I’m amazed that it’s the Democrats who are able to look beyond partisanship and judge this fairly. (Does the internet accurately convey my sarcasm?)
todd - 08:05am on 05/31/2008
You said “Democrats” (plural)! That’s funny!
Proof - 08:05am on 05/31/2008
Good for Terry. I agree with his sentiments exactly, it just always looks like sour grapes (especially so when you were shown the door) and somebody trying to make some cash. I maybe can’t blame them for wanting to make a little extra scratch, but don’t ask me to believe you don’t sensationalize or use artistic license when remembering events.
Hoss - 09:05am on 05/31/2008
Although I am Dem, McAuliffe is just trying to get more middle of the road votes for Republican Hilary.
Davinski - 09:05am on 05/31/2008
And Todd, you mean all that democrat fairness that is still bitching about Bush firing 8 US attorneys, but didn’t raise a whimper when Clinton canned 93 of them. Of course, to the left, when Clinton did it it was under the guise of the attorneys serving at the leisure of the president. Is my sarcasm coming through on the internet.
Hoss - 09:05am on 05/31/2008
Publishers have a way of encouraging individuals to make the story more interesting. (MONEY) Most people know and understand this when a tell all kind of book comes out. I don’t think anyone reeeeeally cares what he thinks. HA!
Zsa Zsa - 10:05am on 05/31/2008
“Republican Hilary”????
True leftie insanity for all to see.
robert108 - 10:05am on 05/31/2008
I don’t think anyone reeeeeally cares what he thinks. HA!
If no one cares, why were the Bush lackeys all over cable news the last couple of days ripping this guy. Even his ex-head lackey Ari Fleischer made the rounds.
Davinski - 10:05am on 05/31/2008
I think most of the talk shows like conflict. So they bring guests who can supply it. BUT really, why would Ari Fleischer dispute scotty? For political reasons, or more personal ones? What does Ari gain politically by doing this? He’s not seeking votes. Maybe he has more of a clue than little scotty.
Zsa Zsa - 11:05am on 05/31/2008
It’s telling when people attack Scott’s character and not the facts of the book. Hypocrisy is evident knowing the Republican reaction to George Stephanopoulos’s book which was published during the second term of Bill Clinton’s presidency.
I’m amazed that it’s the Democrats who are able to look beyond partisanship and judge this fairly. (Does the internet accurately convey my sarcasm?)
You said “Democrats” (plural)! That’s funny!
Good for Terry. I agree with his sentiments exactly, it just always looks like sour grapes (especially so when you were shown the door) and somebody trying to make some cash. I maybe can’t blame them for wanting to make a little extra scratch, but don’t ask me to believe you don’t sensationalize or use artistic license when remembering events.
Although I am Dem, McAuliffe is just trying to get more middle of the road votes for Republican Hilary.
And Todd, you mean all that democrat fairness that is still bitching about Bush firing 8 US attorneys, but didn’t raise a whimper when Clinton canned 93 of them. Of course, to the left, when Clinton did it it was under the guise of the attorneys serving at the leisure of the president. Is my sarcasm coming through on the internet.
Publishers have a way of encouraging individuals to make the story more interesting. (MONEY) Most people know and understand this when a tell all kind of book comes out. I don’t think anyone reeeeeally cares what he thinks. HA!
True leftie insanity for all to see.
I don’t think anyone reeeeeally cares what he thinks. HA!
If no one cares, why were the Bush lackeys all over cable news the last couple of days ripping this guy. Even his ex-head lackey Ari Fleischer made the rounds.
I think most of the talk shows like conflict. So they bring guests who can supply it. BUT really, why would Ari Fleischer dispute scotty? For political reasons, or more personal ones? What does Ari gain politically by doing this? He’s not seeking votes. Maybe he has more of a clue than little scotty.
It’s telling when people attack Scott’s character and not the facts of the book. Hypocrisy is evident knowing the Republican reaction to George Stephanopoulos’s book which was published during the second term of Bill Clinton’s presidency.