It looks like it won’t take a swiftboating to highlight John McCain’s propensity to parse his words for political expediency. As a matter of fact, I suspect that the catch phrase for the 2008 presidential election may turn out to be YouTubing…and there’s little doubt the following video may be the first salvo in a concerted effort to redefine John McCain as a man who is unable to choose which fork in the road best suits his presidential aspirations.

McCain’s short temper and his dogged determination to claim ownership of all that can be construed as honorable and high-minded doesn’t always endear him to the impartial observer. Unfortunately for the Arizona Senator, it can easily be interpreted as arrogance and insolence…especially when the video footage frequently confirms the inconsistencies he’s been forced to adopt in hopes of creating a broader appeal in November.

At its worst, the McCain indignation only enhances the perception that his “grumpy old man” persona is a natural accompaniment to his advancing age. If that impression takes hold, McCain may lose any experience advantage he would have otherwise been able to espouse. If his coming exchanges with the Democratic nominee result in more YouTube moments…moments that appear to show a cranky man with a waning grasp of his prior utterances…he’ll quickly pigeonhole himself as the silver-haired senior with a surly certainty that cannot be sustained.

Should his opponent astutely position himself as someone willing to give respectful deference to age while refusing to relent on those matters of import to the voter, McCain will quickly appear to be a relic worthy of respect who has also eclipsed his capacity to command the issues that concern the citizenry. If this scenario begins to unfold, I would speculate that McCain’s testy temperament will work to his detriment…while also allowing a younger Barack Obama to position himself as the symbol of a changing political climate.

The Real John McCain (VIDEO)

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

It looks like San Francisco has become the new France (freedom fries anyone?)…at least for some members of the GOP. Representative Sam Graves (R-MO) has taken to featuring those awful “San Francisco values” to attack his Democratic opponent, Kay Barnes.

He’s apparently doing this because he wants Missourians to believe that Barnes’ singular goal is to take solid midwestern values and transform them into a San Francisco style Sodom & Gomorrah. Unfortunately, the music and images are a miserable melange comparable to what one might expect to find on a late night TV commercial promoting a singles hook-up phone line.

I could be wrong, but it looks to me like Rep. Graves has spent too many restless nights on the couch in front of his television. A more sinister interpretation of the image might suggest that Graves wants his constituents to ponder the slippery slope mentality one would expect to hear from Rick Santorum…you know, the one that thinks gay marriage is just the tip of the iceberg in the progression towards allowing “man with his favorite pet marriages”.

All that’s missing from this multi-racial, pansexual, menage a trois Solid Gold meets Queer as Folk dance club image to complete this ludicrous mindset is a dirty dancing German Shepherd and a pair of “in sync” silver-haired sister spinsters.

Rep. Graves (R-MO) First San Francisco Values TV Ad (VIDEO)

Rep. Graves (R-MO) Second San Francisco Values TV Ad (VIDEO)

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

It’s beginning to look like the attacks from commentators on FauxNews, from people still in the White House, from Rush and his dittoheads, from Karl Rove and Bob Dole. . . it’s beginning to look like these attacks are not going to be enough for the Republicans. The Democrats who run the House, including Reps. Conyers and Wexler, are talking of having Scott McClellan testify before the House about revelations in his book. The White House appears to have something to say about that. But first. . .

What good is Scott McClellan’s testimony going to be? If you really want to get to the bottom of the deception and criminality that has been the routine at the Bush White House, all the testimony in the world from Scott McClellan isn’t going to get you there. But does such testimony have value in relation to the election in November? Surely the Democrats would like the election to be a referendum on the Bush Administration, and hearings would write this story large, though if Scotty doesn’t testify to anything that isn’t in his book, it’s just a ramping up of what’s already out there. On the other side, the GOP attack machine is energized by this story like they haven’t been in the last several months. Is it wise to wake them up? I don’t have the answer to that. But I suppose I’d approach this based on how such hearings starring Scott McClellan would relate to the candidacies of Barack Obama and John McCain.

If the McClellan testimony focuses like a laser on the lead-up to the War in Iraq, and the ways in which the White House made the case through PR and what Scott McClellan calls the “permanent campaign,” then the hearings might just have a bearing on the Presidential race in the Fall. There’s nothing that separates Barack Obama and John McCain more than Obama being against the War in Iraq from its inception and John McCain carrying water for the Bushies on that same subject. Sure, there would be little in the way of testimony directly about John FlipFlopTalker McCain, but America is tired of this war. Still, I’m betting the wingers and independents who were fooled by Bush’s permanent campaigning about the War in Iraq are not likely to take kindly to being reminded that they were so duped. Yeah, I’m unsure whether this testimony would help or not.

Be that as it may, the testimony may not happen, as Dana Perino has left open the door that the White House may bar such testimony on the grounds of Executive Privelege, even though they vetted McClellan’s book on such grounds already. From ThinkProgress (they’ve got video goodness, as usual):

QUESTION: Could the White House block him from testifying, if he wanted to testify? Or how does that work?

PERINO: Conceivably?

QUESTION: Yes.

PERINO: Hypothetically, which I’m not supposed to answer a hypothetical, yes, I think so. The law would allow for that. But by saying that, I’m not suggesting that that’s what would happen or not happen.

I think this is a riot. The White House has already vetted the book on the topic of executive privilege, according to quotes from Perino in the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Perino also said White House lawyers routinely had reviewed the book before publication “for any possible classified information or any needs for executive privilege to be asserted.”

“None of them were in this case,” she said, adding, “So we’ve known for a little bit of time that this was coming.”

So it looks like they’ll assert executive privilege just to get this thing off the news. After all, they’ve already vetted everything in McClellan’s book, so what else is there to assert that is “executive privilege.” This seems a whiney excuse to get the whole thing out of the news to me.

A survey of opinion in the foreign press (posted below) registers a decline of American influence in the middle east. My question would be: “Is the alleged decline affecting the current presidential campaign?” The Republicans wouldn’t have you believe it.

But here’s another question: “Do you know how to make a foreigner roll his eyes?”

Answer: make the triumphalist claim, that “America is the greatest nation on earth!” I heard McCain utter this phrase yesterday, and as a transplant, know that, for foreigners, it is “inflammatory talk”.

I know that such rhetoric is for domestic consumption, but in today’s climate of instant messaging, cable TV, and the like, the phrase — and many more like it — has no boundaries.

What about McCain and the decline of America? Checkout the following:

John McCain and the Decline of America
An Unnatural Disaster
Gary Indiana on Hobsbawm’s ‘On Empire’

Is this Decline of American Power in the Middle East Affecting the Campaign? (Also see links above) — basically any question about America’s decline is political, of course, one that, according to political bent, necessarily, elicits different responses. For Republicans, for America to embrace a more internationalist stance – promoted by liberal Dems – is a sign of decline, especially anything that signals a warmer embrace of the UN. For Liberal Dems, not to embrace the UN is a sign of decline.

Back to the original question:

IN THE GEOPOLITICS OF THE MIDDLE EAST, THE HEAVY HAND OF THE BUSHIES IS INCREASINGLY OVER-SHADOWED BY BOTTOM-UP INITIATIVES OF LOCAL POWERS

The Beirut Daily Star columnist Rami G Khouri writes that,

The Doha agreement that resolved the immediate political crisis in Lebanon is the latest example of the new political power equation that is redefining the Middle East. It reflects both local and global forces and, 18 years after the Cold War ended, provides a glimpse of what a post-Cold War world will look like, at least in the Middle East.

Several dynamics seem to be at play, but one is paramount: the clear limits of the projection of American global power, combined with the assertion and coexistence of multiple regional powers - Turkey, Israel, Iran, Hizbullah, Syria, Hamas, Saudi Arabia and others. These regional actors tend to fight and negotiate at the same time, and ultimately prefer to make compromises rather than perpetually wage absolutist battles. …

Iran, Turkey, all the Arabs, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Israel all share one and only one common trait: They routinely ignore the advice, and the occasional threats, they get from Washington…

Condoleezza Rice was correct in summer 2006 when she said we are witnessing the birth pangs of a new Middle East. But the emerging new regional configuration is very different from the one she fantasized about and tried to bring into being with multiple wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Somalia and Lebanon, and threats against Iran and Syria.…

America is “Missing in Action”

In McClatchy Newspapers, Warren Strobel and Hannah Allam wrote:

In a week of dramatic developments in the Middle East, the most dramatic development of all may have been the fact that the United States, long considered the region’s indispensable player, was missing in action.

As its closest allies cut deals with their adversaries this week over the Bush administration’s opposition, Washington was largely reduced to watching.

More painful for President Bush, friends he’s cultivated - and spent heavily on - in Lebanon and Iraq asked the United States to remain in the background, underlining how politically toxic an association with the US can be for Arab leaders.

Over the past few days, Strobel and Allam claim,

• The Lebanese government, which has received $1.3 billion and political support from the Bush administration, compromised with the Hezbollah-led opposition, giving the Iranian-backed Shiite Muslim group, which Washington considers a terrorist organization, a greater role in running the country.
• Israel ignored U.S. objections and entered indirect peace talks with Syria through Turkey, another longtime U.S. ally.
• The U.S.-backed Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki deployed military forces to Baghdad’s Sadr City slum under an agreement that specifically excluded U.S. troops.
• Saudi Arabia, a crucial oil supplier and long a major buyer of U.S. weapons, is quietly closing what could be a multibillion-dollar arms deal with Russia, according to a U.S. defense official.

Is this Decline of American Power in the Middle East Affecting the Campaign? (Also see links above)

According to Strobel and Allam,

Not even Mr Bush’s allies at home feel comfortable being visibly associated with him. For the first time in nearly three months, the Republican presumptive presidential nominee, Senator John McCain was seen in public with Mr Bush this week. The appearance, during which neither spoke to the press, lasted 47 seconds.

(Update 6-1-08: According to NYT’s Frank Rich, it was 29 seconds, not 47: read Rich’s take on how McClellan’s What Happened has impacted the McCain campaign.)

Diplomatically, Qatar is on the Ascendant

As American influence in the Middle East falls into the background, a new trend is emerging fostering home grown solutions for the region’s problems. Most prominent among these recently have been Qatar’s role in bringing about political reconciliation in Lebanon and Turkey’s mediation in talks between Israel and Syria.

In Lebanon, political rivals made a major step towards reconciliation when they signed the Doha agreement. The first result of the accord was seen in the election of Gen Michel Suleiman as Lebanon’s new president. Qatar’s instrumental role in advancing this diplomatic initiative led to emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al Thani being given the unusual honour of addressing the Lebanese parliament.

For IPS, Meena Janardhan wrote: “Qatar’s latest diplomatic success could be attributed to its ties with the rival factions and regional powers with influence in Beirut.

“While Doha is a close ally of Washington, which also supports the government in Beirut, it has maintained good relations with Tehran and Damascus, which back the Lebanese opposition led by the Shia militant movement Hizbollah. Recent reconciliation with Saudi Arabia, which also supports the Lebanese government, helped in the process too.

The mediation efforts, according to Doha-based political analyst Mehran Kamrava, is consistent with Qatar’s ‘increasingly proactive diplomacy’ over the last few years both in the Gulf region and larger Middle East.

The Christian Science Monitor added:

Qatar’s nonaligned role in regional politics may be a survival mechanism in an unforgiving corner of the world, given its small size and enormous oil and gas riches. But it may also signal a shift from the polarisation of the region during the tenure of President Bush toward a greater emphasis on negotiation and compromise. Turkey, for example, has emerged as a key player in quietly brokering initial peace moves between Israel and Syria.

The actions of Turkey and Qatar suggest we are moving away from the black-and-white dichotomies of the higher Bush years,” said Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Endowment’s Middle East Center in Beirut. “Now mediators, like Qatar and Turkey, are trying to find accommodation between players previously considered as either good or evil.

Turkey Sponsoring Talks Between Israel and Syria

The announcement last week that Israel and Syria have opened indirect peace talks through Turkish mediation has rapidly been overshadowed by uncertainty over the Israeli prime minister’s future.

The New York Times said:

Israel’s defence minister called on Wednesday for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to remove himself from his post pending the outcome of a high-profile corruption investigation in which Mr Olmert is embroiled.

The defence minister, Ehud Barak, a former prime minister, was the first senior member of Israel’s coalition government to insist Mr Olmert relinquish his office over the corruption case.

‘The prime minister must disconnect himself from the daily running of the government,’ Mr Barak said at a lunchtime news conference broadcast live from the Parliament building.

Iran/Syria Ties Continue

Meanwhile, in the Los Angeles Times, Borzou Daragahi wrote:

Iranian and Syrian officials poured a bucket of ice water this week on Israeli hopes for a rupture in the long-standing Tehran-Damascus relationship.

Israeli officials had demanded Syria break ties with Iran in exchange for returning the occupied Golan Heights to Syria.

Instead, Syria this week appeared to strengthen its ties with Iran, signing a defense cooperation pact in a showy Tehran photo-op on Tuesday.

Watching Scott McClellan on Countdown last night, a frightening thought struck me. What if his book, and the kerfluffle around the book, is simply more psyops from the GOP? Here’s an example of what I mean:

In the interview with Olbermann, former Minister of Propaganda McClellan invoked the term “permanent campaign” about 10 times to describe how he ostensibly feels about the hyper-partisan mindset in Washington, D.C., and how the bunker mentality of the Bush administration has evolved over the past 8 years.

It occurred to me that one of the selling points of the McCain campaign has been (and will continue to be) John McCain’s “maverickness” and willingness to reach across the political divide to get things done.

Let’s be honest, there are few revelations in McClellan’s book that appear to be new, at least to anyone who’s been paying the least bit of attention during the course of the Bush regime’s dismantlement of the American dream (more on that in a future post). Mostly, what McClellan relates is no more than insider confirmation of incidents and hubris that for the most part is already in the public domain.

So, could McClellan’s book, and all of the apparent outrage from McClellan’s former colleagues, be an elaborate GOP ruse, staged in order to bolster McCain’s (and the GOP’s) message of bipartisanship? As I listened to Olbermann’s interview, it was almost like McClellan was utilizing the time tested GOP strategy of repeating focus-grouped phrases (such as “permanent campaign”). As the interview progressed, the words he was using started sounding like he was reading from a Frank Luntz talking points script.

Are McClellan’s words (and indeed, the book itself) a well-calculated psyops move by the GOP to put further distance between the party and George Bush? Let’s not forget that Scott McClellan was a true believer in the Bush deity. He didn’t just drink the Texas koolaid, he power chugged it from a firehose. True believers do strange things for their godheads — such as creating the illusion of throwing themselves under the proverbial bus — for the greater good of the cult. Just think about Scooter Libby for a moment. Or Joseph Goebbels.

As we’ve discovered over the past 8 years, in the Bush house of mirrors, any illusion is possible. Don’t believe a thing that you read or hear right now. As I noted before, anyone who harbors a present (or past) association with this criminal regime is at great personal legal risk going forward, so nearly anything is possible.

It’s all very strange…and something just isn’t quite adding up. There’s no need to put on a tinfoil hat when it comes to analyzing any move by the GOP and Bush administration. However, there is the continuing necessity to think outside the box, look beyond the obvious, and consider alternate realities, because the Bush administration has specialized in creating false illusions.

I’m not the only one who’s thinking there is something amiss in how all of this is playing out.

Yeah, Larry Craig is writing a book. Here’s a bit of the story from an interview with KTVB in Boise:

In a live interview on NewsChannel 7 Tuesday night – Craig, 62 - told Dee Sarton that he is in the process of writing a book on energy - that will also talk about his time in Congress – and the events of the past year.

“There will be a bit of what’s happened in the last year, and the way it evolved,” Craig said. “I think that’s important for Idaho and those outside Idaho who are interested to know.”

He hopes the book will be on store shelves in the next year.

Let’s have some fun. Craig is going to give his version of his public restroom escapades, so that probably figures in the title, doesn’t it? Wonkette is forming a book club to, presumably, read and dissect the book. I’m thinking that’s not necessary. The book needs a title! Post them in the comments. How about. . . .

Wise Cracks From a Wide Stance?

Edit, 1:40: Seems Levi Strauss is bringing out a new line of Wide Stance jeans in honor of Larry Craig. Be the first on your block to get the, From CAP News:

“We will be marketing the pants to cowboys and others who straddle things for a living, as well as men of discretion and adventure,” said Levi spokesperson Janice Weiss. She denied that the pants would be solely marketed to closet homosexuals, despite a flurry of pre-advertising that seems to suggest otherwise.

“Is the closet homosexual market huge? Of course it is, but that’s not who we’re trying to attract with our Wide Stance Pants,” Weiss said. “We’re looking to farmers straddling rows in a field, Seattle residents who find themselves constantly trying to avoid puddles, men who just honestly like the feel for more space between their legs. That sort of thing.”

I’m thinking Larry Craig may have a future in marketing.

It’s being reported by Ben Smith of Politico and by Jake Tapper of ABCNews. A Republican blogger, digging for dirt on Barack Obama’s Great Uncle, got told off in no uncertain terms by a World War II veteran and his son. Bravo to Raymond and Mark Kitchell, my heroes for this week, for sure.

Everyone read about the story of Barack Obama saying his Great Uncle helped liberate Auchwitz, when it was in fact a different camp the uncle, Charles Payne helped liberate. Enterprising Republican blogger Steve Gilbert, of a web site ironically called “Sweetness and Light,” decided that there must be something out of the ordinary, so he decided to investigate. He probably had dreams of being the first to SwiftBoat Barack Obama’s great uncle, imagining that by impugning the reputation of a World War II veteran he was somehow making a comment on Barack Obama’s fitness for service. Yeah, this falls under the category of “Most Disgusting Republican Dirty Tricks.”

Gilbert, and “snake” is too nice a word for him, decided to contact the 89th Infantry Division of World War II unofficial web site to find some dirt on Barack Obama’s great uncle, a man who is 84 at the time of this writing. There is no doubt that Gilbert wanted to destroy Charles Payne’s reputation, of course. (Destroy the reputation of a World War II vet who is 84 years old? How completely disgusting!) Well, Gilbert got nowhere, because the men responsible for the web site, Raymond Kitchell and his son Mark, weren’t having any of it. Here’s the email in response to Steve Gilbert’s request:

—– Original Message —–
From: Steve Gilbert
To: markkitchell@[redacted].com
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:14 AM
Subject: Any Record Of Charles W Payne?

Mr. Kitchell,

As you may have heard by now, Barack Obama has claimed that his great uncle Charlie Payne was a member of the 89th Div that liberated Buchenwald.

According to records his full name is either Charles W Payne or Charles T Payne (most likely the former), and he was born in 1924 — and he is still alive today.

He most likely was from Kansas at the time of enlistment.

Do you have any record of this gentleman?

Thank you,

Steve Gilbert
sweetness-light.com

PS - If you go to my website, you will see that I was probably the first to note the error in Mr. Obama’s first claims about his “uncle.”

Obama Claims His Uncle Liberated Auschwitz | Sweetness & Light

And Mr. Kitchell’s helpful reply:

Please crawl back under the rock you came out from.

Good day

Raymond Kitchell, veteran 89th Inf Div

I have since been sent this followup email:

From: Mark Kitchell [mailto:markkitchell@[redacted].com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 10:47 AM
To: Steve Gilbert
Subject: Re: Any Record Of Charles W Payne?

I don’t claim to represent anyone. You are the one who came to my son and I asking for information.

Please spend ample time chasing down the lies fed to you by chickenhawks Bush & Co. Like 90% of this administration, they don’t have the foggiest idea what we went through or what we saw at Ohrdruf.

I wonder how many people who visit the 89th Infantry site and support Mr. Kitchell’s work realize his politics are those of Cindy Sheehan?

Evidencing no shame, as if he’d been raised by wolves, or maybe Karl Rove, Steve Gilbert has the entire exchange with the good folks Kitchell on the Sweetness and Light web site. It’s ugly. The guy even compares Raymond and Mark Kitchell to Cindy Sheehan.

There’s a lot of ethical ugliness to unpack here. Steve Gilbert evidently wanted to destroy the reputation of a man who served this country just because he was related to Barack Obama. That certainly ranks high on the ugliness meter, but it’s certainly within the ethical parameters of how Republicans work, I suppose. That Gilbert went to the keeper of a site honoring those veterans like Charles Payne, is simply stupid. These guys are very likely to stick together, after all. They went through a lot together in WWII. I love how Steve Gilbert crows that he’s the one to make Barack Obama look good by uncovering the Obama mistake about Auchwitz. So let’s see, we’ve got trying to smear an 84 year old veteran, counting on the complicity of a fine fellow veteran of that 84 year old Charles Payne, bragging about how he’d already stuck it to Barack Obama. . . this guy Steve Gilbert is almost ready for Republican Prime Time, don’t you think? Then he publicly compares Raymond Kitchell to Cindy Sheehan.

I’ll echo Mr. Kitchell, and note that Steve Gilbert ought to go crawl back under the rock he came from. But I’m thinking he’s almost been ugly enough in this exchange to qualify as a guest host for Rush Limbaugh. Still, I’d give a lot of money to see Steve Gilbert in a room full of veterans of the 89th, the Rolling W. I might even have enough in me to pity how those men would “honor” Steve Gilbert, though I’m more likely to break into applause.

I’m guessing the Republicans lost a few votes among members of the 89th on this one.

In a move that is sure to keep same-sex marriage in the media spotlight, New York Governor David Paterson has issued a directive requiring the state of New York to recognize same-sex marriages from those states and countries where they have been allowed. The governor argues that the move is consistent with long standing New York law…law that has always required recognition of marriages from other jurisdictions.

From The New York Times:

ALBANY — Gov. David A. Paterson has directed all state agencies to begin to revise their policies and regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, like Massachusetts, California and Canada.

The revisions are most likely to involve as many as 1,300 statutes and regulations in New York governing everything from joint filing of income tax returns to transferring fishing licenses between spouses.

The directive cited a Feb. 1 ruling by a State Appellate Court in Rochester that Patricia Martinez, who works at Monroe Community College and who married her partner in Canada, could not be denied health benefits by the college because of New York’s longstanding policy of recognizing marriages performed elsewhere, even if they are not explicitly allowed under New York law. The appeals court said that New York must recognize marriages performed in other states that allow the practice and in countries that permit it, like Canada and Spain.

Monroe County filed an appeal with the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, but it was rejected on technical grounds. The county has not decided whether to file another appeal, a county spokesman said on Wednesday. The Court of Appeals has previously ruled that the state’s Constitution did not compel the recognition of same-sex marriages and that it was up to the Legislature to decide whether do so.

In the larger picture, the move may be part and parcel of a tipping point in the battle over same-sex marriage. At the very least, this action coupled with the ruling of the California Supreme Court, may lead opponents of same-sex marriage to reconsider their opposition to the granting of any of the same rights that are currently afforded to heterosexual marriages.

Until now, opponents of same-sex marriage have been able to ignore the granting of reasonable rights to same-sex couples by placing their focus on same-sex marriage as a threat to the institution and the family. The latest polling in California seems to suggest that more and more citizens are shifting their views on same-sex unions. That shift, assisted by the Supreme Court ruling, may indicate that the issue of equality is beginning to eclipse the fomenting of fear that has been the cornerstone of the religious right’s efforts to deny any recognitions that might legitimize homosexuality.

I’ve long argued that a majority of Americans are ultimately fair minded…though they are frequently slow to shed fears that can prevent them from making objective conclusions. In the case of homosexuality, the religious right has sought to cloak their hatred and bigotry as a simple adherence to morality. Unfortunately, more and more citizens are able to recognize the true agenda of those opposed to same-sex marriage…which is actually an effort to prevent the codifying of any gay rights.

The fact that gays have sought the full array of rights has, to a degree, allowed the religious right the leeway to disguise their agenda as well as distort the agenda of the gay community. That dynamic has served to heighten fears and relegate a rational discussion of basic rights to the back burner.

While I’m concerned that the California ruling has the potential to initiate a backsliding or a backlash against gays, the ruling of the court, coupled with Governor Paterson’s clearly articulated justification for granting basic rights and recognitions to same-sex couples, may be the point at which fair Americans realize that they can’t allow their reservations about homosexuality to be the impetus to deny rights to their fellow citizens.

The following video is today’s announcement by the Governor detailing the directive and the rationale by which it has been issued.

Governor Paterson On New York Same-Sex Marriage Directive (VIDEO)

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

Hey, Scott McClellan couldn’t have written his book because he thought it was the truth, or because he wanted to tell the whole story. No, he’s either deranged, or someone got to him. That’s the implication of a story out of Little Green Footballs, where they dug up the fact that George Soros is involved in the ownership of the publisher of McClellan’s book.

So they’re now trashing McClellan and cooking up conspiracy theories? After all, the wingers might say, if Soros is involved, then the publication of the book is because Soros hates Bush and Republicans. Yes, George Soros ate Scott McClellan’s brain!

The smear campaign against former Minister of Propaganda Scott McClellan continues in full fury this morning.

On Faux Friends this morning, anchor Gretchen Carlson opined:

Scott McClellan better not have any skeletons in his closet. I hope he didn’t do anything that he doesn’t want the world to know about because we all have, and all of his secrets are going to be coming out.

That seems like a rather overt threat to me. There have been, eh, rumors about McClellan’s sexual orientation since former White House press room rentboy James Guckert / Jeff Gannon was outed in 2005. Late yesterday evening, Guckert posted in his own blog:

What I hear about the book does not sound like the Scott McClellan I knew for two years. I can say without fear of contradiction, that I knew Scott better than any other White House correspondent or Washington reporter…

Let’s not forget that Guckert / Gannon was up to his hips in the Plame affair. And one of the most profound revelations from McClellan was on his allegedly being kept in the dark on Plame. So, perhaps we can start to connect the dots on the direction that the anti-McClellan smear campaign is heading.

McClellan’s been subjected to some scathing interviews this morning. He’ll also be appearing on Countdown tonight, and that might be some “must see TV”, although Olbermann has a bit of a history of pulling his punches in interview situations such as this one. I’m not sure that we’ll learn anything new. But the point is, the right wing attack dogs are once again going after the messenger, not the message. That’s been their modus operandi as they’ve attacked books from the likes of Paul O’Neill and Richard Clarke.

It’s clear though, that the right wing muckrakers are on the prowl, and will certainly destroy Scott McClellan before this verbal shooting war comes to an end. There seems little question at this point that he’ll be a Fredo-style casualty of the Bush Crime Family.

I hope Scottie has made his fortune already, because he won’t be able to get a job toasting bagels at a terrorist lovin’ Dunkin Donuts franchise when the political smoke clears.

Update: Here’s an interesting thought from the feedback to this posting on Buzzflash.net: would the Bush administration really want to drop the Gannon bomb on Scottie? That would seem to be the nuclear option, with significant potential for mutually assured destruction. Jimmy Jeff’s hooks go pretty deeply into the White House. I’m not sure that the White House velvet mafia really wants to go there and ressurect that particular dead horse. Check out this comment from below.