it is not surprising that many critics quickly label this most recent book a personal revenge. “Scott, we know now, is disgruntled about his experience at the White House”, says current White House press secretary Dana Perino. Ari Fleischer, McClellan’s predecessor, states that “this is not the Scott we knew.” Instead, he believes that the editors of the publishing house might have been responsible for the harsh words. “If Scott had such deep misgivings, he should not have accepted the press secretary position as a matter of principle”.
Arianna Huffington, the publisher of the online newspaper Huffington Post, calls Mcclellan’s revelations “interesting, but about five years too late”. She additionally wonders: “”How many times are we going to have a key Bush administration official try to wash the blood off his hands by writing a come-clean book?”.
The book is also of major political importance to John McCain. He will certainly leave it up to his party, the Republicans, to determine why such a prominent Bush loyalist so suddenly and publically turned his back on his political beliefs. However, with the spot light once again illuminating the inglorious past of the American President, McCain is now stuck between a rock and a hard place: He cannot do with or without Bush.
After all, the president is an experienced and effective donation collector, who still has a lot of influence on the traditional Republican Party base. Given the enormous financial advantage of the Democrats, John McCain cannot afford to completely forgo Bush.
At the beginning of this week, and for the first time in three months, George Bush appeared at several fundraising events for McCain. They could not found together in any of the pictures, however. Also, journalists were not allowed to join the events. “No cameras, no reporters. And we all know why”, Barack Obama commented whimsically.
Despite some serious disagreements regarding climate change, proliferation of nuclear weapons, and immigration policies, McCain’s political beliefs overlap with those of Bush concerning the main issues of the current election: Iraq and economy. But as the shadow of an unpopular president, his chances are very small.
And this is exactly what the supporters of the Democrats are gleefully taking advantage of. This past Tuesday, for example, the leftist organization MoveOn introduced a new advertising spot about the “identical cousins’ in the Patty Duke Show, a teen sitcom from the 1960s. Highlighted with pictures of Bush and McCain, the catchy original soundtrack sounds:” They laugh alike, they walk alike, at times they even talk alike.”
Not Without Bush The Scapegoat
Scott McClellan’s revelations about his time as White House press secretary for George W. Bush are causing an international uproar. For John McCain, this means to keep as much distance as possible between himself and the president.
Scott McClellan claims that the invasion of Iraq was a “serious strategic blunder” and a “grave mistake”. In his book “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception”, which was published last Wednesday, Scott describes the contrived “political propaganda campaign” prior to the latest Iraq war that was intended to “manipulate the sources of the pubic opinion”. Apparently, the government had already decided on the war more than a year in advance.
According to McClellan, this “conspiracy” had been initiated by a small number of people tightly connected to President Bush, in particular Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defense Minister Donald Rumsfeld, and former advisor Karl Rove. “I still like and admire President Bush”, McClellan writes in an affectionate tone, but simultaneously criticizes the “lack of intellectual curiosity and his detrimental resistance to reflection.”
Washington is shocked. Not so much about the revelations themselves – since they were already known in one form or the other – but about the author who published them. After all, Scott McClellan was known as one of Bush’s most loyal supporters. He was devoted to the point where he quickly became the target of much ridicule during his almost three years in office.
Scott McClellan made history as one of the worst U.S. press secretaries. Since his assumption of office in July of 2003, he was regarded as a “popular punching bag” (Huffington Post), as someone who always took in with a “cherubic smile” (Time), but never dished out. Because of the dark circles around his eyes, journalists internally called him “Panda”.
The famous beads of sweat on his forehead existed for a reason: Although McClellan had already worked for Bush when he was still Governor of Texas, he stayed an outsider with little influence in Washington. The strategy for the media was developed by the Counselor to the President Dan Bartlett – and the press secretary had no other choice than to meekly announce what he had been handed to. Rich Galen, Republican strategist and consultant, states that “reporters were frustrated because they knew McClellan never knew more than what he was saying.”
Therefore, it is not surprising that many critics quickly label this most recent book a personal revenge. “Scott, we know now, is disgruntled about his experience at the White House”, says current White House press secretary Dana Perino. Ari Fleischer, McClellan’s predecessor, states that “this is not the Scott we knew.” Instead, he believes that the editors of the publishing house might have been responsible for the harsh words. “If Scott had such deep misgivings, he should not have accepted the press secretary position as a matter of principle”.
Arianna Huffington, the publisher of the online newspaper Huffington Post, calls McClellan’s revelations “interesting, but about five years too late”. She additionally wonders: “”How many times are we going to have a key Bush administration official try to wash the blood off his hands by writing a come-clean book?”.
The book is also of major political importance to John McCain. He will certainly leave it up to his party, the Republicans, to determine why such a prominent Bush loyalist so suddenly and publically turned his back on his political beliefs. However, with the spot light once again illuminating the inglorious past of the American President, McCain is now stuck between a rock and a hard place: He cannot do with or without Bush.
After all, the president is an experienced and effective donation collector, who still has a lot of influence on the traditional Republican Party base. Given the enormous financial advantage of the Democrats, John McCain cannot afford to completely forgo Bush.
At the beginning of this week, and for the first time in three months, George Bush appeared at several fundraising events for McCain. They could not found together in any of the pictures, however. Also, journalists were not allowed to join the events. “No cameras, no reporters. And we all know why”, Barack Obama commented whimsically.
Despite some serious disagreements regarding climate change, proliferation of nuclear weapons, and immigration policies, McCain’s political beliefs overlap with those of Bush concerning the main issues of the current election: Iraq and economy. But as the shadow of an unpopular president, his chances are very small.
And this is exactly what the supporters of the Democrats are gleefully taking advantage of. This past Tuesday, for example, the leftist organization MoveOn introduced a new advertising spot about the “identical cousins’ in the Patty Duke Show, a teen sitcom from the 1960s. Highlighted with pictures of Bush and McCain, the catchy original soundtrack sounds:” They laugh alike, they walk alike, at times they even talk alike.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.