could scott mcclellan be any more of a douche?

I know a relative of Scott McClellan’s who lives here in Ypsi, and I hope that she doesn’t take offense at this, but I’m pissed. According to comments just made by McClellan, when he was serving as President Bush’s Press Secretary, the President told him in no uncertain terms that he himself had authorized the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame. This, of course, is an impeachable offense, and, had McClellan come forward earlier with this piece of information, we might have possibly had a shot at getting Bush and company out of power. As it is, though, I guess the revelation will just sell more copies of McClellan’s damn book… Good work, Scott. You’re an American hero.

This entry was posted in Observations. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

9 Comments

  1. Paw
    Posted November 17, 2008 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    Yes, it is conceivable that Scott McClellan could be more of a douche. He could have a nozzle for a head and he could squirt vinegar and water when he talks. Short of that, no, he could not be more of a douche.

  2. Derek Foreal
    Posted November 17, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Succubi

  3. Mr X
    Posted November 17, 2008 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

    The pathetic little piece of shit hangs on to pertinent information during a trial – I believe in spite of being asked for just such information by investigators – and now, when it’s too late to act on it, comes out and tells people that, yes, Bush was behind it, expecting them to pat him on the back for his courage, buy his book, etc. Utter bullshit. The ethically-deficient Weeble of a man should be in the stockade.

  4. Mark H.
    Posted November 17, 2008 at 11:24 pm | Permalink

    i’ll be the devil’s advocate here: Yes, assuming that his statements are truthful, he should have made them earlier, when they would have maybe mattered. He was not the only Bushie to keep the facts to himself, to lie to the public. That’s terrible behavior. But that said, isn’t it better to have him telling the truth now rather than staying silent? Maybe he’s only doing so for the $, but lots of books are written for money. If his claims are credible, i’d rather have them told than kept secret.

  5. LAKE
    Posted November 17, 2008 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, what a douche!

  6. Robert
    Posted November 20, 2008 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    I just don’t know why I should believe him now anymore than I did when he was lying for the Administration. He just seems like a pathological liar to me. I suppose that’s what got him the job in the first place.

  7. Brackache
    Posted November 20, 2008 at 11:37 pm | Permalink

    He could be mark maynard.

  8. mark
    Posted November 21, 2008 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    solid douche

  9. Robert
    Posted November 21, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    Oh, I’m sorry, Brackache. I didn’t make that clear…Mark is who I was referring to. Oh my! I hope nobody thought I was talking about Scott McClellan. He seems like a really honest, forthright sort of fella.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connect

BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Steve