Scott McClellan: Superstar

Excerpt from White House Press briefing (this is the big, bad, resurgent media we've been hearing about):

Q But, bottom line, does (Harriet Miers) have the tenacity to weather this fight?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, no, let's talk about how -- the way you're approaching things. This should be based on a person's record and qualifications and their judicial philosophy, and she greatly exceeds all the standards that have been set for meeting what is needed to serve on our nation's highest court. She is exceptionally well-qualified. And I would encourage you -- I know you don't necessarily want to do this -- but to look at her qualifications and record.

Q Excuse me?

MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't seen you out there reporting about some of her qualifications and her record, and I see by the tone of your question that you want to get into some of these side issues. Let's look at the record --

Q You divided your own party?

Q Wait a minute --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- let's look at the qualifications.

Q But, Scott, yesterday you yourself said that --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not saying everybody. I'm just saying I haven't seen John report on the qualifications record.

Q Yesterday you talked about some prospective nominees who decided that they didn't want to go through this, this laborious process. The question was, is it possible that she would be overwhelmed enough by this laborious process that she might consider pulling out.

MR. McCLELLAN: Bob, anyone that knows Harriet Miers knows that she's exceptionally well-qualified to serve on our nation's highest court, and no one that knows her would make such a suggestion. And no one that knows her record and her qualifications would make such a suggestion. We look forward to people getting to know her like the President knows her. She is someone who has not sought the limelight, but she is someone who has served with great distinction and has a distinguished career and record. And that's what this should be about when it comes to the Supreme Court. I welcome the opportunity to engage in this discussion, because this should be based on qualifications and experience and judicial philosophy.
Some people want to create a different standard. And, Jim, you can sit there and shake your head, but she's exceptionally well-qualified.

Q Wait a minute, wait a minute -- excuse me --

Q Scott, yesterday both you and President said that it was important for --

MR. McCLELLAN: Anyone -- anyone that knows her record and experience wouldn't be making such a suggestion.

Q Scott, yesterday, both -- yesterday the President himself said that the American --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, some of you all wanted to focus more on religion. We focused on her qualifications and record.

Q Scott, isn't the idea we ask the questions and you provide the answers?

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, and I was providing the answer. Can I not say what I want to say?

Q Don't you wish that Scott would get back to you?

Q Can you characterize --

MR. McCLELLAN: Isn't it my right to talk and say what I want to?

Q I defend your right, Scott.

MR. McCLELLAN: You all want to focus on side issues like religion. We've said from the beginning --

Q Side issues --

Q You focused on religion.

MR. McCLELLAN: We've said -- no, we have always publicly talked about --

Q When has religion been a side issue?

Q Scott --

MR. McCLELLAN: Come on, Jim, we've always talked about her record and her qualifications --

Q You call this a side issue.

Q Scott, yesterday --

Q The opposition to her is in your own party. What are you going to do about that?

Q Yesterday, Scott, the President said that the American people did want to know about her background, and that her religion was part of that. And you pointed out repeatedly that her religion was part of that, as a means of letting the American people know more about who Harriet Miers is. The question was whether or not she is the type of person that has the tenacity to deal with any criticism in a confirmation process. Could you describe her and who she is, relative to her tenacity? The President has called her a pit bull in size six shoes. Could you elaborate?
___________________________________________

Q But you also called her a woman of faith, a person of faith, yesterday. Those words came out of your mouth, she's a person of faith.

MR. McCLELLAN: She is -- and she is. (Mental Note: D'OH!!)

Q And so we've reported on the qualifications and --

Q But what's the relevance if you're saying it's not relevant?

Q And why would -- why would you not answer -- but why not answer the question? It sounds as though you're not willing to say she's tenacious.
__________________________________________

MR. MCLELLAN: ...And I welcome talking about this; I welcome talking about her record. Let's talk about it.

Q Can I ask -- can I ask one question just before we go here?

MR. McCLELLAN: Steve said "thank you" a second time. I think the first time -- the first time --

Q I know, but my question is --

MR. McCLELLAN: The first time, we probably should have stopped it at that.

Q Right. I know. Aren't you sad that you didn't go for -- that you went past, "thank you"?

MR. McCLELLAN: No. Actually, I'm not. I'm glad we had this discussion, John.

Q Okay, good. But my only question was, the very last thing that you said there, why didn't you just say that in response to my question instead of attacking me and getting into this whole brouhaha?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I was trying to, but some people kept jumping in, including yourself when I was responding to your question.

Q Well, excuse me, you attacked me. I just wasn't going to let it sit.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm not attacking. I'm just pointing out that a lot of the coverage is not focused on the record and the qualifications and the philosophy -

Q I'll bring you transcripts after the briefing.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and that's where it should. Did it focus on it last night? Let's look at the transcripts.

Q You spoke about a dignified process, do you think it's dignified to --

Q Are you -- let's talk about truth and honesty. Are you trying to say that the White House has not talked to conservatives and pointed them to the church that she goes to, and to her religion --

MR. McCLELLAN: I answered all those questions yesterday.

Q -- to show that she has religion -- but you're just saying right now that we're making an issue of it. You're making an issue of it by having White House officials --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm saying --

Q -- tell conservatives that that's a reason they should trust her. Then they tell us that --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm not saying that. You're putting words --

Q -- that that's what's happening.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- in my mouth. I'm saying the focus ought to be on records and qualification and philosophy.

Q I'm not putting any words in your mouth.

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, you are.

Q I have a question about judicial philosophy.

Q Scott. Scott, you used the term "dignified process." Is it dignified to pejoratively characterize the motives or tactics of a reporter who is trying to cover a story?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
__________________________________________

Yes, Scott, you are pretty damn sorry. Isn't it great when a towelboy starts acting like his time is ultra-valuable and he can't, just not possibly, no way in hell repeat himself or give any more information? That's like a butler telling a houseguest to get his own fucking coat and hat. Not in GWB's America, pal!

No doubt the media likes this ass-licking reparte and will soon begin to apotheosize little Scotty as the next Rove-like Svengali of the right. He's a virtual copy of Karl: smarmy, unable to speak without telling the most foul lies, devious, confrontational, and a complete whore. I'll be on the lookout for him on the cover of Time magazine any day now.