« A Scientist Examines the Bush-McCain Challenge | Main | Links With Your Coffee - Friday »

What Happened

What happened, Scotty talks Keith listens.

Quicktime Video 47.4 MB | Duration: 32'12
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Countdown w/Keith Olbermann
Keith's latest book is Truth and Consequences: Special Comments on the Bush Administration's War on American Values



For those too busy to watch, a quick summary: roughly 15 seconds in Keith actually drops to his knees and begins fellating McClellan; about thirty seconds later, Scott returns the favor.

I don't really want to hear about your fantasies.

I don't really want to hear about your fantasies.

Now, now, it only helps him get off when you resist.

McClellan has a lot of balls to do this. Yes, I wish he had written this book years ago, but better late than never.

McClellan on Olberman. Did you ever think you would see such a thing?

Yes calli, I feel the same way. The way they stroke each other's egos borders on 'icky'.

On a slightly different note concerning McClellan, Pat Buchanan had this to say about the whole thing...

BUCHANAN: But let me, wait a minute now. I mean, this may be is an old town tradition but the president of United States has honored this man with the tremendous post, he‘s made him famous -
ABRAMS: And they lied to him.
BUCHANAN: And he turns around and starts talking about what Bush remembers about cocaine use 20 years ago. That is ratting out your boss. That is a rotten thing to do.

It doesn't matter to Pat that it was the right thing to do (although it would have been better to have done it sooner, maybe making the statement by leaving his post early), simply that Scott let out some 'secrets' about his boss. Pat's comments could be considered rational only if the circumstances did not affect the American people.

Calligraph…I agree with you. They were both all over each other for the 1st 30 seconds. But like most people who think like you, you don't mention what happened in the following 40 minutes or so of this interview. What he said is very damaging to the White House because he is (was) one of them. His remarks are candid and to the point. Whatever his motivations he appears to be telling the truth. If not, then I wish those in the White House (and friends) will come out and say so. No, instead they just keep repeating that he is not the same Scott they knew and how unethical he is by criticizing Bush.

It is not about what is right for you guys (agree with your lukkystarr) but about being loyal to the party. While the Democrats lack courage for not standing up to this administration, the Republicans lack morals (and courage for those like McClellan). I'm glad he is speaking out now. He is like one of those people that was in a cult and finally sees the light.

Dar…good one about Calligraph's fantasy but I'm sure he put himself in the middle.

This sounds like nothing more than weak confirmations of some of the things everybody has known for a long time. What's all the fuzz about?

It's disappointing that Olderman accepts the presumption that Bush wants to spread democracy to the world. But I guess not even the most leftist of the mainstream media dare question the premise that the US government always has good intentions. If they do wrong, it's because of faulty implementation, not bad motivs.

This sounds like nothing more than weak confirmations of some of the things everybody has known for a long time.

Everybody who doesn't have their heads shoved so far up their asses it's a mind-rending proctological impossibility.

What's all the fuzz about?

This situation highlights how truly dire things are, when even partisan insiders can figure out what's wrong and be inspired to speak out about it... and yet the American people as a whole still allow a mass-murdering criminal to stay in the White House.

It highlights how firmly the USA is scraping rock-bottom.

"Calligraph…I agree with you. They were both all over each other for the 1st 30 seconds."

I didn't see that. Olbermann was being pretty lovy with McClellan, but I didn't see McClellan doing the same. Mainly they were just agreeing with each other.

The interview was kind of disappointing, though. Keith supposedly read much of the book, but he mainly asks McClellan about broad, general issues the the book doesn't really address, and which the guy doesn't really know about. The book is not a "Rosetta stone" to the last 7 years, it's largely a rehash of things we already knew about.

I kind of admire what McClellan is doing. He got involved with a political team for one reason; it turned out to be a sham, so he had a moral reckoning and did something about it. But he kind of comes off as simpleminded. Bush was going to be a "bi-partisan" president (whatever that means)? He thought this even after the first year of Bush's presidency? I really wonder where they get people like McClellan, Fleisher, and Dana Perino.

Bush likes to think he's the Second Coming of Lincoln, but if he knew his history he'd know better than to hire McClellans!


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives