Telling Tales
May 29, 2008 on 2:01 pm | In Main, Media |
Update 11 a.m. Friday: Now McClellan says the tone of the book (and the title) “evolved over time” — apparently under pressure from his publisher, who thought What Happened was boring.
* * * * * * *
SALISBURY TOWN GROVE — I have been absolutely amazed at the amount of attention Scott McClellan’s new book, What Happened, has received — although I suppose I should never underestimate the propensity of the news media to flood the zone with a hot story.
As I wrote this morning on Denis Horgan’s blog, the reax to these sorts of affairs is always so predictable. It’s ironic that the same people who hated McClellan and thought he was a liar are now praising him as a truth teller because he’s saying exactly what they want to hear. In fact, lots of lefties I’ve spoken to are swallowing this book whole, while many conservatives attack the messenger.
It’s sort of like these endless studies that come out about one thing or another. If the study confirms what we already believe, we say, “See, I told you so.” If we don’t like the study’s conclusions, we attack the methodology or the group that sponsored it.
McClellan was quite possibly the worst White House press secretary in my lifetime. I’d say he was the only Bush administration official more inarticulate than the president himself. He’s certainly entitled to write a tell-all book, but I would think someone with Denis’s level of sophistication would be a little more skeptical in assessing it.
Let’s face it, it’s not Swiftboating to point out that press secretaries in the Bush admin have been routinely left out of important discussions and that it’s questionable whether McC could have known all the things he claims. So, dear lefty friends, shouldn’t we be looking at What Happened with a critical eye? Why no, we can’t do that. It’s exactly what Bush, Cheney and Rove would want. Ergo, McC must be telling the truth.
As I said on Marshall and Mike this morning (click here to get podcast), I can understand that McC was torked off at Rove and Libby for sending him out to lie about their involvement in l’affaire Plame and perhaps he feels foolish now to have huffed and puffed about Saddam’s WMDs.
But is there really any need to write about Bush saying he couldn’t remember if he’d done coke because the parties he went to as a young man were so wild? That sort of thing just comes across as petty and score-settling. I think it even undermines McC’s credibility.
7 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
McClellan makes a lot of important allegations — the coke one is not amongst them. I disagree with you on his central position in the WH. He was in a position to know, and I daresay was plenty duplicitous. But you are right to be skeptical. What we need is confirmation from within the WH.
Comment by Peter Halle — May 29, 2008 #
Good observations about the knee-jerk reactions by both ends of the political spectrum. You do, however, reveal a bit of your own auto bias when you say you understand why McC was “torked off at Rove & Libby for sending him out to lie about their involvement in l’affaire Plame.” Where do you get off assuming that occured? It is that constant yearning to hang onto any possible dirt that will continue to justify your BDS, even in the face of facts proving this time the truth lies elsewhere.
The toughest lefty U.S. Attorney they could find spent years and millions of dollars investigating that silly waste of tax payer dollars and he knew from the beginning that the person who outed the useless dopey blond bomshell Plame long after she could be considered “undercover” was equally dopey Richard Armitage.
The whole thing was a trumped up wild-goose chase propaganda stunt by the money-grubbing, Democrat hacks Wilson & Plame. Disgraceful.
Totally agree McClellan was the worst, most pathetic White House Press Secretary ever. I always thought he was a weasel and wondered how long it would take for Bush to can him. Too long obviously.
This book smells very strange and I have to wonder if McClellan has, like Gore, become unstable and delusional because of his career impasse, if he allowed the book editors (George Soros’ publishing house)free hand with the final manuscript and failed to doublecheck what they did, or if it was simply a matter of greed on McClellan’s part.
Comment by Kathy Lauretano — May 29, 2008 #
Kathy,
Even someone with BDS knows a lousy press sec’y when he sees it.
You are correct that Armitage was Novak’s source for the infamous column that first outed Plame.
McClellan, however, announced at a press briefing in 2003 that Rove and Libby told him they had nothing to do with press leaks about Plame, only to find out that they had indeed spoken with members of the media about it after Armitage did. That is a fact, as John Dickerson notes here.
http://www.slate.com/id/2128820/
I don’t know about you, but if my boss told me to tell the press something she knew to be untrue, I’d be pretty pissed off about it. I’m not sure anyone would buy my book on it, though.
Comment by Terry — May 29, 2008 #
I think you’re onto something Kathy. McLellan and Al Gore. They’re ” delusional. ” Crazy bastards. Ship them off to the gulag. And herd into the same box car anyone else you disagree with.
I’m getting a little tired of glib folks branding those with whom they disagree as crazy. My guess is that those who resort to this are engaging in a little projective identification.
Comment by Terrence McCarthy — May 29, 2008 #
Hooray Terry!
Thank you for your reasoned observation.
Whatever happened to civility? Why can’t people have differt views, different opinions, different ideas?
No one is forced to accept someone else views…just be tolerant, and express your own views without calling people Marxists, etc….
Comment by Marshall Miles — May 30, 2008 #
One thing few seem to have picked up on the brouhaha following announcement of the book is McLellan’s actual role in the White House — his job description. The fact is that the guy was not a policy-maker, he was a public relations guy, a flack.
Flacks don’t make policy. They have no input to policy. The most input they are apt to have is how to enunciate the policy others make in such a way that it is more attractive to the working press.
It was interesting to see the Administration’s response. The consistent line they all used was “that just doesn’t sound like the “Scotty” I know” — frankly, that’s an excellent PR approach, and whoever recommended it deserves credit for a job capably done. This approach succeeds in being ad hominem by condescension — belittling the person (and thereby diminishing the credibility of the product) while appearing to be expressing a kindly, almost avuncular, concern. Nice!
I saw the publicity strategy break down only once — and I don’t recall which Administration person said it — but they asked “Why didn’t McClellan object at the time?”
That particular official went off-message; instead of dimishing the bringer of the bad news and thus trivializing the news itself, this official unrealistically elevated McClellan’s importance in the relative scheme of things, making the flack into something approaching a policy maker.
Comment by Geoff Brown — May 30, 2008 #
Geoff,
You always have something interesting to say. The admin response is indeed clever.
You’re correct that PR people do not make policy, but in order to be effective they must believe on some level in the people they work for.
I think that’s why my four-year stint in PR was ultimately a failure. No matter how lofty the mission of the organization, you are ultimately representing the leadership. And if that leadership is morally bankrupt, then there is no way you can go out there every day and sell the institution with a clear conscience, especially if they don’t want your candid advice. So I quit and I think McC should have done the same thing.
Hey, maybe I, too, will write a book about my experiences. Interested in some freelance editing?
Comment by Terry — May 30, 2008 #