McClellan testifies before the House Judiciary Committee

From Salon:

Scott McClellan found himself in an unfamiliar position on Friday. There were reporters hanging on his words, and lights and cameras focused on him, but he was criticizing the Bush administration, not defending it.

McClellan, the former White House press secretary, came back to national attention recently when the contents of his tell-all book, “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception,” leaked, showing he’d become a strong critic of the Bush administration since he left it in 2006. And because of those criticisms, the House Judiciary Committee called him to testify to see if he could shed any light on certain subjects, especially the leak of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame. read more

McClellan before the House Judiciary Committee:

Bruce Fein discusses the implications on The Real News:

What We Know About Iraq From the People Who Launched the War

Now that Scott McClellan – a member of the Bush inner circle dating back to Texas days – has come out of the closet, it becomes increasingly unimaginable how any of the true-believers can continue to truly believe. But they do.

One wonders what it would take to dissuade these folks from their faith-based politics and the belief that the war in Iraq was justified. Will they need Laura Bush to actually turn on her husband? What if George’s pastor came out and divulged that the president had broken down and confessed all, begging the lord’s forgiveness?

It’s unlikely even those would be sufficient. And anyhow, the White House would go into its standard defensive posture that it employs whenever this happens, describing the truth-teller as “sad”, lamenting his obvious psychological pathology without of course coming out and saying quite that, wondering aloud why he’s never spoken out before. Indeed, it’s a wonder that McClellan wasn’t better prepared for this completely scripted response to his revelations, especially as he had used it himself against Richard Clarke, Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame.

Anyhow, all the true believers watching Fox will continue to truly believe. As the mayhem of the Bush years dwindles into numbed, robotic destruction and the tragedy of once noble national aspirations not only ruined but now also forgotten, it becomes ever more painfully obvious why these folks cannot let go, no matter how compelling nor how broad the growing mountain of evidence.

They are simply frightened to death. Frightened of bad people, frightened of brown people, frightened of terrorist threats blown ridiculously out of proportion, frightened of existential meaningless, frightened of cosmic insignificance. And now, to that weighty pile, must be added this: They are so frightened of their own complicity in bringing death, disaster, destruction and ungodly sorrow to Iraq that they can now only resort to astonishing levels of self-delusion to maintain their sanity. At this point, I almost don’t blame them anymore. They were so lazy, so stupid, so callow, so mean-spirited, so prejudiced that they bought into a crime of epic (and epochal) proportions and can no longer imaginably bear taking responsibility for the damage they’ve produced. And yet, people continue to suffer and die. Every day spent still supporting the war out of fear or laziness or stupidity or any of the rest is another day’s additional responsibility, another oil tanker of blood poured on hands long ago soaked to the bone.

And that responsibility is grave indeed. We don’t know (because the White House doesn’t want us to know) how many Iraqis have perished for Mr. Bush’s Folly, but the best estimates are over one million. We know that almost five million have been turned into refugees. Combined, that is over one-fifth of this country’s population. We know that over 4,000 Americans have been sacrificed, with tens of thousands gravely wounded and uncounted more tens of thousands psychologically traumatized. We know that our country’s reputation has been shattered, and that we’ve spent our children’s future livelihoods to pay for it by borrowing from them, without even asking for the money. That is a very large load to bear, so now people are compounding their original sin with additional ones, because they are so frightened of what they’ve caused that they’d rather continue causing more of the same than confront their responsibility, even when a Scott McClellan comes along and sticks it in their face.

The truth is, though, we never needed McClellan’s revelations to begin with. Just a bit of simple logic, combined with even a small, half-filled pail of basic factual information would have rendered the war rationale absurd from the beginning, well before an invasion morphed into an occupation, which morphed then into a debacle. Saddam’s Iraq was no threat to anybody in 2003. I mean, how threatening can a guy be who has already lost control of two-thirds of his own airspace, while his citizens are dying of malnutrition by the hundreds of thousands from internationally-imposed sanctions? How scary can a country be, when it has neither attacked yours, nor threatened to? Whatever happened to the logic of deterrence, a mechanism that prevented an infinitely more powerful Soviet Union from attacking the US through forty years of cold war? Why was Saddam bad when he attacked his neighbors in Kuwait, but not when he did the same thing to Iran, with American support and encouragement? Why was he considered evil for using chemical weapons when we wanted to go to war against him, but not when he actually was doing it, during which time the very same people in the US government protected him from international rebuke? If we knew where the WMD were, why didn’t we just tell the inspectors where to look? Why was Iraq such a threat that the inspectors couldn’t be allowed to finish their work, which would have required only a month or two more time? If Saddam was already so threatening, wouldn’t invading his country be just the thing to trigger an attack by him, using his WMD? Weren’t we supposed to be fighting the people who did 9/11, not a country that had nothing whatever to do with that? Why was Iraq all of a sudden such an immediate and urgent threat in March of 2003, when it hadn’t been less than a year earlier? Why did nearly the whole rest of the world condemn this war of choice?

read more | digg story

McCain Commits To Ongoing War – This Should Commit Him to Election Defeat

Does John McCain have a chance?

Now with the backing of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and money and advice from Karl Rove, one would certainly believe this seals the deal for his defeat. Bush’s low popularity ratings, administrative avoidance of the media, and flurry of additional Constitutional defying acts, one would consider the Cheney – Bush team to be the least desired of endorsements. McCain would like to press on with Bush’s illegal war that was based on dishonesty. The facts surrounding the war have clearly shown that. In light of this, McCain’s judgment and integrity is clearly questionable. From McCain on the issues:

• I would much rather lose a campaign than lose a war. (Oct 2007) Exactly what is winning or losing the war? Dick Cheney has already said the a war in Iraq could not be won.
• Stategy in Iraq: defeat al-Qaeda; limit Iran’s influence. (Sep 2007) But Cheney said al Qaeda was never in Iraq.
• Iraq is now the central front in the war against al-Qaeda. (Sep 2007)
• Americans want to win; bin Laden thinks he’s winning now. (Sep 2007)
• Democrats proposing failure in Iraq by withdrawing. (Sep 2007) Does failure mean not getting their oil for private companies?
• Reducing military presence has never in history won a war. (Sep 2007) An Iraqi quagmire?
• Bring troops home the right way: home with honor. (Sep 2007) The world resents our nose in other countries. Where’s the honor?
• Surge is working; let it continue until it succeeds. (Sep 2007) Exactly what part of the objectives are being met?
• Support the surge even if benchmarks are not met. (Aug 2007) Stay there no mater what happens? And for what reason?
• Did not read NIE before war vote, but was fully briefed. (Jun 2007) What wasn’t it fully read?
• If new strategy not working by Sept., we still must succeed. (Jun 2007)
• Willing to be last man standing for US involvement in Iraq. (May 2007) Judgment?
• Consequences of failure: regional chaos & we must come back. (May 2007)
• In hindsight, Iraq invasion was still justified. (May 2007) Based on what?
• Timetable would be catastrophe, even if Iraq wants it. (May 2007) Didn’t they say they didn’t want it?
• Advocated leaving Somalia, but no comparison to Iraq. (May 2007)
• War has been mismanaged, but we are now on the right track. (May 2007)
• War in Iraq has not gone well: dire but not hopeless. (Mar 2007)
• Al Qaeda may take over Iraqi oilwells. (Mar 2007)
• Prefers more troops for surge, but 20,000 is sufficient. (Jan 2007)
• Bush now has the right strategy, and it’s our last chance. (Jan 2007)
• Generals advising “no more troops” was a failed policy. (Jan 2007)
• If we leave Iraq, terrorists will follow us home. (Jan 2007)
• Send in a heavy wave of troops to Iraq to establish order. (Nov 2006)
• Looting, terrorism in Iraq a result of US mistakes. (Sep 2004)
• The Iraqi war was necessary after years of failed diplomacy. (Aug 2004)
• Saddam would have acquired terrible weapons again. (Aug 2004)
• The Iraqi war was necessary, achievable and noble. (Aug 2004) Noble?
• The cause of the Iraqi war was just. (Apr 2004)

But didn’t the government present bin Laden as the culprit of 9/11? Where ever did Iraq come from and why was it targeted before 9/11? Invasion and post invasion plans were a disaster, yet McCain voted for them.
The current administration finds waterboarding acceptable, and defends it’s use. McCain states that:

• Waterboarding is torture; we’re not going to torture people. (Nov 2007)
• Waterboarding is torture; & as A.G., Mukasey will declare it. (Nov 2007)
• Torture supported only by people without military experience. (Sep 2007)
• Torture is ineffective as interrogation & for world opinion. (May 2007)
• Close Guantanamo Bay prison; announce no-torture policy. (Apr 2007)
• Torture has never worked throughout history. (Apr 2007)
• Hiding torture is wrong, and harms US credibility abroad. (Dec 2007)

Yet after proclaimed years of torture, McCain follows the current administration with 90% of his votes. Torture is illegal, it defies an agreement that this nation signed, and it compromises the safety of our soldiers around the world.

It’s really time to get Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, and all of the other rif-raf that has been hanging around the White House since Nixon and Ford out. Certainly a vote for McCain would continue the same flavor, and increase in government size and spending. Hopefully the incompetence and dishonesty of his endorsers will seal his defeat.

Karl Rove Speaking Again! Delete

Does Karl Rove actually think we care what he has to say! My gosh. Rove, under suspicion for numerous lies and creator of  fabrications to bring this nation to an unnecessary war, co-author of “pre-emptive strike”, outs a government agent working for our intelligence community (although he was never charged), is speaking out against a democratic candidate, Obama.

Rove is the last individual on the planet that should provide commentary on anyone. The Wall Street Journal didn’t even dare to offer a comment section, can you imagine the comments folks would want to leave. Just let him blow hot air and hope the government gets off their bottoms and charges him for his offenses against the American people and our brave military individuals that have lost their lives.

I’m sorry , I can’t even reference the article, it’s just beyond belief. Rove, the individual that was hired and allowed to speak by Newsweek, Wall Street Journal, among other mainstream media rags, is the reason I have cancelled so many subsciptions and wrote the corporate offices to tell them exactly why. I can’t believe this man did not have charges brought against him, but then in the Bush adminstration, dishonesty seems to be heralded as “patriotism”.

My only hope is that Cheney will face impeachment hearings, and Rove will go down the tube with him.

That’s all that can be said about his presence in government and media.

Karl Rove Finally Found A Publisher

Karl Rove’s memoirs will be published by Threshold Editions, the conservative-minded imprint of Simon & Schuster’s Pocket Books overseen by GOP strategist Mary Matalin reports the New York Observer.

I guess there were problems finding a publisher.

The idea of his memoirs curiously reminds me of OJ’s “If I Did It”.

Like “If I Did It”, it should be untouchable except as a source of revenue for families affected by the loss of loved ones in Iraq, as the Goldmans received from O.J.’s book.