Comments on: "Beam me up" - Scotty

"Beam me up" - Scotty

mkultra — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:10:43 -0800

Scott McClellan resigns; Karl Rove sidelined. (NYT) The promised "shakeup" of the White House begins.

By: Baby_Balrog

Baby_Balrog — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:13:01 -0800

*pop* champagne?

By: spock

spock — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:13:09 -0800

Or it could be done like this with just a bit more effort: Scottie McClellan resigns and Rove leaves policy post. New White House Chief of Staff Bolten is housecleaning. McClellan replacement names floated: Fox News anchor Tony Snow and Dan Senor, a prominent former spokesman for the US Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority. Also, the Director of faith-based initiatives is leaving. Is this to stop the bleeding or is it a hemorrage? Meanwhile, "You're doing a great job, Rummy!" Yup. /newsfilter /usafilter

By: shnoz-gobblin

shnoz-gobblin — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:18:17 -0800

Remember when we had Ari Fleischer and everyone thought "Aw, Geez, this guy tapdances around every issue in front of him." and then we got Scott McClellan and everyone was all like, "Aw, Geez, this guy just lies and denies comment to every issue in front of him." What's it going to be like with Fox's Tony Snow?

By: bouncebounce

bouncebounce — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:19:11 -0800

A snowjob?

By: mkultra

mkultra — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:20:48 -0800

www.foxnews.gov?

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:21:50 -0800

Hilarious. I was just about to post this with the same thread title. Well, at least Scott won't have to face the wrath of Helen anymore. In truth, McClellan always seemed slightly out of his element, as Michael Wolff showed in his recent Vanity Fair profile. But he was a good soldier.

By: bhance

bhance — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:22:51 -0800

So, one puppet out, to be replaced by another., and millions of Jeff Gannons are suddenly dusting off their resumes. Doesn't seem like much to rejoice over.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:23:54 -0800

I'd feel bad for a worm like McClellan but he was the front man for this shameful circus called the Bush Regime for way too long to have any bit of sympathy for. I hope there's a future Fitzmas with an indictment for him as well. But maybe now he'll be able to get that oily forehead problem under control.

By: birdherder

birdherder — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:24:10 -0800

I will miss Scott and David Gregory's exchanges.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:24:35 -0800

So, they're not even bothering with a "to spend more time with his family" for Scott? "New challenges in the private sector?" Shit, how about "creative differences"?

By: jrb223

jrb223 — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:24:36 -0800

Huh. And right after I read that interesting VF article about him (McClellan) too. Guess I should start reading more articles about W.

By: TheGoldenOne

TheGoldenOne — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:25:11 -0800

Karl Rove sidelined? Hardly. The man is a machine. He can multi-task.

By: peacay

peacay — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:26:14 -0800

Thanks spock. Rove "sidelined"? Hm. I guess. But he's the political fixeur's political fixer. He's gunning it for the mid-terms. I tend to think (perhaps ignorantly) that he's not altogether the dangerous one in the administration anyway (unless of course you are running against his candidate). Newsfilter++.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:26:29 -0800

it'll be Senor i think--directly hiring a FOX guy defeats the purpose entirely, altho they lie well. This is certainly not a surprise to anyone i don't think--McClellan was way out of his league, and too sweaty and lumpy and hesitant to be a liar of Ari's quality. McClellan's now free to hit the gay bars again, and has more time for Gannon/Guckert, i guess ; >

By: shnoz-gobblin

shnoz-gobblin — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:27:25 -0800

You don't think he did it over remourse, do you? You know, torturing the truth for so long. Or did it just get so easy that he thought he could get some real money doing the same job for Exxon or Haliburton?

By: SirOmega

SirOmega — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:27:35 -0800

I'm only hoping Rove's removal from a policy position is a prelude to him being indicted on the Plame leak. Surely its better that he be demoted first so that they'll spin it as just a "peon" who was indicted and not someone as powerful as Rove really is.

By: shnoz-gobblin

shnoz-gobblin — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:29:21 -0800

Karl Rove simply has too much work on these 2006 and 2008 campaigns to be wasted on a lame duck much anymore.

By: mkultra

mkultra — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:29:53 -0800

Rove "sidelined"? Hm. I guess. Absolutely. The GOP is increasingly worried about losing control of Congress this year, and needs all the help it can get. Meanwhile, it's looking increasingly likely that Rove will get fingered (if not indicted) for his role in Plamegate, so the WH wants to keep him out of the public eye.

By: trey

trey — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:32:02 -0800

Those Gannon/Guckert jokes were tired the day they began.

By: shnoz-gobblin

shnoz-gobblin — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:33:43 -0800

"I thought he handled his assignment with class, integrity," the president said. "It's going to be hard to replace Scott, but nevertheless he made the decision and I accepted it. One of these days, he and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas and talking about the good old days."

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:35:28 -0800

Rove "sidelined"; Tony Soprano says, "It's just a little mom-and-pop waste management business."

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:37:35 -0800

The real joke was that Gannon/Guckert and Scott had a really tight little thing going there for a while.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:39:33 -0800

There's a big difference between "sidelined" and "pulled back out of the public eye a bit."

By: dios

dios — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:40:53 -0800

Those Gannon/Guckert jokes were tired the day they began. posted by trey at 9:32 AM CST on April 19 But... but... he was gay! And had an alias! Don't you understand what this means?????

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:41:38 -0800

How long until Rummy steps down? I suppose that's up to the Iraqis now.

By: carter

carter — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:41:43 -0800

everyone thought "Aw, Geez, this guy tapdances around every issue in front of him." That's pretty much a qualification for the job, Republican or Democrat. At least Ari could be funny and smart in his tapdancing. McClellan comes across as neither.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:42:17 -0800

I'm glad that Scott is gone. I never liked him. The average tenure for someone in his position is 2 years, and I'm glad his was up.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:42:40 -0800

"One of these days, he and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas and talking about the good old days." That's probably going to be a bit difficult considering all the radioactive fallout in the air.

By: pineapple

pineapple — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:44:14 -0800

"it's looking increasingly likely that Rove will get fingered (if not indicted) for his role in Plamegate, so the WH wants to keep him out of the public eye" Isn't Plamegate a non-starter? If Bush himself declassified the information, there's no crime. The "leak" ceases to be.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:44:16 -0800

Shnoz-gobblin, I interpret that to mean that Bush expects all these bobbleheaded yes men to continue blowing smoke up his butt for the rest of his life, even after he's been deposed from his throne. Bush is a man so severely in need of a reality check, I say we drop him, buck naked in downtown Baghdad. We can call it a fraternity prank and he'd probably go along with it.

By: jperkins

jperkins — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:44:36 -0800

Not by any means scientific, but I was heartened to see this poll on MSNBC. "Should the Senate open a Watergate-style investigation of President Bush's conduct in office?" With 93% of the respondendts agreeing with the statement that, "Yes, this administration has hidden and manipulated information at every turn. It must be called to account." YMMV.

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:45:05 -0800

I will miss Scott and David Gregory's exchanges. I hope Gregory keeps bashing heads, but I will not miss Scott's barely-making-an-effort dissembling.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:45:12 -0800

That's pretty much a qualification for the job, Republican or Democrat. At least Ari could be funny and smart in his tapdancing. McClellan comes across as neither. posted by carter at 9:41 AM CST on April 19 I agree completely. The whole point of the job is to only say what the President wants said and to try to control the news. And at that task, Clinton had the best. Joe Lockhart was the best press secretary in a long time. He was one of the best tap-dancers I have seen. Ari was never that good and Scott was even worse. Good ol' Joe. I miss him.

By: loquax

loquax — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:45:39 -0800

Anyone else gay? We'd better out them now. I'll start. I heard Karl Rove frequents gay clubs in Alexandria and calls himself Sally. Hillary Clinton and Cindy Sheehan have also been seen canodling on the banks of the Potomac under a full moon. A source told me so.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:47:13 -0800

pineapple, did you not notice it took them three years to come up with that "excuse"? I did.

By: crunchland

crunchland — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:48:26 -0800

Isn't Plamegate a non-starter? If Bush himself declassified the information, there's no crime. The "leak" ceases to be. It's all about the lying to investigators now. Ask Scooter.

By: wfrgms

wfrgms — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:48:48 -0800

Well, the good news is that McClellan can now slink back to Athens. Rumor has it he never felt at home in the DC gay night clubs anyway. Some advice for Scott: Take some time off buddy. Go dancing. Maybe call up your old friend Jeff Gannon – he can help get you back into the scene.

By: peacay

peacay — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:49:57 -0800

mkultra writes "[peacay]: {rove 'sidelined'? hm. i guess.} "Absolutely. The GOP is increasingly worried about losing control of Congress this year, and needs all the help it can get" I guess it's a question of viewpoint. See, taking over the political fixing so as to shore up Republican control in Washington until kingdom come can quite easily be read as "activation" rather than being "sidelined".

By: dios

dios — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:50:26 -0800

By: empath

empath — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:50:29 -0800

The President chuckled. "Well, you got a pretty face," he told the surprised Mr. Reid. He wasn't done. "You got a pretty face," he said again. "You're a good-looking guy. Better looking than my Scott anyway."

By: wfrgms

wfrgms — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:51:01 -0800

digaman: I have to second the Vanity Fair piece on McClellan. Savage. It's this verbal haplessness that has made Scott McClellan—a pleasant, low-wattage, old-before-his-time young fellow, with, at 38, a wife, no children, and "two dogs and four cats"—the living symbol of this White House's profound and, perhaps, mortal problem with language and meaning. McClellan himself, as though having some terrible social disability, has, standing miserably in the press briefing room every day, become a kick-me archetype. He's Piggy in Lord of the Flies: a living victim, whose reason for being is, apparently, to shoulder public ridicule and pain (or, come to think of it, he's Squealer from Animal Farm). He's the person nobody would ever choose to be.

By: rxrfrx

rxrfrx — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:51:52 -0800

I thought Ari had a knack for lying and was therefore pretty good at his job. Scotty liked to do hand-waving and dumb-excuses, which will never be as good as straight-up lying. When someone says "why did the president do X," you can't say "oh, I can't comment on that, 9/11." You gotta step right up and say "the president never did X."

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:52:16 -0800

But... but... he was gay! And had an alias! Don't you understand what this means????? Yes. It means he was very likely fucking someone in the White House Press Office to get unchecked access to the Press Corps on a near-daily basis; something that was a blatant security breach given it put him within feet of the President of the United States. Something that would actually be of journalistic interest, sex issue or not, to anyone who wasn't a kneejerk right-wing contrarian.

By: trey

trey — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:52:40 -0800

I find it really appalling that *snicker*snort*gay!!!*snicker* is an acceptable epithet to level at someone. I could not STAND Scott McClellan almost as much as I can't stand Bush, but honestly. Isn't that the equivalent of "That Scott guy is such a fag." I find it totally unacceptable. Additionally, how is it looking increasingly likely that Rove is going to get fingered/indicted? No one knows what's going on with the case. The court filings about Rove don't really tell us that much.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:53:06 -0800

Yep, wfrgms. "One of these days, [McClellan] and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas and talking about the good old days." -- Bush, this morning. I rather like that image -- seems more natural for both of them than their current positions. That's right, dios -- gay, an alias, and a GOP agenda! But without the agenda, Gannon/Guckert would have been just another lonely bottom trying to pass as a "military" top online. loquax, some of us gay people have a little thing about closeted gays who help this administration cynically exploit issues like same-sex marriage, threatening to amend the Constitution just to drive evangelicals to the polls for a single election. Call it a visceral loathing for Uncle Toms. I'm not saying that McClellan was gay. I'm just saying -- not every prostitute with faux-news credentials gets daily passes to White House press briefings. It would get so crowded in that stuff little room.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:53:47 -0800

All this celebration about what? Nothing has changed except a few names. The GOP is still hijacked. America is still hijacked. Bush is still an addict.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:54:21 -0800

Maybe they should have fired him for being gay. Maybe the White House has also adopted a totally awesome Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:54:42 -0800

"Mr. Bush praised Mr. McClellan, who he said "handled his assignment with class, integrity."" He sold bullshit and was brown up to his elbows, but he never once complained about the stink.

By: loquax

loquax — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:57:01 -0800

loquax, some of us gay people have a little thing about closeted gays who help this administration cynically exploit issues like same-sex marriage, threatening to amend the Constitution just to drive evangelicals to the polls for a single election. Call it a visceral loathing for Uncle Toms. Fair. Now if there was more to the "accusations" of him being gay than "anonymous sources" from Austin or whatever, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it. As it is, it looks horrible and petty.

By: wfrgms

wfrgms — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:57:44 -0800

Maybe they should have fired him for being gay. Between the gay-question-mark that is McClellan, Cheney's lesbian daughter (complete with same sex life-partner) and gay-operatives like Gannon (plus all the others we HAVEN'T heard about yet)... Not to mention the fact that Bush surrounds himself with unmarried spinster cheerleaders. This administration is practically one big alternative lifestyle showcase.

By: Toecutter

Toecutter — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:58:25 -0800

Sort of a reverse kill the messenger.

By: mkultra

mkultra — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:02:12 -0800

See, taking over the political fixing so as to shore up Republican control in Washington until kingdom come can quite easily be read as "activation" rather than being "sidelined" Sorry, I thought the implication of "sidelined from actual WH work" was clearer. He's effectively been reduced to a GOP employee on the WH payroll.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:03:54 -0800

klangklangston, Scottie tried to sell bullshit but really, was anyone buying? Was anyone fooled by Scottie's song and dance? He was bad at his job. And had a really shiny forehead that I found incredibly distracting. Kind of like Karl Rove's chin farm. I don't give a damn about his sexual orientation except as it pertains to giving a male prostitute inside information and access to the president.

By: leftcoastbob

leftcoastbob — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:04:44 -0800

I neither know nor care about the gay issue. All I know is that it's damned kinky that Scottie will have to have his nose surgically detached from Bush's butt before he leaves.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:07:10 -0800

As it is, it looks horrible and petty. To me, who's very sensitive to homophobia, it strikes me as the same level of "horrible" as dissing Scott for having "an oily forehead" or Cheney for being fat (I'm fat, too.) Sophomoric, certainly. Horrible? Horrible is telling lies that kill tens of thousands of people. I'm not saying Scott's lies are at that level -- he worked at the House of Pancakes, so he served up big steaming platters of flapjacks. But the chef...

By: graymouser

graymouser — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:07:41 -0800

By: rxrfrx

rxrfrx — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:10:16 -0800

a hypocritical club used against hypocrites I think it's more of a desire to "give them a taste of their own medicine" than actual hypocrisy.

By: wfrgms

wfrgms — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:10:59 -0800

spend so much time gleefully gay-bashing members of the same administration based on unfounded rumor? Because no one likes an Uncle Tom. Particularly one who has - in his own way - made the world a meaner place.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:12:13 -0800

gray, I doubt if Scott McClellan lived an openly happy married life with some theoretical gay spouse, many people here would be bashing him for being gay. (A scenario his boss has worked hard to make impossible.) It was the utterly bizarre spectacle of a sleazy whore with the barest credentials acting as a useful shill in White House press briefings, day after day after day, bashing Democrats, redirecting the conversation away from sticky questions, and so on, that has put the venom in these barbs. It's not garden-variety homophobia in most (if not all) cases.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:14:51 -0800

he worked at the House of Pancakes, so he served up big steaming platters of flapjacks. But the chef... posted by digaman Are we talking about Tutti Frutti Fresh and Fruity here?

By: ND¢

ND¢ — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:16:34 -0800

This may be totally unacceptable for a white straight male protestant to say, but what is it with, not only all the gay people, but also all the jewish people in the Bush administration? I mean this may just be my impression as a Southerner, but isn't the fundamental belief of all conservatives that they hate minorities? If you asked your average South Carolina republican what they think of gays or jews, the answer would be virtually the same: "They are different from me, they aren't from around here, they are what is wrong with this country". Yet people who hate minorities (republicans) support the bush administration, and minorities work for the people who hate minorities. Why is that? What is going on here? I apologize to all gay people and jewish people for talking about them. No disrespect intended.

By: pineapple

pineapple — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:17:11 -0800

fenriq: pineapple, did you not notice it took them three years to come up with that "excuse"? I did. Sure. Doesn't change the fact that Libby's testimony retroactively creates a get-out-of-jail-free card for everyone on Plame. Don't get me wrong, I'm heartened by what could be a public change of heart over calling out the administration... but I stopped getting my hopes up on "the American people wising up" about 17 months ago. I just don't see any connection between Rove giving away the public aspect of his policy work and trying to lay low to avoid indictment. He's far too valuable; the GOP will sacrifice all manner of lambs to protect him.

By: rxrfrx

rxrfrx — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:17:51 -0800

Jews built neoconservatism and then lept into bed with the bigots to get votes, that's what with all the Jewish people.

By: ND¢

ND¢ — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:18:33 -0800

Why?

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:21:05 -0800

Jews are necessary for the Rapture to occur. Then they will be annihilated. I can't imagine why anyone, even the most hardcore ideologue of either side, would want the job of press secretary. You go down in history as "the guy who lies for a living," even under presidents who don't have approval numbers above the 30's. You're basically a human shield. On a bad day, you deflect anger and criticism from the president to yourself. On a good day, you heap praise upon other people. But that's Washington--more whorish than Hollywood. (And I'm a Washington native who loves the city, but this is definitely one of its less charming sides.)

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:21:25 -0800

digaman, all I said was that his oily forehead was a constant distraction, as it was intended to be. That and he's never short of lube.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:21:40 -0800

what is it with, not only all the gay people, but also all the jewish people in the Bush administration? I mean this may just be my impression as a Southerner, but isn't the fundamental belief of all conservatives that they hate minorities? If you asked your average South Carolina republican what they think of gays or jews, the answer would be virtually the same: "They are different from me, they aren't from around here, they are what is wrong with this country". Yet people who hate minorities (republicans) support the bush administration, and minorities work for the people who hate minorities. Why is that? What is going on here? posted by ND¢ at 10:16 AM CST on April 19 Maybe your bullshit stereotypes are just that: bullshit stereotypes? And here I thought Republicans were the ones who needed scorn for their crass playing of identity politics.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:23:12 -0800

Clinton's Press Secretary Gives Free Pass to "DDD-Cup Dominatrix" Jennifer Bukakke, a reporter from a left-leaning blog called Back in Blue News, has been revealed to be a high-priced prostitute who advertised her considerable wares on online sex sites, it was revealed today. Bukakke, known for asking questions in White House press briefings like, "Is it true that Tom DeLay is just a shameless crook?" and "Do the GOP phone-jamming campaigns in the last election prove a pattern of Republicans trying to undermine American democracy?" has been stripped of her press credentials following her "outing" as a sex-worker on a website called RedState.org. White House spokesperson Joe Trotsky had no comment... I mean, just imagine how much fun certain people would have had with that.

By: loquax

loquax — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:24:20 -0800

Exactly how many Jewish people are in the Bush administration?

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:25:40 -0800

pineapple, how does Libby's indictment give everyone else a free pass? He didn't fall on his sword (like he'd been trained), he named Bush and Cheney as the original sources and then they had to change their story again to fit with the new reality. I don't see Libby's indictment as a free pass, I see Libby as the gateway indictment to getting some of the rest of the filthy pricks.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:33:54 -0800

I'm just glad to see conservatives have a zero-tolerance policy for homophobia. In this one instance. And when a democrat mentions that Cheney has a lesbian daughter. And in no other cirumstance, ever.

By: fugitivefromchaingang

fugitivefromchaingang — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:34:24 -0800

Why would opponents of the Bush regime, who ostensibly should oppose the anti-gay policies of the administration, spend so much time gleefully gay-bashing members of the same administration based on unfounded rumor? It's weird and deeply twisted, a hypocritical club used against hypocrites. The real problem is the utter compliance of the media with the White House, not whatever McClellan likes to do with his or others' wangs. Of course it matters. Things like the Federal Marriage Amendment, abstinence-only sex ed (which says you shouldn't/can't have sex until you're married, and then explicitly defines marriage as between a man and a woman), gay-bashing incidents around the world (see what happened in St. Maarten and the string of incidents in Clapham Common, England, recently), etc. etc. means that, yes, what high-ranking people in this White House do with their dicks matters. It's nice to talk about how it shouldn't matter, how ideally it would make no difference, in the future it won't, etc. But right now, it does. When supporters of gay equality say it shouldn't matter, that doesn't mean that they're not going to point out hypocrisy when it occurs. It shouldn't matter, but attacks on gay people and the prospect of gay equality means it does matter. I don't purport to know McClellan's sexuality, by the way. What digaman and wfrgms said.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:34:43 -0800

ND, I think that's a fascinating question that reveals a deeper truth -- I don't think Bush or Cheney are homophobes. I think, deep down, they don't bloody care "what the fags are doing in the back room," as gay novelist William Burroughs put it. My one moment of outright admiration for Dick Cheney came during his debate with John Edwards, when he refused to let Edwards bait him into trashing his lesbian daughter to spout the party line. Which makes all of this administration's concerted efforts to ban gay marriage, inscribe hatred into the Constitution, and use gay people as a vote-driving wedge issue even more disgusting.

By: sohcahtoa

sohcahtoa — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:36:42 -0800

Loquax: Is that a Fred Malek joke? (It should be).

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:38:34 -0800

The implosion continues.

By: loquax

loquax — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:38:52 -0800

Malek, McCarthy, take your pick!

By: sohcahtoa

sohcahtoa — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:39:56 -0800

I want them both.

By: Relay

Relay — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:44:10 -0800

Karl Rove sidelined? Yeah, sure ... Bush without Rove is like Charlie McCarthy saying he'll do a solo performance.

By: 327.ca

327.ca — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:44:25 -0800

Ever notice how two FPPs sorta get...merged...in your brain? Like "Scott McClellan resigns; Karl Rove sidelined" and "Whole Tree Shredding" (Watch the "SLASHBUSTER"® HD 480B chew through 10-14 inch diameter trees with ease)...

By: ND¢

ND¢ — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:45:35 -0800

Maybe your bullshit stereotypes are just that: bullshit stereotypes... posted by dios at 11:21 AM EST on April 19 [!] I started this comment intending to argue that I didn't make any stereotypical remarks, then I looked up at my comment and saw that I said, "the fundamental belief of all conservatives [is] that they hate minorities." That wasn't fair. I know that there are conservatives that don't hate minorities. I apologize. I'm not saying all Republicans are racist, sexist homophobes, just the people they elect into office to represent them - David Cross

By: pineapple

pineapple — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:46:21 -0800

I don't see Libby's indictment as a free pass, I see Libby as the gateway indictment to getting some of the rest of the filthy pricks. From your mouth to Fitzgerald's ear. I'm just not optimistic. I think it's going to stall with Libby's statement that Bush himself declassified Plame's identity. And, I believe we'll see in the end that Libby did fall on his sword -- by creating an image throughout the investigations of a brazen lying liar with no credibility of truth or truthiness. Ergo, Libby says, "The President said [declassifying Plame] was okay," the Shrub shrugs and says, "Oh, right, whoopsie... but no one broke the law" -- and then, conveniently, on everyone else Libby incriminates, it's "wait, look how dishonest he has already been, though, you just can't believe a word this guy says." We've certainly seen more egregious sleights of hand succeed.

By: KirkJobSluder

KirkJobSluder — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:48:23 -0800

Rove sidelined? Hardly. The guy is planning strategy for the midterm elections. He may have been less that stellar as a White House policy wonk, but when it comes to running dirty election campaigns the guy is demonically brilliant.

By: squalor

squalor — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:48:32 -0800

The obvious logical choice for our next White House Press Secretary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Bob

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:54:57 -0800

The GOP is still hijacked. Nope, we're just seeing the ultimate culmination of an unworkable philosophy. American Conservativism is about as workable in the real world as Communism or any other pie in the sky system.

By: slatternus

slatternus — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:56:53 -0800

Sidelined my ass. Rove is more powerful than Bush and Rumsfeld put together. He doesn't get demoted, he gets camouflaged.

By: trondant

trondant — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:58:16 -0800

That man has chinchillas on his torso.

By: nofundy

nofundy — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:00:03 -0800

Why is that? What is going on here? - indecent Simple. Same way it always works. IOKIYAR. (It's OK If You Are Republican)

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:01:28 -0800

Those ain't chinchillas -- they're tribbles.

By: digaman

digaman — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:13:30 -0800

I know that the whole Guckert/Gannon issue is drift, but you gotta love that this brave "voice of new media" kept up the party-line attacks on gay marriage and the "gay activist agenda" while running ads under a "USMC" screen name on MaleCorps.com.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:45:53 -0800

"klangklangston, Scottie tried to sell bullshit but really, was anyone buying? Was anyone fooled by Scottie's song and dance? He was bad at his job." No, he was great at his job. It didn't matter that no one bought it. He deflected and managed the White House press pool with alacrity. If he'd been bad at his job, there'd be impeachment hearings already. ND¢— Republicans like rich people, a very small minority population wise. (That's something that a lot of people miss in the discussions of minority rights around the US Constitution: that the minority being protected was landowners.)

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:46:01 -0800

I thought President Bush was looking forward to sitting on Trent Lott's porch.

By: wakko

wakko — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:48:57 -0800

meet the new boss, same as the old boss

By: rxreed

rxreed — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:55:01 -0800

"My career goal remains to get to Heaven" -Jim Towey

By: Jatayu das

Jatayu das — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:03:02 -0800

And what exactly will change? Will this usher in a new era of honesty, transparency, and accountability?

By: aaronetc

aaronetc — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:11:18 -0800

I'm curious to see where they go with this vacancy simply because the Vanity Fair piece is right on -- McClellan was the administration's sineater, employed for no apparent reason other than his ability to deplete the press corps' cache of slings and arrows before they could be deployed against anybody important. I have a hard time seeing Snow or Senor in that position. Also, if Senor gets the job, will David Gregory and/or Campbell Brown have to quit being on the Today Show?

By: Skygazer

Skygazer — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:31:23 -0800

Frankly, I'll miss Scott's pudgy sweaty deer-in-the-headlines-aww-damn-how-am-I-going-to-answer-that-question-without-sounding-like-a liar look while David Gregory is staring daggers into his head. Anyhow only a tiny victory, cos McClellan was strangely telling us the truth about the BS and ineptitude in his own sweet helpless pudgy way and becoming a liabilty to the White House. They'll replace him with someone who's less transparent and a smoother liar who hasn't been tired out. Of course, considering the BS and ineptitude of the Bush White House I think they may have to engineer some sort of super spokesman to hide their pungent horseshit. Speaking of which, I'll be happy as a pig in shit if Rove gets Fitzmased and/or Rummy finally gets kicked out BTW did anyone see the footage of Bush yesterday defending Rummy and saying that "He (Dubya) is in charge and he decides if and when Rummy stays or goes and he wants him to stay etc. Did that sound a bit desperate to anyone? I mean when a President or any superior has to point out the obvious (that they're in charge) doesn't it mean they're already losing control or have already lost it? Anyhow, insecurity form the most powerful man on the planet is some scary shit I'll tell you what...

By: Skygazer

Skygazer — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:40:22 -0800

American Conservativism is about as workable in the real world as Communism or any other pie in the sky system. posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:54 AM EST on April 19 [!] You got that right if by American Conservatism you mean the present demented strain of Neoconservative Christian Fundamentalism. Yeah that's some serious pie in the sky utopioanistic coo coo juice. Someday the Neocons will seem as silly, misguided, shallow and dated to the mainstream as hippies are today. You heard it hear first. But there was a fine tradition of fiscally responsible level headed centerist talk to the other guys across the aisle brand of American Conservatism at some point that wasn't too heinous I believe.

By: butterstick

butterstick — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:47:53 -0800

You guys really need to quit harping on the hypocrisy. You're gonna give yourselves ulcers. It's simple opportunism. Calling out hypocrisy is an empty exercise unless you can tie it to something more concrete like intellectual dishonesty, "flip flopping" or the like. I really think this is a flaw of the left. They get (justifiably) exasperated at the two-facedness and then pass out in spasms of cognitive dissonance. /rant

By: zoogleplex

zoogleplex — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:54:57 -0800

"Those ain't chinchillas -- they're tribbles." Well for all our sakes, DON'T FEED THEM!!! Re FPP: Good, let's see some more housecleaning.

By: Superfrankenstein

Superfrankenstein — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:57:57 -0800

Rove surrenders policy role

By: QIbHom

QIbHom — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:59:02 -0800

Rove just needed more time to manufa...erm...stage man...nope...define strategy for the new war in Albania.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:59:50 -0800

You got that right if by American Conservatism you mean the present demented strain of Neoconservative Christian Fundamentalism. Yeah that's some serious pie in the sky utopioanistic coo coo juice. I was aiming more for the general mishmash of self-reliance, small government and low taxes at any price, authoritarianism, naive and short sighted enshrinement of realpolitic,and market fundamentalism that has informed American Conservatism for decades. Neoconservatism in the form of Grover Norquist, PNAC and the like is certainly an extreme version, but it only serves to point up how unrealistic and immature from a real world standpoint what we think of as conservatism in this country is.

By: Sinner

Sinner — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:16:41 -0800

QIbHom: Rove just needed more time to manufa...erm...stage man...nope...define strategy for the new war in Albania. "Albania... Albania... You border on. The. Adr-i-atic..." /RIP Coach

By: willnot

willnot — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:19:15 -0800

From your mouth to Fitzgerald's ear. I'm just not optimistic. I think it's going to stall with Libby's statement that Bush himself declassified Plame's identity. Nobody has ever said that. Libby says that Bush declassified portions of the NIE on Iraq. Bush did not declassify Plame's identity (these are two separate "leaks" which are conveniently conflated in public opinion, but have nothing to do with each other in the courts). I can't imagine a situation where Bush would ever admit that he declassified Plame's identity or asked his people to leak it.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:24:26 -0800

Look at George Bush in that picture. He looks like an old man. Reminds me of this post.

By: tula

tula — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:35:44 -0800

Baghdad Bob!?? He'd be perfect! I loved Baghdad Bob! thanks, squalor, for reminding me of happier times.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:40:12 -0800

Has Rove’s Security Clearance Been Revoked?

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:16:47 -0800

White House rearranges the deck chairs, but policy course stays the same...

"By ripping a star from Rove's epaulet — the first time Rove has ever lost, rather than acquired, power in the Bush circle — Bolten showed that he can be effective, that he can influence events. I'm not sure the same can be said any longer of his boss. 'The Decider,' a.k.a. President George W. Bush, thinks of himself as a can-do guy. He likes to hammer away at his to-do list until he can check off every item and go fishing for the weekend.... But now the Can-Do President can’t, or won’t, or isn’t even able to try. He has a long — indeed, ever-lengthening — to-do list. But circumstances, combined with his beliefs, loyalties and mistakes, are forcing him to put off to the future — or even into the next presidency — the tasks he needs to do today. Bush has become a one-man holding action. [Bush is not]...likely to make wholesale changes in his foreign policy and defense team. Bolten can rearrange the deck chairs all he wants to on domestic and economic policy. But the Axis of Believers — Cheney-Rummy-Rove-Condi — remains. The more the media and its band of Republican allies complain, the more dug in Bush will become. He’s as stubborn as Slim Pickens in 'Dr. Strangelove': He’d rather ride Rummy to Armageddon than seem to concede that Iraq was a botched project."

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:23:18 -0800

...has been stripped of her press credentials following her "outing" as a sex-worker on a website called RedState.org. White House spokesperson Joe Trotsky had no comment... I mean, just imagine how much fun certain people would have had with that. I know I would've. Do you think she was expensive? I don't purport to know McClellan's sexuality, by the way. Eh. S'ok. Neither does he.

By: bshort

bshort — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:48:55 -0800

I bet homonculus is correct.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:05:43 -0800

Rove will keep his security clearance...

John Podesta asked today whether Karl Rove would keep his security clearance despite stepping down from his policy post. At today’s press briefing, Scott McClellan provided the answer: 'Oh, absolutely, yes.'"

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:15:15 -0800

Rolling Stone Cover Story: “The Worst President in History?”

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:28:11 -0800

There's something wrong with Superman's underwater cape, but I can't put my finger on it.

By: blueberry

blueberry — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:57:23 -0800

"According to Washington insiders, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan could be the next official to leave the Bush administration. McClellan says he'd like to spend more time lying for his family" –Amy Poehler, SNL Weekend Update

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:09:04 -0800

these are two separate "leaks" which are conveniently conflated in public opinion, but have nothing to do with each other in the courts willnot is right. Rove is not yet Scott-free (pun intended) regarding the leak of Valerie Plame's identity. Blumenthal: Leak Inquiry is Turning Toward Rove

"Former Salon Washington Editor and ex-Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal claims in his latest column [in The Guardian] that Patrick Fitzgerald's two-year investigation into the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame has turned towards Karl Rove, noting a small but important change in filings made by I. Lewis Libby, Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff. Libby was indicted for obstructing the investigation.
'Two weeks ago,' Blumenthal writes, 'Fitzgerald filed a motion before the federal court in the Libby case stating that his investigation had proved that the White House engaged in 'concerted action' from 'a plan to discredit, punish or seek revenge against" former ambassador Joseph Wilson, who revealed that the rationale of the Iraq war was based on false information that the White House knew was bogus. Fitzgerald declared further that he had gathered 'evidence that multiple officials in the White House' had outed his wife's clandestine identity to reporters as an element of revenge.' ...'Last week, on April 12, Libby counter-filed to demand extensive documents in the possession of the prosecutor. His filing, written by his lawyers, reveals that he intends to put Karl Rove on the stand as a witness to question him about his leaking of Plame's name to reporters and presumably his role in the 'concerted action' against Wilson. In his request for documents from Rove's files, Libby dropped mention of Rove's current legal status. For months, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, has assured the press that his client, who was believed to be vulnerable to indictment for perjury, is in the clear. But Libby insisted that he was entitled to 'disclosure of such documents' in Rove's files 'even if Mr. Rove remains a subject of a continuing grand jury investigation.' Karl Rove is a subject of Fitzgerald's investigation - this is the headline buried in Libby's filing.'" [emphasis aded]

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:14:19 -0800

Fitzgerald's filings and Libby's counter-filings are showing that this investigation is moving forward with more evidence being uncovered and other indictments possible. Is the caged bird singing?

By: TechnoLustLuddite

TechnoLustLuddite — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:21:24 -0800

I'm not going to comment on an ongoing investigation

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:25:43 -0800

Senate Hearings on Bush, Now -- Watergate veteran Carl Bernstein calls for bipartisan hearings investigating the Bush presidency.

By: KirkJobSluder

KirkJobSluder — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:43:54 -0800

Of course Rove will keep his clearance. The basic message is that Rove did nothing wrong, and revoking his clearance would be seen as undermining that message.

By: brundlefly

brundlefly — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:52:25 -0800

PinkStainlessTail, I have to disagree with you. The "conservatism" of G.W. has little to do with the conservatism of, say, Goldwater. His brand of conservatism, while I may disagree with it on a lot of key issues (nuking Vietnam, anti-Communist rantings), is not unworkable. Modern "conservatism" is ridiculous in comparison, and clearly not an extreme version of the true conservative mindset

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:54:56 -0800

Rove on the Stand?

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 06:32:02 -0800

Keith Olbermann's Scotty highlight reel

By: Skygazer

Skygazer — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:07:54 -0800

Brundlefly: PinkStainlessTail, I have to disagree with you. The "conservatism" of G.W. has little to do with the conservatism of, say, Goldwater. His brand of conservatism, while I may disagree with it on a lot of key issues (nuking Vietnam, anti-Communist rantings), is not unworkable. While I think you're generally right Brundlefly, I think Goldwater is in fact the seminal forefather of warped modern day GOP conservativism. His GOP rise in the mid-60's made Reagan possible and Reagan made you-know-who possible, the idealogy has become more skewered with each succesive GOP rise to power until it's become the dangerous polarizing power at any cost neocon stupidity that it is today. I think there was a more sober and pragmatic version of it pre-Goldwater that worked well as a part of the U.S. government. There's a good essay that explains it here.

By: pineapple

pineapple — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:44:52 -0800

Bush did not declassify Plame's identity (these are two separate "leaks" which are conveniently conflated in public opinion, but have nothing to do with each other in the courts). Mea culpa -- I went back and looked at the article I originally read, ready to blame that Damned Irresponsible Media... but I just can't read, it would seem.

By: ericb

ericb — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 20:19:55 -0800

Grand Jury Hears Evidence Against Rove In Plame Investigation.

By: ericb

ericb — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:05:37 -0800

Harriet Miers May Be Next in White House Shake-Up.