Scott McClellan brings the shock and awe

For those who haven't heard, the early details of Scott McClellan's new tell-all book, What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception came out the other day. Even a mere handful of excerpts provide enough revelations to go around:

• McClellan charges that George W. Bush used "propaganda" to sell the war.
  (Translation: George lied like a weasel)
• McClellan admits that some of his own statements were "badly misguided."
  (Translation: I lied like an apprentice weasel)
• McClellan says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war
  (Translation: You morons in the media let us get away with lying like weasels)
• McClellan accuses George W. Bush, Karl Rove and "Scooter" Libby conspired to leak the identity of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame
  (Translation: Treason, treason, treason!)

Needless to say, the Bush Administration, Republican apologists, and right-wing news media spin-machine wasted no time in circling the wagons and attacking Scott. If you've got the stomach for it, here's a sampler of the accusations -- naked denial in its raw form.

An interesting aspect of the orchestrated Republican narrative is that no one is out-and-out accusing Scott McClellan of being a liar -- they'll happily say that McClellan sold out or blame the charges to an "unscrupulous" "radical left" publisher, but apparently the zealots won't take the simple route of saying he lied. I can think of two reasons for this:

1. They're afraid of being sued for slander and/or libel by McClellan, and the ensuing repercussions that'd cause. After all, if (for example) Bill O'Reilly calls McClellan a liar, McClellan could easily have his lawyers slap Bill with a lawsuit for defamation of character. Next thing you know, things end up in court and McClellan testifies under oath -- which is the last thing a neoconservative wants...

2. They know, in their heart of hearts, that what Scott wrote is true:

   Feeling for Scott McLellan. Nice getting savaged for saying what everyone knows to be true anyway.
   

   -- Mike Turk, Bush-Cheney eCampaign Director

Smelling blood in the water, Rep. Robert "Sharkticon" Wexler is already calling on McClellan to testify before Congress -- under oath. With any luck, Scott will get his day...

One early revelation from McClellan's book was that Bush had two reasons for going to war with Iraq:

Surprisingly enough (or not), the second narrative has disappeared off the mainstream news media's talking points.

An early mistake... or a truth that hits too close to home? I guess we'll find out when the book gets released next week and everyone pours over its pages.

And speaking of the mainstream news media, I found it entirely unsurprising that -- despite McClellan lamblasting them as doormats for the Bush White House -- there has been a decided lack of introspective navel-gazing from said news media about their failure to actively pursue the issues (example: "Why bother asking John McCain any tough questions when we can attend his barbecues instead?").

In a brief, shining moment of candor, however, CNN correspondent Jessical Yellin admitted that the press corps failed to do its job, and went so far to confess that she was pressured by network news executives to make Bush and the Iraq war look good, and went so far to edit her pieces to favor the administration:

Jessica Yellin: ...[T]he press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war that was presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the President's high approval ratings and my own experience at the White House was that the higher the President's approval ratings, the more pressure I had ...from these executives to put on positive stories about the President. I think over time--

Andersen Cooper: You had pressure from news executives to put on positive stories about the President?

Jessica Yellin: Not in that exact -- they wouldn't say it in that way, but they would edit my pieces. They would push me in different directions. They would turn down stories that were more critical and try to put on pieces that were more positive. Yes. That was my experience.

And people wonder why I don't bother with mainstream news any more. Liberal media, my ass.

Wanna bet this gets ignored as well? Even the bookies in Vegas won't take the odds...