Perhaps we should be referring to Peter Osnos’ candid memoir of the Bush years?
From today’s Washington Post:
Osnos said McClellan just needed editorial guidance to tell the story he wanted to tell all along.
“First we had to ascertain what kind of book he wanted to write,” said Osnos, a former Washington Post reporter and editor. “We are journalists, independent-minded publishers. We weren’t interested in a book that was just a defense of the Bush administration. It had to pass our test of independence, integrity and candor.”
The article is on how Scott McClellan’s “scathing” memoir of the Bush years “evolved.” It wasn’t as negative when McClellan began the process. Any of us who’ve ever done reporting pieces for liberal publications recognize the process. (I once had to fight to make sure a profile I was doing of the late Cardinal O’Connor didn’t “evolve” into comparing O’Connor unfavorably to then-liberal stalwart and then-Archbishop Rembert Weakland!)
But unlike McClellan, most of us have an inkling of what is happening. This guy seems even dumber than he did when he was Bush’s flack. If that is possible.