Scott McClellan

Although today his book is being touted by left-wing reporters and pundits, his initial plans for the project show former White House press secretary Scott McClellan intended to take a much different approach, one that was more sympathetic to President Bush but also quite hard on the "liberal elites" of the Washington press corps and their "hostility" toward the administration.

Reading through McClellan's original book proposal, obtained by Politico.com, it is clear that before his editor Peter Osnos took the book on a sharp leftward turn, McClellan wanted to turn the tables on foes in the press gallery including far-left columnist Helen Thomas and NBC correspondent David Gregory.

"I came to know and respect those who were assigned to the White House beat. They are solid professionals, but rarely scrutinized or put under the microscope. I will take a look at notable personalities in the White House Briefing Room, including David Gregory and Helen Thomas. I anticipate an entire chapter about the former," McClellan writes in his proposal.

According to McClellan, America's elite journalists have a dramatic problem with political diversity which in turn leads them to skew the political debate in a leftward direction. The media are in a "constant state of denial" when it comes to admitting this.

I will look at what is behind the media hostility toward the President and his Administration, and how much of it is rooted in a liberal bias.

The public holds the national media in low esteem. I think there are several reasons why, and I intend to write about them in some detail while discussing ways the media could improve their image. It is more than just the perceived arrogance, cynicism, gotcha-journalism, and lack of accountability. The establishment media does not tend to reflect Main Street America, or spend enough time focusing on the issues that matter most to the general public, and too often sacrifice substance for process. They tend to reflect the liberal elites of New York and Washington that are part of the social circles in which they run, and it shows in their reporting. Yet, they live in a constant state of denial when it comes to acknowledging such an obvious fact.

Fairness is defined by the establishment media within the left-of-center boundaries they set. They defend their reporting as fair because both sides are covered. But, how fair can it be when it is within the context of the liberal slant of the reporting? And, while the reporting of the establishment media may be based on true statements and facts, is it an accurate picture of what is really happening?

The fact that McClellan's revised, Bush-bashing book is being so heavily promoted by the top media outlets is a testament to the veracity of McClellan's original thesis. It is also a validation of one of the right's biggest critiques of the Bush Administration--its loyalty fetish. Scott McClellan should never have been appointed to his position. He only obtained it because of his personal connections, not through his merit or affinity for conservative principles. That he turned on Bush is not exactly surprising.

Full text of McClellan proposal.

 I personally believe while there is lots of competition, Bush's hiring of  Scott McClellan as press secretary will go down as his worst blunder as President.

Just when you thought our do-nothing Democrat majority controlled congress couldn't possibly waste any more of Americas time and money on pointless exercises. In comes House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) stage left with the preposterous Idea of calling for congressional hearings on the already settled Valerie Plame leak case.

CBS News

"I find Mr. McClellan's revelations about attempts to cover up the Valerie Plame leak extremely troubling. Particularly disturbing is McClellan's assertion that he was specifically directed by Andy Card to 'vouch' for Scooter Libby after the investigation had begun, which, if true, could amount to obstruction of justice beyond that for which Mr. Libby has already been convicted,” said Conyers

 

 

"I believe this issue may require closer examination, so I have instructed my counsels to begin discussions with Mr. McClellan to determine whether a hearing is necessary and to secure his possible cooperation."

 

So let me get this straight, this Congress, armed with its 18.7% approval rating (RCP Average), may hold hearings to try and find new evidence on a case that the federal prosecutors investigative teams, the FBI, and a Grand Jury somehow missed??? Not to mention all of the "on the record" and "public" testimony from a completed trial that ended in a conviction (albeit on a bogus ancillary charge).

It's no secret that John Conyers, who's owned by lawyers and law firms and beholden to Soros and MoveOn, has been looking for any excuse to hold hearings that he hopes would lead to impeaching the President and Vice President but this is a ridiculous wast of time and money. 

This my friends is why it is so important for Republicans/Conservatives to regain control of congress and why whether you're voting for McCain or not to vote the down ticket!      

For more on Conyers see Liberalscum

Cross posted from The Minority Report

Today, I read the best analysis of the McClellan betrayal by C. Edmund Wright,  where he states that  Bush betrayed us by not hiring the best person for the job.   

Afterall, in the real world, folks who are elevated beyond their capabilities do one thing predictablly when they start to slip in stature; they sell whoever and whatever down the river to maintain their status, because they surely cannot do it on their own talent. McClellan may no longer be welcome in the Oval Office, but he's a star in Keith Olbermann's green room.

For eight years, Bush recycled Texas talent instead of casting the net out wide and recruiting the best conservative person for the job. By the time Scott  McClellan took over, Bush was at the bottom of the Texas talent pool. This has been the greatest disappointment  -- our great world leader turned the Oval office into a college fraternity by only trusting his close clan of Texans or the Bush family. Just look at the irrational choice of selecting Harriet Miers as a candidate to serve on the Supreme Court!

As a keen observer, I believe Bush's Texas loyalty strangled innovation, fresh ideas and new approaches. Rarely, would the Bush administration take time to listen to GOP congressional leaders, leaders of key constituencies or conservatives around the country.  The motto seemed to be Texas knows best.

Management 101 for any company is to hire the best and the brightest. Instead, Bush created an insular community by recycling old ideas and using the same approaches to the same problems....  I hope McCain and others in the GOP will be mindful that loyalty is good, but not at the cost of talent.

Does anyone remember the connection between Scott McClellan and Bush's approval numbers?

On July 6, 2003, Joe Wilson's op-ed appeared in the New York Times, where he claimed that something G. W. Bush had said months before wasn't true.  Putting aside the question of the validity of Wilson's statements, the timing was interesting.

Over the next week, Ari Fleisher and Condoleeza Rice did an admirable job of explaining the situation and dealing with the incessant questions from the White House press corps.

On July 15, 2003, Scott McClellan took over as White House Press Secretary and began leading the press briefings.  Here's a link to his first press briefing.  Personally, I think it showed his incompetence.  That was the beginning of the end of Bush's high approval ratings.

Here's a list of links to White House press briefings.  Peruse them for yourself and see if McClellan did a competent job as Press Secy.  My personal opinion, he was a victim of Murphy's Law who got the position because Bush is loyal to the people who are loyal to him, even if they're not up to the job.  Consider the Harriet Myers SCOTUS nomination.

Here's a chart of Bush's approval ratings. Under McClellan's watch (July '03 to April '06) Bushes numbers dropped below pre-9/11 levels and below 50%, 40% and almost to 30%, and they basically stayed there.  The only time that the ratings climbed was when Saddam was captured.  Otherwise, it was in a steady decline the entire time he was press secretary.

The Bush administration has been widely criticized by conservatives for not selling a conservative agenda (or even the Bush agenda where it differed) to the public.   Scott McClellan was a big part of that failure.

He's no Ari Fleischer. Even Tony Snow couldn't reverse the trend.

His 'tell-all book'?  Considering the source, I won't bother reading it.  It's already being discredited by his co-workers.

[Cross-posted at 5views.com]