Scott McClellan is he a liar to?

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Since I am the problem, bringing this country to it's knees by supporting OUR President, OUR troops and by wanting America to win the war in Iraq, I might just respectfully retire from this forum. I will leave you anti-America, Bush-bashing liberals to yourselves.

To answer your question Chadman, I was too young to give a darn about politics when Carter was in office but I did support Clinton when he was my President especially when military action had to be taken. I did not agree with all of his policies but I did respect his office even if he disgraced it by his own actions. Just because my President is a Democrat, I would never hope for bad things to happen to America so a Republican might be voted into the White House the next time around. Wish I could say the same about the left.

Of course my way of thinking is what's wrong with this country. Just can not bring myself to call the President of the United States the Anti-Christ, Hitler, an idiot, etc.; can not hope for the worst in Iraq and can not believe that some in this country say these things and feel this way. Guess Barack Hussein is our best choice for President because then and only then will the liberals here and in the media support OUR country. Again, I apologize for wanting my country to be victorious in Iraq and for respecting the office of the President. Might not have to put up with me much longer.:shrug:

You really miss the whole point don't you. We all want success in Iraq. But guess what....it ain't happening!!!!! We are going bankrupt. We can all want to win all we want but it ain't happening. Cut our loses. Save some lives. You have a problem with that? We stayed in 4 Vietnam too long. We could have saved 20,000 American lives if we pulled out when Nixon took office instead of when we did. Not only that but we would of had the same results. Learn from history. There is nothing to gain in Iraq. Except for the contractors.
 
Last edited:

Double Two

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 18, 2001
33,802
629
113
61
Pelham, Alabama USA
You really miss the whole point don't you. We all want success in Iraq. But guess what....it ain't happening!!!!! We are going bankrupt. We can all want to win all we want but it ain't happening. Cut our loses. Save some lives. You have a problem with that? We stayed in 4 Vietnam too long. We could have saved 20,000 American lives if we pulled out when Nixon took office instead of when we did. Not only that but we would of had the same results. Learn from history. There is nothing to gain in Iraq. Except for the contractors.

Now who is missing the point SteveD? Granted our successes in Iraq have been modest, but to cut and run before we have a chance at victory would not save lives. Yes it would obviously save American lives but as you say we must learn fom history. You talk about Vietnam, well my friend the millions that were tortured or killed as a result of our departure there will be nothing compared to what would happen in Iraq. There is something to be gained by winning the war, a free democracy in the middle east would show them and the world what America is all about. Of course the America most liberals want seems similar to our socialist allies France & Germany:rolleyes:the to countries that cause the most problems in the last century. Like you said StevieD, we MUST learn from history.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Now who is missing the point SteveD? Granted our successes in Iraq have been modest, but to cut and run before we have a chance at victory would not save lives. Yes it would obviously save American lives but as you say we must learn fom history. You talk about Vietnam, well my friend the millions that were tortured or killed as a result of our departure there will be nothing compared to what would happen in Iraq. There is something to be gained by winning the war, a free democracy in the middle east would show them and the world what America is all about. Of course the America most liberals want seems similar to our socialist allies France & Germany:rolleyes:the to countries that cause the most problems in the last century. Like you said StevieD, we MUST learn from history.
The point is we stayed and left and we had the same results. Now, who is telling you there will be the massacre? The same guys who said we would be in and out in 60 days and the thing would pay for itself?
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Of course the America most liberals want seems similar to our socialist allies France & Germany:rolleyes:the to countries that cause the most problems in the last century. Like you said StevieD, we MUST learn from history.

:142smilie :142smilie :142smilie
 

The Judge

Pura Vida!
Forum Member
Aug 5, 2004
4,909
29
0
SJO
No official White House response yet but here are the top-ten attacks on McClellan that you are likely to hear from White House officials, ex-officials and their Fox allies:

1. He's a disgruntled ex-employee.
2. He was never close to the President.
3. We're shocked, shocked that Scott thought these negative thoughts. He never said anything about his concerns to us at the time.
4. He became too close to the liberal reporters he worked with.
5. Karl Rove thought that Scott was incompetent and he's getting his revenge in this book.
6. He wasn't at many of the meetings he described and he got key facts wrong.
7. He's after a quick buck and he knew that he'd make more money (and more headlines) if he publicly broke from Bush.
8. He's an opportunist. True loyalists never kiss and tell.
9. This is not the Scott we thought we knew. Something must have happened in his personal life. He's channeling the liberal bloggers now.
10. It's not even good fiction. It's just bad writing. Don't waste your time or money.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
No official White House response yet but here are the top-ten attacks on McClellan that you are likely to hear from White House officials, ex-officials and their Fox allies:

1. He's a disgruntled ex-employee.
2. He was never close to the President.
3. We're shocked, shocked that Scott thought these negative thoughts. He never said anything about his concerns to us at the time.
4. He became too close to the liberal reporters he worked with.
5. Karl Rove thought that Scott was incompetent and he's getting his revenge in this book.
6. He wasn't at many of the meetings he described and he got key facts wrong.
7. He's after a quick buck and he knew that he'd make more money (and more headlines) if he publicly broke from Bush.
8. He's an opportunist. True loyalists never kiss and tell.
9. This is not the Scott we thought we knew. Something must have happened in his personal life. He's channeling the liberal bloggers now.
10. It's not even good fiction. It's just bad writing. Don't waste your time or money.

1,2,3 and 8 are already out there.

Won't be long for the other ones.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Yeh its damage control

No one better at it that Karl Rove.

Hillary says Rove thinks she can win :142smilie
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
Rove is going around saying Scotty M is committing treason. :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: This fuker needs to get some mirrors in his house. Scotty telling the truth and Rove outing a CIA agent. :shrug:
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
..........................................................

He is better at damage control that you are at trying to make a point.

I try to dumb them down Scotty. Do you want me to dip to the level in which a three year old could understand? Im sitting at five now since Gary said we have become a nation of five year olds. I think that was rotten of Gary to say such a thing. He insulted every five year old in the country.
 
Last edited:

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
This is precious. David Gregory on Hardball saying he doesn't agree with Scott M. He feels the press did it's job and did not contribute to the build up of Iraq. The same David Gregory, who took part in the staged press conference where Bush got screwed up and gave it away. The same David Gregory who danced with Cheney while we are at war. This is the danger. Guys like this are the talking heads. We are in this pretty deep.
 

WhatsHisNuts

Woke
Forum Member
Aug 29, 2006
28,079
1,362
113
50
Earth
www.ffrf.org
I can't wait to see how this grease fire plays out. Faux News has already had Rove on for his "thoughts".

If you need me, I'll be at amazon.com looking for my next book buy.
 

JCDunkDogs

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 5, 2002
956
5
0
L.A. Area
This is the danger. Guys like this are the talking heads. We are in this pretty deep.

Yes. David Gregory appears to be nothing more than a talking head, without a brain to process any of the information. :scared

He even admitted on msnbc last night that he got criticism from his wife about his job performance in 2003. (This makes great pillow talk, right?). According to David, wifey wasn't happy about what she called his abandonment of journalistic integrity during the media fervor of patriotism in the run-up to the Iraq invasion.

He disagrees with his wife, and said that he is sticking by his position. (Can you imagine that conversation? But Honey, blind patriotism and warmongering is good for us). He gave no further explanation on MSNBC.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Reb's are confused about Scotty. Fox news defends all the crooks in WH. It's interesting how they have answers at Fox but don't ask Scotty to come on. I guess we won't have Bush with arms around Scott telling him how good he is.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top