On Sunday’s Reliable Sources, CNN host Howard Kurtz ended the Scott McClellan analysis segment of his show with his own two cents: "For McClellan to turn on Bush is clearly a ticket for him to be embraced by the media. I watched all the interviews and I've read all the interviews. He's not fully been able to answer these questions. Why didn't he speak up before even in private? Why didn't he resign if he was so troubled by the questions? And is he doing this for money?"
Former White House speechwriter David Frum, whose own Bush memoir was fairly supportive and hence was largely ignored by the media, let loose on McClellan: "One of the things that President Bush, one of the great failures as a manager is he put loyalty ahead of competence. And Scott McClellan is proof positive. He had no business being press secretary. He was awful at the job. It was painful to watch him. He got the job because he was somebody's deputy. And one of the way the Bush administration works is they promote the deputy then the deputy of the deputy of the deputy and then the deputy of the deputy."
Kurtz turned to Joe Lockhart, who was press secretary late in the Clinton administration: "Is it understandable that Dana Perino and Karl Rove and Ari Fleischer would rip this guy who they thought was a friend? Clinton loyalists didn't like the book that George Stephanopoulos wrote in the middle of Clinton's administration."
Lockhart claimed: "I mean it's become part of the White House warfare playbook. Which is when you don't like the facts are out there, assassinate the character." He claimed McClellan was unquestionably correct in his Bush-bashing and even suggested no one is disagreeing with the book’s claims: "There is nobody saying he's wrong on this point or he is wrong on that point which means he's right."
This isn't true at all. The White House strenuously objected to McClellan claiming the White House was conducting a campaign of propaganda and lies in the leadup to war. Conservatives have aggressively objected to the idea that the press was somehow a Bush-adoring chorus before the war.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"Embraced by the
June 1, 2008 - 16:53 ET by Blazer"Embraced by the media" probably, but I'm sure the prospect of making a few million on his book and speaking engagements may have had a little something to do with it also.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Concur: Interesting if
June 1, 2008 - 17:52 ET by BDConcur:
Interesting if you ponder the similarities between Scotty M and Benedict Arnold. Both changed sides for increased wealth and position coupled with a sense that they were being handled poorly by their former comrades.
If we use the Benedict Arnold scenario and apply it to Scott M, you will find:
BDS
June 1, 2008 - 17:01 ET by ThatDudeWas this not a primary reason as to why he released the book? Any Bush bashing is widely praised by the msm, and even more so if it's coming from someone they can falsely claim was in Bush's inner circle. I see nothing here except for the man trying to gain money, influence, and hurt the reps. in the coming election. That R by McCain's name is the only thing hurting him when it comes to BDS.
Lockhart's a Hack
June 1, 2008 - 17:40 ET by Del DolemonteHe was almost as Slick as Willie himself.
Yes
June 1, 2008 - 17:45 ET by jaywlalways reminded me of a used car salesman, a real slimeball.
Don't bash me to hard, I once worked for one.
Joe Lockhart : Obnoxious Jerk
June 1, 2008 - 18:16 ET by AgentAmericanYou talk about flunky...this idiot was about as obnoxious as it gets. I couldn't stand this jerk to the point when I seen him, my stomach tied up in knots.
Drill ANWAR
Lockhart Logic
June 1, 2008 - 18:20 ET by Reaver"There is nobody saying he's wrong on this point or he is wrong on that point which means he's right."
Not hard to see how he qualified to be Bubba's press secretary.
Lockhart's...........
June 1, 2008 - 18:30 ET by zoro7957.........statement is typical Dem balderdash. "Right or wrong"? What about true or not true?
----
June 1, 2008 - 19:00 ET by dahliatravers"For McClellan to turn on Bush is clearly a ticket for him to be embraced by the media. I watched all the interviews and I've read all the interviews. He's not fully been able to answer these questions. Why didn't he speak up before even in private? Why didn't he resign if he was so troubled by the questions? And is he doing this for money?"
Great questions, Howard.
I must say, Kurtz asks all
June 1, 2008 - 19:54 ET by fitzfongI must say, Kurtz asks all the correct and intellectually honest questions in this segment. He certainly appears to be a fair journalist overall. Lockhart, on the other hand, is a dissembling jackass spin doctor totally worthy of the ethical vacuum he worked for.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
Actually, Scottie's
June 2, 2008 - 02:45 ET by CooltomActually, Scottie's ''conversion'' makes sense. Now, instead of 100% of the electorate thinking he is an idiot, now 50% find it convenient to forget his bumbling and proclaim him a man of great intellect. Guess which 50%.
I've tried several ways to
June 2, 2008 - 12:25 ET by fitzfongI've tried several ways to say the same thing, but this captures it. Well done.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan