Soros Publisher 'Shaped' McClellan's Hit Job

[red states rule]

Here it is folks - the publisher really wrote the book not McClellan


Soros Publisher 'Shaped' McClellan's Hit Job: Other publishers don't recognize it as the same book


An examination of published reports reveals that Scott McClellan's kiss-and-smell betrayal of George W. Bush is a far cry from the book McClellan started out to write and was shaped into an offensive tome by a publisher with close ties to George Soros.

To understand how McClellan's literary knife-in-the-back evolved, one has to know something about the book industry.

Unlike fiction, a non-fiction book usually hasn't been written before it's sold to a publisher. The author normally puts together an outline and/or synopsis detailing what the book will be about and how it will be structured, and writes 1-3 sample chapters to show the author's writing ability. The author's agent then shops the proposal around to prospective publishing houses.

The agent actually lands the deal, so the choice of agents is crucial. Any author normally starts at the top of the A list and works his or her way down until--or if--they find an agent with whom they can work. According to an Associated Press article,

"McClellan's book does not fit the pattern of Washington megadeals. He was not represented by Washington, D.C., attorney Bob Barnett, whose clients include Tenet and countless political leaders, but by the much less known Craig Wiley, whose most famous client is actor Ron Silver."

for the complete article

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/05/soros_publisher_shaped_mcclell.html

[Yurt]

then why has mcclellen rigorously defended his book?

[red states rule]

then why has mcclellen rigorously defended his book?

I guess he wants the money.

If he is so bothered by taking part in a "propaganda campaign" perhaps he should give the money he makes off the book to a charity to help Iraq war vets

I will not hold my breath

[ranger]

McClellan is just another in a long line of hypocrites that criticize after they leave service instead of while they are there. If he truly felt things were going so wrong, why did he stay for 3 years and why was it such a surprise to the media people he dealt with every day that he felt that way?

[Abbey Marie]

then why has mcclellen rigorously defended his book?

First, he wants as much in sales as possible,.
Second, what's he going to do? Denounce it?
As for all the interviews, I assumed that publishers can require a book tour.

[midcan5]

It would be impossible for wingnut journalism to sink any lower, that is if you want to call it journalism, and how anyone who has watched McCellan defend his writing, can believe he is insincere, is simply a moonbat.

[red states rule]

McClellan is just another in a long line of hypocrites that criticize after they leave service instead of while they are there. If he truly felt things were going so wrong, why did he stay for 3 years and why was it such a surprise to the media people he dealt with every day that he felt that way?

Here is an examples of Scott doing his usual piss poor job as Press Sec - and people wonder why he was fired


How Scottie Took a Beating
By Tim Graham | June 1, 2008 - 13:21 ET

Scott McClellan upbraiding the press for being unchallenging certainly doesn't match the record of combative exchanges we recall. Here are a few eyebrow-raising examples of McClellan being pounded by the network stars from our Notable Quotables newsletter:

1. Won't Bush bury Saddam's sons with respect, according to the rites of the religion they held dear?

"Article 17 of the Geneva Conventions requires countries at war to, quote, ‘ensure that the dead are honorably interred, if possible, according to the rites of the religion to which they belong.’ Does the President, as Commander-in-Chief, believe that the United States is bound by that, when it comes to the bodies of Uday and Qusay Hussein?" – ABC’s Terry Moran questioning new White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan at the July 23, 2003 briefing.


2. What would you have the media do? How dare you answer my question by suggesting what you would have the media do?

ABC White House correspondent Terry Moran: "Scott, you said that the retraction by Newsweek magazine of its [phony Koran-in-the-toilet] story is a good first step. What else does the President want this American magazine to do?"

Press Secretary Scott McClellan: "...We would encourage Newsweek to do all that they can to help repair the damage that has been done, particularly in the region. And I think Newsweek can do that by talking about the way they got this wrong, and pointing out what the policies and practices of the United States military are when it comes to the handling of the Holy Koran. The military put in place policies and procedures to make sure that the Koran...is handled with the utmost care and respect...."

Moran: "With respect, who made you the editor of Newsweek? Do you think it’s appropriate for you, at that podium, speaking with the authority of the President...to tell an American magazine what they should print?" — Exchange at the May 17, 2005 White House news briefing.


3. Who told you that you had the right to use discretion as to which parts of a leak prosecution to comment on?

NBC’s David Gregory: "Scott, I mean, just — I mean, this is ridiculous. The notion that you’re going to stand before us after having commented with that level of detail and tell people watching this that somehow you decided not to talk. You’ve got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium, or not?...Why are you choosing when it’s appropriate and when it’s inappropriate [to comment on the leak investigation]?"

Press Secretary Scott McClellan: "If you’ll let me finish-"

Gregory: "No, you’re not finishing — you’re not saying anything!" — Exchange at a July 11, 2005 White House news briefing.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/06/01/how-scottie-took-beating

[bullypulpit]

Here it is folks - the publisher really wrote the book not McClellan


Soros Publisher 'Shaped' McClellan's Hit Job: Other publishers don't recognize it as the same book


An examination of published reports reveals that Scott McClellan's kiss-and-smell betrayal of George W. Bush is a far cry from the book McClellan started out to write and was shaped into an offensive tome by a publisher with close ties to George Soros.

To understand how McClellan's literary knife-in-the-back evolved, one has to know something about the book industry.

Unlike fiction, a non-fiction book usually hasn't been written before it's sold to a publisher. The author normally puts together an outline and/or synopsis detailing what the book will be about and how it will be structured, and writes 1-3 sample chapters to show the author's writing ability. The author's agent then shops the proposal around to prospective publishing houses.

The agent actually lands the deal, so the choice of agents is crucial. Any author normally starts at the top of the A list and works his or her way down until--or if--they find an agent with whom they can work. According to an Associated Press article,

"McClellan's book does not fit the pattern of Washington megadeals. He was not represented by Washington, D.C., attorney Bob Barnett, whose clients include Tenet and countless political leaders, but by the much less known Craig Wiley, whose most famous client is actor Ron Silver."

for the complete article

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/05/soros_publisher_shaped_mcclell.html

Another opinion piece offering conjecture instead of evidence to support its assertions. But that's about all you ever manage to cut-and-paste. And I still wonder why so much energy is being expended in attacking the messenger while so little is being said about the message.

[red states rule]

Another opinion piece offering conjecture instead of evidence to support its assertions. But that's about all you ever manage to cut-and-paste. And I still wonder why so much energy is being expended in attacking the messenger while so little is being said about the message.

Once again the Bush haters ignore how a Soros puppet rewrote the book

Here is more BP - not that fcats ever mean anything to you

More proof the book was not written by Scott but by the publisher


Scott McClellan Originally Planned to Attack Media, Defend Bush
By Matthew Sheffield | June 2, 2008 - 10:44 ET

Although today his book is being touted by left-wing reporters and pundits, his initial plans for the project show former White House press secretary Scott McClellan intended to take a much different approach, one that was more sympathetic to President Bush but also quite hard on the "liberal elites" of the Washington press corps and their "hostility" toward the administration.

Reading through McClellan's original book proposal, obtained by Politico.com, it is clear that before his editor Peter Osnos took the book on a sharp leftward turn, McClellan wanted to turn the tables on foes in the press gallery including far-left columnist Helen Thomas and NBC correspondent David Gregory.

"I came to know and respect those who were assigned to the White House beat. They are solid professionals, but rarely scrutinized or put under the microscope. I will take a look at notable personalities in the White House Briefing Room, including David Gregory and Helen Thomas. I anticipate an entire chapter about the former," McClellan writes in his proposal.

According to McClellan, America's elite journalists have a dramatic problem with political diversity which in turn leads them to skew the political debate in a leftward direction. The media are in a "constant state of denial" when it comes to admitting this.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-sheffield/2008/06/02/scot-mcclellan-originally-wanted-attack-media-defend-bush

[Abbey Marie]

RSR, I wouldn't bother. Scott M has very little credibility at this point. And Dems will defend any attack against President Bush, no matter how shady or anemic. Even if the attacks are of the tin-foil variety. It's pointless to debate people who never let the truth get in the way of a good smear. ;)

[red states rule]

RSR, I wouldn't bother. Scott M has very little credibility at this point. And Dems will defend any attack against President Bush, no matter how shady or anemic. Even if the attacks are of the tin-foil variety. It's pointless to debate people who never let the truth get in the way of a good smear. ;)

Abbey, if BP follows his usal patter, once he can;t counter the facts - he will "redeploy" to another thread

BP once demanded me to show the racism Dems showed toward Lt Gov Michael Steele in the 06 election

Once I did, he ran away

[theHawk]

McClellan is on Bill O'Reilly right now. He is saying they did not change it at all.

[red states rule]

McClellan is on Bill O'Reilly right now. He is saying they did not change it at all.

According to his original book proposal, Scott was defending the Bush administration

Who changed the book, or who changed Scott's mind?

[bullypulpit]

Abbey, if BP follows his usal patter, once he can;t counter the facts - he will "redeploy" to another thread

BP once demanded me to show the racism Dems showed toward Lt Gov Michael Steele in the 06 election

Once I did, he ran away

You, and others, continue to mistake boredom with your stupidity on my part with victory on your part. Your capacity for self-delusion is quite remarkable.

Now, please provide a link from an independent, credible source for your assertions. I won't be holding my breath though.

[red states rule]

You, and others, continue to mistake boredom with your stupidity on my part with victory on your part. Your capacity for self-delusion is quite remarkable.

Now, please provide a link from an independent, credible source for your assertions. I won't be holding my breath though.

Id di son. I posted the news article from the Washington Times that had quotes from elected black Dems who were tossing out racial slurs toward Gov Steele. You fled from the tread and never responded

You also fled for your own thread on "torture" when I posted a link from ABC showing waterborading has been used only 3 time, the terrorist cracked evertime, and goave up info that prevented attacks

On this thread I have posted links that proves McClellan's original book proposal was not to be a hit piece on Pres Bush. The liberal publisher changed the content of the book

Here is the link again

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=3EA9893A-3048-5C12-009B1CFA43B87E7D

[theHawk]

According to his original book proposal, Scott was defending the Bush administration

Who changed the book, or who changed Scott's mind?

After watching the interview on Bill OReilly, its quite clear McCellan is a moron. Basically he is arguing that his book is going to bring people on both sides together to come up with solutions. He thinks his book is going to change Washington.

What a load of crap. I can't believe is dumb enough to actually believe that.:poke:

[red states rule]

After watching the interview on Bill OReilly, its quite clear McCellan is a moron. Basically he is arguing that his book is going to bring people on both sides together to come up with solutions. He thinks his book is going to change Washington.

What a load of crap. I can't believe is dumb enough to actually believe that.:poke:

He is doing for the bucks. His original proposal is available for you to read. He took the money and sold out

He is a moron. He let the liberal media chew him up and spit him out everyday while he was Press Sec