Looking around over the rim of my coffee mug this morning and noted Martin;  McPhillips chatting about the McClellen thing again.
Yes, I noticed the business with toward the end of his tenure at the White House as well, Martin.
To be honest, I was always a little skeptical of the man, but always figured that he was doing a reasonably good job representing his boss, who, you understand, I also had some skepticism about. He was representing a centrist in W, after all, so how much can you expect of the man?
Your point about how well he handled David Gregory is well taken, but Gregory is so obviously a pusillanimous puss anyway that making him look like one was no great shakes, given that all one had to really do was turn the camera on him and let him do his thing. MSNBC proves that just about every night these days.
And of course, McClellan really had no understanding of the greater vision involved… you’re quite correct.
Then again, that’s one of the problems with centrist administrations… instead of getting people who really understand and believe in what the guy at the head of the ticket is doing, what you get instead, is process bound bureaucrats who really have no clue about “that vision thing”, past staying in power.
That’s precisely the type of individual you ended up with as staffers on Bush 41’s administration, too. Nixon’s, as well, since he too was no conservative, but rather a centrist. Such staffers are competent in their way, but with no idealistic direction that they’re going… No fire…no deeper understanding of policy, and the ideas and goals behind it. The one thing they do well is staying in power, via PR at least, as Nixon’s staff, shortly after the second term started, demonstrated rather clearly. And, yes, that also includes center left, such as Bill Clinton.
In fairness, the constant election season that McClellan complains about was initiated by the Democrats. A public relations campaign had to be mounted in response. So, to some degree, the hand of the Republicans got forced, here. I think what annoys the Democrats in Congress the most just now, is how very effective that PR campaign was.
If you want the truth, the reason I’m going quite so deeply into responding to your post just now, is because I’m finally beginning to understand just what it is that troubles me about John McCain, more than anything else; The man himself, is troubling enough in terms of his lack of conservatism, as we’ve discussed here many times. What troubles me more, however, is the type of staff that is invariably attached to such an individual.
For the record, I am forced to conclude just now that the type a staff that would be attracted to a John McCain, is far less threatening to our country, then would be the staff attracted to Barack Obama. Marxists, we don’t need, thank you. They certainly understand the larger vision of the top of the ticket, but their vision is one I’d rather not see the nation follow.
I do not, under any circumstances take seriously McClellan’s revelation of a Damascus Road incident surrounding Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. Sorry, I just don’t. It seems to me that it too closely matches the liberal mantra to be anything but a product of the Soros finaced ghostwriters pen. Which, I note with some dismay that McClellan’s book has been proven to be, as I remarked here last night.
I suspect and suppose that what we’re going to see here is that this thing will probably be blowing over very shortly, save for the congressional hearing, which stands about a 75/25 chance of showing up before November. Most likely the Democrats running Congress will arrange such a hearing to show up in late October, just for the timing effect. We’ll all get a reminder at that point. Talk about your October surprise.
The light in McClellen’s head has gone on, though, apparently, and he’s starting to understand the depth of how badly the Democrats have been using him. . Even now, McClellan seems to have backed off on some of what has been said. He is now publicly stating that he does not believe that the administration is guilty of war crimes. That seems a rather revealing shift of tone. That kind of backing down, it strikes me is the hallmark of someone who has been manipulated into saying something he doesn’t really believe, but who also really doesn’t believe that the consequences are going to be very dire for him, and then finds out otherwise, and acts in desperation (and insufficiently) to cover his butt.
Another point to be made here, is the idea that we have not been told how much McClellan was paid for his work, or at least the use of his name by Mr. Soros & Co. I suspect it was something more than the 30 pieces of silver that James Carville referenced in a recent comment.
There is something to be said for the comparison I saw somewhere earlier today between this situation and David Brock, someone called it David Brock, version 2.0. I think where the comparison falls down, however, is the degree of broken trust. Certainly, when David Brock pulled his Andrew Sullivan parlor trick, there were a lot of hurt feelings. But I suspect that that doesn’t hold a candle to the hurt feelings within the White House inner circle. I say that because simply put, I don’t see a whole bunch of evidence that David Brock, trampled on anybody’s trust the way McClellan did.
Don’t be overly shocked if we see McClellan being offered a position in the White House again, should the nation be stupid enough to elect Brarack Obama. Obama may well owe McClellen a lot for such a win. Which of course was always the purpose of the book, even if McClellan didn’t know that. Regardless, I suspect he knows it now… and doesn’t care much for the taste it leaves in his mouth.
Update: Welcome Real Clear Politics  Readers